[_fs]

> give hundreds of billions of my nation's money

30% of the US aid goes to ukraine for immediate local purposes, think humanitarian and and economic relief, the other 70% goes to us defense manufacturers, directly supporting american companies who then send their stock of weapons to ukraine. This 70% that goes directly to US companies is counted in the total aid provided

[soerxpso]

I can think of a hundred things we could have US defense contractors make instead. And it's surprising how quickly Democrats have begun worshiping the Military Industrial Complex. As recently as Bush, it was the boogeyman. Now I'm supposed to support shoveling money into it to burn? Why don't we spend $100B on having American workers build high-speed rail instead, or anything else more useful than drawing out an unwinnable conflict? All that would be purchased with this money is a lot more dead Ukrainians before it's over.

[artem2471]

There is currently an air raid siren in Kyiv. Because of US Kyiv has better air defense, so in case of rocket strike some would be intercepted. There are benefits to US aid.

[fatbird]

It's clearly not unwinnable. Russia is doing serious structural damage to its economy and can't get enough Russians to fight, so they're pulling North Koreans in (who think they're going to fight South Korea). At worst (for Ukraine), Russia is piling up dead bodies at a 2:1 ratio, and in the process Ukraine is now the world's leading drone combatant. And all the whining that Trump has done about Europe not pulling its weight, is going to be answered with Europe now understanding that US aid is over and they're all publicly pledging to step in.

And the US has more than enough money to build high speed rail and continue or double its support for Ukraine. Available money isn't the problem.

The US has cleared out vast reserves of older armaments that they no longer have to pay to warehouse or retire safely. Besides most of that aid money going into American pockets, the inventory has been cycled for America's benefit.

If the US had chosen to be a steadfast ally and actually help Ukraine win, it could have reaped the same rewards it received after WW2 once Ukraine won: rebuild it as a bastion of capitalism and democracy and let the rising tide lift all boats, especially the leader's. Instead, you're walking away, destroying NATO and transatlantic co-operation in the process. And by doing so, you're making Europe independent of the US, when dependency on the US was the cornerstone of 80 years of peace in Europe as well as a strong world economy. Congratulations on kissing goodbye the very thing that's made America so wealthy and strong for the last 80 years.

[JohnBooty]

This is severe whataboutism. I'm not a fan of the MIC, and much money given to it could be better spent on other things.

But the reality is that money poured into the MIC to replace equipment we sent to Ukraine is not money that leaves the US economy, and it is absolutely essential to understand that when discussing the "cost" of this war to America.