NATO allies have agreed to pledge $43 billion in military aid for Ukraine, which will be provided next year, Reuters reported on Wednesday.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg was looking for the alliance to make a multi-year commitment to ensure long-term support for the proxy war, but the allies did not agree. Instead, they will re-evaluate military aid for Ukraine each year.
The agreement says that NATO allies will “aim to meet this pledge through proportionate contributions.” If the $43 billion is funded based on how much each member contributes to NATO, most of the burden would be on the US since it pays for about two-thirds of the alliance’s budget.
The $43 billion is part of a slew of measures NATO will announce at its summit next week in Washington. NATO is also expected to station a civilian official in Kyiv and establish a new command in Germany that will oversee military aid and training for Ukraine, taking over duties currently overseen by the US.
While planning to provide tens of billions in new military aid, NATO will also tell Ukraine that it’s too corrupt to join the alliance. The Telegraph reported this week that the alliance will release a communique calling on Ukraine to take more anti-corruption steps before talks on its NATO membership could progress.
President Biden has frequently cited Ukraine’s corruption as a reason why the country couldn’t join NATO. But that hasn’t stopped him from providing over $100 billion in aid to Ukraine, which includes tens of billions in the form of direct budgetary aid that funds the government.
Direct budgetary aid, which makes a mockery of the notion that when Ukraine drone bombs into Russia, the US has nothing to do with it. Except funding it.
Putting it in context; when roadside IEDs became a problem in Iraq, and it was "discovered" (insinuated? alleged? claimed?) that "some" of the "components" had been manufactured in Iran, the USA was beside itself in tantrums and hysterics, wailing like a small child, threatening "war" with Iran, even though they had exactly ZERO proof that anyone in the Iranian government or military had any involvement in supplying these items. Because anyone "fighting back" against our unprovoked aggression is wrong and evil. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and suddenly, as long as we didn't literally (as opposed to figuratively) pull the trigger, nothing is our fault. Liars, cowards, hypocrites, fools, children, and weaklings. My government; makes me so proud.
Right Wing Lies! '
It(YOUR Government) makes you so patriotic!
Hunter Biden, Burisma, and Corruption:
The Impact on U.S. Government Policy and
Related Concerns U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs
U.S. Senate Committee on Finance
Majority Staff Report
https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/library/files/hsgac-finance-report/
Good but Demo-Controlled Senate produced…ergo….
Ukraine will lose anyway unless NATO sends troops. That seems crazy but the billionaires have loaned and invested many billions of dollars in Ukraine. We have to protect them!
Ukraine will lose regardless of whether NATO sends troops. If NATO sends troops, NATO will lose. But in reality, NATO can not send troops, at least not more than a few brigades. Both Scott Ritter and Colonel Wilkerson have added up the numbers, and NATO just isn't there.
Safe to say the Russian Federation continues to enjoy the advantage of escalation dominance.
Putin seems to disagree, at least if the British media reports from yesterday are true — his supposed latest peace proposal gives up Kherson and Zaporzhzhia and offers some kind of power-sharing deal on Crimea. The Crimea part goes even further than I expected Putin to be willing to go to get his teat out of the wringer.
British media reports…
Good one.
I only follow the British tabloids for gossip on the Royals, and Coronation Street cast changes.
If you want to know what Putin thinks about possibilities of a peace deal, listen to what Putin says. He talked about that not many hours ago while meeting Orban. They both talked to press.
You need to find a more reliable source.
No, I don't need to find a reliable source. I'm fine with just being skeptical of all sources. Which is why I very specifically said "if."
You quoted a known unreliable propaganda mill source, as if it supported your fantasy that Putin will relinquish the territory he has taken. NO ONE of any standing supports that position, but you chose to present it. Why, I don’t know; but you can’t cry for being called out on it.
I didn’t quote any source.
I cited the general British press (my recollection is that articles saying essentially the same thing ran in the Mail, the Express, and the Independent, among others.
And I did so skeptically, even though it does suggest that Putin has finally realized he won’t be able to both 1) end the war and 2) keep Kherson and Zaporzhia.
The problem is not in Putin, the problem is in American leadership. How far will they go in their efforts to return those lands to Ukraine (actually, to put them under control of American corporations and American militarists)? Yes, those lands are very good and rich of natural resources. People who live on those lands decided already on referendum that they wish to belong to Russia. Russia accepted them into Federation and will defend them doesn't matter what American oligarchs may wish. If Americans decide to have a big nuclear war, so we will have it. It is American choice.
There are multiple problems.
The biggest one is probably for Putin in figuring out how to GTFO of Ukraine without being deposed and likely murdered by his oligarch masters.
You live in a fantasy world which fake news created for you. Russia, unlike U.S., is not ruled by oligarchs.
The US is ruled by oligarchs.
Russia is ruled by oligarchs.
The fight in Ukraine is over whether Ukraine will be ruled by Russian oligarchs or US oligarchs.
In Russia, the power is concentrated in Kremlin. Putin is the boss. The governors of the regions are subordinated to him.
Pushilin and Pasechnik, the current governors of Donbass republics, became heads of their independent states more than five ago. They are born in Ukraine (Donbass). They were elected by their people. What makes you think that they are working for some "Russian oligarchs"?
Iron law of oligarchy.
Yes, a rumor in the UK press, “suggests” Putin will do what you predict he will. That makes complete sense. And nothing in your post suggested you were “skeptical”; more like a drowning man grasping at straws.
You dared to oppose Team Russia!
I expect Putin would be overthrown if he accepted that deal.
Ukrainian Nazism is a real thing. It is massive and it keeps Ukrainian army fighting. There are many more Ukrainians in the battlefields than foreigners. Foreign mercenaries are paid well and they are also ideologically motivated. Still it is Ukrainians who are doing most of the job and who are dying now in huge numbers.
Germany is most pro-Ukrainian nation for the same reason: German Nazism is still alive and kicking. So, in the end, neocons could eventually succeed in mobilizing Europe against Russia and starting a new big European war.
What about Ukrainian corruption, which is really great, maybe, it is a good idea to appoint Hunter Biden to take care of it.
There is an old saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". In World War II the Ukrainians saw Germany as their potential liberator from Russian domination.
East Ukrainians who before WW II were under Russian (or rather under communist with Stalin on the top) domination, fought against Germans. West Ukrainians who between WW I and WW II were under Polish fascist domination, they indeed saw Nazi Germany as their liberator.
I assume, there is, perhaps, some irony in your post, good sir?….
If you mean, madam, the appointment of Hunter Biden would be a bit too funny, really, I don't think, Blinken or anyone else is able to do this job any better; the outcome would be the same.
It doesn’t make any sense why a Nazi would fight in the war. They’re just fakes (at the top) and useful idiots. The Ukrainian side is anti-nationalist, and maybe the Russian side is also. Ukrainians will be replaced with foreign workers, and the nation will be destroyed by the “West.”
For them it makes sense. They hoped, the same as millions of their supporters in The West, that with help from NATO they could defeat Russia. They are disinformed and brainwashed the same way as people in The West.
The West just wants a war to profit from. And it wants to weaken and bother Russia for a variety of reasons. If Russia wins some total victory, it’s still “the best money ever spent” by the US. Ukraine is corrupt, plenty of money from that. Ukraine as a nation is broken, which is a win for the US and maybe even for Russia too. The US uses East European nationalism, but it doesn’t want it. And the US is forcing Russia to waste money on its military instead of on its development. You could probably think of many other “benefits.” Libya was a wonderful place, and the US had to destroy it. The US similarly doesn’t want Russia to become wonderful.
I seriously doubt German NS support Ukraine. AfD is fairly noninterventionist. Why support the destruction of Ukraine? I’m right wing. I don’t support the Ukrainians, because I actually like Ukraine. The war needs to end, and I don’t see Putin’s goals as excessive. Maybe some negotiation is possible for reduced territory from what Russia wants, but the general goals of Russia are benign.
What does a Ukrainian Nazi achieve from “defeating” Russia? I remember years ago seeing videos of far right people training in Ukraine. It’s hilarious that that spirit was just wasted in fighting Russia.
It’s like feeding the poor each day only to discover the people you’re feeding would otherwise be better off if not feeding them (eg. working, not on drugs, etc.)
It seems to me that it might be time to hold new talks on NATO and its far reaching arms and ambitions, in the region and indeed perhaps the world…
There's no one to talk to. The rest of the world already knows NATO is finished.
I sure hope you are right that NATO is finished. North Atlantic Terrorist Organization is what it is.
what point of the North Atlantic does NATO member Muslim Autocracy Turkey touch?
what point does CRIMINAL MONEYLAUNDERING pit NATO wanna-be Ukraine touch?
NATO is run by idiots.
One day they say that the Ukrainian government is corrupt.
The next day, they say that they are sending $43 billion of military equipment to that same corrupt government.
It's not their money; it's ours.
!!!
Of course those money collected from taxpayers, and a good part of it goes to the pockets of corrupted politicians. They are not idiots, they are corrupt.
There is an old song the lyrics of which go: Don’t cross the river if you can’t swim the tide….
Better send it early this year because the Ukraine state may not exist in 2025.
Not as we know it. I'd guess a Balkanisation of the territory; Crimea plus 2-4 oblasts as Russian Federation buffer zones in the east.
And as I like to predict, the European Union Welfare State of Aryan West Ukraine ruled over from Kiev with Western money propping it up for decades.
(Consult the past ~10 years of Ukrainian presidential election results to see consistently where the country splits east & west)
Until maybe Poland says "eff this" (Poland has the Metric system; it'll translate differently in their language) and annexes the EUWSoAU. For "stability" and "security" of course.
Worldwide destruction of cash and military equipment that costs money leading to more worldwide inflation!
Talk about criminal activity: "Joey Biden has frequently cited Ukraine’s corruption as a reason why the country couldn’t join NATO. But that hasn’t stopped him from providing over $100 billion in aid to Ukraine, which includes tens of billions in the form of direct budgetary aid that funds the government."
Waste of taxpayer money…!
Biden here is an unimpeachable witness having himself perpetrated the Burisma/Hunter scam.
Ironies abound ! President Biden unimpeachable as the office of President moves steadily closer to kingship and legal immunity.
Don't forget the Funny Farm.
Yes ! The 1988 Chevy Chase film comedy. Prophetic, that.
It appears they’re aiming at some sort of totalitarian archon, an evolution from Hamiltonian Federalism, a Big Boss Emperor, political “steve jobs”.
Ugh, Steve Jobs. If there's one person whose whitewashed image irritates me more than that of Mother Teresa, it's aberrant opportunist and mid-functioning sociopath Steve "my tech is polished turds" Jobs.
Precisely, … the ideal big bourgeois boss emperor.
Can I get 1 percent of that? I swear, I’ll buy two private jets.
and only 1 Crimean dacha and a Lamborgini NOT an expensive Bugatti!!! He might even give in and get a white dress shirt, a Jerry Garcie tie and a Brooks Bros suit..
Biden speaks from both sides of his mouth. He says Ukraine is too corrupt to join NATO but funds it as he does for Israel.
If Trump is the next president, he will tell the Europeans to contribute more to NATO but the US will still pay the lion's share.
Trump is fine with the war in Ukraine going on as long as the US stays out of it, he doesn't care how the Europeans handle the war.
Trump has said his priority will be to get a Peace deal done between Russia and Ukraine that will stop the killing and destruction.
Trump has said many things.
and many people still think that the ELITE CHOSEN "President" is in charge and does things HIS WAY….smh…
Trump also was grateful for Assange for the DNC leak in 2016 only to try to find a solutions to capture or kill him.
And he did find the solution. A little bribe for Ecuador's President.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/10/12/the-tortured-trial-of-julian-assange/
You rock wars!
So does CP, along with antiwar!
Trump wants to prove how he’s the greatest for Team America. His grasp of what Team America means seems tenuous, but maybe he’s improved.
Trump’s first presidency proved how small the U.S. government really is and how smaller the U.S. presidents are.
What would have been so terrible about Ukraine adopting a policy of non-aligned neutrality like Sweden, Ireland and Switzerland? They could have acted as an EU bridge between East and West and they wouldn't have lost Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, not to mention hundreds of thousands of their finest people. Plus, we'd have saved a huge amount of money. But no, we just had to encroach NATO closer and closer to Russia's border. This is the inevitable result.
Nothing that was actually the path they were on – they were not on a path to NATO membership – and it was only when Putin annexed Crimea that the attitude to NATO membership started to change in Ukraine – and only after the start of the SMO that it became an overwhelming majority wish.
Add to this that there was no chance of Ukraine joining before the SMO as both Germany and France (not to mention Hungary and Turkey) were against and things should be pretty clear.
They lost Crimea before they ever got to apply for NATO membership.
Only we didn't and the Ukrainians didn't either – i.e. they did not apply and we did not offer.
What we did do was to reject Putin's proposal that we roll back NATO to the status of 1991 and make new rules that would prevent Ukraine from ever applying to join.
Or in other words we stuck to the guarantees that were in the Budapest memorandum i.e. respect Ukraine as a sovereign state.
Did the U.S. honor the Budapest memorandum when we paid for and staged a coup in Ukraine which overthrew the democratically elected leader Yanukovich?
The US did not pay for or stage the Yanukovych ousting – the US had supported Ukraine for a long while when it happened – but I challenge you to show where the US was actually funding democracy subversive movements prior to 2014.
Moreover the memorandum required the signatories to respect Ukrainian sovereignty – seeing as the US only continued support for Ukraine based on their movement for a democratic election post the ousting of Yanukovych – the US actually continued to honor the memorandum – the Russians violated it less than 7 days after Yanukovych had left Ukraine.
The change of status of Crimea was the result of a coup in Kiev, as I recall. The coup changed a lot of the dynamics in the area – all the way to 2022. The coup was sponsored by the American government.
Good job of filtering, but no one here is that stupid or ignorant.
You should troll Political Wire. They'd love your stuff.
The Russians took Crimea less than 7 days after Yanukovych had left – i.e. they did not do so because the path set out the new people in charge.
US had funded a lot of things in Ukraine but there is no proof that they funded a coup or that the Maidan movement was not a Ukrainian popular movement.
Your points have been rebutted.
Listen to the speech Victoria Nuland gave saying the U.S. gave $5 Billion dollars to prepare Ukraine for democracy.
I have listened to it, nothing in it is a smoking gun – all she does is to express the US wishes and preferences – more specifically her expressions reveal that the US is not in control but do have wishes and preferences – and the donations to ‘prepare for democracy’ given before Yanukovych was ousted was not given to ‘the opposition’.
Dig up the transcript of the interview and show me where there is anything more incriminating.
It is one thing to be combative, verbally, but I should like to point out that good manners are a universal thing but then again, there is no room for ego and arrogance here.
I’m not making any excuses for her attitude or rudeness – I’m very far from a fan of her or the administrations she has worked for.
;-}
Your reply was trash. But keep trying. Most of us here don't really treat this forum as a junior high school debating club.
"No proof the US funded a coup". You are unique, but not in an admirable way – more like a troubled, clueless way. Personally I eschew liars, so so long.
Well my answer can be backed up with links to the Russians confirming the veracity of them taking Crimea less than 7 days after Yanukovych leaving Ukraine.
I have proof that the Russians started the war in the Donetsk:
You know how one is supposed to be able to support ones claims.
You have absolutely no proof of the US funding the Maidan movement that ousted Yanukovych.
So the trash would seem to be all on your side.
Try escaping your own shadow.
Russians took Crimea and Donbass because Russians were living there before Ukrainian state appeared. They tolerated it when it was tolerable but after Ukrainian state was hijacked by Nazis and American puppets, they opted first for independence and then for reunification with Russia.
Even if true, that is still in violation of UN rules and a patent violation of no aggressive wars of territorial conquest.
According to international law, people have the right of self-determination. In case of Ukraine, the right of self-determination was absolutely justified after the unconstitutional change of the central power. Ukrainian legal state stopped to exist after the far-right coup 2014.
Absolutely within well defined areas – only Putin did not want to proceed through those channels so he went and occupied the areas before holding a vote. And no Ukraine did not stop existing after Yanukovych was ousted – it might have done so, only that required that Putin waited to see if they were going to hold democratic elections or go the way of most far right coups.
They didn’t and Putin managed to end up as the criminal.
"Putin managed to end up as the criminal" – who decided that he is the criminal? War criminals who themselves killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria and some other countries.
Their recent massive war crimes are happening in Gaza.
The very same kind of international law that makes the basis for self-determination. You know the people who decided that Germans had to be executed for executing an aggressive war of territorial conquest.
Probably Ukrainian neo-Nazis also will be executed for the same reason. They started a war of aggression against Donbass republics and committed many war crimes.
No they did not start this, we have the Russians admitting that they started it.
And they could not start an aggressive war of conquest while not invading any other country but putting down a domestic revolt.
Strelkov organized an armed resistance to neo-Nazi militants who came to Donbass to kill and rob.
That does not change that this was Russian interference in the domestic affairs of a neighbor, while the Ukrainian action was a government response to a foreign supported insurrection – so a war crime on the side of Russia not Ukraine – what political line that interim government had plays no role in the legal issue.
Had the government carried out a genocide the Russians could have approached the UN – they did not they chose to support an insurrection in Ukraine instead.
Russia did everything according to the international law. First Russia recognized the independence of Donbass republics (Russia had the right to do it). Then Russia signed with them an agreement for mutual military help in case of aggression. Then Russia intervened military. And now Russia is ready for the peace if Ukrainian army stops military activity and leaves Russian territories. Those four former Ukrainian regions which reunited with Russian Federation after the referendum in September 2022 are also Russian territory. Everything was done in compliance with the international law.
If they had then the protests would have died down in the Donbas as they did in Kharkiv and Odessa – but instead they started fermenting an insurrection.
As pointed out we have them on video admitting as much.
That is not how international law works.
You can see how wrong your statement is by the fact that the Russians claimed not to be involved between 2014 and 2022.
You can see that you are wrong even after 2022 by the fact that the Russians did not claim that they started the SMO to counter a Ukrainian military offensive in the Donbas, and that their demands to not take action were not restricted to Ukraine just not attacking the Donbas insurrectionist areas.
Not by international law – again that is not how it works.
No you do not get to invade and then hold a referendum that violated international law.
Like the US regime, the Russian regime does whatever it wants to do, while announcing that whatever it wants to do is "in compliance with the international law" because "the international law" is whatever the regime in question happens to want it to be at the moment.
Yes, the Coup in Ukraine. A minor detail.
: )
Just put it on the card, Mr. HoloCost.
“NATO allies”. Who are these allies really?
Ya can't fix THE STUPID.
Can't really come up with anything else that fits the European-US Axis better than this.
What percentage of the Ukraine $43 Billion in Military Aid for 2025 will come from USA taxpayers?
A good 80% of your federal income tax goes to MIC…! So proportionally, it would be 3.44% of the taxes if the budget is $1 trillion…!
The one most insidious pair of Joey Biden and obama have the world on the brink of nuclear destruction.
"After me (Us), the flood" is a French expression attributed to King Louis XV of France, or in the form "Après nous, le déluge"
What does after me comes the flood mean?
A phrase meaning 'After me, the deluge', attributed to Louis XV of France (1710–74). > Used in the context of someone leaving a place or job and predicting disaster or chaos after their departure.
https://www.foreignaffairs….
Netflix and neo-nazis (about 2 minutes): https://www.greanvillepost….
It is so nice when we all get along so well! Antiwar is the best! we can argue, agree to disagree or move on to another conversation but we are mostly still friends!
It is so nice when we all get along so well! Antiwar is the best! we can argue, agree to disagree or move on to another conversation but we are mostly still friends!
Netflix and neo-nazis (about 2 minutes): https://www.greanvillepost….