On September 3 1940, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt made a decision, which I may surprise you to know, actually bears on what we’re trying to do with Ukraine. You know, Britain by September of 1940, was in desperate trouble. The Germans had occupied Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Holland and France, and seem to be preparing to try to invade Britain. The British were out of ships. They were in a situation when they were losing ships their power on a regular basis. And Winston Churchill for months, had begged President Roosevelt to find a way to help them.
They finally found 50 used destroyers. That’s right. destroyer is built for World War One over 20 years old. But sitting there and available. And Roosevelt on September 3 said, we’re going to give the British these 50 destroyers, in return for having a land lease agreement to occupy a series of islands and build naval bases on British territories. Those 50 destroyers played a major role in winning World War Two in saving Britain from a potential German invasion. And why does that matter today? Because the United States has a lot of surplus weapons that could be sent to Ukraine. At no cost. We’re in the process. I’ve been told of the mobilizing 100 IMRs artillery systems that will be perfectly useful, and an enormous asset to Ukraine. Now, why is it happening like this? I think there are two reasons. The bureaucracy and the Pentagon is a very complicated, frankly, self serving system that has massive red tape, and very, very limited ability to be agile. And they just haven’t thought it through. Second, the lobbyists have a game going, we’re going to pass money for Ukraine. But the money by the way, is not going to go to Ukraine. The money’s going to go to American manufacturers, were going to build new weapons, which are going to go to the Pentagon, for the Pentagon sends old weapons to Ukraine. So I think there’s probably a problem that if we were to suddenly say, what if we just took all the weapons that we were going to demobilize that we didn’t need anymore, that were surplus, and gave them to Ukraine, because it’s not costing us anything, these are weapons we’re not going to use, then that wouldn’t be weapons that would lead to money going back to the American manufacturers. So you’re not going to find any defense lobbyists, eagerly out there saying, Gosh, this would be a really smart thing to do. Good for the American taxpayer. Good for the Ukrainians, really bad for Putin and Russia. And yet, what I think should happen is we should survey first of all, how many weapons have been demobilized in the last two years that could have gone to Ukraine? My guess is it’s an amazing number, and would have made Ukraine much stronger, save Ukrainian lives, and forced the Russians to really rethink what they’re doing. But let’s start right now. We can’t go back and relive the last two years. Let’s make a ground rule that we’re going to make sure that every available surplus weapon goes to Ukraine. It doesn’t go to some graveyard and as used at no cost to the American taxpayer to help defeat Putin.
Commentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
With globalization ending, the US can and should adapt
Yesterday Peter ZeihanDeglobalization’s impact on world food exports
Yesterday Peter Zeihan‘The lesser of two evils’: Undecided Gen Z on 2024 election
Wednesday Dr. Frank LuntzWill climate change be the death of wheat?
Wednesday Peter ZeihanLet’s send every available surplus US weapon to Ukraine
By Straight Arrow News
As Ukrainian munitions reach critically low levels, the Biden administration has pledged an additional $300 million in ammunition and weaponry for Kyiv. This marks the first security package announced by the Pentagon for Ukraine since December, and as national security adviser Jack Sullivan cautions, it will serve to maintain Ukraine’s defenses against Russian attacks for only a few weeks.
Straight Arrow News contributor Newt Gingrich contends that the United States should have consistently provided Ukraine with its entire inventory of decommissioned weapons to fend off Putin. Gingrich posits a theory to explain why this hasn’t been the case.
So I think there’s probably a problem that if we were to suddenly say, ‘What if we just took all the weapons that we were going to demobilize, that we didn’t need anymore, that were surplus, and gave them to Ukraine, because it’s not costing us anything. These are weapons we’re not going to use.’ Then that wouldn’t be weapons that would lead to money going back to the American manufacturers. So you’re not going to find any defense lobbyists, eagerly out there saying, ‘Gosh, this would be a really smart thing to do — good for the American taxpayer, good for the Ukrainians, really bad for Putin and Russia.‘
And yet, what I think should happen is, we should survey, first of all, how many weapons have been demobilized in the last two years that could have gone to Ukraine. My guess is, it’s an amazing number, and would have made Ukraine much stronger, save Ukrainian lives, and forced the Russians to really rethink what they’re doing.
But let’s start right now. We can’t go back and relive the last two years. Let’s make a ground rule that we’re going to make sure that every available surplus weapon goes to Ukraine, it doesn’t go to some graveyard, and is used at no cost to the American taxpayer to help defeat Putin.
On September 3 1940, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt made a decision, which I may surprise you to know, actually bears on what we’re trying to do with Ukraine. You know, Britain by September of 1940, was in desperate trouble. The Germans had occupied Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Holland and France, and seem to be preparing to try to invade Britain. The British were out of ships. They were in a situation when they were losing ships their power on a regular basis. And Winston Churchill for months, had begged President Roosevelt to find a way to help them.
They finally found 50 used destroyers. That’s right. destroyer is built for World War One over 20 years old. But sitting there and available. And Roosevelt on September 3 said, we’re going to give the British these 50 destroyers, in return for having a land lease agreement to occupy a series of islands and build naval bases on British territories. Those 50 destroyers played a major role in winning World War Two in saving Britain from a potential German invasion. And why does that matter today? Because the United States has a lot of surplus weapons that could be sent to Ukraine. At no cost. We’re in the process. I’ve been told of the mobilizing 100 IMRs artillery systems that will be perfectly useful, and an enormous asset to Ukraine. Now, why is it happening like this? I think there are two reasons. The bureaucracy and the Pentagon is a very complicated, frankly, self serving system that has massive red tape, and very, very limited ability to be agile. And they just haven’t thought it through. Second, the lobbyists have a game going, we’re going to pass money for Ukraine. But the money by the way, is not going to go to Ukraine. The money’s going to go to American manufacturers, were going to build new weapons, which are going to go to the Pentagon, for the Pentagon sends old weapons to Ukraine. So I think there’s probably a problem that if we were to suddenly say, what if we just took all the weapons that we were going to demobilize that we didn’t need anymore, that were surplus, and gave them to Ukraine, because it’s not costing us anything, these are weapons we’re not going to use, then that wouldn’t be weapons that would lead to money going back to the American manufacturers. So you’re not going to find any defense lobbyists, eagerly out there saying, Gosh, this would be a really smart thing to do. Good for the American taxpayer. Good for the Ukrainians, really bad for Putin and Russia. And yet, what I think should happen is we should survey first of all, how many weapons have been demobilized in the last two years that could have gone to Ukraine? My guess is it’s an amazing number, and would have made Ukraine much stronger, save Ukrainian lives, and forced the Russians to really rethink what they’re doing. But let’s start right now. We can’t go back and relive the last two years. Let’s make a ground rule that we’re going to make sure that every available surplus weapon goes to Ukraine. It doesn’t go to some graveyard and as used at no cost to the American taxpayer to help defeat Putin.
Here’s how the Trump-Harris debate should work
What if the asteroid had missed Earth and dinosaurs still lived?
Kamala Harris really is a big-government socialist
America must stand by Israel as threat of greater war looms
On Purple Heart Day, remember America is built on merit
Underreported stories from each side
Grassley releases new details of Iran-backed assassination plots against Trump, Biden and others
8 sources | 0% from the left ReutersTrump staffers in Arlington incident identified
7 sources | 0% from the right Getty ImagesLatest Stories
Michigan’s first ‘I Voted’ sticker contest draws inspiration from folklore and more
IRS recovers $1.3B in unpaid taxes from high-income Americans
Rome considers timed ticket system for Trevi Fountain
NOAA says Vineyard Wind won’t kill sea life, issues permits for it to do just that
Trump campaign staffers involved in Arlington cemetery altercation identified
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
Don’t blame Israel, and keep the pressure on Hamas
Yesterday Star ParkerThe reckoning of the Trump campaign has begun
Yesterday Dr. Rashad RicheyAs Trump goes lower, Harris aims higher
Yesterday Jordan ReidThe government isn’t the answer to a stressed-out parenting culture
Yesterday Timothy Carney