aircooled said:
In reply to 06HHR (Forum Supporter) :
You clearly don't realize you are dealing with a world champion in playing the game shown below.
I was not aware that there were people predicting that the US would have difficulty in tracking weapons sent to Iraq... you know, what the report says, but OK.
Inability to fully track weapons (whether it's a reasonable result or not) certainly creates for the possibility of corruption that you will not know about, but it does not prove it in any way. Just that if it is happening, you may not know about it. That is what the report states. No one is disbelieving the report, we are just not reading into what it does not say.
To be clear. Is there corruptions happening in regards to US weapons sent to Ukraine? Almost certainly. To what extent? I have no idea, and I don't think anyone does. Is corruption acceptable? Certainly not. Does it happen anyway? Certainly yes. Does it only exist in US military dealings? Absolutely not. It's everywhere (other countries, US domestic spending etc.), it very important to be aware of the EXTENT of it though. Which in this case, we do not know.
As previously compared. I know it is a very unfortunate comparison, but the corruption, and more importantly, waste, involved in both the Iraq war, and especially Afghanistan, were certainly far worse. I still say the US is getting a very good return for the money spent in Ukraine (all things considered). I really don't think you could even come close with what was spend (and wasted) in Iraq or Afghanistan.
To be fair in one sentence you say corruption is almost certain, and in another you say not being able to accurately track weapons doesnt prove corruption and "we" arent reading into the report what it doesnt say.
I understand were Anthonys coming from, because in the beginning he was saying Ukraine is incredibly corrupt (which was widely reported before they got invaded and become the western darling) and we are sending them vast amount of OUR money, which was generally met with hostile responses in this thread. Some people dont think we should be spending any money on European wars, some people dont necessarily mind spending money in Europe but think because of the current domestic situation that money should be spent here, some people are just anti war, some people just want the US govt to spend less money , some people just think sending huge amounts of money to corrupt nations no matter the reason is stupid. Im not sure which ones he agree or disagrees with but they are all valid points. You dont have to agree but they arent unreasonable positions.
Ive been following this thread for a few hundred pages and many people treat him like E36 M3 and then use the excuse its because "the way he posts," but I have seen many members post sarcastic or hyperbole filled or just downright incorrect posts but the ones met with the most vitriol all happen to be the ones that seem to be against the mainstream narrative that we need to send and keep sending Ukraine money.
So put yourself in Anthonys shoes, a year or year and a half ago you trying to raise the flag about corruption in Ukraine and poor tracking and oversight of money sent to Ukraine and you are shouted down. Skip to present day and you post an article about a billion dollars of OUR MONEY (thats what it is) not being tracked properly, potentially validating what you said a year or year and a half ago and youre shouted down again, or just called a troll, or told Well yah of course there is corruption no one doubts that but we dont exactly know how big it is, so dont worry about it.
You may be correct that we dont know how big it is, but you have to give some recognition to the argument just based on historical information, you even mention how bad Iraq and Afghanistan were, why would we expect it to be any better?
PS about it not being a big of waste of money as Iraq and Afghanistan, we are just shy of two years into Ukraine and I think we have spent more than we did until about the 3rd or 4th year of the war in the middle east (its been a while since I looked at it but I think im close). So the only reason its not as big as the Middle east is because it hasnt been 20 years, because Ukraine spending is happening faster. Now you could make the argument that there is little chance it will get there because public support in the US for further aid is dwindling. You are correct, and thats mostly because there are a whole bunch of people in the US just like Anthony that dont want to send more money to Ukraine and the politicians know it. Its hard for me to tell someone not to fight against something because it wont happen, but the reason it wont happen is because they are fighting against it.
