Ukraine needs more soldiers than it can field, even with draconian conscription policies. And it needs more matériel than the United States can provide. This reality must inform any future Ukraine policy, from further congressional aid to the diplomatic course set by the president.
How much does Ukraine need and how much can we actually provide? Mr. Biden suggests that a $60 billion supplemental means the difference between victory and defeat in a major war between Russia and Ukraine. That is also wrong. $60 billion is a fraction of what it would take to turn the tide in Ukraine’s favor. But this is not just a matter of dollars. Fundamentally, we lack the capacity to manufacture the amount of weapons Ukraine needs us to supply to win the war.
Since the start of the conflict, the United States has gone to great lengths to ramp up production of 155-millimeter shells. We’ve roughly doubled our capacity and can now produce 360,000 per year — less than a tenth of what Ukraine says it needs. The administration’s goal is to get this to 1.2 million — 30 percent of what’s needed — by the end of 2025. This would cost the American taxpayers dearly while yielding an unpleasantly familiar result: failure abroad.
Proponents of American aid to Ukraine have argued that our approach has been a boon to our own economy, creating jobs here in the factories that manufacture weapons. But our national security interests can be — and often are — separate from our economic interests. The notion that we should prolong a bloody and gruesome war because it’s been good for American business is grotesque. We can and should rebuild our industrial base without shipping its products to a foreign conflict.
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
To what extent should a country go to support an ally in war, especially when the odds of a favorable outcome are uncertain?
@9L88VD3 2mos2MO
Depends on the conflict and the ally
This is highly dependent on the conflict and the ally in question. I've seen a lot of people reference Ukraine. Ukraine is not a NATO country and we've already gone way beyond what we are required to do for them. The US should cut off the aid to Ukraine completely and not get involved further in that conflict. If however Russia attacked an actual NATO country, then the US should get involved. I've seen several conditionals on this point, mainly concerning whether NATO countries are upholding their end of the NATO agreement to spend at least 2% of their GDP on military. While I do think we should put more pressure on NATO countries to meet that obligation that they have agreed to, I think it would set a very bad precedent if we were to not help them if they were attacked by Russia.
@9LJ2SQF2mos2MO
It depends on what that ally is and what we have promised in aid to those countries. But I think that the minimum should be aiding with funds, resources, and weapons, to help the ally in their war effort.
@9LJ2Q6WConstitution2mos2MO
I think we should help where we can.
@9LJ2BV52mos2MO
I think they should if we have an agreement with them
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
Considering the limitations on manufacturing capacity and resources, should the U.S. prioritize domestic needs over foreign military support?
@9LJ26C4 2mos2MO
Every now and then, the existing Military usage proves the capabilities of newer technologies and if they could benefit civilians once sold domestically.
@9LHZWGK2mos2MO
I think that we need to help and focus on ourselves before we go and help other countries.
@9LHZNLXRepublican2mos2MO
I think the US needs to focus on its own domestic affairs but it also needs to be prepared to handle foreign threats should they come to head.
@9LHZHX42mos2MO
i dont really know i dont watch thr news
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
How do you reconcile the moral implications of providing military aid that prolongs conflict with the strategic interests of national security?
It can be important to the people that are interested and caught up to date with news, but it shouldn't be a mandatory subject to follow along in other peoples everyday life, consequences, positives, achievements, ect.
@9LHZJHW2mos2MO
Prolonging shouldn’t be happening
@9LHYWC22mos2MO
i chose this because it seems most important
@9LHYQJ2Republican2mos2MO
I think this only leads to proxy wars, and unfavorable economic situations.
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
Do you believe that the economic benefits (e.g., job creation) justify the United States' involvement in supplying military aid to other countries, even if the conflict continues indefinitely?
@9LJ478L2mos2MO
No, Ukraine relies on the US and the European nations for full support especially as a NATO member. US needs to justify and make sure that everything is calculated correctly and to make sure that Ukraine still stands as a strong and important NATO member. It is important for the US to make sure that support is on the way to Ukraine whether its weapons, or donations.
@LegislativePretzelsDemocrat2mos2MO
Republicans simply need to approve the funding so Ukraine can get the weapons and ammunition they need to defeat Putin.
Stop with the Russian talking points.
@V0terMeerkatDemocrat2mos2MO
Everyday Ukraine survives this war, they defeat Putin. There are no opponents to Putin who can make that claim. I imagine he has never worked so hard to attain what he has wanted, with as little success and the resulting cost to his reputation. They have already won.
@PumaJonnyPeace and Freedom2mos2MO
Outside of airlifting the 101st airborne to Kiev in advance of the rest of the US army there is no way for Ukraine to win this war.
And it's doubtful even they would do it. No one alive in the US army has experience fighting a peer opponent in combined arms warfare.
@ZealfulKittenLibertarian2mos2MO
Hopefully the rest of the American leadership also understand that Ukraine can never win and pressure Zelenskyy to negotiate
@ForsakenS0cialistDemocrat2mos2MO
Republicans suggests giving Putin Ukraine. Should the USA give Texas to Mexico? Learn your history JD., Russia will not stop at Ukraine. Give Ukraine the support it needs or our own troops will end up fighting a war in Europe when Russia decides to take Poland.
@Centr1stCurLibertarian2mos2MO
What makes you think Russia feels like they can win a fight with a NATO ally? Russia can't even take Ukraine, and the people are getting impatient. I have never understood the thinking behind this talking point.
@Activ1stGaryLibertarian2mos2MO
NATO expansion led to this. Stop NATO expansion and it ends.
@MantisMattLibertarian2mos2MO
Anyone claiming Ukraine can “win” is lying or hopelessly misinformed.
This has been obvious since the disastrous Ukrainian counteroffensive last year.
The Ukraine war Overton window is moving.
Biden will blame all this on Republicans not passing the latest aid package, and if they do pass it he’ll say they took too long.
the math was upside down long before the additional $60B ever was contemplated.
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
The historical activity of users engaging with this general discussion.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...