Yes, it does add up to a lot, but it always came in just enough to keep Russia at bay. Also the permissions around where and how which weapons could be used.
When Russia invaded, Putin had no idea how corrupt, weak and inefficient his forces were.
This trickle allowed Russia enough time to turn around much of that, getting us to the point where they are now severely threatening Ukraine.
If the military aid was more decisive, Russia could have been defeated early on, and the total spend could have been less than where it is now.
As I mentioned to the other commenter, all countries proceeded with discretion. We also didn’t realize how bad of shape Russia’s infrastructure was in, so that demanded a slow approach to try and prevent a nuclear retaliation. Now we know that’s not going to happen, thus lifting the restrictions on attacking within Russian territory.
It’s funny how the opinion on the US’s role in this war over the last two years has gone from “WTF are we doing risking a nuclear war with Russia” to today where folks seem to be saying “why didn’t we stomp Russia from the very beginning?”. The answer in both cases was obvious, I don’t know why anyone has forgotten the reason for that initial caution.
I do understand those arguments, and the US has been a true ally to Ukraine - much more than the Europeans who generally didn’t spend as much as they should have, and sometimes added additional layers of caution (Olaf Scholz in particular).
But if you take a “don’t criticize us” attitude, you won’t be open to any lessons that might be learned. The lesson I hope the West, Europe in particular, would learn is that timidity and weakness invites aggression from someone like Putin.
Don’t forget that not all aid and support is publicly shared , especially from countries that are within firing range of Putin. It’s actually amazing what we do hear.
I know Poland in particular has covertly (and often just quietly) gifted Ukraine quite a number of things. Including tanks and aircraft before anyone else had. It was real confusing for me when Germany was holding off on providing tanks because they didn’t want to be the leader/first, meanwhile Poland had been providing tanks to Ukraine for awhile already.
I dunno, I feel like there’s a distinction between being timid and being cautious. Yeah we all wish things could have ramped up much faster and knocked Putin back to his bunker like a coward, but if we had misjudged his readiness then there might not be a Ukraine left today. We know better now, and I think Russia’s disastrous ICBM testing gave everyone a good idea of what to expect. And the fact that they’re not turning to North Korea of all places for support? Yeah it’s not looking good for Russia’s military.
Yes, it does add up to a lot, but it always came in just enough to keep Russia at bay. Also the permissions around where and how which weapons could be used.
When Russia invaded, Putin had no idea how corrupt, weak and inefficient his forces were.
This trickle allowed Russia enough time to turn around much of that, getting us to the point where they are now severely threatening Ukraine. If the military aid was more decisive, Russia could have been defeated early on, and the total spend could have been less than where it is now.
As I mentioned to the other commenter, all countries proceeded with discretion. We also didn’t realize how bad of shape Russia’s infrastructure was in, so that demanded a slow approach to try and prevent a nuclear retaliation. Now we know that’s not going to happen, thus lifting the restrictions on attacking within Russian territory.
It’s funny how the opinion on the US’s role in this war over the last two years has gone from “WTF are we doing risking a nuclear war with Russia” to today where folks seem to be saying “why didn’t we stomp Russia from the very beginning?”. The answer in both cases was obvious, I don’t know why anyone has forgotten the reason for that initial caution.
I do understand those arguments, and the US has been a true ally to Ukraine - much more than the Europeans who generally didn’t spend as much as they should have, and sometimes added additional layers of caution (Olaf Scholz in particular).
But if you take a “don’t criticize us” attitude, you won’t be open to any lessons that might be learned. The lesson I hope the West, Europe in particular, would learn is that timidity and weakness invites aggression from someone like Putin.
Don’t forget that not all aid and support is publicly shared , especially from countries that are within firing range of Putin. It’s actually amazing what we do hear.
I know Poland in particular has covertly (and often just quietly) gifted Ukraine quite a number of things. Including tanks and aircraft before anyone else had. It was real confusing for me when Germany was holding off on providing tanks because they didn’t want to be the leader/first, meanwhile Poland had been providing tanks to Ukraine for awhile already.
I dunno, I feel like there’s a distinction between being timid and being cautious. Yeah we all wish things could have ramped up much faster and knocked Putin back to his bunker like a coward, but if we had misjudged his readiness then there might not be a Ukraine left today. We know better now, and I think Russia’s disastrous ICBM testing gave everyone a good idea of what to expect. And the fact that they’re not turning to North Korea of all places for support? Yeah it’s not looking good for Russia’s military.