this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32347 readers
597 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JohnBrownsDream@hexbear.net 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or anything to help with inflation, etc.

[–] Roody15@reddthat.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Where is the off ramp here? Despite billions and constant propaganda Russia is not going to lose this war on the battlefield.

How much money and how many people are we going to just send to their deaths just because prolonging the conflict weakens an adversary to US.

It’s really sad :(

[–] jackmarxist@hexbear.net -1 points 1 year ago

Russia will lose any day now. Their army has been routed and they're constantly fleeing the lines. Hundreds of thousands of Russians are dead or zero-summed while Ukraine has no casualties. Ukraine is marching towards Moscow and this war will end with ~~Putin~~ Putler shooting himself in the head! Slava Ukraini!

Inb4 anyone calls me a tankie for supporting Biden sending tanks to Ukraine.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is this actual money in this case or is this more designated monetary amounts of goods, ie the worth of the guns and tanks and other things we've been giving them that were just collecting dust over here?

Because that's what most of the past monetary support was. No actual money was involved and so didn't really cost us anything.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

the worth of the guns and tanks and other things we’ve been giving them that were just collecting dust over here?

Use of reserves motivates replacement. Just because you're giving them weapons that were produced in the past, and therefore whose (production) cost has already been incurred, doesn't mean that occurs in a vacuum. With stock running low, contemporary money goes in to replenishing that stock. In effect, there's no difference whether you send old or new equipment, because both incur costs in the present.

No actual money was involved and so didn’t really cost us anything.

It cost you exactly the amount it cost to produce them. Just because it was produced in the past, doesn't mean it was free. You paid for it X years ago, and are only now seeing it used. You paid for it. Moreover, you're now going to pay to replace it.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yea we just have billions of dollars of military equipment that popped out of thin air and of course will not be replenished in the next trillion dollar military budget.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago

We have billions of dollars of military equipment that was made 10+ years ago and has been sitting around since then because we have no reason to use any of it.

To the point where military commanders are begging Congress to not make the military budget so big because it's being wasted on building more assets that aren't seeing any use.