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.
Related
Newt Gingrich
Former House Speaker; Chairman of Gingrich 360
View Video LibraryCommentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
How could RFK Jr. impact 2024 election?
Yesterday
Peter Zeihan
Global warming won’t impact Russian-Chinese shipping
Thursday
Peter Zeihan
Can other nations replicate success of US shale revolution?
Wednesday
Peter Zeihan
Peace between Israel and Iran, at least for now
Tuesday
Peter Zeihan
Let’s send every available surplus US weapon to Ukraine
Mar 13
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.
Related
How AI is changing the world
Artificial intelligence (AI) is significantly reshaping numerous sectors, including banking, education, finance and technology. Its impact extends across various industries, including the military sector, where companies are leveraging AI to enhance productivity and streamline operations. Straight Arrow News contributor Newt Gingrich is excited about the future application for artificial intelligence and provides examples of how…
Wednesday
Biden’s foreign policy riddled with errors and misfortune
President Biden entered office with a promise to repair the damage inflicted by former President Trump on the international stage. He vowed to prioritize values like democracy and human rights while also aiming to end the “forever wars” in Afghanistan and the Middle East. Yet, some critics argue that U.S. foreign policy has been marked…
Apr 17
Illegal immigrants want to invade and occupy your home
Illegal immigrant Leonal Moreno recently posted an instructional video on TikTok guiding fellow immigrants on how to leverage U.S. squatting laws to safely occupy abandoned homes. Moreno said that his goal is to avoid having to become a “public burden” to U.S. taxpayers by finding his own shelter in abandoned places. Some viewers, however, perceive…
Apr 10
Americans should not have to pay to rebuild Key Bridge
The collapse of the Key Bridge in Baltimore represents a major setback for the Port of Baltimore and the entire East Coast highway network. Although the debris removal may be completed within a few weeks, the reconstruction process will be both time-consuming and expensive. Some estimates suggest the cost could exceed $1 billion. So who…
Apr 3
White rhino IVF pregnancy breakthrough could save species
In February 2024, a controversial ruling by the Alabama Supreme Court prompted some health care providers in the state to halt their in vitro fertilization (IVF) programs, sparking division among Republicans. The Republican-led Alabama Legislature quickly worked to address the issue and protect IVF, resulting in the Republican governor signing a bill into law protecting…
Mar 27
Underreported stories from each side
Biden’s 13th-Quarter Approval Average Lowest Historically
8 sources | 13% from the left
AP Images
Jamie Raskin Slams Supreme Court Over Trump Immunity Case: ‘Acting Like A Bunch Of Partisan Operatives’
6 sources | 0% from the right
AP Images
Latest Stories
Biden uses NFL draft ad to try to connect with young voters
Watch 2:16
Yesterday
Powering pot: Energy for US cannabis industry could electrify 13.5M homes
Watch 1:29
Yesterday
Allies plan for Trump to have more control over interest rates
Watch 3:07
Yesterday
FDA: Bird flu found in 1/5 commercial milk samples, suggests greater spread
Watch 1:21
Yesterday
China permanently deploys warships to second overseas base
Watch 2:58
Yesterday
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
House Speaker Johnson’s foreign aid bill shows a focused GOP
Yesterday
Star Parker
Trump’s own behavior betrays his guilt
Yesterday
Dr. Rashad Richey
Portraying far-left and far-right as equal in ‘Civil War’ is wrong
Thursday
Jordan Reid
Who will Trump pick for vice presidential running mate?
Thursday
Matthew Continetti