Joe Biden Could Send Millions Of Artillery Shells To Ukraine, For Free, Tomorrow. And It’s Perfectly Legal.
Joe Biden Could Send Millions Of Artillery Shells To Ukraine, For Free, Tomorrow. And It’s Perfectly Legal.
So the author proposes using not one but two legally questionable tactics to send Ukraine artillery shells that are actually worse than useless!?!
As the article correctly notes the US quit using those M483A1 and M864 DPICM rounds because of their high failure rate. If Ukraine were to fire even 2,000 of these per day that means there would be 280 (or more) unexploded bomblets lying on the ground just waiting for a unsuspecting soldier or child to wander by and set it off.
It gets mind bogglingly worse the longer they are used too, as after just a year there would be over 100,000 of the damn things laying around!
So no, they shouldn't be used anywhere...unless you want to spend the next hundred years dealing with the unexploded ordinance littering your terrain!
Republicans need to STFU and get back to funding the real stuff. THAT is the answer, not legal chicanery to send shit ordinance.
What a nonsense take.
For a start: The orcs are using cluster munitions since the start of the war, and their dud-rate is much higher.
Second: Ukraine has requested the DPICM munitions already and has used the ones they received to great effect. Especially against the meat wave attacks they work very well.
Third: If the choice is between no munitions or (in the opinion of non-warfighters) shitty munitions, ask the Ukrainians what they prefer, but I'll assure you they will be loading DPICM's.
The US quitting these munitions has much to do with the type of warfare they engaged in over the past decades, the amount of civilian casualties when using the cluster munitions in civilian centers is just unacceptable. But at a trench front in a positional war, these limitations do not apply.
Ukraine atm has millions if not tens of millions of mines all over the place. Adding a few hundred or thousand bomblets wouldnt make things measurably worse.
Many of these wont even be used as artillery shells, they will just strip them and ducktape the bomblets on fov drones.
Both sides have been extensively using mines and cluster munitions, because they are extremely effective. Sending Ukraine extra ammunition will save countless ukranian lives.
After the war, both sides will have a strong incentive to remove mines. Mines are often an issue for poorer countries, who dont have the funds to clear them out. Of course even in Ukraine there will be incidents decades later, but they should be comparatively low(to the amount of mines used).
Ultimately, the issue with cluster munitions is mostly about conflicts that dont already have millions of mines, because failed bomblets can act like mines. Thats less of an issue in Ukraine, because it already has millions of mines, acting like mines.
PS Russian cluster munition are terribly unreliable, much more than even old nato ones
I hope ukraine can send them to russia soon. For free and completely legal.
Express delivery!
"If I don't get my money, the next missiles I send will come very much faster."
Good. Fuck the GOP, and fuck Putin.
Removed by Moderator — Modlog
Sorry, you're not my type.
This article's title reads like clickbait
Yeah, because it is. The actual munitions they theorise could be sent to Ukraine are highly unreliable cluster munitions that Ukraine is already condemning the use of because of their danger to civilians during rebuilding efforts thanks to their insanely high dud rate.
The shells have cute little yellow hats :)
hell yeah Joe, do it let's gooooo
I'm against war and warfare in every case, but since this war is well underway, I have no issue with Joe Biden legally sending millions of artillery shells to Ukraine; I have to believe that we should be doing everything we can to ensure that Russia does not prevail in their horrific genocidal global takeover.
To be clear, then, you're not against war and warfare "in every case".
Untrue, I really am against war and warfare in every case, including this one which is as always the result of egotistical male shitheads trying to out-penis size each other with their weaponry. And I'd rather such an event NEVER occurred in human history. But it has, and with Russia now gaining so many despicable victories, it should be obvious that we must help Ukraine defeat them anyway we can.
I'm not OK with any of it, but I have to face the reality that it is what it is.
The law caps annual transfers of so-called “excess defense articles” at a total value of $500 million a year. But the same law doesn’t dictate how much value the president assigns to a particular weapon. He in theory could price an item at zero dollars.
And another president (guess who?) could in theory do the same thing to provide the same thing to Russia, which is probably why he hasn't done it.
If Biden does it now, the conservative SCOTUS would likely rule against him, as they are wont to do. That would actually be beneficial in stopping a future potential president from doing the same for Russia.
Nah, a future president would give the weapons to Russia and the SCOTUS would rule "it's totally different this time somehow."
The hypothetical person will do it whether Joe does it first or not.
Hypothetical, huh?
I would hope there would be rather excessive backlash from all of our institutions if Trump decided to give artillery ammo to Russia.
"I would hope there would be rather excessive backlash from all of our institutions if Trump decided to..."
That sums up Trump every day since the GOP decided they were fine with him.
Didn't Reagan try something like this back in the 80s, under his friend Oliver North?
Yeah I get the point of the article but maybe it isn't a good thing that the president can send anyone a bunch of weapons without oversight
And there it is:
Forbes recommending Biden sends Ukraine a bunch of potentially faulty ammunition that are known to make rehabilitation of warzones insanely difficult because of the civilian risk posed by dud cluster munitions.
The same kind of munitions the west condemns being used by Russia against Ukraine for those above reasons.
Removed by Moderator — Modlog
Ukraine and Russia have been using cluster munitions from the start. It's a valid concern but it's closing the gates after the horse has bolted.
Genocide Joe will only use his powers for israel.
Quick, someone respond how giving weapons to a country committing Genocide is "arguably" legal and don't mention all the laws that say it's not.
Yeah, so let's all get out and vote for Trump. I'm sure that will help everyone else but Israel...
Oh, Christ. While I appreciate looking for unorthodox solutions, that's a court case tugging at its chain.
Yeah; reading the article it would seem "arguably legal" is probably a lot more accurate than "perfectly legal"
I mean, you can call this legal but when you're paying to ship equipment you've clearly decided is excess before declaring it "excess" in an attempt to get around the clear intent of the law...
Basically this comes down to: [The Executive Branch could use an arguably legal method to send to Ukraine 4 million 25 to 50 year old cluster shells that have been determined to be unreliable and unsafe]
I'm no expert but it seems to me like it's basically the kind of thing that is only technically legal only because nobody has been stupid enough to push their luck. If someone did try to do this they'd likely still be challenged legally in order to set a precedent, so I'm guessing it's not like Biden could do something like this and get away with it scott free.
Why worry? Trump has made it perfectly clear that the president can apparently do whatever the hell they want to and good luck at stopping them. I believe Biden should take the same liberties. Perhaps I’ve just lost faith in the system.
Probably should wait and see if SCOTUS agrees with Trump on that before jumping the gun.
Afterward? Yeah, Biden should do whatever the fuck he wants. And he had better.
I agree, in theory. But I like if he'd use that unlimited unitary executive power to... expand Medicaid into all the states that rejected it over the objections of those state governors. Then, maybe unilaterally abolish the $1.6T in outstanding student debts. And while he's at it, nationalize the Petroleum industry and start ramping it down, so we can avoid climate change.
I feel like we can do the military surplus to Ukraine thing once we wrap the high priority stuff up first.
Could you imagine Republicans letting that happen if there was any way they could stop it? I'm guessing they would try every possible avenue to stop it.
Presumably they'd get the manufacturers to sue for the damage to their ability to set prices when the president is literally saying that their shit is worth nothing.
I mean, if Biden sends them a bunch of "free" shells and this ridiculous loophole is closed I'd call that getting two birds stoned at once.
Especially since it's now known. Close that shit before Herr Cheeto has the chance to do that with arms to Russia.
I wonder if it would be cheaper to give these cluster munitions to Ukraine, than it would be to dismantle them. The USA won't use them anymore, so is there a plan + budget for dismantling/destroying them? Historically they dumped large redundant stockpiles like this into the sea, but that's now causing problems, so a more expensive solution is needed.
It wouldn't surprise me if blowing up big piles of the stuff, is cheaper than dismantling all these tiny munitions and at that point, it's likely going to be the cheapest option (for real, not just on paper) to send it to Ukraine and let them deal with it in their way.
Yeah. Even if it goes unchallenged (it won't), I'd rather not get this loophole codified into law for future fascists to utilize.
Not to mention if Biden says X item from Lockheed is worth $1, they are going to flip their shit. That could have a market impact on their perceived value, even if most people know it's done to skirt the law. Or leave them open to getting very low-balled for those items later.
It's also wild speculation about something that has not happened yet.
Well, "a court case might force us to do nothing, so we have to do nothing" doesn't sound like a very good argument to me, but I respect the consistency of taking the same approach to this they did with universal student loan forgiveness at least
Actions have political costs, and optics could be the difference between Putin's lapdog and our current milquetoast administration.
I know which one I prefer, and, not coincidentally, that one is also better for Ukraine. So I do understand why saying "Fuck the law, we're gonna do it" hasn't been the first, second, or third choice.
This is the "Mint the Big Platinum Coin" solution to surplus military spending.