r/NoStupidQuestions Sep 24 '22

How will Ukraine pay for all the arms they have been given from other countries once the war is over? Or are they “gifts” that will require political “favours” in return?

1.4k Upvotes

3.1k

u/Wizard_Elon_3003 Sep 24 '22

The favor is that Ukraine continues to be one of the most important buffers between Western Europe and Russia.

1.6k

u/CannedRhino Sep 24 '22

Yes. Ukraine is paying in blood. Essentially the US is degrading and deterring Russia without sacrificing US citizens. It is more than fair.

755

u/Niadh74 Sep 24 '22

Not to mention field testing weapons and tactics.

563

u/thenewtbaron Sep 24 '22

Also, they get to see how the russian military works, the communications, the structure, how it responds., what intelligence they are able to get and use and how.

If you were a sports person, it would be like being able to watch another team before you have to deal with it. Like, you can see their normal calls, how the coach reacts.

205

u/Niadh74 Sep 24 '22

Definitely this. Anyone want to bet that the USA gets first dibs on any russian gear captured intact?

156

u/diamondpredator Sep 24 '22

Not sure there's much that Russia has that the USA wants. The only thing I can think of is equipment related to cyber or electronic warfare.

90

u/Niadh74 Sep 24 '22

Still, it's good to know/confirm just how crap their hardware is.

38

u/ArchdukeOfNorge Sep 24 '22

Would be sick if we (the West) could get our hands on more of their naval equipment. Probably the one type of tech we haven’t see at play as much as others.

28

u/Niadh74 Sep 24 '22

I am sure if the moskva is in internationsl waters it'll have diving teams exploring it in the nit too distant future if of course the likes of the seals and sbs haven't already been down for a look see

23

u/GamemasterJeff Sep 24 '22

It was built in Ukraine by Ukrainians. If we wanted anything, we would already have the bluprints down to every bolthead, plus interviews with the shipwrights on what they really did.

→ More replies

7

u/Renovatio_ Sep 25 '22

Maybe. You have to sink in relatively shallow waters in order to get a diver down there. 300m is around the maximum depth saturation divers can reliably do.

The black sea can be like 2000m deep. But also has areas that are really shallow.

→ More replies

7

u/Additional_Sleep_560 Sep 24 '22

Help them figure out counter measures.

→ More replies

7

u/Illustrious-Fault224 Sep 25 '22

It’s not just Russian hardware but any hardware supplied to them. Chinese mortar shells have supposedly been found in the most recent push. If it is true, then being able to see the capabilities of more assets would be valuable to any military planner. North Koreans seem to supposedly be supplying ammunition through normal arms sales.

Iranian drone capabilities and also recovered malfunctioned missiles or downed planes give the pentagon and its military contractors an idea about supply chain.

To tangent a bit here, a secure supply chain is critical for any prolonged war effort. Nazi Germany suffered this during the end days of ww2.

→ More replies

0

u/hail_SAGAN42 Sep 24 '22 edited Sep 25 '22

I'll never understand this thought pattern.. Russia isn't anything to be sneezed at technologically speaking, if for no other reason than they seem to have no qualms about throwing human suffering at a hypothesis until they determine just how bad it fucks people up.

We have been in a quiet war trying to outdo each other for awhile. Not only that, but most technology they have is from elsewhere, so it's not as if it's shit design based on being made in Russia.

I feel like this attitude is possibly because of the Russian tendency to not need something to be shiny and exciting looking, or upgrade something unless it's necessary, and to feel no need to make something aestheticslly pleasing just functional.. in that regard I envy them.

9

u/diamondpredator Sep 25 '22

Uhhh, have you been paying attention? They have SOME more modern tech, but it’s useless because they can’t get it in working order and have no personnel to run it (like their SU’s).

Most of their shit is ancient when compared to countries like the US. Are you under the impression they’re still keeping the “good stuff” under wraps until they REALLY need it?

Are you also implying that US military tech is made to look good? So you think the F35’s look like that because people will like it? No bud, it’s all functional. If anyone doubts it they can fuck around and find out the hard way.

Look, I’m not a loyalist or a nationalist to anyone or any country, but I’m also not blind to reality. Russian military tech, Russian military strategy, and Russian military structure is all leagues below the US/UK/others.

I honestly thought they’re better than this when the invasion started. Even with all the help I thought that Russia would eventually crush Ukraine. I’m surprised at just how shitty their armed forces are.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

20

u/HulaViking Sep 24 '22

I think the US already got a captured Russian T90M tank.

9

u/Trasartr00mpet Sep 24 '22

That's what I was thinking. That got recovered near the start of the war and sent to the west for reverse engineering

43

u/Jlpanda Sep 24 '22

The US spends nearly as much on its military as the rest of the world combined. I don't think the Russians have any technology that we haven't already figured out.

63

u/SheepherderFront5724 Sep 24 '22

I think the US was quite happy to get that electronic warfare container back in March. Though, given what we've seen of the Russians so far, it's probably just a hamster in a wheel powering a TV antenna...

4

u/thenewtbaron Sep 25 '22

Yeah, because it may contain codes, location markers for bases, components so that we know how to jam/deal with them, and if need be know where they are getting parts from.

12

u/josh_sat Sep 24 '22

Was told early 2000s tech at best. But that's the information that we want.

56

u/A_MAN_POTATO Sep 24 '22

Just because the US has more advanced technology, does not mean there is not value in knowing what technology Russia has. Information is power.

19

u/OnTheUtilityOfPants Sep 24 '22

It's not about obtaining new technology, it's about learning the capabilities and limitations of their hardware. Capturing working examples yields plenty of useful intelligence.

10

u/unpossible_labs Sep 24 '22

Came here to say this. The US has been training for decades with dedicated OPFOR units that use actual captured Soviet & Russian equipment. It also helps US troops know what that equipment looks like and how it is used in the field. (Firsthand) knowledge is power.

→ More replies

4

u/Peter1456 Sep 24 '22

Thats not the point, the point is to find weaknesses in their armour/design to more easily exploit in future weapons systems.

Knowledge is power. And when it is life or death, you want to find every advantage to the smallest minute detail.

4

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '22

[deleted]

4

u/Glass-Taste-2287 Sep 25 '22

One more reason to keep the former president out of office.

3

u/Substantial-Basil337 Sep 24 '22

Yeah. The Ukrainians captured a T-90 tank that is allegedly headed for the U.S. It will be thoroughly examined and reverse engineered. I guess it's apparently just a modified T-72.

4

u/Niadh74 Sep 24 '22

A T-72 with eggshell packaging to deaden the sound of the incoming atgm warhead

→ More replies

1

u/11_Wolfie_11 Sep 24 '22

I think the time where “we” don’t know “our enemies” is long past. Ukraine has an interest in defying Russian influence, and our involvement is just theatre.

3

u/Mikisstuff Sep 24 '22

You might be right about the physical capability of platforms, but how they use them, will to fight and actions of troops would be much harder to predict. Not to mention the insights the conflict is giving into Putin...

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

11

u/SamGropler Sep 24 '22

The Russian military works?

17

u/thenewtbaron Sep 24 '22

yes, they probably would have been winning this if not for supplies and intelligence aids the rest of the world and the US are giving to the ukrainians. That isn't to discount them, they would have made it very hard on the russians but if you throw enough fodder and old tanks at a much smaller nation eventually they buckle if they can't keep up with the troops and equipment.

So, we know that they have large swatches of fodder(under trained, under equipped men) using old tech, and a couple of merc groups that are more "high speed" however, they are also using less than the best equipment.

So, we know how to better counter that threat if we ever see it.

22

u/IanDOsmond Sep 24 '22

I remember a quote from a military analyst from the beginning of the war. They said "Russia has a large and modern army. It is important to remember, however, that their large army isn't modern, and their modern army isn't large."

Still.. the "Zerg rush" is a tactic that can be done if you don't value your own people any more than insects...

→ More replies
→ More replies

7

u/RecognitionPretty342 Sep 24 '22

Nukes are a game changer.

9

u/thenewtbaron Sep 24 '22

They are, but if they rattle that saber too often over petty things... you know, such as "if you try to stop us from invading our neighbor and they get into the UN, i'll nuke you"... Then they'd be willing to bring that card out at any time.

Based on the state of the actual military of the Russians, it is possible the nukes are mostly well out of commission, some low level official selling off something that "won't be missed" mixed with "we don't need to put money into this"

2

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '22

[deleted]

2

u/thenewtbaron Sep 25 '22

They can claim that but Ukraine is its own sovereign nation.

If the united states sent troops up to attack canada because we once owned part of it and they speak english... it would be shitty.

→ More replies

5

u/josh_sat Sep 24 '22

What communications it's just all of Eastern Europe screaming profanities at the Russians on every single frequency when they find which one they are on.

2

u/vorpal8 Sep 24 '22

All that, plus whoever is playing your rival is inflicting various injuries on them.

→ More replies

36

u/No-oneReallycares Sep 24 '22

Yeah the Americans are itching to get more of there tech on that field I reckon.

39

u/Assholejack89 Sep 24 '22

I know Lockheed and Northrop Grumman are salivating at the prospect of sending more war machines, especially now that we are taking Ukrainian pilots and training them in our aircraft.

3

u/Rave_With_Dave Sep 24 '22

They don't need to really not when everyone has nukes. At least those they won't fight.

→ More replies

81

u/crystalGwolf Sep 24 '22

Not just US mate, we're all chipping in and getting threatened with nukes

16

u/TheGamblingAddict Sep 24 '22

My favourite one being the nuke in the north sea, it would create a tsunami that would engulf the UK underwater. Not sure how credible that actually is, but it was stated on one of those talk shows that rile up Putins supporters, they had one level headed guy on it (maybe they were paid to be, wouldn't suprise me), that straight up reminded them the UK was also a nuclear power. The host shrugged it off stating a reset is maybe what we need (aka mutually assured destruction). Very chilling words to instill into a population. Their news made the initial announcement.

Edit: For anyone interested, Russian news source? Mind the poster of the video..

16

u/PhoenixEnigma Sep 24 '22

There have been plenty of underwater nuclear tests. They certainly make a good sized splash, and you don't want to be splashed by the water coming down (it picks up a lot of radionuclides in the process), but it's hardly a tsunami that's going to wipe out the British Isles. More like taking a port out of service.

6

u/MrBeer9999 Sep 25 '22

It's not at all credible. Nuclear weapons don't remotely generate enough power to move thousands of cubic kilometres of ocean in such a violent manner, not even the Tsar Bomba monstrosities that Russia could manufacture if they wanted.

The theoretical way that you could engineer a catastophic tsunami using nuclear weapons would be to trigger landslides in formations of existing instability e.g. La Palma.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbre_Vieja_tsunami_hazard

→ More replies
→ More replies

23

u/WayDownUnder91 Sep 24 '22

"Hey guys I know we said we would help you if you gave up your nukes in 1994, yeah.... about that have a few bullets and rockets. Peace"

5

u/ThisShouldBeObvious2 Sep 25 '22

AND we’re spending a HEKL of a lot less money than a proper war or even skirmish. A few hundred billion to fully declaw Russia publicly is an unspeakably good deal for the US.

→ More replies

129

u/sleepyj910 Sep 24 '22

Keeping Ukraine in the fight is probably also relatively cheap way to diminish Russian power... in what is otherwise a new cold war.

29

u/omghorussaveusall Sep 24 '22

It also is essentially the Central Valley if Europe and the main corridor for energy transport from Russia. If Russia took complete control they would have massive leverage over the EU.

6

u/SamGropler Sep 24 '22

Russia already has massive leverage over Europe.

19

u/MichaelEmouse Sep 24 '22

After this, Ukraine is gonna be full of NATO early warning sensors, airbases and missiles.

12

u/IanDOsmond Sep 24 '22

And possibly full of NATO membership.

If Zelensky ends up getting what he REALLY wants - full of EU membership, too.

→ More replies

5

u/ElectronicYoughurt Sep 24 '22

Oh wow I never thought of it that way

1

u/Help_Her_LosetheMask Sep 24 '22

Well, actually, will there even be a need for a buffer against Russia after this?

18

u/Wizard_Elon_3003 Sep 24 '22

Considering the history of Russia is them invading others, yes. Ukraine has always been this buffer, and that's part of what made the Soviet Union such a big threat back during the Cold War. It's also part of why Putin tried to blitz Ukraine in the first place, though there's many others such as Ukraine finding massive natural gas fields (which would compete with Russia's natural gas supply to Europe).

3

u/jt5574 Sep 24 '22

Unsurprisingly, the eastern part of Ukraine that Russia is concentrating on holds over $1.3 TRILLION worth of natural resources. But it’s all about denazification. Yeah, uh huh. That’s exactly what it’s about. Surreee.

→ More replies
→ More replies

324

u/allen_idaho Sep 24 '22 Gold

A lend-lease program works by giving them the option to return the equipment or pay for it incrementally over several years after the war has ended. We used the same program for the Russians and British during World War 2.

In the case of the Russians, the US forgave everything that couldn't be repurposed for civilian use. So out of $10 billion in war material, they were being charged for $2.6 billion. But over the course of 25 years, negotiations dragged on until they eventually paid $48 million and the US washed their hands of the entire thing.

The British were given $4.3 billion which they incrementally paid off, making the final payment in 2006. So just over 60 years.

51

u/CupformyCosta Sep 25 '22

Britons made off like bandits in that deal. Inflation and monetizing the debt over 60 years made those payments seem inconsequential.

24

u/MrBeer9999 Sep 25 '22

Yeah Britain also paid the modern equivalent of billions in gold to the US as well though.

4

u/abroamg Sep 24 '22

It was the soviets during and after WW2, Russia didnt really exist then

26

u/Eskimoobob Sep 25 '22

Russia has always existed, well before the establishment of socialism across their massive empire and the creation of the Soviet Union with a bunch of other nations, which eventually left and Russia was alone, but they've always been there... I mean since like 850 AD or the 1500s Tsardom of Russia.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

566

u/TNCNguy Sep 24 '22 Silver

We aren’t doing Ukraine a favor. If we allow Russia to eat up Ukraine, it’ll be the end of the post WW2 global security order. Nations can not invade other nations to annex them. That makes the world less safe. More dangerous. The prosperity we’ve enjoyed would end. The same prosperity that led to miracles in agriculture and medicine.

76

u/Serafim91 Sep 24 '22

Also there is literally no better use of those weapons then destroying your enemies weapons without having your people in them.

97

u/MadClam97 Sep 24 '22

Well, that's terrifying

105

u/Kellosian Sep 24 '22

Welcome to post-WWII geopolitics, where Goal 1 has always been "Let's not do that shit again".

13

u/Short-Echo61 Sep 25 '22

Concise, but straightforward

→ More replies
→ More replies

71

u/sunnydaysahead2022 Sep 24 '22

Also - they did give up their nukes - we do have a responsibility to them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

15

u/BKacy Sep 24 '22

And yet we can’t do enough because Russia ha threatened us with nukes if we do more.

5

u/do_pm_me_your_butt Sep 25 '22

Russia is bluffing. Im pretty sure nukes are defensive measures at this point and only get used as counternukes and for bluffing.

Pretty sure...

10

u/PrizeStrawberryOil Sep 25 '22

I was also pretty sure Putin didn't want to start a war because wars are awful for everyone. He should have known the world wouldn't let him steamroll Ukraine.

This is honestly the best case scenario for everyone so far after he started the war. If he was making fast progress the world would have been forced to get actually involved.

Dude is literally insane and needs to be taken out. I would not hold him to the standards of "smart enough to not use nukes."

→ More replies
→ More replies

20

u/qpFacts Sep 24 '22

Exactly this. Only reason so many countries are helping is because Ukraine winning is Mutually Beneficial and Russia winning will be Mutually Devastating.

→ More replies

3

u/off-chka Sep 25 '22

Well let me introduce you to a country called Azerbaijan.

2

u/Scvboy1 Sep 25 '22

That’s silly. I don’t recall any other nation that’s been invaded getting hundreds a of billions in free weapons. It’s definitely a favor.

→ More replies

2

u/kirakira88 Sep 24 '22

there is nothing to suggest this man. there have been countless wars that have damaged international relations since wwII

3

u/TNCNguy Sep 25 '22

Yes. But these were proxy wars (Vietnam) or minor nations (Libya vs Egypt). Or interfering in its internal sphere (Hungry 1956). Even the American invasion of Iraq was disguised as “Humanitarian intervention”. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, if successful, will lead to Russia invading other European nations. China taking Taiwan.

→ More replies

1

u/Eskimoobob Sep 25 '22

Ukraine and Russia were still one nation until 1987 though? Which is way after WW2, it was really only under their massive blunders of Chernobyl did it remove any faith in the Soviet Union and finalized the dissolution by 1991.

Though that's just going on memory.

Can you link me anything on this post WW2 global security order? I can't find anything in writing about it.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22

Unless you're Israel

→ More replies

808

u/catwhowalksbyhimself Sep 24 '22

In this case, everyone already wants the same thing. Ukraine standing will both prevent Russia from invading everyone else in the region, while damaging Russia's military and restricting their power and influence.

That alone is worth the investment.

Russia was already planning on invading other nations from what I understand, so this has already paid off big time.

265

u/bullevard Sep 24 '22 edited Sep 24 '22

In other words, from Nato's perspective Ukraine is paying for it with the lives of their people serving essentially as the front line.

Edit: Lots of people seem to be misunderstanding me. I am not suggesting NATO wanted this war or started this war or anything like that. This war has already been financially harmful for NATO countries and this winter risks being very brutal for many NATO countries. And it is using up some degree of those country's military supplies as well as internal political capital.

But also providing these resources isn't some charity act. NATO countries don't want Russia taking over Ukraine, they don't want expansionism rewarded, they don't want Putin emboldened, and they don't want to lose access to the ample resources of Ukraine.

Ukraine is providing the bodies and blood in defense of their country, and in general NATO is happy (so far) to keep supplying them if it means Ukraine wins the war. It isn't a disinterested third party.

72

u/Fubai97b Sep 24 '22

NATO is giving Ukraine the tools to defend themselves from a foreign invasion, because if NATO takes direct action there would almost certainly be either a much larger multinational war or nuclear arms used would be a bit more accurate.

77

u/catwhowalksbyhimself Sep 24 '22

That's one way of looking at it. If Ukraine had fallen, some of their neighbors would have been next and all of NATO would be in danger.

21

u/rickmccloy Sep 24 '22

That is true so long as you remember that it was not NATO's choice to send Russian troops into the Ukraine. Putin put Ukrainians on the battlefront, not NATO.

17

u/Help_Her_LosetheMask Sep 24 '22

I mean, the people of Ukraine are defending themselves. All this unnecessary suffering was forced on them by Putin (not NATO), be it through the war or through his dictatorship and the war crimes of the occupation force. But with aid from the West, at least Ukraine is standing much more of a chance. So to call this NATO sacrificing the people in Ukraine doesn't accurately reflect the actual situation, even if NATO benefits from the outcome. Putin and the people around him that support his agenda are at fault.

9

u/catwhowalksbyhimself Sep 24 '22

That person didn't say they were sacrificing them. Just that the price they are already paying is blood is already enough.

3

u/Help_Her_LosetheMask Sep 24 '22

Yeah, true. Good point. I hope we get to see Putin in front of a court or something.

14

u/AnnaBananner82 Sep 24 '22

NATO isn’t the aggressor here.

-6

u/Azelicus Sep 24 '22

Edit: Lots of people seem to be misunderstanding me. I am not suggestingNATO wanted this war or started this war or anything like that.

And you would be wrong.

NATO has been encroaching on Russia for decades. They accepted nations into their organization closer and closer to russian territory, disregarding any russian declarations about stoking the fire. NATO has also picked off russian allies all over the map (Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya). The USA has been meddling in Ukranian affairs for decades, fueling instabilities any time russian aligned politicians won elections.

NATO (or at least a few of its most prominent members) has been an active party in setting up this conflict: those who think that everything is due to mad Putin are just clueless.

P.S:

I am from Western Europe. Just because my country is a member of NATO I don't need to believe every scrap of propaganda that is being fed to us. While I have no love for Putin and his regime (and will cheer the Russians when they will finally get rid of both), I understand that a lot of reasonable measures could have been adopted to make sure we would not be in this situation. Right now, Europe is suffering, Ukraine is bleeding, and the US of A are laughing their asses off, throwing money overseas so that both their enemies and their fiercest competitors (th EU) are trapped in the quagmire they so thoughtfully created.

7

u/notunprepared Sep 24 '22

NATO countries meddling in other countries elections is 100% dodgy and bad, but I don't think accepting nations who apply to join an alliance should count as encroaching. Ex-soviet nations aren't part of Russia and should be able to join whichever alliance they think would benefit them most.

2

u/Azelicus Sep 24 '22

When being part of an alliance also means that the most powerful member of that alliance will install nuclear missile silos in your country, being accepted becomes a dangerous game. We are living the effect of that game. The USA crafted this situation, they knew it would happen. They are benefiting from it happening.

→ More replies
→ More replies

6

u/Macdonaldworker123 Sep 24 '22

Does this mean Ukraine is the South Korea (from the Korean War) of Europe?

20

u/catwhowalksbyhimself Sep 24 '22

No, not at all. That was an entirely different situation.

→ More replies

62

u/audigex Sep 24 '22

The “favour” Ukraine is doing is to dramatically weaken Russia economically, militarily, and diplomatically

As far as NATO is concerned those weapons were built for the primary purpose of preventing Russia from invading Europe… if they’re used to destroy Russia’s armed forces today, they won’t be needed tomorrow anyway

This is particularly true when we consider that the majority of weapons supplied to Ukraine are last-generation or spare equipment, so NATO is mostly only donating things it had in reserve anyway. The total cost to NATO so far is a fraction of NATO military spending, the West will barely even notice the expense

Ukraine doesn’t owe anything in return, because the West already gain massively from Ukraine continuing to exist as a buffer between Europe and Russia, and by doing so much damage to Russia’s ability to take aggressive action against NATO nations

If I give you a big stick to fight off a bear in my back yard, you’ve already done me a favour by fighting off the bear - you don’t owe me anything for loaning you the stick to do it with

→ More replies

424

u/CommitmentPhoebe Only Stupid Answers Sep 24 '22

Other countries are already working in their own interests when they arm Ukraine, because if Russia succeeds it will destabilize the planet. If Russia can invade any random country it wants and wins, then all countries are at risk. There aren't a whole lot of expectations attached to the arms supplies except for Ukraine to fight off the invaders.

117

u/jimdeanmo Sep 24 '22

Came here to say this. No sense in asking for a return when the situation provides a convenient proxy fight with an international POS

59

u/DomUK89 Sep 24 '22 edited Sep 24 '22

Ukraine sits a top some of the world's largest untapped gas reserves... There's a good reason the West are so eager to help. And so well publicly supported because of the energy crisis as a result. Which will no doubt be well resolved in the longer term when we start sucking on that gassy teet.

I imagine it would give whomever can tap to it, a large source of wealth and power. We can't let Putin have even more control over Europe's energy.

https://hir.harvard.edu/ukraine-energy-reserves/

Edit: I got downvoted last time I posted this but without reasons. It's a good source. And a decent hypothesis seeing as know the importance of resources.

43

u/Karatekan Sep 24 '22

You are being downvoted because it isn’t really that accurate. Ukraine has gas, but nowhere near the amount where you would fight a war over it.

Ukraine technically has the second largest untapped gas reserves in Europe after Norway at 1 trillion cu/m, but they drop to fourth when you include Russia and Azerbaijan, and Europe frankly is not a major player in natural gas production. In terms of total reserves they are only 23rd in the world. For a point of comparison, Russia has like 30 times as much gas, Norway has 50% more. And it’s shitty reserves too; mostly shale gas, which a pain to extract and refine compared to Russian fields

The idea that we’d be spending $60,000,000,000 and climbing for gas reserves that amount to about two years of European consumption is farcical.

13

u/DomUK89 Sep 24 '22

Fair. Thanks for putting it into perspective.

9

u/NoLongerGuest Sep 24 '22

A far more important resource Ukraine has is extremely fertile soil

4

u/GamemasterJeff Sep 24 '22

Ukraine was both the breadbasket and industrial heartland of the former USSR. Without it Putin will never be more than a third rate dictator.

2

u/didwanttobethatguy Sep 24 '22

Good perspective

→ More replies

13

u/wheredoestaxgo Sep 24 '22

Comments like this are often downvoted or liked but far down the comment section for some reason

12

u/AlamutJones get a stupid answer Sep 24 '22

I don’t think it’s the gas. I think it’s the food.

Ukraine grows and exports a lot of food. Most of the country is beautifully rich farmland, of the kind where if you planted a brick you could grow a house. Part of the reason food prices have climbed - and cost of living in general has climbed - around the world is because a country that until now was reliably pumping out grain for the world (they produce about 40% of the World Food Bank’s wheat, for example) has completely stopped doing it.

17

u/AlluTheCreator Sep 24 '22

I don't think that plays big part if any. European timelines of getting rid of fossil fuels is so short that any investment made to extract Ukraine gas, would most likely not have time to even repay it self. Also most gas reserves are located on the eastern part, which all of the fighting is now focused and has been going on since 2014. So huge investments to politically unstable area to resource that is actively been faced out, I don't think that is a reason to get involved in a war.

On the other hand keeping Eu countries safe from Russia without having to sacrifice any of our own young men sounds like a hell of a deal. USA has also learned that world war in Europe always means sending their own to the meat grinder, so it also on their interest to prevent the war from getting any closer to Eu. Also something something NATO and economy.

3

u/DomUK89 Sep 24 '22

Those are fair points!

→ More replies

5

u/BitsAndBobs304 Sep 24 '22

*any not-nato-not-china country

4

u/paulydee76 Sep 24 '22

Yes. This isn't pure altruism.

→ More replies

12

u/WyvernsRest Sep 24 '22

& Allied armies get to order shiny new weapon systems to replace the ones shipped to Ukraine.

142

u/LadyFoxfire Sep 24 '22

It's a proxy war against Russia. The payment is that Russia is getting humiliated.

49

u/IanDOsmond Sep 24 '22

The payment is that the EU continues to have an entire country in between them and Russia.

10

u/aftabangbruh Sep 24 '22

Russia winning is probably more expensive for NATO countries in the long term

9

u/IanDOsmond Sep 24 '22

In a case like this, they already are doing the political favor: keeping Russian expansionistic impulses in check. The EU and their allies, like the United States and UK (still an ally even if they're not PART of the EU any more) don't want Russia to be in striking distance of EU member states like Poland and Hungary. Poland is the third largest provider of military aid, and they are literally one of the next countries over if Ukraine falls. If Russia attacked Canada, the United States would want to provide military help for the purely selfish reason that we would rather have another country in between us and them, as well as the fact that they are an ally.

→ More replies

42

u/green_meklar Sep 24 '22

I wouldn't expect them to pay. They can't afford it, and nobody else cares anyway- western countries are supplying Ukraine because it's already in their own interest to do so for various geopolitical reasons, not because they expect to be paid back.

108

u/Around_the_campfire Sep 24 '22

From the most cynical perspective, the value America gets from simply handing over weapons is advertising. The US government is the world’s #1 arms dealer, and the quality of the product is being displayed in Ukraine.

43

u/AccurateSympathy7937 Sep 24 '22

It’s like Nike and Under Armour outfitting athletes for free!

26

u/HoldTheRope91 Sep 24 '22

America: Just Shoot It™

13

u/Firemage007 Sep 24 '22

LETS GOO BABY FREE MARKETING

3

u/grabtharsmallet Sep 25 '22

To continue in this vein of cynicism... The second biggest is Russia. Over half the value of all military export sales is aircraft, and their air force has looked even worse than their army. Russia relies on money from export contracts to support their own military construction. They can pay for ongoing building of current equipment off primarily internal sales, but R&D can't continue without foreign investment.

17

u/HamsterIV Sep 24 '22

Most of the countries in Europe are armed for the main purpose of preventing Russia from rolling over them over some diplomatic dispute. So giving Ukraine weapons to blow up Russian tanks means they are degrading Russian combat potential. If their equipment is destroyed in the process of making the Russian military less of a threat, then mission accomplished.

On top of this how well domestically produced weapons preform in Ukraine will boost future arms sales. Turkey is more than happy publicly donating a few Bayraktar drones to Ukraine. They are going to make bank off arms sales to countries that want a cheep counter to their neighbor's Russian build tank force. The internet is awash with Bayraktar footage of artillery being walked onto Russian tanks. That is better advertisement than going to 1000 arms expos.

7

u/grabtharsmallet Sep 25 '22

I'm certain Poland and the Baltic states are entirely satisfied with their giant investments in Ukrainian military capability. Almost all of the former Warsaw Pact nations have made large donations relative to GDP, as they aren't interested in being Moscow's "friends" again.

21

u/Henchforhire Sep 24 '22 Gold

The neat part it doesn't have to be paid back it's aid.

→ More replies

4

u/collapsingrebel Sep 24 '22

The cost of keeping Ukraine in the fight and degrading Russian capabilities is very cheap. This only benefits the broader West and the cynic in me notices that we're improving our relationship with a vital ally for pennies on the dollar and stimulating our defense industry at the same time. I'd imagine that eventually we'd either write the bill off, minimize the bill or trade it for access to Ukrainian markets/goods.

5

u/launchedsquid Sep 25 '22

A lot to unpack there.
If Ukraine buys weapons they pay for them right now, cash and carry style.
If Ukraine receives aid, that is effectively a gift, no repayment required.
Regarding "political favors" it's not so much a quid pro quo and rather that the west is looking to help Ukraine be more in the western culture than the Russian culture, from that would come more western laws, more western sensibilities etc, maybe easier trade in the future, that sort of thing.
If Ukraine takes loans for weapons that would eventually need to be repaid, think like the US's Lend Lease act will allow Ukraine to buy arms with a promise to repay in the future, akin to how the UK did during WW2.
That would just be repaid as any government debt would be repaid, over a long time with interest.
There is another aspect to the west supporting Ukraine in this war, the west promised them we would when we negotiated with Ukraine and Russia for Ukraine to hand over their nukes to Russia following the collapse on the soviet union. We promised we would help them if Russia even attempted to invade them, so giving them weapons is literally the bare minimum we could do without looking to the world like we will break or treaties and abandon our allies, emboldening our enemies.
If our word means anything we have to help Ukraine, or nobody would believe us if we made an ultimatum in future.

5

u/Ran_dom_1 Sep 25 '22

They’re gifts. The rest of the world needs Ukraine to succeed in fending off Russia, & reclaim their land. Putin can’t go on unchecked, invading & taking over. We’ve seen the atrocities.

He also can’t be allowed to control that much of the world’s food source.

Even after Ukraine wins, they’ll need assistance for decades in rebuilding. I heard early on that some countries were already talking about that, creating partnerships between the demolished cities & other countries.

4

u/Debesuotas Sep 24 '22

The favour - stoping WW3... Good enough I guess.

5

u/Strong_Special_8924 Sep 25 '22

Ukraine owes nobody nothing. They're paying with lives.

23

u/Agitated-Airline6760 Sep 24 '22

Most are "gifts" which may or may not have political favours attached to them.

7

u/Help_Her_LosetheMask Sep 24 '22

The political favor is Ukraine winning the war.

7

u/woffka Sep 24 '22

but what about lend lease? that shit must be paid off, right?

-9

u/CommitmentPhoebe Only Stupid Answers Sep 24 '22

Lend-Lease was a WWII program to arm the UK. So, like, 80 years ago. Also, it was never really intended to be paid back.

26

u/Breaker8888 Sep 24 '22

The Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act of 2022 is an act of the United States Congress that facilitates the supply of materiel to the Ukrainian government in a manner similar to the World War II Lend-Lease Act in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine

→ More replies
→ More replies

6

u/Drpoofaloof Sep 24 '22

They will allow US troops to build US bases on Ukrainian land.

3

u/jesusleftnipple Sep 24 '22

Tbh natural resources they have europs 3rd largest natural gas in untapped reserves, they produce something like 20 percent of the world's wheat there's gotta be other stuff too.

3

u/Jogroig Sep 24 '22

There is nothing free in this world.

3

u/disfunctionaltyper Sep 24 '22

Deals on rebuilding it, export taxes (?), intel about russians and its good to have some owe you than nothing. It's a buffer from Eu to Ru so why not?

3

u/TonyBoat402 Sep 25 '22

WW2 essentially started with Germany invading other countries, so if Russia successfully take control of Ukraine it could possibly start a similar situation

3

u/BigChonkyPP Sep 25 '22

Its called "Lend Lease" basically it never gets paid back when it comes to western nations. Instead the western nations replace what they "lend" with more updated equipment.

7

u/terpfam121 Sep 24 '22

They’ll pay with russias reparation money I would think.

→ More replies

8

u/didwanttobethatguy Sep 24 '22

Ukraine is paying a pretty dear price in blood for these weapons, whilst the west gets its weapons and tactics tested, an open laboratory to develop new weapons and tactics, as well as insight into Russian weapons, tactics, and fighting qualities. Plus one of our major enemies is using up their hard to replace armor and missiles.

7

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '22

Oh, you mean like, all the former Soviet-oppressed eastern states sending weapons... I take that as a mild fuck you Russia. From those who know Russia best.

6

u/AlamutJones get a stupid answer Sep 24 '22 edited Sep 24 '22

Food. The war in Ukraine has wreaked havoc on the stability of food supplies around the world. Most of the country is gorgeous rich farmland, they export so much grain…

When they can start doing that reliably again, when trade stabilises, they’ll be in good nick. Mineral resources are also a factor, they have a lot of those too.

4

u/jacksnsticks05 Sep 24 '22

It’s an investment in the stability of the world

5

u/vicblaga87 Sep 24 '22

A strong and democratic Ukraine, a weak Putin (or - one can only hope - a gone Putin) is worth 100x more than all the financial and military support sent to Ukraine.

5

u/MistaCharisma Sep 25 '22

As others have said, Ukraine is paying with blood.

The USA for example is funding them because a direct conflict with Russia would be much morr expensive, would cost American lives, and would be politically dangerous for those in charge. Throwing some money and weapons at the problem is cheaper and less risky for the US.

Initially it looked like Russia would just steamroll over the Ukraine, but the longer this draws out the worse it is for Putin and the ruling regime. Putin's platform is built on strength, so the more his strength is shown to be inadequate (to clariify Putin is a dictator so it's not like votes matter, but Dictators are only in power as long as their suppirters keep them there).

TLDR: The longer the Ukraine keeps Russia busy the better it is for all the other major players in the world, because by reducing Russia they are elevated in comparison ... except the Ukraine, who are suffering greatly.

1

u/SoMuchMoreEagle Sep 25 '22

*the Ukraine.

2

u/Awkward-Broccoli-150 Sep 24 '22

Every nation has a national debt too US national debt

2

u/ThunderGunFour Sep 24 '22

Meet me down the back alley for those “favours”

2

u/nevermidit Sep 24 '22

It usually goes like this: some foreign company will come and buy destroyed/bankrupt mines, factories and business, repair them and make the profits.

2

u/Binxdiamond Sep 24 '22

It's all gifts that they can write off come tax season.

2

u/hundehandler Sep 24 '22

Don't worry about it

2

u/Falsus Sep 25 '22

It is cheaper to gift them arms now and stop Russia and weaken their influence than it is to contend with a more experienced Russia a few years later. Like if Ukraine didn't get all this aid they would still lost the war despite their initial successes and now Russia would know their weaknesses and have more experience.

Instead because of the aid and sanctions they are in disarray without losing any sizeable amounts of resources besides what is gifted.

The benefit is a free Ukraine which means a buffer zone to Rusiaa for central Europe that is friendly towards them, make sure the food keeps flowing from Ukraine and a new friend from what used to be a Russia friendly region.

In the end Ukraine stills pays the most out of everyone though since they are (alongside volunteers) putting their lives in danger to defend their nation and freedom.

2

u/KiwiPsy Sep 25 '22

Most of its been gifts. Debt will probably come into it eventually, especially the rebuild.

2

u/TheFumundaWunda Sep 25 '22

have you seen the war crimes russia has committed on a massive scale? hasn't ukraine paid enough?

2

u/Bergenia1 Sep 25 '22

They don't need to repay. They are paying with the blood of their citizens. They are protecting the rest of the world from Russian imperialism. Every free nation in the world should be supporting them.

2

u/6th_lvl_of_hell Sep 25 '22

War is an economy, which is extremely profitable. Let me explain.

Whilst Ukraine is getting bombed to shit, the western world is generously gifting them arms... Which need to be manufactured. Which means government puts subsidies and other positive influences on industry which boosts their economy (or at least in theory ceteris paribus). All of the bombed cities will need to be rebuilt eventually, the Ukrainian government will have to provide tenders to foreign companies to rebuild Ukraine - which hopefully won't go to Russia. The longer the war lasts and the more destruction that occurs, the more profitable it will be for the western world in the long run to supply Ukraine with arms and prolong the war regardless of the who will win.

I am looking at this topic though a macro economic lens, which makes this sound almost like russian propaganda. I support the Ukrainian nation and personally will always recognise their sovereignty. But don't let media fool you, nothing is done out of empathy and love in politics.

2

u/8tqz803 Sep 25 '22

They will pay US by not snitching on Joe Biden's shady deal with them.

2

u/A_BOMB2012 Sep 25 '22

The Ukraine is essentially a pro-western puppet. It's the price other countries have to pay for maintaining hegemony over the region. Plus it allows countries to harm Russia, without having to actually fight them themselves.

5

u/hiricinee Sep 24 '22

Basically other countries are willing to shell out cash to kill Russians. We can't send our armies in directly to shoot them, but sending Ukrainians to kill them in Ukraine is less of an international problem.

3

u/Willing_Slice8639 Sep 24 '22

Something noone want to touch on but Ukraine will be indebted for a long long time, still better then being wiped out.

3

u/Shpritzer Sep 24 '22

Everybody is more than happy to get rid of their old Soviet era weapons and get modern weapons instead from rich countries who pay with their tax payers money. Also the USA has no problem spending gazilions on weapons since the weapons manufacturers have many ways of giving politicians their cut. Everyone’s happy, except for the dead and their families.

3

u/ShoWel_redit Sep 24 '22

If Ukraine will be asked to pay for it, most likely Russia will be the one to pay, as a part of compensation. Most likely Ukraine won't be asked to pay for it, or maximum will be asked to return leftover weapons

2

u/Ghostusn Sep 24 '22

As long as Ukrainian people keep putting up the good fight and especially now that they have taken the offensive. I say keep supporting them. These people are willing to die for their freedom unlike some other nation the world wasted billions on to make it functional and the people didn't do anything to fight the taliban from taking back power.

4

u/GayBear2060R Sep 24 '22

It’s a proxy war. The military industrial complex in America probably hopes this lasts for years. But honesty they will pay concessions back to the west by allowing their industry and the like to be super deregulated so western companies can exploit the area. Nothing is free in capitalism you just don’t see the obvious checks being written. Look up Europe after ww2 for a good example of it. Or Japan after ww2

2

u/Bo_Jim Sep 24 '22

They are neither. They are gifts with no strings attached. The West benefits enormously if Russia does not take Ukraine.

2

u/toy_makr Sep 24 '22

Stock options for the elite

2

u/AvoidingCares Sep 24 '22

In the US, we have weapons manufacturers everywhere. And everyone in our government has a hand in the pockets of those weapons manufacturers. Our elected officials make sure the contracts keep coming, for a cut.

So... at least as far as the US was concerned, this was a done deal before we even handed over the first rocket. We also brokered the deals from other countries.

Poland, for example, donated an entire air force, minus crew. But this was delivered by the US, and I find it difficult to believe we did that out of kindness.

2

u/Scottyboy1214 Sep 24 '22

Knock down an adversarial nuclear power down a peg is likely more than enough payment.

2

u/thebluew Sep 24 '22

They are already fighting the peoples war. Providing all the blood and labour. The world is just providing the ammo and $$.

2

u/darln_nikki Sep 24 '22

In return for us giving them all of the armaments that we have we get to not have WWIII, or nuclear war so I feel like that's a pretty good trade

3

u/NorionV Sep 24 '22

We're using Ukraine to fight a proxy war with Russia.

Probably won't ask for compensation - the death, destruction, and trauma Ukraine is suffering will be more than enough compensation on its own.

Especially as we seem intent on making them do this for as long as possible, instead of encouraging a break in the conflict.

13

u/RickMonsters Sep 24 '22

You act as if Ukraine isn’t asking for aid. Nobody in the West is “making them” fight against the invaders. They are intent on doing that themselves

→ More replies

1

u/Swordbreaker925 Sep 24 '22

They're gifts. This is in many ways a proxy war with Russia. A lot of countries that have had bad blood with Russia for decades are using this as their way of attacking Russia without doing so directly in a way that would put them in direct harms way

12

u/FlatulentSon Sep 24 '22

are using this as their way of attacking Russia

Not "attacking russia", defending against russia and it's genocidal imperialism.

→ More replies

2

u/MrFroogger Sep 24 '22

EU aid is mostly loans as I understand it, whereas the US contributions are with few exceptions no-ties assistance. Ukraine is headed for a major inflation as the war drags on.

1

u/Rich_Acanthisitta_70 Sep 24 '22 edited Sep 25 '22

No one's expecting political favors. These are investments in the future of democracy in Europe.

And it appears to be paying off. Putin is having to reinstate a very unpopular draft, and it's clear Xi and Modi are unhappy with him. If the casualties in Ukraine increase with no indication of a clear win in sight, we could see Putin lose his government. That would be a hell of a return on this investment.

1

u/spindlecork Sep 24 '22

All the money the US gives them goes straight to military contracts with US makers. That’s how the war machine works. Do Israel next.

1

u/Silencer271 Sep 24 '22

Russia will be paying them BILLIONS if not trillions for years. They will be fine.

-2

u/zihuatapulco Sep 24 '22

Repayment involves Ukraine becoming a US puppet-- just like the rest of Europe.

-6

u/Hotwheelsjack97 I know nothing Sep 24 '22

Some politicians have ties to Ukraine so they're already getting a good return

0

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '22

Trump can’t come to the phone right now; he’s busy getting manhandled by Putin

1

u/CheeseSeas Sep 24 '22

It's debt that will require repayment and political favours in return.

1

u/littlemarcus91 Sep 25 '22

As an American, I think we'll be ok if Ukraine doesn't "pay us back" XD just keep Russia at bay.

-13

u/PancakeTactic Sep 24 '22

Nations inherit the debt of the nations they conquer.

If Russia takes over the full of Ukraine, It will take on the debt, other nations will get paid.

If Russia loses and retreats, Ukraine will owe the money, and policy will be able to be shaped by the debters. Counties may even lease land for their own purposes as a way to relieve some debt Ukraine has large natural gas deposits and pipelines, which may be seeded to pay down to he debt with 100 year lease agreements.

If Russia takes the Donbas then Ukraine will still be saddled with the debt, a mix of the above may apply, but largely Ukraine would keep the debt.

The IMF will offer rebuilding funds for their own debt traps, but will only set up funds with plans that can be paid down, with requirements on setting policy, that must be adhere to.

As you can see, it doesn't matter who wins, Ukraine will lose some of its sovereignty and become a puppet state.

10

u/FlatulentSon Sep 24 '22

it doesn't matter who wins, Ukraine will lose some of its sovereignty and become a puppet state.

Not true, at all. Nobody wants to annex Ukraine as russia does, nobody commits genocide in Ukraine but russia. Once russia loses, and it will, and when Ukraine successfully defends itself againt russian invaders, it won't become a puppet state, it will remain free as it was.

Forcefully annexing Ukranian regions into puppet states by forcing sham referendums at gunpoint is exactly what russia is doing, they're doing it at this very moment.

The west knows that it can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Nobody will have to force Ukraine to do anything, Ukraine will want to join the EU and NATO on their own, as we all did, as they aleready do, not to become a puppet state but to keep their freedom and sovereignty and be safe from russian imperialism.

Your arguements are standard russian fascist apologist lies. Saying that either way Ukraine will become a puppet state and implying that NATO is the same as russia is not just plain wrong, but insane. Civilised world stands alongside free Ukraine, russia can get fucked.

→ More replies
→ More replies

-6

u/Andrew_Higginbottom Sep 24 '22

Its all a part of the deal that has been planned for years. If Clinton would have gotten into office it would have been executed back then, but Trump getting in had it put on Ice. Trump out, plan is executed.

The plan: The west bribes Ukraine to use as a puppet to put pressure on Russia with one of two outcomes:

a) Putin doesn't stand his ground and western influence is on putins doorstep; or

b) Putin goes into Ukraine to stop the west getting a foot hold so the west demonize Putin as the aggressor ..when all he is doing is reacting to the threat imposed by the west.

The west spearheaded by the US using another country as a puppet/proxy Is how they have always done it; Korean war, vietnam, Afghanistan, etc..

6

u/Poppa-in-Texas Sep 24 '22

You’re being downvoted? Everything you wrote is the truth, and you left out some of the obvious triggers. The Obama regime pumped money into Ukraine, a LOT of that money was laundered back into the DNC and relatives of both republican & democrat politicians.

2

u/Andrew_Higginbottom Sep 25 '22

Thank you.
I don't get too involved with finding out finer details of things I can't control. Once I understand the basic principles I just sit back and observe.

I feel a phrase I once came across sums up the downvoters:

"If you wish to be enlightened, know that you will spend the rest of your days being ridiculed by the unenlightened"

If you see what I see ..I'm guessing you can relate to that phrase.

→ More replies