I think Belarussian people prefer the Western camp and are held down,they have no support for the Russo/Ukraine war hence Luka's position to appease Putin BUT not involve his forces,Putin may one day be sending in troops to save Luka or crush another "Orange" revolution.Wholeheartedly agree. I also think NATO and EU members near Belarus' border should flex way more. Scare the shit out of Lukashenko and his supporters, while signaling those who oppose them to stand by.
Belarus launches military exercises near border with Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine
On Tuesday, the Belarusian Armed Forces began manoeuvres in the regions bordering Ukraine, Lithuania and Poland.www.pravda.com.ua
War
- Thread starter captainmorgan
- Start date
I have some Polish heritage,and that said I'm glad Poles have determined that they will NOT be steamrolled again without putting up a hell of a resistance.Poland has invested heavily in comparison to other NATO countries,they have purged most old Soviet/Russian equipment w/modern Western kit.They have a pretty modern air force and a sizeable well equipped army/tanks,the Poles are determined not to repeat history though they did show robust bravery in 1939 they were woefully under equipped w/antiquated weaponry.They,along w/the Baltic nations KNOW the hood in which they reside.Comparison of Poland and Belarus Military Strengths (2024)
Comparison of two world military powers in side-by-side format.www.globalfirepower.com
Poles would eat White Russians alive.
Aside from that, Poland has a special place in Europe. Don't fuck with Poland, again. They might as well attack Germany directly, who would undoubtedly be very eager to take the situation as an opportunity to restore their relationship with neighbor Poland.
Poland renews demand for war reparations from Germany – DW – 01/31/2024
Poland's Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski has renewed the country's demand for financial reparations from Germany for World War II losses. Warshaw seeks a "creative solution" to compensate for wartime suffering.www.dw.com
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
if he has any left that are qualified to be troops, most only to 5 days of train then sent to the front.
meanwhile...there has been some talk of another orange rev and get lushy......we'll have to see on that front
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
meanwhile last night UA hit 3 air base housing SU fighter and bomber last night......talk about impressive.....all drones, according to reports UA sent 50 drone to 3 air bases........
some of the video captured is at the bottom of the post......
now that's impressive...
some of the video captured is at the bottom of the post......
now that's impressive...
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
UA may get long range drones......ah hell.......
and when i say long range, that's exactly what it is....
and when i say long range, that's exactly what it is....
Looks like Russia never invested in parking its jets in hardened bunkers,and if they did the $$$ went to Dachas for Generals or some jewelry to keep the wives happy.
printer
Well-Known Member
Russia wants to turn Kharkiv into uninhabitable "grey zone" – The Economist
British media outlet The Economist, with reference to military sources in Kyiv, assumes that Russia decided to turn the city of Kharkiv into a "grey zone" uninhabitable for civilians.
Source: The Economist, in the story titled The Kremlin wants to make Ukraine’s second city unliveable
Quote: "The escalation had military sources in Kyiv suggesting that Russia has resolved to make the city a "grey zone", uninhabitable for civilians."
Details: Meanwhile Ihor Terekhov, mayor of Kharkiv, strongly refuted this hypothesis. In an interview conducted at a secret location in the industrial quarter, Terekhov says residents of his city have no intention of giving up.
Things were worse at the start of the war, he argues, when all but 300,000 of the city's pre-war population of 2 million people fled.
Quote: "How can you make a city like this a grey zone? People won’t leave, because they have already left, then returned. They have been tortured enough already."
More details: Terekhov stated that it was quite challenging to power the city up without power stations or working transformers, but they have managed to do it.
"If I told you how we did it, that too would be targeted," he added.
The Economist notes that many of Kharkiv’s problems would be solved if the West provided more air defence systems or F-16 fighter jets that could push back the Russian fighter jets carrying the gliding bombs. It adds that Russia destroyed some of the Western-supplied Patriot air-defence units that Ukraine had been using to protect cities like Kharkiv.
Russia’s exact intentions are not clear at this stage, though there are certain signs that it is preparing for a major summer offensive.
"A Ukrainian source with knowledge of the intelligence picture said Russia is currently training six divisions (approximately 120,000 troops) in eastern Siberia," the article says.
The Economist believes that "Kharkiv is one of several possible directions for a future assault". It is not the most likely, but it has already been heavily trailed in Russian media.
"That might indicate a Kremlin information campaign to frighten Kharkiv residents. Or it could be a nod in the direction of a pro-war camp agitating for a fiercer response to Ukraine’s frequent attacks on Belgorod, which are also causing unease in Western circles," – the material says.
The Economist admits that the military operation of invading Kharkiv would be an exceptionally complicated mission for Russia.
"Taking the city would require breaking through Ukrainian defences and encircling it, which Russia is nowhere near being able to do; establishing air superiority, which is not a given; and winning a bloody urban campaign," – The Economist explains.
Background: Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine, stated that Ukraine seeks the opportunity to provide the city of Kharkiv with better air defence and urged foreign partners to supply Ukraine with air defence systems.
www.pravda.com.ua
British media outlet The Economist, with reference to military sources in Kyiv, assumes that Russia decided to turn the city of Kharkiv into a "grey zone" uninhabitable for civilians.
Source: The Economist, in the story titled The Kremlin wants to make Ukraine’s second city unliveable
Quote: "The escalation had military sources in Kyiv suggesting that Russia has resolved to make the city a "grey zone", uninhabitable for civilians."
Details: Meanwhile Ihor Terekhov, mayor of Kharkiv, strongly refuted this hypothesis. In an interview conducted at a secret location in the industrial quarter, Terekhov says residents of his city have no intention of giving up.
Things were worse at the start of the war, he argues, when all but 300,000 of the city's pre-war population of 2 million people fled.
Quote: "How can you make a city like this a grey zone? People won’t leave, because they have already left, then returned. They have been tortured enough already."
More details: Terekhov stated that it was quite challenging to power the city up without power stations or working transformers, but they have managed to do it.
"If I told you how we did it, that too would be targeted," he added.
The Economist notes that many of Kharkiv’s problems would be solved if the West provided more air defence systems or F-16 fighter jets that could push back the Russian fighter jets carrying the gliding bombs. It adds that Russia destroyed some of the Western-supplied Patriot air-defence units that Ukraine had been using to protect cities like Kharkiv.
Russia’s exact intentions are not clear at this stage, though there are certain signs that it is preparing for a major summer offensive.
"A Ukrainian source with knowledge of the intelligence picture said Russia is currently training six divisions (approximately 120,000 troops) in eastern Siberia," the article says.
The Economist believes that "Kharkiv is one of several possible directions for a future assault". It is not the most likely, but it has already been heavily trailed in Russian media.
"That might indicate a Kremlin information campaign to frighten Kharkiv residents. Or it could be a nod in the direction of a pro-war camp agitating for a fiercer response to Ukraine’s frequent attacks on Belgorod, which are also causing unease in Western circles," – the material says.
The Economist admits that the military operation of invading Kharkiv would be an exceptionally complicated mission for Russia.
"Taking the city would require breaking through Ukrainian defences and encircling it, which Russia is nowhere near being able to do; establishing air superiority, which is not a given; and winning a bloody urban campaign," – The Economist explains.
Background: Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine, stated that Ukraine seeks the opportunity to provide the city of Kharkiv with better air defence and urged foreign partners to supply Ukraine with air defence systems.
Russia wants to turn Kharkiv into uninhabitable “grey zone” – The Economist
British media outlet The Economist, with reference to military sources in Kyiv, assumes that Russia decided to turn the city of Kharkiv into a “grey zone” uninhabitable for civilians.
www.pravda.com.ua
printer
Well-Known Member
Second dam in a week? The gods must be crazy.
https://x.com/EuromaidanPR/status/1777273428766072871
https://x.com/JayinKyiv/status/1777269957060890957
Darn beavers smoking now?
The person responsible for the dam break in Orsk has been identified.
A dam in Orsk broke because it was “gnawed by rodents.” The director of the construction company Sergei Komarov spoke about this.
“14-15 years have passed without any repairs. I was surprised that only one rodent was able to chew through the material. If the cause had turned out to be something else, the dam could have collapsed in several places,” expert Sergei Komarov said on Channel One. He added that after the construction of the dam was completed in accordance with the project, it was handed over to the customer and then to the city. The city included it in its balance sheet without the necessary vehicle fleet, which should have ensured its maintenance in normal condition throughout the operational period, the expert concluded.
When a dam broke on the Ural River in Orsk on April 5, more than 10 thousand residential buildings were flooded and 47 bridges were closed. The photo report is available on URA.RU. Rostekhnadzor created a commission to investigate the dam accident. In 2020, an audit was carried out and 38 comments were identified that were to be eliminated by 2022. Due to the moratorium on unscheduled inspections, compliance with the instructions was not verified, the National News Service reports .
https://x.com/EuromaidanPR/status/1777273428766072871
https://x.com/JayinKyiv/status/1777269957060890957
Darn beavers smoking now?
The person responsible for the dam break in Orsk has been identified.
A dam in Orsk broke because it was “gnawed by rodents.” The director of the construction company Sergei Komarov spoke about this.
“14-15 years have passed without any repairs. I was surprised that only one rodent was able to chew through the material. If the cause had turned out to be something else, the dam could have collapsed in several places,” expert Sergei Komarov said on Channel One. He added that after the construction of the dam was completed in accordance with the project, it was handed over to the customer and then to the city. The city included it in its balance sheet without the necessary vehicle fleet, which should have ensured its maintenance in normal condition throughout the operational period, the expert concluded.
When a dam broke on the Ural River in Orsk on April 5, more than 10 thousand residential buildings were flooded and 47 bridges were closed. The photo report is available on URA.RU. Rostekhnadzor created a commission to investigate the dam accident. In 2020, an audit was carried out and 38 comments were identified that were to be eliminated by 2022. Due to the moratorium on unscheduled inspections, compliance with the instructions was not verified, the National News Service reports .
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Conditions continue to erode for Ukraine.
amp.cnn.com
Kyiv, Ukraine: Largest power plant in region destroyed in Russian attack | CNN
The largest power-generating plant in Ukraine’s Kyiv region has been destroyed in a Russian missile attack on Thursday, according to the energy company Centrenergo.
printer
Well-Known Member
It will take years to get back online.Conditions continue to erode for Ukraine.
Kyiv, Ukraine: Largest power plant in region destroyed in Russian attack | CNN
The largest power-generating plant in Ukraine’s Kyiv region has been destroyed in a Russian missile attack on Thursday, according to the energy company Centrenergo.
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Kremlin: 2022 draft document could serve as basis for peace talks
Putin said Russia could negotiate with Ukraine to end the war if there are no imposed schemes, as Zelenskyy goes to Switzerland to participate in peace talks.
www.euronews.com
printer
Well-Known Member
Trump on Ukraine aid: ‘We’re thinking about making it in the form of a loan’
Former President Trump on Friday signaled an openness to Republicans approving additional aid for Ukraine in its war against Russia if it came in the form of a loan.
“We’re looking at it right now, and they’re talking about it, and we’re thinking about making it in the form of a loan instead of just a gift,” Trump said during an appearance alongside Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) at the former president’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
“We keep handing out gifts of billions and billions of dollars, and we’ll take a look at it,” Trump continued. “But much more importantly to me is the fact that Europe has to step up, and they have to give money. They have to equalize. If they don’t equalize I’m very upset about it, because they’re affected much more than we are.”
Trump has for months expressed skepticism about providing U.S. assistance to Ukraine in its war against Russia, arguing support for Ukraine is not a vital American interest and that Europe should be providing the bulk of the assistance. His views have been deeply influential among his allies in Congress, making passage of Ukraine aid in the GOP-controlled House difficult.
The former president’s stance has created a political minefield for Johnson as he looks to help Kyiv’s beleaguered forces. The U.S. has provided billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine in the form of military and humanitarian assistance, but it ran out of congressionally approved funds late last year.
The Biden White House has for months pleaded with lawmakers to pass more aid for Ukraine as its forces struggle to fend off Russian attacks. President Biden and others have repeatedly argued that supporting Ukraine is in the interest of the United States, because if Russia defeats Ukraine it could invade a NATO ally that would draw American forces into a wider conflict.
The Senate last month passed a $95 billion national security funding package, which included $60 billion in aid for Ukraine. But Johnson has refused to put the bill on the floor as Trump allies in the House have dug in against providing more aid to Kyiv.
Johnson for months has said the House would consider foreign aid in due time, pushing back the timeline for other must-pass matters, like government funding. But the Speaker narrowed in on a schedule last weekend, announcing that the House would consider Ukraine aid “right after” the two-week Easter recess.
Democrats in both chambers have suggested they’re willing to support Ukraine aid in the form of a loan if it can break the impasse, even if it’s not their first choice.
thehill.com
Former President Trump on Friday signaled an openness to Republicans approving additional aid for Ukraine in its war against Russia if it came in the form of a loan.
“We’re looking at it right now, and they’re talking about it, and we’re thinking about making it in the form of a loan instead of just a gift,” Trump said during an appearance alongside Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) at the former president’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
“We keep handing out gifts of billions and billions of dollars, and we’ll take a look at it,” Trump continued. “But much more importantly to me is the fact that Europe has to step up, and they have to give money. They have to equalize. If they don’t equalize I’m very upset about it, because they’re affected much more than we are.”
Trump has for months expressed skepticism about providing U.S. assistance to Ukraine in its war against Russia, arguing support for Ukraine is not a vital American interest and that Europe should be providing the bulk of the assistance. His views have been deeply influential among his allies in Congress, making passage of Ukraine aid in the GOP-controlled House difficult.
The former president’s stance has created a political minefield for Johnson as he looks to help Kyiv’s beleaguered forces. The U.S. has provided billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine in the form of military and humanitarian assistance, but it ran out of congressionally approved funds late last year.
The Biden White House has for months pleaded with lawmakers to pass more aid for Ukraine as its forces struggle to fend off Russian attacks. President Biden and others have repeatedly argued that supporting Ukraine is in the interest of the United States, because if Russia defeats Ukraine it could invade a NATO ally that would draw American forces into a wider conflict.
The Senate last month passed a $95 billion national security funding package, which included $60 billion in aid for Ukraine. But Johnson has refused to put the bill on the floor as Trump allies in the House have dug in against providing more aid to Kyiv.
Johnson for months has said the House would consider foreign aid in due time, pushing back the timeline for other must-pass matters, like government funding. But the Speaker narrowed in on a schedule last weekend, announcing that the House would consider Ukraine aid “right after” the two-week Easter recess.
Democrats in both chambers have suggested they’re willing to support Ukraine aid in the form of a loan if it can break the impasse, even if it’s not their first choice.
Trump on Ukraine aid: ‘We’re thinking about making it in the form of a loan’
Former President Trump on Friday signaled an openness to Republicans approving additional aid for Ukraine in its war against Russia if it came in the form of a loan. “We’re looking at it right now,…
thehill.com
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
They need to stop giving that man a podium for his odium.Trump on Ukraine aid: ‘We’re thinking about making it in the form of a loan’
Former President Trump on Friday signaled an openness to Republicans approving additional aid for Ukraine in its war against Russia if it came in the form of a loan.
“We’re looking at it right now, and they’re talking about it, and we’re thinking about making it in the form of a loan instead of just a gift,” Trump said during an appearance alongside Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) at the former president’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
“We keep handing out gifts of billions and billions of dollars, and we’ll take a look at it,” Trump continued. “But much more importantly to me is the fact that Europe has to step up, and they have to give money. They have to equalize. If they don’t equalize I’m very upset about it, because they’re affected much more than we are.”
Trump has for months expressed skepticism about providing U.S. assistance to Ukraine in its war against Russia, arguing support for Ukraine is not a vital American interest and that Europe should be providing the bulk of the assistance. His views have been deeply influential among his allies in Congress, making passage of Ukraine aid in the GOP-controlled House difficult.
The former president’s stance has created a political minefield for Johnson as he looks to help Kyiv’s beleaguered forces. The U.S. has provided billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine in the form of military and humanitarian assistance, but it ran out of congressionally approved funds late last year.
The Biden White House has for months pleaded with lawmakers to pass more aid for Ukraine as its forces struggle to fend off Russian attacks. President Biden and others have repeatedly argued that supporting Ukraine is in the interest of the United States, because if Russia defeats Ukraine it could invade a NATO ally that would draw American forces into a wider conflict.
The Senate last month passed a $95 billion national security funding package, which included $60 billion in aid for Ukraine. But Johnson has refused to put the bill on the floor as Trump allies in the House have dug in against providing more aid to Kyiv.
Johnson for months has said the House would consider foreign aid in due time, pushing back the timeline for other must-pass matters, like government funding. But the Speaker narrowed in on a schedule last weekend, announcing that the House would consider Ukraine aid “right after” the two-week Easter recess.
Democrats in both chambers have suggested they’re willing to support Ukraine aid in the form of a loan if it can break the impasse, even if it’s not their first choice.
Trump on Ukraine aid: ‘We’re thinking about making it in the form of a loan’
Former President Trump on Friday signaled an openness to Republicans approving additional aid for Ukraine in its war against Russia if it came in the form of a loan. “We’re looking at it right now,…
printer
Well-Known Member
The Big Oil behind America’s criticism of Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries - Euromaidan Press
Mykhailo Honchar, a Ukrainian energy analyst, contends that Defense Secretary Austin's warnings against striking Russian refineries reveal the Kremlin's influence on US policy through oil giants like Chevron, which heavily invests in Kazakhstan's oil fields.
euromaidanpress.com
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Is this is Ukraine's answer to Big Oil's support to Republican legislators who are holding up military aid to Ukraine? Hit them where they live..The Big Oil behind America’s criticism of Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries - Euromaidan Press
Mykhailo Honchar, a Ukrainian energy analyst, contends that Defense Secretary Austin's warnings against striking Russian refineries reveal the Kremlin's influence on US policy through oil giants like Chevron, which heavily invests in Kazakhstan's oil fields.
printer
Well-Known Member
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
Capt caps o lock to the rescue.....smh
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
printer
Well-Known Member
Dem leaders embrace Johnson’s Ukraine strategy, but want policy details
House Democratic leaders said Tuesday that they’re ready to embrace Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) strategy of splitting an emergency foreign aid package into targeted pieces, but first want assurances that all the components of a Senate-passed bill are a part of the deal. The Democrats have, for weeks, pushed Johnson to bring a vote on the $95 billion Senate package, which combines military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan with humanitarian assistance for Gaza and other global hotspots.
But this week, after Johnson announced his plan to vote on those four provisions separately, Democratic leaders said they’re ready to get on board — if all the major elements of the Senate package are included. “The important point is the substance of the legislation. The substance matters,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (Calif.), chairman of the Democratic Caucus, told reporters in the Capitol. “We hope that we can get an agreement today on exactly what’s going to be in it,” echoed Rep. Katherine Clark (Mass.), the Democratic whip.
The Democrats are waiting for Johnson to release the precise details of his plan, expected on Tuesday. At that time, Aguilar said, several top Democrats — including the heads of the Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Appropriations committees — will review the four bills to ensure they pass the substance “test” meriting Democratic support. “If those individuals indicate that the substance of the legislation that we are talking about meets that test to help Ukraine, to help our allies, to provide humanitarian assistance, then House Democrats and the leadership team will work to find the process that fits to deliver that,” Aguilar said. “We’re more concerned about the substance right now than we are the process.”
That message marks a shift for Democrats leaders, who have insisted for weeks that Johnson stage a vote specifically on the Senate bill, which passed through the upper chamber in February with a resounding bipartisan vote of 70 to 29. Anything less, they said, would cause an undue delay at a time of urgent need. “We continue to make clear that the only path forward is an up or down vote on the bipartisan, comprehensive, national security bill passed by the Senate,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said last week.
The Democrats’ openness to Johnson’s alternative strategy acknowledges the political dilemmas the Speaker is facing as he seeks to usher the foreign-aid package through a rebellious GOP conference, where scores of conservatives are opposed to major pieces of the Senate bill. It also reflects the urgency of the situations in Ukraine, where Kyiv’s beleaguered forces are said to be running low on ammunition, and in Israel, which was attacked by missile strikes from Iran over the weekend.
Some Democrats have hammered Johnson’s four-vote plan, voicing concerns that it provides no guarantees that the less popular proposals will make it all the way to President Biden’s desk. “I don’t think it’s good,” said Rep. Tony Cardenas (D-Calif.). “I think they’ll leave us out to dry on some of the components. We need to do a supplemental that’s comprehensive.”
Yet some liberal Democrats are actually welcoming Johnson’s piecemeal strategy, which will allow them to vote against parts of the Senate package they opposed: namely, offensive weapons for Israel. “I think it’s important that this not all be lumped together,” said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas). “I’m a very strong supporter of Ukraine aid. I’m also a strong believer that I don’t want to be complicit with the policies of Benjamin Netanyahu.”
In an effort to make the legislation more appealing to wary conservatives, Johnson and his leadership team have tweaked their messaging pitch with a new emphasis on the billions of dollars that will go to replenish U.S. weapons supplies. “The lion’s share of that money — at least two-thirds of it — is money that really is used to backfill American stockpiles, American weapon systems,” House Majority Leader Steve Scales (R-La.) said Monday. “So it’s not money that would be going to Ukraine.”
That message has done little to appease many GOP hardliners, who are furious that Johnson — after insisting for months that any Ukraine aid must be accompanied by tougher security measures at the southern U.S. border — abandoned that demand in unveiling his foreign aid blueprint. Fueling the conservative discontent, Johnson is also not allowing any amendments related to the border. “I’m fine with putting individual subjects as a matter of course on the floor,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas). “But when it’s all sort of predetermined, and it’s gonna leave border off, then you’ve given up the entire point of the fight.”
Democrats, meanwhile, appear most concerned that GOP leaders will scrimp on the humanitarian aid, particularly in Gaza, where Israeli strikes have killed more than 34,000 people. The Senate bill provided $9.2 billion for food, medical supplies and other humanitarian aid for Gaza, Ukraine and other global hotspots. Many Democrats on Tuesday morning said they’re prepared to oppose any foreign-aid package that falls below that number.
“If they take out the aid to Gaza and all the other places that need help, that’s a poison pill,” said Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.). “We need to have humanitarian aid in this.” “If Speaker Johnson’s version is missing one of these components, it’s highly unlikely Democrats would support it,” echoed Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), the vice chair of the Caucus.
Johnson is planning to bring the four bills to the floor under a single rule. If they all pass, then he’ll recombine them into a single package to send to the Senate. That strategy is likely to present the Speaker with an early problem: How to pass the rule given that some conservatives will likely oppose it to block votes on the underlying bills?
The answer might be that he’ll have to lean on the minority Democrats to pass the rule and bring the four bills to the floor — a highly unusual scenario, but one that Democratic leaders are not ruling out. “There is no option off the table right now, from procedural measures that bring this directly to the floor, to any votes that are options,” Aguilar said. “We don’t want to sink any plan that delivers any aid to our allies,” he said.
thehill.com
House Democratic leaders said Tuesday that they’re ready to embrace Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) strategy of splitting an emergency foreign aid package into targeted pieces, but first want assurances that all the components of a Senate-passed bill are a part of the deal. The Democrats have, for weeks, pushed Johnson to bring a vote on the $95 billion Senate package, which combines military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan with humanitarian assistance for Gaza and other global hotspots.
But this week, after Johnson announced his plan to vote on those four provisions separately, Democratic leaders said they’re ready to get on board — if all the major elements of the Senate package are included. “The important point is the substance of the legislation. The substance matters,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (Calif.), chairman of the Democratic Caucus, told reporters in the Capitol. “We hope that we can get an agreement today on exactly what’s going to be in it,” echoed Rep. Katherine Clark (Mass.), the Democratic whip.
The Democrats are waiting for Johnson to release the precise details of his plan, expected on Tuesday. At that time, Aguilar said, several top Democrats — including the heads of the Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Appropriations committees — will review the four bills to ensure they pass the substance “test” meriting Democratic support. “If those individuals indicate that the substance of the legislation that we are talking about meets that test to help Ukraine, to help our allies, to provide humanitarian assistance, then House Democrats and the leadership team will work to find the process that fits to deliver that,” Aguilar said. “We’re more concerned about the substance right now than we are the process.”
That message marks a shift for Democrats leaders, who have insisted for weeks that Johnson stage a vote specifically on the Senate bill, which passed through the upper chamber in February with a resounding bipartisan vote of 70 to 29. Anything less, they said, would cause an undue delay at a time of urgent need. “We continue to make clear that the only path forward is an up or down vote on the bipartisan, comprehensive, national security bill passed by the Senate,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said last week.
The Democrats’ openness to Johnson’s alternative strategy acknowledges the political dilemmas the Speaker is facing as he seeks to usher the foreign-aid package through a rebellious GOP conference, where scores of conservatives are opposed to major pieces of the Senate bill. It also reflects the urgency of the situations in Ukraine, where Kyiv’s beleaguered forces are said to be running low on ammunition, and in Israel, which was attacked by missile strikes from Iran over the weekend.
Some Democrats have hammered Johnson’s four-vote plan, voicing concerns that it provides no guarantees that the less popular proposals will make it all the way to President Biden’s desk. “I don’t think it’s good,” said Rep. Tony Cardenas (D-Calif.). “I think they’ll leave us out to dry on some of the components. We need to do a supplemental that’s comprehensive.”
Yet some liberal Democrats are actually welcoming Johnson’s piecemeal strategy, which will allow them to vote against parts of the Senate package they opposed: namely, offensive weapons for Israel. “I think it’s important that this not all be lumped together,” said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas). “I’m a very strong supporter of Ukraine aid. I’m also a strong believer that I don’t want to be complicit with the policies of Benjamin Netanyahu.”
In an effort to make the legislation more appealing to wary conservatives, Johnson and his leadership team have tweaked their messaging pitch with a new emphasis on the billions of dollars that will go to replenish U.S. weapons supplies. “The lion’s share of that money — at least two-thirds of it — is money that really is used to backfill American stockpiles, American weapon systems,” House Majority Leader Steve Scales (R-La.) said Monday. “So it’s not money that would be going to Ukraine.”
That message has done little to appease many GOP hardliners, who are furious that Johnson — after insisting for months that any Ukraine aid must be accompanied by tougher security measures at the southern U.S. border — abandoned that demand in unveiling his foreign aid blueprint. Fueling the conservative discontent, Johnson is also not allowing any amendments related to the border. “I’m fine with putting individual subjects as a matter of course on the floor,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas). “But when it’s all sort of predetermined, and it’s gonna leave border off, then you’ve given up the entire point of the fight.”
Democrats, meanwhile, appear most concerned that GOP leaders will scrimp on the humanitarian aid, particularly in Gaza, where Israeli strikes have killed more than 34,000 people. The Senate bill provided $9.2 billion for food, medical supplies and other humanitarian aid for Gaza, Ukraine and other global hotspots. Many Democrats on Tuesday morning said they’re prepared to oppose any foreign-aid package that falls below that number.
“If they take out the aid to Gaza and all the other places that need help, that’s a poison pill,” said Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.). “We need to have humanitarian aid in this.” “If Speaker Johnson’s version is missing one of these components, it’s highly unlikely Democrats would support it,” echoed Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), the vice chair of the Caucus.
Johnson is planning to bring the four bills to the floor under a single rule. If they all pass, then he’ll recombine them into a single package to send to the Senate. That strategy is likely to present the Speaker with an early problem: How to pass the rule given that some conservatives will likely oppose it to block votes on the underlying bills?
The answer might be that he’ll have to lean on the minority Democrats to pass the rule and bring the four bills to the floor — a highly unusual scenario, but one that Democratic leaders are not ruling out. “There is no option off the table right now, from procedural measures that bring this directly to the floor, to any votes that are options,” Aguilar said. “We don’t want to sink any plan that delivers any aid to our allies,” he said.
Dem leaders embrace Johnson’s Ukraine strategy, but want policy details
House Democratic leaders said Tuesday that they’re ready to embrace Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) strategy of splitting an emergency foreign aid package into targeted pieces, but first…
thehill.com