How do you know what Germany and France have sent to the Ukraine?
Same way we know what the USA sent.
Maybe they have sent more than $40 billion. Germany and France are less than 1/2 of the US in population. You should be comparing EU contributions to Ukraine to US contributions.
I used Germany and France, being the largest countries, as a representation of the EU. How much do you think the EU has sent Ukraine?
Maybe they have sent more than $40 billion. Germany and France are less than 1/2 of the US in population. You should be comparing EU contributions to Ukraine to US contributions. â How much do you think the EU has sent Ukraine?
https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/stroâŚ
Since the Russian aggression started, the EU has mobilised around âŹ4.1 billion to support Ukraineâs overall economic, social and financial resilience in the form of macro-financial assistance, budget support, emergency assistance, crisis response and humanitarian aid. Military assistance measures have also been provided under the European Peace Facility, amounting to âŹ1.5 billion, that will be used to reimburse Member States for their in-kind military support to Ukraine and the mobilisation of an additional âŹ500 million is under way.
I used Germany and France, being the largest countries, as a representation of the EU. How much do you think the EU has sent Ukraine?
The âUâ in âEUâ is rather overrated. The way I interpret the news, Germany and France were more on the appeasement side while the ex Soviet nations were more on the help Ukraine side which makes sense since they are the more likely targets of Putinâs aggression. Germany also had a long standing ban on sending weapons to war zones, a ban that has now been rescinded. A Ukrainian commentator on uTube this morning thanked Germany for the shipment of weapons so it seems the German shipments have started. He also thanked the Slovak shipment of Soviet era weaponry saying that the German stuff was much more important.
Over the past few weeks Russia has been making gains while Ukraiane has inflicted important damage to the Russian Black Sea fleet and now has put the Black Sea gas platforms under Russian control (near Crimea) out of action.
As long as Putin is in command EU/NATO/Russia/US war risk rises and sticking the head in the sand does not change that. Help Ukraine keep the West safe.
Thank you for recommending this post to our Best of feature.
âŚ
Germany also had a long standing ban on sending weapons to war zones, a ban that has now been rescinded. A Ukrainian commentator on uTube this morning thanked Germany for the shipment of weapons so it seems the German shipments have started. He also thanked the Slovak shipment of Soviet era weaponry saying that the German stuff was much more important.
The Germans sent a large number of a truly impressive 155mm artillery system. Each unit can put 7 rounds âon the wayâ that all land at the same time as a barrage. Value 1.7 Billion Euro.
I think this is the core of the problem for ALL wars, pretty much throughout history. When one side is perceived to be feckless, wars can happen. When it is clear what will ensue if war is started, then the war can often be avoided. For example, if it was eminently clear that if Russia attacks countries on the Baltic Sea then their Black Sea fleet would be completely destroyed, then they probably wouldnât attack. And this even applies when led by a âmadmanâ, because madmen also like their Navy to remain intact.
Basically wars are rarely started unless there is some probability of success.
By the way, I wonder if the war could be stopped by simply targeting Russian ships and sinking them. One by one, every hour or two.
And that brings up the other problem with too many cooks in the kitchen, different and sometimes conflicting interests. The USA may (âmayâ ⌠ha, DO) have slightly different interests than the EU has now that war has started. It could be that the USA has at least a partial interest in keeping the war going for a while to degrade Russian capability, and to set an example for China. While the EU has a partial interest in a quick war and less destruction, and keeping Russia in decent shape so they can continue to reliably supply energy resources to the EU. And there are other examples of conflicting interests that we all read about.
It could be that the USA has at least a partial interest in keeping the war going for a while to degrade Russian capability, and to set an example for China.
The USA, as defined as the current administration, is far more concerned with inflation (and by extension keeping their jobs) than they are about the esoteric goal of degrading Russia - and as long as the war continues, it will make energy and food more expensive.
Besides, it is already clear that as it pertains to Russia, their military sucks. We donât need more death and destruction to further that point. We have nothing to fear from their conventional military.
But itâs kind of odd that the USA is sending $40B of stuff over to Ukraine instead of Germany and France sending it, no?
Without digging too deep, the US spends about 10 times as much on defense as France or Germany. So it would make some sense that the US has 10 times a much military âstuffâ lying around that could be sent to Ukraine.
The potential threats from Putin on the three countries are significantly different as well. Russia poses no real threat of invasion to the US. But an invasion of France or Germany are at least possible, if unlikely.
So itâs not as big a deal for the US to send weapons suitable for defending a land attack to Ukraine. We donât really need them for ourselves. We only have them to support allies.
France and Germany, on the other hand, absolutely need to keep some of those weapons for their own self defense. Sending too many to Ukraine would be too risky to their own security.
So it makes sense that at least initially, the US would send significantly more direct military aid to Ukraine than almost any other country in the world.
That is not the problem. You post that France and Germany do not support Ukraine like USA without any references or links to support your claim. I called you out to provide the references or links. All you do is tell me to search the internet.
Please start backing up your statements with references or links. How old are you - 90?
You post that France and Germany do not support Ukraine like USA without any references or links to support your claim.
Everything I write here is my opinion, mostly based on facts that I read. This isnât a scholarly research paper that requires footnotes, itâs just a discussion among friends.
I called you out to provide the references or links. All you do is tell me to search the internet.
Thatâs a lie. IN THAT POST, I gave you a link that has hundreds of references at the bottom.
Thatâs a lie. IN THAT POST, I gave you a link that has hundreds of references at the bottom.
===============================================
Thanks for the encyclopedia. So your initial claim of Europeans not providing as much as $40 billion aid by U.S. is was a wild shot that missed the target.
Thanks for the post but I can not read the article because of paywall.
Does it include the cost of about 5 million refugees that the EU was housing, feeding, clothing, and providing healthcare and schooling for children in April? Those costs are increasing everyday as more refugees arrive in EU.
<<Thatâs a lie. IN THAT POST, I gave you a link that has hundreds of references at the bottom.>>
Thanks for the encyclopedia. So your initial claim of Europeans not providing as much as $40 billion aid by U.S. is was a wild shot that missed the target.
Itâs very difficult to have a normal conversation with you. First you claim I didnât provide data. Providing data in a generic conversation about world events isnât required, itâs not a research paper that needs data and footnotes! But then when I provide the EXACT data you asked for, you say itâs an âencyclopediaâ, itâs like a no-win situation.
And, are you arguing just for the sake of arguing? Itâs a well-known fact that the USA has sent FAR MORE direct military assistance and materiel to Ukraine than the EU has. Just like itâs a well-known fact that EU energy supplies have suffered far more than USA energy supplies have suffered.
If you gave the American public the choice between abandoning Ukraine (for the hope of lower gas and food prices) versus continuing the war, what would they chose?
I bet theyâd âcut & runâ for 25 cents off a gallon of gas.
The WSJ seems to be echoing my analysis of a week ago.
Mr. Biden wants Americans to see this as the price of solidarity with Ukraine. âFor all those Republicans in Congress criticizing meâŚAre you saying that we would rather have lower gas prices in America and Putinâs iron fist in Europe? I donât believe that,â he said last week. And some polls suggest Americans do support punishing Russia even at some cost to themselves.
Nonetheless, history and circumstance stand in Mr. Bidenâs way. Historically Americans donât rally around the president when geopolitical shocks send oil prices up; quite the opposite. In 1973, Arab countries embargoed oil exports to the U.S. as punishment for supporting Israel in the Yom Kippur War. The resulting energy crisis, combined with Watergate, hammered public confidence in President Richard Nixon. The surge in prices that followed the Iranian revolution in 1979 helped doom Jimmy Carterâs presidency.