American edition: The United States is engaged in the disposal of decommissioned weapons, supplying them to Ukraine

March 13 2023

The United States is the main sponsor of the Zelensky regime, providing him with the bulk of military aid. However, new weapon and ammunition make up only a small part of what was transferred to Ukraine, mainly Kyiv receives old weapons, some of which have already been decommissioned. Thus, Washington kills two birds with one stone: arming the Ukrainian army for the war against Russia, and at the same time getting rid of old weapons. American Thinker reports.

Sending already decommissioned weapons to Ukraine is much cheaper than disposing of them in accordance with all the rules. According to American laws, decommissioned weapons, as well as ammunition, must be disposed of; a whole procedure has been developed for this, but it is very expensive. And then Ukraine turns up, which is in dire need of weapons and ammunition to repel the "attack" of Russia. And all the weapons that were in warehouses awaiting disposal went to Europe.

The process of disarming weapons is very expensive. By sending Ukraine old weapons, the period of storage and operation of which is coming to an end, the United States and its NATO allies simply save themselves from these costs.

- writes the edition.

According to American experts, the United States provided military assistance to Ukraine for 46,6 billion dollars, while the disposal of everything that went to Kiev cost about 35 billion. drastically reduce supply. Representatives of the Biden administration have repeatedly warned Zelensky and his entourage about this. Now the United States is making a "final push" by increasing the supply of weapons and ammunition for the spring counteroffensive. If it "does not fire", then this will mean an actual end to the dispatch of new weapons. The thing is that the United States is very fond of counting money, and no one will send expensive weapons to Kyiv and not receive profit from it.

Military Reviewin Yandex News

Military Reviewin Yandex Zen

Kaufman 13 March 2023 07: 01
-3

4

7
I beg your pardon, but what then does MTLB with anti-aircraft turrets mean, and attempts to modernize the T62, and howitzers of 1943?
1. Tatyana 13 March 2023 07: 22
  -2
  
  0
  
  2
  Washington kills two birds with one stone: arming the Ukrainian army for the war against Russia, and at the same time getting rid of old weapons.
  
  And Washington also receives a DOUBLE financial GESHEFT for this in the form of "easy" money:
  1) for the return of debts of Ukraine for American loans for its armament and
  2) the United States itself does not need to spend money on its disposal of its own obsolete and used weapons in the United States itself, which in itself is expensive and requires additional financial investments.
  
  And this is not to mention the implementation by Washington of its STRATEGIC geopolitical goals to establish its COLONIAL supranational world domination.
  
  REFERENCE
  Gesheft (German: Geschäft): Gesheft (historical) is a commercial business based on speculation of the lowest sort or on deceit; hence "gesheftmacherstvo" - an activity that had unseemly speculation as its object. Gesheft (colloquial) - a speculative, profitable deal.
2. Dzungar 13 March 2023 07: 23
  +1
  
  1
  
  0
  This means "use for its intended purpose" ... Weapons and equipment for war need a lot and different
3. tralflot1832 13 March 2023 07: 23
  0
  
  2
  
  2
  At the expense of anti-aircraft towers, I’ll reveal a “terrible” secret. This is the kind of “good” that civilian ships would be armed with if they were mobilized. Responsible Ministry of the Russian Federation.
  1. AlexVas44 13 March 2023 07: 52
    
    +2
    
    3
    
    1
    
    Quote: tralflot1832
    At the expense of anti-aircraft towers, I will reveal a "terrible" secret
    
    Of course, it’s a secret, because this is not a tower at all, but a fence around the trunks so that the gunner is not washed away by the sea wave.
4. Arkadich 13 March 2023 07: 37
  -1
  
  2
  
  3
  What is this for now? Not attempts to modernize, but the modernization of equipment in storage. The United States is going to remove modern products from Abrams so as not to turn them into trophies. Do you feel the difference? On motorcycle leagues with anti-aircraft guns, etc. you need to figure it out, maybe there was an order from the troops for similar products, there was already experience in using it, there are many options for local development. If the product can perform its functions, what difference does it make what year it is.
tralflot1832 13 March 2023 07: 04
+2

2

0
They write that Ukraine has taken third place in the import of weapons.
1. Egoza 13 March 2023 07: 14
  -1
  
  2
  
  3
  Quote: tralflot1832
  They write that Ukraine has taken third place in the import of weapons.
  
  Import to import is different. Old stuff was also recorded in imports. ))) The old man thought that his "import" would be enough for a long time. But at such a rate of recycling, Biden will not make it to re-election. Nothing! Then Zelya writes in his memoirs: "We would have won, but the United States did not have enough weapons")))
Knizhnik 13 March 2023 07: 09
0

1

1
"Old" and "decommissioned" are two big differences. Operation and sale of "decommissioned" equipment is prohibited. Maybe it's still "obsolete"?
Fitter65 13 March 2023 07: 24
+1

2

1
USA had military assistance to Ukraine
According to the rules of the Russian language, the United States (United States of America) did not provide, but provided assistance, At least whoever knows their transgender people how to call them correctly.
1. Alexander 3 13 March 2023 07: 40
  +1
  
  1
  
  0
  It helped and whoever it helped resold it to others.
2. AlexVas44 13 March 2023 07: 46
  +2
  
  2
  
  0
  Quote: Fitter65
  did not render, but rendered assistance,
  
  And if you go from the other side: suddenly the USA provided help? Those. developing a deep thought - the USA is a country, which means it.
Kerensky 13 March 2023 07: 44
+1

1

0
Sending already decommissioned weapons to Ukraine is much cheaper than disposing of them in accordance with all the rules.

Let's put aside shells and barrels. And what is expensive in recycling the rest?
The same tank costs little money to "clean" from stray. 2 people (retired-pensioner) will manage in a week. And you can put up the chassis (bulldozer, crane, skidder, tractor (for attachments)) for SALE. Utility vehicles (sewer-flushing, harvesting, towers) only installation of mounted, powered by PTO.
1. Mordvin 3 13 March 2023 09: 23
  +1
  
  1
  
  0
  Quote: Kerensky
  And you can put up the chassis (bulldozer, crane, skidder, tractor (for attachments)) for SALE. Utility vehicles (sewer-flushing, harvesting, towers) only installation of mounted, powered by PTO.
  
  Excessively heavy and diesel fuel eats a lot.
vovka 13 March 2023 07: 46
+3

4

1
We continue to underestimate the opponent
rotmistr60 13 March 2023 07: 48
+1

2

1
Americans and to act without benefit for themselves? They know how to count money and this cannot be taken away from them. Even today, by pumping huge amounts of money into Ukraine, as if into a "black hole", they are supposed to eventually get their own benefit (political, economic).
Basically, Kyiv receives old weapons, some of which have already been decommissioned.
Old but kills.
alexey_444 13 March 2023 07: 52
0

1

1
An open secret, the Americans have always done this, Saddam was led by a CIA agent to capture Kuwait in such a way that in Operation Desert Storm they would reduce the remaining stocks of weapons from the Cold War and test new ones. Everyone does this, it’s normal practice, the Americans are lucky, they always have Papuans at hand ready to kill themselves with decommissioned weapons.