"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (8 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Politicians Of all hues in every country say that we have donated this many billions and that so many billions and a high proportion and so much of it is bull. So much of what we have given was going to be disposed of.
All good points, but how should military aid be valued for better clarity ? Perhaps four categories:
  1. newly produced for NATO - planned replacement for #3 and 4 below, thus any given to Ukraine will need replacing.
  2. newly produced specifically for Ukraine - not depleting NATO stocks. For example 155mm shells shipped from production line to Ukraine.
  3. Pulled from fresh stock - currently in NATO use, thus any donated stock will need to be replaced
  4. Pulled from short dated or obsolete stock - sitting in warehouses, marked for replacement and/or disposal
The difference between # 3 and 4 would need some rules. For example, the Challenger 2 tank is marked for replacement, but not until the Challenger 3 arrives in the late 2020s. Nonetheless, such categorization of military aid valuation would help to placate domestic complaints that Ukraine is getting billions $ that could be otherwise spend on on domestic priorities. I'm most interested in how much military aid from the first three categories has been given.
 
Last edited:
Well, that's good news.


Now, what about Jordan's four hundred Challenger 1s? Refurbish them over the winter and send to Ukraine in spring 2024.

 
Just to make things worse...

 

Users who are viewing this thread