(I'm a bit fuzzy on these points, so if you know I'm wrong about the following, please offer a correction. Good sources tend to be many pages long, and not necessarily easy to follow.)
The cost-benefit analysis of the US expenses in Ukraine are (unbelievably) good so far.
We're getting value out of outdated military equipment that we weren't using, and weren't going to be using, and it was sitting in storage waiting to be dismantled / reclaimed for parts.
We're not sending new / higher tech stuff as aid. We're sending the stuff that is old to us, that we wouldn't ever use again unless the newer stuff ran out. The cost to us is far less than the benefit to our allies. Some Americans are crying about the billions we're "wasting" on Ukraine, but the reality is that those billions were already wasted on military supplies we never ended up using. Now we have a way to use them, and the price tag on their delivery will be recouped. We're making so much value by "selling" aid to Ukraine when what we're actually sending them is tantamount to our military trash.
That wont stay that way forever. Eventually those stocks of older munitions will be gone, and we'll be facing a much different question of the cost on our side to maintain support of Ukraine. So far, though... the costs evaluation is complicated.
Ukraine needs military aid in part because the nations now aiding Ukraine talked Ukraine into disarming itself in a show of their desire for peace. Russia in now sending those exact same planes Ukraine gave up to bomb Ukrainian targets. The fact that Ukraine needs assistance is in part due to them trusting us to provide assistance if they should need it.
As I understand it, historically, Ukraine was where a significant amount of the USSR's weapon production came from. So Ukraine has that industrial knowledge and expertise, and I've been told some of those facilities are still intact. The longer this war drags on, the more Ukraine will be able to get those facilities on line. They're understandably not too keen on disarmament anymore.
The economic impact on Russia has been steep. Some estimates put Russia's spending at 4:1 of the opposition spending. That's almost certainly an incorrect number, inflated for war propaganda reasons. Still... if our opposition is to Putin, and he holds his power by maintaining the wealth of his oligarchs, and this war is hurting the oligarchs, then we're getting *something* of a return on our investment to hurt Putin. IDK how to evaluate that, but economic sources online seem to be adamant that the strain on the Russian economy is much greater than the strain on nations sending aid to Ukraine.
So the economics of war are in play. I don't understand economics much, but I try to. So far, the cost to the US seems to be buying far more for it than it otherwise would have.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by oskar
