Ukraine war mega thread

[bsnub]

TASS. So the Three Stooges continue with the propaganda onslaught. Keep shoveling the horseshit.

[sabang]

Washington has given billions of dollars worth of weapons to Ukraine. A timeline of what and when, and the price tag, since the start of the war.

AUGUST 18, 2022


Since Russia invaded Ukraine, the United States has sent over $9 billion worth of military aid to support Kyiv’s war effort. This massive arms transfer has included a wide range of weapons, from anti-armor missiles to helicopters and beyond.

With the constant flow of news about the war, it can be hard to keep track of all these weapons packages, so we at Responsible Statecraft decided to put together a timeline of every arms shipment that has been announced since the war began. And whenever a new transfer is announced, we’ll update this page to reflect it.

Before jumping into the timeline, it is important to note a couple of things. First, this list only contains publicly announced information. The Pentagon admitted on August 11 to sending at least one type of missile that had not been previously mentioned in their press releases, so there’s reason to believe that this list is not exhaustive.

Second, there are two different sources for these lethal aid packages. One, which has made up the vast majority of transfers to date, is known as a “presidential drawdown.” This means that the White House and Pentagon agree to send weapons to Ukraine from U.S. stockpiles, after which DoD can use the funds to replenish their stocks by purchasing new arms from defense contractors. Biden has used this authority an unprecedented 18 times in order to send weapons to Ukraine, with most of the funding coming from money that Congress has set aside to arm Kyiv.

The other source of weapons is the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, or USAI. This is a special fund within the Pentagon’s budget that is used to purchase new weapons from contractors rather than drawing from existing stockpiles. Transfers from these funds do not require additional approval from Congress.

Without further ado, here is a timeline of every major weapons shipment or funding package announced since February 24:
August 19


The Pentagon announced that it will send an additional $775 million worth of security assistance to Ukraine via presidential drawdown, including:
— HIMARS ammunition
— Artillery ammunition
— Javelin anti-armor systems
— ScanEagle surveillance drones
— High-speed anti-radiation missiles (HARM) (These missiles are fired from planes at targets on the ground.)
— Various armored vehicles

---

August 8
The Pentagon announced that it will send $1 billion worth of security assistance to Ukraine via presidential drawdown, including:
— HIMARS ammunition (This is an acronym for High Mobility Artillery Rocket System. These mobile missile launchers can fire a wide range of munitions, including rocket artillery and short-range ballistic missiles.)
— Artillery ammunition
— Javelin missiles and other anti-armor weapons

---

August 1
The Pentagon announced an additional $550 million of security aid via presidential drawdown, including:
— HIMARS ammunition
— Artillery ammunition

---

July 22
The Pentagon announced that it will send $270 million of military aid to Ukraine, with $175 million authorized via presidential drawdown and the other $95 million coming via USAI funds. This included:
— Four additional HIMARS
— HIMARS ammunition
— Four Command Post vehicles (These can be used as a tactical operations center or an armored ambulance, among other things.)
— Tank gun ammunition
— Phoenix Ghost drones (These are a type of “loitering munition,” or a weapon that can wait in the air for extended periods of time before attacking a target. This was created by the United States for use in Ukraine.)

---

July 8
The Pentagon announced an additional $400 million of military assistance via presidential drawdown, including:
— Four additional HIMARS
— HIMARS ammunition
— Artillery ammunition

---

July 1
The Pentagon announced that it will send $820 million of security aid, with $50 million authorized via presidential drawdown and the remaining $770 million coming via USAI funds. This included:
— HIMARS ammunition
— Two National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) (This system launches missiles to defend against various types of aircraft, including drones.)
— Artillery ammunition

---

June 23
The Pentagon announced an additional $450 million in military assistance via presidential drawdown, including:
— Four HIMARS
— Artillery ammunition
— Grenade launchers
— Patrol boats

---

June 15
The Pentagon announced an additional $1 billion in lethal aid, with $350 million authorized via presidential drawdown and $650 million coming from USAI funds. This included:
— Howitzers (This is a popular long-range artillery weapon.)
— Artillery ammunition
— HIMARS ammunition
— Two Harpoon coastal defense systems (These launch missiles that fly just above the surface of the water to attack planes and ships.)

---

June 1
The Pentagon announced an additional $700 million in military assistance via presidential drawdown, including:
— HIMARS
— HIMARS ammunition
— Javelin missiles and other anti-armor weapons
— Artillery ammunition
— Four Mi-17 helicopters (These can be used for transport or combat.)

---

May 19
The Pentagon announced $100 million in lethal aid via presidential drawdown, including:
— Howitzers
On the same day, Congress passed a $40 billion aid package for Ukraine, roughly half of which was earmarked for military assistance.

---

May 6
The Pentagon announced $150 million in military aid via presidential drawdown, including:
— Artillery ammunition

---

April 21
DoD announced $800 million in further aid via presidential drawdown, including:
— Howitzers
— Artillery ammunition
— Phoenix Ghost drones

---

April 13
The Pentagon announced that it will send an additional $800 million in military assistance via presidential drawdown, including:
— Howitzers
— Artillery ammunition
— Switchblade drones (This is another form of loitering munition.)
— Javelin missiles and other anti-armor weapons
— Armored personnel carriers
— 11 Mi-17 helicopters
— Various types of explosives

---

April 6
The Pentagon announced an addition $100 million in aid via presidential drawdown, including:
— Javelin anti-armor systems

---

April 1
DoD announced that it will send $300 million in lethal aid using USAI funds, including:
— Laser-guided rocket systems
— Switchblade drones
— Puma surveillance drones
— Anti-drone systems
— Armored vehicles

---

March 16
The Pentagon announced that it will send $800 million worth of military aid via presidential drawdown. The exact contents of this package are unclear, but it likely included Mi-17 helicopters, Javelin missiles, and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles.

---

March 12
The White House announced that it will send $200 million in lethal aid via presidential drawdown, including:
— Javelin missiles
— Stinger missiles

---

March 10
Congress approved $13.6 billion in aid to Ukraine, roughly half of which was earmarked for military assistance.

---

February 25
The White House announced that it will send $350 million in military aid via presidential drawdown, including:
— Anti-armor weapons
— Small arms

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/20...in-us-history/

[sabang]

Excellent Article:-


The Washington Post has launched a new history-shaping exercise, but it fails to ask the right questions and omits Biden’s most serious mistakes.

AUGUST 19, 2022


The United States got it half right on Ukraine. That is the picture that emerges from the Washington Post’s extensive new reporting on the lead up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The Post advances a narrative that the Biden administration no doubt embraces: that the Intelligence Community performed superbly in providing early warning to the White House about the gathering storm, and that the White House did everything within its power to stop this invasion before it began by talking tough to Russian leaders, providing robust military support to Ukraine, and working to organize a united front among NATO allies.

This depiction rings only partially true. Certainly, the record on the Russian invasion represents a resounding success for American intelligence. And policymakers used the time afforded by early and accurate warnings from the IC to prepare Ukraine and NATO allies for the coming onslaught. Absent such preparation, Russia’s initial bid to seize Kyiv and sweep the Zelensky government quickly from power might have been far more successful.

Nonetheless, the Biden administration’s efforts to avert the war altogether come across as quite lacking. As Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov put it during the weeks preceding the invasion, for Russia “the key to everything is the guarantee that NATO will not expand eastward.” But nowhere in Post’s account is there any mention that the White House considered offering concrete compromises regarding Ukraine’s future admission into NATO.

In fact, prior to his video meeting with Putin last December, as Russian forces were massing near Ukrainian borders and Putin was demanding that Washington forswear accepting Ukraine into NATO, Biden made his position quite clear to the White House press corps: “I don’t accept anybody’s red line.” Following that video meeting, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan explained Biden’s reasoning: “He stands by the proposition that countries should be able freely to choose who they associate with.”

This is consistent with what Derek Chollet, counselor to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, told the War On the Rocks podcast in April: compromises over Ukraine’s NATO aspirations were not “on the table” in U.S.-Russia talks leading up to the invasion.

Instead, according to the Post Biden told Putin in the video meeting that “Ukraine was unlikely to join NATO any time soon.” The unstated implication by the Postwas that such an assurance deprived Putin of any legitimate reason for concern. Ironically, however, Biden’s statement probably increased rather than decreased Putin’s alarm. Trust levels between Washington and Moscow have long been near zero, and the Kremlin has believed that the United States employs equivocal assurances about American intentions as a cover for deepening its military involvement in Ukraine and elsewhere along Russia’s periphery. Putin understands well that if Washington opposes Ukrainian membership in NATO, Kyiv cannot be admitted. Biden’s implicit suggestion that the United States lacks agency on this question was bound to ring hollow.

The Biden administration’s apparent belief that threats of draconian economic sanctions and stiff military countermeasures could prompt Putin to rethink the costs and benefits of an invasion was a fundamental misreading of Russia’s threat perceptions. Moscow has made clear for years that it regards Ukrainian and Georgian membership in NATO as a redline, something that would threaten Russia’s core security interests. In Georgia in 2008 and again in Ukraine in 2014, it had demonstrated that it was willing to use force to prevent such outcomes.

Attempting to deter Russia from enforcing that redline was a fool’s errand. Vital national interests are just that — issues perceived as essential to a nation’s survival. By contrast, while Washington may have considered Kyiv’s NATO aspirations as desirable, no serious analyst considered them a matter of existential concern to Washington.

“Ukraine is a core Russian interest but not an American one, so Russia will always be able to maintain escalatory dominance there,” as Jeffrey Goldberg described then-President Obama’s view of the matter in 2016.

Given this reality, and given that the Biden team had initially proclaimed a goal of making US relations with Russia “stable and predictable” so it could focus on the rise of China, exploring a compromise would have made sense. Washington’s failure to seek a mutually acceptable diplomatic outcome in Ukraine is particularly striking given Zelensky’s own proposal, offered in negotiations over a settlement weeks after the Russian invasion, that Ukraine declare itself a neutral state, allied neither to the West nor Russia, with its security ensured by a group of international guarantors.

Would a compromise over NATO enlargement have averted what is proving to be a tragedy in Ukraine for all involved? We cannot know. But Americans deserve some real answers about the unwillingness to explore one. The Post’sarticle is the latest in a long line of reporting on this conflict that fails to ask the right questions.

On Russian invasion, US intel got it right — but policymakers stumbled - Responsible Statecraft

[panama hat]

UN chief Guterres speaks for demilitarization of Zaporozhye nuclear power plant in Ukraine

Excellent . . . Russia should fuck off then.

[David48atTD]

Excellent Article:-
On Russian invasion, US intel got it right — but policymakers stumbled - Responsible Statecraft

No, it's a BULLSHIT ARTICLE

It's not written by the Washington Post, it's Russian State Propaganda which cherry picks and twists a very in-depth article (14 chapters) by the WP which is behind a paywall.

It's viewable from this link ... https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...amble_inline_1 Don't know how that works.

[David48atTD]

If you want to read some other articles from that series try ...

5 things you need to know about Russia’s intelligence failures ahead of the invasion of Ukraine

1. A clandestine branch of Russia’s security service was deeply involved in the Kremlin’s failed war plan, assuring officials in Moscow that Ukraine’s government would fall quickly and deploying operatives to install a puppet regime.


2. FSB officers were so confident they would seize the levers of power in Kyiv that they spent the final days before the war arranging accommodations in the capital.


You can read the rest here ... https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...r-fsb-ukraine/

[David48atTD]

By the numbers: Keeping track of the single largest arms transfer in US history - Responsible Statecraft

What, because the 'responsible state craft' wrote this article it's credible?

'responsible state craft' is part of the stable of quincyinst.org

[baldrick]

No, it's a BULLSHIT ARTICLE

All these people who wail about the USA meddling in other countries and then wail about the USA not meddling in the affairs of other countries.

[bsnub]

No, it's a BULLSHIT ARTICLE

It is par the course for the Three Stooges, who flood these threads with nothing but propaganda lies and horseshit on a daily basis.

[sabang]

Actually a rational analysis of Russian Intelligence failures would be quite interesting, however the excellent article linked above is focused on US Diplomatic failures.
It is totally in sync with what Jack Matlock, John Mearsheimer, Noam Chomsky, Pat Buchanan, Henry Kissinger and many others have been saying. This war could, and should have been avoided. But it wasn't- and at what cost??

[sabang]

Just because someone/ something advances a narrative that you don't like, or disagree with, or just plain don't want the public to read does not make it 'in-credible' david. You are acting like a slightly less embittered version of bsnub and 'arry- and believe me that is no compliment. FYI Responsible Statecraft is a highly credible American publication, read by many inside the Beltway. If there is an Editorial bias, it is towards the so called Realist school of foreign relations. They, like me, consider the Neo-con school as highly damaging to US and western interests (I wonder why?).

If you have a point to make, or a critique to make- then make it. Rather than taking cheap little juvenile ad hom potshots which mean and say nothing. I had always considered you as a better poster than that.

[bsnub]

It is totally in sync with what Jack Matlock, John Mearsheimer, Noam Chomsky, Pat Buchanan, Henry Kissinger and many others have been saying. This war could, and should have been avoided. But it wasn't- and at what cost??

The WaPo article that David posted totally blows that hogwash out of the water. The evidence is overwhelming that Putin could not have been swayed. You are as wrong now as you were when you claimed this war would never happen. Once again, the WaPo article linked by David shows in incredible detail what really happened.

You were wrong then, and you are still wrong now. Your epic fail continues.

[David48atTD]

No, the deception is with your article.

The title ... "By the numbers: Keeping track of the single largest arms transfer in US history"

Has the article given it's sources for it facts? - NO

Has the article given it's comparisons for it facts? - NO To be the 'largest', it has to be great than the second largest.

Has the article given any comparisons for it facts? - NO

Yet the article and you are representing it as a fact ... with absolutely no proof.

So, I reassert, the whole article is baseless on comparison fact and thus bullshit.

[David48atTD]

If you want some facts, and these relate to total war costs, re-based to current costs try this ...

Detailed findings & methodology

World War II remains as the costliest conflict in American history, accounting for nearly 36% of the country’s gross domestic product in 1945, or $4.7 trillion based on inflation-adjusted constant dollars.
More recently, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan rank as the second- and third- most expensive conflicts in American history, respectively.
The war in Afghanistan is the longest in U.S. history, nearly 18 years and counting, though it is not among the longest wars in history.

Cost of war: The 13 most expensive campaigns in U.S. history

[Backspin]

Yikes. Certainly not condoning it, but I guess some fanatical Nazi types make good soldiers.

It's photoshopped fraud. It's totally fucking illegal to have Nazi symbols in Russia.

Law Against Rehabilitation of Nazism - Wikipedia

[Backspin]

Botched terrorist assassination attempt on Alex Dugin ends up killing his 30 year old daughter. But he is alive and uninjured.

Someone actually thought this was a good idea. The fierced retribution will be demanded. The biggest hawks in Russia just won the controls of the war.


Yahoo news

Daughter of Putin Propagandist Killed in Car Bomb Outside Moscow, Reports Say

[panama hat]

The fierced retribution will be demanded.

Do fuck off with your incel wank . . . Russia invaded Ukraine without provocation. Tens of thousands of Ukrainians have been slaughtered by Russian soldiers.

It's not written by the Washington Post, it's Russian State Propaganda

Ah . . . so yet another lie by one of the Twat-Trio . . . no surprise

Actually

Actually what? Oh this:

Has the article given it's sources for it facts? - NO

Has the article given it's comparisons for it facts? - NO To be the 'largest', it has to be great than the second largest.

Has the article given any comparisons for it facts? - NO

Yet the article and you are representing it as a fact ... with absolutely no proof.

[bsnub]

's photoshopped fraud. It's totally fucking illegal to have Nazi symbols in Russia.

You are once again proving to be a clueless imbecile. Russia is awash in neo-Nazi activity and the symbols are everywhere. How can one person be such a clueless buffoon?

[panama hat]

How can one person be such a clueless buffoon?

Backspit not realising that you're referring to him thinks 'Hold my mid-strength beer':

It's totally fucking illegal to have Nazi symbols in Russia.

The Nazi-inspired symbol used by Russia in war against Ukraine finds way to downtown Murmansk

[sabang]

Russia invaded Ukraine without provocation.

An absolute, total lie- and everyone vaguely intelligent knows it. Ok david- welcome to the bonehead brigade, and you report to snubby & 'arry now. Hope you like it down there.


Back on topic, I found this stuff by a retired Australian Ambassador quite interesting-



Following the war in Ukraine

By Dennis Argall
Aug 19, 2022


To write in real terms about war is not to condone war. War is an inappropriate activity for a species calling itself sapiens.

Compared with other major conflicts, information about the present war in Ukraine, at least since the Russian arrival in February 2022, is



with a bit of searching.

The war from 2014 to early 2022, in eastern Ukraine, is harder to track, there being a lack of western media interest and the ready acceptance of Ukraine government labelling of the opposition as separatist and terrorist, without regard for history. Reports of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are of value and show a persistence of shelling against civilian targets, mainly by Ukraine forces.

It is useful to look at the OSCE’s history and contrast with recent international manners.

Russia’s armed forces are the largest in Europe, those of Ukraine the second largest. At the outset both sides were mainly equipped with common weapons, as existed in the USSR and as have been modified from Soviet weapons.

This is an article on the scale of the military-industrial complex of Ukraine; the article appears to have been published by this western establishment site soon after 24 February

There have been these trends.

1. Russia initially attacked Ukraine on all fronts on 24 February. It seems likely that President Putin did not expect Ukrainian nationalist opposition of the intensity that developed. It is definitely the case that delaying the assault until after the Winter Olympic Games in Beijing damaged vehicles and troops camped out near the Ukraine border.
2. It may be the case as claimed by some Russian commentators that the advance on Kyiv was a feint to distract the preponderant effort by the Ukraine defence force towards Kyiv while the Russians secured territory in their major objectives in eastern Ukraine. In any case, that was achieved. The retreat of Russian forces saw the arrival of Ukraine secret police to eliminate the disloyal. The legend of Russian atrocities in Bucha, so advantageous for showing to distinguished guests, may have been created by Ukraine. Trust no one.
3. Russia eliminated Ukraine air defence capabilities in the first day or so. They did not anticipate that the US (USAID and Elon Musk) would
4. . He’s not a native English speaker, he’s drawing on Ukraine sources as well as Russian. It’s hard work to follow. He cannot be reporting from Ukraine, the independence of the reports would bring a treason charge in Ukraine.

This was written on 15 March, to suggest a framework for observing events. I do not have a crystal ball.

https://johnmenadue.com/following-the-war-in-ukraine/


The Youtube source above is useful for following the short term progress of this war that should never have happened, and as the author points out:-

There is no substitute for looking at daily situation reports and observing over time to see if what is reported is real two weeks later

[bsnub]

An absolute, total lie- and everyone vaguely intelligent knows it.

Bullshit. Read the Wapo article you coward. Except you can not handle the truth because it totally implodes your shitty fake narrative...

The WaPo article that David posted totally blows that hogwash out of the water. The evidence is overwhelming that Putin could not have been swayed. You are as wrong now as you were when you claimed this war would never happen. Once again, the WaPo article linked by David shows in incredible detail what really happened.

You were wrong then, and you are still wrong now. Your epic fail continues.

[sabang]

The average, intelligent reader is quite capable of deciding that for themselves snubchild. The boneheads can think whatever they want to think.

‘Not a Justification but a Provocation’: Chomsky on the Root Causes of the Russia Ukraine War - CounterPunch.org

[David48atTD]

‘Not a Justification but a Provocation’: Chomsky on the Root Causes of the Russia Ukraine War - CounterPunch.org

More Bullshit ...

The Author is Ramzy Baroud, a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle

His opening statement is, and I quote ... "One of the reasons that Russian media has been completely blocked in the West"

Well fuck me ... Sabang seems to keep finding Russian media easily enough.

Russia is the one who has completely censored non-Russian propaganda.



From Ramzy Baroud other recent article he pens ...

Though Russia and its allies are now mostly focused on claiming some kind of victory in Ukraine, their ultimate goal is to sow the seed for a different economic balance, with the hope that it will ultimately force a renegotiation of today’s globalization, therefore the West’s economic hegemony.
Russia is clearly invested in a new global economic system, but without isolating itself in the process. On the other hand, the West is torn.
The End of Laissez-Faire: Russia’s Attempt at Reshaping the World Economy - CounterPunch.org

[baldrick]

Well the sad little fcukwit who got the bomb that was aimed at her dad was some delicious irony. Now the Russian tucker can wail and gnash his teeth at the unfairness of it all

His " foundation of geopolitics" has influenced a lot of the past 20 years of cnutish behaviour and is likely the base of pootins god complex

Suck it up

[bsnub]

The average, intelligent reader is quite capable of deciding that for themselves snubchild.

You are a moron and far from intelligent. You are just looking more and more stupid with every post, especially when the Wapo article totally debunks and kills off the idiotic false narrative you are trying to cling to. Every diplomatic means was tried for months to prevent the war. The US, the Europeans and the Brits all tried exhaustively for months to try and stop this war that they knew Putin was intent on starting. From the article...

During Lavrov’s nearly 18 years as Russia’s foreign minister, a succession of American diplomats had found him blunt and doctrinaire, but occasionally frank and realistic about relations between their two countries. After again going over the Ukraine situation, Blinken stopped and asked, “Sergei, tell me what it is you’re really trying to do?” Was this all really about the security concerns Russia had raised again and again — about NATO’s “encroachment” toward Russia and a perceived military threat? Or was it about Putin’s almost theological belief that Ukraine was and always had been an integral part of Mother Russia?


Without answering, Lavrov opened the door and walked away, his staff trailing behind.


It was the last time top national security officials of Russia and the United States would meet in person before the invasion.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...amble_inline_1

Read the article, or continue to look like a fool pushing a debunked false narrative.