Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

agnos.is Forums

  1. Home
  2. World News
  3. US halts weapons shipments to Ukraine over fears stockpiles are too low

US halts weapons shipments to Ukraine over fears stockpiles are too low

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved World News
world
28 Posts 22 Posters 1 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • P [email protected]

    Speculation on my part:

    Patriot stocks may have been really reduced - by defending Israel during Netanyahu's adventure against Iran (it could have been smarter to tell Netanyahu not to start).

    There is no reason to think that stocks of other weapons (e.g. air to ground missiles, glide bomb units for F-16) have suddenly gone really low. In fact, there is probably a f**kton of them.

    Consequently, I suspect that Trump and Putin have made a deal they failed to disclose: Putin promised to refrain from helping Iran (it was an easy promise, he was really low on supplies). Trump promised in return to refrain from helping Ukraine, which he could have easily helped. At best, he got conned, at worst he got to do what he already wanted.

    I would advise journalists to ask around: "has the US DoD been ordered to alter criteria for determining what is sufficient supply?" If yes, we're looking at an excuse. If no, we're looking at inability.

    Both are bad, but inability can be corrected with honest admission and action, Ukraine has a bit of money from other allies to actually buy some US weapons, although they are rushing to make more domestically.

    If it's not inability but an undercarpet deal, then corrections are bit harder to achieve.

    geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlG This user is from outside of this forum
    geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlG This user is from outside of this forum
    [email protected]
    wrote on last edited by
    #15

    Trump implied as much as the article states.

    At the end of last week’s Nato summit, Donald Trump hinted that supplies of Patriot missile interceptors were running down because some had been supplied to Israel, though he suggested he would like to help Kyiv.

    After a meeting with Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the US president acknowledged that Ukraine did “want to have the anti-missile systems, as they call the Patriots, and we’re going to see if we can make some available”.

    But Trump added: “They’re very hard to get. We need them. We were supplying them to Israel,” implying that supporting Israel in its war with Iran – a priority for the Republican administration – had set back its willingness to help Kyiv.

    1 Reply Last reply
    7
    • H [email protected]

      The US is halting some shipments of weapons to Ukraine amid concerns that its own stockpiles have declined too much, officials said Tuesday, a setback for the country as it tries to fend off escalating attacks from Russia.

      Certain munitions were previously promised to Ukraine under the Biden administration to aid its defences during the more than three-year-old war. The pause reflects a new set of priorities under President Donald Trump and came after defence department officials scrutinised US stockpiles and raised concerns.

      “This decision was made to put America’s interests first following a review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement. “The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned – just ask Iran.”

      A This user is from outside of this forum
      A This user is from outside of this forum
      [email protected]
      wrote on last edited by [email protected]
      #16

      If it wasn't clear before, usa is pathetic

      1 Reply Last reply
      20
      • H [email protected]

        The US is halting some shipments of weapons to Ukraine amid concerns that its own stockpiles have declined too much, officials said Tuesday, a setback for the country as it tries to fend off escalating attacks from Russia.

        Certain munitions were previously promised to Ukraine under the Biden administration to aid its defences during the more than three-year-old war. The pause reflects a new set of priorities under President Donald Trump and came after defence department officials scrutinised US stockpiles and raised concerns.

        “This decision was made to put America’s interests first following a review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement. “The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned – just ask Iran.”

        T This user is from outside of this forum
        T This user is from outside of this forum
        [email protected]
        wrote on last edited by
        #17

        This is what people may not want to hear, but even before Trump 2.0, Pentagon did express concerns of dwindling stocks, especially if the US wants to keep China in check. It is easier to blame Trump, but this time it may not be his fault. As the article mentioned, there has been change of priorities (not that I support Israel).

        H A 2 Replies Last reply
        4
        • A [email protected]

          I'm pretty sure both things are connected. The US can't (no longer?) fight a war on two fronts...

          S This user is from outside of this forum
          S This user is from outside of this forum
          [email protected]
          wrote on last edited by
          #18

          I'd be shocked if we can't. Since WWII, our whole military mission has been predicated on simultaneously fighting two major fronts and one brush fire. We've only recently dropped the brush fire bit.

          OTOH, maybe I'm wrong. Put my comment in ChatGPT:

          • Obama-era Reassessment (2012): The strategy began shifting toward being able to fight one major war while deterring or denying another — a step down from the full two-war capability.

          • Trump and Biden Administrations: Strategy documents further refined focus on peer or near-peer competition (e.g., China and Russia), moving away from the rigid 2-MRC structure. The “brush fire” idea has largely fallen away as the military now emphasizes great power competition and integrated deterrence rather than trying to be everywhere at once.

          D 1 Reply Last reply
          2
          • P [email protected]

            Republicans want to send those arms to ICE. They want to use the military against us.

            S This user is from outside of this forum
            S This user is from outside of this forum
            [email protected]
            wrote on last edited by
            #19

            We're sending war materiel, not so much (if any?) small arms.

            1 Reply Last reply
            2
            • T [email protected]

              This is what people may not want to hear, but even before Trump 2.0, Pentagon did express concerns of dwindling stocks, especially if the US wants to keep China in check. It is easier to blame Trump, but this time it may not be his fault. As the article mentioned, there has been change of priorities (not that I support Israel).

              H This user is from outside of this forum
              H This user is from outside of this forum
              [email protected]
              wrote on last edited by
              #20

              (whispers) It is his fault.

              T 1 Reply Last reply
              1
              • T [email protected]

                This is what people may not want to hear, but even before Trump 2.0, Pentagon did express concerns of dwindling stocks, especially if the US wants to keep China in check. It is easier to blame Trump, but this time it may not be his fault. As the article mentioned, there has been change of priorities (not that I support Israel).

                A This user is from outside of this forum
                A This user is from outside of this forum
                [email protected]
                wrote on last edited by
                #21

                We give them so much fucking money, where is it all going? We don’t even have weapons to show for it?

                geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlG T 2 Replies Last reply
                3
                • A [email protected]

                  We give them so much fucking money, where is it all going? We don’t even have weapons to show for it?

                  geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlG This user is from outside of this forum
                  geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlG This user is from outside of this forum
                  [email protected]
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #22

                  Turns out that giving all your money to weapon lobbies does not actually produce good value for the money.

                  The US military is still using archaic tech because they have no reason to innovate.

                  The last thing MIC wants is when a drone bombs a brown kid without earning a few thousand dollars from it.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  5
                  • A [email protected]

                    We give them so much fucking money, where is it all going? We don’t even have weapons to show for it?

                    T This user is from outside of this forum
                    T This user is from outside of this forum
                    [email protected]
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #23

                    It is not physical money being given to Ukraine, the amount of money mentioned is the worth of already outdated military hardware being given, which would have been decommissioned in the near future anyway. And Ukraine is actually paying for this in IOU (the lend lease programme). With all things considered, helping Ukraine is bang for the buck.

                    A 1 Reply Last reply
                    6
                    • H [email protected]

                      (whispers) It is his fault.

                      T This user is from outside of this forum
                      T This user is from outside of this forum
                      [email protected]
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #24

                      The amount of supplies would have already gone critical whether or not Trump became president this term.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • T [email protected]

                        It is not physical money being given to Ukraine, the amount of money mentioned is the worth of already outdated military hardware being given, which would have been decommissioned in the near future anyway. And Ukraine is actually paying for this in IOU (the lend lease programme). With all things considered, helping Ukraine is bang for the buck.

                        A This user is from outside of this forum
                        A This user is from outside of this forum
                        [email protected]
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #25

                        By “them” I meant the military-industrial complex.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        2
                        • diplomjodler3@lemmy.worldD [email protected]

                          What kind of antisemitic, communist, muslim fundamentalist terrorist are you to suggest such an outrageous idea?

                          R This user is from outside of this forum
                          R This user is from outside of this forum
                          [email protected]
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #26

                          The best kind?

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          2
                          • S [email protected]

                            I'd be shocked if we can't. Since WWII, our whole military mission has been predicated on simultaneously fighting two major fronts and one brush fire. We've only recently dropped the brush fire bit.

                            OTOH, maybe I'm wrong. Put my comment in ChatGPT:

                            • Obama-era Reassessment (2012): The strategy began shifting toward being able to fight one major war while deterring or denying another — a step down from the full two-war capability.

                            • Trump and Biden Administrations: Strategy documents further refined focus on peer or near-peer competition (e.g., China and Russia), moving away from the rigid 2-MRC structure. The “brush fire” idea has largely fallen away as the military now emphasizes great power competition and integrated deterrence rather than trying to be everywhere at once.

                            D This user is from outside of this forum
                            D This user is from outside of this forum
                            [email protected]
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #27

                            Israel will remain as one front. The other one will be closer to home soon.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            1
                            • H [email protected]

                              The US is halting some shipments of weapons to Ukraine amid concerns that its own stockpiles have declined too much, officials said Tuesday, a setback for the country as it tries to fend off escalating attacks from Russia.

                              Certain munitions were previously promised to Ukraine under the Biden administration to aid its defences during the more than three-year-old war. The pause reflects a new set of priorities under President Donald Trump and came after defence department officials scrutinised US stockpiles and raised concerns.

                              “This decision was made to put America’s interests first following a review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement. “The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned – just ask Iran.”

                              R This user is from outside of this forum
                              R This user is from outside of this forum
                              [email protected]
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #28

                              Smart. Don't stop the enemy thousands of kilometers away. Wait till it's in your backyard to skip on delivery costs.

                              /s just in case

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              5
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • World
                              • Users
                              • Groups