• The House passed a more than $60 billion bill that provides more military aid to Ukraine.
  • It’s part of a larger foreign aid package that’s likely to pass the Senate and be signed into law.
  • 112 Republicans voted it against — the most ever, and a majority of the GOP conference.

Saturday’s vote marked the first time the House had approved billions of dollars in Ukraine aid since December 2022, when Democrats still controlled the chamber.

In the two years since Russia’s invasion, opposition to aiding Ukraine has grown from a fringe position to a majority view among House GOP lawmakers. Many argue the money should be spent domestically or that policy changes at the US-Mexico border should take precedence.

Here are the 112 House Republicans who voted against the bill.

  • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The aid is in the form of outdated, surplus military equipment that was scheduled to be replaced anyways. The alternative is paying a company to dispose of them. So why don’t you want to send this aid to Ukraine where it can be used? The only people that should have any problem with this are those who are busy sucking Putin’s knob.

    • Soulg@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Or people who don’t know anything about what you said because the media just acts like the bill steals money from us to give to them instead

    • Filthmontane@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      A lot of that equipment would’ve just gone back for rework and upgrades. Just because they’re old doesn’t mean they don’t work. That narrative was intended to force the US to by new more expensive hardware instead of repairing what we already have. Now that the old stuff is shipped out there’s a demand for new builds.

      We will only give Ukraine just enough to prolong the war as long as possible. This war means trillions of dollars in sales if it goes on long enough. I bet the US can stretch it up to ten years if they play the same right. And all the while, Ukraine will be bombed to shit, waiting for the US mega corporations to make more money on the reconstruction efforts. They just need to make sure Putin stays in power or the whole scheme falls apart.

      • theprogressivist @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        So your idea is to let Russia steamroll Ukraine in which Ukraine will still be bombed to shit? Yeah you’re a fucking bootlicker.

        • Filthmontane@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          The best idea is to force a peace treaty. Tell Putin he can have the land he’s captured if the war ends now. Better to let him take that land than wait until Russian military gets back into Kiev again or other more populous cities in the West. He’ll feel like he’s won and the killing will end. Otherwise there will be no end. Putin will never give up unless the Russian people put his head on a pike. Even if Ukraine somehow manages to push Russian troops back to their borders, the war doesn’t end there and Ukraine isn’t going to conquer Russia.

    • index@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      28
      ·
      2 months ago

      The only people that should have any problem with this are those who are busy sucking Putin’s knob.

      I would like to point out that russia is fine with this war otherwise they wouldn’t have started it. Politicians and government use wars as a tool to get more power and enrich themself which is pretty much what is happening right now too

      • Skua@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        2 months ago

        Russia isn’t necessarily fine with it just because they started it. After all, they seized Crimea back in 2014 and got away with it without a fight. Russia also made a push to capture Ukraine’s government in a matter of days at the start, which they wouldn’t have done if they didn’t think there was a chance of it succeeding. It’s very possible that Russia expected this to be over quickly and based its decision on that expectation

        • index@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          2 months ago

          If they are able to bribe 112 US government figures i believe they also weighted in the option that the invasion of a full ass country they have been at war since 2014 could have last more than 3 days