cesmonkey Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 Quote The bill retains $300 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which allows the Pentagon to place contracts for equipment to send Kyiv. House Republican leaders had initially removed the $300 million in Ukraine aid amid opposition from the right flank of their caucus when they narrowly passed their version of the defense spending bill 218-210 in September. Quote Additionally, the bill provides an $800 million boost to the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit, for a total budget of $983 million in FY24. It also provides $200 million for Replicator, the Pentagon’s effort to buy and field thousands of drones by next August. Quote Separately, the compromise defense spending bill includes funding for multiyear contracts to procure six critical munitions: the Naval Strike Missile, the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System, the PATRIOT Advanced Capability-3, the Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile, the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile and the Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holien Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 5 hours ago, Carolus said: Great news after another night of Russian bombardment... If America could only ween itself off Oil... There is a pathway but too many on the right are against anything "green". A topic not for this thread but it would help the world and stop Americans being held hostage to oil price pressure. I wonder if Ukraine will listen to this advice from Biden or will take the Israeli position. Europe really needs to up it's involvement as I despair of some Americans who hold power. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carolus Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 (edited) Another arms company setting up shop in Ukraine. If this continues every major European military industrial company will have a sub-branch in Ukraine. Edited March 22 by Carolus 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FancyCat Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 There is no point in making facilities in Ukraine for military equipment if they get destroyed. Air defense to Ukraine now! I'm not concerned about American handwringling, we have seen the articles of worry in the past, end of the day, the oil and gas markets are quite robust, slack in Russia will allow the rest of the vultures to feed, and America is now a vulture, combine that with continued Chinese economic weakness, which is keeping oil and gas markets weary, not concerned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimbosbread Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 (edited) 3 hours ago, Holien said: I wonder if Ukraine will listen to this advice from Biden or will take the Israeli position. I sincerely hope the latter; the way to end the war is render Russia incapable of conducting a war. EDIT: If the US was willing to give more weapons, especially those capable of taking out for example Russia’s bomber fleet, and more road-mobile patriots, maybe? But that’s not going to happen. Edited March 22 by kimbosbread 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbindc Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 The idea that American analysts shouldn't be doing stringent cost/benefit analyses of whether the temporary effects of drone strikes on Russian refineries might be less important than avoiding a price spike that delivers Trump to the WH and Putin an outright victory is absurd. In addition, we should not assume much about this revelation since we have absolutely no idea of what the context of the conversations were. And of course, by the time anyone reports that aspect of the story attention will have moved on. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kraft Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 (edited) 54 minutes ago, billbindc said: The idea that American analysts shouldn't be doing stringent cost/benefit analyses of whether the temporary effects of drone strikes on Russian refineries might be less important than avoiding a price spike that delivers Trump to the WH and Putin an outright victory is absurd. With a complete breakdown in the promised US support and perceived unreliability as an ally, how much is a higher chance for Bidens protracted status quo war stance in office worth if MAGA hats keep their complete deadlock on the system? The Trump base doesnt seem to mind at all if the US gov stays paralysed and I dont see them change their mind when another election is "stolen". The supposed bypassing of the speaker only now has a single republican supporter, meanwhile not even all Democrats have supported it. MAGA blockade and resulting shell rationing has gone on for a quarter of the war now! Pressure on russia to end this has to come from somewhere and everyday the US does nothing because of a "minority" fraction causing touble is a day further in a future where it counts less as an ally and consequently will be listened to less. Edited March 22 by Kraft 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 20 minutes ago, billbindc said: The idea that American analysts shouldn't be doing stringent cost/benefit analyses of whether the temporary effects of drone strikes on Russian refineries might be less important than avoiding a price spike that delivers Trump to the WH and Putin an outright victory is absurd. In addition, we should not assume much about this revelation since we have absolutely no idea of what the context of the conversations were. And of course, by the time anyone reports that aspect of the story attention will have moved on. What I don't understand is why the they think the refinery strikes are pushing up crude prices. I thought that Russia was putting more crude on the world market as it lost refinery capacity. This brings me back to my question about Russian infrastructure capacity for importing refined products? I also think it is a classic example of the Biden administration trying to exert a level of control over the glide path of this war that just doesn't exist. If they want the Ukrainians to settle for the current lines as a long term armistice they need to say so. If they don't, they need to let them fight. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 7 hours ago, Maciej Zwolinski said: On a more serious note, one of the few things which could explain this refusal to surrender which sometimes borders on madness is the belief that Russia will eventually win and all prisoners will be repatriated like von Pannwitz' Cossacks and will meet a similar fate to the repatriated von Pannwitz Cossacks. That, or those particular soldiers who refuse to surrender are guilty of attrocities and are afraid of Ukrainian revenge more than anything. It isn't clear to me that most of the current crop of Mobiks has the opportunity to commit warcrimes at anything like the rate of the early part of the war. I suggest this simply because as the lines have gone static the Russians have just not had the opportunity to go full Waffen SS on new batches of civilians. I am not saying they wouldn't if they could, but if you are stuck in a trench with barrier troops behind you, Ukrainian guns in front of you, and nothing but the Somme 2.0 around you there is just a lot less scope for certain things 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbindc Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 (edited) 54 minutes ago, Kraft said: With a complete breakdown in the promised US support and perceived unreliability as an ally, how much is a higher chance for Bidens protracted status quo war stance in office worth if MAGA hats keep their complete deadlock on the system? The Trump base doesnt seem to mind at all if the US gov stays paralysed and I dont see them change their mind when another election is "stolen". The supposed bypassing of the speaker only now has a single republican supporter, meanwhile not even all Democrats have supported it. MAGA blockade and resulting shell rationing has gone on for a quarter of the war now! Pressure on russia to end this has to come from somewhere and everyday the US does nothing because of a "minority" fraction causing touble is a day further in a future where it counts less as an ally and consequently will be listened to less. First, US support has not completely broken down. $3 billion is being disbursed now and another $300 million is shortly to follow. In addition, while there is a deadlock now doesn't mean it will continue as long as Biden is in the WH and the Senate remains non-crazy. At this very moment, a motion to vacate has been tendered on Johnson and it's quite likely that the price of Dem support to keep him in place is going to be a clean vote on Ukraine aid. To say the "US does nothing" isn't just extremely not factual...it actually hurts your argument in DC because the MAGA folks can point to that sort of talk and say "See? Whatever we do is never going to be enough". I feel and sympathize with your frustration but the old saw about babies and bathwater applies. And to the original point, a big spike in energy prices *would* make the job of Ukraine aid deniers *easier*. It would be strategic malpractice to pretend otherwise. Edited March 22 by billbindc 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbindc Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 45 minutes ago, dan/california said: What I don't understand is why the they think the refinery strikes are pushing up crude prices. I thought that Russia was putting more crude on the world market as it lost refinery capacity. This brings me back to my question about Russian infrastructure capacity for importing refined products? I also think it is a classic example of the Biden administration trying to exert a level of control over the glide path of this war that just doesn't exist. If they want the Ukrainians to settle for the current lines as a long term armistice they need to say so. If they don't, they need to let them fight. I would strongly suggest anyone who thinks this level of push/pull between the US and Ukrainian liaisons is excessively disfunctional should go back look at what it was like in the Allied high commands in WWI and WWII. Alliances are hard. Hard questions have to be asked and long term possibilities must be hashed out. Making the sausage always looks ugly and in war triply so. It's a sign of Ukrainian strength, not weakness, that the US clearly *isn't* calling the shots and a sign of US trust in the Ukrainian government that it isn't trying harder to do so. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 More American political drama: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 (edited) 44 minutes ago, billbindc said: I would strongly suggest anyone who thinks this level of push/pull between the US and Ukrainian liaisons is excessively disfunctional should go back look at what it was like in the Allied high commands in WWI and WWII. Alliances are hard. Hard questions have to be asked and long term possibilities must be hashed out. Making the sausage always looks ugly and in war triply so. It's a sign of Ukrainian strength, not weakness, that the US clearly *isn't* calling the shots and a sign of US trust in the Ukrainian government that it isn't trying harder to do so. It isn't that I think our relationship with the Ukrainians is excessively dysfunctional given the circumstances. It is that I think Jake Sullivan has had the wrong strategic conception from the beginning. That isn't to say he it isn't seven orders of magnitude (edit: better) than it would be with Trump, but it is still a problem. And this situation much more like our relationship with Great Britain before Pearl Harbor, instead of after it. That time we came all the way in, eventually. Quote https://www.threads.net/@maks_23_ua/post/C40ak_PqmrX Germany and France have reached a "breakthrough" on how to develop a planned next-generation tank known as the Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) and split up tasks between the two nations, - Reuters️"This is more than a milestone, it is a historic moment", - Boris Pistorius If this is correct the French and Germans have agreed just agreed to waste a lot of money on class of systems that is well on its way to being obsolete. Although it sounds like this at the agreeing to have a design committee meeting stage. Edited March 22 by dan/california 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 (edited) 9 minutes ago, cesmonkey said: More American political drama: Well, this will get the cards on the table, at least. Edit: I wonder if Trump asked her to do this? or if she is freelancing because she is mad that he hasn't already made her his VP pick? Edited March 22 by dan/california 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 Rybar offers a map of last night's missile strikes: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danfrodo Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 16 minutes ago, cesmonkey said: More American political drama: the greatest nation in the world -- held hostage by lunatics due to the unbelievable cowardice of GOP congressmen & women and a GOP voter base-cult that's so brainwashed it doesn't even know where reality even begins anymore. Disgraceful and sickening. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbindc Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 8 minutes ago, dan/california said: Well, this will get the cards on the table, at least. Edit: I wonder if Trump asked her to do this? or if she is freelancing because she is mad that he hasn't already made her his VP pick? Whatever she's doing, she provoked Democrats into making it clear they would vote to keep Johnson in the Speaker's chair...so she just made Ukraine aid more likely. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 Quote https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/22/us/politics/congress-spending-bill-government-shutdown.html Ms. Greene told reporters on the House steps minute after the vote that she would not seek an immediate vote to oust Mr. Johnson, but had begun the process as a “warning” because his actions were a “betrayal.” Or may this is just MTG being theatrical. Given how bleeped up everything in the house is Johnson isn't going to make a deal on Ukraine until five minute before the vote on his ouster, we don't quite seem to be there yet. Subject to change without notice obviously. Trump hasn't weighed in that I am aware of at this exact moment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 2 minutes ago, dan/california said: Or may this is just MTG being theatrical. Given how bleeped up everything in the house is Johnson isn't going to make a deal on Ukraine until five minute before the vote on his ouster, we don't quite seem to be there yet. Subject to change without notice obviously. Trump hasn't weighed in that I am aware of at this exact moment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 Quote https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/22/congress/greene-drops-the-motion-vacate-johnson-00148543 Greene, who supported Johnson's October election as speaker, is one of several members on his right flank who have publicly soured on his leadership in recent weeks. She had hinted earlier Friday that she was considering a maneuver to force the ouster vote. Johnson may or may not have to take it up, since it's not yet clear whether Greene filed it as a "privileged" resolution that requires House floor time. This is the critical bit. There is a way that she can do this that is just a high profile nastygram, and there is way she can doit that forces a vote on Johnson next week. It isn't quite clear which way she intends to go. And Trump hasn't said anything that I can find. And I honestly don't know which way he will jump on this. He may want absolutely maximum chaos, or may realize that making the Republicans look COMPLETELY feckless is not good for him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 6 minutes ago, dan/california said: This is the critical bit. There is a way that she can do this that is just a high profile nastygram, and there is way she can doit that forces a vote on Johnson next week. It isn't quite clear which way she intends to go. And Trump hasn't said anything that I can find. And I honestly don't know which way he will jump on this. He may want absolutely maximum chaos, or may realize that making the Republicans look COMPLETELY feckless is not good for him. https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4549577-greene-oust-speaker-johnson-spending-deal/ Quote “Today I filed a motion to vacate after Speaker Johnson has betrayed our conference and broken our rules,” Greene told reporters on the steps of the Capitol. “I respect our conference, I paid all my dues to my conference, I’m a member in good standing and I do not wish to inflict pain on our conference and to throw the House in chaos,” she added. “But this is basically a warning and it’s time for us to go through the process, take our time, and find a new Speaker of the House that will stand with Republicans in our Republican majority instead of standing with the Democrats.” Pressed on when she would force a vote on Johnson’s removal, Greene said “I don’t have a timeline” and noted that it “will be a rolling issue that we’ll be judging and making decisions by.” “I’m not saying that it won’t happen in two weeks or it won’t happen in a month or who knows when, but I am saying the clock has started,” Greene said. “It’s time for our conference to choose a new Speaker.” 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 (edited) 2 minutes ago, cesmonkey said: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4549577-greene-oust-speaker-johnson-spending-deal/ This seems to imply she is still at the nastygram stage, although obviously she is just nuts and might change her mind before I finish typing this. Edit: Nothing counts at this point until there is a vote scheduled, anything she does that doesn't put the vote on the calendar is just posturing. Edited March 22 by dan/california 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.