The FT article is paywalled. Someone on Twitter however took images of the article.![]()
"I don't think he's bluffing": Zelenskyy says Putin's nuclear threats "could be a reality"
"Maybe yesterday it was a bluff. Now, it could be a reality," Zelenskyy said on "Face the Nation."www.cbsnews.com
![]()
Kyiv’s western allies boost nuclear deterrence after Putin’s threats
White House security adviser Jake Sullivan says US is taking the threat ‘deadly seriously’www.ft.com
Why need a $12B dollar new bill if there's still money in the other pot? Why did they reject Rand Paul's amendment to look at wheres the money going?May have already been stated, the new 1B "package" is funded under the 14B authorization in the Spring, think of it as another withdrawal against that previously passed congressional funding bill.
Why need a $12B dollar new bill if there's still money in the other pot? Why did they reject Rand Paul's amendment to look at wheres the money going?
Your article's not about the current deal. Wounder why they included energy in this funding when they just passed $60B in the "inflation reduction act"Good question, but I think that's a political conversation regarding why or why not amendments were approved.
Regarding the new request, some specifics are here as to where it would go. A portion is resupplying us as Ukraine has obviously drawn down some of the US stockpiles for specific arms.
![]()
Congress wants more details on latest Ukraine aid request
Multiple senators on Tuesday said that they want reports and briefings on Joe Biden’s new $13.7 billion funding request for Ukraine.www.defensenews.com
![]()
Congress to vote on $12.3 billion Ukraine aid package
The bill grants the White House request for $7.5 billion in military assistance to Ukraine and another $4.5 billion in economic support.www.defensenews.com
$2 billion for the U.S. energy industry, to address the impact of the war and reduce future energy costs.
$4.5 billion to continue to provide direct budget support to the Kyiv government through the next quarter.
Your article's not about the current deal. Wounder why they included energy in this funding when they just passed $60B in the "inflation reduction act"
It's also nice we are funding Ukraine's government while we have massive debt ourselves.
Well that's the only information we have as what's in the article to this gift to Ukraine as the $4.5B and $2B are not loans.I think they are but fact check me for sure. My guess is the 2B for energy is more towards hardening out posture domestically through the Winter including support for NATO allies. If you think natural gas is high, just wait.