278
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

"We have issued the last package that we had withdrawn and for which we had funding," John Kirby said. White House National Security Council strategic communications coordinator John Kirby said at a briefing Thursday that "the assistance we were providing has come to a halt."

The White House official also said it is very important that Congress continues to approve the allocation of money to Ukraine. He stressed that Kiev needs help more urgently during the winter period.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] [email protected] 191 points 2 years ago

Putin is going to give all of his U.S. congressional pawns a big bonus this week.

[-] [email protected] 73 points 2 years ago

MTG and Boebert will be dining out at the finest roadside BBQ restaurant in their districts tonight

[-] [email protected] 39 points 2 years ago

maybe even see a movie, exchange dick pics..

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

a nice handjob between courses

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 21 points 2 years ago

It's sad to watch these world leaders who understand long strategy use the short American attention span to twist global politics to their own ends.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

I think it's OK to put the blame where appropriate here. "U.S. Republican Congressional pawns."

[-] [email protected] 90 points 2 years ago

The headline is a bit misleading, as you can see in the 2nd paragraph of the submission text, it's the current round of assistance that has halted, and they're pushing for Congress to continue their support of Ukraine.

[-] [email protected] 24 points 2 years ago

Purposely so, that site was using sources and links to RT news.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

And it's not that it has halted.

It has concluded.

It being halted would mean that that which was meant to be allocated is stopped from being allocated before all of it was allocated.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

I'm sure Ukraine appreciates the difference.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] [email protected] 67 points 2 years ago

It's clear that Ukraine is of "National Security Interests". So I vote we just take a lil bit of the budget allocated for military spending and use it where it would be best served.

[-] [email protected] 19 points 2 years ago

it's mostly a gear refresh for our military anyway. we send them stuff we have stockpiled, then we spend the allocated money on new shit for us.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 60 points 2 years ago

Funny how are government starts fucking up the war most Americans support AND fucking up the other one that most Americans don't support.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

One of those effects the transfer of capital far more than the other. The whole reason we have a navy is to police international waters for commerce.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] [email protected] 36 points 2 years ago
[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

i can post peoples world as a counter source

[-] [email protected] 30 points 2 years ago

Take the Israel weapon donations, ship them through a sketchy ukranian subcontractor in Ukraine, "lose them" in such a way the ukraine government "aquires" them. Two problems solved.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] [email protected] 23 points 2 years ago

We could send all of the people fighting the war on drugs, they're used to achieving nothing.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 2 years ago

Most cops would never make it through that much required training, tbh.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
278 points (92.4% liked)

politics

24613 readers
2344 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS