[Goose]

I think you're reading too much into these statements because you have an axe to grind based on some preconceived notions. Every indication is that lots of aid was prepositioned and nothing was delaying any C17s.

I can't point you to an article that says x number of air defense missiles and y number of artillery shells have already been delivered, but similarly the article you link only talks generally about needing more aid, nothing specifically about the latest US aid that was sent.

We may be somewhat talking past each other. You seem to be talking about "delays" and I am talking about arrivals. I too can't point to an article about specific numbers of arrivals of aid, in particular artillery shells. I wouldn't necessarily to ever see lots of statistics. However,  I also can't point to any articles of any kind referencing aid arriving in Ukraine (regardless of quantity) and even more significantly I read in articles about "waiting" for aid without any statements from Ukraine thanking the US for what has already arrived. Even if that amount of aid wasn't militarily significant I would expect such publicity. Ukraine is already suffering from increasing doubts in the population about the possibility of victory. Any "good news" would be very welcome, yet we don't hear any. The fact nothing was specifically stated about the latest US aid is exactly the point. Should I believe "all is well" because nobody is saying anything to that effect? 

And of course any aid the US has delivered is not delivered directly to the front, it is delivered to western Ukraine, where it would presumably take some time to securely get to undermanned front positions that are organizing delaying actions and retreats under fire (a process that unfortunately has been ongoing since before the aid bill was passed.) In terms of public information, we do know for instance that Ukraine has received long range ATACMS even before being announced. And we have seen several more instances of its deployment in the days since the aid bill was announced.

The many months of delay in approving the aid was certainly a problem. There has been no publicly available information that I'm aware of to indicate any problematic delays of aid that has already been approved, it seems you are twisting the available reporting to conform to your assumptions.

This is a bit hard for me to process. The fact that the available reporting does not say any aid has arrived implies that I am "twisting" available reporting by saying that aid has not arrived? Indeed if there were reports that there were "delays" causing aid to not arrive, that would give us a direct data point. IMO there are good political reasons for Ukraine to highlight the arrival of some actual aid, particularly artillery shells, in Ukraine. You may not agree. In the absence of any reports of arrival you conclude that means that "all is well" and things are and have been arriving in considerable quantity. This conclusion is supported by the fact there are no reports saying this not the case.  I conclude that because there are no reports of arrival that arrivals have not happened. This conclusion is supported by the articles that talk about "waiting" and the political (morale raising) reasons for both Ukraine and the US to report such arrivals. Your assumption appears to be that lack of arrivals would be reported and my assumption is that arrivals would/will be reported.  Understandably, I like my position much better than I like yours :-).

FWIW, there were very good strategic reasons to not reveal the ATACMS delivery in advance. It allowed them to be used first without giving Russia warning they would be dealing with a new threat. The aid packages that have been approved in this aid tranche are already public knowledge, although there may be some surprises hidden in non-specific wording.

[Goose]

I think you're reading too much into these statements because you have an axe to grind based on some preconceived notions. Every indication is that lots of aid was prepositioned and nothing was delaying any C17s.

I can't point you to an article that says x number of air defense missiles and y number of artillery shells have already been delivered, but similarly the article you link only talks generally about needing more aid, nothing specifically about the latest US aid that was sent.

We may be somewhat talking past each other. You seem to be talking about "delays" and I am talking about arrivals. I too can't point to an article about specific numbers of arrivals of aid, in particular artillery shells. I wouldn't necessarily to ever see lots of statistics. However,  I also can't point to any articles of any kind referencing aid arriving in Ukraine (regardless of quantity) and even more significantly I read in articles about "waiting" for aid without any statements from Ukraine thanking the US for what has already arrived. Even if that amount of aid wasn't militarily significant I would expect such publicity. Ukraine is already suffering from increasing doubts in the population about the possibility of victory. Any "good news" would be very welcome, yet we don't hear any. The fact nothing was specifically stated about the latest US aid is exactly the point. Should I believe "all is well" because nobody is saying anything to that effect? 

And of course any aid the US has delivered is not delivered directly to the front, it is delivered to western Ukraine, where it would presumably take some time to securely get to undermanned front positions that are organizing delaying actions and retreats under fire (a process that unfortunately has been ongoing since before the aid bill was passed.) In terms of public information, we do know for instance that Ukraine has received long range ATACMS even before being announced. And we have seen several more instances of its deployment in the days since the aid bill was announced.

The many months of delay in approving the aid was certainly a problem. There has been no publicly available information that I'm aware of to indicate any problematic delays of aid that has already been approved, it seems you are twisting the available reporting to conform to your assumptions.

This is a bit hard for me to process. The fact that the available reporting does not say any aid has arrived implies that I am "twisting" available reporting by saying that aid has not arrived? Indeed if there were reports that there were "delays" causing aid to not arrive, that would give us a direct data point. IMO there are good political reasons for Ukraine to highlight the arrival of some actual aid, particularly artillery shells, in Ukraine. You may not agree. In the absence of any reports of arrival you conclude that means that "all is well" and things are and have been arriving in considerable quantity. This conclusion is supported by the fact there are no reports saying this not the case.  I conclude that because there are no reports of arrival that arrivals have not happened. This conclusion is supported by the articles that talk about "waiting" and the political (morale raising) reasons for both Ukraine and the US to report such arrivals. Your assumption appears to be that lack of arrivals would be reported and my assumption is that arrivals would/will be reported.  Understandably, I like my position much better than I like yours :-).

FWIW, there were very good strategic reasons to not reveal the ATACMS delivery in advance. It allowed them to be used first without giving Russia warning they would be dealing with a new threat. The aid packages that have been approved in this aid tranche are already public knowledge, although there may be some surprises hidden in non-specific wording.