• Cethin@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    1 year ago

    Most of what we’re sending isn’t money, it’s assets. Assets that were constructed to fight China and Russia at the same time if needed. They were literally built and maintained in waiting for a fight with Russia. Sending them to make Russia weaker lowers the stockpile we need to maintain. The number of dollars sent over isn’t real dollars, it’s the value of assets (at the date of construction, not after technology advanced). We were literally spending money to keep them ready in case they were needed, and now they’re needed and we no longer have to spend money on them.

    We are spending some new money on aid and things, but most of the military stuff is stuff we already had kicking around, not new spending to build new stuff to send over. Also, sure we’ll have to replace some, but we would anyway as technology advances, and it also won’t be to the same level as Russia is weaker.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      it’s the value of assets (at the date of construction, not after technology advanced).

      Arguably much of it should be valued at negative monetary value as with Ukraine taking it the US won’t have to pay to decommission it. Especially ammunition gets expensive (tanks you can just dump in a desert somewhere).