The Biden administration is asking Congress to provide more than $13 billion in emergency defense aid to Ukraine and an additional $8 billion for humanitarian support through the end of the year.
Either you’re arguing in bad faith or you’re too dense to understand how this works. You make a claim and can’t support it. That means your claim has no merit. It means nothing without supporting evidence. Nobody has to disprove it because it carries no value. You say it’s well understood, but can’t back it up. That’s it. Baseless claims are equivalent to falacy that don’t need disproven.
Buddy im past that. Im asking you now to help me understand. If you cant help me underatand then you can say that. Ill concede and say i made a baseless claim. It is a claim I have heard but i dont remember where i saw. But i want help understanding how it works. The only information i see look like this.
This doesnt specify how it was spent. I am assuming loans are taken out from banks and they need funds to pay back the interest on the loans. I dont see information on that specifically though.
Looking at that source, the US has committed just over 70bn €, 42.8 to military, 34.3 to financial, and 3.6 to humanitarian aide. I can’t find what each of those topics entail specifically. The estimated total commitment from everyone is about €165bn. So while your initial statement wasn’t true, the spirit was accurate, in that most money is going to military rather than humanitarian, but hundreds of billions has not gone to Ukraine. However, you did initially claim that all this money is going to banks, which also isn’t true. From the US, we have sent billions in equipment, from munitions, to vehicles, to weapons. Admittedly, idk what the expected return is from Ukraine in the end, whether it’s loans or something else. What I do know is the equipment we’ve sent isn’t the top shelf stuff, but rather long term storage and dated equipment. On the domestic side, manufacturing has increased significantly to replace that old stock with new, better stock. War sucks, and ideally people could just not kill each other and stuff, but since they are we can help by arming an ally that’s fighting an enemy all while boosting the domestic economy and creating jobs. It’s dirty, but it’s a win/win for the US.
My counter from the start, is that you should have provided this source. We can have a conversation and debate over facts, but not over conjecture. You don’t have to care about Ukraine, but this isn’t black and white on all points.
Either you’re arguing in bad faith or you’re too dense to understand how this works. You make a claim and can’t support it. That means your claim has no merit. It means nothing without supporting evidence. Nobody has to disprove it because it carries no value. You say it’s well understood, but can’t back it up. That’s it. Baseless claims are equivalent to falacy that don’t need disproven.
Buddy im past that. Im asking you now to help me understand. If you cant help me underatand then you can say that. Ill concede and say i made a baseless claim. It is a claim I have heard but i dont remember where i saw. But i want help understanding how it works. The only information i see look like this.
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
This doesnt specify how it was spent. I am assuming loans are taken out from banks and they need funds to pay back the interest on the loans. I dont see information on that specifically though.
Looking at that source, the US has committed just over 70bn €, 42.8 to military, 34.3 to financial, and 3.6 to humanitarian aide. I can’t find what each of those topics entail specifically. The estimated total commitment from everyone is about €165bn. So while your initial statement wasn’t true, the spirit was accurate, in that most money is going to military rather than humanitarian, but hundreds of billions has not gone to Ukraine. However, you did initially claim that all this money is going to banks, which also isn’t true. From the US, we have sent billions in equipment, from munitions, to vehicles, to weapons. Admittedly, idk what the expected return is from Ukraine in the end, whether it’s loans or something else. What I do know is the equipment we’ve sent isn’t the top shelf stuff, but rather long term storage and dated equipment. On the domestic side, manufacturing has increased significantly to replace that old stock with new, better stock. War sucks, and ideally people could just not kill each other and stuff, but since they are we can help by arming an ally that’s fighting an enemy all while boosting the domestic economy and creating jobs. It’s dirty, but it’s a win/win for the US.
My counter from the start, is that you should have provided this source. We can have a conversation and debate over facts, but not over conjecture. You don’t have to care about Ukraine, but this isn’t black and white on all points.
I hope this helped clarify some things.