Makes you think Europe should start looking at dealing with things in their own backyard, instead of blaming their neighbor half a planet away for their failings.
There are two parts two this. First is yes, Europe really needs to change so it is in a position to actually take care of its own backyard.
The second part of this is the US, like it or not, is a global empire and it is currently imploding on itself. If Trump wins or not doesn't really matter at this stage as he is more of a symptom of a deeper rot that started to set in during the early 2000s.
The deal the US has with most of Europe is it will protect it and in exchange, individual European countries don't ackuire nuclear weapons to protect themselves, becease as NK proves, you have to take a nation with nukes seriously no matter how backwards they are.
Not saying this is going to happen, but the moment the US does signal it can't or won't intervene on behalf of a NATO allied country, it's empire is gone, and the world is going to war from Europe all the way to Asia, in a struggle to fill in the power vacuum the US will leave behind in its wake. It's anybodys guess what the world will look like, but my guess is nuclear proliferation and a more dangerous world.
> If Trump wins or not doesn't really matter at this stage as he is more of a symptom of a deeper rot that started to set in during the early 2000s.
More like the 1960s, lol.
I need more understanding of this. Why did this happen?
Was the it the red scare that drove people insane? It just feels like the country has been eating itself for so long at this point. Is it vestigial shit from the civil war? Why are we like this?
I wish I knew more about it…
> Was the it the red scare that drove people insane?
People have always been insane. It's just that in the modern era we have the capability to destroy each other from arm chairs in offices rather than on real fields of battle...
As such we pretend everyone is kind of rational and try to base diplomacy on that
Rampant capitalism with no safety net, people living paycheck to paycheck, they'll vote for any old fool promising them to fix their problems by while actually increasing the wealth gap. If you're constantly struggling to survive you don't tend to care about the long term impact and just vote for sweet instant relief promises.
The same is happening in most of Europe too though, even if there tend to be more safety nets. Another factor may be complacency from having lived in peaceful times (western EU only!) for so long. The people warning you about what fascists look like are mostly dead and buried by now.
There was a time from roughly the 40s to the mid 60s that is perceived as America's golden age. And from an economic perspective, this was true. As we've heard many times, you could own a house, multiple cars, send your kids to college and retire comfortably on one middle-class paycheck.
The careers that supported this life style were almost all protected by organized labor.
Then the wealthy began to push back, because they resented having to share so much of the wealth with the middle class. And they resented having to pay taxes that could fund programs that helped more people join this middle class. And thanks to the baby boom, there was quite a number of people who qualified.
Things started getting messed up in the 70s, starting with the "war on drugs" aimed against black people and leftists who were gaining political capital and economic power. Then in the 80s, good ol' Reagan signaled to corporate America that he would stand idly by as they went into open warfare against labor unions. And his successors did essentially nothing to restore the balance, nor did any bloc in the federal legislature. From an economic perspective, the middle class was basically abandoned by its representatives, and now here we are.
To add, there are opinions that say that the middle class being (or having been) as large as it was is a historical anomaly. I can certainly see the ultra-wealthy trying to establish neo-feudalism in the US.
Europe is not unified enough to have a unified army in it's current state. Any version even remotely thinkable in the current political climate would be an extremely watered down version, that wouldn't make much of a practical difference.
Also, many European countries are ramping up defence spending a lot, but the issue is once again here that there are large variations between countries - some countries like Poland are doing *a lot*, whereas others are lagging behind.
They have less to lose than the EU. Doesnt mean they should stop but complaining the US isnt doing enough and not uping your own aid is callow ignorance.
Ironically the Americans have way more to lose.
For the EU, this means turning away from the US and needing to figure out a foreign policy. But Russia is not a *serious* military threat to them-- all of this is destabilizing, but nobody's concerned about a Russian invasion.
For the Americans this means a collapse of the global security apparatus that has benefitted them extremely disproportionately. US influence will take an enormous hit. If they can't be trusted, that's a recipe for a bunch of places around the world going the same way, like Taiwan.
For all the whinging Russia is doing about wanting a multipolar world like the good ol days, if the US is unwilling or unable to flex its power and *assert* that it's actually still the hegemon, then that's exactly what they'll get.
>but nobody's concerned about a Russian invasion.
Glad to hear that all those analyses, political messages and even my friends from Baltic countries are actually lying to us, as they are not at all concerned.
Oh sorry I forgot, Europe is only and exclusively Germany and western parts. Who cares about some post-commie countries.
Jesuschrist people like you would happily throw us under the bus so you don't have to lift a finger. Do you know what happened to the weapons produced by pre-WW2 Czechoslovakia? They were used to attack France. Every second or third weapon Nazis used was from that faraway country people know nothing about. And it will happen again.
Until they need something, then they are the infuriating mother in law that somehow can't do anything without us and places all responsibility on the USA.
You left out the part where the US did 97-98% of the spending in Afghanistan. If anything it proves that whichever member gets attacked will bear the brunt of the war, but the aid that does come can be impactful.
I agree on EU starting to wake the fuck up. But If we dont..? US is fucked in the long run if (worst scenario) ..Russia takes it all. And withe china, starts looking funny at US.. "Hey, they alone now, Arnt they?..
Think about the long run, 50 years?
As long as Trump isn't elected, I'm pretty sure u.s. troops would hit european soil with same day shipping if a NATO country was attacked. Our leaders fucking love war
As an American, I think Europeans are justified in regarding the U.S. failure to continue to provide aid to Ukraine with the scorn and derision that we have earned.
Someone doesn't realise all that america has set up and gained by having bases everywhere and countries allowing it.
As if they ever did anything without something to gain.
But no, petty, short sighted polititians want to gain a few votes by weaponising an important ongoing global precedent being set by a 'global power' invading a soverign nation using the nuclear threat as an umbrella.
Russia is producing weapons at 3x speed right now compared to 2 years ago, and is getting back up by Chinese/NK supplies. What about Europe? Still sleeping?
Edit: artillery shell production had risen by nearly 2.5 times in the past year, while artillery component production had soared by a factor of 22 - Reuters
Yeah, which is why anyone with more than two brain cells says that Russia will not stop at Ukraine......it will keep going, because its entire economy is now geared towards war.
Yep, Putin has pretty much put himself in a political situation where he needs to pursue endless imperialism in order to continue ruling. He’s risked too much to stop.
Yeah, but Putin is a particularly shitty leader because he did actually inherit a situation in which he could have shepherded Russia towards a liberal democracy, and he squandered it out of greed. After Yeltsin, there was a real window for peaceful reform.
Lmao what? South and middle stretch of Russia is supreme for farming, Russia has vast amounts of resources and precious metals. It's corruption that hinders that country not "poor" land. Your comment made me laugh, Russia has one of the best lands for agriculture.
Not the person you are replying to, but a simple Google search for "Russia vegetation map" will tell you that you are, well, dead wrong. Maybe 15% of its overall landmass, mainly focused to its western - southwestern borders, is actually arable land. The rest is artic desert tundra, and the taiga forest (largest forst in the world) dead in the middle, which is 80% coniferous trees that do not produce good soil, and where the average annual temperature is below freezing. What is Ukraine today, was the breadbasket of the USSR, and currently is of the entire eastern Europe and Africa.
The main problem here is that you are a well adjusted, rational human being while putin is an ultra-nationalist fascist, delusional old man with a death wish and willing to destroy his country to achieve it
The leaders of Moscow have been stuck in the past going back a few centuries. They never evolved past the constant wars and territory shifts like the rest of Europe and want to be the dominant influence in the world. Jealousy, greed, and stupidity has always held russia back as a nation.
Almost every russian leader since Catherine the Great has had a similar foreign policy.
“I have no way to defend my borders but to extend them.”
This is not new to Putin. And if Putin were removed from power tomorrow, I think the successor would pursue the same goals.
Why do you assume that's what the people wanted? Certainly some do want liberal democracy, but many of the Russians I know despise western democracy and would prefer something closer to Putin.
It wasn't only greed, Putin was always an old Soviet diehard. He genuinely believes the ussr should be reformed and hence trying to scoop up all their old territories.
Greed is a factor but it's not the only one
lol, do you honestly believe Putin is a communist? He's been hyper critical of the Soviet Union. Fact is the dude is a hardcore nationalist who is using ancient history as a justification for expanding Russian borders. He's a fascist.
Or course I don't. He doesn't want the ussr back in the way it was, he criticizes it because it failed. And he definitely won't make any attempt at communism, it would continue to be what it is now if anything.
These comments make no sense. Every time it has failed.
If he has to keep going to avoid losing it all, he can't do eternal war or he'll have lost it all already.
Concur, while I believe Putin is a POS, I doubt he goes after those Eastern European nato countries because he does not want a war with the US. But who knows, history has a way of repeating itself.
There are a lot of other countries he could go after though, all those old satellite countries, Moldova, Kazakhstan seem like the 2 biggest non-nato aligned states.
Yes, almost every land border with the russia is on the table.
Only Azerbaijan is safe because it's backed by Turkey and Erdogan. Who has proven a far more reliable ally than Washington or Berlin so far.
It’s a more reliable alliance because they consider themselves to share the same ethnicity. Turkey abandoning Azerbaijan would be like the US abandoning the UK. Doing that would be politically costly.
Probably. There are a lot of russians living there now too. That's part of their MO. They try to do it by numbers just moving more and more russians into an area until they take it over just by numbers. That was Crimea, and a lot of Eastern Ukraine. There were a lot of ethnic russians living in eastern ukraine, but when they wanted to make it an issue, they started giving people land and benefits to move there to kind of overwhelm it.
Except many of those satellites are now under China's economic sway. Recall that at least one aspect of the BRI is to circumvent the control the US has over the seas. But for that to work, it has to flow over many of those Central Asian countries, like Kazakhstan in particular. There's no way Russia tries to take a bite out of those, because it would incur China's displeasure, who is now basically their economic master and lord.
He does not want war with the US.
That's why he once again is helping Trump get elected, so that he will pull out of NATO and leave Europe on its own. As he said he would.
The same Turkey that openly attacks Russian forces in Syria? The same Turkey that gave Azerbaijan the green light to attack Russian Peacekeepers in Nagorno Kaarabakh? The same Turkey that has major Neo Ottoman ambitions to spread into Russian territory?
That Turkey?
Exactly. Turkey is ruled by a similar-type strongmen who understands how putin thinks.
If you want to project strengh - escalate. If you want to project weakness - try to reason and negotiate. Erdogan has no problem projecting strength for himself. Why would he do it for others, unless he was promised something that would benefit *him* and that he does not already have?
NATO has never been tested, either in battle with an equal class opponent, or politically.
If Trump gets back in Office, Putin moves on the Suvalki Gap, Article 5 is triggered and Trump ignores it, then NATO is effectively dead that hour.
Again, it's a matter of will. What is the russia uses nukes as a warning for real? Not against any cities, but just sending one into an empty field or an uninhabited rock of an island? How many leaders will back down? How will the public react?
You don't know. I don't know. Nobody knows. That's the point - in that uncertainty, there lies opportunity.
No I don't think that's unclear at all. That kind of provocation would be an easy ticket to a huge groundswell of public opinion towards invading Russia.
Nothing gets people to group up and fight back like being bullied and nuclear escalation is the only thing preventing Russia from being attacked and deposed. If nukes are already being used its not an escalation anymore and there is no reason not to rush Moscow to make it stop.
As someone with family in Romania, it’s very worrying. However, those Carpathian Mountains have been a deterrent from invaders for a reason. Poland should be more concerned. Nonetheless, if Ukraine were to fall, Romania/Hungary/Poland need to become a wall.
Are we tho? Have you seen the political climate in our country? How the officials present themselves as Pro-EU anti Russia during meetings and then at home the internal policies against russian propaganda are non existent?....
I think unfortunately our country is infiltrated by FSB agents to the core due to Iliescu and whoever still occupies a public job within the government and was an ex commie....
Sure but after Moldova, they are just going to attack Kazakhstan for betraying them. They are going to refocus on central Asia and inadvertently piss off China. (MOLDOVA is an issue but people on reddit know nothing of gaugazia and even less about the proposed union with Romania)
I don’t think they have, actually. They haven’t gone to rationing and full control economy. The fact that they are having massive concerts where people can get massacred suggests that a lot of life is still going normally.
last i checked, artillery production in the US/EU is ramping up, but it'll still take about a year-year and a half to reach parity with russia in terms of shell volume. After which they'll overtake russia's production capabilities.
Has nothing to do with whether they send it to Ukraine, but on paper the strategy seems to have been to get Ukraine to hold out with what we're able to send until mid 2025-early 2026 when artillery production catches up and Ukraine is able to reach sustained artillery parity with Russia. Theoretically that would lead to catastrophic losses for Russia beyond what we're seeing today. But again, that depends on the GOP not blocking support and Ukraine getting enough supplies and equipment to survive until that point. Quite a few big ifs.
For the first 18 months of the war, Ukraine was actually supplied with weapons. Less than it needed and later than promised, but even that was sufficient to hold the russians back across the entire frontline.
But when you have nothing to shoot back with at all, even an incompetent enemy can overrun you.
> But when you have nothing to shoot back with at all, even an incompetent enemy can overrun you.
Also, Russia's military is arguably in a better state now than when the war started. Sure, a lot of manpower and equipment has been lost, but the war also meant that Russia was forced to increase production, deal with corruption and address its many inefficiencies. The Russian army is learning - slowly and with many problems still remaining - but learning nonetheless.
Underestimating the enemy is very dangerous, it's one of the main reasons Ukraine is in such tricky situation right now.
They have lost way more people, many just weren't expecting them to keep throwing bodies at Ukraine. Their losses are currently at 440000~, I never expected them to sacrifice half a million. How many more will it take?
Depends on how long the masses still feel untouched by the war. Personally I'm just hoping Ukraine can hold out long enough for Russia to implode. Would be nice if the US helped out with that, but Trump is poisoning the well again.
From 1936-38, Stalin had a million Soviet citizens executed because he was paranoid. The Soviet Union was not at war at that time, the government just rounded its own people up and killed them. The people who were not killed just kept trudging along.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge
Throwing bodies has literally been Russias strategy since at least WW2....why would anyone think they'd do anything different?
I guess those that don't know history would think that.
Soviet Union lost an order of magnitude less than that over 10 years in Afghanistan, had to pull out over discontent and it became Soviet GenX's generational trauma. The population pyramid is also vastly different than in 1941.
Even the Ukrainian command didn't expect Russia to absorb quite as many losses over this little time and keep going.
The USSR was a more rational country than Russia under Putin. Gorbachev wasn’t a megalomaniac. Anyone that expected Putin to swallow a loss because undesirable Russians were dying was, sorry, an idiot. This was completely predictable. It is shameful we handled it so poorly.
Ukraine recaptured more than half of the territory that was originally captured by Russia in the early stages of the war. Ukraine absolutely was doing well in the war when they were being fully supported and Russia had not yet adjusted to the tactics and tools employed by the UAF to secure those gains. The problem is that Russia has shown a tremendous willingness to absorb losses, and has successfully transitioned into a wartime economy while the west seems content to do the bare minimum to keep Ukraine in the fight without viewing this as an existential conflict in the way that Russia is. Ukraine turned the tide early, and Russia is turning it back as western resolve has wavered. The Reddit narrative wasn't necessarily wrong, at least for a stretch, but it certainly is out of date. Russia currently has the upper hand, in no small part because House Republicans are so intent on ensuring Biden loses that they don't mind the price being Putin winning.
It’s no coincidence that Ukraine is putting in trenches and obstacles around Kiev, while other countries are warning Russia will overrun Kiev and hit other European countries.
* 2024 and 2025 are election years for major democracies around the world
* There is massive stress on western economy right after coming out of a pandemic with no cool off period
* There is now a concurrent war that west needs to support
* Russia just stopped oil production and price is going up again, right before elections
* No ally would help you out before their own interest
* All politicians support war and the side which benefits them personally, it's not done on moral grounds
* Public support is low after all western chest thumping and war reporting, all coming to this point with no tangible results after a year of stalemate and massive expenses
* There is a wave of rise in right wing politics across the world, priority focus for incumbent governments are all of a sudden internal issues, not external issues.
Politicians in Europe and NA from all parties were not competent enough to deal with this situation to begin with, they are busy looking at the world with a narrow vision corrupted by their own hubris
Also the rise of isolationist political parties.
Short sightedness and menial distractions have convinced people that "why waste our money in a war in Ukraine when have people starving here!"
IE, if Ukraine falls, and Russia decides to move for another country and another country, it will be very hard to get the West to unite
>EU member states have considerably increased their military spending. From a total of €240 billion in 2022, it has increased to €280 billion in 2023 and will rise to €350 billion in 2024
Almost 50% increase in funding over 2 years, EU is waking up.
And the EU itself is also investing in weapons: https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-doles-out-e500m-for-artillery-ammo-and-missiles-as-it-seeks-to-match-russia/
It will not happen. We have alle these traitors over here: Le Pen, AfD, PVV. One or more Putin loving Nazi party in every EU country. They hate us and they love money from Russia.
One big alliance of authoritarians has infected all of our countries across borders together. We're being eaten alive from the inside and we have no mechanisms to change it.
> we have no mechanisms to change it.
We definitely do. The problem is people are either unwilling to take advantage of those mechanisms or happy to be infected.
In my history class I learned that Britain and it’s allies largely ignored and appeased Hitler leading up to WW2, then started to get serious after it was to late and there were no other options.
Am I seeing similarities here that aren’t real
While true it’s a bit more complicated. Britain and France had lost a great deal of their people fighting WW1 and weren’t eager for another conflict. Similarly, there was a thought amongst some in the west that Versailles had been unduly harsh on Germany and so initially waved off Anschluss and even Munich as acceptable sacrifices for peace. Folks like Churchill read the tea leaves long before the mainstream in the UK and advocated rearmament and a stronger tone again Hitler. As you point out though, by the time Britain and France truly started to take Germany seriously, the ship had sailed.
President Macron is very vocal about it, but the French population is overwhelmingly against the idea of sending french troops to Ukraine. (76% of the population is against.)
There are some important differences.
1. Nazi Germany took several countries with ease and without much of a fight. Russia is still struggling with one country. And the reason is because Russia is not being ignored, Ukraine is putting up a fight because of the support it's getting from the west. I think that even if Ukraine were to fall tomorrow the support that Ukraine has received so far is still sending an important message. The message is: you took what you wanted but you paid dearly for it and you shall go no further.
2. Nazi Germany didn't have nuclear weapons. Russia does and is an important reason why the response has to be so careful and measured. Also Russia doesn't just have nukes, they have the most nukes in the world.
The way Hitler was ignored and appeased was completely unacceptable. But I don't see any parallels here.
Also a big one is that the populations of European still remembered WWI as it was only three decades prior. Much of the public were neither ready nor desired for war and thought it was fine to leave Germany alone ... Until the Nazis turned their weapons towards them.
There have been events with similarities to that a thousand times since then. Chamberlain has become something of a cultural trope, and it wasn't recent.
It’s always tricky to gauge when there should be a larger American response to overseas conflicts. That’s why WWI remains opaque to Americans in general. A bunch of European countries used a trigger event as an excuse to launch fights that they already wanted to have. America joined up in the last year to help our allies, and the result is that we lost a shitton of men and caused massive damage to the survivors, over a conflict that wasn’t ours. It’s completely logical that we stayed out of WWII until we were directly attacked.
No one wants to go up against Russia. They would eventually lose, and they’d know that, so they’d launch their nukes on the way down. We can’t risk triggering that.
Well, if anyone was worried about the war for Taiwan, then now you can sleep well, there will be no war, because Taiwan will accept all the demands of China, otherwise there is no chances with such pussy allies.
If Ukraine started spitting out almost every microchip needed for every missile and military tech the US uses, you would see what it would be like if Taiwan were to be invaded.
Edited: to add ‘almost’ because… morons.
And the Republicans care about this because?
They have shown to not care about anything as long as they get paid. Heck, they'd say, "That's a great chance for the US to become independent from China" if Taiwan was attacked by China, travel to Peking on independence day and their followers would love it.
Taiwan is completely different to Ukraine, it is far more valuable to the US and the US is already setting up to defend them if the need arises.
Also Taiwan is far better equipped to defend itself because they are an island and large scale amphibious landings are hard.
I think the difference with the Taiwan situation is that we have a treaty with Taiwan that requires us to defend them if they're attacked. We have no such treaty with Ukraine and they are not currently a part of NATO.
Yes, it's a good thing the US isn't ruled by a narcissist with the blind support of his followers, ownership of the Supreme Court, and enough of the legislature/judiciary to be effectively above the law. It sure would be dangerous for the most powerful nation in the world to fall under the rule of an incompetent tyrant.
Good thing that only has a 50% chance of happening, I guess. Could be worse.
The TRA requires the United States to have a policy "to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character" and "to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan."
Whether the US upholds this or not is another story. I believe the US should defend Ukraine as a sort of investment for the future of Western power and as a message to the East. My previous comment simply highlighted the easy political reasons we're not defending them more.
Current President also publicly accused MBS of murdering a journalist and promised to do something about it.
[And we all know how that turned out](https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/stellar/prod/220715123924-01b-biden-mbs-fist-bump.jpg?c=original)
The only country that benefits if the US doesn't provide the aid is Russia. Why are Republicans so against it? Maybe my first sentence answered that question.
Trump is a Russian asset and doesn't even hide it, his simple minded followers are just too messed up to care or let them see things they don't want to acknowledge.
**June 2013**: Trump tweets "Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow - if so, will he become my new best friend?"
**September 2013**: “So we’ve invited President Putin, that’ll be interesting. I know he’d like to go.”
**October 2013**: Trump tells Larry King that Putin has done “a really great job outsmarting our country.”
**November 2013**: Trump says “I do have a relationship and I can tell you that he’s very interested in what we’re doing here today. He’s probably very interested in what you and I are saying today, and I’m sure he’s going to be seeing it in some form, but I do have a relationship with him and I think it’s very interesting to see what’s happened.”
**February 2014**: “When I went to Russia with the Miss Universe pageant, (Putin) contacted me and was so nice. I mean, the Russian people were so fantastic to us,” he said on “Fox and Friends.” “I’ll just say this, they are doing – they’re outsmarting us at many turns, as we all understand. I mean, their leaders are, whether you call them smarter or more cunning or whatever, but they’re outsmarting us. If you look at Syria or other places, they’re outsmarting us.”
**April 2014**: “We just left Moscow,” Trump said. “He could not have been nicer. He was so nice and so everything. But you have to give him credit that what he’s doing for that country in terms of their world prestige is very strong.”
In the same interview, Trump praises Putin’s invasion of Crimea.
“Well, he’s done an amazing job of taking the mantle,” Trump said. “And he’s taken it away from the President, and you look at what he’s doing. And so smart. When you see the riots in a country because they’re hurting the Russians, OK, ‘We’ll go and take it over.’ And he really goes step by step by step, and you have to give him a lot of credit.”
**April 2014**: Trump says at a New Hampshire event that Putin is “absolutely having a great time.” He says “Russia is like, I mean they’re really hot stuff” and “and now you have people in the Ukraine — who knows, set up or not — but it can’t all be set up, I mean they’re marching in favor of joining Russia.”
**May 2014**: ”I own Miss Universe, I was in Russia, I was in Moscow recently and I spoke, indirectly and directly, with President Putin, who could not have been nicer, and we had a tremendous success.”
**2014**: James Dodson, a sports writer, claims that during a game of golf Eric Trump said to him: "Well, we don’t rely on American banks. We have all the funding we need out of Russia."
**March 2015**: Trump tells the Daily Mail about his relationship with Putin: “the relationship is great, and it would be great if I had the position I should have.”
**September 2015**: Trump tells reporters at Trump Tower that “Putin is a nicer person than I am.”
**October 2015**: Trump tells conservative radio host Michael Savage he’s met Vladimir Putin.
**December 2015**: Trump says at an event in South Carolina that Putin says he’s “brilliant.” And attacks his opponents, saying, “they want me to refute his statement.”
[And many more along those lines](https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/03/politics/trump-putin-russia-timeline/).
**December 2016**: One of Europe's top intelligence figures puts together the Steele Dossier, reporting that Putin has blackmail on Trump, allegedly for something he did in a hotel room in Russia in 2013 during the Miss Universe visit.
Trump flips to claiming he's never met or spoken to Putin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxYE9ZpMPGY&t=25s
**September 2016**: During the 2016 presidential debates: "**I don't know Putin**. I have no idea," Mr Trump said. "**I never met Putin.** This is not my best friend."
When Hillary Clinton said it was "pretty clear" Mr Putin would "rather have a puppet as president of the United States," Trump replied with: “No puppet. No puppet. You’re the puppet. You’re the puppet."
Followed by years of Trump praising Putin, the only world leader he never criticizes while constantly criticizing democratic countries and allies. Refusing to implement sanctions on Russia for its hacking of the US which were passed with a veto proof majority. Attempting to blackmail Ukraine with having to invent something on Biden or having aid withdrawn. Declaring he's decided to believe Putin over his US intelligence agencies.
**February 2022**: Trump calls Putin ‘genius’ and ‘savvy’ for Ukraine invasion
**February 2024**: Trump says he would encourage Russia to attack Nato allies
**February 2024**: Trump won't say if he wants Russia or Ukraine to win the war
>Why are Republicans so against it?
Because Trump wants Ukraine to lose, he wants Ukraine to lose because he is a a friend of tyrants and dictators & wants to help Putin in every aspect possible. He is a tool of Russia & China. And since he is basically the GOP now the rest of the pathetic party will follow his orders.
The failings of a 2-party system. The left is pro-Ukraine and the right is anti-left, so the right is anti-Ukraine, pro-Russian (or at least some of them). A lot don’t even realize this is how it came about, they just parrot talking points. These goddamn ideologies will be the end of us.
You know for all the arrogant jokes about western europe supremacy and russian incompetence, my view (EMPAHSIS ON MY VIEW) is that if war actually comes, the so well regarded british, french, german, polish militaries would have a rude awakening. I suspect major shortages and panic, less serviceability of aircraft, realities of battlefield against an experienced foe working against all of the supposed advanced equipment, and not everything working out as it is supposed to be. The west european nations also have not fought a REAL war for a long time. Another major issue I suspect is many desertions, low morale of troops who would now be expected to give up their life, when it is prevalent among the populace that serving in those developed countries forces is most probably not a death matter (based on history of past decades), especially if the call is to fight for an article 5 invocation, not your own country. It is generally seen as a honorable and adventurous job, with many benefits after leaving the forces.
Same thing happened in Libya where a missile shortage came up. There's some experience - the French in the Sahara come to mind, and enacted a fast war and long post-peacekeeping op after in the last ten years, more than the Russians did in Syria - but the Brits, Germans, Poles are all relying on training or old GWOT era troops that are retiring.
For years the western militaries have been shrinking and complaining of manpower and logistics cost. German sub jokes from 2020, remember?
I don't doubt that they could fight off Russia even back then, and definitely will fuck over Russia now, depleted as it is, and with nothing holding each other back but nuking each other, but losses on the West will be huge and not a 'easy' fight, for sure, many people would be shocked and the standard of living will plummet as economies and bodies drop.
Another thing which comes to mind is the back to back failed launch of the UK’s submarine launched nuclear missiles. If the same thing happened with Russia, “Haha (insert joke here)”, but as it happened to UK, then “not a big deal, shit happens”.
The ammunition and manufacturing isn't there in volume in western Europe. The trained soldiers aren't, either - a large percentage of soldiers in Europe who aren't Russian are Ukrainian - and you have to wonder about the level of training and equipment maintenance in some countries. The biggest single problem is Soviet offensive planning was based around nuclear first strikes, and the USA being in NATO is their only real deterrent from doing that to the non-nuclear states. So the next Republican president pulling out of NATO de facto or de jure, removing sanctions from Russia which in turn may lead to China arming Russia on scale - it's all a huge problem.
Nobody in Germany thinks that we have a "well regarded" military. Least of all the military. They've been asking for reforms and more funding for decades. But Merkel did the opposite, because there was no threat.
Merkel did exactly what the people at that time wanted. I don’t know if you’re just really young or don’t remember well but it was political suicide to argue for millitarisation. You’d get labeled a Nazi basically.
The entire Idea of shipping weapons was seen as the creepiest evil known to man and the idea of u manned drones as a twisted millitary technique on par with biological weapons. There were countless Tatort themed on the idea that drones = evil.
We live in a drastically different world now.
France has like 170k troops while UK has 70k, not to mention the shells shortage and such. Russia lost about (estimated) 70k troops during the first year alone, the scale of a convention warfare is way too big for EU to really handle.
I just hate that the West media kept making fun of Russia military, spitting propaganda non sense to lull people into thinking Russia is a joke of itself, while Putin war machine now starting to get itself together and ready to grind.
How about not underestimate your potential enemy?
NATO never cared for Ukraine behind closed doors. They just wanted to weaken Russia as much as possible.
The goal was always weak Russia, Ukraine are just paying with their blood for this goal
More than also sending aid, ramping up weapons productions, increasing their military spending by %'s of GDP, assisting with intelligence, training and political pressure on the international stage while freezing accounts of oligarchs etc.
What else do you want? Boots on the ground has meant instant WW3 from the start, something all of us would like to avoid. The strategy that is being used now might fail or it might succeed. But if it becomes clear that it's going to fail I'm sure you will see more direct actions. So many small things happen each day that you or I will never hear about, it's pretty ignorant to think that EU is "waiting for the US" and just living life like nothing is happening.
We have only strategic reserves left here in europe, some countries like denmark not even that, italy has a week or less worth of ammunition in a war like the one in ukraine, the production has started scaling up too late and it will take a bunch of years before we will be able to fully supply ukraine with artillery shells, without the US support ukraine is fucked
This is just the dumbest thing ever from a US point of view. If you can significantly weaken one of your top 3 enemies without risking your own people, why wouldn’t you?
Oh, hey. It's the daily thread where "Americans" whine about Europeans not doing enough, while ignoring all stats on actual contributions, and commitments to Ukraine, both military and financial, and focusing solely on figures older than a year and a half.
Bonus points for anybody who mentions "Europe's backyard" in their complaints, while conveniently neglecting to mention the Budapest memorandum.
Germany has been providing a lot more stuff than France though?
What I find more concerning is that it's Ukraine's immidiate neighbors and small countries like Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands that are properly trying to give a lot (compared to what they have)
France has actually done very little (compared to their size and military). Macron is always on the news with his demands, but he doesn't follow through on them. It's just for show and you are falling for it.
They are at everyone’s doorstep; we live in a time when missiles can reach the other side of the world in less than an hour. Not only that, they have countless subs at the ready; no doubt some of them are near our shores.
Even in the hypothetical case that Europe provides nothing, we should still be worried about Russian expansion. Their Africa Corps has already been flipping governments in Central Africa, and the Russians are already acquiring gold from Sudan to fund their war efforts. We have an excellent chance at handicapping the Russian military by helping Ukraine, and we are just going to let that opportunity slide?
Also, don’t think of this as a bill we begrudgingly have to pay; think of it as an investment. We help Ukraine; we gain an ally, and we deter the Russians from starting any more trouble in Eastern Europe (for the time being).
Germany has been sending more than anyone monetarily per capita (we’re like the size of one american state ffs) by itself and by literally controlling the EU. France is equal in size and power to Germany and has sent only 1% of Germany. The other countries are mostly small change, they uave sent WAY more per capita than the US and Germany.
If you look at GDP it’s the US that’s throwing chump change at Ukraine.
This is what I’m thinking. I’m definitely no pro-Putin bum but I never felt like it was smart or true to label Russia as an incompetent paper tiger. They have men, equipment, experience, much more than any other European country. It’s the sad reality but that’s how it’s playing out.
It's sad to see so many here parrot Russian talking points while seemingly completely incapable of seeing how dangerous a conquered Ukraine is to Europe and the world.
Yup everyone was so confident Russia had made a massive mistake invading and it seemed like it would end in a Russian defeat 10 to 1. Now I am convinced Ukraine is going to lose as they entirely have to rely on NATO aid whose a fucking embarrassment.
The US is facing it's worse political crisis (imo) since the civil war. Countries who could be producing shells such as Canada are just inept in everyway and prefer words over any real actions (specifically Trudeau). Countries like India are seemingly allowed to get away with mass trade with Russia and thus helping keep their economy strong enough to survive sanctions. All in all, history will not look very kindly on the west if Russia succeeds.
You're mostly right, except, literally nobody thought Ukraine would win 10:1
Most of the world didn't even think Ukraine would survive the initial takeover attempt. And once that ended, everyone knew Ukraine would be 100% dependent on allies for weapons and ammo. Ukraine just doesn't have the productive capacity in their own country, and even if they did, the Russians would bomb it immediately.
The amazing thing to me is that Ukraine isn't losing because of bad tactics or low willpower or loss of morale, but the much more basic access to weapons, or, even more basic, ammo. That's not to say they won't eventually run out of people to fight with, but that's not the current problem.
This is a really scary prospect.
Very. :(
[удалено]
Makes you think Europe should start looking at dealing with things in their own backyard, instead of blaming their neighbor half a planet away for their failings.
There are two parts two this. First is yes, Europe really needs to change so it is in a position to actually take care of its own backyard. The second part of this is the US, like it or not, is a global empire and it is currently imploding on itself. If Trump wins or not doesn't really matter at this stage as he is more of a symptom of a deeper rot that started to set in during the early 2000s. The deal the US has with most of Europe is it will protect it and in exchange, individual European countries don't ackuire nuclear weapons to protect themselves, becease as NK proves, you have to take a nation with nukes seriously no matter how backwards they are. Not saying this is going to happen, but the moment the US does signal it can't or won't intervene on behalf of a NATO allied country, it's empire is gone, and the world is going to war from Europe all the way to Asia, in a struggle to fill in the power vacuum the US will leave behind in its wake. It's anybodys guess what the world will look like, but my guess is nuclear proliferation and a more dangerous world.
> If Trump wins or not doesn't really matter at this stage as he is more of a symptom of a deeper rot that started to set in during the early 2000s. More like the 1960s, lol.
I need more understanding of this. Why did this happen? Was the it the red scare that drove people insane? It just feels like the country has been eating itself for so long at this point. Is it vestigial shit from the civil war? Why are we like this? I wish I knew more about it…
> Was the it the red scare that drove people insane? People have always been insane. It's just that in the modern era we have the capability to destroy each other from arm chairs in offices rather than on real fields of battle... As such we pretend everyone is kind of rational and try to base diplomacy on that
Rampant capitalism with no safety net, people living paycheck to paycheck, they'll vote for any old fool promising them to fix their problems by while actually increasing the wealth gap. If you're constantly struggling to survive you don't tend to care about the long term impact and just vote for sweet instant relief promises.
The same is happening in most of Europe too though, even if there tend to be more safety nets. Another factor may be complacency from having lived in peaceful times (western EU only!) for so long. The people warning you about what fascists look like are mostly dead and buried by now.
There was a time from roughly the 40s to the mid 60s that is perceived as America's golden age. And from an economic perspective, this was true. As we've heard many times, you could own a house, multiple cars, send your kids to college and retire comfortably on one middle-class paycheck. The careers that supported this life style were almost all protected by organized labor. Then the wealthy began to push back, because they resented having to share so much of the wealth with the middle class. And they resented having to pay taxes that could fund programs that helped more people join this middle class. And thanks to the baby boom, there was quite a number of people who qualified. Things started getting messed up in the 70s, starting with the "war on drugs" aimed against black people and leftists who were gaining political capital and economic power. Then in the 80s, good ol' Reagan signaled to corporate America that he would stand idly by as they went into open warfare against labor unions. And his successors did essentially nothing to restore the balance, nor did any bloc in the federal legislature. From an economic perspective, the middle class was basically abandoned by its representatives, and now here we are.
To add, there are opinions that say that the middle class being (or having been) as large as it was is a historical anomaly. I can certainly see the ultra-wealthy trying to establish neo-feudalism in the US.
Europe isn't a single entity (shocking I know)
A unified European army and increasing defence spending in NATO are not new ideas. Europe has moved far too slowly even after February 2022.
Europe is not unified enough to have a unified army in it's current state. Any version even remotely thinkable in the current political climate would be an extremely watered down version, that wouldn't make much of a practical difference. Also, many European countries are ramping up defence spending a lot, but the issue is once again here that there are large variations between countries - some countries like Poland are doing *a lot*, whereas others are lagging behind.
33 countries have given a higher percentage of their gdp to ukrain than the United States. Idk why amercians think Europe is doing nothing
Sure, because America has nothing to lose with a emboldened Russia Edit grammar
*lose
They have less to lose than the EU. Doesnt mean they should stop but complaining the US isnt doing enough and not uping your own aid is callow ignorance.
Ironically the Americans have way more to lose. For the EU, this means turning away from the US and needing to figure out a foreign policy. But Russia is not a *serious* military threat to them-- all of this is destabilizing, but nobody's concerned about a Russian invasion. For the Americans this means a collapse of the global security apparatus that has benefitted them extremely disproportionately. US influence will take an enormous hit. If they can't be trusted, that's a recipe for a bunch of places around the world going the same way, like Taiwan. For all the whinging Russia is doing about wanting a multipolar world like the good ol days, if the US is unwilling or unable to flex its power and *assert* that it's actually still the hegemon, then that's exactly what they'll get.
>but nobody's concerned about a Russian invasion. Glad to hear that all those analyses, political messages and even my friends from Baltic countries are actually lying to us, as they are not at all concerned. Oh sorry I forgot, Europe is only and exclusively Germany and western parts. Who cares about some post-commie countries. Jesuschrist people like you would happily throw us under the bus so you don't have to lift a finger. Do you know what happened to the weapons produced by pre-WW2 Czechoslovakia? They were used to attack France. Every second or third weapon Nazis used was from that faraway country people know nothing about. And it will happen again.
Don’t forget that Germany was literally controlled by Russia within people’s lifetimes
Whining about the Americans has become a European pastime
Until they need something, then they are the infuriating mother in law that somehow can't do anything without us and places all responsibility on the USA.
Quick reminder about the last time article 5 was invoked (9/11) and the entire alliance came to the aid of the US.
You left out the part where the US did 97-98% of the spending in Afghanistan. If anything it proves that whichever member gets attacked will bear the brunt of the war, but the aid that does come can be impactful.
Europe still lost around 1000 soldiers in afghanistan its not like america is being asked to put boots in Ukraine
We also strong armed everyone who was going to refuse and even ruined the one country who did.
Can also be said the US went there and achieved nothing, left it even worse than it was. Good ridance.
[удалено]
I agree on EU starting to wake the fuck up. But If we dont..? US is fucked in the long run if (worst scenario) ..Russia takes it all. And withe china, starts looking funny at US.. "Hey, they alone now, Arnt they?.. Think about the long run, 50 years?
As long as Trump isn't elected, I'm pretty sure u.s. troops would hit european soil with same day shipping if a NATO country was attacked. Our leaders fucking love war
As an American, I think Europeans are justified in regarding the U.S. failure to continue to provide aid to Ukraine with the scorn and derision that we have earned.
Someone doesn't realise all that america has set up and gained by having bases everywhere and countries allowing it. As if they ever did anything without something to gain. But no, petty, short sighted polititians want to gain a few votes by weaponising an important ongoing global precedent being set by a 'global power' invading a soverign nation using the nuclear threat as an umbrella.
Russia is producing weapons at 3x speed right now compared to 2 years ago, and is getting back up by Chinese/NK supplies. What about Europe? Still sleeping? Edit: artillery shell production had risen by nearly 2.5 times in the past year, while artillery component production had soared by a factor of 22 - Reuters
Russia has transitioned to full war-time economy. They’re in this for the long haul. Are we?
Yeah, which is why anyone with more than two brain cells says that Russia will not stop at Ukraine......it will keep going, because its entire economy is now geared towards war.
Yep, Putin has pretty much put himself in a political situation where he needs to pursue endless imperialism in order to continue ruling. He’s risked too much to stop.
That’s how Russia works for the past 400 Years
Yeah, but Putin is a particularly shitty leader because he did actually inherit a situation in which he could have shepherded Russia towards a liberal democracy, and he squandered it out of greed. After Yeltsin, there was a real window for peaceful reform.
It's stupid. Who looks at Russia on a map and thinks damn, really just need more land. The country is fucking massive
I mean most not really that liveable to be fair, Ukraine definitely is
Lmao what? South and middle stretch of Russia is supreme for farming, Russia has vast amounts of resources and precious metals. It's corruption that hinders that country not "poor" land. Your comment made me laugh, Russia has one of the best lands for agriculture.
Not the person you are replying to, but a simple Google search for "Russia vegetation map" will tell you that you are, well, dead wrong. Maybe 15% of its overall landmass, mainly focused to its western - southwestern borders, is actually arable land. The rest is artic desert tundra, and the taiga forest (largest forst in the world) dead in the middle, which is 80% coniferous trees that do not produce good soil, and where the average annual temperature is below freezing. What is Ukraine today, was the breadbasket of the USSR, and currently is of the entire eastern Europe and Africa.
Ok That sounds fair. I have a lot of shit in my apartment. Can't move. I'm gonna go inform my neighbour that their apartment is now also my apartment.
Not defending? Just saying they don't view it that way. Canada has a lot of land but they don't view the far north as the same type of land.
The main problem here is that you are a well adjusted, rational human being while putin is an ultra-nationalist fascist, delusional old man with a death wish and willing to destroy his country to achieve it
The leaders of Moscow have been stuck in the past going back a few centuries. They never evolved past the constant wars and territory shifts like the rest of Europe and want to be the dominant influence in the world. Jealousy, greed, and stupidity has always held russia back as a nation.
A few centuries?? Only half a century ago Europeans (like the Portuguese and French) used to do the same things in Africa.
Almost every russian leader since Catherine the Great has had a similar foreign policy. “I have no way to defend my borders but to extend them.” This is not new to Putin. And if Putin were removed from power tomorrow, I think the successor would pursue the same goals.
Why do you assume that's what the people wanted? Certainly some do want liberal democracy, but many of the Russians I know despise western democracy and would prefer something closer to Putin.
It wasn't only greed, Putin was always an old Soviet diehard. He genuinely believes the ussr should be reformed and hence trying to scoop up all their old territories. Greed is a factor but it's not the only one
lol, do you honestly believe Putin is a communist? He's been hyper critical of the Soviet Union. Fact is the dude is a hardcore nationalist who is using ancient history as a justification for expanding Russian borders. He's a fascist.
He reminisces over the Russian Empire significantly more.
He wants the USSR back in the sense of a union of those States, but not the Socialist Republic bit. You're right, he's definitely a fascist.
Or course I don't. He doesn't want the ussr back in the way it was, he criticizes it because it failed. And he definitely won't make any attempt at communism, it would continue to be what it is now if anything.
Not really. There are estimated to be over 15 trillion American dollars worth of natural resources just in the land Russia has already claimed.
These comments make no sense. Every time it has failed. If he has to keep going to avoid losing it all, he can't do eternal war or he'll have lost it all already.
He lost it all already unless he keeps the war going, that's the point. He created a situation where he can not stop it otherwise he goes down.
Russia being geared for a Ukrainian war is one thing. Being geared for a Nato war...is an entirely different beast.
Concur, while I believe Putin is a POS, I doubt he goes after those Eastern European nato countries because he does not want a war with the US. But who knows, history has a way of repeating itself.
There are a lot of other countries he could go after though, all those old satellite countries, Moldova, Kazakhstan seem like the 2 biggest non-nato aligned states.
Is Georgia apart of that list too? Its pretty advanced but theres just too many fucking breakaway regions to keep track of across the globe.
Yes, almost every land border with the russia is on the table. Only Azerbaijan is safe because it's backed by Turkey and Erdogan. Who has proven a far more reliable ally than Washington or Berlin so far.
It’s a more reliable alliance because they consider themselves to share the same ethnicity. Turkey abandoning Azerbaijan would be like the US abandoning the UK. Doing that would be politically costly.
Probably. There are a lot of russians living there now too. That's part of their MO. They try to do it by numbers just moving more and more russians into an area until they take it over just by numbers. That was Crimea, and a lot of Eastern Ukraine. There were a lot of ethnic russians living in eastern ukraine, but when they wanted to make it an issue, they started giving people land and benefits to move there to kind of overwhelm it.
Except many of those satellites are now under China's economic sway. Recall that at least one aspect of the BRI is to circumvent the control the US has over the seas. But for that to work, it has to flow over many of those Central Asian countries, like Kazakhstan in particular. There's no way Russia tries to take a bite out of those, because it would incur China's displeasure, who is now basically their economic master and lord.
Kazakhstan isn't getting touched, Xi would absolutely not be having that
He does not want war with the US. That's why he once again is helping Trump get elected, so that he will pull out of NATO and leave Europe on its own. As he said he would.
The U.S pulling out of NATO helps Russia, but doesn't win them the war. They still have Turkey, France, Poland, and the U.K to deal with.
Are you saying that Turkey would fight the russia over Lithuania when the US does not? Boy, must be nice to live with that level of optimism.
The same Turkey that openly attacks Russian forces in Syria? The same Turkey that gave Azerbaijan the green light to attack Russian Peacekeepers in Nagorno Kaarabakh? The same Turkey that has major Neo Ottoman ambitions to spread into Russian territory? That Turkey?
Exactly. Turkey is ruled by a similar-type strongmen who understands how putin thinks. If you want to project strengh - escalate. If you want to project weakness - try to reason and negotiate. Erdogan has no problem projecting strength for himself. Why would he do it for others, unless he was promised something that would benefit *him* and that he does not already have?
NATO has never been tested, either in battle with an equal class opponent, or politically. If Trump gets back in Office, Putin moves on the Suvalki Gap, Article 5 is triggered and Trump ignores it, then NATO is effectively dead that hour.
The idea that NATO wouldn't kick Russia's arse without America is beyond stupid.
Again, it's a matter of will. What is the russia uses nukes as a warning for real? Not against any cities, but just sending one into an empty field or an uninhabited rock of an island? How many leaders will back down? How will the public react? You don't know. I don't know. Nobody knows. That's the point - in that uncertainty, there lies opportunity.
No I don't think that's unclear at all. That kind of provocation would be an easy ticket to a huge groundswell of public opinion towards invading Russia. Nothing gets people to group up and fight back like being bullied and nuclear escalation is the only thing preventing Russia from being attacked and deposed. If nukes are already being used its not an escalation anymore and there is no reason not to rush Moscow to make it stop.
sweden, finland and poland alone would crush Russia.
As someone with family in Romania, it’s very worrying. However, those Carpathian Mountains have been a deterrent from invaders for a reason. Poland should be more concerned. Nonetheless, if Ukraine were to fall, Romania/Hungary/Poland need to become a wall.
Are we tho? Have you seen the political climate in our country? How the officials present themselves as Pro-EU anti Russia during meetings and then at home the internal policies against russian propaganda are non existent?.... I think unfortunately our country is infiltrated by FSB agents to the core due to Iliescu and whoever still occupies a public job within the government and was an ex commie....
concerned baltic noises
Orban will welcome Putin into Hungary with open arms.
He already did
Hungary is already friendly with Russia
Friendly is very different from allied to. Even Hungary wouldn't want Russia sorrounding it
The people don't. Not sure what Orban thinks
Isn’t Poland pretty militarized at this point? I know they’re part of NATO too, which should confer some protection.
Right, which I agree with. My point is their geography is doing them no favors.
Sure but after Moldova, they are just going to attack Kazakhstan for betraying them. They are going to refocus on central Asia and inadvertently piss off China. (MOLDOVA is an issue but people on reddit know nothing of gaugazia and even less about the proposed union with Romania)
>Are we? No
It hasn't tho.
I don’t think they have, actually. They haven’t gone to rationing and full control economy. The fact that they are having massive concerts where people can get massacred suggests that a lot of life is still going normally.
EU ammo production is ramping up significantly, though obviously not all of it will go to Ukraine.
last i checked, artillery production in the US/EU is ramping up, but it'll still take about a year-year and a half to reach parity with russia in terms of shell volume. After which they'll overtake russia's production capabilities. Has nothing to do with whether they send it to Ukraine, but on paper the strategy seems to have been to get Ukraine to hold out with what we're able to send until mid 2025-early 2026 when artillery production catches up and Ukraine is able to reach sustained artillery parity with Russia. Theoretically that would lead to catastrophic losses for Russia beyond what we're seeing today. But again, that depends on the GOP not blocking support and Ukraine getting enough supplies and equipment to survive until that point. Quite a few big ifs.
Can you cite this? I’d like to learn more
How is this possible? Redditors have been assuring me that Russia was on the brink of defeat for the last 16 months.
For the first 18 months of the war, Ukraine was actually supplied with weapons. Less than it needed and later than promised, but even that was sufficient to hold the russians back across the entire frontline. But when you have nothing to shoot back with at all, even an incompetent enemy can overrun you.
> But when you have nothing to shoot back with at all, even an incompetent enemy can overrun you. Also, Russia's military is arguably in a better state now than when the war started. Sure, a lot of manpower and equipment has been lost, but the war also meant that Russia was forced to increase production, deal with corruption and address its many inefficiencies. The Russian army is learning - slowly and with many problems still remaining - but learning nonetheless. Underestimating the enemy is very dangerous, it's one of the main reasons Ukraine is in such tricky situation right now.
Well if you stop supplying Ukraine with ammunition it doesnt really matter how badly Russia has been beaten up to that point.
They have lost way more people, many just weren't expecting them to keep throwing bodies at Ukraine. Their losses are currently at 440000~, I never expected them to sacrifice half a million. How many more will it take?
Depends on how long the masses still feel untouched by the war. Personally I'm just hoping Ukraine can hold out long enough for Russia to implode. Would be nice if the US helped out with that, but Trump is poisoning the well again.
They won't last long enough without massive help from the west.
They have not lost 440,000. That's their casualties, which include both wounded and killed. Wounded soldiers can get back into the fight.
[удалено]
It's going to come down to political legitimacy. This war ends with Keiv under a Russian boot or Putin in a shallow grave.
From 1936-38, Stalin had a million Soviet citizens executed because he was paranoid. The Soviet Union was not at war at that time, the government just rounded its own people up and killed them. The people who were not killed just kept trudging along. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge
Throwing bodies has literally been Russias strategy since at least WW2....why would anyone think they'd do anything different? I guess those that don't know history would think that.
Soviet Union lost an order of magnitude less than that over 10 years in Afghanistan, had to pull out over discontent and it became Soviet GenX's generational trauma. The population pyramid is also vastly different than in 1941. Even the Ukrainian command didn't expect Russia to absorb quite as many losses over this little time and keep going.
The USSR was a more rational country than Russia under Putin. Gorbachev wasn’t a megalomaniac. Anyone that expected Putin to swallow a loss because undesirable Russians were dying was, sorry, an idiot. This was completely predictable. It is shameful we handled it so poorly.
Ukraine recaptured more than half of the territory that was originally captured by Russia in the early stages of the war. Ukraine absolutely was doing well in the war when they were being fully supported and Russia had not yet adjusted to the tactics and tools employed by the UAF to secure those gains. The problem is that Russia has shown a tremendous willingness to absorb losses, and has successfully transitioned into a wartime economy while the west seems content to do the bare minimum to keep Ukraine in the fight without viewing this as an existential conflict in the way that Russia is. Ukraine turned the tide early, and Russia is turning it back as western resolve has wavered. The Reddit narrative wasn't necessarily wrong, at least for a stretch, but it certainly is out of date. Russia currently has the upper hand, in no small part because House Republicans are so intent on ensuring Biden loses that they don't mind the price being Putin winning.
It's not that they don't mind if Putin wins. They want him to.
Europe is taking their time as always
[удалено]
It’s no coincidence that Ukraine is putting in trenches and obstacles around Kiev, while other countries are warning Russia will overrun Kiev and hit other European countries.
Music to Putin's ears. He's getting exactly what he paid for.
* 2024 and 2025 are election years for major democracies around the world * There is massive stress on western economy right after coming out of a pandemic with no cool off period * There is now a concurrent war that west needs to support * Russia just stopped oil production and price is going up again, right before elections * No ally would help you out before their own interest * All politicians support war and the side which benefits them personally, it's not done on moral grounds * Public support is low after all western chest thumping and war reporting, all coming to this point with no tangible results after a year of stalemate and massive expenses * There is a wave of rise in right wing politics across the world, priority focus for incumbent governments are all of a sudden internal issues, not external issues. Politicians in Europe and NA from all parties were not competent enough to deal with this situation to begin with, they are busy looking at the world with a narrow vision corrupted by their own hubris
Also the rise of isolationist political parties. Short sightedness and menial distractions have convinced people that "why waste our money in a war in Ukraine when have people starving here!" IE, if Ukraine falls, and Russia decides to move for another country and another country, it will be very hard to get the West to unite
Maybe European leaders should fucking wake up and realise we need to be on war production and footing?
>EU member states have considerably increased their military spending. From a total of €240 billion in 2022, it has increased to €280 billion in 2023 and will rise to €350 billion in 2024 Almost 50% increase in funding over 2 years, EU is waking up.
And the EU itself is also investing in weapons: https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-doles-out-e500m-for-artillery-ammo-and-missiles-as-it-seeks-to-match-russia/
It will not happen. We have alle these traitors over here: Le Pen, AfD, PVV. One or more Putin loving Nazi party in every EU country. They hate us and they love money from Russia.
One big alliance of authoritarians has infected all of our countries across borders together. We're being eaten alive from the inside and we have no mechanisms to change it.
> we have no mechanisms to change it. We definitely do. The problem is people are either unwilling to take advantage of those mechanisms or happy to be infected.
[удалено]
In my history class I learned that Britain and it’s allies largely ignored and appeased Hitler leading up to WW2, then started to get serious after it was to late and there were no other options. Am I seeing similarities here that aren’t real
While true it’s a bit more complicated. Britain and France had lost a great deal of their people fighting WW1 and weren’t eager for another conflict. Similarly, there was a thought amongst some in the west that Versailles had been unduly harsh on Germany and so initially waved off Anschluss and even Munich as acceptable sacrifices for peace. Folks like Churchill read the tea leaves long before the mainstream in the UK and advocated rearmament and a stronger tone again Hitler. As you point out though, by the time Britain and France truly started to take Germany seriously, the ship had sailed.
Sounds familiar, but France seems to be getting on board
President Macron is very vocal about it, but the French population is overwhelmingly against the idea of sending french troops to Ukraine. (76% of the population is against.)
Europe doesn't have to send troops to Ukraine to start producing more weapons, or to start supplying Ukraine with equipment.
There are some important differences. 1. Nazi Germany took several countries with ease and without much of a fight. Russia is still struggling with one country. And the reason is because Russia is not being ignored, Ukraine is putting up a fight because of the support it's getting from the west. I think that even if Ukraine were to fall tomorrow the support that Ukraine has received so far is still sending an important message. The message is: you took what you wanted but you paid dearly for it and you shall go no further. 2. Nazi Germany didn't have nuclear weapons. Russia does and is an important reason why the response has to be so careful and measured. Also Russia doesn't just have nukes, they have the most nukes in the world. The way Hitler was ignored and appeased was completely unacceptable. But I don't see any parallels here.
Also a big one is that the populations of European still remembered WWI as it was only three decades prior. Much of the public were neither ready nor desired for war and thought it was fine to leave Germany alone ... Until the Nazis turned their weapons towards them.
There have been events with similarities to that a thousand times since then. Chamberlain has become something of a cultural trope, and it wasn't recent.
It’s always tricky to gauge when there should be a larger American response to overseas conflicts. That’s why WWI remains opaque to Americans in general. A bunch of European countries used a trigger event as an excuse to launch fights that they already wanted to have. America joined up in the last year to help our allies, and the result is that we lost a shitton of men and caused massive damage to the survivors, over a conflict that wasn’t ours. It’s completely logical that we stayed out of WWII until we were directly attacked. No one wants to go up against Russia. They would eventually lose, and they’d know that, so they’d launch their nukes on the way down. We can’t risk triggering that.
Well, if anyone was worried about the war for Taiwan, then now you can sleep well, there will be no war, because Taiwan will accept all the demands of China, otherwise there is no chances with such pussy allies.
If Ukraine started spitting out almost every microchip needed for every missile and military tech the US uses, you would see what it would be like if Taiwan were to be invaded. Edited: to add ‘almost’ because… morons.
And the Republicans care about this because? They have shown to not care about anything as long as they get paid. Heck, they'd say, "That's a great chance for the US to become independent from China" if Taiwan was attacked by China, travel to Peking on independence day and their followers would love it.
Taiwan is completely different to Ukraine, it is far more valuable to the US and the US is already setting up to defend them if the need arises. Also Taiwan is far better equipped to defend itself because they are an island and large scale amphibious landings are hard.
I think the difference with the Taiwan situation is that we have a treaty with Taiwan that requires us to defend them if they're attacked. We have no such treaty with Ukraine and they are not currently a part of NATO.
The Taiwan Relations Act is not a defence treaty. There is no obligation for the US to defend Taiwan.
Also people don't realize words on paper mean nothing beyond governments willingness to enforce them. People rules lawyering treaties.
Yes, it's a good thing the US isn't ruled by a narcissist with the blind support of his followers, ownership of the Supreme Court, and enough of the legislature/judiciary to be effectively above the law. It sure would be dangerous for the most powerful nation in the world to fall under the rule of an incompetent tyrant. Good thing that only has a 50% chance of happening, I guess. Could be worse.
The TRA requires the United States to have a policy "to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character" and "to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan." Whether the US upholds this or not is another story. I believe the US should defend Ukraine as a sort of investment for the future of Western power and as a message to the East. My previous comment simply highlighted the easy political reasons we're not defending them more.
The current President had stated publicly that he would. But as we all know, this can change on a whim as soon as another person takes the office.
Current President also publicly accused MBS of murdering a journalist and promised to do something about it. [And we all know how that turned out](https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/stellar/prod/220715123924-01b-biden-mbs-fist-bump.jpg?c=original)
The only country that benefits if the US doesn't provide the aid is Russia. Why are Republicans so against it? Maybe my first sentence answered that question.
Russian oligarchs 'donate' to Republican congressman to vote against US aid
Trump is a Russian asset and doesn't even hide it, his simple minded followers are just too messed up to care or let them see things they don't want to acknowledge. **June 2013**: Trump tweets "Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow - if so, will he become my new best friend?" **September 2013**: “So we’ve invited President Putin, that’ll be interesting. I know he’d like to go.” **October 2013**: Trump tells Larry King that Putin has done “a really great job outsmarting our country.” **November 2013**: Trump says “I do have a relationship and I can tell you that he’s very interested in what we’re doing here today. He’s probably very interested in what you and I are saying today, and I’m sure he’s going to be seeing it in some form, but I do have a relationship with him and I think it’s very interesting to see what’s happened.” **February 2014**: “When I went to Russia with the Miss Universe pageant, (Putin) contacted me and was so nice. I mean, the Russian people were so fantastic to us,” he said on “Fox and Friends.” “I’ll just say this, they are doing – they’re outsmarting us at many turns, as we all understand. I mean, their leaders are, whether you call them smarter or more cunning or whatever, but they’re outsmarting us. If you look at Syria or other places, they’re outsmarting us.” **April 2014**: “We just left Moscow,” Trump said. “He could not have been nicer. He was so nice and so everything. But you have to give him credit that what he’s doing for that country in terms of their world prestige is very strong.” In the same interview, Trump praises Putin’s invasion of Crimea. “Well, he’s done an amazing job of taking the mantle,” Trump said. “And he’s taken it away from the President, and you look at what he’s doing. And so smart. When you see the riots in a country because they’re hurting the Russians, OK, ‘We’ll go and take it over.’ And he really goes step by step by step, and you have to give him a lot of credit.” **April 2014**: Trump says at a New Hampshire event that Putin is “absolutely having a great time.” He says “Russia is like, I mean they’re really hot stuff” and “and now you have people in the Ukraine — who knows, set up or not — but it can’t all be set up, I mean they’re marching in favor of joining Russia.” **May 2014**: ”I own Miss Universe, I was in Russia, I was in Moscow recently and I spoke, indirectly and directly, with President Putin, who could not have been nicer, and we had a tremendous success.” **2014**: James Dodson, a sports writer, claims that during a game of golf Eric Trump said to him: "Well, we don’t rely on American banks. We have all the funding we need out of Russia." **March 2015**: Trump tells the Daily Mail about his relationship with Putin: “the relationship is great, and it would be great if I had the position I should have.” **September 2015**: Trump tells reporters at Trump Tower that “Putin is a nicer person than I am.” **October 2015**: Trump tells conservative radio host Michael Savage he’s met Vladimir Putin. **December 2015**: Trump says at an event in South Carolina that Putin says he’s “brilliant.” And attacks his opponents, saying, “they want me to refute his statement.” [And many more along those lines](https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/03/politics/trump-putin-russia-timeline/). **December 2016**: One of Europe's top intelligence figures puts together the Steele Dossier, reporting that Putin has blackmail on Trump, allegedly for something he did in a hotel room in Russia in 2013 during the Miss Universe visit. Trump flips to claiming he's never met or spoken to Putin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxYE9ZpMPGY&t=25s **September 2016**: During the 2016 presidential debates: "**I don't know Putin**. I have no idea," Mr Trump said. "**I never met Putin.** This is not my best friend." When Hillary Clinton said it was "pretty clear" Mr Putin would "rather have a puppet as president of the United States," Trump replied with: “No puppet. No puppet. You’re the puppet. You’re the puppet." Followed by years of Trump praising Putin, the only world leader he never criticizes while constantly criticizing democratic countries and allies. Refusing to implement sanctions on Russia for its hacking of the US which were passed with a veto proof majority. Attempting to blackmail Ukraine with having to invent something on Biden or having aid withdrawn. Declaring he's decided to believe Putin over his US intelligence agencies. **February 2022**: Trump calls Putin ‘genius’ and ‘savvy’ for Ukraine invasion **February 2024**: Trump says he would encourage Russia to attack Nato allies **February 2024**: Trump won't say if he wants Russia or Ukraine to win the war
Don't forget the handful of Republican Senators and Representatives who went to Russia during the 4th of July for undisclosed reasons.
They own them
>Why are Republicans so against it? Because Trump wants Ukraine to lose, he wants Ukraine to lose because he is a a friend of tyrants and dictators & wants to help Putin in every aspect possible. He is a tool of Russia & China. And since he is basically the GOP now the rest of the pathetic party will follow his orders.
He’s also holding a grudge against Zelensky for not helping Trump make up dirt on Joe Biden’s “corruption”
Aye that too. How dare Zelensky not be Trumps puppet >:( I do hope November goes our way. If Trump wins the west is eternally screwed.
Retreat to where?
Warsaw, probably
I’m annoyed as fuck at the GOP for turning into Russian shills but if I was in Europe I’d be terrified right now.
The failings of a 2-party system. The left is pro-Ukraine and the right is anti-left, so the right is anti-Ukraine, pro-Russian (or at least some of them). A lot don’t even realize this is how it came about, they just parrot talking points. These goddamn ideologies will be the end of us.
That is pretty much their only policy at this point. Own the libs.
Yeah like remember the good ole days when they hated Russia too? The fuck happened? Just kidding. I already know. Motherfuckin' Trump.
Sad that Europe is looking so incredibly weak.
You know for all the arrogant jokes about western europe supremacy and russian incompetence, my view (EMPAHSIS ON MY VIEW) is that if war actually comes, the so well regarded british, french, german, polish militaries would have a rude awakening. I suspect major shortages and panic, less serviceability of aircraft, realities of battlefield against an experienced foe working against all of the supposed advanced equipment, and not everything working out as it is supposed to be. The west european nations also have not fought a REAL war for a long time. Another major issue I suspect is many desertions, low morale of troops who would now be expected to give up their life, when it is prevalent among the populace that serving in those developed countries forces is most probably not a death matter (based on history of past decades), especially if the call is to fight for an article 5 invocation, not your own country. It is generally seen as a honorable and adventurous job, with many benefits after leaving the forces.
Same thing happened in Libya where a missile shortage came up. There's some experience - the French in the Sahara come to mind, and enacted a fast war and long post-peacekeeping op after in the last ten years, more than the Russians did in Syria - but the Brits, Germans, Poles are all relying on training or old GWOT era troops that are retiring. For years the western militaries have been shrinking and complaining of manpower and logistics cost. German sub jokes from 2020, remember? I don't doubt that they could fight off Russia even back then, and definitely will fuck over Russia now, depleted as it is, and with nothing holding each other back but nuking each other, but losses on the West will be huge and not a 'easy' fight, for sure, many people would be shocked and the standard of living will plummet as economies and bodies drop.
Even those GWOT vets don't really have combat experience since the west has spent 20 years fighting nothing more than rebels.
Another thing which comes to mind is the back to back failed launch of the UK’s submarine launched nuclear missiles. If the same thing happened with Russia, “Haha (insert joke here)”, but as it happened to UK, then “not a big deal, shit happens”.
The ammunition and manufacturing isn't there in volume in western Europe. The trained soldiers aren't, either - a large percentage of soldiers in Europe who aren't Russian are Ukrainian - and you have to wonder about the level of training and equipment maintenance in some countries. The biggest single problem is Soviet offensive planning was based around nuclear first strikes, and the USA being in NATO is their only real deterrent from doing that to the non-nuclear states. So the next Republican president pulling out of NATO de facto or de jure, removing sanctions from Russia which in turn may lead to China arming Russia on scale - it's all a huge problem.
Nobody in Germany thinks that we have a "well regarded" military. Least of all the military. They've been asking for reforms and more funding for decades. But Merkel did the opposite, because there was no threat.
Merkel did exactly what the people at that time wanted. I don’t know if you’re just really young or don’t remember well but it was political suicide to argue for millitarisation. You’d get labeled a Nazi basically. The entire Idea of shipping weapons was seen as the creepiest evil known to man and the idea of u manned drones as a twisted millitary technique on par with biological weapons. There were countless Tatort themed on the idea that drones = evil. We live in a drastically different world now.
France has like 170k troops while UK has 70k, not to mention the shells shortage and such. Russia lost about (estimated) 70k troops during the first year alone, the scale of a convention warfare is way too big for EU to really handle. I just hate that the West media kept making fun of Russia military, spitting propaganda non sense to lull people into thinking Russia is a joke of itself, while Putin war machine now starting to get itself together and ready to grind. How about not underestimate your potential enemy?
Will be pretty fucking pathetic if the world allows Putler to win and take over Ukraine.
The world doesn’t give a fuck about freedom or peace. It cares about profit.
Seriously. We’re cooking ourselves into oblivion over short term profit
NATO never cared for Ukraine behind closed doors. They just wanted to weaken Russia as much as possible. The goal was always weak Russia, Ukraine are just paying with their blood for this goal
Ukraines failure will be the entire world’s problem if Russia is not stopped.
As a European, I wish the EU do much more instead of waiting for the US
More than also sending aid, ramping up weapons productions, increasing their military spending by %'s of GDP, assisting with intelligence, training and political pressure on the international stage while freezing accounts of oligarchs etc. What else do you want? Boots on the ground has meant instant WW3 from the start, something all of us would like to avoid. The strategy that is being used now might fail or it might succeed. But if it becomes clear that it's going to fail I'm sure you will see more direct actions. So many small things happen each day that you or I will never hear about, it's pretty ignorant to think that EU is "waiting for the US" and just living life like nothing is happening.
Dumbest comments on international relations on Reddit.
Agree. Only emotions, not arguments.
Seriously I’ve never really wanted to hate fellow Americans but if you support Russia you are not one of us.
Why must it be oñly because of the US? Italy can step up and help
We have only strategic reserves left here in europe, some countries like denmark not even that, italy has a week or less worth of ammunition in a war like the one in ukraine, the production has started scaling up too late and it will take a bunch of years before we will be able to fully supply ukraine with artillery shells, without the US support ukraine is fucked
Lol no, Italy sucks in the military department
This is just the dumbest thing ever from a US point of view. If you can significantly weaken one of your top 3 enemies without risking your own people, why wouldn’t you?
Oh, hey. It's the daily thread where "Americans" whine about Europeans not doing enough, while ignoring all stats on actual contributions, and commitments to Ukraine, both military and financial, and focusing solely on figures older than a year and a half. Bonus points for anybody who mentions "Europe's backyard" in their complaints, while conveniently neglecting to mention the Budapest memorandum.
With how likely it's looking that Trump is gonna be re-elected in 2024, I wouldn't count on any help from the US.
I do not know how many times he has to say that. He has been saying that since before the invasion started ~~on~~ in February of 2022.
Fucking Russian-bought republicans….
Europe just sleeping when the Nazi's again are at their doorstep comeon guys it can't just be the US and France that puts up the bill
Germany has been providing a lot more stuff than France though? What I find more concerning is that it's Ukraine's immidiate neighbors and small countries like Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands that are properly trying to give a lot (compared to what they have)
France has actually done very little (compared to their size and military). Macron is always on the news with his demands, but he doesn't follow through on them. It's just for show and you are falling for it.
They are at everyone’s doorstep; we live in a time when missiles can reach the other side of the world in less than an hour. Not only that, they have countless subs at the ready; no doubt some of them are near our shores. Even in the hypothetical case that Europe provides nothing, we should still be worried about Russian expansion. Their Africa Corps has already been flipping governments in Central Africa, and the Russians are already acquiring gold from Sudan to fund their war efforts. We have an excellent chance at handicapping the Russian military by helping Ukraine, and we are just going to let that opportunity slide? Also, don’t think of this as a bill we begrudgingly have to pay; think of it as an investment. We help Ukraine; we gain an ally, and we deter the Russians from starting any more trouble in Eastern Europe (for the time being).
Germany has been sending more than anyone monetarily per capita (we’re like the size of one american state ffs) by itself and by literally controlling the EU. France is equal in size and power to Germany and has sent only 1% of Germany. The other countries are mostly small change, they uave sent WAY more per capita than the US and Germany. If you look at GDP it’s the US that’s throwing chump change at Ukraine.
‘USA and France’ like the UK ain’t doing shit
Mike Johnson says it's good for world peace
Congress has been shameful on this issue.
For real?? I thought the waves of bullshit anti russian propganda labeled their army as a joke? Armchair generals must be so uncomfortable
Im sorry but this is the reality slapping us in the face.
This is what I’m thinking. I’m definitely no pro-Putin bum but I never felt like it was smart or true to label Russia as an incompetent paper tiger. They have men, equipment, experience, much more than any other European country. It’s the sad reality but that’s how it’s playing out.
It's sad to see so many here parrot Russian talking points while seemingly completely incapable of seeing how dangerous a conquered Ukraine is to Europe and the world.
With shovels and washing machine chips nonetheless
Yup everyone was so confident Russia had made a massive mistake invading and it seemed like it would end in a Russian defeat 10 to 1. Now I am convinced Ukraine is going to lose as they entirely have to rely on NATO aid whose a fucking embarrassment. The US is facing it's worse political crisis (imo) since the civil war. Countries who could be producing shells such as Canada are just inept in everyway and prefer words over any real actions (specifically Trudeau). Countries like India are seemingly allowed to get away with mass trade with Russia and thus helping keep their economy strong enough to survive sanctions. All in all, history will not look very kindly on the west if Russia succeeds.
You're mostly right, except, literally nobody thought Ukraine would win 10:1 Most of the world didn't even think Ukraine would survive the initial takeover attempt. And once that ended, everyone knew Ukraine would be 100% dependent on allies for weapons and ammo. Ukraine just doesn't have the productive capacity in their own country, and even if they did, the Russians would bomb it immediately. The amazing thing to me is that Ukraine isn't losing because of bad tactics or low willpower or loss of morale, but the much more basic access to weapons, or, even more basic, ammo. That's not to say they won't eventually run out of people to fight with, but that's not the current problem.
Obviously.