In 1994 Ukraine gave its nuclear weapons to Russia in exchange for promises to respect its sovereignty and yet here we are. If part of the treaty is that Ukraine remains independent and defenseless Russia will just invade again when it sees an opportunity. Just as it did last time
actually he attacked because he realised that the ukranians dont want to be part of russia. he tried a sneaking anexation and it fell appart in the euromeidan protests.
Good comment. Many people don't know about this. There is a popular misconception that USA or Britain are giving aid to Ukraine solely because of moral altruism or irrational anti-russian prejudices even though these countries have given guarantees to Ukraine.
Good comment. Many people do not know about this. There are many people who think that the USA or Britain are giving aid to Ukraine solely because of moral altruism or irrational antirussian prejudices even though these countries have given guarantees to Ukraine.
Good take. There is a popular misconception that the USA or Britain are giving aid to Ukraine solely because of moral altruism or irrational prejudices against Russia even though these countries have given guarantees to Ukraine.
If you listen to what Trump, Vance and Musk say, I think that we know exactly what Trump will do. The general outline is a ceasefire with territory more or less frozen along existing lines. No NATO membership for Ukraine in the foreseeable future and some kind of demilitarized between the two sides. (Kursk is a negotiating chip.) Russia will agree because they have won enough territory to declare victory and to obtain release from sanctions. the Ukrainians, without continued US aid and starlink, have no realistic choice but to agree.
4:51 "the US has spent more than 70B in military aid" would be more accurate to phrase as "the US has provided military aid valued at more than 70B". their aid has largely been providing old stockpiles which they would otherwise have to scrap. that's not the same as paying 70B in money, i.e. "spending"
yea they also get loans and stuff . on other hand just because poll shows americans believe something is true doesnt make it so make a poll how many of them think that moon is made of cheese and if numbers are single digit we can talk (its almost 15% of them btw)
Thats a good point. I'm not an American citizen but i can talk about from where i'm from. We have tons of old stockpiles of a bit of everything (except nukes) and people neglect how crazy expensive it is JUST TO KEEP IN STORAGE every month/year and than the same story to maintenance by which the majority will end on hundreds of millions or billions in a few years to just end in scrap. So what people need to realize is that giving aid is actually a saving money scheme by stop wasting astronomic sums of money into unused stuff in wherehouses and also makes the economy grow by keep investing on newer stuff by making new/create more jobs/sell to others. TLDR: People are too short sighted to understand that this AID is not charity and unlike populists preach this saves more than what costs, if not this aid would not be given this willy nilly lol.
He’s basically proposing Ukraine surrender all claims to occupied lands post 2014 and 2021 invasions! Twenty percent of their land mass and resources. If the US guaranteed Ukrainian sovereignty and integrity in exchange for nuclear disarmament in the Budepest memorandum they should be prepared to honour that guarantee. As the third greatest nuclear power in the world Ukraine disarmed on the basis of American, European and Russian assurances of protection. If they do not, how valid will international agreements be, the guarantors word in any future agreements anywhere would be viewed as unreliable at best.!
"they should be prepared to honour that guarantee" read any history book on the US and you will quickly learn how much they (don't) love to honour their treaties...
@ Yes sadly that’s very true of many governments, international laws and agreements seem to be often considered as guidelines rather than binding strictures!
What’s the other choice wait for Russia to gain more land and wait for all Ukrainians to run out until ww3 Wow such a smart idea. Do you genuinely believe after 3 years and all those casualties Russia is just going to give up on Russian speaking land anyway?
One very hard to swallow truth about reality is that agreements treaties alliances and documents laws morals and ethics are all just words and if the circumstances make it beneficial all of those things will become irrelevant the fact of the matter is Russia has nukes America has nukes neither of them can really commit to the war without creating world war III nuclear winter which is the worst possible scenario FOR THE ENTIRE WORLD! *So yeah that's not happening no matter how many fancy pieces of paper says the US has an obligation to* Ukraine has lost they are sending the elderly the women and the disabled to the Frontline and every piece of military equipment they have was paid for by American tax dollars America has Ukraine by the balls even more so than Russia does if America were to just stop supplying aid Ukraine would cease to be a nation within a year yeah Russia has the upper hand in these negotiations one because they have nukes so the USA can't just descend on Moscow and make Ukraine win by default and two because they've been winning the conventional war they have the leverage and this is simply just the product of the outcome of the war if Ukraine had taken back their lands with a actually successful counter-offensive and even pushed into Russia then they would probably have a more favourable deal but they don't people need to remember that modern borders are exactly that modern because they are what we have right now throughout human history they have changed from constant victories and losses territorially at least this was a Russian win and at the end of the day will just be another footnote of history where the world map slightly changed
And by empowering Russia and undermining American global influence, he’s also destroying the “American empire”. American “patriots” supporting Trump have been Putin’s best friends in helping destroy America from the inside.
He absolutely doesnt need to do that. No matter what he does, the war needs to stop. He is completely right, no matter what he does to stop it. Its terrorizing the whole world.
As a ukrainian kid I feel so exhausted from all of this bro. I just want to come back to my home city and play with my friends like it was before the war.
Once Winston churchill said to Neville Chumberlain when he agreed to surrender piece of Czechia to Hitler for peace " You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war"
Do you realize that if Trump chooses war, then it'll be WW3 and nuclear exchange? Are you ready for you and your family to melt? This is not WW2, the West can't even allow Ukraine to win because of the risk of nuclear war, what's the point of just letting Ukraine lose slowly?
You don’t see the dark side of the United Dtates using the Ukrainians as the human bodies to wield their Western Weapons in order to weaken and wear down Russia? It’s the West being sneaky here we know what Russias endgame is and exactly why they attacked. What we don’t know is why America refuses to go to the table with an all or nothing attitude literally just using a proxy war to kill Russians. If we go to war with Iran I bet you there’ll be some Slavs wrapped in turbans on the field
@@kristijangrgic9841 @Malikluqman3054, Winston Churchill also blamed WW2 happening on America and democracy: "This war would never have come unless, under American and modernising pressure, we had driven the Habsburgs out of Austria and the Hohenzollerns out of Germany. By making these vacuums we gave the opening for the Hitlerite monster to crawl out of its sewer on to the vacant thrones. No doubt these views are very unfashionable..." - Winston Churchill, April 1945. "If your family [Kaiser Wilhelm] remained in power in Germany, I am certain that Mr Hitler would not be giving us any headaches right now" - David Lloyd George, Britain's WW1 wartime prime minister "There's a man alone, without family, without children, without God... He builds legions, but he doesn't build a nation. A nation is created by families, a religion, traditions: it is made up out of the hearts of mothers, the wisdom of fathers, the joy and the exuberance of children [...] But of our Germany, which was a nation of poets and musicians, of artists and soldiers, he has made a nation of hysterics and hermits, engulfed in a mob and led by a thousand liars or fanatics." - Kaiser Wilhelm, attacking Hitler before WW2 but after Anschluss & Munich, trying to warn a deaf world of the threat Hitler posed (& only monarchists tried to oust Adolf before Munich, but Britain was deaf to Goerdeler and others who begged them to support their coup attempt). All of diplomacy is appeasement, it's either that or escalation/warmongering/conflict. Appeasement just means conceding something in a negotiation. That's all non-belligerent diplomacy. But maybe you're right. Saddam appeasing America by letting inspectors in, didn't stop American aggression. Gaddafi appeasing America by giving up his nuclear program, didn't work. But one might argue they didn't appease "enough" to avoid the aggression. But there are PLENTY Of examples of where appeasement DOES work. Thailand is a perfect example, one of the ONLY nations in Southeast Asia to avoid colonization despite being sandwiched between three great powers. It successfully appeased all three great powers over time and avoided being colonized. Heck, we wouldn't even being speaking ENGLISH right now if not for appeasement. It was the French giving land to the Vikings (appeasement), who then became known as Normans (hence Normandy and our Norman-influenced language (Northman=Normand), those appeased Vikings/Normans then later invaded England centuries later and gave us our language we're using right now. So appeasement CLEARLY works in many situations. Virtually all diplomacy is either appeasing/conciliatory or else aggressive/belligerent. Saying appeasement never works is basically saying to always maintain a belligerent/hostile stance. It's basically been the military industrial complex's mantra to ensure endless wars.
And remember that Czechia was Czechoslovakia. Slovakians made up half of that country and were quite happy when the Germans challenged the Czech government to cede their German majority provinces. Dumb comment on your part.
If you actually think Russia present the same treat to Europe (which exists under the most powerful military alliance in human history) as Hitler did, then why aren't you fighting? If you actually believe the parallel between the two dictators, then you are a coward for not fighting. What's more likely is that you, and everyone else that compares Putin and Trump to Hitler are just toddlers.
@@lolaboots7028 except churchill is better than trump in every way, and warned britain about hitler getting appeased for ages, look how appeasing turned out
The problem is the the USA has not suffered a land war in their country for 150 odd years. Ask an American how much land they would be prepared to give up to stop a war on their soil, so stop the killing and I bet a cent to a dollar they they would not give up an inch. The only reason that they are in powerful position is that they did not suffer large catastrophic destructions in both world wars, but expect other countries to cave to tyrants. As Churchill said " America will do the right thing after they have tried everything else"
Would you rather Russia take some Ukrainian territory or take over all of Ukraine? It's very easy to tell them to keep fighting when you're sitting in your couch like the little coward you are, while hundreds of thousands are dying and suffering. Sometimes you have to not be delusional and give some concessions in a war you know you cannot win, like Finland in 1940 at the conclusion of the Winter war. What you suggest instead is be like Germany during WWII and not surrender whatsoever. This will lead to the total occupation of Ukraine, once its army can no longer keep on fighting. And that is not to mention the horrible demographic problem that Ukraine is facing. They better peace out while they can, use the time of peace to rebuild it's army, economy and fortify their border so that Russia will think twice before invading again (NATO troops will be stationed there anyways so if Russia attacks it will be an attack on NATO) or face their physical eradication. Also, Churchill was a complete idiot. Thanks to him the British Empire ceased to exist. Had Britain allied instead with Germany against the Soviet Union, they would have kept their empire for much longer.
An invasion of America wouldn't result in 20% of the US being occupied. We have a rifle available for every single citizen. Every single citizen would be immediately mobilized to aid in its defense whether through conscription or a sense of patriotism and pride. It would take nearly the entire Chinese population to occupy the entirety of the USA(assuming the 3 to 1 numbers advantage needed by the attacker). As it turns out, the 2nd Amendment and it's implementation in the current USA is what ensures a foreign invader will never conquer American soil. Europe could learn something from this, if every single citizen was armed and willing to die for the nation's defense, they wouldn't be in this situation.
Because most of that budget is going to make corporations and politicians rich...it's not about actually providing anything for the military. There was an article in Responsible Statecraft that discussed that American spends more and more every budget term but the number of things produced goes DOWN every year.
Dude noone wants to defeat russia beside ukraine, elites has other plans or this war would be quick. Ukriane would dust russia in several month with proper equipment but here we are even with those spoon feedings hear about restrictions for ukraine to strike russia deep (no escalation talks all the time). imagine NK giving 8 millions of artillery shells said that, sending soldier and other stuff. iamgine Iran giving rockets and thousand of shakhed drones said something about no escalation :D russia can traid oil anywhere, and buy rocket part that will have usa parts in them. not enought ammunition is just pure bullcrap
And his supporters will believe him. The man killed the concept of collective truth in the 21st century, the damage since 2016 has been untold and ever worsening.
Go ahead and hold every politician accountable for something they said would happen that didn't. Sensational rhetoric is and always has been utilized. It's politics, bud. Try to see the big picture.
The Ukrainian people were always just disposable Canon fodder to whittle down a bit of Russia with minimal effort they were never going to survive and they most definitely were not going to win
@@st.altair4936 That's the problem, they're not America's friend. Ukraine isn't in NATO, because if they were, there would be US troops on the ground. As to the quote as a whole, I see a lot of people repeating it over the fact that europe might lose a lot of American military support, and honestly I couldn't be happier. For some reason everyone likes to say that Trump wants to abandon europe and nato and pretend like it's for no reason and america is just being cruel, and no one likes to mention that trump's problem with nato was that all the countries in it who enjoy US protection under article 5 are supposed to also be paying their dues. Trump's reasoning was "why would we spend our resources protecting them when they aren't upholding their end of the bargin" I've spent years hearing my country reticuled by europeans for our military spending and now when we decide to try and make those countries up hold their contractual obligations they're all crying about? Fuck em.
@@IWLGaming. Funny thing that. First time around when Trump threatened to pull out of NATO it was because he said it needs to do more in support of its own defense, and not rely on the U.S. so much. He was vilified for the very idea. Then Russia invades Ukraine and the European Union is having round tables about how they need to stop relying on the U.S. so much and do more for their own defense. Everybody applauds. This is literally on camera.
If I was Ukraine I'd be like: "Yeah the only way we are officially giving up any territory to Russia, is if we're instantly accepted into NATO because we know otherwise, Russia is going to try this again in a few years time when they've rebuilt their military."
If Ukraine remains neutral and does not try to join NATO, then Russia will not attack either. Moreover, in a couple of years Putin will die and there will be no government that started the war in 22.
@@pannik_lucas Maidan Revolution. The Ukrainians overthrew their government and have been spouting anti-Russia and and anti-Russian rhetoric ever since, changing Russian named streets, tearing down Russian statues, putting bans on some Russian authors and musicians, putting limits on the Russian language. Well, the people living in Eastern Ukraine just so happened to be ethnic Russians, they looked at the situation and said "no thanks" and declared themselves autonomous regions. How did Ukraine respond? Starting a war against those regions and engaging in a shitload of war crimes and human rights violations...the Azov battalion was accused of "ISIS style attacks" (you can look it up), when you're being compared to ISIS, you are not the good guys.
I hope we all know that it doesn't matter who is in the 'top job' because this is a systemic problem -- greed. We have allowed many of our economic sectors, to take advantage of the American people. It's disgusting and frightening for the future of our country. My husband and I will be retiring in the next two years in another country. We are absolutely worried that SSI will no longer be funded. we'll have to rely on his pension, a 403 (b) and a very prolific lnvestment account with my Tracy Britt Cool Consulting my FA. Our national debt is bloating and expanding every month. Our government needs to get spending under control and cut the federal budget.
I went from no money to lnvest with to busting my A** off on Uber eats for four months to raise about $20k to start trading with Tracy Britt Cool Consulting. I am at $128k right now and LOVING that you have to bring this up here
Out of curiosity i looked up Tracy Britt Cool Consulting and she's known for her impressive career. She has served as the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway-owned Pampered Chef and has been recognized as one of Warren Buffett's protégés.
Tracy Britt Cool Consulting has really set the standard for others to follow, we love her here in UK as she has been really helpful and changed lots of life's
"American ammunition stocks are running low" Bro stop huffing exhaust fumes 😂😂😂 Its just the military industrial complex smelling blood in the water and wanting to jump on that opportunity
The military-industrial complex no longer exists. US military spending as a share of the economy has fallen since the end of the Cold War. There are single companies with more profit than the big five defence companies combined.
American ammunition is running low, how is saying "companies make money off it" a counter argument to that? I increased my donations to Ukraine after Trump won.
@@Harsh-mg2emROFL imagine donating to Ukraine - are you even aware how much of the weapons we send are being illegally stolen then sold on the black market? Because so much of Ukraine’s military is corrupt organized crime. The NY Times did a series on how Ukraine is the most corrupt country in all of Europe. …then switched over into pro-Ukraine propaganda as soon as their goal switched to war.
Crazy to think peace means giving up 1/5 of your country someone else just walked in and took. Wonder if the US would agree to giving up a 1/5 of it's county if they got invaded or would they decide to fight? It's all so sad. I feel.for the people of Ukraine
i mean, if the enemy is winning by that much, then in that case, we(us alone) already have over 30 million troops dead, with the draft already getting 14 year olds into the military, yea, we'll want peace. since we'll lose everything if we kept fighting. and of course in this scenario, we're fighting aliens, who already wiped out, or taken over the weak EU, and other countries, in fact, ceding 1/5 of our territory is an bargain if we get to live, since another alien faction brokered this deal for us, after supplying us with tons of alien weapons.
well usa would be able to fight just fine,so the comparison doesnt work,this issue goes back way longer,after ww2 russia should have been demolished after germany fell
They nuked a country that sank one of their dreadnought battleships at pearl. What do you think? The americans have to figure out for themselves, if they want to be a global superpower or go back to making fridges in 15 years is up to them..
@@walkingcarpet420we’re not pro-war, we’re just smart enough to see that a Russian victory in Ukraine would likely embolden them and cause more conflict in the future. Also Russia by all intents and purposes have already lost. Their economy is in shambles and their population is in steady decline, they just happened to bring Ukraine down with them. Also would you consider American intervention in WW2 a bad thing, because if you do then you need to seriously reconsider your world view.
It couldn't have ever been any different. Ukraine was always an unstable state, never fully formed, fully economically tied to Russia. The West has been underestimating Russia in various forms for centuries. Russia considers Kiev to be the mother of the Russian cities, having been fighting off the West influence away from since they've split their focus to the east as well, and had always been preparing for another round. The Northeastern Black Sea will be Russian as long as Russia exists, the best the west can do is to not allow it to fully become the Russian lake, but at a great cost, as we witness today, since the funds used to aid Ukraine should have been spent on their internal issues.
@@hReNeVaYz1 Do you really think TRUMP IS GOING TO HELP THE POOR? Stop the lies, we know who he is. A grifter doing anything he can to grift. He has no real plans just stupid promises for stupid people.
How would everyone feel if Russia decides that the USA purchase of Alaska was not legitimate and moved people into Alaska "on vacation" to protect ethnic Russians?
That's the stupidest comment I've read, and what do you say considering that there are 22 nations in the Russian Federation, if each nation was given independence, then Russia would be half the size, of course, Russia should return the territories stolen from Finland, also Russia should return the Kuril Islands to the Japanese, those islands were occupied during World War II.
@@FabulousIdea-xe8gt I'd say that since the Russian Federation is a single nation comprized of 22 republics, and not an alliance of 22 nations, you're the stupid one.
Ukraine potentially joining nato isn't the reason for the invasion, it was the fear of losing the option to take it and so they did so whilst membership wasn't granted. Taking away membership options from Ukraine is an open door for Putin to invade again until he eventually achieves his goal.
You completely ignored euromaidan, the civil war, the cult of Bandera, and US meddling in Ukraine dating back to 1946. If conquering Ukraine was always the goal, why didn't they do it in 2014 when the country was in anarchy and its military was much weaker?
They literally tried you dumb ass, but they failed and settled on just crimea. How a side note how do people forgot that the 2014 invasion was suppose to take way more than just crimea.
@@bloodmagiclord8253 There *never was* a "civil war", there is no "cult of Bandera", and *you* are ignoring the *centuries* of Russian oppression and periodic genocide against the Ukrainian people.
Whether you're for or against the war in Ukraine, the USA is to blame for not following through with with protecting Ukraine's sovereignty. If you need a history lesson read below 👇 On December 5, 1994, the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances to reaffirm security commitments to Ukraine. This political agreement, aligned with the Helsinki Accords, provided assurances against threats or use of force, respecting Ukraine's sovereignty and borders. Concurrent memorandums were also signed for Belarus and Kazakhstan. In exchange, Ukraine joined the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state, facilitating the ratification of the START treaty on the same day. Timeline * July 16, 1990: Ukraine’s Declaration of Sovereignty * July 31, 1991: The United States and the Soviet Union sign START * Dec. 26, 1991: The Soviet Union officially dissolves, delaying entry into force of START * Dec. 30, 1991: Minsk Agreement on Strategic Forces * The Commonwealth of Independent States agrees that strategic forces would be under the joint command of the former Soviet Union states * May 23, 1992: Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and the United States sign the Lisbon Protocol * The protocol calls for the return of nuclear weapons in three formerly Soviet states to Russia and for all states to be added to the START treaty and join the NPT * Jan. 14, 1994: Ukraine, Russia, and the United States sign the Trilateral Statement * Ukraine commits to full disarmament, including strategic offensive weapons, in exchange for economic support and security assurances from the United States and Russia * Sept. 4, 1993: Massandra Accords * Failed summit between Russian and Ukrainian governments * Dec. 5, 1994: Russia, Ukraine, the United States, and the United Kingdom sign the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances * Includes security assurances against the threat or use of force against Ukraine’s territory or political independence * Dec. 5, 1994: Ukraine submits its instrument of accession to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state * The five START parties exchange instruments of ratification for START, which enters into force * June 1, 1996: Ukraine transfers its last nuclear warhead to Russia * October 30, 2001: Ukraine eliminates its last strategic nuclear weapon delivery vehicle * Dec. 4, 2009: Joint Statement by Russia and the United States * The two countries confirm the security guarantees made in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum * March 18, 2014: Russia annexes Ukraine's Crimean peninsula and provides support for an ongoing insurrection by separatist forces in the eastern Luhansk and Donetsk provinces of Ukraine. * Late 2021 to early 2022: Russia engages in "military exercises" with a force estimated to exceed 150,000 military personnel involving land-, sea-, and air-based weaponry on the northern, eastern, and southern borders of Ukraine raising fears of an invasion by Russia. * February 24, 2022: Russia began a large-scale military attack and invasion of Ukraine, with planes and missile launcher attacks on Ukrainian cities, airports, and military infrastructure across much of the country.
You trying to say that Donbass land doesn't belong to people that live there? How about asking these people? They voted to secede from Ukraine back in 2014, you don't respect democracy and people's will? What "other people's" are you talking about? People on the land said their word, and the word was - they don't want to live in Ukraine, there was even e referendum in 2022 with a foreign watch, where people voted to join Russia. Nobody is giving away anything, but yeah, it's always easy to brag about defending democracy with other people's lives...
@@zukunftverstehen Alright ivan, so let's let the Tartarians vote for independance too. And the Chechens, And the ukranians living in russia should get a referendum aswell to take their land and join ukraine.
@@zukunftverstehen Donbass people didn’t vote for Russian army to occupy Donbass region, and 1/5 of the Ukraine land as well - this I know for certain.
@@SweBeach2023 peace will never be found. Putin did it once in 2014, he did it again in 2022, he will just break the agreement and invade Ukraine again at a later point in time
@@hiya2793 because there’s a real chance the US will go to war with China or Russia or both. They don’t want their military capabilities relying on potential enemies.
Not really, these three countries can't actually go to war against each other, if they did then military supply chains would actually be low down the list of concerns.
@@jamesmarlow8035 They don't need to go to war. They just need to drag their feet on military contracts. The American military being dependant on hostile countries for its resupply efforts no doubt keeps some generals awake at night.
No, South Korea has American military bases with American troops. In the case of Ukraine I don't hear any americans advocating for military bases in Ukraine for future protection from russia. All that america wants is to force Ukraine to stop fighting while not providing any protection for the future.
@@ОгурецМолоко Sad to say but Ukraine is in a tough spot being not NATO but also not pro-Russian. USA shit the bed with its own economy so Europe will have to pull through with funding for the war effort (which it already should have been doing). And in case you're new to this - it's not the end of the world to stop a war via a peace treaty just to end the death toll. Plenty of times throughout history peace was brokered to avoid larger scale conflict and it didn't have the WW2 appeasement effect. Putins not Hitler and he hasn't made rapid expansions and rapid militarization. He's not as much of a threat and with a properly funded European military he would actually be quite minimal
Hm, I disagree, I already lost count how many years it has been since is started. It is pretty stagnant. Isn't Russian and Ukraine exchange the same 3-5 villages. It is almost 3 years since it started.
@@myentertainment55 I'm afraid you are misinformed, the eastern and southern front are crumbling. Strongholds are falling, Soledar, Bakmut, Adivka, Marinka, Vuledar, etc. Defences being destroyed by glide bombs and tos- A1. Lack of experienced troops, conscripts not holding their positions. And i support Ukraine.
@@colincampbell4261 And Russia is making those gains at the cost of exponentially increasing Russian casualties and equipment losses that they can't sustain.
The democratically elected government of Ukraine was overthrown in a coup in 2014. The Ukraine regime then reneged on the two Minsk agreements that they signed brokered by Germany and France. This reminds me of Germany breaking the Munich agreements in 1938.
The Polish German (Hitler-Piksudki) Pact of 1934 was the crucial pact of the era. This alliance allowed Germany to rearm in contravention of the Versailles Treaty (knowing that their eastern border was secure) - Germany then also remilitarised the Rhineland, took over Austria and then signed an agreement with France Britain and Italy to carve up Czechoslovakia - Poland then joined in. The Soviets only signed a non.aggression pact after Poland Latvia Lithuania Denmark Britain Estonia and France had done so (and Italy Japan Spain Romania Hungary etc had signed similar agreements) The Soviets went into the eastern borderlines of Poland after it became clear Britain and France weren’t going to help Poland, (the Poles refused military help from the Soviets) and the Polish government ran away to the Romanian corridor.
The funny thing is that, technically, the US is in the position where it could leverage both ways: tell Ukraine to chill or the US pulls out from aid, and simultaneously tell Russia to chill or he'll start firing (conventional) missiles himself. I wonder if that's the basis of his plan.
@@lhumanoideerrantdesinterne8598most Ukraine men are dying, conscription will soon be reduced to 18 years. Fighting a losing battle. Ukrainian women will be free for the taking, once the war is over. Oh wait they already are marrying foreign men here in Canada. My friend just got sent back home to fight, it seems they’re getting desperate.
Putin is losing this war and asked NORTH KOREA CAN YOU SEND WHATEVER YOU CAN WE NEED HELP AGAINST A TINY COUNTRY! Putin will lose this war if we don't give in to his demands. If Trump doesn't cow like a bitch to his master, Lord Putin!
No, he'll give them everything they want. It's not a deal, it's surrender. He'll do it because he's dumb, and doesn't think about long term consequences.
its like a pendulum. After 4 years they will be invading everyone again. Isolationism - expansionism - isolationism - expansionism. Who can take the US as a reliable ally if they keep behaving like this? What do they want? Be left alone or dominate everyone and tell everyone what they should do? They should make up their frigging mind. You cant control the world and ignore the world at the same time. xD
@@XReflexian giving Putin all what he wants is the only one exists. Russia will not negotiate on anything less and will simply take Kharkov and Odessa so all useful Ukraine becomes Russia.
@@AlexanderMeldianov America's biggest military is SCARED OF a obviously weakened Russia? Russia is scared of Ukraine so they called in their tag team partner North Korea. Stay in the figfht Ukraine, support them USA and the world.
(Commenting on the ad is weird but I'm gonna do it anyway) it is crazy how different biases can change a story so much. Last week, I read the guardians article on badenoch's first pmqs as opposition leader - and according to them, she spectacular messed it up and humiliated herself and her party. Meanwhile, the telegraph basically said that she completely owned starmer and demonstrated her strength and efficacy as an opposition leader
No they won't. Russia is weak, they're just not a democracy so they don't have to care about public opinion. America will only lose if it chooses to lose.
@@MrH1990s Russia more or less achieved its goals. They dont want to take parts of land where they do not have their own people, its simple. Other goal is not to let Nato expand.
The United States, as a global superpower, does not have the luxury of remaining neutral in significant international conflicts, as its global influence and leadership position are partly maintained through active involvement in world affairs. A shift in policy regarding the conflict in Ukraine could have significant repercussions. For instance, Trump were to push for a resolution favoring Russian interests, potentially aligning with President Putin, it could lead to increased tensions within NATO and strain the U.S.'s relationships with European allies. European nations, many of which feel directly threatened by Russian aggression, are unlikely to accept a resolution that undermines Ukraine’s sovereignty or their own security concerns. This could lead to friction within longstanding alliances, creating divisions that adversarial powers might seek to exploit.
@@stunstar4553 Hypothetically, the US or EU’s response would depend on who the aggressor is, who the victim is, and whose interests align most closely with theirs. Both the US and EU have historically supported territorial integrity, human rights, and stability. If one side is clearly the aggressor, expect diplomatic support for the victim and possibly sanctions against the aggressor. Ultimately, their actions would be guided by strategic alliances, international law, and humanitarian concerns, and if those are violated, the US or EU would likely take a stand.
I hate to be that guy but the truth is America says jump and the rest of the Western world says how high if America stops the war in Ukraine everyone will immediately consider it a "brilliant move completely flawless good job daddy keep keeping us safe from the bad people" and I'm saying that as a non-american
@ I’m talking about this video. We know Trump wants to end the war and many people want to end funding for Ukraine. I agree with the baseline assumptions that are already in place. As far as the specifics, I would rather hear it from the president instead of all of the speculation.
@@Ym-oi2we Its more the manner in which Trump intends to deliver peace that is the problem. He intends to provide peace through Russian victory. Which is in a very real sense rewarding their invasion of their neighbour and attacking civilian populations. Whatever political point the Russians had about Nato threat was lost the moment they went across a border with tanks and men and rockets. Russia will of course invade again in 5 years because why not? and any other nation that wishes to annex territory will do so because why not, if ultimately, Nato will just allow it. Americas interests as a global military and economic superpower are not served by this because it is a zero sum game, the stronger China, and Russia become, the less say the United States has to dictate trade terms.... When in the fullness of time, the United States is no longer the top dog... do you think the other powerful nations are going to give favorable terms? A ukrainian defeat is immoral now and damaging long term.
Ukraine is running out of troops, the only way they could win at this point is with total NATO support. That's never happening, and i don't see anyone pro Ukraine joining their volunteer force. The war is already lost for Ukraine.
Trump gave billions to the wealthy. Reagan trickle down economics did too, but funny how WEALTH INEQUALITY SPIRALED OUT OF CONTROL UNDER REAGAN AND NEVER RECOVERED. If we can give money to billionaires, we can give money to our ALLIES. Do you want Russia to come for Alaska Next?
No peace until Russia leaves Ukraine completely... hell why doesn't Trump threaten to make Russia pay for it like he did with Mexico and that stupid border wall..
@@ChristopherJohnson-un9gb have you ever heard that in Ukraine lived almost 10 million Russians, and that Russia entered the war after 8 years of Ukraian regime made terrot on Russian people?
@@HalterWalter4 1. Vocabulary does matter. Words matter. 2. Putin isn't afraid of anything either. They're both too dumb to be afraid when they should be, for humanity.
@@OAlem Isnt that what liberals said about Biden? That it doesnt matter what words he uses because he means well? Putin is scared of US. They are deeply reminded of what happened in syria between Russia And US
@hurremhightower No. Ukraine is not imperialist. Since when did they annex anything from Russia (except MAYBE that one occupation in Kursk and the other in Belgorod)? Ukraine and Syria both wanted their territorial integrity. Stop putting your ""eastern"" twist on this, same way the west likes to put their own twist on the Middle East situation. Common sense is common sense, no matter which direction you're facing.
@ syria is supported by putin,assad is by far one of the worst war criminal from the middle east,what he did to his people only a few well known monsters would have israel didn’t start wars with its neighbours(the exception being the six day war which we all know was bound to start by arab armies yet again),the same thing can’t be said about them,every time israel was at war they were attacked(including the war of independence in which the arab armies with superior military power lost shamefully in front of a country wity very little support) i agree however that the golan heights should go back to syrian people but that doesn’t change the fact that israel is not russia(i can tell you who is close to that from the middle east but you won’t like it)
@@NovikNikolovicIsrael isn't imperialistic. They have historical ties to that land for over 3000+ years unlike arabs living there who didn't even have a flag to fly until 1964. Maybe learn some history and apply actual common sense to facts.
Ukraine had a lot of ethnic russians who had strong ties with Russia and never want to be part of European union or neither in Nato, but to be part of Russian block like Belarus. So all they had to do was split Ukraine in half and everyone is happy just what they did "almost" less then half but still ethnic russian can now be part of great Russia and Ukrainians can have their west side who had strong ties with Europe.
Then the USA should compromise with the Mexican drug cartels and give them the lower part of Texas in an effort to have peace. It's only right for peace.
Those who think Ukraine should make peace with Putin and in exchange give up part of Ukrainian land. Would you do it? Would Americans give up land to anyone?
In reality, the military assistance provided to Ukraine primarily consists of older, outdated weaponry, vehicles, and tanks. The United States has essentially extended loans to Ukraine, allowing them to procure these military assets from various suppliers. This arrangement enables Ukraine to enhance its defense capabilities, albeit with equipment that may not be the latest in technological advancements. Meanwhile, the funds loaned to Ukraine are being strategically utilized by the U.S. to acquire more modern weapons systems, vehicles, and tanks, reflecting a dual approach to bolstering Ukraine's military while simultaneously upgrading the U.S. arsenal. This process underscores the complexity of international military support and the overarching goal of strengthening Ukraine's position in the face of ongoing conflicts.
Funnily the reply button is missing in the comment talking about Ukraine giving up nukes. I would just like to clarify that Ukraine never actually at any point had a sovereign nuclear launch capability, so in the essence as we understand nukes with their actual implications, Ukraine has never been a true nuclear state.
to say it would take weeks to replenish ammo DURING a major conflict, is ridiculous. we have the ability to seize production and mass produce anything under the defense production act... oddly we only ever used it for baby formula...
I don’t think any of this is correct. Russia has repeatedly stated that peace is possible if the realities of the battlefield are recognized. Basically if Ukraine surrenders what Russia has conquered thus far it’s over. They don’t need trump for that. If Ukraine is going to go to the table there has to be something in it for Ukraine.
Putin's war machine is exhausted, of course he wants to end it now rather than let it play out. He had to get North Korean fighters to help him against tiny Ukraine.
Ukraine has lost they're not in a position to ask for anything the only reason the country hasn't completely capitulated and broken down into complete anarchy was from Western financial support and the only reason it's been able to slowly lose land instead of rapidly has been from Western military aid
Blinken says they are giving as much as possible to Ukraine before Trump takes office. Meanwhile in Western North Carolina they are still struggling to get their water and road systems back up and whole towns disappeared.
If Kamala spoke like that in the interviews, she would’ve faired better in the Presidential Election. That’s the strong talking we need from a President. :)
putin already talked to Trump and Trump could not convince him. So, why to promise things you dont even understand? same way there will be problems with his other promises.
@@iamaim2847 If it weren't for the sales sent from the US, the Soviet Union wouldn't have won. And don't forget that Germany has already conquered half of Europe in the meantime. 1 vs 1 the USSR wouldn't stand a chance against the Germans.
@@plincz9279 Just another cold war propaganda. USA lend lease was less then 1% of GDP. In 1943 2% of military spending , 0.25% of German military spending. And in 1941 even 2 orders of magnitude lower. Just 29M USD for 300M population country with 500B military spendings. 0.0058% - that's western help when victory was undecided. USA started to send goods more than 1% of military spendings only after Stalingrad, when nazi started to lose ground. >Germany has already conquered half of Europe Exactly, it was not just Germany, it was united Europe with all their resources. French Reno totally worked on wermaht. And even with all their money, they still had no resources to overproduce USSR.
where is the world media and UN outrage about Russian military use of glide bombs and other projectiles striking and destroying homes, towns, apartment buildings, civilian infrastructure of a sovereign country (Ukraine)? where has been the support going to prevent this, but also to stop and push out the Russian military from Ukrainian territory?
All these comments can say that ceding land to Russia doesn't work all they want, but it doesn't matter how they envision Russia's future leadership to act. The point stands that this is an ever-losing battle on the side of the Ukraine and it's not only exhausting bodies in the Ukraine, but money and military supplies in the rest of the Western world, and Russia can keep it going as long as it wants. It's neither in the West's favor nor Ukraine's favor to keep this war going as the only alternative to TRULY stopping Russia would be involving foreign soldiers from Western countries, which would mark the beginning of a new World War.
And then China would come. And just a bilion of all western countries and there subjects are outnumbered and outproduced. Colonial world order is ended. The west can't grab what they like any more. Making good relationship with other powers is necessary.
In 1994 Ukraine gave its nuclear weapons to Russia in exchange for promises to respect its sovereignty and yet here we are. If part of the treaty is that Ukraine remains independent and defenseless Russia will just invade again when it sees an opportunity. Just as it did last time
actually he attacked because he realised that the ukranians dont want to be part of russia. he tried a sneaking anexation and it fell appart in the euromeidan protests.
Good comment. Many people don't know about this. There is a popular misconception that USA or Britain are giving aid to Ukraine solely because of moral altruism or irrational anti-russian prejudices even though these countries have given guarantees to Ukraine.
Good comment. Many people do not know about this. There are many people who think that the USA or Britain are giving aid to Ukraine solely because of moral altruism or irrational antirussian prejudices even though these countries have given guarantees to Ukraine.
Good take. There is a popular misconception that the USA or Britain are giving aid to Ukraine solely because of moral altruism or irrational prejudices against Russia even though these countries have given guarantees to Ukraine.
You broke both Minsk agreements. Russia has no obligation to respect anything.
Isolationist? Will he stop supporting Israel too?🤔
Hahaha never
Probably cut funding to them
On the contrary, nethanyahu will get carte blanche most likely.
The Israeli government celebrated his victory as their own victory, cheering for him. That should tell you all you need to know.
@@andrewpritt8739 His evangelical base will not stand for that.
We should ask Czechia how surrendering land in exchange for peace helped everyone in 1938
Why aren't you fighting then?
@@bamaramify Oh, the czechs did end up fighting. On the german side, through forced conscription.
@@valentinmitterbauer4196 probably best the enlisted now instead of expecting to send US children!
@@bamaramify wdym
@@wittehagedis what confused you
So basically no one knows still. This is like the 10th video about this topic where no actual answer is given. Let’s just wait
We all know Trump will serve Ukraine to Russia on a silver platter for Trump's daddy.
The truth is nobody knows what Trump will do except Trump himself.
Yeah, trump is notorious for having concepts of a plan
He doesn't even know himself.
If you listen to what Trump, Vance and Musk say, I think that we know exactly what Trump will do. The general outline is a ceasefire with territory more or less frozen along existing lines. No NATO membership for Ukraine in the foreseeable future and some kind of demilitarized between the two sides. (Kursk is a negotiating chip.) Russia will agree because they have won enough territory to declare victory and to obtain release from sanctions. the Ukrainians, without continued US aid and starlink, have no realistic choice but to agree.
@@herman65 More than likely this.
@@herman65 That was biden when he was president
I love TLDR, but 2-3min ad read on a 9min video.... feels a bit much.
its at the end of the video and you don't have to watch it
Thanks for the heads up! It's not even 9 minutes lol
Complete tax cuts and minimal support to workers also seems a bit too much but here we are after all!
just skip it.
This guy even talks like a snail
4:51 "the US has spent more than 70B in military aid" would be more accurate to phrase as "the US has provided military aid valued at more than 70B".
their aid has largely been providing old stockpiles which they would otherwise have to scrap. that's not the same as paying 70B in money, i.e. "spending"
Money has also been sended
Further clarification. Not provided, allocated. Much of it has yet to arrive.
Its definitely $70B too much.
yea they also get loans and stuff . on other hand just because poll shows americans believe something is true doesnt make it so
make a poll how many of them think that moon is made of cheese and if numbers are single digit we can talk (its almost 15% of them btw)
Thats a good point. I'm not an American citizen but i can talk about from where i'm from. We have tons of old stockpiles of a bit of everything (except nukes) and people neglect how crazy expensive it is JUST TO KEEP IN STORAGE every month/year and than the same story to maintenance by which the majority will end on hundreds of millions or billions in a few years to just end in scrap. So what people need to realize is that giving aid is actually a saving money scheme by stop wasting astronomic sums of money into unused stuff in wherehouses and also makes the economy grow by keep investing on newer stuff by making new/create more jobs/sell to others. TLDR: People are too short sighted to understand that this AID is not charity and unlike populists preach this saves more than what costs, if not this aid would not be given this willy nilly lol.
He’s basically proposing Ukraine surrender all claims to occupied lands post 2014 and 2021 invasions! Twenty percent of their land mass and resources. If the US guaranteed Ukrainian sovereignty and integrity in exchange for nuclear disarmament in the Budepest memorandum they should be prepared to honour that guarantee. As the third greatest nuclear power in the world Ukraine disarmed on the basis of American, European and Russian assurances of protection. If they do not, how valid will international agreements be, the guarantors word in any future agreements anywhere would be viewed as unreliable at best.!
"they should be prepared to honour that guarantee" read any history book on the US and you will quickly learn how much they (don't) love to honour their treaties...
@ Yes sadly that’s very true of many governments, international laws and agreements seem to be often considered as guidelines rather than binding strictures!
Egypt was colonized by the British after Britain broke its promise to Egypt not to break international law by invading through the Suez canal
What’s the other choice wait for Russia to gain more land and wait for all Ukrainians to run out until ww3 Wow such a smart idea. Do you genuinely believe after 3 years and all those casualties Russia is just going to give up on Russian speaking land anyway?
One very hard to swallow truth about reality is that agreements treaties alliances and documents laws morals and ethics are all just words and if the circumstances make it beneficial all of those things will become irrelevant the fact of the matter is Russia has nukes America has nukes neither of them can really commit to the war without creating world war III nuclear winter which is the worst possible scenario FOR THE ENTIRE WORLD! *So yeah that's not happening no matter how many fancy pieces of paper says the US has an obligation to* Ukraine has lost they are sending the elderly the women and the disabled to the Frontline and every piece of military equipment they have was paid for by American tax dollars America has Ukraine by the balls even more so than Russia does if America were to just stop supplying aid Ukraine would cease to be a nation within a year yeah Russia has the upper hand in these negotiations one because they have nukes so the USA can't just descend on Moscow and make Ukraine win by default and two because they've been winning the conventional war they have the leverage and this is simply just the product of the outcome of the war if Ukraine had taken back their lands with a actually successful counter-offensive and even pushed into Russia then they would probably have a more favourable deal but they don't people need to remember that modern borders are exactly that modern because they are what we have right now throughout human history they have changed from constant victories and losses territorially at least this was a Russian win and at the end of the day will just be another footnote of history where the world map slightly changed
One thing is for sure: he will definitely not make Ukraine great again.
He doesn’t need too. He’s not the president of Ukraine
@@JoshuaDepaz-gl7geCurrent president of ukrane is also not president of ukrane of you no😂😂
Same thing for the US
And by empowering Russia and undermining American global influence, he’s also destroying the “American empire”. American “patriots” supporting Trump have been Putin’s best friends in helping destroy America from the inside.
He absolutely doesnt need to do that. No matter what he does, the war needs to stop. He is completely right, no matter what he does to stop it. Its terrorizing the whole world.
As a ukrainian kid I feel so exhausted from all of this bro. I just want to come back to my home city and play with my friends like it was before the war.
Ivan is that you?
@@knoll9812how the weather in Langley ?
I feel for you man... Love from Sweden
@@knoll9812Yvan*
Well if Trump can't make peace, no one can.
Once Winston churchill said to Neville Chumberlain when he agreed to surrender piece of Czechia to Hitler for peace " You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war"
Do you realize that if Trump chooses war, then it'll be WW3 and nuclear exchange? Are you ready for you and your family to melt?
This is not WW2, the West can't even allow Ukraine to win because of the risk of nuclear war, what's the point of just letting Ukraine lose slowly?
You don’t see the dark side of the United Dtates using the Ukrainians as the human bodies to wield their Western Weapons in order to weaken and wear down Russia? It’s the West being sneaky here we know what Russias endgame is and exactly why they attacked. What we don’t know is why America refuses to go to the table with an all or nothing attitude literally just using a proxy war to kill Russians. If we go to war with Iran I bet you there’ll be some Slavs wrapped in turbans on the field
So join Ukraine as soldier then. This war will be decided on battlefield on in RUclips comment section.
@@kristijangrgic9841 @Malikluqman3054, Winston Churchill also blamed WW2 happening on America and democracy: "This war would never have come unless, under American and modernising pressure, we had driven the Habsburgs out of Austria and the Hohenzollerns out of Germany. By making these vacuums we gave the opening for the Hitlerite monster to crawl out of its sewer on to the vacant thrones. No doubt these views are very unfashionable..." - Winston Churchill, April 1945.
"If your family [Kaiser Wilhelm] remained in power in Germany, I am certain that Mr Hitler would not be giving us any headaches right now"
- David Lloyd George, Britain's WW1 wartime prime minister
"There's a man alone, without family, without children, without God... He builds legions, but he doesn't build a nation. A nation is created by families, a religion, traditions: it is made up out of the hearts of mothers, the wisdom of fathers, the joy and the exuberance of children [...] But of our Germany, which was a nation of poets and musicians, of artists and soldiers, he has made a nation of hysterics and hermits, engulfed in a mob and led by a thousand liars or fanatics."
- Kaiser Wilhelm, attacking Hitler before WW2 but after Anschluss & Munich, trying to warn a deaf world of the threat Hitler posed (& only monarchists tried to oust Adolf before Munich, but Britain was deaf to Goerdeler and others who begged them to support their coup attempt).
All of diplomacy is appeasement, it's either that or escalation/warmongering/conflict. Appeasement just means conceding something in a negotiation. That's all non-belligerent diplomacy. But maybe you're right. Saddam appeasing America by letting inspectors in, didn't stop American aggression. Gaddafi appeasing America by giving up his nuclear program, didn't work. But one might argue they didn't appease "enough" to avoid the aggression.
But there are PLENTY Of examples of where appeasement DOES work. Thailand is a perfect example, one of the ONLY nations in Southeast Asia to avoid colonization despite being sandwiched between three great powers. It successfully appeased all three great powers over time and avoided being colonized.
Heck, we wouldn't even being speaking ENGLISH right now if not for appeasement. It was the French giving land to the Vikings (appeasement), who then became known as Normans (hence Normandy and our Norman-influenced language (Northman=Normand), those appeased Vikings/Normans then later invaded England centuries later and gave us our language we're using right now.
So appeasement CLEARLY works in many situations. Virtually all diplomacy is either appeasing/conciliatory or else aggressive/belligerent. Saying appeasement never works is basically saying to always maintain a belligerent/hostile stance. It's basically been the military industrial complex's mantra to ensure endless wars.
And remember that Czechia was Czechoslovakia. Slovakians made up half of that country and were quite happy when the Germans challenged the Czech government to cede their German majority provinces. Dumb comment on your part.
Like Churchill said, you don't bargain with a Lion when your head is already in its mouth!
useless quotes... that deff helps
If you actually think Russia present the same treat to Europe (which exists under the most powerful military alliance in human history) as Hitler did, then why aren't you fighting? If you actually believe the parallel between the two dictators, then you are a coward for not fighting. What's more likely is that you, and everyone else that compares Putin and Trump to Hitler are just toddlers.
@@lolaboots7028 COWERD
@@lolaboots7028 except churchill is better than trump in every way, and warned britain about hitler getting appeased for ages, look how appeasing turned out
The problem is the the USA has not suffered a land war in their country for 150 odd years. Ask an American how much land they would be prepared to give up to stop a war on their soil, so stop the killing and I bet a cent to a dollar they they would not give up an inch. The only reason that they are in powerful position is that they did not suffer large catastrophic destructions in both world wars, but expect other countries to cave to tyrants. As Churchill said " America will do the right thing after they have tried everything else"
Would you rather Russia take some Ukrainian territory or take over all of Ukraine? It's very easy to tell them to keep fighting when you're sitting in your couch like the little coward you are, while hundreds of thousands are dying and suffering. Sometimes you have to not be delusional and give some concessions in a war you know you cannot win, like Finland in 1940 at the conclusion of the Winter war. What you suggest instead is be like Germany during WWII and not surrender whatsoever. This will lead to the total occupation of Ukraine, once its army can no longer keep on fighting. And that is not to mention the horrible demographic problem that Ukraine is facing. They better peace out while they can, use the time of peace to rebuild it's army, economy and fortify their border so that Russia will think twice before invading again (NATO troops will be stationed there anyways so if Russia attacks it will be an attack on NATO) or face their physical eradication. Also, Churchill was a complete idiot. Thanks to him the British Empire ceased to exist. Had Britain allied instead with Germany against the Soviet Union, they would have kept their empire for much longer.
2+ years zelensky do nothing
Simply waste USA money
Well said!
@@hinefamily7565 Ukrainian problem not usa problem
Usa give more money no use
An invasion of America wouldn't result in 20% of the US being occupied. We have a rifle available for every single citizen. Every single citizen would be immediately mobilized to aid in its defense whether through conscription or a sense of patriotism and pride. It would take nearly the entire Chinese population to occupy the entirety of the USA(assuming the 3 to 1 numbers advantage needed by the attacker). As it turns out, the 2nd Amendment and it's implementation in the current USA is what ensures a foreign invader will never conquer American soil.
Europe could learn something from this, if every single citizen was armed and willing to die for the nation's defense, they wouldn't be in this situation.
interesting how the US defence budget is $841.4 BILLION and they can't figure out how to procure enough ammunition
Because most of that budget is going to make corporations and politicians rich...it's not about actually providing anything for the military. There was an article in Responsible Statecraft that discussed that American spends more and more every budget term but the number of things produced goes DOWN every year.
A lot of that ginormous amount of money goes into defense contractors executives pockets. There is no pentagon accountability. It’s a giant black hole
Republicans
This video is lying
Dude noone wants to defeat russia beside ukraine, elites has other plans or this war would be quick. Ukriane would dust russia in several month with proper equipment but here we are even with those spoon feedings hear about restrictions for ukraine to strike russia deep (no escalation talks all the time). imagine NK giving 8 millions of artillery shells said that, sending soldier and other stuff. iamgine Iran giving rockets and thousand of shakhed drones said something about no escalation :D
russia can traid oil anywhere, and buy rocket part that will have usa parts in them.
not enought ammunition is just pure bullcrap
if it doesn't end in 24 hours he will say he never said that
And his supporters will believe him. The man killed the concept of collective truth in the 21st century, the damage since 2016 has been untold and ever worsening.
It won't. The Ukrainians won't just give up.
Go ahead and hold every politician accountable for something they said would happen that didn't. Sensational rhetoric is and always has been utilized. It's politics, bud. Try to see the big picture.
@@fredrickmason7588 sure, but some people use sensationla rhetoric waaaay more than others
It will not happen with in 24 hours obv but it will happen surely
US before: go fight the Russians I'll aid you...
US after: stop the fight I won't aid you anymore...
Ukrainians died for nothing
Then you go fight for Ukraine. I'll pack your bags.
"To be America's enemy is dangerous... but to be America's friend is fatal."
- Henry Kissinger
The Ukrainian people were always just disposable Canon fodder to whittle down a bit of Russia with minimal effort they were never going to survive and they most definitely were not going to win
@@st.altair4936 That's the problem, they're not America's friend. Ukraine isn't in NATO, because if they were, there would be US troops on the ground. As to the quote as a whole, I see a lot of people repeating it over the fact that europe might lose a lot of American military support, and honestly I couldn't be happier. For some reason everyone likes to say that Trump wants to abandon europe and nato and pretend like it's for no reason and america is just being cruel, and no one likes to mention that trump's problem with nato was that all the countries in it who enjoy US protection under article 5 are supposed to also be paying their dues. Trump's reasoning was "why would we spend our resources protecting them when they aren't upholding their end of the bargin" I've spent years hearing my country reticuled by europeans for our military spending and now when we decide to try and make those countries up hold their contractual obligations they're all crying about? Fuck em.
@@IWLGaming. Funny thing that. First time around when Trump threatened to pull out of NATO it was because he said it needs to do more in support of its own defense, and not rely on the U.S. so much. He was vilified for the very idea. Then Russia invades Ukraine and the European Union is having round tables about how they need to stop relying on the U.S. so much and do more for their own defense. Everybody applauds. This is literally on camera.
If I was Ukraine I'd be like: "Yeah the only way we are officially giving up any territory to Russia, is if we're instantly accepted into NATO because we know otherwise, Russia is going to try this again in a few years time when they've rebuilt their military."
If Ukraine remains neutral and does not try to join NATO, then Russia will not attack either. Moreover, in a couple of years Putin will die and there will be no government that started the war in 22.
@@ChukchaWot war started in 2014 and this is the reason why we want in NATO
You still will have to live with the fact that you betrayed part of your people, give them up to the enemy that invaded your country.. not easy..
@@Strade8 What do you mean?
@@pannik_lucas Maidan Revolution. The Ukrainians overthrew their government and have been spouting anti-Russia and and anti-Russian rhetoric ever since, changing Russian named streets, tearing down Russian statues, putting bans on some Russian authors and musicians, putting limits on the Russian language. Well, the people living in Eastern Ukraine just so happened to be ethnic Russians, they looked at the situation and said "no thanks" and declared themselves autonomous regions. How did Ukraine respond? Starting a war against those regions and engaging in a shitload of war crimes and human rights violations...the Azov battalion was accused of "ISIS style attacks" (you can look it up), when you're being compared to ISIS, you are not the good guys.
I hope we all know that it doesn't matter who is in the 'top job' because this is a systemic problem -- greed. We have allowed many of our economic sectors, to take advantage of the American people. It's disgusting and frightening for the future of our country. My husband and I will be retiring in the next two years in another country. We are absolutely worried that SSI will no longer be funded. we'll have to rely on his pension, a 403 (b) and a very prolific lnvestment account with my Tracy Britt Cool Consulting my FA. Our national debt is bloating and expanding every month. Our government needs to get spending under control and cut the federal budget.
I went from no money to lnvest with to busting my A** off on Uber eats for four months to raise about $20k to start trading with Tracy Britt Cool Consulting. I am at $128k right now and LOVING that you have to bring this up here
How can i reach this Tracy Britt Cool Consulting, if you don't mind me asking? I've known her by her reputation at Berkshire Hathaway
You can glance her name up on the internet .she's renowned and has quite a following. So it shouldn't be a hassle finding her consulting page
Out of curiosity i looked up Tracy Britt Cool Consulting and she's known for her impressive career. She has served as the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway-owned Pampered Chef and has been recognized as one of Warren Buffett's protégés.
Tracy Britt Cool Consulting has really set the standard for others to follow, we love her here in UK as she has been really helpful and changed lots of life's
"American ammunition stocks are running low"
Bro stop huffing exhaust fumes 😂😂😂
Its just the military industrial complex smelling blood in the water and wanting to jump on that opportunity
😂they are burying their war planes but they want us to believe they are out of weapons
US only sending old stock that they would never use anyway
The military-industrial complex no longer exists.
US military spending as a share of the economy has fallen since the end of the Cold War. There are single companies with more profit than the big five defence companies combined.
American ammunition is running low, how is saying "companies make money off it" a counter argument to that?
I increased my donations to Ukraine after Trump won.
@@Harsh-mg2emROFL imagine donating to Ukraine - are you even aware how much of the weapons we send are being illegally stolen then sold on the black market?
Because so much of Ukraine’s military is corrupt organized crime.
The NY Times did a series on how Ukraine is the most corrupt country in all of Europe.
…then switched over into pro-Ukraine propaganda as soon as their goal switched to war.
Crazy to think peace means giving up 1/5 of your country someone else just walked in and took. Wonder if the US would agree to giving up a 1/5 of it's county if they got invaded or would they decide to fight? It's all so sad. I feel.for the people of Ukraine
i mean, if the enemy is winning by that much, then in that case, we(us alone) already have over 30 million troops dead, with the draft already getting 14 year olds into the military, yea, we'll want peace. since we'll lose everything if we kept fighting. and of course in this scenario, we're fighting aliens, who already wiped out, or taken over the weak EU, and other countries, in fact, ceding 1/5 of our territory is an bargain if we get to live, since another alien faction brokered this deal for us, after supplying us with tons of alien weapons.
I feel sorry for simple-minded tools. For people that got caught up in the middle of corrupt bandit games too
well usa would be able to fight just fine,so the comparison doesnt work,this issue goes back way longer,after ww2 russia should have been demolished after germany fell
They nuked a country that sank one of their dreadnought battleships at pearl. What do you think? The americans have to figure out for themselves, if they want to be a global superpower or go back to making fridges in 15 years is up to them..
Trump would no give an inch of soil to China, North Korea or Russia when the missiles start dropping , so why should Ukraine people ?
Appeasment worked so well last time.
Closest thing to Ukraine winning is everyone losing.
@@walkingcarpet420Ending a war for a Russian victory, how nice.
@@walkingcarpet420Hitler thought the same. He would never lose the war. What happen next then?
@@walkingcarpet420 i hope you will say the same when russians came for your home
@@walkingcarpet420we’re not pro-war, we’re just smart enough to see that a Russian victory in Ukraine would likely embolden them and cause more conflict in the future. Also Russia by all intents and purposes have already lost. Their economy is in shambles and their population is in steady decline, they just happened to bring Ukraine down with them.
Also would you consider American intervention in WW2 a bad thing, because if you do then you need to seriously reconsider your world view.
In almost all scenarios Ukraine will be the one that lost.
As they're not seeking any Russian territory when hostilities cease, that's a given.
Only if we the United States choose to be weak instead of strong.
@@pierrewilliams1533well its not that their not seaking it. Even if they wanted russian territories they have no way of getting them
It couldn't have ever been any different.
Ukraine was always an unstable state, never fully formed, fully economically tied to Russia.
The West has been underestimating Russia in various forms for centuries.
Russia considers Kiev to be the mother of the Russian cities, having been fighting off the West influence away from since they've split their focus to the east as well, and had always been preparing for another round.
The Northeastern Black Sea will be Russian as long as Russia exists, the best the west can do is to not allow it to fully become the Russian lake, but at a great cost, as we witness today, since the funds used to aid Ukraine should have been spent on their internal issues.
Ukraine loss when Obama was president
When you give an aggressor what he wants, you have shown you can be Bought.
Yes, much better idea is make your own people suffer, sending the tax money overseas instead of using it to make your own country better
@@hReNeVaYz1 Do you really think TRUMP IS GOING TO HELP THE POOR? Stop the lies, we know who he is. A grifter doing anything he can to grift. He has no real plans just stupid promises for stupid people.
And what exactly is the other path wait until Ukraine is completely gone? Trump has stated if they invade again he will join Ukraine
don't start a war you can't win. Zelensky had his chance at peace talks and chose war.
@@Larnce-n7z anf if they wait until he's out and the next president is in, how much will those words be worth?
How would everyone feel if Russia decides that the USA purchase of Alaska was not legitimate and moved people into Alaska "on vacation" to protect ethnic Russians?
😂
There are no ethnic Russians in Alaska. Ukraine was created by Lenin
That's the stupidest comment I've read, and what do you say considering that there are 22 nations in the Russian Federation, if each nation was given independence, then Russia would be half the size, of course, Russia should return the territories stolen from Finland, also Russia should return the Kuril Islands to the Japanese, those islands were occupied during World War II.
@@FabulousIdea-xe8gt I'd say that since the Russian Federation is a single nation comprized of 22 republics, and not an alliance of 22 nations, you're the stupid one.
@FabulousIdea-xe8gt Japan stole Islands from China after WWII.
Seems like the top commenters didn't actually watch the video as usual...
yeah haha
If content creators cut out the fat (which is often 75-90%) i’d watch their videos. I’m not too excited about filler and ads.
Ukraine potentially joining nato isn't the reason for the invasion, it was the fear of losing the option to take it and so they did so whilst membership wasn't granted. Taking away membership options from Ukraine is an open door for Putin to invade again until he eventually achieves his goal.
You completely ignored euromaidan, the civil war, the cult of Bandera, and US meddling in Ukraine dating back to 1946.
If conquering Ukraine was always the goal, why didn't they do it in 2014 when the country was in anarchy and its military was much weaker?
They literally tried you dumb ass, but they failed and settled on just crimea.
How a side note how do people forgot that the 2014 invasion was suppose to take way more than just crimea.
@@bloodmagiclord8253 There *never was* a "civil war", there is no "cult of Bandera", and *you* are ignoring the *centuries* of Russian oppression and periodic genocide against the Ukrainian people.
@@bloodmagiclord8253 ahahahahahha
jesus christ you are delusional
When I heard “according to a paper written by 2 former Trump security advisors” I tuned out thinking they probably have no idea..
Whether you're for or against the war in Ukraine, the USA is to blame for not following through with with protecting Ukraine's sovereignty. If you need a history lesson read below 👇
On December 5, 1994, the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances to reaffirm security commitments to Ukraine. This political agreement, aligned with the Helsinki Accords, provided assurances against threats or use of force, respecting Ukraine's sovereignty and borders. Concurrent memorandums were also signed for Belarus and Kazakhstan. In exchange, Ukraine joined the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state, facilitating the ratification of the START treaty on the same day.
Timeline
* July 16, 1990: Ukraine’s Declaration of Sovereignty
* July 31, 1991: The United States and the Soviet Union sign START
* Dec. 26, 1991: The Soviet Union officially dissolves, delaying entry into force of START
* Dec. 30, 1991: Minsk Agreement on Strategic Forces
* The Commonwealth of Independent States agrees that strategic forces would be under the joint command of the former Soviet Union states
* May 23, 1992: Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and the United States sign the Lisbon Protocol
* The protocol calls for the return of nuclear weapons in three formerly Soviet states to Russia and for all states to be added to the START treaty and join the NPT
* Jan. 14, 1994: Ukraine, Russia, and the United States sign the Trilateral Statement
* Ukraine commits to full disarmament, including strategic offensive weapons, in exchange for economic support and security assurances from the United States and Russia
* Sept. 4, 1993: Massandra Accords
* Failed summit between Russian and Ukrainian governments
* Dec. 5, 1994: Russia, Ukraine, the United States, and the United Kingdom sign the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances
* Includes security assurances against the threat or use of force against Ukraine’s territory or political independence
* Dec. 5, 1994: Ukraine submits its instrument of accession to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state
* The five START parties exchange instruments of ratification for START, which enters into force
* June 1, 1996: Ukraine transfers its last nuclear warhead to Russia
* October 30, 2001: Ukraine eliminates its last strategic nuclear weapon delivery vehicle
* Dec. 4, 2009: Joint Statement by Russia and the United States
* The two countries confirm the security guarantees made in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum
* March 18, 2014: Russia annexes Ukraine's Crimean peninsula and provides support for an ongoing insurrection by separatist forces in the eastern Luhansk and Donetsk provinces of Ukraine.
* Late 2021 to early 2022: Russia engages in "military exercises" with a force estimated to exceed 150,000 military personnel involving land-, sea-, and air-based weaponry on the northern, eastern, and southern borders of Ukraine raising fears of an invasion by Russia.
* February 24, 2022: Russia began a large-scale military attack and invasion of Ukraine, with planes and missile launcher attacks on Ukrainian cities, airports, and military infrastructure across much of the country.
This needs more visibility.
Please Lord let there be peace
We all want peace but some countries do not want peace or respect for leaders
I like it how you use Groundnews. I havent experienced it myself yet, but to see the views from the left and the right, is what's really needed.
It is always easy to make peace treaties by giving away “other people’s land”.
welp
trump gave golan heights (syria territory) to israel lol
americans live in a bubble
You trying to say that Donbass land doesn't belong to people that live there? How about asking these people? They voted to secede from Ukraine back in 2014, you don't respect democracy and people's will? What "other people's" are you talking about? People on the land said their word, and the word was - they don't want to live in Ukraine, there was even e referendum in 2022 with a foreign watch, where people voted to join Russia. Nobody is giving away anything, but yeah, it's always easy to brag about defending democracy with other people's lives...
@@zukunftverstehen Alright ivan, so let's let the Tartarians vote for independance too. And the Chechens, And the ukranians living in russia should get a referendum aswell to take their land and join ukraine.
@@zukunftverstehen Donbass people didn’t vote for Russian army to occupy Donbass region, and 1/5 of the Ukraine land as well - this I know for certain.
@@zukunftverstehenif they don’t want to live in Ukraine they can cross the border to Russia
“Stagnation front line” we ain’t getting the same sources lol
Because Ukraine won’t get their land back, there is very little incentive for Ukraine to agree to peace with Russia
Trump has so many enemies, I doubt he will last 4 years.
Literally, I don't understand how people are so supportive of a crappy compromise when both sides what to continue the war
Is peace not an incentive?
@@SweBeach2023 peace will never be found. Putin did it once in 2014, he did it again in 2022, he will just break the agreement and invade Ukraine again at a later point in time
@@SweBeach2023 Peace without freedom is not peace
Did anyone else notice the the ammo graphic featured 22LR rounds. 😂
Yes, I noticed that! But seriously, does it really matter?
@@pierrewilliams1533 Made me smile at least.
Yes, that was odd, clearly the editor don't know much about weapons
Yup, a cartridge not used in military conflicts. They could have shown artillery rounds…
Can we focus on "American military supply chains are dependant on Russia and China" because that's a terrifying thought.
Why would we focus on that, who cares
@@hiya2793 because there’s a real chance the US will go to war with China or Russia or both. They don’t want their military capabilities relying on potential enemies.
Not really, these three countries can't actually go to war against each other, if they did then military supply chains would actually be low down the list of concerns.
@@jamesmarlow8035 They don't need to go to war. They just need to drag their feet on military contracts. The American military being dependant on hostile countries for its resupply efforts no doubt keeps some generals awake at night.
It's more true about China than Russia. In fact, I haven't heard anything about Russia in that regard.
Wow. This was like, actually impressive and useful journalism with useful citations
I feel really sorry for Blackrock and all the money they arent going to make now. Spare a thought
So the end might be similiar to Korean war.
There is only one Korea like there is only one Vietnam. The peninsula will be reunified as Vietnam was reunified.
No, South Korea has American military bases with American troops. In the case of Ukraine I don't hear any americans advocating for military bases in Ukraine for future protection from russia. All that america wants is to force Ukraine to stop fighting while not providing any protection for the future.
@@ОгурецМолоко Sad to say but Ukraine is in a tough spot being not NATO but also not pro-Russian. USA shit the bed with its own economy so Europe will have to pull through with funding for the war effort (which it already should have been doing). And in case you're new to this - it's not the end of the world to stop a war via a peace treaty just to end the death toll. Plenty of times throughout history peace was brokered to avoid larger scale conflict and it didn't have the WW2 appeasement effect. Putins not Hitler and he hasn't made rapid expansions and rapid militarization. He's not as much of a threat and with a properly funded European military he would actually be quite minimal
@@ОгурецМолоко it could be reunified by Russia.
@@kbelyavs For you as a russian it sounds great, but for the rest of the world it would be a disaster.
The lines are far from stagnant.
Hm, I disagree, I already lost count how many years it has been since is started.
It is pretty stagnant. Isn't Russian and Ukraine exchange the same 3-5 villages.
It is almost 3 years since it started.
@@myentertainment55 I'm afraid you are misinformed, the eastern and southern front are crumbling. Strongholds are falling, Soledar, Bakmut, Adivka, Marinka, Vuledar, etc. Defences being destroyed by glide bombs and tos- A1. Lack of experienced troops, conscripts not holding their positions. And i support Ukraine.
Stagnant compared to the first months of the war.
@@colincampbell4261 And Russia is making those gains at the cost of exponentially increasing Russian casualties and equipment losses that they can't sustain.
@@aronchai1 gorillion pf destroyed Russian tanks. Yeah man, true info definitely
The democratically elected government of Ukraine was overthrown in a coup in 2014. The Ukraine regime then reneged on the two Minsk agreements that they signed brokered by Germany and France.
This reminds me of Germany breaking the Munich agreements in 1938.
+ Molotov-Rebentrop non-agression pact. And starting a war without declaration. Nazi are always the same.
The Polish German (Hitler-Piksudki) Pact of 1934 was the crucial pact of the era.
This alliance allowed Germany to rearm in contravention of the Versailles Treaty (knowing that their eastern border was secure) - Germany then also remilitarised the Rhineland, took over Austria and then signed an agreement with France Britain and Italy to carve up Czechoslovakia - Poland then joined in.
The Soviets only signed a non.aggression pact after Poland Latvia Lithuania Denmark Britain Estonia and France had done so (and Italy Japan Spain Romania Hungary etc had signed similar agreements)
The Soviets went into the eastern borderlines of Poland after it became clear Britain and France weren’t going to help Poland, (the Poles refused military help from the Soviets) and the Polish government ran away to the Romanian corridor.
The funny thing is that, technically, the US is in the position where it could leverage both ways: tell Ukraine to chill or the US pulls out from aid, and simultaneously tell Russia to chill or he'll start firing (conventional) missiles himself. I wonder if that's the basis of his plan.
Putin owns Trump. Trump will not tell him to do anything.
This is the only sensible comment I was able to find in this entire thread.
What does "chilling" implies for Ukraine when they are the ones getting invaded?
@@lhumanoideerrantdesinterne8598 it means, "just be better and not get invaded lmao"
@@lhumanoideerrantdesinterne8598most Ukraine men are dying, conscription will soon be reduced to 18 years. Fighting a losing battle. Ukrainian women will be free for the taking, once the war is over. Oh wait they already are marrying foreign men here in Canada. My friend just got sent back home to fight, it seems they’re getting desperate.
The sooner this is over the better
Putin is losing this war and asked NORTH KOREA CAN YOU SEND WHATEVER YOU CAN WE NEED HELP AGAINST A TINY COUNTRY!
Putin will lose this war if we don't give in to his demands. If Trump doesn't cow like a bitch to his master, Lord Putin!
Put chapters in so i can avoid your ads. I already pay premium to avoid ads. Thaaanks
so I have this unique ability where I can smell bullshit from a mile away and it is very very potent
Go to the front lines if you want other men to keep going in a meat grinder.
@MrBurnsExcellent
But like they literally are, ukraine has on multiple occasions said they will fight until every part of ukraine is taken back.
no, its just you havent showered in a month
@@lordpeanut3245then let them deal with it alone
@@AllBetzOff I mean ok, but thats still not a "peace plan" that just surrendering and saying YAY Russia you can do what ever you want
It's obvious: he'll make them a deal. A carrot here, a stick there.
That's called diplomacy, which unfortunately totally lacked the last yearsby US and Europeans !
The only other option is you go on the Frontlines
@@eddastrohmayer251 cringe
No, he'll give them everything they want. It's not a deal, it's surrender. He'll do it because he's dumb, and doesn't think about long term consequences.
@@XandateOfHeaven it's best YOU step up then if you care that much
the US going back to isolationism feels like history repeating itself
its like a pendulum. After 4 years they will be invading everyone again. Isolationism - expansionism - isolationism - expansionism. Who can take the US as a reliable ally if they keep behaving like this? What do they want? Be left alone or dominate everyone and tell everyone what they should do? They should make up their frigging mind. You cant control the world and ignore the world at the same time. xD
It's infuriating when someone confuses isolationism and non-interventionism
In other words, let Putin have what he wants? .... That would be such a stupid mistake
what are the alternatives?
@@AlexanderMeldianov Sorry, to lazy to type everything out ... Giving Putin everything he wants is not one of them
@@XReflexian giving Putin all what he wants is the only one exists. Russia will not negotiate on anything less and will simply take Kharkov and Odessa so all useful Ukraine becomes Russia.
Giving Putin what he wants is letting him FULLY annex Ukraine
@@AlexanderMeldianov America's biggest military is SCARED OF a obviously weakened Russia?
Russia is scared of Ukraine so they called in their tag team partner North Korea.
Stay in the figfht Ukraine, support them USA and the world.
(Commenting on the ad is weird but I'm gonna do it anyway) it is crazy how different biases can change a story so much. Last week, I read the guardians article on badenoch's first pmqs as opposition leader - and according to them, she spectacular messed it up and humiliated herself and her party. Meanwhile, the telegraph basically said that she completely owned starmer and demonstrated her strength and efficacy as an opposition leader
Wait till you dive down the rabbit hole during the build up to the US election
"it is crazy how different biases can change a story so much"
welcome to the world of media work.
Yes. Have you seen Owen Jones's latest RUclips video about the media coverage of the violence in Amsterdam? It's worth your time
More like sweep-under-the-rug plan.
Is it worse than they current "Keep giving Ukranians weapons until every young man in Ukraine is dead from fighting an unwinnable war"?
Or maybe it like he says, the US has no business in all of these wars. It’s time to get out of that business.
Russia won’t accept this deal, the simple fact is that Russia will carry on until they achieve their goals
No they won't. Russia is weak, they're just not a democracy so they don't have to care about public opinion. America will only lose if it chooses to lose.
These lands are their goals for a peace plan nato are the ones that keep on fighting.
I think if somebody is not gonna accept its gonna be Ukraine.
@ Ukraine will have to do as there told, Ukraine doesn’t pay for this war the west does and NATO, without our money Ukraine won’t survive a month
@@MrH1990s Russia more or less achieved its goals. They dont want to take parts of land where they do not have their own people, its simple. Other goal is not to let Nato expand.
Can’t he end Palestine Israel war?
He will !
As the supreme dictator of America, Netanyahu would neve allow that. He's on a "chosen" mission ordained by his holy book.
Hell Gaza has already agreed to a cease fire! I think the world takes him for his word!
One step at a time
@@dustinspivey2519 Hamas has been begging for ceasefires since the beginning of the war this is nothing new
is this stuff even fact checked?
Yes. It’s usually pretty bang on.
No, its clickbait
You can't do this yourself?
Very very informative!
The United States, as a global superpower, does not have the luxury of remaining neutral in significant international conflicts, as its global influence and leadership position are partly maintained through active involvement in world affairs. A shift in policy regarding the conflict in Ukraine could have significant repercussions. For instance, Trump were to push for a resolution favoring Russian interests, potentially aligning with President Putin, it could lead to increased tensions within NATO and strain the U.S.'s relationships with European allies. European nations, many of which feel directly threatened by Russian aggression, are unlikely to accept a resolution that undermines Ukraine’s sovereignty or their own security concerns. This could lead to friction within longstanding alliances, creating divisions that adversarial powers might seek to exploit.
Who do US or EU support in the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan?
@@stunstar4553 Hypothetically, the US or EU’s response would depend on who the aggressor is, who the victim is, and whose interests align most closely with theirs. Both the US and EU have historically supported territorial integrity, human rights, and stability. If one side is clearly the aggressor, expect diplomatic support for the victim and possibly sanctions against the aggressor. Ultimately, their actions would be guided by strategic alliances, international law, and humanitarian concerns, and if those are violated, the US or EU would likely take a stand.
what are they gonna do about it?? the only thing they can do is prostrate themselves for China. bold strategy
I hate to be that guy but the truth is America says jump and the rest of the Western world says how high if America stops the war in Ukraine everyone will immediately consider it a "brilliant move completely flawless good job daddy keep keeping us safe from the bad people" and I'm saying that as a non-american
Can we hear from President Trump first? It’s still 2 months before he takes office. I want to hear what his plans are directly from him.
He said he would end it before he was even inaugurated. He was full of shit as always
@pretzelboi64 ok when he does it I'll come back to you and I'll remind you what you said here, deal?
Would that not have been a wise thing to request before the election?
@ I’m talking about this video. We know Trump wants to end the war and many people want to end funding for Ukraine. I agree with the baseline assumptions that are already in place. As far as the specifics, I would rather hear it from the president instead of all of the speculation.
@@Ym-oi2we Its more the manner in which Trump intends to deliver peace that is the problem. He intends to provide peace through Russian victory. Which is in a very real sense rewarding their invasion of their neighbour and attacking civilian populations.
Whatever political point the Russians had about Nato threat was lost the moment they went across a border with tanks and men and rockets.
Russia will of course invade again in 5 years because why not? and any other nation that wishes to annex territory will do so because why not, if ultimately, Nato will just allow it.
Americas interests as a global military and economic superpower are not served by this because it is a zero sum game, the stronger China, and Russia become, the less say the United States has to dictate trade terms.... When in the fullness of time, the United States is no longer the top dog... do you think the other powerful nations are going to give favorable terms?
A ukrainian defeat is immoral now and damaging long term.
Ukraine is running out of troops, the only way they could win at this point is with total NATO support. That's never happening, and i don't see anyone pro Ukraine joining their volunteer force. The war is already lost for Ukraine.
I wonder when the notorious 24 hours start. Haven't they already, or should we wait till the inauguration?
stop wasting our tax money
Trump gave billions to the wealthy. Reagan trickle down economics did too, but funny how WEALTH INEQUALITY SPIRALED OUT OF CONTROL UNDER REAGAN AND NEVER RECOVERED.
If we can give money to billionaires, we can give money to our ALLIES. Do you want Russia to come for Alaska Next?
No peace until Russia leaves Ukraine completely... hell why doesn't Trump threaten to make Russia pay for it like he did with Mexico and that stupid border wall..
Ukraine is losing, They are not in a position of strength. This will take years to end
Russia has nukes, Mexico does not
Maybe because Russia has nukes and can destroy the world?
@@ChristopherJohnson-un9gb have you ever heard that in Ukraine lived almost 10 million Russians, and that Russia entered the war after 8 years of Ukraian regime made terrot on Russian people?
Support our allies. The world is full of bullies. And having allies means they can't pick us off one by one. I'm glad you s ee this.
Ukraine is just like Other american associated conflicts: Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq. Americans and their friends always lose.
5:03 that handshake!
6:22 so basically what we are doing right now
Except Trump puts it into toddler vocabulary and the uneducated think it's genius.
@@OAlem To be fair, it doesnt matter what vocabulary you use. Russia is scared of US and Trump isnt afraid to push over Putin as he pushed over Kamala
@@HalterWalter4 1. Vocabulary does matter. Words matter.
2. Putin isn't afraid of anything either. They're both too dumb to be afraid when they should be, for humanity.
@@OAlem Isnt that what liberals said about Biden? That it doesnt matter what words he uses because he means well? Putin is scared of US. They are deeply reminded of what happened in syria between Russia And US
@@HalterWalter4grow up. Read a book
This is literally just the Golan Heights situation but with Ukraine.
except israel is ukraine and syria is russia
hope this helps
@hurremhightower No. Ukraine is not imperialist. Since when did they annex anything from Russia (except MAYBE that one occupation in Kursk and the other in Belgorod)?
Ukraine and Syria both wanted their territorial integrity. Stop putting your ""eastern"" twist on this, same way the west likes to put their own twist on the Middle East situation. Common sense is common sense, no matter which direction you're facing.
@ syria is supported by putin,assad is by far one of the worst war criminal from the middle east,what he did to his people only a few well known monsters would have
israel didn’t start wars with its neighbours(the exception being the six day war which we all know was bound to start by arab armies yet again),the same thing can’t be said about them,every time israel was at war they were attacked(including the war of independence in which the arab armies with superior military power lost shamefully in front of a country wity very little support)
i agree however that the golan heights should go back to syrian people but that doesn’t change the fact that israel is not russia(i can tell you who is close to that from the middle east but you won’t like it)
@@NovikNikolovic Syria wanted to protect it's land by declaring war on Israel?(who had no interest in them at that point)
@@NovikNikolovicIsrael isn't imperialistic. They have historical ties to that land for over 3000+ years unlike arabs living there who didn't even have a flag to fly until 1964. Maybe learn some history and apply actual common sense to facts.
Ukraine had a lot of ethnic russians who had strong ties with Russia and never want to be part of European union or neither in Nato, but to be part of Russian block like Belarus. So all they had to do was split Ukraine in half and everyone is happy just what they did "almost" less then half but still ethnic russian can now be part of great Russia and Ukrainians can have their west side who had strong ties with Europe.
If they want, they can surely leave Ukraine for Russia.
Unless the USA should give back Texas to Mexico.
For peace some one needs to compromise and loose the land
Then the USA should compromise with the Mexican drug cartels and give them the lower part of Texas in an effort to have peace. It's only right for peace.
Respect sovereignty means ukraine should not have leason to British or EU or usa, stay independent. That is called sovereignty
TRUMP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Thank you for making the Western hubris as clear as day.
There isn't one. Give away another country's land
I feel kinda sad that I’ve gotten used to not seeing Simon in these videos anymore
Those who think Ukraine should make peace with Putin and in exchange give up part of Ukrainian land.
Would you do it? Would Americans give up land to anyone?
In reality, the military assistance provided to Ukraine primarily consists of older, outdated weaponry, vehicles, and tanks. The United States has essentially extended loans to Ukraine, allowing them to procure these military assets from various suppliers. This arrangement enables Ukraine to enhance its defense capabilities, albeit with equipment that may not be the latest in technological advancements. Meanwhile, the funds loaned to Ukraine are being strategically utilized by the U.S. to acquire more modern weapons systems, vehicles, and tanks, reflecting a dual approach to bolstering Ukraine's military while simultaneously upgrading the U.S. arsenal. This process underscores the complexity of international military support and the overarching goal of strengthening Ukraine's position in the face of ongoing conflicts.
Let the little things go.
If you are weak - someone will attack you. Big fish hunts and eat small fish.
Animals in the wild. Not modern man. 😂😂😂
They should have joined NATO years ago instead of sitting on the fence. We wouldn't be having this problem nor wasting tax payers dollars.
Trump should NOT give any public details!
Trump is nuts and should not get involved.
To think if ukraine was not greedy for the nato/eu coin it would be still safe and intact, greed will always get you in the end.
Funnily the reply button is missing in the comment talking about Ukraine giving up nukes.
I would just like to clarify that Ukraine never actually at any point had a sovereign nuclear launch capability, so in the essence as we understand nukes with their actual implications, Ukraine has never been a true nuclear state.
to say it would take weeks to replenish ammo DURING a major conflict, is ridiculous. we have the ability to seize production and mass produce anything under the defense production act... oddly we only ever used it for baby formula...
I don’t think any of this is correct. Russia has repeatedly stated that peace is possible if the realities of the battlefield are recognized. Basically if Ukraine surrenders what Russia has conquered thus far it’s over. They don’t need trump for that. If Ukraine is going to go to the table there has to be something in it for Ukraine.
Putin's war machine is exhausted, of course he wants to end it now rather than let it play out. He had to get North Korean fighters to help him against tiny Ukraine.
Ukraine has lost they're not in a position to ask for anything the only reason the country hasn't completely capitulated and broken down into complete anarchy was from Western financial support and the only reason it's been able to slowly lose land instead of rapidly has been from Western military aid
If they do it there is another war in 10 years guaranteed unless they join nato
This is good video. Thank you for good video. Keep doing good video. :D
Great clip, but paying for Premium RUclips and now all videos have advertising as part of the clip anyhow. 😂
Blinken says they are giving as much as possible to Ukraine before Trump takes office. Meanwhile in Western North Carolina they are still struggling to get their water and road systems back up and whole towns disappeared.
not wanting to be the world's piggy bank isn't even close to the same thing as being an isolationist...
STAGNANT?!?! HAHAHAHAHAHAH
If Kamala spoke like that in the interviews, she would’ve faired better in the Presidential Election.
That’s the strong talking we need from a President. :)
One of his first tasks will be to buy gallons of face makeup before it gets tariffed
2:16 is that .22LR ammo!? 😂
putin already talked to Trump and Trump could not convince him. So, why to promise things you dont even understand? same way there will be problems with his other promises.
US is NOT running out of ammo.
Source!?
billions of natural resources in the sea of azov, its no longer about fighting for your country but fighting for your countries economy
Never thought I would see you here
if anyone thinks America is running out of ammo, its not, not even close, America has the biggest military budget in the world.
WW2 germany had military budget x8 over USSR. And what? More money without more goods just makes the same goods more expensive.
@@iamaim2847 If it weren't for the sales sent from the US, the Soviet Union wouldn't have won. And don't forget that Germany has already conquered half of Europe in the meantime.
1 vs 1 the USSR wouldn't stand a chance against the Germans.
@@plincz9279 Just another cold war propaganda. USA lend lease was less then 1% of GDP.
In 1943 2% of military spending , 0.25% of German military spending.
And in 1941 even 2 orders of magnitude lower. Just 29M USD for 300M population country with 500B military spendings. 0.0058% - that's western help when victory was undecided.
USA started to send goods more than 1% of military spendings only after Stalingrad, when nazi started to lose ground.
>Germany has already conquered half of Europe
Exactly, it was not just Germany, it was united Europe with all their resources. French Reno totally worked on wermaht. And even with all their money, they still had no resources to overproduce USSR.
we have more 600$ 🔨 s than you could shake a stick at
where is the world media and UN outrage about Russian military use of glide bombs and other projectiles striking and destroying homes, towns, apartment buildings, civilian infrastructure of a sovereign country (Ukraine)? where has been the support going to prevent this, but also to stop and push out the Russian military from Ukrainian territory?
West realising they dont have any power to stop the east ! A bit slow but finally !
Wow, someone that actually said Ukraine is stationary! People are dying for a game that’s over!
All these comments can say that ceding land to Russia doesn't work all they want, but it doesn't matter how they envision Russia's future leadership to act.
The point stands that this is an ever-losing battle on the side of the Ukraine and it's not only exhausting bodies in the Ukraine, but money and military supplies in the rest of the Western world, and Russia can keep it going as long as it wants. It's neither in the West's favor nor Ukraine's favor to keep this war going as the only alternative to TRULY stopping Russia would be involving foreign soldiers from Western countries, which would mark the beginning of a new World War.
And then China would come. And just a bilion of all western countries and there subjects are outnumbered and outproduced.
Colonial world order is ended. The west can't grab what they like any more. Making good relationship with other powers is necessary.