They forgave 4.8$ billion over three years.
The TOTAL Ukraine aid consists of 183$ billion worth of WEAPONS, without weapons it’s around 20$ billion.
For reference, the US spends 800$ billion a YEAR on its own military.
But It’s a lot – of course.

— Joe (@lejoezamat) December 11, 2024

Weapons for Ukraine

joeKMorris: @JosephMagnani1 @ZelenskyyUa @JMilei The US isn’t funding Ukraine. It’s funding its own replacement weapons systems and giving the out of date ones to Ukraine USA should do much more and fulfil its side of the Budapest agreement. Ukraine gave up its nukes for safety of USA. USA owes Ukrainians big time

Post author By Mike Nova
Post date December 11, 2024

The US isn’t funding Ukraine. It’s funding its own replacement weapons systems and giving the out of date ones to Ukraine

USA should do much more and fulfil its side of the Budapest agreement.

Ukraine gave up its nukes for safety of USA. USA owes Ukrainians big time

— Joe Morris (@joeKMorris) December 11, 2024

Conversations with the Gemini

Podcast by Gemini, Google AI, Michael Novakhov

Analyzing Ratcliffe’s 2026 Moscow Visit
https://share.gemini.google/BvWdGWSGW3QA
Created with 3.1 Pro August 30, 2026 at 05:04 PM
Published August 30, 2026 at 05:05 PM
Opinions on John Ratcliffe’s visit to Moscow – 2026

CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s unannounced, eight-hour visit to Moscow in late August 2026 has generated significant debate among intelligence analysts and the media. Because the CIA and the White House have kept the official details classified, international observers and major news outlets have formed several competing theories about the primary purpose of the trip.
مجلة المجلة

A key detail driving these assessments is the conspicuous nature of the visit: rather than flying on a discreet business jet, Ratcliffe arrived at Vnukovo airport on a massive U.S. Air Force C-17 Globemaster with its transponder broadcasting its flight path. Analysts view this lack of subtlety as a deliberate message.
CBC
+ 1

Here is a breakdown of the prevailing theories and opinions regarding the visit:

1. Deterring an Attack on NATO
According to reporting from The Wall Street Journal, Politico, and CBS News, a primary driver of the trip was to warn the Kremlin against launching escalatory attacks on NATO members, particularly the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania).
Meduza

The Context: Western intelligence agencies have reportedly grown concerned that Vladimir Putin, facing a stalemate in Ukraine and severe economic strain, might attempt a small land incursion or launch cyberattacks across Eastern Europe to test the alliance’s resolve.
CBC

The Opinion: Many security analysts view the trip as a necessary “riot act” reading. By sending the CIA Director, the U.S. intended to clearly communicate that hybrid warfare or direct provocations in Europe would cross a red line.
CBC

2. Countering Perceptions of U.S. Weakness (The Iran Factor)
The Washington Post reported that the visit was deeply tied to the ongoing U.S. conflict with Iran.

The Context: Recent classified intelligence suggests the Kremlin believes the U.S. is heavily depleted by its six-month war with Tehran, suffering from munitions shortfalls and diminished troop readiness.
The Guardian

The Opinion: Sources told the Post that Ratcliffe’s mission was to explicitly counter the narrative that the U.S. is “exhausted and unable to intervene”. He reportedly warned Russian officials not to exploit this perceived weakness and pushed Moscow to reduce its military and economic support for Tehran.
Meduza
+ 1

3. Delivering a Reality Check on Ukraine
The New York Times focused on Ratcliffe’s specific meetings with Russian intelligence officials, notably FSB Director Alexander Bortnikov.
Meduza

The Context: U.S. intelligence has long suspected that Putin is insulated from the reality of Russia’s heavy casualties—estimated at 1.4 million—and the actual battlefield dynamics in Ukraine.
CBC
…