I'm waiting for you to specify which folks in Chicago you were referring to in your recent post.
Let’s have a war!
Re: Let’s have a war!
This is a long post, but if you follow the link, it goes on even further explaining why the propaganda being spread about how much our support for Ukraine is costing Americans, is nearly total BS.
Opinion Ukraine aid’s best-kept secret: Most of the money stays in the U.S.A.
That’s right: Funds that lawmakers approve to arm Ukraine are not going directly to Ukraine but are being used stateside to build new weapons or to replace weapons sent to Kyiv from U.S. stockpiles. Of the $68 billion in military and related assistance Congress has approved since Russia invaded Ukraine, almost 90 percent is going to Americans, one analysis found.
But you wouldn’t know that from the actions of some U.S. lawmakers. When Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance ® joined a United Auto Workers picket line in October at the Jeep assembly plant in Toledo, he said he wanted to “show some support for the UAW workers” in his state. Yet he has not shown the same solidarity with the UAW workers in Lima, Ohio, who are churning out Abrams tanks and Stryker combat vehicles for Ukraine thanks to the military aid that Congress has approved. Vance opposes Ukraine aid, as does Rep. Jim Jordan (R), whose House district includes Lima.
Ohio voters might have expected their elected leaders to be pushing the (reluctant) Biden administration to give Ukraine more Lima-produced tanks and vehicles — or to require that more of them be included in the aid package for Ukraine that Congress will soon take up. Instead, Vance and Jordan are fighting to stop Ukraine from receiving any more union-made tanks and combat vehicles from America’s only tank factory.
It’s not just them. In all, 31 senators and House members whose states or districts benefit from funding for Ukraine have voted to oppose or restrict that aid. They include some of the most prominent anti-Ukraine voices in Congress, such as Republican Sens. Josh Hawley (Mo.), Tommy Tuberville (Ala.) and Mike Braun (Ind.), as well as Republican Reps. Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Bill Posey (Fla.), Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.) and Lance Gooden (Tex.).
At a time when both major parties are competing to win working-class votes and strengthen the U.S. manufacturing base, our military aid to Ukraine does exactly that — it is providing a major cash infusion into factories across the country that directly benefits American workers. It is also creating jobs and opportunities for local suppliers, shops, restaurants and other businesses that support the factories rolling out weapons.
Until now, no one had mapped out precisely where these U.S. military aid funds are going. My American Enterprise Institute colleagues Clara Keuss, Noah Burke and I have catalogued the weapons systems being produced in the United States for Ukraine — tracing the states and congressional districts where they are being made and how senators and House members voted on the funding. We analyzed contracts and press releases and spoke to defense industry experts, diplomats and Pentagon officials to determine where U.S. tax dollars end up.
We have identified 117 production lines in at least 31 states and 71 cities where American workers are producing major weapons systems for Ukraine. For example, aid that Congress has already approved is going to, among many other places:
Simi Valley, Calif.;
Fullerton, Calif.;
Andover, Mass.;
Forest, Miss.;
and York, Pa.,
to build Switchblade unmanned aerial systems, radar systems and tactical vehicles.
York, Pa., and Anniston, Ala., to build Bradley infantry fighting vehicles.
Aiken, S.C.; Elgin, Okla.; Sterling Heights, Mich.; Endicott, N.Y.; York, Pa.; and Minneapolis to build howitzers.
Peoria, Ill.; Clearwater, Palm Bay and Niceville, Fla.; Camden, Ark.; Lancaster and Grand Prairie, Tex.; Rocket Center, W.Va.; and Trenton, N.J., to build HIMARS launchers.
Anniston and Huntsville, Ala., and Camden, Ark., to build parts for the Hydra-70 rocket.
Farmington, N.M.; Orlando; Tucson; and Troy, Ala., to build Javelin antitank missiles.
Many other weapons systems are being built for Ukraine in factories around our country. Nor does this list count the suppliers that provide these contractors with parts, such as plastic and computer chips, or produce smaller items for Ukraine, such as cold-weather and night-vision gear, medical supplies, spare parts and millions of rounds of small-arms ammunition. As one Ukrainian official told me, “Every single state in the U.S. contributes to this effort.”
Ukraine aid funds are going to at least 71 American cities where weapons systems and parts are being manufactured.
In other words, as happens with foreign military aid, our aid to Ukraine is not only creating American jobs but also reinvigorating our dangerously atrophied defense industrial base. Vance said in October that “the condition of the American defense industrial base is a national scandal. Repairing it is among our most urgent priorities.” Well, our aid to Ukraine is doing exactly that.
For example, the United States had not built a single new Stinger antiaircraft missile since 2005. The terrorists we were fighting in recent decades did not have jet fighters, so production faltered. Now, thanks to the Ukraine aid that Vance opposes, the Pentagon signed a $624.6 million contract last year to build Stinger missiles in Tucson, to replace about 1,400 sent to Ukraine. Without our Ukraine resupply effort, the Stinger production line likely would have remained dormant — perhaps until bombs started dropping in a conflict over Taiwan.
Or take the $600 million being used to build two weapons systems for Ukraine in St. Charles, Mo. One is the Joint Direct Attack Munition-Extended Range (JDAM ER), an air-launched GPS-guided weapon that converts dumb bombs into precision-guided glide bombs with a range of up to 45 miles (triple the range of the original weapon). The other is the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB), a weapon system newly developed for Ukraine that can be launched from High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) and can travel 93 miles, almost double the range of current ground-launched precision munition systems.
If we were not aiding Ukraine, the United States would not be producing either of these weapons. The funding Congress has provided to manufacture both systems injects many millions of dollars into Missouri’s economy and is busying production lines for these advanced capabilities. Those systems will now be available for the United States and Taiwan should a conflict erupt with China, as well as available for Israel.
Workers in West Plains, Mo., are using Ukraine aid to build the MIM-104 Phased Array Tracking Radar for the Patriot missile system that shocked the world this year by downing Russia’s supposedly “invincible” hypersonic missile. This saved Ukrainian lives and proved in real battlefield conditions that the upgraded Patriot system might help defend against hypersonic threats from other adversaries.
Most senators would take credit for these successes. Not Hawley, who is trying to cut funding for these systems being built in his state. The same goes for Rep. Jason T. Smith, who represents Missouri’s 8th Congressional District, where the Patriot radars are built, yet has voted against such aid multiple times. Missouri’s other Republican U.S. senator, Eric Schmitt, has not yet voted on Ukraine aid but has said, “I don’t support these forever wars.” Perhaps he will support defense investments that benefit Missouri workers and strengthen our military production capacity to defend against Communist China?
Among the most shocking examples of our defense industrial base’s decline is our struggle to produce a relatively simple munition: 155mm artillery shells. These shells would be in high demand in any conflict the United States fights. Ukraine is firing 6,000 to 8,000 such shells a day, and Israel is ordering them by the tens of thousands. But before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine last year, the United States was producing fewer than 15,000 shells per month. So the Pentagon has allocated $1.5 billion to boost production by 500 percent and is on pace to reach 100,000 per month.
With our withered defense production capacity, including a lack of machine tools, reaching that rate will take two years. Even then, the U.S. output in 2025 is likely to not match that of Russia in 2024. But were it not for our aid to Ukraine, those U.S. production increases would not be happening. With money Congress approved to arm Kyiv, shells are being assembled in Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, Pa., and in a new factory in Camden, Ark., using components (including explosives, propellant, primers, fuses and shell bodies) produced in such U.S. cities and towns as Kingsport and Cordova, Tenn.; Bristol, Pa.; Middletown, Iowa; and Coachella, Calif. A factory being built in Mesquite, Tex., is expected to produce about 20,000 shells a month and employ at least 125 workers after it comes online early next year. The president of the Mesquite Chamber of Commerce told the New York Times that lawmakers who oppose Ukraine aid are “voting against your constituents. … You’re literally saying no to the people you’re representing.” Yet Gooden, who represents Mesquite, voted against the aid that is helping fund the new plant in his district.
Our aid to Ukraine is not only forcing the Pentagon to rapidly increase the United States’ ability to produce weapons; it’s also modernizing the U.S. military. As retired Army Maj. Gen. John G. Ferrari, now a colleague at the American Enterprise Institute, recently pointed out, we are giving Ukraine weapons systems that are often decades old and then replacing our stockpiles with more advanced versions. “Because of the existing budget pressures on the Army, it wouldn’t be able to afford this needed modernization of equipment on its own,” Ferrari wrote in an op-ed. “By transferring weapons and gear to Ukraine, the Army would receive more modern weapons in return.”
[...]
Opinion Ukraine aid’s best-kept secret: Most of the money stays in the U.S.A.
That’s right: Funds that lawmakers approve to arm Ukraine are not going directly to Ukraine but are being used stateside to build new weapons or to replace weapons sent to Kyiv from U.S. stockpiles. Of the $68 billion in military and related assistance Congress has approved since Russia invaded Ukraine, almost 90 percent is going to Americans, one analysis found.
But you wouldn’t know that from the actions of some U.S. lawmakers. When Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance ® joined a United Auto Workers picket line in October at the Jeep assembly plant in Toledo, he said he wanted to “show some support for the UAW workers” in his state. Yet he has not shown the same solidarity with the UAW workers in Lima, Ohio, who are churning out Abrams tanks and Stryker combat vehicles for Ukraine thanks to the military aid that Congress has approved. Vance opposes Ukraine aid, as does Rep. Jim Jordan (R), whose House district includes Lima.
Ohio voters might have expected their elected leaders to be pushing the (reluctant) Biden administration to give Ukraine more Lima-produced tanks and vehicles — or to require that more of them be included in the aid package for Ukraine that Congress will soon take up. Instead, Vance and Jordan are fighting to stop Ukraine from receiving any more union-made tanks and combat vehicles from America’s only tank factory.
It’s not just them. In all, 31 senators and House members whose states or districts benefit from funding for Ukraine have voted to oppose or restrict that aid. They include some of the most prominent anti-Ukraine voices in Congress, such as Republican Sens. Josh Hawley (Mo.), Tommy Tuberville (Ala.) and Mike Braun (Ind.), as well as Republican Reps. Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Bill Posey (Fla.), Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.) and Lance Gooden (Tex.).
At a time when both major parties are competing to win working-class votes and strengthen the U.S. manufacturing base, our military aid to Ukraine does exactly that — it is providing a major cash infusion into factories across the country that directly benefits American workers. It is also creating jobs and opportunities for local suppliers, shops, restaurants and other businesses that support the factories rolling out weapons.
Until now, no one had mapped out precisely where these U.S. military aid funds are going. My American Enterprise Institute colleagues Clara Keuss, Noah Burke and I have catalogued the weapons systems being produced in the United States for Ukraine — tracing the states and congressional districts where they are being made and how senators and House members voted on the funding. We analyzed contracts and press releases and spoke to defense industry experts, diplomats and Pentagon officials to determine where U.S. tax dollars end up.
We have identified 117 production lines in at least 31 states and 71 cities where American workers are producing major weapons systems for Ukraine. For example, aid that Congress has already approved is going to, among many other places:
Simi Valley, Calif.;
Fullerton, Calif.;
Andover, Mass.;
Forest, Miss.;
and York, Pa.,
to build Switchblade unmanned aerial systems, radar systems and tactical vehicles.
York, Pa., and Anniston, Ala., to build Bradley infantry fighting vehicles.
Aiken, S.C.; Elgin, Okla.; Sterling Heights, Mich.; Endicott, N.Y.; York, Pa.; and Minneapolis to build howitzers.
Peoria, Ill.; Clearwater, Palm Bay and Niceville, Fla.; Camden, Ark.; Lancaster and Grand Prairie, Tex.; Rocket Center, W.Va.; and Trenton, N.J., to build HIMARS launchers.
Anniston and Huntsville, Ala., and Camden, Ark., to build parts for the Hydra-70 rocket.
Farmington, N.M.; Orlando; Tucson; and Troy, Ala., to build Javelin antitank missiles.
Many other weapons systems are being built for Ukraine in factories around our country. Nor does this list count the suppliers that provide these contractors with parts, such as plastic and computer chips, or produce smaller items for Ukraine, such as cold-weather and night-vision gear, medical supplies, spare parts and millions of rounds of small-arms ammunition. As one Ukrainian official told me, “Every single state in the U.S. contributes to this effort.”
Ukraine aid funds are going to at least 71 American cities where weapons systems and parts are being manufactured.
In other words, as happens with foreign military aid, our aid to Ukraine is not only creating American jobs but also reinvigorating our dangerously atrophied defense industrial base. Vance said in October that “the condition of the American defense industrial base is a national scandal. Repairing it is among our most urgent priorities.” Well, our aid to Ukraine is doing exactly that.
For example, the United States had not built a single new Stinger antiaircraft missile since 2005. The terrorists we were fighting in recent decades did not have jet fighters, so production faltered. Now, thanks to the Ukraine aid that Vance opposes, the Pentagon signed a $624.6 million contract last year to build Stinger missiles in Tucson, to replace about 1,400 sent to Ukraine. Without our Ukraine resupply effort, the Stinger production line likely would have remained dormant — perhaps until bombs started dropping in a conflict over Taiwan.
Or take the $600 million being used to build two weapons systems for Ukraine in St. Charles, Mo. One is the Joint Direct Attack Munition-Extended Range (JDAM ER), an air-launched GPS-guided weapon that converts dumb bombs into precision-guided glide bombs with a range of up to 45 miles (triple the range of the original weapon). The other is the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB), a weapon system newly developed for Ukraine that can be launched from High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) and can travel 93 miles, almost double the range of current ground-launched precision munition systems.
If we were not aiding Ukraine, the United States would not be producing either of these weapons. The funding Congress has provided to manufacture both systems injects many millions of dollars into Missouri’s economy and is busying production lines for these advanced capabilities. Those systems will now be available for the United States and Taiwan should a conflict erupt with China, as well as available for Israel.
Workers in West Plains, Mo., are using Ukraine aid to build the MIM-104 Phased Array Tracking Radar for the Patriot missile system that shocked the world this year by downing Russia’s supposedly “invincible” hypersonic missile. This saved Ukrainian lives and proved in real battlefield conditions that the upgraded Patriot system might help defend against hypersonic threats from other adversaries.
Most senators would take credit for these successes. Not Hawley, who is trying to cut funding for these systems being built in his state. The same goes for Rep. Jason T. Smith, who represents Missouri’s 8th Congressional District, where the Patriot radars are built, yet has voted against such aid multiple times. Missouri’s other Republican U.S. senator, Eric Schmitt, has not yet voted on Ukraine aid but has said, “I don’t support these forever wars.” Perhaps he will support defense investments that benefit Missouri workers and strengthen our military production capacity to defend against Communist China?
Among the most shocking examples of our defense industrial base’s decline is our struggle to produce a relatively simple munition: 155mm artillery shells. These shells would be in high demand in any conflict the United States fights. Ukraine is firing 6,000 to 8,000 such shells a day, and Israel is ordering them by the tens of thousands. But before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine last year, the United States was producing fewer than 15,000 shells per month. So the Pentagon has allocated $1.5 billion to boost production by 500 percent and is on pace to reach 100,000 per month.
With our withered defense production capacity, including a lack of machine tools, reaching that rate will take two years. Even then, the U.S. output in 2025 is likely to not match that of Russia in 2024. But were it not for our aid to Ukraine, those U.S. production increases would not be happening. With money Congress approved to arm Kyiv, shells are being assembled in Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, Pa., and in a new factory in Camden, Ark., using components (including explosives, propellant, primers, fuses and shell bodies) produced in such U.S. cities and towns as Kingsport and Cordova, Tenn.; Bristol, Pa.; Middletown, Iowa; and Coachella, Calif. A factory being built in Mesquite, Tex., is expected to produce about 20,000 shells a month and employ at least 125 workers after it comes online early next year. The president of the Mesquite Chamber of Commerce told the New York Times that lawmakers who oppose Ukraine aid are “voting against your constituents. … You’re literally saying no to the people you’re representing.” Yet Gooden, who represents Mesquite, voted against the aid that is helping fund the new plant in his district.
Our aid to Ukraine is not only forcing the Pentagon to rapidly increase the United States’ ability to produce weapons; it’s also modernizing the U.S. military. As retired Army Maj. Gen. John G. Ferrari, now a colleague at the American Enterprise Institute, recently pointed out, we are giving Ukraine weapons systems that are often decades old and then replacing our stockpiles with more advanced versions. “Because of the existing budget pressures on the Army, it wouldn’t be able to afford this needed modernization of equipment on its own,” Ferrari wrote in an op-ed. “By transferring weapons and gear to Ukraine, the Army would receive more modern weapons in return.”
[...]
“We are living through a revolt against the future. The future will prevail.”
Anand Giridharadas
Anand Giridharadas
Re: Let’s have a war!
Oh.
https://nypost.com/2023/12/05/news/ukra ... ign=nypost
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is becoming an autocrat who is reshaping Ukraine into an authoritarian state no different than Russia, Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko has shockingly claimed.
https://nypost.com/2023/12/05/news/ukra ... ign=nypost
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is becoming an autocrat who is reshaping Ukraine into an authoritarian state no different than Russia, Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko has shockingly claimed.
Imjustheretohelpyoubuycrypto
Re: Let’s have a war!
“We are living through a revolt against the future. The future will prevail.”
Anand Giridharadas
Anand Giridharadas
Re: Let’s have a war!
Dangit.jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 2:35 pmRespectfully, you have played your way out of a discussion on why support might have eroded to a degree over these two years.ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 1:37 pm Wait, who’s saying support for Ukraine is popularly favorable?
I’d also be curious what direction that support has trended and is trending in the almost 2 years since the war started, and also what direction(s) it may trend in the almost year until the election.
But here is data on what the support presently is: https://globalaffairs.org/research/publ ... ns%20agree.
All I’m saying (besides maybe some point about that milk carton meme) is, if Biden’s campaign strategy really is gonna be largely to hang his hat on support for Ukraine for the next 11 months, buckle up.
Re: Let’s have a war!
It is bizarre to me that you think supporting an ally’s defense of its land and people against an unprovoked war of aggression brought by an enemy of our country is “pro-war.”
Ukraine did not ask for this. We did not ask for this.
I understand that it is very important to you to draw 1:1 comparisons between this and our involvement in Iraq. Those comparisons are unfounded.
Re: Let’s have a war!
Bro if you’re gonna keep ripping on me like this then will you at least also take a jab at DC for posting propaganda from that notorious Putin parrot the mayor of Kiev?
Re: Let’s have a war!
I didn’t look closely as it was in the NY Post.
Re: Let’s have a war!
jfish dissing the The NY Post?
Or, as it's known on the show, "The Morning Joe Paper of Record! "
“We are living through a revolt against the future. The future will prevail.”
Anand Giridharadas
Anand Giridharadas
Re: Let’s have a war!
The USS Carney, a U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer, was sent to the Red Sea along with other U.S. destroyers to deter the Houthis and other groups from getting involved in the Israel-Hamas War.
For the past six months, Iranian-backed militia groups held off from launching attacks against American troops in Iraq and Syria. But attacks have suddenly resumed as the conflict in Gaza escalates...
For the past six months, Iranian-backed militia groups held off from launching attacks against American troops in Iraq and Syria. But attacks have suddenly resumed as the conflict in Gaza escalates...
“We are living through a revolt against the future. The future will prevail.”
Anand Giridharadas
Anand Giridharadas
Re: Let’s have a war!
This is not intended to be a leading question - I genuinely do not know: what would stop state national guards from donating materiel to Ukraine, and then the federal government from replenishing stocks/stores?Shirley wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 6:33 pm Putin will be happy:
Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked the advance of a $110 billion package of wartime funding for Ukraine and Israel as well as other national security priorities as they tried to force President Joe Biden to include changes to U.S. border policy.
I think, but again, do not know, that the issue would be in funding replenishment. That seems act of Congress-y to me. But I do wonder if there is an executive workaround.
Re: Let’s have a war!
“We are living through a revolt against the future. The future will prevail.”
Anand Giridharadas
Anand Giridharadas
Re: Let’s have a war!
The executive workaround is using Russian embargoed funds to fund Ukraine. Give Russia a withdrawl ultimatum to rescue their foreign assets. Hardball.
Re: Let’s have a war!
If the US pulls out of NATO and stops all aid to Ukraine, what is the power and financial windfall to Putin?
How much of the financial windfall does trumpty dumpy expect to get if he is president and does Putin this solid?
How much of the financial windfall does trumpty dumpy expect to get if he is president and does Putin this solid?
I saw the worst minds of my generation empowered by madness, bloated farcical naked,
dragging themselves through the whitewashed streets at dawn looking for a grievance fix.
dragging themselves through the whitewashed streets at dawn looking for a grievance fix.
Re: Let’s have a war!
I don't think this is the math anymore.
Trump needs the big chair to avoid living out the remainder of his days in prison. Putin has, at Trump's request, put him in the big chair before. He may have the ability to do so again. In my opinion, that's all that needs be said.
Re: Let’s have a war!
I think trumpty believes he can run out the clock on charges even without the presidency. Either his boot licking toadies in the R Party will slow the roll on the hearings or a future R president will give him a blanket pardon for everything he has done or thinks about doing. Pardoning himself option is just for insurance.jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 10:07 am
I don't think this is the math anymore.
Trump needs the big chair to avoid living out the remainder of his days in prison. Putin has, at Trump's request, put him in the big chair before. He may have the ability to do so again. In my opinion, that's all that needs be said.
Now the presidency is mostly about revenge for trumplethinskin and regaining the wealth he has lost, and Putin can return.
I saw the worst minds of my generation empowered by madness, bloated farcical naked,
dragging themselves through the whitewashed streets at dawn looking for a grievance fix.
dragging themselves through the whitewashed streets at dawn looking for a grievance fix.
Re: Let’s have a war!
None of that would really help on state charges, though. His only* hope there is to win the big chair in 2024.japhy wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 11:53 amI think trumpty believes he can run out the clock on charges even without the presidency. Either his boot licking toadies in the R Party will slow the roll on the hearings or a future R president will give him a blanket pardon for everything he has done or thinks about doing. Pardoning himself option is just for insurance.jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 10:07 am
I don't think this is the math anymore.
Trump needs the big chair to avoid living out the remainder of his days in prison. Putin has, at Trump's request, put him in the big chair before. He may have the ability to do so again. In my opinion, that's all that needs be said.
Now the presidency is mostly about revenge for trumplethinskin and regaining the wealth he has lost, and Putin can return.
* Of course this isn't quite right; any other winning R could do this, as well. But I think we all know that for a lot of reasons (but mostly ego), there isn't a universe where someone beats Trump for the R nomination and Trump does anything but undermine that person at every step (most likely by running a third party campaign against that person).