comment: >
  
  These articles always talk about arms transfers as though it's charity. It's sales.
context: Oh you need some gun, missiles, and tanks?  Here's a bunch of stuff from my closet, we weren't going to use it anyways. >
  
  Well, we were, unfortunately it's outdated by our standards but was designed to kick Russia's ass in the Cold War era, which is perfect because they haven't advanced their capabilities at all since then. >
  
  The difference between "we built one of these things, lets show off how awesome we are" and "ooooo shiny new toy, let's order 10,000 as a trial run" >
  
  This is closer to a friend saying "Hey I made too much casserole out of some leftovers, wanna come over and take some off my hands?" >
  
  Even closer to that friend who is really into fishing. And is getting rid of old stock in his freezer to make room for this year's catch >
  
  Great.  Israel has wherewithal to defend itself so no pain to them and Ukraine will receive much needed aid to fight off Russian. >
  
  Was it meant for Israel to use? I figured they kept it there for their ships to pick up for quick use if they need to run through the Suez and into the Red Sea with said arms or go over land to Iraq or go use it on Syria >
  
  I should have worded better.  Yeah, the supplies are not for Israelis to use but for American military personnel to use in case of trouble in Middle East.
  Edit:  In case of emergency Israelis are allowed to use it. >
  
  The article stated the US has let them use weapons from this stash in the past >
  
  That I was not aware.  Thanks for the info. >
  
  This is a good thing, we should have done this a long time ago though >
  
  Unfortunately Israel is toeing an annoying line between angering Moscow and angering Washington, all so they can have more unfettered access to Syria to harass Iran, even though Iran is helping Russia. It's a convoluted mess.
  It's a good thing Israel chose to let the US use their own stockpile to send to Ukraine. >
  
  You're not portraying Israel's side of this very fairly. Russia allows Israel to strike Iranian assets in Syria, and this helps to prevent (relatively) advanced weapons and supplies from being provided through this route to Hezbollah, a group that dominates Lebanon and is hostile to Israel. If Israel sours things with Moscow, that could directly mean bigger, longer ranged, and more advanced weapons rain down on their cities the next time a conflict happens with Hezbollah, even worse than last time in 2006. It's also probable that leaving this unchecked allows more weapons to reach Hamas, which regularly strikes civilian targets in Israel with rockets. 
  I'm not saying Israel never does anything bad. I'm just saying it's not really fair to call it "harassing Iran". >
  
  the US just has a random stockpile of weapons in Israel? I thought it was crazy when the US sent them soviet tanks and soviet equipment.. I mean how did they even get that? This is crazy >
  
  You could buy every homelessperson in America an averageAmerican house - paid off, in full, in cash, and it would cost less than 20% of this year's defense budget. 
  582,000 homeless * $275,000 house= $160,050,000,000. (160 billion dollars) 
  160/858 = 18% >
  
  You forget that a lot of this goes to pay salaries and for aid to foreigners who are in distress. The US is the sole enforcer of maritime trade safety for the entire globe. The scale of services we provide to the world and salaries we pay them and to our soldiers cannot be matched by any other country. The United States of America is the backer for any allied military in the event of a large scale war. Homeless people should probably get jobs or utilize existing benefits even if it means they have to stop substance abuse. Temporary homelessness assistance is drained by the chronically homeless drug addicted criminals. >
  
  I agree to an extent. Social services for issues like mental health were pretty much erased under Regan. He left it to the states and most states said the money was better spent on rich people needs. Homelessness can't be fixed by buying houses for people, but we need a place to put the most sick of those people and we need a way to cover the cost of ensuring our streets are not littered with human shit from people with schizophrenia. >
  
  If everybody had a minimal place to live then homelessness would be cured, within a margin of error. What am I missing when everybody agrees that homelessness can't be fixed with housing? >
  
  The chronically sick who are homeless by choice with untreated mental health. Homelessness isn't just people without a home, it's often people who don't participate in society through work, their needs vary depending on the individual. Some just are not well enough to operate in routine. Like waking up, doing choirs, cleaning a home. Upkeep, preparing food and then cleaning. Some people will literally just treat a house like the street and then in an apartment environment it causes issues like mice and roach infestation. Basically not everyone has the same needs and wants out of life and you can't force a square peg into a circle hole. >
  
  I get it and we should have help for those people, a free house isn't help. It's a handout that has to be paid for. And it also dismiss what we get in return for our military being able to secure the world's shipping lanes and the strength of the US dollar by being the world's only superpower. >
  
  Soooo…. Next time someone complains about the US defense budget should we just point to everything that is going on now?
  Like how the rate of fires is such that the UK’s entire stockpile of artillery munitions would be expended within a week?
  Or how only the US has the capability to provide missile defense systems? And armor on a scale that can top the scale? Or artillery tubes? Or rockets? Or the more mundane munitions? Or the satellite surveillance? Or the constant air surveillance? Or the bazillions of anti tank and anti air missiles?
  I am glad that the Europeans have donated some; but a lot of it was equipment they had intended to retire anyways - and not replace. And even then it has been a relative drop in the bucket. 
  The point is that defense is expensive. Until it isn’t. That doesn’t mean we should just pile it on, Eisenhower’s warning is as prescient today as when he made it, but we should always be cognizant of just how destructive these endeavors are. If it were not for the US Ukraine would have been conquered. Full stop. 
  Of course, the US is also feeling the strain. Decades of relative peace, relatively low intensity conflicts, etc. has seen a significant atrophying of the industrial base. Heck, the remaining tank plant was supposed to be mothballed but Congress stepped in and forced it to remain open. Stinger missiles have not been procured for a decade and a half. Almost half of the US munitions plants have been shuttered in the past 10-12 years. The largest ordnance depot in the world has sat almost entirely empty since the Gulf War… it was never restocked. 
  Something to think about. A few bucks ahead of time seems like a hell of a deal when the alternative is to pay in blood later. >
  
  It's absolutely bonkers that this started out as a "new type of war" that was being fought through media channels and telecommunication, and international oil and gas spigots, and nuclear threats, and introduced the world to drone versus drone combat, and now it's devolved into just a race to produce artillery shells faster. >
  
  
  drone versus drone combat
  
  There's a video of a Ukrainian drone stealing a Russian radio too. >
  
  I don’t think arms are going to be much use against conventional weapons but alright. >
  
  I heard they're bear arms though. Could cause some damage with the claws. >
  
  No one is surprised that Israel has stockpiles of American arms and ammunition. >
  
  That has been widely known for years. Every so often the topic comes up. Usually someone brings up the point of the US giving free weapons to Israel and the defense is they are holding some of it for the US. >
  
  Exactly. US has strategic stockpiles in a "friendly" country in the Middle East should come as no shocker. Stuff has just been sitting there since the 90's and Gulf War though with sending more to account for attrition/expiration. >
  
  They have more stock piles than just Israel as well. 
  Prior to the second Iraq war I was tasked with helping movie vehicles to Kuwait for staging. The country we moved them from had a massive cave and mine system just full of new armored vehicles just tucked away waiting to be used. >
  
  Morocco?
  And I used some of that stuff in Iraq a couple times. Even sent some of it back to Kuwait near the end. TYFYS! (Thank you for your staging) >
  
  Unfortunately I can't say exactly as I know it is still classified but that is on the wrong side of the continent. 
  It was crazy knowing for 8+ months ahead of time before anything was announced as all the people in my unit went about their lives that we getting deployed sooner than not. >
  
  Good. 
  Israel doesn't need them and they are not helping. >
  
  It's kind of crazy how little Israel has given Ukraine. They're one of the wealthiest nations per capita and probably the most beefed up militarily per capita.
  I know they're afraid given their history of wars with neighbors, but they're currently fighting adolescents with rocks. Their iron dome takes care of the rest.
  They have one of the most advanced defense industry, yet they can't give even simple things to Ukraine. 
  How is it that the country made up of Holocaust survivors cannot see what Russia is doing? Israel is afraid to go against Russia. Let that sink in. Israel is afraid to go against the country currently committing a genocide. >
  
  
  ,Israel is afraid to go against Russia. Let that sink in. Israel is afraid to go against the country currently committing a genocide.
  
  No they need the Russian airspace in syira to stop Irani militias....
  Also it's funny that you want a country the size of new Jersey that is serrounded by enemies to help with a war on the other side of the world >
  
  Shalom