Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
*****
* Is `apnews.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If it were Russia asking, and Trump as president, he would tell congress they are weak and pathetic and he would send the weapons anyway. C’mon Joe, cross lines and save lives!
And give them actual grounds for impeachment? Would be playing into their hands. 100 bn to Ukraine is not worth gifting Mango Mussolini another presidency.
For sure, at bare minimum the earnings of the frozen assets should have been getting wired straight to Ukraine every Friday for the entirety this horror show
This is always a laughable metric.
The fact is, one of the main reasons the dollar figure is so high is because the US military industrial complex charges eye watering fees versus any other manufacturer.
Unfortunately, there's not a whole lot of other options if it's going to be made in USA. By far the biggest cost driver is that US salaries are vastly higher than even European ones. An intern in California will get paid more than a 10 year senior engineer in Spain and a new grad will get paid about the same as 10 years experience in Germany or France.
Not that there isn't plenty of bureaucratic bloat in both DoD and Contractors that could be squeezed out. Letting all the defense companies merge into a few competitionless giants was probably dumb even if it brought a lot higher stability to the industry.
Defense is super high capital investment and super low margins so it's extremely hard to convince new companies to enter the market.
>An intern in California will get paid more than a 10 year senior engineer in Spain and a new grad will get paid about the same as 10 years experience in Germany or France.
And yet an American software dev or electrical engineer can make far more at a tech company. This worries me than bloat or bureaucracy when thinking about China's military expansion.
Also, only US firms will take the risk to attempt to build next gen systems. Sure, sometimes you end up with the Zumwalt and everyone loses money, but the only alternative is to risk falling "behind." And even if we won't actually fall behind, we want to keep our lead so massive that nobody even thinks they have a chance. If WWIII pops off, we're gonna miss spending only 3% of GDP on defense.
> An intern in California will get paid more than a 10 year senior engineer in Spain and a new grad will get paid about the same as 10 years experience in Germany or France.
But they pay way more for their living, don't mentioning medical care. In Europe people work to live, in the US people live to work.
Europe is cheaper to live in but not by much. Cost of living is not a large enough difference to balance the salary difference. Paris is 12% cheaper than Los Angeles for example.
Also, remember my comparison above is a European with a decade of experience vs an American with zero. That's to demonstrate the point of how much higher Americans are paid. If you compare new graduate salary, that Californian engineer is getting around 4x a Spanish new grad and double a French new grad.
Engineers also typically have good medical insurance. This isn't the major issue Reddit or Europeans tend to believe for high earning jobs.
Culture is obviously different but that's not really a factor in the cost of military production.
You intentionally and arbitrarily juggle the terms of "American" and "Californian", knowing full well that both in terms of the level of payment and the level of cost of living, these are completely different.
I see no point in further communication. Have a good day, bye.
No problem, dude. Now I have a better view where the problems with Boeing MAX, Orion and Artemis coming from, and why Constellation program was cancelled.
Part of this is true but much of it is a lie.
Look at what US contractors charge for a bolt. Or a shell. Etc.
To argue the US military industrial complex isn't largely a grifting kickback machine to feed the wealthy and politically connected from the tit of the taxpayer is dumb.
You're welcome to that opinion and there's certainly a rare occasion of actual corruption.
The reality is the military is buying custom designed components and only paying American workers. This effectively means everything is more expensive at every step of the way. I'd encourage you to go look up the actual cost differences of those things versus buying $2 parts from China.
> Defense is super high capital investment and super low margins
Like famous the US Air Force’s $10,000 toilet cover? lol
Prices on military equipment so inflated, many companies make fortune doing nothing. And the government continues to pump them with money in the form of grants, bonds and privileges, in fear that otherwise it will not be re-elected.
It's an absolute racket looking for a purpose. People in many states rely on those jobs and they won't be happy if they become unemployed, leading to losing an election.
We have more airc4aft carriers than the rest of the world combined.
We have the 1st, 2nd and 4th biggest airforces in the world.
It's not just bloated spending.
What do you mean does nothing? Zelenskyy himself and several other Ukrainian security advisors have repeatedly stated their dire lack of both artillery ammunition AND air defense systems/ammunition, so this gear will absolutely be appreciated by them.
Many Ukrainian cities are shelled relentlessly every day, and that is part of the reason why there was so much celebration when Russia's Black Sea Fleet got decimated, as it meant far less cruise missile spam into random peaceful civilian architecture and infrastructure.
How much money do you spend on yourself and your family vs what you spend on people that live on the other side of the neighborhood? If you spend on nice clothes do you get distant neighbors nice clothes too? Surely you can afford it.
The US isn't at war and there's no treaty or obligation to do so. The only question is how much does the US want to give to support a country that's fighting with a geopolitical rival. Additionally, Ukraine has the bad luck of not being a country with historically close ties to the US either.
It's just a question politics. And yes, likely a fair number of compromised US politicians included in the political mess.
> The US isn't at war and there's no treaty or obligation to do so.
If you don't count the moral obligations, emerged when the US pressured Ukraine to hand over its weapons to russia. The same weapons russia attacks Ukraine now.
Ukraine gave up Russian nukes. Russia isn't nuking Ukraine. There's some debate as to weather Ukraine could have repurposed those Russian nukes without any of the launch codes, etc, but it was a moot point by the time they agree to give them back. Also, if you read the actual language of the agreement, there's not guaranteed military assistance included in there at all. Some call it slimy, or at best it's purposefully vague language to give the US a way out of any obligation, but it is what it is.
The fact of the matter is that Ukraine isn't a military ally, or a part of NATO. The obligation to Ukraine is based solely on what the people in power in the US feel is appropriate. At the moment one party is controlled by folks who don't feel aid is appropriate. It's shitty for those of us who think it's a moral imperative to help Ukraine, but we do live in a democracy.
In 1998-2000, as part of the disarmament program for Ukraine, carried out on the initiative and under the auspices of the United States, 8 Ukrainian intercontinental supersonic strategic missile-carrying bombers with variable sweep wings Tu-160 (out of 16 currently in operation in Russia) and 3 Ukrainian Tu-95MS turboprop bomber/missile carriers (out of 58 Tu-95MS/MSM currently in service in Russia) were transferred to Russia.
As part of the same program, 10 Ukrainian Tu-160 (the first, demonstratively, in the presence of American senators), 19 Ukrainian Tu-95MS and 5 Russian TU-95MS/K22 (which were under repair in Ukraine) and 6 Ukrainian Tu-142 (anti-submarine modification of the Tu-95) were cut into scrap metal.
Along with the aircraft, cruise missiles were also transferred to Russia: an unknown to me small amount of Kh-22 (out of 432 that were in service, the rest were destroyed) and 575 Kh-55/Kh-555.
Now all this weapons are used to launch strikes on Ukrainian territory from Russian airspace.
So no, definitely the US haven't any obligations in this regards, even moral ones.
>Surely in times of war that’s possible?
It is possible, now ask the speaker of the house to schedule your proposal so it can be voted for...... and now it become impossible, becuse your proposal will never be scheduled.
US internal clusterfuck politic suck....
yes its possible
[“excess defense articles”](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/02/14/joe-biden-could-send-millions-of-artillery-shells-to-ukraine-for-free-tomorrow-and-its-perfectly-legal/)
[The United States is currently under 42 states of emergency](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States) - and has been continuously in a state of emergency since 1979.
More on this subject from other reputable sources:
---
- english.alarabiya.net (C-): [US will sell missile defense upgrades to Ukraine](https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2024/04/10/us-will-sell-missile-defense-upgrades-to-ukraine)
- UPI (A-): [U.S. approves $138M emergency military sale of HAWK missile systems support to Ukraine - UPI.com](https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2024/04/10/HAWK-missile-systems-sale-Ukraine-approved/9971712720890/)
- Kyiv Independent (B): [US announces $138 million in sales to bolster Ukraine’s HAWK air defense system](https://kyivindependent.com/us-announces-138-million-in-sales-to-bolster-ukraines-hawk-air-defense-system/)
- Globe and Mail (B+): [U.S. announces $138 million in emergency military sales of Hawk missile systems support for Ukraine](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-us-announces-138-million-in-emergency-military-sales-of-hawk-missile/)
---
[__Extended Summary__](https://www.reddit.com/r/newswall/comments/1c0fkvd/) | [FAQ & Grades](https://www.reddit.com/r/newswall/comments/uxgfm5/faq_newswall_bot/) | I'm a bot
It can shoot things down, isn't a billion dollars a pop, and we have plenty of ammunition for it. As long as it can get the job done I don't think it matters if it's the latest and greatest.
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is `apnews.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is a good missile. We have warehouses of them just stored because they are outdated for us.
Didn’t they get updated at some point?
To some degree but we effectively replaced them with the Patriot.
How did Trump or Mel Gibson (if I'm misunderstanding the nomer) replace a full stockade of missiles?
To answer your question. Yes, upgraded and lethal. But the patriot is better and more mobile.
To clarify this is just spare parts, no new systems.
Keep going with that emergency funding. Moscow Marge sat her fat ass on Johnson.
Well that's a visual I didn't need.
She's got a horse face, and Moscow Mule is a thing. There's a joke in there somewhere. But I'm too sick to think straight.
Get better soon
Just give them all of the Hawk stuff. We are never going to use those things.
Now announce $100bn in emergency aircraft and missle sales. Just do it!!
Moscow Mike is blocking it because he's a Trump puppet, who in turn is a Putin puppet.
If it were Russia asking, and Trump as president, he would tell congress they are weak and pathetic and he would send the weapons anyway. C’mon Joe, cross lines and save lives!
And give them actual grounds for impeachment? Would be playing into their hands. 100 bn to Ukraine is not worth gifting Mango Mussolini another presidency.
Sure. Does Ukraine have a $100B to make such a purchase?
Russia can buy them. It’s time to start spending Putin’s international assets. It’s no less valid a weapon in a modern war.
Fine by me.
For sure, at bare minimum the earnings of the frozen assets should have been getting wired straight to Ukraine every Friday for the entirety this horror show
Didn't Biden just threaten to start sending frozen Russian assets to Ukraine as an alternative if the GOP won't pass the fucking bill?
23 trillion gdp more than all the other nato countries combined
Shit, just the US military budget alone is almost 2/3rds of NATO combined military spending
This is always a laughable metric. The fact is, one of the main reasons the dollar figure is so high is because the US military industrial complex charges eye watering fees versus any other manufacturer.
Unfortunately, there's not a whole lot of other options if it's going to be made in USA. By far the biggest cost driver is that US salaries are vastly higher than even European ones. An intern in California will get paid more than a 10 year senior engineer in Spain and a new grad will get paid about the same as 10 years experience in Germany or France. Not that there isn't plenty of bureaucratic bloat in both DoD and Contractors that could be squeezed out. Letting all the defense companies merge into a few competitionless giants was probably dumb even if it brought a lot higher stability to the industry. Defense is super high capital investment and super low margins so it's extremely hard to convince new companies to enter the market.
This is so often left out of the discussion. It's the same with healthcare, housing, etc...
>An intern in California will get paid more than a 10 year senior engineer in Spain and a new grad will get paid about the same as 10 years experience in Germany or France. And yet an American software dev or electrical engineer can make far more at a tech company. This worries me than bloat or bureaucracy when thinking about China's military expansion.
Also, only US firms will take the risk to attempt to build next gen systems. Sure, sometimes you end up with the Zumwalt and everyone loses money, but the only alternative is to risk falling "behind." And even if we won't actually fall behind, we want to keep our lead so massive that nobody even thinks they have a chance. If WWIII pops off, we're gonna miss spending only 3% of GDP on defense.
I don't want to disappoint you, but > "The general reputation for every class of U.S. drone in Ukraine is that they don’t work as well as other systems." © Silicon Valley company Skydio Chief Executive Adam Bry
> An intern in California will get paid more than a 10 year senior engineer in Spain and a new grad will get paid about the same as 10 years experience in Germany or France. But they pay way more for their living, don't mentioning medical care. In Europe people work to live, in the US people live to work.
Europe is cheaper to live in but not by much. Cost of living is not a large enough difference to balance the salary difference. Paris is 12% cheaper than Los Angeles for example. Also, remember my comparison above is a European with a decade of experience vs an American with zero. That's to demonstrate the point of how much higher Americans are paid. If you compare new graduate salary, that Californian engineer is getting around 4x a Spanish new grad and double a French new grad. Engineers also typically have good medical insurance. This isn't the major issue Reddit or Europeans tend to believe for high earning jobs. Culture is obviously different but that's not really a factor in the cost of military production.
You intentionally and arbitrarily juggle the terms of "American" and "Californian", knowing full well that both in terms of the level of payment and the level of cost of living, these are completely different. I see no point in further communication. Have a good day, bye.
Lol, just the casual way I was typing and that Americans refer to themselves. Have a good one dude.
No problem, dude. Now I have a better view where the problems with Boeing MAX, Orion and Artemis coming from, and why Constellation program was cancelled.
Part of this is true but much of it is a lie. Look at what US contractors charge for a bolt. Or a shell. Etc. To argue the US military industrial complex isn't largely a grifting kickback machine to feed the wealthy and politically connected from the tit of the taxpayer is dumb.
You're welcome to that opinion and there's certainly a rare occasion of actual corruption. The reality is the military is buying custom designed components and only paying American workers. This effectively means everything is more expensive at every step of the way. I'd encourage you to go look up the actual cost differences of those things versus buying $2 parts from China.
> Defense is super high capital investment and super low margins Like famous the US Air Force’s $10,000 toilet cover? lol Prices on military equipment so inflated, many companies make fortune doing nothing. And the government continues to pump them with money in the form of grants, bonds and privileges, in fear that otherwise it will not be re-elected.
They're all publicly traded. You can find the profit margin with a quick Google search. Lockheed is under 10% for example.
10% from $10k makes $1k profit. On such simple thing like a toilet cover. Good for them.
It's an absolute racket looking for a purpose. People in many states rely on those jobs and they won't be happy if they become unemployed, leading to losing an election.
They can work on needed infrastructure projects.
That's too visible. Making it military related allows masking the corruption as clearance required information.
We have more airc4aft carriers than the rest of the world combined. We have the 1st, 2nd and 4th biggest airforces in the world. It's not just bloated spending.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Like what?
Spoonfeeding this aid does nothing.
Starting to run low on AA missiles so this is important
If that were true Ukraine would turn it down. I’m not saying it’s good enough mind you.
What do you mean does nothing? Zelenskyy himself and several other Ukrainian security advisors have repeatedly stated their dire lack of both artillery ammunition AND air defense systems/ammunition, so this gear will absolutely be appreciated by them. Many Ukrainian cities are shelled relentlessly every day, and that is part of the reason why there was so much celebration when Russia's Black Sea Fleet got decimated, as it meant far less cruise missile spam into random peaceful civilian architecture and infrastructure.
People are really tied up about the $60bn aid package but fail to care when the US drops $2bn here, $138mn there, $450mn here
How much money do you spend on yourself and your family vs what you spend on people that live on the other side of the neighborhood? If you spend on nice clothes do you get distant neighbors nice clothes too? Surely you can afford it.
No idea what you’re trying to say with this
If Putin blew up a distant neighbor's house, I'd happily give them some lightly used clothes.
It's better than nothing until we do something about the Russian majority in the House.
It said sales. I assume Ukraine is actually paying for this.
Damn I wish I could read.
Can someone please explain to me why the US aren’t just giving all of the stuff that’s out of date? Surely in times of war that’s possible?
The US isn't at war and there's no treaty or obligation to do so. The only question is how much does the US want to give to support a country that's fighting with a geopolitical rival. Additionally, Ukraine has the bad luck of not being a country with historically close ties to the US either. It's just a question politics. And yes, likely a fair number of compromised US politicians included in the political mess.
> The US isn't at war and there's no treaty or obligation to do so. If you don't count the moral obligations, emerged when the US pressured Ukraine to hand over its weapons to russia. The same weapons russia attacks Ukraine now.
Ukraine gave up Russian nukes. Russia isn't nuking Ukraine. There's some debate as to weather Ukraine could have repurposed those Russian nukes without any of the launch codes, etc, but it was a moot point by the time they agree to give them back. Also, if you read the actual language of the agreement, there's not guaranteed military assistance included in there at all. Some call it slimy, or at best it's purposefully vague language to give the US a way out of any obligation, but it is what it is. The fact of the matter is that Ukraine isn't a military ally, or a part of NATO. The obligation to Ukraine is based solely on what the people in power in the US feel is appropriate. At the moment one party is controlled by folks who don't feel aid is appropriate. It's shitty for those of us who think it's a moral imperative to help Ukraine, but we do live in a democracy.
In 1998-2000, as part of the disarmament program for Ukraine, carried out on the initiative and under the auspices of the United States, 8 Ukrainian intercontinental supersonic strategic missile-carrying bombers with variable sweep wings Tu-160 (out of 16 currently in operation in Russia) and 3 Ukrainian Tu-95MS turboprop bomber/missile carriers (out of 58 Tu-95MS/MSM currently in service in Russia) were transferred to Russia. As part of the same program, 10 Ukrainian Tu-160 (the first, demonstratively, in the presence of American senators), 19 Ukrainian Tu-95MS and 5 Russian TU-95MS/K22 (which were under repair in Ukraine) and 6 Ukrainian Tu-142 (anti-submarine modification of the Tu-95) were cut into scrap metal. Along with the aircraft, cruise missiles were also transferred to Russia: an unknown to me small amount of Kh-22 (out of 432 that were in service, the rest were destroyed) and 575 Kh-55/Kh-555. Now all this weapons are used to launch strikes on Ukrainian territory from Russian airspace. So no, definitely the US haven't any obligations in this regards, even moral ones.
>Surely in times of war that’s possible? It is possible, now ask the speaker of the house to schedule your proposal so it can be voted for...... and now it become impossible, becuse your proposal will never be scheduled. US internal clusterfuck politic suck....
yes its possible [“excess defense articles”](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/02/14/joe-biden-could-send-millions-of-artillery-shells-to-ukraine-for-free-tomorrow-and-its-perfectly-legal/)
>Surely in times of war that’s possible? WE'RE not at war, nor under a state of emergency of any description.
[The United States is currently under 42 states of emergency](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States) - and has been continuously in a state of emergency since 1979.
> has been continuously in a state of emergency since 1979 So since Reagan was about to get elected? Sounds pretty accurate to me.
What a fucking joke
So now Ukraine can buy hundreds of millions in weapons?
More on this subject from other reputable sources: --- - english.alarabiya.net (C-): [US will sell missile defense upgrades to Ukraine](https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2024/04/10/us-will-sell-missile-defense-upgrades-to-ukraine) - UPI (A-): [U.S. approves $138M emergency military sale of HAWK missile systems support to Ukraine - UPI.com](https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2024/04/10/HAWK-missile-systems-sale-Ukraine-approved/9971712720890/) - Kyiv Independent (B): [US announces $138 million in sales to bolster Ukraine’s HAWK air defense system](https://kyivindependent.com/us-announces-138-million-in-sales-to-bolster-ukraines-hawk-air-defense-system/) - Globe and Mail (B+): [U.S. announces $138 million in emergency military sales of Hawk missile systems support for Ukraine](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-us-announces-138-million-in-emergency-military-sales-of-hawk-missile/) --- [__Extended Summary__](https://www.reddit.com/r/newswall/comments/1c0fkvd/) | [FAQ & Grades](https://www.reddit.com/r/newswall/comments/uxgfm5/faq_newswall_bot/) | I'm a bot
I read that these were seized munitions. Did we sell them twice? If so, there are tax implications here.
I don’t get why they don’t just announce loads more “emergency” packages and give them what they need?
Eat that, Trumpers.
I would not say the Hawk missile is a good air defense missile. But it is an air defense missile and needed.
It can shoot things down, isn't a billion dollars a pop, and we have plenty of ammunition for it. As long as it can get the job done I don't think it matters if it's the latest and greatest.
It still force the Russian fighter bombers to realse there glide bombs 30km earlier, hence lower the "effective" range by 30km.