K. Balinski: It's not help, it's a bluff

wprawo.pl 7 months ago

When legislature voted out another aid package for Ukraine in April of that year, Biden's administration praised that it had already provided aid to Ukraine of 111 billion and that with the package voted out it would give a full of 172 billion. The word “help” should be put in quotes. It's a large bluff. Only 20 percent of the billion allocated goes straight to Ukraine and feeds its budget. Package plan allows, alternatively of supporting

Ukrainian armed forces, donating funds to support... American armed forces. The package has a mechanics to redirect funds to replenish US stocks. It looks like this: The U.S. Army transfers the tank from its supplies or tank utilized for respective years, “because only it is physically available and only it can be rapidly delivered”. In its place is purchased for the army the same tank (of course newer generation) for $10 million, and the cost of this acquisition is included in the package. But that's not all – the tank is transported by the ocean, then by Polish train to Medyka, and it besides costs money, due to the fact that you gotta pay PKP Cargo (although that's not certain, due to the fact that Polish losers do it for free).

But that's not all – more than 1/5 of the value of the package goes to support the actions of the U.S. Army in the region, not only soldiers, but besides the administration staff of the Pentagon and in general the people “who someway work for Ukraine”. The package includes the cost of strengthening the safety of U.S. facilities in Ukraine – and so the circular sum is intended to strengthen the barrier around the US embassy in Kiev. In short, this is not an aid package for Ukraine, but mainly an aid package for America, for the American arms industry, supporting occupation creation for Americans.

According to David Cameron, British abroad Minister, the U.S. goal is not to defeat, but to weaken Russia: "For 10 percent of the U.S. defence budget half of Russia's army possible has been destroyed". British experts estimation that the U.S. has already achieved its goals in this war, and they were, apart from weakening Russia, selling American weapons and clearing magazines. Republican talker Mike Johnson confirmed that.who voted in favour of the package, as did all Democrats and 101 Republicans (112 opposed): “I think it is better to send ammunition to Ukraine than American soldiers.” Joe Biden besides argued: “This aid package serves us first” andDefense Secretary Lloyd Austin, encouraging members of legislature to approve the package, resorted to the argument: “This aid is beneficial for the US due to the fact that arms production for Ukraine reduces unemployment and fresh jobs are created”.

Victoria Nuland, Undersecretary of State of the United States (née Ukrainian Jews) revealed that the real recipient of financial support for Ukraine is the U.S. arms complex: "And by the way, we gotta remember that most of that money goes back to the U.S., To produce these weaponsIt’s okay. ” He seconded her "Washington Post" by calculating the benefits that individual states will draw from the package and to which the most money will go. Even Senator J.D. Vance, who voted against the package, acknowledged: “The conflict in Ukraine continues due to the fact that it is made by solid American arms companies and financial institutions.” The subject was clarified by Ron Paul, at a conference in the institute of his name: Does anyone believe that the 200 billion we spent on Ukraine actually went to Ukraine? Of course not. They're in good hands, most of which operate inside Beltway. (means inside the bypass surrounding Washington).

"The sale of U.S. weapons abroad increased rapidly last year, reaching a evidence level of $238 billion, mainly due to the war in Ukraine and due to the fact that Russia's invasion has made demand. The U.S. government straight negotiated contracts worth $81 billion," the BBC reported, stressing that Poland is the purchasing leader. The station lists acquisition of Apache helicopters for $12 billion, Himars rocket systems for $10 billion, M1A1 Abrams tanks for $3.75 billion, anti-aircraft and rocket defence systems for $4 billion. He adds that the fresh Prime Minister has committed to continuing the military modernisation program of the erstwhile conservative government. "Polish aid to Ukraine has pierced everyone". “Poland is among the leaders of support” – these are the titles of Polish-language newspapers. "Poland is simply a humanitarian power" is the words of Ambassador Marek Brzeziński.

The large and measurable military, financial and humanitarian aid donated to Ukraine has comprehensively estimated analysts from the German Institute of planet Economy in Kiel. They have created a ranking of the countries most active in aid. How is Poland in it? It is second, ahead of countries specified as Germany, the UK or France, and in the first place taking into account the size of the country's economy with aid, that is, the percent of GDP. Poland spent EUR 11.92 billion (i.e. PLN 56.6 billion) in summing up government aid (but not counting private aid and charities). No country in Europe has given Ukraine as much support as Poland. In the first year of the war, the Polish government allocated 2% of GDP to it. By the end of 2023, this was 3.1% and present is 4.9% of GDP. The numbers impress even the wealthy Germans. By comparison, the military aid commitment is only 0.2 percent of US GDP.

The Polish government very scarcely shares information about the amount and scope of aid. All we know from unofficial sources is that 50 percent of the fuel produced in Polish refineries goes to Ukraine, that our soldiers and policemen practice shooting with caps, due to the fact that the Ukrainian army has donated all the ammunition supplies, that the real aid for Ukraine is PLN 140 billion (except military, humanitarian – 4.4 billion; social benefits – 71.4 billion; private aid – 10 billion, etc.). These amounts included the funds for the treatment of Ukrainians. Only from March to September 2022 were 752,000 benefits for patients from Ukraine. In 2023, 828 million were spent on them. And there's no aid in calculating that aid out of nowhere. It is actual that Dr. Leszek Sykulski, president of the Safe Poland organization (who opposes the granting of unconditional military assistance to Ukraine and warns against the organized action of the resettlement of Ukrainians into Poland) promised specified a calculation and even announced the appointment of a peculiar squad for this purpose, but was engaged in a combination, as if to place the Communist organization of China in power in Warsaw.

Analysts from Kiel have calculated to what degree the countries supporting Ukraine are defusing their weapons resources. In the case of Poland, which gave Ukraine 300 tanks (previously upgraded at PLN 1.5 billion), this represents 30 percent of the resources of this weapon, i.e. the equipment of 2 armored brigades. The Americans simply scrapped their arsenal – they "give" 3.9 percent of their dense weapons. Ukrainians got 30% of our haubic, 54 plays, on 188, which were in the resources of the Polish army. They besides received 40 combat infantry cars and 40 armored vehicles. In total, Poland donated 2.4 billion EUR of equipment. At the same time, they said that the shortcomings would be gradually complemented by deliveries from South Korea and the US. But they didn't say it would cost respective twelve billion dollars to fill the gap.

At this point, it should be recalled that on 2 December 2016, a fewer years before the outbreak of the war, the Law and Justice Government concluded an agreement with the Ukrainian government (or, in fact, a secret agreement, due to the fact that it was not ratified by the Sejm and it was only revealed 3 years later), which contains provisions or alternatively unilateral obligations that ruin our country, depriving it of sovereignty, allowing it to take over all economical resources of Poland. It's global. It's like Poland's paying Ukraine war donations. The agreement refers to the free transfer of arms, dual-use items and non-military property from armed forces, both in combat and non-military, military and civilian equipment, i.e. practically intended to transfer to the Ukrainian side all the resources available to the Polish State, without fixing the advanced limit of assistance. On the Polish side it was signed by then Minister of Defence Antoni Macierewicz.

When asked about the U.S. military's engagement in the war in Ukraine, Joe Biden all time declares that he does not intend to send American soldiers there. But for what is an ally whoConvinces its citizens of the inevitability of the war with Russia, buys immense amounts of weapons and advertises American tanks (which in Ukraine melt in the mud, and in Yemen burn together with content like matches, after firing on primitive grenade launchers). In short, a large gesheft – zero costs, zero losses in people and inactive very good earnings and many fresh jobs.

112 Republicans voted against the package. Why the attitude? A conservative Heritage Foundation survey revealed that 56% of Americans consider aid to Ukraine to be besides large, points out the corrupt nature of the Ukrainian government and the inability to verify where and what American taxpayer's money goes, stress that America is already in debt to 35 trillion (and must borrow all 100 days 1 trillion) that it should secure

Your own borders, not the borders of a state that most Americans can't find on the map.

Donald Trump is in favour of ending the war in Ukraine, he is in favour of completing the construction of a wall on the border with Mexico, and considers aid schemes for non-US citizens to be a shameful waste and spendment of taxpayers' money. And whether Trump's approach is different from that of those in Poland who object to bringing Poland into the war. Should not the Polish patriot repeat behind Trump: Why spend billions defending Ukraine's border alternatively than defending borders against illegal immigrants and building a barrier on the border with Ukraine? Therefore, no 1 reasoning in terms of his country's interest should be worried about Trump's return, and it should surely not be Poles. In short, Trump's triumph is the best that could have happened to us in these hard times for Poland.

All of this does not mean that Trump, after moving to the White House, will change the aid mechanisms for abroad people. erstwhile he was in power, he considered specified an approach patriotic and in the interests of America. Especially since he set the reindustrialisation of America as a major nonsubjective in economical policy, and the arms complex are the last remnants of manufacture not transferred to China. Here he finds opposition to the banker-lichviar lobby, which his business sees not in the improvement of industry, but in financial engineering and in usury, that is, the implementation, as 1 of them, the largest and most superb judaic invention, as defined by 1 of them, a percent of the loan.

The U.S. made money for “help” (in quotes) for Ukraine. And what did Poland gain in helping Ukraine (without quotes)? Invoices to pay for American weapons. In exchange for billions of maintenance in the power of Zelenski and his oligarchs, we have been given "refugees" to keep and to fund teaching Ukrainian children about Bander. We besides have an work to pass on a fixed percent of GDP to Ukraine. And we have Duda's doctrine: Let's aid Ukrainians banish Russians from Crimea (which with Ukraine has nothing to do with where Russians live as long as white and black Americans in the US) to set UPA monuments there and where Poles will go on vacation drinking beer in the shadow of the marble statue of Bandera. In exchange for unconditional assistance to Ukraine, we have besides received, to abrade tears, endless demands, threats and misgivings, and thanks in the form of territorial claims. due to the fact that let us remind – late the head of the Federal-funded German Max Planck Institute, put the the thesis: “Ukraine may indeed have stronger claims to Polish Podkarpacie than to Crimea or Donbas”. In another words, Ukrainians of barrels donated to them by Polish haubics and tanks will direct towards us.

When asked on Canadian tv CTV News to meet Donald Trump, our presidential fool made a superb discovery: “Stopping Russian aggression with money, without sacrificing the lives of American soldiers, is profitable to the American taxpayer.” Duda recalled American soldiers fighting and dying on the fronts of planet War I and II: “Today you can avoid another specified situation by simply paying money. And that surely pays off to the American payer – to halt this war with money, without sacrificing the lives of American soldiers.” So, by the way, he made a shocking discovery: the U.S. cares about their interests!

Why are we writing about this? Not out of concern for Ukraine and Zelenski, but in order to think in abroad relations categories of Polish national interest. Here are a fewer remarks: It is not the president of the United States, but the president of the Republic of Poland has a work to search the interests of Poland; Trump will not be the president of Poland, but the president of the United States and not the president of the United States will be liable for taking care of Polish interests; He will do nothing for Poland if it is not in the interests of the US; In defence of Poland, he will not lift a finger unless it is the defence of America. Trump will be able to do business with us, but only if we avoid “blackness” and “sticking”, hard negotiating, and that the defenders of Poland’s interest, not Ukraine’s interest, will sit on our side to talk to him. Is it Trump's criticism and a confession that he will do the same with Poland as with Ukraine? On the contrary! It's an expression of appreciation, due to the fact that the interests of our country for the president should always be in the first place.

Are Trump's peace ideas dangerous to Poland? It could happen. due to the fact that alternatively of, like America, utilizing the war to strengthen their own country, they strengthened Ukraine. due to the fact that alternatively of arming themselves, they armed Ukraine. due to the fact that they wasted time considering that it was more crucial than guarding Polish interests to fight seasonal colds (whose mortality was 0.23 percent), to plant all soldiers, to spend 140 billion on the anti-covid shield, to finish with the alleged Polish Order of hundreds of thousands of tiny and medium-sized companies, to harass Polish farmers (by flooding Poland with junk grain from Ukraine), to fight Polish anti-Semites and "Russian onusists", to teach segregation, to invest in windmills and fresh plastic bottles nuts. erstwhile they donated 300 tanks to Ukraine, they did not think about Poland's interests. It was just a silly saying, "Ha, ha, we would have broken it anyway, so it's not worth anything." Not calculating like Americans: if we're giving the tank back, we gotta buy another 1 in return. If we put all this together, what's all this about? Stupid? Betrayal of the state? How about both?

Read also:

LAST SEANSE 1st episode of Jack Miedlar's movie on Ukrainian genocide in Poles

Read Entire Article