Should’ve sent more weapons and less cash back in 2022.
parks387 on
Should’ve used it to build communities for the homeless.
A1700AW on
What incredible waste.
For what?
BearlyAwesomeHeretic on
These are incredibly basic categories; what does budget support even mean? Also where does the rest go?
BearlyAwesomeHeretic on
Also how is this OC if you literally are screenshotting a graph from a government organization? Did you do this?
Mettelor on
This stuff is spread across multiple years, but IF the full ~$200B was all at once, that is $200B / $6.9T = 2.8% of the annual budget.
Of course, this is 2022 + 2024, so we might consider it 3 years, which would make it more like 2.8/3 ~ 0.9% of the annual budget for three years.
Just some loose perspective, don’t @ me I know the math is inexact.
CFR_org on
The U.S. Congress has voted through five bills that have provided Ukraine with aid since the war began, doing so most recently in April 2024. The total budget authority under these bills—the “headline” figure often cited by news media—is $175 billion. The historic sums have helped a broad set of Ukrainian people and institutions, including refugees, law enforcement, and independent radio broadcasters, though most of the aid has been military-related. In late 2024, the United States also provided the Ukrainian government with a $20 billion loan, funded by interest generated from frozen Russian assets.
It’s important to note that of the total U.S. government spending related to the war, about $128 billion directly aids the government of Ukraine, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. Most of the remainder has funded various U.S. activities associated with the war in Ukraine, and a small portion has supported other affected countries in the region. [See more charts](https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine?utm_medium=social_owned&utm_source=reddit) on aid to Ukraine.
slatchaw on
Isn’t most of the 70B going back to the American war businesses
berowe on
Any existing visualizations on the overhead costs? Spent time at the HQ in charge of UKR military assistance and I know there were costs in buffing up our own deterrence measures in Europe, plans to evac US citizens, etc.
Waiting for the “should’ve spent it on this niche focus area or let me keep my ~$80/yr, what a waste!” to see who lacks understanding of how global issues impact joe-selfish internet gnome’s need to buy more stuff.
csamsh on
Before this whole thing started, Ukraine was on a blacklist of countries with which my particular pie wedge of the military-industrial complex was forbidden from doing any business.
In the last three years, a pretty sizable slice of the lower rectangle there has come straight from the plant at which I work. Crazy how things go.
BrupieD on
The amount **allocated** is not the same as the amount received.
There are already a lot of comments about how most of the spending is done in the U.S. but I haven’t seen anything about how much of the allocated hasn’t been spent or received by the Ukrainians. This isn’t a trivial amount.
SecondBestNameEver on
Now we just need a visualization for the people in the back thinking we are literally strapping money to pallets and flying it over to Ukraine for them to understand that we’re basically instead giving Ukraine a gift card to the American Military Industrial Complex store so that money is ultimately going to Americans to produce the weapons and vehicles we give to Ukraine.
Southern_Jaguar on
I don’t get how this ever became “controversial” but yet here we are
HatCat2012 on
Which one of these include the politicians’ pockets?
rdbpdx on
I _see_ those numbers, but I _know_ that we’ve sent $350B to Ukraine and they lost all the money. That’s what I saw on Twitter so I know it’s true.
-MAGA
red8reader on
We call it aid but a large chunk of the money ‘given’ to Ukraine is to be paid back with interest. So it’s like a loan. Aid to NGOs, however, is not a loan.
FPFresh123 on
Good. We should send more.
akshayjamwal on
Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for treaties with Russia and the west. The former involved no invasions and the latter involved protection. They’ve now been screwed over by both sides.
phdoofus on
So we spent like 3% of what we willingly spent in Iraqistan and we’re squealing like pigs. Ok then.
Alexandros6 on
To note that this is the formal number, but if you detract the loans and cost of weapons due to be scrapped you are more around 50 billions. Same obv for European aid.
So, sweet fuck all, as % of GDP over 3 years even not allowing for the good points made elsewhere that these are inflated numbers
Representing these numbers without any indication of percentage of GDP is either intentionally or unintentionally misleading
Snoo-80626 on
looks like the weapons manufacturers gettin paid.
Global-Cattle-6285 on
I have a question about these numbers? Is it based on the “value” of the items they sent them? From what I understand, the US enormously inflate the price of their weapons vs other countries…. So $100m from Europe may actually be worth more than $195m from the US? Or have I got that completely wrong?
bad_syntax on
These kinds of things are always so misleading.
So, we sent them $70.6B in weapons, equipment, and other military support.
Thing is, it isn’t like we made stuff and sent it to them. We sent them old stuff, sitting outside going unused, in the possibility they may need to be called upon some day. It was mostly obsolete equipment, no longer considered for “front line” use. Stuff was built decades ago, and most of it had a LOT of mileage and wear and tear.
As for weapons, here is the thing. America makes tons of ordnance. From air to air missiles, air to surface missiles, anti-tank missiles, small arms ammo, etc, etc. All of these things do not live forever. They are built, stored, and at some point expire. When those things are about to expire, they are often shipped to front line units to shoot off for training purposes. We keep massive stockpiles so we have them ready in case of war, and our troops cannot even shoot them off fast enough in peacetime. When our long war in Afghanistan was mostly limited engagements, we didn’t get a lot of use for many of these weapons. So, instead of just sending them back to the manufacturer, who charges a fee to dispose of them, we threw them on a ship for Ukraine.
Imagine you have 2 pretty new cars, and your kid got your previous cars. After 10 years, your kids move out, and buy themselves new cars. Their old cars would be what was given to Ukraine. They still work, but are not really costing you anything at all to just get rid of them. You got your money’s worth out of them.
There is just a lot more to “$70B in military aid” than people realize, and many people think somehow that *cost* America that much, but in reality it probably didn’t even cost 10% of that in transportation charges and spare parts.
And that old ass ammo? It sometimes isn’t that reliable either. I saw a good chunk of “old TOW” (anti-tank missiles) get fired off at multiple army posts that flew out of the tube and went straight into the air or straight into the ground. THAT is what we are giving them, and they are making that shit work.
We spent trillions fighting Russia in the cold war, and now we could end it, forever, and completely, by just a steady stream of old crap going to Ukraine.
waterloograd on
Also, a lot of the weapons are old stock that needed to be replaced soon too, either through refurbishing or complete replacement. Now, the military complex and supply chain gets more orders, which means more more money, which means more jobs.
![[OC] Here’s How Much Aid the United States Has Sent Ukraine](https://www.byteseu.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/zh45bt2laioe1-995x1536.png "[OC] Here’s How Much Aid the United States Has Sent Ukraine")
25 Comments
Should’ve sent more weapons and less cash back in 2022.
Should’ve used it to build communities for the homeless.
What incredible waste.
For what?
These are incredibly basic categories; what does budget support even mean? Also where does the rest go?
Also how is this OC if you literally are screenshotting a graph from a government organization? Did you do this?
This stuff is spread across multiple years, but IF the full ~$200B was all at once, that is $200B / $6.9T = 2.8% of the annual budget.
Of course, this is 2022 + 2024, so we might consider it 3 years, which would make it more like 2.8/3 ~ 0.9% of the annual budget for three years.
Just some loose perspective, don’t @ me I know the math is inexact.
The U.S. Congress has voted through five bills that have provided Ukraine with aid since the war began, doing so most recently in April 2024. The total budget authority under these bills—the “headline” figure often cited by news media—is $175 billion. The historic sums have helped a broad set of Ukrainian people and institutions, including refugees, law enforcement, and independent radio broadcasters, though most of the aid has been military-related. In late 2024, the United States also provided the Ukrainian government with a $20 billion loan, funded by interest generated from frozen Russian assets.
It’s important to note that of the total U.S. government spending related to the war, about $128 billion directly aids the government of Ukraine, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. Most of the remainder has funded various U.S. activities associated with the war in Ukraine, and a small portion has supported other affected countries in the region. [See more charts](https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine?utm_medium=social_owned&utm_source=reddit) on aid to Ukraine.
Isn’t most of the 70B going back to the American war businesses
Any existing visualizations on the overhead costs? Spent time at the HQ in charge of UKR military assistance and I know there were costs in buffing up our own deterrence measures in Europe, plans to evac US citizens, etc.
Waiting for the “should’ve spent it on this niche focus area or let me keep my ~$80/yr, what a waste!” to see who lacks understanding of how global issues impact joe-selfish internet gnome’s need to buy more stuff.
Before this whole thing started, Ukraine was on a blacklist of countries with which my particular pie wedge of the military-industrial complex was forbidden from doing any business.
In the last three years, a pretty sizable slice of the lower rectangle there has come straight from the plant at which I work. Crazy how things go.
The amount **allocated** is not the same as the amount received.
There are already a lot of comments about how most of the spending is done in the U.S. but I haven’t seen anything about how much of the allocated hasn’t been spent or received by the Ukrainians. This isn’t a trivial amount.
Now we just need a visualization for the people in the back thinking we are literally strapping money to pallets and flying it over to Ukraine for them to understand that we’re basically instead giving Ukraine a gift card to the American Military Industrial Complex store so that money is ultimately going to Americans to produce the weapons and vehicles we give to Ukraine.
I don’t get how this ever became “controversial” but yet here we are
Which one of these include the politicians’ pockets?
I _see_ those numbers, but I _know_ that we’ve sent $350B to Ukraine and they lost all the money. That’s what I saw on Twitter so I know it’s true.
-MAGA
We call it aid but a large chunk of the money ‘given’ to Ukraine is to be paid back with interest. So it’s like a loan. Aid to NGOs, however, is not a loan.
Good. We should send more.
Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for treaties with Russia and the west. The former involved no invasions and the latter involved protection. They’ve now been screwed over by both sides.
So we spent like 3% of what we willingly spent in Iraqistan and we’re squealing like pigs. Ok then.
To note that this is the formal number, but if you detract the loans and cost of weapons due to be scrapped you are more around 50 billions. Same obv for European aid.
https://econ4ua.org/aid-value/
So, sweet fuck all, as % of GDP over 3 years even not allowing for the good points made elsewhere that these are inflated numbers
Representing these numbers without any indication of percentage of GDP is either intentionally or unintentionally misleading
looks like the weapons manufacturers gettin paid.
I have a question about these numbers? Is it based on the “value” of the items they sent them? From what I understand, the US enormously inflate the price of their weapons vs other countries…. So $100m from Europe may actually be worth more than $195m from the US? Or have I got that completely wrong?
These kinds of things are always so misleading.
So, we sent them $70.6B in weapons, equipment, and other military support.
Thing is, it isn’t like we made stuff and sent it to them. We sent them old stuff, sitting outside going unused, in the possibility they may need to be called upon some day. It was mostly obsolete equipment, no longer considered for “front line” use. Stuff was built decades ago, and most of it had a LOT of mileage and wear and tear.
As for weapons, here is the thing. America makes tons of ordnance. From air to air missiles, air to surface missiles, anti-tank missiles, small arms ammo, etc, etc. All of these things do not live forever. They are built, stored, and at some point expire. When those things are about to expire, they are often shipped to front line units to shoot off for training purposes. We keep massive stockpiles so we have them ready in case of war, and our troops cannot even shoot them off fast enough in peacetime. When our long war in Afghanistan was mostly limited engagements, we didn’t get a lot of use for many of these weapons. So, instead of just sending them back to the manufacturer, who charges a fee to dispose of them, we threw them on a ship for Ukraine.
Imagine you have 2 pretty new cars, and your kid got your previous cars. After 10 years, your kids move out, and buy themselves new cars. Their old cars would be what was given to Ukraine. They still work, but are not really costing you anything at all to just get rid of them. You got your money’s worth out of them.
There is just a lot more to “$70B in military aid” than people realize, and many people think somehow that *cost* America that much, but in reality it probably didn’t even cost 10% of that in transportation charges and spare parts.
And that old ass ammo? It sometimes isn’t that reliable either. I saw a good chunk of “old TOW” (anti-tank missiles) get fired off at multiple army posts that flew out of the tube and went straight into the air or straight into the ground. THAT is what we are giving them, and they are making that shit work.
We spent trillions fighting Russia in the cold war, and now we could end it, forever, and completely, by just a steady stream of old crap going to Ukraine.
Also, a lot of the weapons are old stock that needed to be replaced soon too, either through refurbishing or complete replacement. Now, the military complex and supply chain gets more orders, which means more more money, which means more jobs.