16 ms·
Ukraine is in a bind, and the US has the power to do whatever it wants. But boy, will the nations of the world remember this -- how quickly the US can turn fro
by insane_dreamer 2y ago
Ukraine is in a bind, and the US has the power to do whatever it wants.
But boy, will the nations of the world remember this -- how quickly the US can turn from ally to bully. A really bad day for US foreign policy.
The EU is going to be thinking long and hard about the future of NATO now.
- archagon 2y agoLet’s be real: NATO is already a farce at the moment. If Article 5 is triggered by a European nation, would Trump respond? Of course not.
- insane_dreamer 2y agoYeah, I was wondering at what point Putin decides to roll the dice and put that to the test by rolling into Estonia, Lithuania or Latvia. He must be feeling his chances are pretty good right now.
- tim333 2y agoI'm not sure that would go very well for Putin just now. The Russians are already supplying their troops with donkeys as they've run low on vehicles just fighting Ukraine. (https://metro.co.uk/2025/02/07/putin-resorts-using-donkeys-front-line-run-vehicles-22513922/ https://metro.co.uk/2025/02/07/putin-resorts-using-donkeys-f...) Even if the US did nothing, rolling into NATO lands would put them up against the UK, Germany, France. Poland et al as well as Ukraine. The worry is more that a ceasefire is called. Russia rearms and succeeds in taking over Ukraine and then a combined Ukraine and Russia attacks Europe with President Vance supporting Putin.
- techorange 2y agoI don't think that we're this far gone yet, but is there a chance the US sides with Putin in this case? I think it would be risky, and I don't _think_ Trump's base would go for it, but it does feel like the long term goal is to try to sanitize the idea of a shift in the geopolitical order to ally America with Russia instead of with Europe.
- senordevnyc 2y agoSeems too soon, and both Trump and Putin know that. But in a few months, when Trump’s base and the Republican Party have turned completely pro-Putin and anti-Europe…
- epistasis 2y agoIMHO, they are already there. There's no spine in the Republican party to prevent bowing down to Putin, they have always been anti-Europe, and Putin is a big daddy that they actively court when they idolize Hungary's dictator and hold CPAC meetings and try to emulate Orban.
- borsecplata 2y agotrump and the republicans must really be stupid to trade NATO for russia, while leaving an opening for china to side with europe. If US ditches europe, india/SK/JP and the rest of asia will soon reciprocate. All this so that US sides with a bankrupt cleptocracy and dictatorship. 1000iq move, I guess.
- alrs 2y agoEurope is not allowed to have its own foreign policy, let alone "side with China." All of those US military bases are there for a reason.
- preisschild 2y agoRussia is in war economy now, you definitely shouldn't underestimate them. Especially if the US lifts their sanctions against Russia.
- megous 2y agoIs that dumb? These transport animals basically make themselves. Self-replicating, way cheaper than robots, easy to replace when they break down. Don't need sophisticated software, etc. Just some training and sensory deprivation. I wish humans would not involve other species in their sadistic ways of killing and maiming each other, though. Donkeys, horses, ... all benefited from war mechanization. Dogs not so much so far. Dutch happily train dogs that are then sold to allies to be used to attack, threaten, maim, shit and piss on, sodomize, and kill defenseless people. Bizarre.
- m0llusk 2y agoIt isn't dumb so much as desperate. Their preference is to supply troops with trucks, but they have lost a huge number of trucks and use many of those remaining as troop transports on the front line which also speaks of desperation.
- etc-hosts 2y agoI hate being that guy sometimes but US Marines use donkeys. https://www.marines.mil/News/News-Display/Article/500002/marines-train-resupply-techniques-with-pack-animals/ https://www.marines.mil/News/News-Display/Article/500002/mar...
- F-W-M 2y agoWehrmacht was mostly supplied by horses.
- alabastervlog 2y agoNot a realistic risk, if only because I don't think they can credibly man a second front of any length at this point.
- WinstonSmith84 2y agoyeah NATO got irrelevant and Putin certainly now wishes he would not have attacked Ukraine. Rolling into these 3 mini countries with his entire army from 2022 would have been a much easier task
- sterlind 2y agoIn 2022 the US would have actually showed up for Article 5.
- graublau 2y agoDo you have any evidence of this "Lebensraum" Putin seeks?
- DrFalkyn 2y agoListen to their state media
- castlefreak 2y agoRT or TASS URL would improve this argument.
- DrFalkyn 2y agoHere’s Solovyov https://youtu.be/hULOZDqxv1Q?si=SAwB5ORJm5LM7vNk https://youtu.be/hULOZDqxv1Q?si=SAwB5ORJm5LM7vNk
- insane_dreamer 2y agoIt's not about Lebensraum in this case. It's restoring the glory of the USSR. And Putin has been clear on that.
- aparticulate 2y ago"Glory", so not specifics around hypothetical land Putin aka Hitler 2.0 imagines he wants. There's no evidence for him saying anything besides … what he's literally says. This fantasy conjecture is weakening the international position on Ukraine, especially with such easy access to Russian translation tools where we can just expose this secret conspiracy of yours. He literally only talks about Ukraine, you can look into this yourself. Or perhaps you mean "glory" in the sense of some kind of national pride and confidence in culture and nationality? I am not sure arguments against any nation seeking a sense of themselves are particularly compelling…
- generj 2y agoLook at the high level of Russian immigration into occupied Crimea.
- 6SixTy 2y agoJust because the US changing its mind about Russia changes NATO's dynamic as a whole does not mean that the Baltic states are immediately in danger. Poland and Finland are both nearby NATO countries that have experienced Russia's thumb directly with their own military industrial base or are developing one that would absolutely step in if need be. Reminder that Finland is really close to St. Petersburg, the 2nd largest city in Russia with some pretty big cultural and military importance. Putin's done some fantastically stupid stuff in regard to the 2022 Ukraine war, namely resuming it, but he's probably not that dumb.
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoCome one, we both know Trump would respond. With a contract for half the invaded nations resources.
- senordevnyc 2y agoAnd nothing in return. Such a brilliant negotiator!
- amyames 2y ago[flagged]
- ksaj 2y agoYou are right. I do hope Zelenksy noticed the sudden caveats he added a few days ago, too. Same thing - Trump wants many billions in resources, yet "can't" guarantee anything in return. Russia immediately responded by saying it would happily share those resources. Of course.
- drweevil 2y agoWhat if the trigger was the US annexing a NATO nation's territory? He's already made noises about Canada and Greenland (Denmark). That would be the ultimate farce.
- DamnYuppie 2y agoNo one is going to go to war for Canada lol. Would be fun to watch though. Would be like the US going to war for Mongolia.
- thinkingemote 2y agoGreenland is about the arctic. It's not some farce or meme. Look at an actual globe and when the ice melts that white stuff is going to be a navigable ocean between Canada Greenland and . . . Russia. We tend to think of the world on a flat world Google map and Russia seems so far away, but when the pole melts Russia will be closer to north America and they will be wanting that area too. No ice means it's easier to drill for natural resources. The US is preempting the melt and trying to get ahead in the race for the arctic. It's much more valuable than at first glance. I laughed first too. I then felt that my laughter was due to not understanding it. "How bizarre, LOL". Then I felt like I was missing something big. Now I try to use these "bizarre jokes" as a sign to look deeper. In a way (although this info isn't secret at all, just boring) we can use Trump's inability to have a filter to leak the advice that his advisors are giving him more than past statesmen would.
- etc-hosts 2y agoGreenland has coal, criolite, and most importantly is next to current and future shipping lanes. Some geologists think there might be tons of other deposits under the ice. The US has been trying to add Greenland since 1867.
- DamnYuppie 2y ago[flagged]
- mrtksn 2y agoThere was an opinion poll amongst British on this and apparently even Brits don’t trust America anymore. Only %44 believe that US will come to their help if Russia attacks UK. Yougov: https://x.com/yougov/status/1893967204846063823?s=46 https://x.com/yougov/status/1893967204846063823?s=46
- kelseydh 2y agoI'm curious if there is any polling data on British willingness to help Canada should they face invasion from the U.S. Canada being a commonwealth country with their King as their head of state.
- movingontonext 2y agoKing as head of state, as of 2022.
- School-Cotton 2y agoThe US already invaded a commonwealth country with the British Queen as head of state: Grenada in 1983.
- aeim 2y agowell, after all we've been through together, i expect the french might find the opportunity for us to "owe them one, publicly" quite irresistible... (which is significant because, "after all they went through the last few times", their "find out" policy is a little punchier than most) and i don't think that anyone really wants that course of events...
- scotty79 2y agoWhat's more embarrasing is that the only time article 5 was activated was for US when they got attacked on 9/11
- simion314 2y ago[flagged]
- DamnYuppie 2y ago[flagged]
- simion314 2y ago[flagged]
- DamnYuppie 2y ago[flagged]
- myk9001 2y ago[flagged]
- DamnYuppie 2y ago[flagged]
- Hikikomori 2y agoThe only farce would be the US.
- baq 2y ago> But boy, will the nations of the world remember this -- how quickly the US can turn from ally to bully. Nothing new, smart people knew that for a long, looong time. May I remind you it took Pearl Harbor to get the US into WW2.
- ksaj 2y agoIt also took the White House being set on fire to understand the sovereignty of the land across its northern border. And now there's all this Trump talk of trying to invade once again.
- rcpt 2y agoI don't think I understand this comment
- bchasknga 2y agoCan you please inform me how the US bullied UK into mineral rights in WW2? We exported arms and equipment to them even before Lend-lease acts. It would be true if you were to mention about our special flavor of freedom exportation during the cold war. However, this time Ukraine is a democratic nation being invaded by our biggest political rival, Russia.
- Danieru 2y agoNo mineral rights: just gold up front. The UK paid the US all it's gold reserves. Next it stole of the UK people's gold to use that to buy weapons. The US was not giving the UK when it exported, it was selling. Lend lease came in once the UK ran out of gold. So the US gave them credit: which the UK tool until 2006 to repay.
- Hikikomori 2y agoThe US had about 60% of the world's wealth after ww2. With that, their industrial base and with their "democratic" missions in South America for resources I'm amazed how fast they managed to squander it to make the rich richer.
- 2y ago
- conradfr 2y agoWell most of the nations of the world didn't do anything for Ukraine, or supported Russia one way or the other. Maybe a lot of them see the US and/or the Western countries as bullies anyway. edit: not sure by which part of the world this is downvoted ;)
- yetihehe 2y ago> edit: not sure by which part of the world this is downvoted ;) It's downvoted because of this: > Well most of the nations of the world didn't do anything for Ukraine, or supported Russia one way or the other. Most of the world supports Ukraine or at least is not pro Russia, as you can see in UN votes. In latest vote, USA voted like Russia, North Korea and Israel, China abstained.
- conradfr 2y agoThe U.N vote is a good point but doesn't negate which countries did or didn't do things in relation to this war in the last three years. And after all Ukraine is far away for a lot of the world (but Russia maybe not so much).
- j_maffe 2y agoMost countries can't afford funding a war on this magnitude even if they wanted to. And this war still squarely concerns solely the West, which the US is a part of, even if Trump overestimates the size of that pond.
- rectang 2y agoUkraine’s situation is better than many people realize, and the US, in siding with Russia, may be betting on the wrong horse. The EU has provided more aid to Ukraine than the US, Ukraine drone production is through the roof. Europe needs Ukraine and its army as a bulwark against Russia.
- gscott 2y agoMost of the money the USA has spent went to arms manufacturers. I imagine there's still working on producing and sending the arms.
- duxup 2y agoI worry that Russia is more than capable of throwing mass casualties into the fight for longer than Ukraine can.
- trilobyte 2y agoMost informed analysts say Russia has the opposite problem. They don't have any more meat for the grinder without tapping the middle and upper class of Russian citizens, which will have repercussions, potentially serious ones, for Putin.
- Jtsummers 2y agoThey're throwing North Koreans at the fight, which shows how desperate they are for bodies.
- pkaye 2y agoThe US military was concerned about this scenario long before and raised concerns back in 2011. They predicted why someone like Trump would would come in power and question the purpose of NATO. But it was not taken seriously by NATO allies at that time. Obama even wanted European allies to be able to launch their own military missions with just US as a support role. The Libya interventions was supposed to be a test of that. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/natosource/text-of-speech-by-robert-gates-on-the-future-of-nato/ https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/natosource/text-of-spe...
- alephnerd 2y agoYep. The warnings have existed for a long time, but most European states have continued to ignore the hallmarks. Even Poland only started rearming after Kazynski's plane was shot down in Smolensk in 2010 (edit; not shot down), Romania only (started after Crimea and it's implications of a similar incident in neighboring Moldova in 2014, Turkiye began due interventions in Syria and Libya that lead to Turkish and Russian soldiers fighting against each other in 2012-15, and Netherlands after over a hundred of their citizens were shot down in an Air Malaysia Flight in 2015-16 (forgetting the exact date) Trump is absolutely wrong in publicly abandoning our European allies, but this is something every administration since 2008 has been saying would eventually happen. The failed UK-France intervention in Libya should have been the warning call (France and UK's air forces couldn't disable Libya's A2AD and ran out of precision muntions, forcing the Obama admin to intervene and spark the Benghazi crisis which helped bring Trump into the Oval Office in 2016). In fact, that incident probably further emboldened Russia as Libya's military apparatus was heavily Russian/Soviet in armament and strategy.
- adrr 2y agoWorld needs to help out Ukraine because if Ukraine falls it shows that you should never give up your nuclear weapons for any agreement or treaty. They are just pieces of paper that guarantee nothing. This will just lead to more countries getting nukes which means higher likelihood of a nuclear war.
- poszlem 2y ago> World needs to help out Ukraine because if Ukraine falls it shows that you should never give up your nuclear weapons for any agreement or treaty. This is, unfortunately, already the case. No country will ever fully trust such treaties again, and we are closer than ever to a new era of nuclear proliferation.
- codedokode 2y agoSo in the end of the day, NK and Iran's decision to develop WMD was the right choice?
- Sammi 2y agoIt is the rational choice for their own self interest, yes of course. It used to not be necessary for most countries in the world. But now there is no good alternative to having your own nukes if you don't want to be invaded by others.
- usrusr 2y agoTrue. Non-proliferation is dead, killed three years ago. Only when Ukraine gets Russia to the point of a Compiègne Forest railroad car end (remember how much of Germany had been occupied at that point?) there is hope for a future without widespread nuke availability.
- ttepasse 2y agoDumb nitpicking, sorry: The railroad car was used in 1918 and in 1940. In both cases Germany was unoccupied, in WW1 because the war was fought on French and on Flandern fields, in 1940 because it was the beginning of the war. You're possibly thinking of the German surrender, first in Reims, then a day later again in Berlin.
- HellDunkel 2y agoThe EU is going to be thinking long and hard if the US really is so much more friendly than China.
- kjrfghslkdjfl 2y ago[dead]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ctrlp 2y agoFrankly, the EU is only able to "think long and hard" but never to actually do anything. They have no warfighters anymore and it will take years for the member states of the EU to rebuild anything resembling military capability, if the EU even allows it. Brussels is the equivalent to the Deep State in the US but with official status, instead of being a shadow government. The only leverage EU member states have vis a vis the US is as trading partners and as vassal states for Pax Americana. If the EU wants to move away from the US, good luck. The member states of the EU are soon going to realize they are "a peninsula at the tip of Eurasia" and their best interests lie in close ties to the US. Ukraine is in a bind, and it is sad when a buffer state is put through the meat grinder in a proxy war between two great powers. But here we are. The upside is that the Ukrainians who weren't killed in the conflict will be, along with Poland and Lithuania, the only "European" states with anything resembling a capable military. I doubt the EU members want Ukraine as a full member of NATO. Too risky. There are some proposals on the table for a more complicated peace without conceding full neutrality of Ukraine to Russia. I don't think many people understand the nature of this conflict. They merely see "Russian aggression" but have little comprehension of great power competition and the events leading up to the hot part of this war. I feel for the Ukrainians but I wonder if any of the Ukraine boosters would shed a drop of their own blood for Ukraine. If the US demands that the Europeans take a larger role in the security of Europe, we will see if the European NATO members are up to the task. The US needs to pivot its resources to China in the coming decade. The war with Russia has been very costly and strengthened the bonds between Russia and China (and Iran and North Korea). The Europeans should take a great role in policing their own neighborhood, but I don't believe the EU, as currently constructed, is the governance vehicle capable of leading a unified Europe. The member states are, quite understandably, not happy to give up their sovereignty and culture. Participation in a common market has been a disaster for the working class of Western Europe (unless you think cheaper products is the only measure of a country's vitality). The EU experiment might be at an inflection point. They can remain in this bureaucratic quagmire, or reassert the spirit of Wesphalian sovereignty, or await the arrival of a new Charlemagne to unite a strong Europe under sovereign leadership capable of meeting the challenges of the 21st century. My money is on the decline of the EU into irrelevance and a return to the Westphalian spirit. There is no political will centered in Brussels capable of leading this ragtag assemblage of diverse states and peoples. The border problems persist. The result will be more populist revolts and ascendant "right wing" parties advocating "blood and soil" nationalism. If that's the future, then the western european states will only be supported militarily via bilateral treaties with the US or under the umbrella of a NATO dominated by the US. The latter is just the norm for the post-WWII "New World Order" so it will feel familiar. With luck, the collapse of the EU will allow EU member states to reassert control over their own borders and laws. If that happens, they should abandon this resentment of the US and be grateful they were saved from the managed decline of their central government in Brussels.
- mrcwinn 2y agoMust we endlessly fund a war that is in stalemate and will continue to savagely end the lives of military and civilian alike? Otherwise, we are a bully? Is it in our interest to continue to run up debt, send overseas ammunition and hardware? To what end? And for how long? I remember wondering the same during Iraq and Afghanistan. Is this really America's permanent responsibility, for any country in the world? It's quite remarkable the change in America over a couple decades. In the 90s, the left was solidly pro-free-speech and anti-war. Anti-war sometimes to a fault, even. Maybe aside from some censorship effort of rap and Mortal Kombat, you could count on the left to defend free speech at nearly any cost. Now, it is the left that seems interested in doubling down on wars, without any plan for escape, and of "reigning in" speech deemed by some as harmful. I'm not here to say correct or incorrect. Pick your own ice cream flavor. My point is that it's striking how much the parties have flipped 180 degrees (on some issues).
- i_love_retros 2y ago[flagged]
- i_love_retros 2y agoAnd they way they are trying to bully Ukraine into a minerals agreement and rebuilding agreement to strip Ukraine of everything it has. Trump doesn't care about peace, he wants to make money
- mrcwinn 2y agoIf the war ends, that is peace. Do you believe Ukraine will be better off financially by continuing the war, even if it is on America’s credit card? They will not flourish in the present state, however noble they believe the effort is. War is not fair.
- just-ok 2y agoUkraine has lost massive amounts of lives, territory, and foreign funding under his leadership; Zelensky effectively has zero negotiating power. Where are the voices that simply want the war to end so people stop dying? It’s easy to say bully this and ally that from the comfort of your office while hundreds of thousands of people die in a strip of land most “supporters” couldn’t point out on a map. At this point there’s a collective ego tied to the outcome more than there is any care for the actual people involved.
- i_love_retros 2y agoI'm concerned the US is turning from ally to enemy of the EU.
- nxm 2y agoThey’re not though… it’s just that endless billions being sent for a war that Europe won’t proportionally help support has to end. How much more money and lives will be wasted in Ukraine?
- amanaplanacanal 2y agoAsk Russia?
- apelapan 2y agoThe killing won't stop until Russia is firmly stopped. There is no peace without completely and permanently pacifying Russia. They will attack again and again until we render them unable to continue. The best time to do this is thirty years ago, the second best time is now.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- mlrtime 2y agoWho is "we"? Are you a soldier in Ukraine? More death is not going to help and neither side will stop. The only chance to stop killing is an agreement.
- hobs 2y agoThat's what they thought about appeasing Hitler - why would peace talks stop Putin from taking even more territory? It wouldn't and it wont.
- epistasis 2y agoI know lots of Ukrainians. They all know that life under this sort of "agreement," which is actually Ukraine paying reparations for a war it didn't start, for zero security guarantees, was beyond moronic. It wasn't an agreement it was mere capitulation to Russia to continue genocide. Actual real Ukrainians are fighting, and signing back up even after being injured. Ukraine is on "death ground" and has nowhere to go except to fight to survive. Ukrainians know that. Russia knows that. I'm not sure that those that spout Russian propaganda know that, and for example I doubt you know any Ukrainians with questions like yours, but you sure do sound like the Russian propaganda lines that get trotted out to Americans.
- AI_beffr 2y ago[flagged]
- Taters91 2y agoLiterally not the definition of a dictatorship. Elections alone do not guarantee a government not run by a dictator. Not having elections during wartime doesn't mean a dictator is in charge. There is still a parliament.
- AI_beffr 2y ago[flagged]
- aparticulate 2y agoUS intel agencies and state department are NOT CHOOSY historically about any of these distinctions.
- krelian 2y agoAt the bare minimum educate yourself on the matter before expressing yourself in public
- AI_beffr 2y agosaid the fool who slurps up intel community propaganda. youre even more wrong than i am
- nxm 2y agoGood - they can pay for their own defense instead of milking the American tax payer.
- lenerdenator 2y ago> The EU is going to be thinking long and hard about the future of NATO now. European defense spending has, for decades now, suggested that they don't particularly care about NATO. Well, the Western European members at least. Those who used to live in the Warsaw Pact take it more seriously - see Poland, for example. They also should have been thinking about the implications of buying so much gas from the Russians for the last 15 years. The invasion of Georgia should have been a trigger to move off of Russian exports permanently. Instead it just brought further dependence and a major pipeline project. I despise Trump as much as anyone but strategic security shouldn't rest on one country never being in a position to elect an isolationist demagogue.
- JW_00000 2y ago> European defense spending has, for decades now, suggested that they don't particularly care about NATO. I'd argue the opposite: Western European countries' low defense spending was exactly because they they believed NATO (in particular the US) would intervene if needed. They don't believe this anymore now, hence will increase defense spending, hence making NATO less relevant. They will now be able to rely on the EU alone.
- lenerdenator 2y ago> I'd argue the opposite: Western European countries' low defense spending was exactly because they they believed NATO (in particular the US) would intervene if needed. They don't believe this anymore now, hence will increase defense spending, hence making NATO less relevant. They will now be able to rely on the EU alone. They're increasing spending, but that takes years to translate to real results. It's not particularly hard to pump out a few hundred thousand rifles, small arms ammo, and hand them to cannon fod... I mean... the fighting-age men of a country. What is hard is developing a weapons industry that can act upon intelligence provided by spies planted in places like Russia, develop systems with indigenous technologies, and produce them at scale, all with the logistics to make them mean something on the battlefield. This was on full display during WWII, when some more advanced weapons came out of Germany too late and in too small of numbers to give the Nazis a chance to avoid the ass kicking they so richly deserved. That takes decades to develop. Europeans, with the exception of the UK and maybe France, have let that fruit rot on the vine since 1991. Putin wouldn't have made this gamble if he didn't think this.
- Timber-6539 2y agoI bet this is all a part of Trump's strategy into pushing Europe into geopolitical irrelevance. And if it counts for anything, the Europeans did this to themselves by relying on the goodwill of America for their own security.
- mcswell 2y agoSeems to me that the country Trump is pushing into geopolitical irrelevance is the United States of America. Thanks to him, we're making enemies of friends and allies, throwing away our influence on the world, throwing away any claim we had to being a model, and turning in on ourselves. Trump is MALA: Make America Little Again.
- dh2022 2y agoAnd purpose would that serve Trump? Make Europe weaker... for what? To build a casino in Paris?
- OKRainbowKid 2y agoAnd what will happen instead is the US losing their status as hegemon/leader of the "free" world / West, with all the benefits that entailed.
- Timber-6539 2y agoOr maybe being the hegemon doesn't mean you have to instigate and bankroll wars in every corner of this earth.
- OKRainbowKid 2y agoRussia started this war. The US abandoning their closest allies against their historical main antagonist results in losing the status of hegemon, and the economic and geostrategic benefits that entailed. Russia is winning the cold war, 35 years after it "ended".
- disgruntledphd2 2y agoYou don't get to pick and choose between benefits and costs. Like, over the long term you can, but blowing up your alliances at a press conference is not a strategy for long term geopolitical success. Great TV, though.
- gorbachev 2y agoThis is exactly right. Current US allies should not trust the United States to stand with them at least for the next four years or so. I would go further than that and say you can't trust the US for anything, ever. The United States will not keep long term commitments for more than four years at a time. If you're lucky, or unlucky depending on which side you're on, that cycle will last 8 years.
- DamnYuppie 2y ago[flagged]
- speff 2y ago> American's won't come and die for us Not one person ever expected American blood to be spilled in Ukraine. Framing the opposing side with having these thoughts is arguing in bad faith. And what peace is there in letting a bully get away with the spoils? What's going to stop them from doing it again? And yea the US didn't technically start the war, but if Ukraine didn't give up their nukes because of assurances by the US, then they wouldn't have been in this situation.
- fatbird 2y agoBecause all the allies signed a treaty promising exactly that: we'll come and die for you. It's the whole point of an alliance! You don't consider someone an ally if you can't count on them to show up!
- DamnYuppie 2y agoPart of that treaty was they had spending requirements to meet as well. Yet that gets frequently forgotten by the parties who didn't meet those obligations. It is like Europe wants all the benefits of the treaty but don't feel compelled to keep up their end of the agreement. Because they didn't keep their end of the agreement this means a greater burden would fall on America if we actually got lassoed into another European war. It seems the height of hypocrisy for Europe to demand America do the hard part in wartime when Europe couldn't even be bothered to do the easy part in peacetime.
- Glyptodon 2y agoI don't know if I'd phrase it as the "power" to do whatever it wants. Anyone can always do whatever they want. And the only way there aren't repercussions on some level are if you're some kind of god-like being sealed in the equivalent of closed terrarium. Does the US have power? Sure. But the US could act disgracefully even if it didn't have power. The framing I'd give this is that the US is trying to extort Ukraine without actually bringing anything to the table, and all it's going to accomplish is making the US itself less powerful, less reputable, the rest of the world more convinced that nuclear weapons need proliferate because otherwise invasions are on the table, and a litany of other things that will basically make the US weaker over time.
- hashstring 2y agoThis.
- crznp 2y agoI would go further: this is the end of the US. The pieces haven't hit the ground yet, but they are falling. NATO cannot last when Europe doesn't trust the US. Nations cannot trust that trade agreements will last beyond the whims of the moment. Federal workers are being sacked indiscriminately. The executive branch has openly stated that they will not obey the rule of law if it is against them, even after packing the courts. What is left? There is something left: the land, the people. But not the country, that is something new.
- mutatio 2y agoMake no mistake, this display was a disgrace, but... after the annexation of Crimea the EU (Germany) moved ahead with Nord Stream 2, we are culpable too, massively. Ironically there's a famous video of none other than Trump lambasting the Germans about it.
- g-b-r 2y agoLet's hope that someone learned real politik is actually blind, short-term politik.
- timewizard 2y ago> how quickly the US can turn from ally to bully As if this lesson hasn't been conveyed for the past 30 years. How anyone can sit here after the Iraq war and say any of this with a straight face is beyond me.
- yes_really 2y agoI saw a lot of people justifying Trump's moves because "the US shouldn't be spending so much money helping Ukraine in the war." I understand that argument, but what about security guarantees? Zelensky has been simply asking for security guarantees so that Putin doesn't start another war in a few years (like he did in 2014 and 2022). Why can't Trump provide that? Why should we just trust Putin's word? Or is there something I'm missing here?
- twothreeone 2y agoTrump can't provide that because any "security guarantee" from the US would essentially translate into "send armed troops", which is something that would run counter to his campaign stance.
- yes_really 2y agoIsn't there a middle ground possible? For example, a guarantee, in law, that the US and Europe send military equipment to Ukraine if there is another war in the future?
- jononor 2y agoUSA could guarantee a deployment to European NATO countries large enough for them to be able to move much of their forced into Ukraine. And just guarantees on being able to buy armament would be useful. If there had been any ounce of political will something would have been possible.
- actionfromafar 2y agoNo one is going to believe any guarantees now anyway, so it's a moot point. The US no longer has the goodwill capital for agreements, only transactions.
- bmicraft 2y agoA guarantee would be pretty cheap. Not a lot actually needs to be done as long as people believe that this guarantee will be honored. That is, if the US wasn't currently in the business of eroding trust in any and all agreements they may have entered.
- nwatson 2y agoWith Trump's fragile ego, there's a chance he will designate all humanitarian charitable organizations, and military-aid organizations, to whom USA citizens might want to donate, that have any ties to or otherwise benefit Ukraine, as terrorist organizations. I will be evaluating these ... if you have plans to assist, it may be better to do so sooner rather than later.
- xbmcuser 2y agoUS was always a bully Trump is doing overtly what US has been doing covertly using CIA etc for decades. Actually Trump is more honest than previous US administrations as those would have killed Zelensky and then blamed it on China or Russia if he was not willing to do what they want.
- jmyeet 2y agoThe US has been a bully since at least WW2. The US has been betraying "allies" for just as long. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has been a godsend for US influence. Finland and Sweden joined NATO. The Russian military was exposed as a paper tiger. A huge portion of the Russian military's capability was destroyed without a single US military serviceman or asset being deployed. Russian energy exports to Europe (and the influence that gives them) have dropped to a mere fraction of what they were in 2020. Europe is now dependant on US LNG exports. The second largest military in NATO is Turkey and Turkey is America's puppet. Turkey has been in direct military conflict with other NATO members (ie Greece) with the blessing of the US. Ceding territory to Russia, which seems all but inevitable now, doesn't change the the security picture for Europe. Russia still can't occupy Ukraine. That was true before the invasion. It's still true now. They certainly can't roll into Poland let alone Germany and Western Europe. The EU really has no interest in paying for their own security. Politically it's a nonstarter too with the right of far-right parties like National Front in France and AfD, AfD in Germany and Reform in the UK.
- dismalaf 2y agoLots of this is correct however Turkey isn't anyone's puppet, they're a wildcard if there ever was one. Lately they've been quite insistent that Crimea should not be ceded to Russia, for example. They're also certainly not going to tolerate a Russia/Iran axis in their neighborhood and they've been quite aggressive vs Russian forces that encroached their interests.
- jmyeet 2y agoThere's a world of difference between what Erdogan says and what he does. And you should only look at what he does. For example, since October 7, Erdogan made lots of statements about how he was upset with the Israeli treatment of Palestinians. That was all for show. Something like 40% of Israel's energy comes from Azerbijan and transits through Turkey. Turkey could've cut that off. But they never would. Likeise, Erdogan's family continued to trade with and make money from Israel. Turkey buys a Russian anti-missile defense system [1] while selling Bayraktar drones to Ukraine and hosting US (technically NATO) nuclear weapons. Turkey is consistently aligned with US foreign polciy with some minor exceptions that are really deviations tolerated because of Turkey's strategic importance and recognizing the need for Erdogan to maintain power. [1]L https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/26/erdogan-turkey-could-buy-more-russian-s-400s-despite-us-warnings https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/26/erdogan-turkey-coul...
- taylodl 2y agoThe future of NATO is secure. It just won't include the US. Whether that exclusion is done implicitly or explicitly remains to be seen. The US has put itself in the position where it has no allies and no peaceful trading partners. That's not going to work out well for them, regardless of how much military might they believe they have.
- tim333 2y agoNATO is an alliance of 32 democracies and from time to time some of those will vote in unfortunate leaders. I guess the remainder will have to carry on. I doubt the US will remain this way after the next election.
- attentive 2y agoNot only that, now only insane nation won't try to get nukes. Expect insane nukes proliferation.
- DrNosferatu 2y agoEuropean Democracies should start a, new, NATO-like military Alliance on their own, but without Trump's America. (and without the notorious US-made military equipment kill-switches) And while we're at it, this time will be different: Instead of the membership criteria being anti-soviet communism, as in NATO, it should be effective Liberal Democracy - and - Freedom from Exceptionalist Exemptions, namely from the International Rule of Law. So, to be part, 1. Compulsory International Criminal Court membership and compliance - hence no exceptionalistic US, and no exceptionalistic Israel. 2. No "Illiberal Democracies": say, for example, composite of a minimum 0.67 score on the WJP Rule of Law Index and others: therefore no Orbanic Hungary, and no illiberal others like it. Poland, Slovakia, Italy: time to make some hard choices if you want in. 3. Democratic backsliding removes you rights in the Alliance, and, can proportionally lead to outright expulsion. Not one more new military equipment purchase from the US, (and dispreference for other non-qualifying nations procurement). Member nations should use their - substantial - industrial capacity to equip themselves with indigenous military materiel. Hey, it would be actually great for the economy! Initially European scope, but bridges to a broader global scope (or even a secondary sister-Alliance) with open-ended partnerships with Canada, Australia, New Zeland, Japan, South Korea, and yes: Taiwan. US and/or Israel want to join, if a more Democratic future selves? Simple: fully join the ICC, and meet the Alliance's full criteria as every other member. Same applies for prospective new members. Sweden shows how principled positions can be maintained while building serious defense capabilities. Now multiply that model by Europe's combined industrial and technological base. We just need the political will to execute - instead of just rolling over and wagging our tail to bullies.
- nomel 2y agoWhy a separate alliance? In 2015, only 5 nations meet the 2% funding requirement for NATO, with all previous US administrations asking for increases. That's concrete evidence of disinterest in the concept or intentional reliance on the US. Only recently, with threats of the US pulling out of NATO, have the numbers improved. If the US scaled back the 2%, and was less involved, I would think Europe would be in a better position than a brand new alliance.
- 2y ago
- wesselbindt 2y ago> the US can turn from ally to bully This has been par for the course for decades. They used to be on good terms with Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Iran after they couped Mossadegh. Heck, they even armed and trained Osama Bin Laden to fight the soviets in Afghanistan. It has always been a deadly gambit to ally yourself with the United States. I'm not saying it's universally the case of course. For every Saddam there's a Pinochet, for every Gaddafi there's a Suharto. But the fact that the US can drop an ally just like that should not be a surprise to anyone.
- notahacker 2y agoTraditionally the US turned from ally to bully in a predictable manner though. Ally with the Soviet Union, expect hostility, even if your previous right-leaning government had been their best buddies. Invade another country the US also regarded as a regional ally and oil supplier and you might not last long. The switch to verbally attacking Ukraine and the rest of Europe whilst fellating Putin is an altogether different one, and one much more damaging to US soft power than its past belligerence.
- wesselbindt 2y agoI'm curious where you see Libya fitting in this pattern. Personally I'm more inclined to believe that the ally-turned-foe's invasion serves as a convenient excuse for the US to attack, rather than the root cause. One thing that at least Gadaffi and Saddam have in common is nationalizing their oil industry. This to me seems like a much more believable reason for US aggression.
- notahacker 2y agoGadaffi was a nominal socialist who kicked the US military out, aligned himself with the Soviet Union, proposed pan-Arabist and pan-African alliances to exclude the west and was implicated in bombings of US targets, undermining US-allied causes overseas etc. And yes, he nationalized the oil industry early in his rule. Even if he briefly achieved some sort of rapprochement (mostly with the EU) when he'd run out of allies, he's pretty much the exemplar of how to piss off the US, and so them helping finish his regime off fits the pattern perfectly.
- belter 2y agoThese are verified charities list. Help Ukraine: https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities/?share_id=xGuv-wAQrBh7iEakix6jh https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities/?share_id=xG... Dont buy from Companies doing business with Russia: https://leave-russia.org/ https://leave-russia.org/
- nomel 2y agoThey should have been thinking for a long time now, but weren't. For the 2% requirement: 2015: 5 countries 2021: 9 countries 2024: 23 countries I don't think these levels would have improved so quickly without the US being a bully.
- importantbrian 2y agoThey increased their defense spending because of Russia invading Ukraine in 2014 and 2022. It didn't have anything to do with US bullying. The biden administration certainly wasn't going around bullying Europe between 2021 and 2024.
- nomel 2y agoTrumps talks of NATO problems go back to his last term. Foreign leaders showed fear of reduced US cooperation then [1], some directly attributing increased spending to that [2]. It was very widely reported back then, with similar fervor. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-remarks-nato-trigger-alarm-bells-europe-n613911 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/world/europe/donald-trumps-remarks-rattle-nato-allies-and-stoke-debate-on-cost-sharing.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/world/europe/donald-trump...
- francasso 2y agoThe EU needs to get armed to the teeth and to pile up on nukes. The US cannot be trusted, half of the country is compromised and that's not something that will change any time soon, even after Trump goes to meet his creator.
- JPKab 2y agoHalf the country isn't "compromised." We simply woke up to the fact that a continent of people that do nothing but mock and sneer at us refused to pay for their own defense, and we get nothing from it in return, other than having our exports tariffed at higher levels than EU exports to the US. For the US, NATO is an obligation, of which the EU nations (with their lavish social spending and anemic defense spending) benefited from. In 2014, the EU did NOTHING to help when Crimea was invaded. You continued to buy gas, and even bult new pipelines like Nordstream to continue to hand Putin money. I'm all for the EU to take on it's own protection and investing in militaries. World War II ended 80 years ago. Move on and grow up and pay for your own defense.
- ks2048 2y ago> We get nothing in return Isn't most US NATO spending just hand-outs to the US defense industry?
- anon291 2y agoThe vast majority of Americans are skeptical of our military-industrial complex
- francasso 2y agoYou were buying influence by spending your money on your own military. But I agree that the EU should never have relied on the US for its own defense, I really hope that will change now.
- budududuroiu 2y agoThere’s probably going to be a decade long build up for that to happen. European military industrial production could barely surge to the promised 1 million shells to Ukraine
- simonh 2y agoI suspect The Trump camp realise a peace deal acceptable to Ukraine isn’t viable. Trump having promised one would be easy means he needs an excuse. Manufacturing a split with Zelensky gives them that excuse. Now they can turn off the tap of support to Ukraine, forcing them to capitulate, and blame Zelensky. Meanwhile they can make a deal with Putin to split Ukraine between them. Putin gets East Ukraine, the USA gets the mineral wealth of West Ukraine. It’s win-win.
- etc-hosts 2y agoMost of the mineral wealth stuff is all in the Donbas, or a couple of kilometers from the front lines. I am unaware of much of anything like that in western Ukraine. Historically most of the heavy industry, near the mineral deposits, has always been in eastern Ukraine. Agricultural stuff in western and central Ukraine. Putin would be perfectly happy w/ a Ukrainian only rump state centered around Lviv.
- victorbjorklund 2y agoI saw on russian TV how they pretty much said "yea, trump may be an ally of ours now and do what we want but we must remember how they turned on ukraine and that they might turn on us"
- actionfromafar 2y agoSage advice.
- unclebucknasty 2y agoWhy are people acting as if there's nothing "different" going on here? Like this is all just driven by standard foreign policy choices, and the current US regime doesn't have some unique allegiance to Russia and its leader?
- actionfromafar 2y agoIt's the step before "the US and Russia were always friends, they just misunderstood each other".
- 4ndrewl 2y agoYou're making the assumption that US foreign policy isnt to parrot Russian foreign policy. There's no evidence to suggest this is not the case.
- mistermann 2y agoYou are not aware of all evidence in existence, and what "is evidence for" something is a subjective matter, downstream from your conditioned biases. These conversations are a train wreck, I don't understand how people expect to stop war if you can't be bothered to even try to speak truthfully.
- 4ndrewl 2y agoDo yourself a favour and look up the origins of the stories Trump has been saying - Zelensky a dictator - Messing with WW3 - Not wearing a suit - VIP tours of the front line They're all Kremlin lines/tropes commonly found in state media. And then TASS was allowed in to the Whitehouse and PA News aren't?
- mistermann 2y ago[dead]
- BjoernKW 2y ago> The EU is going to be thinking long and hard about the future of NATO now. Thinking long and hard apparently is all the EU is capable of. Trump's first term should have been more than enough to make the EU come to their senses. Now, we have tethered caps and the AI Act, but the EU still has no coherent vision or just even the slightest idea of how to move the continent forward instead of keeping it in the past.
- etc-hosts 2y agoIt is interesting how the US's influence in the rest of the world is declining every day, and that it appears the main entity trying to tear it down as fast as possible is the US. I don't get it.
- epistasis 2y agoThis is what Russia does when it buys off politicians. Brexit for the UK, and Trump for the US. Make no mistake that the Republican party is bought out, through and through, by foreign powers.
- celdon25 2y agoWhat evidence do you have that Trump was "bought" by Russia?
- piva00 2y ago[flagged]
- etc-hosts 2y agoI think the Trump family has been bought a lot harder by very wealthy Israel supporting Americans and the UAE. The Kushner stuff is well documented. There's checks moving around. Both parties on each end publicly announce huge real estate deals. I can't point to anything concrete about Russia funding Trump.
- piva00 2y agoThere's a whole Wikipedia article going through some of it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_projects_of_Donald_Trump_in_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_projects_of_Donald_Tr...
- dang 2y agoPlease don't cross into personal attack.
- yieldcrv 2y agoIts almost like they’ll start paying for their own defense
- rdevsrex 2y agoI'm sorry, I don't care who you are or what the history between your country and the US is, you don't come and be disrespectful like that and get away with it. All he had to do was was smile and wave, but Zelensky made it into a dick measuring contest which he was always going to lose. He is a terrible leader and this is just more proof of it.
- kemiller 2y agoTrump doesn't understand soft power, nor how much he has destroyed in such a short span. I have hope that a some future point we can repair these relationships, but they will never be like they were. So stupid. Such a waste.
- anon291 2y agoIt is not bullying to say that American monetary support means basically doing what the United States want you to do. This is basic human social interaction.
- unclebucknasty 2y ago>how quickly the US can turn from ally to bully This is not at all consistent with U.S. foreign policy. It is one regime, that clearly has different thoughts about our alliances. It's an anomaly or, more accurately, an aberration. And it's similar to what's happening here domestically as well.
- insane_dreamer 2y agoEU response not unexpected: ‘Free world needs a new leader’, says EU foreign chief after Trump Zelenskyy row
- kardianos 2y agoBelieve it or not, yes, the US wishes NATO paid for more of it's defense.
- whateveracct 2y agoUkraine is in this war partially (largely? primarily?) due to United States foreign policy in the years since the "end" of the Cold War. No surprise Trump screws them over and doesn't honor our geopolitical debts tho.
- redeeman 2y agobully? the ukraine has been DEMANDING more money from pretty much everyone. what kind of entitled mindset is that? he should be down on his knees BEGGING for money if he wants it.
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y agoI wish our allies had interfered in our elections, in the interests of democracy
- belter 2y agoHistory will record than once...An unsuspecting stand up comedian, who once recorded the voice of Paddington Bear in the Ukrainian dubbing of Paddington and Paddington 2... Left his family, took on a uniform...And had to fight, at the same time, Putin and the President of the USA: https://youtu.be/4zwfukYhq-k?t=6 https://youtu.be/4zwfukYhq-k?t=6
- zeroq 2y agoI wish more people would remember that Ukraine was once 3rd nuclear power in the world but agreed to give it all away in return for promise that US will defend it instead. This is why Zelensky keep saying he doesn't want another paper.
- dantheman 2y agoI wish people would actually read the Budapest Memorandum and see what it actually promises. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/Part/volume-3007-I-52241.pdf https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/P...
- gunian 2y agolol the world knows big guy DT did not invent this
- evo_9 2y agoHas anyone actually watched the entire conversation and not just the clip near the end? I encourage everyone to do so: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7pxbGjvcdyY&pp=ygUbZnVsbCB6ZWxlbnNreSB0cnVtcCBtZWV0aW5n https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7pxbGjvcdyY&pp=ygUbZnVsbCB6ZWx...
- raziel2p 2y agodid it change your opinion somehow?
- zellyn 2y agoThe original clips I saw made it look more like Zelensky was behaving unreasonably. Watching more of the context, it seemed more like things escalated. Watching Trump and Vance and others posture and try to score political points while you could just see the depth of exhaustion and horrors witnessed in Zelensky's face… I don't even know how to feel about it all.
- disgruntledphd2 2y agoI found it deeply uncomfortable to watch, to be honest. Both Trump and Vance acted like playground bullies. Maybe that's what a bunch of citizens want? Pretty depressing, if so. I will say that I'm reevaluating my countries alliances and (lack of) security capability.
- jakeogh 2y agoTrump update on Zelenskyy meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t21OERWmxUY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t21OERWmxUY
- refurb 2y ago> how quickly the US can turn from ally to bully. Every country in the world knows this already. I mean all you need to do is look at South Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, many South American countries, the list goes on and on. America is like a fickle woman. When she pays attentions to you it feels wonderful, but when she changes her mind it's like you never existed in the first place. Zelensky had to know that going in. The writing was on the wall.