lenaitch
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,505
- Points
- 1,160
The War in Ukraine
- Thread starter Bruce Monkhouse
- Start date
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,925
- Points
- 1,260
So today’s “deal” was a smashing success. A moratorium on targeting a Russian strategic weakness. Their oil is now safe. Meanwhile…
bsky.app
Darth Putin (@darthputinkgb.bsky.social)
Have agreed to stop bombing infrastructure. So I'll have more time to focus on military targets like hospitals.
bsky.app
Skysix
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 846
- Points
- 1,010
Several hundred Bradleys and Tomahawks wouldn't hurt either. Or all the mothballed A10's.
- Reaction score
- 5,536
- Points
- 1,260
Darth Putin nails it again ...So today’s “deal” was a smashing success. A moratorium on targeting a Russian strategic weakness. Their oil is now safe. Meanwhile…
Darth Putin (@darthputinkgb.bsky.social)
Have agreed to stop bombing infrastructure. So I'll have more time to focus on military targets like hospitals.
Dozens Evacuated After Russian Drone Hits Hospital in Sumy, Ukraine
A hospital in the city of Sumy in northeastern Ukraine was hit by a Russian drone on March 19, hours after Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin discussed a possible cease-fire by phone. Dozens of patients were evacuated to shelter after the strike.
www.rferl.org
- Reaction score
- 9,786
- Points
- 1,160
The Misleading Metric of Aid to Ukraine
By Meaghan MobbsMarch 20, 2025
AP
The Misleading Metric of Aid to Ukraine: Why Dollars Didn’t Equal Support
In the ongoing discourse surrounding Western support for Ukraine, a peculiar and misleading metric has taken center stage: the dollar value of aid. The fixation on the total amount allocated—often in the hundreds of billions—has distorted public perception, muddied strategic discussions, and concealed operational shortcomings. It has served as a sleight of hand, misdirecting both the American people and policymakers away from what truly matters: battlefield effectiveness, operational efficiency, and the ability to meet Ukraine’s evolving military needs.At the heart of this problem is the way aid is valued. The dollar amounts assigned to military assistance are determined not by the recipient nation but by the home country providing the aid. These figures are frequently inflated, unreliable, and based on questionable assessments of the worth of transferred equipment. Worse still, much of the equipment provided has been outdated, depreciated, or poorly maintained—rendering its battlefield utility limited at best. In many cases, Western nations, particularly the United States, have used this opportunity to offload aging stockpiles of weaponry while simultaneously backfilling their arsenals with more modern, reliable systems. This process has been framed as generosity when in reality it is often a transactional reshuffling of military assets.
By focusing on dollars rather than deliverables, the West has allowed itself to be captured by a bizarre and counterproductive narrative. The promised sums have frequently not materialized in tangible, functional military aid. Even when delivered, many of these systems arrived in disrepair, with insufficient logistical support or inoperable conditions, or did not meet the intended tactical, operational, or strategic goal. For example, the critical shortfall in engineering equipment necessary to breach Russian defensive lines during Ukraine’s failed 2023 counteroffensive underscored how misleading these dollar figures were. Billions were pledged, but without the right equipment at the right time, the results were disastrous.
Biden made it ‘all about the Benjamins when it should have been about the battle plan. The obsession with dollar figures has distracted from a more pressing and uncomfortable reality: the West’s—especially Europe’s—dire lack of military readiness. President Trump's push for increased European defense spending is long overdue. For too long, the U.S. has shouldered the financial and operational burden of collective security while European nations have underfunded their own defense, leaving NATO vulnerable in a time of rising threats. By touting high-dollar commitments, Western leaders have masked their own shortages and their failure to meet their own defense obligations. The illusion of robust support for Ukraine has also obscured how unprepared NATO is should conflict escalate beyond Ukraine’s borders.
Under the Biden administration, this flawed ‘counting dollars instead of deliverables' approach became institutionalized. By using massive dollar amounts as the primary indicator of support, the administration set a precedent for misleading narratives which fundamentally misinformed the American public, leading them to believe that Ukraine has received unprecedented, overwhelming support. In reality, the aid has often been piecemeal, mismanaged, and strategically inadequate. Worse, it was virtue signaling at the cost of the trust of the American people, and Ukrainian lives.
Now, with the war entering its fourth year, Ukraine stands in a weakened position as negotiations become serious under President Trump’s leadership. Years of misguided aid policy under Biden, rooted in the illusion of financial generosity rather than operational necessity, have left Ukraine with dwindling options. It is no longer in a position to mount another counteroffensive, and it must enter peace talks with a significantly diminished bargaining position—a direct consequence of past failures.
The lesson should be clear: future security assistance must be judged not by abstract monetary totals but by its actual impact on the battlefield. The true measure of support is effectiveness, not dollars spent. America’s strategy moving forward must be guided by pragmatic military assessments, not political optics. Otherwise, we will continue to mistake the illusion of aid for the reality of security—at great cost to allies, American credibility, and global stability.
Meaghan Mobbs, PhD, is the Director of the Center for American Safety and Security at Independent Women.
- Reaction score
- 5,536
- Points
- 1,260
What could POSSIBLY go wrong?
en.interfax.com.ua
Original DEU media source (in German)
www.welt.de
Google English translation here.
China offers EU its participation in peacekeeping contingent in Ukraine
China held informal talks in Brussels about joining the "Coalition of the Willing," which is forming a peacekeeping contingent to be sent to Ukraine, Die Welt reports, announcing the material with reference to diplomatic sources in the Sunday supplement of Welt am Sonntag.
en.interfax.com.ua
Ukraine-Krieg: China erwägt offenbar Teilnahme an „Koalition der Willigen“ - WELT
Die Angelegenheit gilt als „heikel“: Diplomaten aus Peking haben bei der EU eine Teilnahme an einer Friedenstruppe in der Ukraine angefragt. Gehofft wird, dass sich Russland durch eine Teilnahme Chinas an einer Mission bewegt.
GR66
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 5,026
- Points
- 1,160
Well I think we could quite safely say that the Russians wouldn't attack them. And the more troops they have in Ukraine the less they have available to invade Taiwan. /sWhat could POSSIBLY go wrong?
Original DEU media source (in German)China offers EU its participation in peacekeeping contingent in Ukraine
China held informal talks in Brussels about joining the "Coalition of the Willing," which is forming a peacekeeping contingent to be sent to Ukraine, Die Welt reports, announcing the material with reference to diplomatic sources in the Sunday supplement of Welt am Sonntag.
Google English translation here.Ukraine-Krieg: China erwägt offenbar Teilnahme an „Koalition der Willigen“ - WELT
Die Angelegenheit gilt als „heikel“: Diplomaten aus Peking haben bei der EU eine Teilnahme an einer Friedenstruppe in der Ukraine angefragt. Gehofft wird, dass sich Russland durch eine Teilnahme Chinas an einer Mission bewegt.
Maybe it wouldn't be such a crazy idea. They wouldn't want the political backlash of turning on Ukraine as they would never be trusted again and they might not be willing to turn a blind eye to Russian attempts to break a ceasefire as it would cause them to lose face by failing in their mission.
For China they probably see a big opportunity to secure rights to infrastructure like the port of Odessa and a link into Europe through a non-NATO member in return for investing in re-building Ukraine.
- Reaction score
- 31,543
- Points
- 1,090
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 13,491
- Points
- 1,160
Interesting bit on Russian medical evacuation and the effects of drones on that
istories.media
Of all the injuries to Russian soldiers received during non-active combat, more than 75% were caused by attacks by Ukrainian UAVs.
These statistics were cited by Russian military doctors - their article was published in the March issue of the Military Medical Journal, which is published by the Russian Ministry of Defense. For the study, doctors interviewed about 6 thousand wounded servicemen.
Another 20% of the soldiers surveyed were injured as a result of artillery shelling, and 4% were injured by small arms.
Doctors classify inactive combat actions as periodic, low-intensity clashes and positional warfare, when the parties do not conduct an offensive. As stated in the report of military doctors, the main Ukrainian means of destruction during this period are small attack UAVs.
Drones also affected the time it took to evacuate the wounded for surgical care. It increased threefold, to 14.5 hours, the researchers write.
In July 2024, the same group of doctors published a similar study: on wounds received during active combat, for example, during assaults. At that time, the researchers did not single out wounds received from UAVs as a separate group. But, according to their data, during active combat, the absolute majority of wounds, 94.4%, are shrapnel and explosive. All wounds received from drones fall into these two categories.
The Russian-Ukrainian war is the first large-scale conflict in which drones are used so widely. According to the Ukrainian side, drone attacks account for 70 to 80% of all military losses.
Drones are also effective in destroying military equipment, including heavy equipment. For example, of the 31 Abrams tanks that the United States delivered to Ukraine in 2023, 19 were disabled, including by drones, The New York Times wrote, citing a high-ranking Ukrainian official.
Три четверти ранений российских военных в позиционной войне — от БПЛА
Дроны также эффективны в уничтожении военной техники, в том числе тяжелой
istories.media
These statistics were cited by Russian military doctors - their article was published in the March issue of the Military Medical Journal, which is published by the Russian Ministry of Defense. For the study, doctors interviewed about 6 thousand wounded servicemen.
Another 20% of the soldiers surveyed were injured as a result of artillery shelling, and 4% were injured by small arms.
Doctors classify inactive combat actions as periodic, low-intensity clashes and positional warfare, when the parties do not conduct an offensive. As stated in the report of military doctors, the main Ukrainian means of destruction during this period are small attack UAVs.
Drones also affected the time it took to evacuate the wounded for surgical care. It increased threefold, to 14.5 hours, the researchers write.
In July 2024, the same group of doctors published a similar study: on wounds received during active combat, for example, during assaults. At that time, the researchers did not single out wounds received from UAVs as a separate group. But, according to their data, during active combat, the absolute majority of wounds, 94.4%, are shrapnel and explosive. All wounds received from drones fall into these two categories.
The Russian-Ukrainian war is the first large-scale conflict in which drones are used so widely. According to the Ukrainian side, drone attacks account for 70 to 80% of all military losses.
Drones are also effective in destroying military equipment, including heavy equipment. For example, of the 31 Abrams tanks that the United States delivered to Ukraine in 2023, 19 were disabled, including by drones, The New York Times wrote, citing a high-ranking Ukrainian official.
- Reaction score
- 9,786
- Points
- 1,160
Revealed: Trump’s plan to force Ukraine to restore Putin’s gas empire
America holds gun to Zelensky’s head with unprecedented reparation demands
www.telegraph.co.uk
This reduces Ukraine from a sovereign state to a division of a US corporation. A corporation working with Putin to lock up the oil and gas business, if not the energy business.
If true - how favourable do we reckon Trump will be to us opening taps in competition to him? Or him selling weapons to us for our sovereign use?
- Reaction score
- 5,536
- Points
- 1,260
A question based on a slightly different analogy: how likely are you to get a good deal approaching a mob or biker gang boss?Revealed: Trump’s plan to force Ukraine to restore Putin’s gas empire
America holds gun to Zelensky’s head with unprecedented reparation demands
This reduces Ukraine from a sovereign state to a division of a US corporation. A corporation working with Putin to lock up the oil and gas business, if not the energy business.
If true - how favourable do we reckon Trump will be to us opening taps in competition to him? Or him selling weapons to us for our sovereign use?
Retired AF Guy
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,178
- Points
- 1,160
Revealed: Trump’s plan to force Ukraine to restore Putin’s gas empire
America holds gun to Zelensky’s head with unprecedented reparation demands
This reduces Ukraine from a sovereign state to a division of a US corporation. A corporation working with Putin to lock up the oil and gas business, if not the energy business.
If true - how favourable do we reckon Trump will be to us opening taps in competition to him? Or him selling weapons to us for our sovereign use?
Is the Telegraph is still considered a reliable source? Lately I've heard some real howlers from the paper and I'll wait until I see some conformation from other sites. Speaking of which, here is a report about a possibly deal between Russia and Ukraine is this update from the SOFREP website:
US-Brokered Black Sea Deal: A Glimmer of Hope in the Russia-Ukraine War
The agreements forged in Riyadh mark a fragile but meaningful step toward de-escalation in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, though early signs of strain reveal just how uncertain the road to lasting peace remains.
sofrep.com
- Reaction score
- 5,536
- Points
- 1,260
Slightly less … brash papers are quoting “anything we can get”, so the Telegraph might be at least within the same beaten zone of reality…
Trump demands compensation for previous US aid to Ukraine — 'We're asking for rare earth and oil, anything we can get'
"I want them to give us something for all of the money that we put up."
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 36,743
- Points
- 1,160
Is the Telegraph is still considered a reliable source? Lately I've heard some real howlers from the paper and I'll wait until I see some conformation from other sites. Speaking of which, here is a report about a possibly deal between Russia and Ukraine is this update from the SOFREP website:
US-Brokered Black Sea Deal: A Glimmer of Hope in the Russia-Ukraine War
The agreements forged in Riyadh mark a fragile but meaningful step toward de-escalation in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, though early signs of strain reveal just how uncertain the road to lasting peace remains.
Suggest cross referencing anything in any of the daily UK papers with the Spectator, just to be safe
Czech_pivo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,179
- Points
- 1,260
What would be a WAG of the timeline that Ukraine would need if they started on 6 Nov in putting together some type battlefield or further out nuclear device?
Could they be playing for time right now in the peace talks?
Could they be playing for time right now in the peace talks?
HavokFour
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 240
- Points
- 580
Well that partial ceasefire didn't last long. Perhaps Zelensky may have been on to something with how many times he's said Putin and Russia can not be trusted at all? Time to light up some more refineries.
kyivindependent.com
Alt: https://archive.ph/XH7My
'Should be reaction from US' — Russian attack on Kherson breaks energy ceasefire terms, Zelensky says
"The city of Kherson is a civilian city, it is not a battlefield. I believe that there should be a reaction from the United States, in actions," President Volodymyr Zelensky said on March 27.
kyivindependent.com
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 13,491
- Points
- 1,160
Looks like Ukraine is finally getting it's large formation act together
Similar threads
