Zelensky says Ukraine will lose war if US cuts funding
Zelensky says Ukraine will lose war if US cuts funding
US President-elect Donald Trump has campaigned on a promise to end America's involvement in wars.
Summary
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned that Ukraine would lose the war if the U.S., its primary military supporter, cuts funding.
Speaking to Fox News, he stressed the importance of unity between the U.S. and Ukraine as Russia accelerates its territorial gains.
Zelensky acknowledged Ukraine’s challenges on the battlefield, despite new U.S. weapon supplies, including long-range missiles and anti-personnel land mines.
He criticized German Chancellor Olaf Scholz for engaging with Putin, calling it a risky move.
Trump has pledged to end the war quickly but offered no specifics.
Trump: Hold my beer.
Right? Before the election I had a political conversation with a coworker who leans more conservative and she was excited about Trump “making peace with Putin”. It was a serious wtf moment for me. “Peace” with Putin means pulling funding for Ukraine and letting Russia roll over it.
I had an argument on here with a supposed green party voter who "hated trump", but admired him for his sincere efforts to end wars.....
I reminded them about ending the nuclear deal with Iran and then assassinating their most idolized military commander. He just went on to admit he didn't care about a war with Iran.
There are so many "green voters" who are just trump supporters turfing as leftist on this site.
I grew up during the cold war. The idea that Republicans (after spending decades calling people left of them "pinko commies" - it was their cold war version of complaining about people being "woke") are the party that sees nothing wrong with Putin now is part of what has convinced me that Trump has somehow made them lose their minds.
I absofuckinglutely guarantee that there are crusty old white guys who were wearing "better dead than red" tshirts all through the 80s who are somehow now cheerleading for Trump being in bed with Putin.
Did you call them out on it?
Trump: "Putin may I have someone hold my beer?"
Give em full air support. If it causes world war 3, it causes world war 3. Fuck it. Avoiding that isn't worth letting Russia just consume its neighbors on a whim - that shit certainly won't stop with Ukraine.
if it causes ww3, it will be a lot less bloody war than what will be if russia is allowed to recover and take over next country
There isnt enough North Koreans for that.
Maybe if WW3 breaks out, Biden won't hand over power to the literal fascists that are already making decisions to cause our demise.
That doesn't sound very good either. I still want a chance to vote in another election. Trump might be able to dismantle it before then but if Biden held on to power it would be immediately dismantled.
Standards are low
Liberals have become full throated right wing war hawks.
You guys are really batshit crazy about war. I hope you are the first ones in the front lines. "The stars of the firing line".
Bold stance. Better to bring about world war 3 than let Russia consume its neighbors? I’ll have to sit with that one for a bit.
I grew up with the USSR so maybe I’m not quite ready to throw all earthly civilization into the fire to prevent 20% of that empire from being restored.
Give em full air support. If it causes world war 3, it causes world war 3. Fuck it
If you are so willing to die you can join the front and fight russia in ukraine. Don't drag other people and the rest of the world in.
Give em full air support. If it causes world war 3, it causes world war 3. Fuck it
If you are so willing to die you can join the front and fight russia in ukraine. Don't drag other people and the rest of the world in.
You willing to go there to die?
Same page as catloaf - I already did my time and got my honorable discharge. If WW3 breaks out, pretty sure I'll be getting recalled. So, yes.
Then again, the alternative is wait for shit to destabilize until we get there anyway - again this shit won't end with Ukraine.
Call Russia's bluff. If we're wrong, it's not like we aren't fucked anyway. Might as well go down fighting evil, vs going down with evil's dick in our throat.
*looks at recent presidential election*
...oh yeah. Reality. Pass the lube, my throat is sore as fuck.
If US cuts funding it would be abandoning its allies in violation of the Budapest memorandum which the US signed in '94 to protect Ukraine if Russia invades, and that violation from Russia since 2014 also grants Ukraine back its nuclear program which should have been supported by allies like the US. The only language a dictator like Putin understands is violence or the threat of violence, look at the nuclear saber rattling he does frequently and how people and nations capitulate to it and the only neighbors they avoid are either nuclear armed or NATO allied.
Well, if it violates the Budapest memorandum of 1994, of course Trump will change his mind. /s
That aside, it only would kick in if Russia used nuclear weapons, anyway. Link to the text. The present effort is all about trying to keep Europe safe through deterrence, and to a lesser degree supporting a democracy that's under attack.
The US may yet betray Ukraine and break its agreement under the treaty, I hope not but I don't expect anything else from Putin's #1 sycophant.
- The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and The United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
CSCE final act, not exclusive to using nuclear weapons: https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Final_Act_of_the_Conference_on_Security_and_Cooperation_in_Europe
Unfortunately the Budapest Memorandum doesn't obligate the US to actually protect Ukraine.
Hopefully Europe can fill the gap left if Putin's puppet cuts support US support
Of course the letter of the treaty can be interpreted, what does "immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine" include in literal obligations? But the intent of the document seems clear that the signatories are there to hold each other accountable to prevent nuclear proliferation, if the guarantees are no longer valid like the repeated Russian violation of Ukraine sovereign borders, the other signatories are expected to either protect Ukraine or reinstate their nuclear arms.
Edit: including link to the document text https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
Europe unfortunately has neither the infrastructure nor the reserves to provide armaments in volume to Ukraine. It has only very recently started switching its military from being a small projection force for asymmetric warfare to a much larger self defence army. Completing the change will take some time though.
It is technically not a violation, the memorandum just gives the US and the UK "the right" to intervene, but not the obligation...
Except US is going to cut funding because Trump is a piece of shit, this isn't new.
There is no treaty that the US has with Ukraine that obligates the US to defend Ukraine. Stop spreading misinformation.
I'm all for America funding as much as possible, but FFS Europe, the monster is ringing your doorbell.
That reads as if the EU is just sitting on its hands and doing nothing. Please keep in mind that there is significant financial support coming from the EU:
Source: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
Where the EU cannot compete with the US is in the supply of military goods. For the simple reason that these do not exist to the extent that the US has them.
Edit: I have to correct myself in a detail. The graph of course shows Europe not the EU. So it includes e.g. the UK as well. The point still stands though looking on the rest of the data.
Jesus fuck that really puts it into perspective how much larger the United States military complex is. I want to to see this combined with the Israeli financing. I mean is what we removed about being bad over budgeting of the defense budget or whatever it falls under really just a means of paying other countries to fight battles they used to send US soldiers to fight? Did I just become pro-military complex?
Nice sources! Puts things in perspective for me. I really mean that.
Still doesn't change the fact that the enemy is at the gates. And has been for decades. And it ain't America's gates. Which is not to say, "Not our problem." It eventually will be our problem.
Europe has to spin up a war economy. Yesterday. We Americans have the privilege of being able to do that with two oceans buffering us. Europe has no such buffer. Once again, the filthy Russians are knocking.
Europe ARE doing a lot. We just don't have as much of an aging stockpile of weapons as the US does. Also when turned into financial contribution you need to convert it to a percentage of GDP.
Well, turns out someone made that data available.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/Europe most certainly are doing their part.
However, that's not the real fear. The USA is going into a new presidential term, a term where the house, senate and the supreme court are going to likely side with the president on most things.
The USA can put significant pressure on European countries. If we're to believe Trump is really working in Putin's favour then, as well as stopping US aid, there's not too much stopping the US pressuring Europe from doing the same. That is my real fear. I think without US support this is hard, very hard for Europe to fill that gap. But, we certainly can still try.
To add some context to the numbers. Coming from Denmark which tops the chart, I can tell you that the top donors are getting sick and tired of big countries e.g. Germany and French providing way less resources. Bigger economies and military industries, yet the small countries of Europe donate the most. Different political situations of course. Still crazy that Germany are sort of "meh" considering their history with Russia.
If the US cuts funding can Ukraine use their remaining stockpile of US weapons without restriction?
Yes, but they will run out of weapons very quickly
True but at least deliveries are being supercharged for the next couple of months. Let's hope it doesn't come to that though
Trump: Oh no that's horrible, on an unrelated note heeeey Putin how that deal going for a Trump tower in Moscow
Trump's plan is just to force Ukraine to hand whatever the Russians have taken over to the Russians, or whatever or they stop getting aid.
The Kremlin said any peace plan proposed by a possible future Trump administration would have to reflect the reality on the ground but that Russian President Vladimir Putin remained open to talks.
The Kremlin said any peace plan proposed by a possible future Trump administration would have to reflect the reality on the ground but that Russian President Vladimir Putin remained open to talks.
So Putin's puppet will let them take what they have under control..and knowing Trump and Putin, probably more, like sanctions or stripping Ukraine of more autonomy.
Sounds better than a proxy war.
Yep if NK wants to attack SK they should do it directly instead of having their proxy invade one of SK's arms suppliers.
That was kind of the point. Trump, Putin and Netanyahu are playing everyone. Started the Gaza attack knowing Americans move on and will forget about Ukraine once Gaza is in flames and he was right. Americans don't care about Ukraine anymore, they've moved on and voted with Putin. Just waiting for the next conflict now that will distract everyone away from Gaza
Ukrainian people and russian people already lost the war, casualties are up to a million
Yeah but Ukraine can lose twice.
So can Russia
Can’t believe you’re being downvoted for this. Everyday people are the ones who lose in a war regardless of nationality. The people who wage wars don’t fight them.
Frankly speaking Russia and China would have a great opportunity to try to appear sane for Europe when Trump gets into office. Like offer an actual peace for the price of giving a huge middle finger to USA. Trump admin seem to be begging for us to do it anyway.
I suspect that this is a pipe-dream and they will not do that, and also for Russia their credibility is pretty much gone and I don't see any way they could restore it.
China might be able to pull it off though.
"if"
what's next? the sky is blue? duhh
Sadly there is no if. To me it looks like the EU and US want to make the war as expensive as possible for Russia. Their aim is not to strengthen Ukraine to the point where they can win. (I don't know if out of fear from russia's nuclear weapons or if there simply isn't enough political support for more help.)
Ukraine losing, is also exactly the story which Russia wants the world to see and believe in. Hence their inhumane warfare.
That must be hard for the people in Ukraine. I wouldn't be very grateful for this kind of support if I were in their position. Rn it just prolongs the war.
Just a note, it's "Ukraine" not "the Ukraine".
Thanks. Fixed it.
In my first language, German, using an article for a country is usually a deterogatory leftover from colonial speech, unless it refers to Unions like the US or the UAE.
The actual sad truth is that unless the Russian people turn on Putin or it turns into their next Afghanistan, there is no path to victory for Ukraine. Russia is larger with more people and more resources. It may be extremely painful but they will win in the end if the war goes on long enough. That's why NATO is treating Ukraine as a way to bleed Russia. The best case scenario is to turn it into a version of Afghanistan, so expensive in money and manpower that Russia is forced to leave. The next best scenario is to bleed Russia and destroy enough infrastructure in Ukraine that Russia cannot use it as a base of operations into Europe, cannot make use of it's industrial capacity, and cannot sustain a military campaign until the next generation is old enough to rebuild the Russian military.
A negotiated peace where Russia gets to keep Eastern Ukraine and start again in a couple years is the worst possible scenario as far as NATO is concerned. It will cause an arms race, and it allows Russia to absorb it's losses (economic, material, and manpower) in a way that avoids critical problems.
Ukraine is in a horrible spot between two giants, one is despicable and the other is willing to defend itself with the utilitarian moral guide of the ends justifying the means.
A Russian defeat would again deprive NATO of purpose.
Hows that "bleed Russia out slowly" strategy working out dipshits?
Fuck off, Zelensky; Russians are white. We need that money to kill brown fuckers
I think you forgot the /s
Indeed
This issue is a great example of the insane double think that most of Europe has about the US. We are too involved in world affairs until someone needs to take military action and then all of a sudden we're the only ones who can address it. Ukraine is your neighbor, not ours. You should be the ones funding Ukraine's defense because if you don't Russia is on your doorstep. Ukraine should have so much money that it doesn't matter what the US does but instead all of Europe is looking on like "it's a shame a country on the other side of the world isn't doing enough to stop this".
Edit: lots of people proving my point for me below. Downvote if you like but Europe is gonna have to step up or watch Ukraine fall. There isn't a third option no matter how much you wish there was.
That being said, it’s not crazy to ask the country who has been developing anti-Russian weapons for 50 years to donate those weapons to an anti-Russian cause. That’s what they were built for after all.
More than anything your statement just makes me wonder why the phrase "the country who has been developing anti-Russian weapons for 50 years" does not refer to a European country. They seem to have been content to outsource defense spending for the last half century at least and now are acting surprised that they have to rely on someone else for defense.
“it’s a shame a country on the other side of the world isn’t doing enough to stop this”.
The US is not a totally random country, but one signatory of the Budapest memorandum (giving Ukraine security guarantees in return for Ukraine giving away nuclear weapons).
As for levels of support - I advise taking a look at this website. You may notice some surprising patterns.
It doesn't help that the US spends an 'OBSCENE' amount of money on their military for their own internal workings.
It's hard for any NATO member to justify more spending of their GDP.
When everyone decides to build 2/tanks per cycle.. and yet one entity is just pissing out 20/tanks per cycle,
There's so much oversupply in general, why would anyone else increase their output to 3/tanks?
stretch that out over 50 years, and that's where we are today.
There's so much oversupply in general, why would anyone else increase their output to 3/tanks?
I think the why should be pretty obvious at this point.
I'll give you an angry upvote on this one.
I agree that the EU should do better and be independent from the US. But I still think the US should keep helping out, or at least present a plan for its decreased support over time so that the EU has time to pick up the slack.
Just suddenly pulling funding is more supporting Putin than it is "changing to America first interests".
Absolutely. If I had my way we would be giving Ukraine everything they ask for and more. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in. My point is that European apathy is just as much to blame for the situation we find ourselves in as the instability in the US. Europe has allowed, and continues to allow, the situation to become hopeless without US support and that can't be blamed on the US.
The vast majority of the stuff we send to Ukraine is slightly outdated weapons that are sitting in warehouses. The US military isn't going to use this stuff. Sure they put a dollar amount on it, but that just confuses people to think we're sending American tax dollars.
We need to send every bit we can in huge shipments before Trump takes office.
Sure, the US will at the same time see a lot of their international soft power evaporate. The US is showing what it means if they for decades keep riling up a country, rattling sabers only to not be home when it counts. Taiwan and whole of Asia Pacific is watching this.
Also the US will see their intelligence networks dry up, humint will become less reliable and less likely to reach them. Tulay gabbard as head of the national intelligence in the US means a lot of countries cannot share their intelligence with the US anymore.
That will surely help the US prevent their next international tragedy.
And if the US emboldens dictators around the world and make the whole less stable, what happens to the world economy and all these countries the US sells to.. they can't afford.. or shop elsewhere. Especially the EU fending for themselves will probably mean short term gains for the US in weapons sales, and then they stop. The EU will have been forced to do everything in house and the US will lose a massive customer base. And create a larger competitor at the same time.
The examples of this short sighted way of thinking are endless. But it is true the EU needs to do more in terms of re-armament. Because the US is an untrustworthy Partner.
Just like Putin proved to be when our leaders made him too important in our energy market.. he leveraged his power. Now trump will do the same.
I hope you people in the US will be OK, because if you think we will have it bad because if this, if only a part of what maga says they will actually happen, you'll be in for a heck of a ride.
We're definitely not looking at a good time on the home front that's for sure. I agree with the rest of what you said as well. People don't seem to like it being pointed out to them though. Perhaps they think Trump will not pull funding from Ukraine but if I had to bet on all the things Trump will do over the next four years that would be in my top 3.
It's not so much about USA helping Ukraine as it is about USA helping Russia.
The US being eager to integrate more countries into NATO, getting closer and closer to Russia as well as blocking Russias ambitions for a joint security structure in the years after the SU fell paved the way to this. Also there is tens of thousands of US soldiers stationed all over Europe and Europe has been and is ised as staging point for US war endeavours like Iraq.
You dont get to play empire and then pretend its not your responsibility.
Russia joining NATO was never going to happen. And it's weird to think it lead to the current state of affairs. If anything it held it back. Else the fox would have been in charge of guarding the hen house.
I never said it wasn't the US's responsibility to defend Ukraine I said we're clearly not going to continue to do it. If you want to play the blame game we could talk about how it was a mistake for Europe to accept the situation you described but they wanted to spend their defense budgets on other domestic projects so they let the US take on a role they never should have outsourced.
At the end of the day it doesn't really matter how we got here. The fact remains that Europe is going to have to sort this one out with drastically reduced assistance from the US. Are you guys going to step up and fill the void or are you going to be satisfied watching Ukraine become a vassal state to Russia because it was supposed to be someone else's job to stop that from happening?
Ukraine is your neighbor, not ours.
So what's your government doing here?