how sad and maddening. What's the point of keeping this thread. Since no one steps up to protest the hideous blockage of aid to an invaded Democratic nation. A nation heroically fighting to stay independent.

In checking out the BAE Systems site and a few other public sources I was able to find this.

Israel has 280 AGS-aimed 155mm Paladin guns (have guns will travel).  The Muslim Hamas Gazas are yelping about this.
At total of 1,729 of these weapons have been sold to 23 Islamic nations, including Israel's enemies.
Current free world production is only 100,000 rounds of 155mm ammunition per year.
The Ukraine has been consuming 10,000 rounds per day during major actions.  This is unsustainable.
Fear not!  The USA and the EU have increased production, productivity and productiveness so that in 2025 the output of 155mm projectiles  will be over 1.7 Million rounds.  This will assure that BOTH The Ukraine and Israel will be able to hold off their enemies without the need to ration ammunition.

Israel's Paladins include the latest BAE military grade GPS that assures that every round will destroy its target with zero chance of collateral damage.

During The Cold War, 1945 through 1991, the USA provided the weapons, money, and fighting men to contain the USSR, now again called "Russia".

During those 46 year billions and billions of dollar were spent on weapons that became obsolete and were scrapped out without even bien used.

Now, in The Ukraine, we have good fighting men ready and willing to kill The Russians, and out criminal president won't even give them some old ammunition. Hell, Biden won't need it.  He's too senile to fight anybody.

Here's a president who blew out four Trillion dollars in giveaways just to bribe his vote stuffers.

Odd take, considering it is Speaker Johnson (and the Maga minority in the house that hold him hostage) who refuses to take up a bill on sending additional military aid to Ukraine.
The fact that the  majority of the public, members of congress and the Senate are in favour of it seems not to matter.

If you are not aware of this, you might want to expand your sources of information.

Paul,

Much of the direct aid provided by the US to the Ukraine came from stocks which were already in Europe for the purpose of fighting the USSR.  The Bradley's which the US committed to providing generally fall under this category.  Although they still have "value", they were already paid for a long time ago.  Much of the military aid that provided early on fell in this category.  Newer equipment such as the HIMARS, ATACMS and others cannot be lumped into this category.  You may not remember but the US kept saying that the Russians were coming before the war started and warned the Ukraine.  Other countries did not, for example, in France, the President fired his Minister of Defense (or similar) for not interpreting the intelligence correctly.

Politically, in the lower house of Congress, providing aid to the Ukraine has proven unpopular and based on the comments made by one of the candidates regarding NATO it would appear to me that he would be willing to let the Ukraine go to Putin along with a few other European countries.

Although in terms of the gross amount, the US has provided the largest share of aid, other countries have provided more as a percentage of their GDP, including one of the countries (Germany) which one of the candidates has been critical of in the past:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/

The summer offensive did not achieve what they were hoping to and a few days they lost one of the key cities (at least symbolically) that they had retaken. Personally, I would like to see them win but realistically I no longer think that it is possible unless something drastically changes within Russia.

This has been a coming to Jesus moment for the US and other countries, not only in Europe but Asia as well.  It was estimated that if NATO had committed all of their air assets they might have been able to establish air superiority over portions of the Ukraine for a maximum of two weeks.  Probably not enough to win the war.  The RAF is stretched thin with too many commitments around the world; good training for the aircrews but rough on the equipment. The US strategy has always been to establish air superiority first which meant having plenty of missiles and bombs but as we have been, in a near peer scenario, that might not be possible. 

Although the Ukraine needs the 155 mm shells, they US has come to realize that it needs them as well.  In broader terms, the US military has come to realize that how they fight the next war might be different from what they had expected.  For example, the Air Force relies on the Navy Growlers for electronic warfare, something they gave up after the F111 was retired.  One of the first things sent to Europe when the war started were 6 Growlers to collect electronic data (ELINT).  Further, the Navy is starting to become a larger part of the budget as they try maintain and improve their capabilities with an eye on China.  The new frigate program is an example of that; they are also thinking about fighting in smaller, more dispersed groups. Drones will also play an important part as well.  Canada is getting new ships, so are Australia and Japan.  And we will need their help if Taiwan becomes a thing.

Oh my!  Me thinks there are some glaring omissions here ...

(1) Even as Russia massed tens of thousands of troops on the border with Ukraine, Ole Joe put a hold on American aid.  (a bird in the hand ...)  Quick, go back and do some reading again, then please - for the sake of intellectual integrity - acknowledge the FACT.  He was going to use "diplomacy", remember!?!

(2) House Republicans have a simple request of the Administration's proposals for aid: tell us how to PAY for it.  I doubt any of us want to bankrupt our grandchildren's futures any further by financing proxy wars with Russia.  And a reminder: The Soviet Union didn't crumble because of cold winters or because its citizens drank too much Vodka, but because of a lack of $.  Reagan seemed to understand that would be their downfall and helped engineer it.

And, while I'm at it, (3) We, like Israel and much of the rest of the civilized world, are in a much less stable place today because of the administration of a man named Obama.  Can you find ONE - JUST ONE - instance of a President Obama referring to the threat of Islamic Terrorism?  I thought not ...

But you will find that when an Army Doctor proudly claimed killing 13 American soldiers in the name of jihad, his administration labeled it ... "workplace violence."  That when the Yemeni government announced to the delight of Islamic militants that we closed our embassy in Yemen, Obama's Press Secretary labeled it ... "a reduction in staff."  That "the global war on terror" became ... "an overseas contingency operation."

'Nuff said?

With all due respect Bill, you're doing some "cherry picking" ...

Can we agree it's better to have aid before a battle starts as opposed to after?  If so, did Biden hold up aid before Ukraine was invaded?  Yes or no?  You do remember Obama sent bandages and Trump sent missiles, right?

You mention Iraq - did Obama insist we must set a withdrawal date before committing to increased forces?  "We're gonna throw the kitchen sink at ya ... well, at least until next July."

Syria.  I'd like to laugh at Obama's "red line", but crying would be more appropriate.  How many Russians died in Syria as a result of Trump's decisions?  Serious observers might suggest Obama seemed to hope all this "terror stuff" would just quietly go away ...

Germany.  Great contributions to Ukraine's defense.  Good!  (We won't go into the anticipated rewards for their military ...)  But what percentage of their GDP did they spend on defense prior to the war?  Please, don't pick and choose - give us ALL the numbers!  (Can we add in the extent to which Germany financed Russia's war by buying energy from Russia!?!)

The very sad fact is in our country we have a large group of politicians who seem much more interested in enforcing "proper pronouns" than in protecting our own national security as well as democracies around the world.

Dennis

Yada, yada, yada.  He said, she said ... John Kennedy instituted a naval blockade because he was a sailor.  My daddy can beat up your daddy.

I choose to look at results.  You still convinced Biden didn't hold up aid to Ukraine, Bill?

You're right.  When we choose to ignore FACTS, discussion is pointless.   Over and out.

Dennis

Afterthought: I think one of the most disgusting individuals I've ever seen was the "witness" who stated he is the EXPERT on Ukraine.  There are about a zillion EXPERTS in Washington who need to GO.  Humility is NOT their primary asset.