^As a U.S. senator, Barack Obama won $48 million in federal funding to help Ukraine destroy thousands of tons of guns and ammunition – weapons which are now unavailable to the Ukrainian army as it faces down Russian President Vladimir Putin during his invasion of Crimea.
In August 2005, just seven months after his swearing-in, Obama traveled to Donetsk in Eastern Ukraine with then-Indiana Republican Senator Dick Lugar, touring a conventional weapons site.
The two met in Kiev with President Victor Yushchenko, making the case that an existing Cooperative Threat Reduction Program covering the destruction of nuclear weapons should be expanded to include artillery, small arms, anti-aircraft weapons, and conventional ammunition of all kinds.
After a stopover in London, the senators returned to Washington and declared that the U.S. should devote funds to speed up the destruction of more than 400,000 small arms, 1,000 anti-aircraft missiles, and more than 15,000 tons of ammunition.
While some of those weapons were sent to the U.S., some were sent to Libya [[and one has to wonder what happened with those!) Most were destroyed.
https://www.redstate.com/nick-arama/...defend-itself/
Obama laid the ground work for Russia to invade the Ukraine,like any good little dictator he took away the Ukraine’s ability to defend itself by removing thier weapons.
Sounds familiar?
Instead of attacking the link,maybe try providing links to where Obama provided defensive weapons to the Ukraine.
I already posted that because the Ukraine was not a part of NATO Obama’s policy was to stay out of it.
You do not get 10,000 Ukrainians dead from a skirmish.
Doctrine: “Obama’s theory here is simple: Ukraine is a core Russian interest but not an American one, so Russia will always be able to maintain escalatory dominance there.” Indeed, Obama told Jeff: “The fact is that Ukraine, which is a non-NATO country, is going to be vulnerable to military domination by Russia no matter what we do.” Despite their criticism of Obama, the Republican platform ahead of the 2016 presidential election didn’t call for U.S. weapons to be sent to Ukraine to fight Russian-backed rebels.
What part of that is confusing?
Why would Obama send weapons to the Ukraine in order to fight Russian aggression when he viewed it as Russia’s right to the the Ukraine.
Every person involved in Ukraine that testified in the impeachment hearings,weather they liked Trump or not,agreed that without Trumps support in providing the javelin missiles that Obama would not,directly changed the ability of the Ukraine to remain free of Russian aggression.
Weather you agree with the links provided or not has no bearing on anything,it is well documented.
Please provide the links that back up your claim that Obama provided the Ukraine with the ability to protect itself.
So he threw a few humves their way,you wanna go up against a Russian tank in a humvee ?
Let me know how it went.
Notice how when Trump evened the playing field the Russians backed down and went home.
So not only did Obama’s weak ass foreign policies help 10,000 Ukrainians die in the Ukraine his same polices got Americans killed and set the path of 100s of thousands of refugees in Syria.
The CIA already had Syria handled,all Obama had to do was keep his nose out of it,but no,he had to supply weapons to the terrorists and make deals with Russia and send Americans home in boxes.
If he had been anything but a United States President,the rest of the world would have had him up for war crimes and we should have had him up as a traitor.
He used to call ISIS and tell them the time and date where we would do a missile strike,ISIS would then get out and fill the building with civilians in order to gain international support against the US for targeting civilians with air strikes.
ISIS directly manipulated him like silly putty.
Providing military intelligence to the enemy is treason.
There are over 200 factions fighting in Syria,ever wonder why Obama choose the Taliban and ISIS to provide weapons to?
The CIA was working and finishing up on an internal coup which would have not displaced millions of refugees and cost countless lives and that would have not involved the US military.
Today we are in exactly the same place as where it all started.
Assad in power but now with the full support of Russia.
The cost ?
Millions of refugees.
Billions in damages to pretty much every city in the country.
Dead Americans
Dead Sryian men women and children.
Terror groups fully weaponized by a United States President.
$275 Billion in United States taxpayer dollars.
$6.5 billion spent in the United States alone with the Syrian refugee program.
It does not stop there,those same terrorists took those weapons to Africa and it is now costing the French military lives fighting them in Mali.
Obama gave them the support that they needed in order to expand and wage war in Africa which is now costing the lives of every other NATO country.
All they had to do was take out one guy.
The irony of the Ukraine
As a United States Senator Obama spent $48 million dollars in US taxpayer money in order to disarm the Ukraine which left it open for Russia to take.
Now it has cost the United States taxpayers billions to prevent the exact scenario that was clear as day at the time of what was going to happen.
We have all of this anti Russian sentiment but yet lay the ground work for them to occupy any country of their choosing.
Obama was colluding with the Russians even way back when he was a state senator.