"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (76 Viewers)
- Thread starter XBe02Drvr
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Probably scratching his head why he is (was?) working for the current US Govnt
View: https://mastodon.social/@MAKS23/116127720542380037
View: https://mastodon.social/@MAKS23/116127720542380037
Last edited:
ARTESH
Chief Master Sergeant
ThomasP
Chief Master Sergeant
re current monetary aid to Ukraine
Depending on how you count it, there is a figure of around $185 billion usually tossed around as the total amount the US has sent to Ukraine - not counting the $20 billion "loan" negotiated by Trump in the fiscal year 2025. The last US government appropriation in spending for Ukraine took place at the end of 2024.
Having said the above, it is important to understand that only about $110 billion out of said $185 billion has been disbursed as of today. There is still $65 billion obligated for Ukraine aid. Under US law, with "obligated" - as it relates to this subject - meaning that a law was passed by Congress stating that the amount MUST be given to Ukraine as aid. This means that the remaining $65 billion is still in the pipeline. In fact, some of the $65 billion was sent to Ukraine in various forms in 2025 (including the $20 billion "loan") under the Trump administration. The nature of, and exact amount of said aid has not been spoken of much although there have been a couple of public mentions. It is expected that disbursement will continue in 2026, though the nature and timing is being kept quiet in general.
The reasons for the secrecy should be obvious to anyone familiar with current political behavior in the US, so I am not going into the above subject further due to the probability of violating the forum guidelines on political discussion.
re the earlier lack of aggressive action against Russia in 2014 under Obama and in 2022 under Biden
No offense intended to Ukraine, but in 2014 Ukraine had no practical military ability to fight Russia in any kind of intense conventional war, They did not have the numbers under arms to deploy large enough forces to do so, nor the equipment. The Obama administration subsequently increased cooperation with (already begun in 2010) and training of the Ukrainian forces (while providing only non-lethal aid) with said efforts in significant part responsible for the subsequent increase in size and war-making ability of the Ukrainian military during the years between 2015 and 2022.
Under the 1st Trump administration, the aid begun by the Obama administration was continued and in fact increased, including the sending of some lethal aid.
Under the Biden administration before the beginning of the war in Feb'22, the training and aid continued - with a significant increase in lethal aid. After the war began I think that we are all familiar with what the Biden administration did to aid Ukraine, so I will not go into it here.
What the 2nd Trump administration has done/is doing is somewhat unclear (largely for political reasons) - however, there is still some aid going to Ukraine - but it is not necessarily what some people would like, either in nature or amount. Statements by the Trump administration that we should not be sending some things like additional Patriot systems in case the US gets into a war with someone, or in case of attack by ballistic missiles - because we might need them ourselves - could very well be correct.
re the 'failure' of the Obama and Biden administration in not acting aggressively enough, quickly enough
The reason the Obama administration did not get more involved in the 2014-15 fighting in Ukraine (aside from what I mentioned above) was the idea that it might drag the US into a proxy war with Russia, which could then lead to WWIII. The Joint Chiefs and the State Department both concluded the same.
When the US intelligence agencies realized (in late 2021) that Russia was gong to invade Ukraine, they informed Ukraine, and began making plans for what to do when the invasion began. Part of the contingency plans involved the deploying of US troops into Ukraine itself, either as combat troops or as rescue troops - said troops including units like elements of the 82nd Airborne Division (some of which were deployed to Poland in February), elements of the 75th Ranger Regiment (some of which were put on standby here in the US and some of which were sent to 'somewhere' in readiness for deployment to the Ukraine 'area'), elements of V Corps (some of which - including the HQ units - deployed to Poland and set up their HQ there, where it still remains today), as well as significant other military units that I am not going to mention here. However, the way it played out, the Joint Chiefs and the State Department both concluded it was best not to get directly involved, instead beginning the plan to 'weaken' Russia to the point where it could not sustain a conventional war, or expand the war further into Europe.
The units I mention above were told at the time that it was 50-50 whether they would be sent into Ukraine in active an/or passive support of the Ukrainian ground forces - and quite possibly that they would engage in combat with the Russians.
It should be noted that ALL 4 (or 5 depending on how you wish to count it) administrations came to the conclusion that it was best not to get into a direct confrontation with Russia - partly for fear of starting WWIII (whether conventional or nuclear) and partly because of the potential consequence(s) of a Russia devolving into chaos.
And last, but not least, I am not saying decisions that have been made are right or wrong (though I obviously know better than the State Department, NSA, CIA, DIA, JCS, War College, etc), just that there are rational reasons for most of them.
bleh
Depending on how you count it, there is a figure of around $185 billion usually tossed around as the total amount the US has sent to Ukraine - not counting the $20 billion "loan" negotiated by Trump in the fiscal year 2025. The last US government appropriation in spending for Ukraine took place at the end of 2024.
Having said the above, it is important to understand that only about $110 billion out of said $185 billion has been disbursed as of today. There is still $65 billion obligated for Ukraine aid. Under US law, with "obligated" - as it relates to this subject - meaning that a law was passed by Congress stating that the amount MUST be given to Ukraine as aid. This means that the remaining $65 billion is still in the pipeline. In fact, some of the $65 billion was sent to Ukraine in various forms in 2025 (including the $20 billion "loan") under the Trump administration. The nature of, and exact amount of said aid has not been spoken of much although there have been a couple of public mentions. It is expected that disbursement will continue in 2026, though the nature and timing is being kept quiet in general.
The reasons for the secrecy should be obvious to anyone familiar with current political behavior in the US, so I am not going into the above subject further due to the probability of violating the forum guidelines on political discussion.
re the earlier lack of aggressive action against Russia in 2014 under Obama and in 2022 under Biden
No offense intended to Ukraine, but in 2014 Ukraine had no practical military ability to fight Russia in any kind of intense conventional war, They did not have the numbers under arms to deploy large enough forces to do so, nor the equipment. The Obama administration subsequently increased cooperation with (already begun in 2010) and training of the Ukrainian forces (while providing only non-lethal aid) with said efforts in significant part responsible for the subsequent increase in size and war-making ability of the Ukrainian military during the years between 2015 and 2022.
Under the 1st Trump administration, the aid begun by the Obama administration was continued and in fact increased, including the sending of some lethal aid.
Under the Biden administration before the beginning of the war in Feb'22, the training and aid continued - with a significant increase in lethal aid. After the war began I think that we are all familiar with what the Biden administration did to aid Ukraine, so I will not go into it here.
What the 2nd Trump administration has done/is doing is somewhat unclear (largely for political reasons) - however, there is still some aid going to Ukraine - but it is not necessarily what some people would like, either in nature or amount. Statements by the Trump administration that we should not be sending some things like additional Patriot systems in case the US gets into a war with someone, or in case of attack by ballistic missiles - because we might need them ourselves - could very well be correct.
re the 'failure' of the Obama and Biden administration in not acting aggressively enough, quickly enough
The reason the Obama administration did not get more involved in the 2014-15 fighting in Ukraine (aside from what I mentioned above) was the idea that it might drag the US into a proxy war with Russia, which could then lead to WWIII. The Joint Chiefs and the State Department both concluded the same.
When the US intelligence agencies realized (in late 2021) that Russia was gong to invade Ukraine, they informed Ukraine, and began making plans for what to do when the invasion began. Part of the contingency plans involved the deploying of US troops into Ukraine itself, either as combat troops or as rescue troops - said troops including units like elements of the 82nd Airborne Division (some of which were deployed to Poland in February), elements of the 75th Ranger Regiment (some of which were put on standby here in the US and some of which were sent to 'somewhere' in readiness for deployment to the Ukraine 'area'), elements of V Corps (some of which - including the HQ units - deployed to Poland and set up their HQ there, where it still remains today), as well as significant other military units that I am not going to mention here. However, the way it played out, the Joint Chiefs and the State Department both concluded it was best not to get directly involved, instead beginning the plan to 'weaken' Russia to the point where it could not sustain a conventional war, or expand the war further into Europe.
The units I mention above were told at the time that it was 50-50 whether they would be sent into Ukraine in active an/or passive support of the Ukrainian ground forces - and quite possibly that they would engage in combat with the Russians.
It should be noted that ALL 4 (or 5 depending on how you wish to count it) administrations came to the conclusion that it was best not to get into a direct confrontation with Russia - partly for fear of starting WWIII (whether conventional or nuclear) and partly because of the potential consequence(s) of a Russia devolving into chaos.
And last, but not least, I am not saying decisions that have been made are right or wrong (though I obviously know better than the State Department, NSA, CIA, DIA, JCS, War College, etc), just that there are rational reasons for most of them.
bleh
Last edited:
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,306
- Jun 25, 2013
I don't want to get too deeply into politics, but it is interesting that many of the same people who were ideologically hysterical about the USSR and are hysterical about Chinese aggression (largely posturing so far) are so blasé about Russia's current invasion of Ukraine.
Either russian clowns or they accidentally posted their real losses claiming them as Ukrainian
View: https://mastodon.social/@MAKS23/116131632364330089
View: https://mastodon.social/@MAKS23/116131632364330089
RogerdeLluria
Staff Sergeant
- 1,409
- Jul 5, 2015
I vote for clowns ...
Starting with an initial force of roughly 900 to 1,000 tanks, Ukraine has strengthened its armored capabilities with 470 to 800 units from Western allies and former Soviet bloc countries, alongside over 540 captured Russian tanks. By early 2026, Ukraine has an estimated operational force of 1,100 to 1,500 tanks-
Yet, they lost almost 28000 tanks
Starting with an initial force of roughly 900 to 1,000 tanks, Ukraine has strengthened its armored capabilities with 470 to 800 units from Western allies and former Soviet bloc countries, alongside over 540 captured Russian tanks. By early 2026, Ukraine has an estimated operational force of 1,100 to 1,500 tanks-
Yet, they lost almost 28000 tanks
Ukraine targets Russian army command post using ATACMS missiles
Ukraine’s Armed Forces carried out a strike using U.S.-supplied ATACMS tactical ballistic missiles overnight on Feb. 24, targeting a Russian military command facility near Novopetrivka in the occupied Donetsk region, according to the General Staff of the Armed Forces of
Canada confirms new armored vehicle shipment to Ukraine
Canada on February 24, 2026, announced a new package of military assistance to Ukraine that includes the donation of more than 400 armored vehicles and the extension of its military training mission, Operation UNIFIER, for an additional three years, the
Ukraine confirms interception of over 140,000 aerial targets since 2022
Ukraine’s Air Force said it has destroyed more than 140,000 aerial targets since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, including over 2,000 Kh-101 cruise missiles and roughly 44,000 Shahed-type attack drones. The figures were released in an
It's OK. After all, they follow the historical tradition.
Comrade Stalin (whose cult is on the rise in the Russian Federation) claimed in October and November 1941 that the losses in the first 4 months of the war were:
USSR 1,748,000 - killed/wounded/missing
Germany over 4,500,000 - killed/wounded/prisoners
The text of his speech in Russian: Доклад Сталина И. В. на торжественном заседании 6 ноября 1941 г. — Викитека
I wonder... did they call Moscow each time when US-owned businesses were hit by Russian missiles and drones?
American Business in Ukraine Is Being Destroyed by Russia
More than 50% of the 600 members of the American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine have suffered direct damage to their buildings and infrastructure during the war, its president, Andy Hunder, says.
www.kyivpost.com
