Politics

[steve white]

This is turned upside down...the AfD people and lately your government try to market whats happening as a violation of free speech. What they call sharing ideas is breaking german law, ie german laws against hate speech.

So, let me spell it out for you, this is a matter of breaking german hate speech law. If you do not like german law, fine.. But its not violating free speech.

Except that "hate speech" can be politically defined/motivated, and is often wide enough to drive a Mack truck through it...We saw hate speech definitions abused here.

 

[mdwest]

When calling a fat person fat becomes “hate speech” your laws have jumped the shark… it’s time to reevaluate what you’ve done to yourselves..

 

[rigbymauser]

The highest contributor in NATO to Ukraine as a percentage of GDP is Estonia at 4.1% and number two is Denmark at 3%. The mighty US provides only 0.3%. Only three NATO countries provide a lower percentage of GDP than the US. They are France, Italy, and Belgium and France is not a full member of the alliance.

Yes, I know in real dollar terms the US has contributed about 40% of the total (in kind and in actual monetary support). But if one of us gives half a million to a charity and if Elon Musk does the same, it is an identical amount but not quite the same thing is it.

As far as casualties. what would you sacrifice for your independence - to not be under the bootheel of a tyrant like Putin? Our ancestors pledged to each other, their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. Of those 56 signers of the declaration of independence

Nine fought and died from wounds or hardships during the war.
Five were captured by the British, charged with treason and were tortured before they died.
Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned.
Two lost their sons serving in the Continental Army
Another had two sons captured.
Several lost wives, sons or entire families.
One lost his 13 children.
Two wives were brutally treated.
All were at one time or another the victims of manhunts and driven from their homes.
Seventeen lost everything they owned.

And of course the enormous sacrifices of so many more whose names are not recorded by history.

Yet, all of that sacrifice would have been in vain were it not for French military materiel and eventual French army and naval support. Without it that support, our revolution would have utterly failed. Yet to many, Ukraine doesn't have that right, and we should do nothing to support them. Were a reemerging belligerent Russia not a clear threat to our national interests, I would hope this nation before all others still would be supportive of Ukraine's fight for self determination and a democratic future aligned with the West.

I am thoroughly sick of these nonsensical comparisons to Vietnam or Afghanistan. I do not believe that I am the only one who may have noticed that the US does not have a single infantryman serving in Ukraine - not even any advisors or contractor support. It is Ukrainians who are sacrificing their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor for independence. They know the casualties they have suffered and they know the injury they have inflicted on their enemy. All they have asked for is the means to see this war to a just conclusion. The Biden administration provided barely the combat systems to survive (look at those percentage of GDP numbers again), and now Trump seems determined to force a settlement on them through a negotiation in which they are not even allowed to participate.

I am also thoroughly sick of the blame America first crowd. I despised them when they were leftists, and I find them no more appealing when they are suddenly on the right. This war began as a result of one thing. Vladimir Putin ordered and executed a brutal invasion. Against all expectations, Ukraine has fought that military to a standstill.

If we now sell out Ukraine to the Russians, I do not think history will treat us kindly.

According to GDP Denmark is the highest contributor

Infographic: The Countries Sending the Most Aid to Ukraine

This chart shows the countries which have committed the most aid to Ukraine, by type, from January 2022 to December 2024.

www.statista.com

 

[Wheels]

I find it humorous that Al Sharpton doesn't realize that James Madison and Thomas Jefferson did overthrow their government.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891232205017641344

 

[Red Leg]

According to GDP Denmark is the highest contributor

Infographic: The Countries Sending the Most Aid to Ukraine

This chart shows the countries which have committed the most aid to Ukraine, by type, from January 2022 to December 2024.

www.statista.com

Depends on the list, the time the list was printed, and who complied it.

The link below shows the complete list as compiled by Statista that you quote and is more recent than my data. Thank you. I think it underscores the point I was making equally well. The most generous supporters of Ukraine in this compilation are Denmark, Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia in that order. The US is number 17 on this list, behind such notables as Germany and the United Kingdom. That may go some way in explaining their frustration with being lectured to by the US.

Bilateral aid to Ukraine by country GDP 2024 | Statista

Estonia and Denmark had the highest ratio of bilateral support to Ukraine to donor GDP as of February2024. Poland ranked sixth by GDP share of aid to Ukraine.

www.statista.com

 

[Red Leg]

Thanks @Red Leg for the compliment but I’ve never worked with depreciation of defense weapons systems. I don’t think short of demilitarization or Defense Logistics Agency’s Defense Reutilization, it is even possible to depreciate weapons systems, be they tanks, fighters, of specialized laptops. For over 20 of the past 40 years working in and for DoD in procurement, sustainment, and demilitarization of weapons systems, spare parts, and ammunition to include explosives, I’ve never been advised by DoD contracting that a system was worth any less than it’s in production procurement cost. Further, I can’t find anything in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) about depreciating weapons systems. There probably is for common items like fleets of commercial automobiles and office equipment but I’ve a weapons guy.

Please remember there are Public Laws passed by the US Congress, along with DoD regulations that govern how weapons systems from specially configured laptops to F-35 fighters are developed, procured, trained, operated, sustained, and eventually put in storage or sent to be demilitarized. Some of the older equipment is sold to friendly foreign nations via Foreign Military Sales (FMS). Other times with Presidential and/or Congressional authorization, such as presently is occurring in Ukraine, our military equipment is provided for friendly nations to train on and/or use to defend themselves.

Let’s consider an Abrams tank. I pulled this off the Internet so it may not be exact but it’s close enough for this analogy. “The cost of an M1 Abrams tank varies, with the M1A1 model estimated at around $4.3 million, while the more advanced M1A2 SEPv3 can cost approximately $24 million.”

A base Abrams M1A1 when in production for a lot of say 500+ units cost $4.3 million each. Chances are that cost is double or more today.

A current M1A2 SEPv3 costs $24 million each for a lot of approximately 500. That is if those tanks were to be built from scratch. Probably not because with a few thousand M1A1’s sitting in the desert, some of those will be the base of the new SEPv3’s. Their $4.3M procurement cost each is just the base price of the new SEPv3’s.

This is why DoD doesn’t depreciate a weapons system. When the main production line throttles back to 5% of full rate production, each unit produced is probably twice the cost of the larger initial contract price. The 5% production is maintained to keep the line open. Because when the production line is gone, it is nearly impossible to resume production for anything than another full rate production. Production lines have specialized equipment that when gone, must be procured again.

Here’s another aspect, old weapons systems form the base of current requirements of upgraded versions capable of the necessary offensive capabilities and defensive survivability. Otherwise with the production line in a skeleton state, where would we acquire a few hundred Abrams for upgrading. So, each old Abrams sitting in the desert is worth at least what we paid for it.

If the USA pulls a few hundred M1A1 Abrams out of desert storage at $4.3M each and restores/rebuilds them to full operational capability at a cost of $1M each, the net cost is $5.3M each. But let’s not have a cow because the cash outlay was $1M each, not $5.3M. Plus, that $1M each is for USA labor and components and parts, mostly made here!

What if we continue this to demilitarization rather than rebuilding or reutilization? Those Abrams have components and parts in them with demil codes restricting them to very secure or hazardous material restricted destruction. Each special demil of a component costs money, our tax dollars! First however, those parts must be removed from each tank, cleaned, catalogued, and then shipped to the probably unfunded demil facility. Once again, John Q. Public tax payer pays for that. Demilitarizing an Abrams probably costs about the same as an upgrade and shipment to Ukraine.

Remember the components and piece parts that have environmentally restricted materials? Those are very expensive to demilitarize. Only a few places can accommodate them and it is expensive to do so. These environmentally restricted materials are found in many different types of military ammunition. That’s the stuff that goes “bomb” when it hits the target. Talk about a waste of our tax dollars! It would probably be cheaper overall to just shoot it off but that would be illegal. Illegal? Yes, there are laws against this for demil. But, if our allies need ammo and we have old ammo that would over wise be on the demil list due to exceeding their shelf life, it is legal for the USA to ship it to our allies who will shoot at our mutual enemies.

The bottom line is probably half to ¾ of the value of the military aid authorized by the President and Congress is accounted for in old weapons systems and aging ammunition. All of that would eventually cost you and I tax dollars to demilitarize.

What @Red Leg states time and time again is accurate, very accurate. Further, for those who from time to time demean him because he is a Major General in a retired duty status, or post service had a career as a business executive, grow up. This forum includes a lot of high powered people balanced by common Joe’s and everyone in between.

What @Red Leg states about aid to Ukraine is accurate. Heck he commanded the DoD Security Assistance Office (probably not the correct designation). That’s the bureaucratic entity that processes all the defense equipment going to places like Ukraine.

For those that wonder who the heck I am, I am a former USMC Gunnery Sergeant, Chief Warrant Officer-3, who retired as a Limited Duty Officer (LDO, very specialized and like Trump, "Loud, Dumb, and Obnoxious" ) Captain. I followed my service with a career assisting DoD in weapons systems management. Be advised, no one hates arrogant, uppity unrestricted (“regular”) officers more than someone with my service background. Having met our resident General Officer and looked him in the eyeballs, he’s good to go!

Pretty much explains why I was a pretty good combat arms officer but lousy logistician.

 

[Altitude sickness]

How Much U.S. Aid Is Going to Ukraine?

Nine charts illustrate the extraordinary level of support the United States has provided Ukraine in its war against Russian invaders.

www.cfr.org

The US and Germany contribute the most overall. But not % of GDP

 

[Red Leg]

How Much U.S. Aid Is Going to Ukraine?

Nine charts illustrate the extraordinary level of support the United States has provided Ukraine in its war against Russian invaders.

www.cfr.org

The US and Germany contribute the most overall. But not % of GDP

I think Poland is over 4%

The "How much aid is actually going to Ukraine" chart is the most interesting, and based on my experience is likely optimistic. It goes some way in explaining Zelensky's frustration a couple of days ago.

 

[Brent in Az]

Did you see Trump doing laps in "The beast" as the pace car at Daytona?

 

[Lone Star Bluegrass]

Probably not. Certainly Gorbachev didn't think so as I noted above.

This is a good article on the subject.

‘There was no promise not to enlarge NATO’ - Harvard Law School

Robert Zoellick, the U.S. diplomat who helped negotiate the end of the Cold War, says Vladimir Putin’s claims about Ukraine are part of a disinformation campaign.

hls.harvard.edu

The original question was posed as is there an obligation to provide defense in the event of an invasion of Ukraine; NATO expansion was not what he asked. It’s true, of course, that there is no “NATO limitation treaty,” just as there is no “Ukraine defense treaty.”

 

[Wheels]

Mocking Trump in 2018 to crying after Vance's speech last week. Heusgen seems to be loosing his smugness.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891577762034442441

 

[Datchew]

Thanks @Red Leg for the compliment but I’ve never worked with depreciation of defense weapons systems. I don’t think short of demilitarization or Defense Logistics Agency’s Defense Reutilization, it is even possible to depreciate weapons systems, be they tanks, fighters, of specialized laptops. For over 20 of the past 40 years working in and for DoD in procurement, sustainment, and demilitarization of weapons systems, spare parts, and ammunition to include explosives, I’ve never been advised by DoD contracting that a system was worth any less than it’s in production procurement cost. Further, I can’t find anything in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) about depreciating weapons systems. There probably is for common items like fleets of commercial automobiles and office equipment but I’ve a weapons guy.

Please remember there are Public Laws passed by the US Congress, along with DoD regulations that govern how weapons systems from specially configured laptops to F-35 fighters are developed, procured, trained, operated, sustained, and eventually put in storage or sent to be demilitarized. Some of the older equipment is sold to friendly foreign nations via Foreign Military Sales (FMS). Other times with Presidential and/or Congressional authorization, such as presently is occurring in Ukraine, our military equipment is provided for friendly nations to train on and/or use to defend themselves.

Let’s consider an Abrams tank. I pulled this off the Internet so it may not be exact but it’s close enough for this analogy. “The cost of an M1 Abrams tank varies, with the M1A1 model estimated at around $4.3 million, while the more advanced M1A2 SEPv3 can cost approximately $24 million.”

A base Abrams M1A1 when in production for a lot of say 500+ units cost $4.3 million each. Chances are that cost is double or more today.

A current M1A2 SEPv3 costs $24 million each for a lot of approximately 500. That is if those tanks were to be built from scratch. Probably not because with a few thousand M1A1’s sitting in the desert, some of those will be the base of the new SEPv3’s. Their $4.3M procurement cost each is just the base price of the new SEPv3’s.

This is why DoD doesn’t depreciate a weapons system. When the main production line throttles back to 5% of full rate production, each unit produced is probably twice the cost of the larger initial contract price. The 5% production is maintained to keep the line open. Because when the production line is gone, it is nearly impossible to resume production for anything than another full rate production. Production lines have specialized equipment that when gone, must be procured again.

Here’s another aspect, old weapons systems form the base of current requirements of upgraded versions capable of the necessary offensive capabilities and defensive survivability. Otherwise with the production line in a skeleton state, where would we acquire a few hundred Abrams for upgrading. So, each old Abrams sitting in the desert is worth at least what we paid for it.

If the USA pulls a few hundred M1A1 Abrams out of desert storage at $4.3M each and restores/rebuilds them to full operational capability at a cost of $1M each, the net cost is $5.3M each. But let’s not have a cow because the cash outlay was $1M each, not $5.3M. Plus, that $1M each is for USA labor and components and parts, mostly made here!

What if we continue this to demilitarization rather than rebuilding or reutilization? Those Abrams have components and parts in them with demil codes restricting them to very secure or hazardous material restricted destruction. Each special demil of a component costs money, our tax dollars! First however, those parts must be removed from each tank, cleaned, catalogued, and then shipped to the probably unfunded demil facility. Once again, John Q. Public tax payer pays for that. Demilitarizing an Abrams probably costs about the same as an upgrade and shipment to Ukraine.

Remember the components and piece parts that have environmentally restricted materials? Those are very expensive to demilitarize. Only a few places can accommodate them and it is expensive to do so. These environmentally restricted materials are found in many different types of military ammunition. That’s the stuff that goes “bomb” when it hits the target. Talk about a waste of our tax dollars! It would probably be cheaper overall to just shoot it off but that would be illegal. Illegal? Yes, there are laws against this for demil. But, if our allies need ammo and we have old ammo that would over wise be on the demil list due to exceeding their shelf life, it is legal for the USA to ship it to our allies who will shoot at our mutual enemies.

The bottom line is probably half to ¾ of the value of the military aid authorized by the President and Congress is accounted for in old weapons systems and aging ammunition. All of that would eventually cost you and I tax dollars to demilitarize.

What @Red Leg states time and time again is accurate, very accurate. Further, for those who from time to time demean him because he is a Major General in a retired duty status, or post service had a career as a business executive, grow up. This forum includes a lot of high powered people balanced by common Joe’s and everyone in between.

What @Red Leg states about aid to Ukraine is accurate. Heck he commanded the DoD Security Assistance Office (probably not the correct designation). That’s the bureaucratic entity that processes all the defense equipment going to places like Ukraine.

For those that wonder who the heck I am, I am a former USMC Gunnery Sergeant, Chief Warrant Officer-3, who retired as a Limited Duty Officer (LDO, very specialized and like Trump, "Loud, Dumb, and Obnoxious" ) Captain. I followed my service with a career assisting DoD in weapons systems management. Be advised, no one hates arrogant, uppity unrestricted (“regular”) officers more than someone with my service background. Having met our resident General Officer and looked him in the eyeballs, he’s good to go!

Beers are already on me if ever we meet @Mark A Ouellette
You didn't have to tell me you were a CWO to convince me further.

I think the bombastic and condescending approach from the general brings it on his head by his own hand.
Maybe it's just his writing style. I'm sure mine comes across dry and edgy from time to time.

Everyone should feel free to express and read opinions in a public forum.

I'm a former Navy spec war guy, aircrew rescue swimmer, aerial door gunner, aviation electronics warfare specialist, and sub tracker. Swiss army knife in a helicopter.
After going civilian, mech engineer, got into leadership by mistake, and have restructured 2 businesses at the VP and c suite level. I've rang the bell on wall street with one we sorted out to take it public.
So what?

That should carry no more weight in the opinion arena than anyone else.

In the expertise area, I love hearing from and learning from folks that give us esoteric knowledge and tell us why they know what they know.

But browbeating, being condescending, and routinely punching down on newbies is not a respect earning methodology.

 

[Rocked and Loaded]

No hate speech laws in America..??

No. There are laws against threatening speech but hate speech is protected by the 1st amendment. Which is as it should be since the issue arises as to who gets to define “hate speech.”

Based of your description, it’s sounds an awful lot like Germany doesn’t actually have freedom of speech. It’s easy to defend speech you like but its not defending liberty if you don’t protect speech that disgusts you. In a legal sense, of course. You can and should condemn hateful speech with your own freedom of speech but any government arresting people for it is repugnant.

 

[WAB]

I feel that there is one thing missing from a lot of this Ukraine support debate. @Red Leg can verify but if I remember correctly in exchange for Ukraine getting rid of their nuclear weapons we would protect Ukraine from invasion. If this is true I feel we are obligated to help. Or it will be another broken promise from the US.

Actually both the US and Russia made that assertion to Ukraine. Obviously both the USA and Russia proved that their word was worth crap in 2014.

 

[LivingTheDream]

I am totally puzzled about what bothers you about the filling of military aid appropriations. I suppose we could transfer a billion actual dollars from the appropriation and let Ukraine transfer it back to us at 10 mil a copy or whatever the total cost is for Abrams tanks. But, is that a better management system? Or perhaps we should have contracted with GD directly for new production tanks, charging their full cost to the appropriation and thus American taxpayer? We would then add training and transportation costs on top of it.

This is the disconnect, I'm not bothered by it. The issue I have is given Ukraine 81B dollars or 200B dollars is essentially a made up number by accountants because we are giving them military aid. As a rough example, my buddy gives me a 300 dollar treestand, he can't use it so it is pretty much worth zero to him, he gives it to me and says because of age and wear he is essentially giving me 200 dollars. We have things at end of life, sell them to Ukraine for 1 dollar and have accountants take the loss on the deappreciated value.

Basically just give them what they need to actual fight. We have been too slow this whole time and it is a constant drip drip drip.

 

[Lone Star Bluegrass]

Actually both the US and Russia made that assertion to Ukraine. Obviously both the USA and Russia proved that their word was worth crap in 2014.

An assertion is not a binding treaty. The requirements for treaty ratification in the US have been in place since the 1780s, it’s not as if we moved the goal posts.
This is a good thing—Trump shouldn’t be bound by the “assertions” of Biden just as who ever comes after Trump should not be bound by his. It must clear the”advice and consent” threshold of the US Senate. I’m guessing the Ukrainians knew this in the 1990s, if they didn’t that’s diplomatic malfeasance on their part.

 

[Datchew]

Actually both the US and Russia made that assertion to Ukraine. Obviously both the USA and Russia proved that their word was worth crap in 2014.

Sadly true

 

[YancyW]

Beers are already on me if ever we meet @Mark A Ouellette
You didn't have to tell me you were a CWO to convince me further.

I think the bombastic and condescending approach from the general brings it on his head by his own hand.
Maybe it's just his writing style. I'm sure mine comes across dry and edgy from time to time.

Everyone should feel free to express and read opinions in a public forum.

I'm a former Navy spec war guy, aircrew rescue swimmer, aerial door gunner, aviation electronics warfare specialist, and sub tracker. Swiss army knife in a helicopter.
After going civilian, mech engineer, got into leadership by mistake, and have restructured 2 businesses at the VP and c suite level. I've rang the bell on wall street with one we sorted out to take it public.
So what?

That should carry no more weight in the opinion arena than anyone else.

In the expertise area, I love hearing from and learning from folks that give us esoteric knowledge and tell us why they know what they know.

But browbeating, being condescending, and routinely punching down on newbies is not a respect earning methodology.

Yes, it actually should carry more weight than others in many subject areas.

 

[Ed Lally]

I

Social security admin sends out a proof of life form every year or to SS recipients.
Benefits are supposed to be cut off if the form is not filled out and returned by due date.
Recently, SSA has cut off SS benefits to expats in foreign countries who do not have a valid U.S address. It has caused quite a panic among those who rely on that monthly benefit payment to survive.

80 years old. Collecting SS and NEVER asked for proof of life. A poll of friends shows that none of them ever received. POL request.

 

[WAB]

An assertion is not a binding treaty. The requirements for treaty ratification in the US have been in place since the 1780s, it’s not as if we moved the goal posts.
This is a good thing—Trump shouldn’t be bound by the “assertions” of Biden just as who ever comes after Trump should not be bound by his. It must clear the”advice and consent” threshold of the US Senate. I’m guessing the Ukrainians knew this in the 1990s, if they didn’t that’s diplomatic malfeasance on their part.

Ask yourself if you think Ukraine believed they had a deal when they gave up their nukes. We’re playing legal niceties with people’s lives. I for one think that we screwed them.