The GOP is the Good Old Party As in Trumps party and the ones blocking aid

MTG is a gob on a stick and is possibly the dumbest women In power on the planet, she is a member of the GOP and congress.

Marjorie Taylor Green

Here you go fill your boots.

MTG is truly a dim bulb , somehow she has increased her influence within the Republican Party . A lunatic spreader of conspiracy theories , remember the Jewish space lasers and democrat paedophile rings ? . As Trump says she is a good friend , she should beware ! many of his good friends are left behind in the wreckage .
Sadly she is in thrall to Trump and these fools are costing Ukrainian lives and freedoms with their MAGA philosophy . Their goal is to get Trump elected at any cost .. Putin has the same goal , draw your own conclusions .
The fact is the billions of dollars of aid are spent in the US for weapons manufacture. They should be deeply ashamed as are most normal Americans that I know, embarrassed by their MAGA politicians , that include republicans btw . As a previous poster stated wtf does US government policy have to do with a convicted fraudster , sexual assault perpetrator and many times bankrupt con man . Sure beats me .

MTG makes Sarah Palin look like Churchill!

Did you notice the ****hole they live in lol.
I watched the crying Russian in his flooded house and thought the only tragedy here is that it's not -26 degrees celcius.

335 million and you’ll never trust the word of any of us? The problem is with you.

A telling moment is when the mother says her sons are going into battle to defend the Russian homeland...... All the Russians have to do to defend their homeland is leave Ukraine alone.

Edited to add: It looks like the Iranian attack on Israel is putting major pressure on House speaker Johnson to advance the Israeli and Ukrainian aid bills. Let's hope so.

Nutty, perhaps if large parts of NATO hadn't been neglecting their treaty obligations regarding military spending for the last 50+ years - and letting the US pick up the slack - NATO wouldn't find it itself nearly so dependent on USA largeness to supply Ukraine.
No, I'm not happy about what some in the GOP are doing and I'm no fan of Trump (and MTG is an embarrassment), but Trump wasn't wrong when he said other NATO countries need to step up and meet their obligations rather than leaning on a (nearly bankrupt) USA.

I hear what you say about NATO spending, but that is highly irrelevant in regards support to Ukraine (which is not a member of NATO). Firstly, there are a lot of countries supporting Ukraine that do not belong to NATO or hasn't belonged to for a very long period yet (eg Japan, Finland, Sweden, Australia).
As second, the US spending hasn't been solely NATO spending. A big portion is due other theaters eg the Pacific, SE Asia, Middle East, and other hot spots like Afghanistan (where, btw, other countries, including non-NATO countries participated and lost troops as well, taking Finland as an example).

I emphasize that the 2% club is important, but it has to be considered as a separate topic in the context of supporting Ukraine.
The US of A has the biggest arsenal in the western hemisphere, the only arsenal that matches the Russian stocks. Why that arsenal exists is not solely due to NATO, but regarding support to Ukraine, NATO membership is irrelevant and therefore NATO spending should not be used as an excuse.

335 million - and Trump & Biden are the best you can find? Really?

An optimistic forecast from China…

Feng Yujun, one of the China's leading Russianists and a professor at Peking University: Russia is sure to lose in Ukraine – The Economist

Four reasons why Russian Federation will lose to Ukraine, according to Feng Yujun:

🔹 The first is the level of resistance and national unity shown by Ukrainians, which has until now been extraordinary.

🔹 The second is international support for Ukraine, which, though recently falling short of the country’s expectations, remains broad.

🔹 The third factor is the nature of modern warfare, a contest that turns on a combination of industrial might and command, control, communications and intelligence systems. One reason Russia has struggled in this war is that it is yet to recover from the dramatic deindustrialisation it suffered after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.

🔹 The final factor is information. When it comes to decision-making, Vladimir Putin is trapped in an information cocoon, thanks to his having been in power so long. The Russian president and his national-security team lack access to accurate intelligence. The system they operate lacks an efficient mechanism for correcting errors. Their Ukrainian counterparts are more flexible and effective.

His conclusion is as follows:

🔸 Russia will be forced to withdraw from all occupied Ukrainian territories, including Crimea.

🔸 Russia's nuclear capability is no guarantee of success. Feng Yujun gives the example of the United States, which left Vietnam, Korea, and Afghanistan with no less nuclear potential than the Russian Federation has today.

🔸 Kyiv has proven that Moscow is not invincible, so a ceasefire under the "Korean" scenario is ruled out.

🔸 The war is a turning-point for Russia. It has consigned Putin’s regime to broad international isolation. He has also had to deal with difficult domestic political undercurrents, from the rebellion by the mercenaries of the Wagner Group and other pockets of the military — for instance in Belgorod — to ethnic tensions in several Russian regions and the recent terrorist attack in Moscow. These show that political risk in Russia is very high. Mr Putin may recently have been re-elected, but he faces all kinds of possible black-swan events.

🔸 After the war, Ukraine will have the chance join both the EU and NATO, while Russia will lose its former Soviet republics because they see Putin's aggression there as a threat to their sovereignty and territorial integrity.

According to Feng Yujun, the war, meanwhile, has made Europe wake up to the enormous threat that Russia’s military aggression poses to the continent’s security and the international order, bringing post-cold-war EU-Russia detente to an end. Many European countries have given up their illusions about Mr Putin’s Russia.

Source: https://archive.ph/2024.04.13-195439...pert-on-russia

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....d9b82fff49.png
​​​​​​​

The 2% spending is NOT a treaty obligation - it is a target.

But the general thrust of what you say is right.

Completely agree. Opposition politics has morphed into finding and leverage anything and everything the in-power party does or says including swearing black is white or allowing conspiracy theory lunacy to run wild -as long as it plays to their hand.

With generation Z and more preferring to get their information from social media without the remotest knowledge of the source or motivation, MTG is simply a useful idiot riding on a wave of populist support propagating Trumps conspiracies. We have them too lest we forget Farrage, Galloway, Robinson etc.al.

The damage this is causing is immeasurable
Fiddling while Rome burns.

Moving back on topic, Shapps is attempting to accelerate completion of the Dragonfire laser for shipment to Ukraine. If it works, it can be a game changer for troop protecton. With no ballistic trajectory or shells to track, it could negate artillery radar to direct return fires. Taking out surveillance drones removes the primary method of tracking troop and formation movements. Not until 2027 though.

Marjorie Taylor Greene and the "Grand Old Party", AKA Republicans.

A target ? In the present situation it should be an absolute minimum !

This is nothing to do with NATO. Individual countries have decided for themselves whether to support Ukraine or not, and are contributing what they can. The US did not have to get involved, but announced that Ukraine was their ally and would provide weapons, ammunition and other assistance. To turn your backs on them now, at their time of greatest need, does not seem very honourable. The supplies are sitting there unused, just send them. The other matters can be sorted out when the immediate danger from Russia is contained. Our enemies would love to drive a wedge between Europe and the US - please don't give them that satisfaction.

Totally agree. We used to spend ~6-7% of GDP on defence, when the world was more stable than it is today.

Interestingly, since ~1980, the UK has basically exchanged £ for £ spending on defence, for spending on benefits.

I would advocate for the UK to spend ~4% of GDP on defence, with 1% on support for Ukraine, and make it a bipartisan public commitment until Russia withdraws from every inch of Ukrainian territory.

Thanks Nutty,and S-D.....

Sorry if this comes across as a bit dumb, as I have no real understanding of American politics or Presidential power.
In the UK we often hear of US Presidential Executive Powers, does this just relate to pardoning their mates, or could they instruct the military to get the kit on planes, fly it to Poland and give it to Ukraine?

I meant politicians.

​​​​​​…

Has the like facility been pulled and if so why?

It’s reappeared :) and then disappeared, have they put in place a like limit?