And he is not wrong. European support can be adequately described as Too little too late
post
Watch out for that first step. It's a doozy!
Zelensky isn't wrong, but even peacekeeping missions are extremely politically unpopular in Western Europe right now.
The French left is basically saying "it's not our issue, we shouldn't get involved". The far right say the same. The incumbents are barely hanging on to their remaining political capital
Unless Mélenchon changed his tuned again, last I heard, he was only against loans. Helping, yes, but no strings attached.
I don't know about Mélenchon but years after the fact I still read a lot of similar slander on the Swedish left. They literally were just in disagreement about how weapons exports should be made possible without breaking existing Swedish legislation, and the issue was addressed in 24 hours, but people still bring up that incident as "the Swedish far left blocked help for Ukraine".
Zelensky isn’t wrong, but even peacekeeping missions are extremely politically unpopular in Western Europe right now.
This is why I'm not bullish on the notion of a collective European defense. I'm sure it will happen, but how hamstrung will it be with politics?
I'm not bullish on a collective European defence because Europe thinks it's a spending and rearmament problem, when in fact it's a logistics and coordination one.
You have a battalion in Spain that you'd need to deploy to Latvia. How do you airlift? Which country has airlifting capabilities, etc.
Far rights became Putin's mouthpiece in most countries.
Helping Ukraine is a duty of the free world, because we can't afford losing more allies after we lost US.
For a peacekeeping mission, there has to be a peace to keep.
He's asking for combat troops.
I wish the EU would get off the pot and destroy Russia already. It is a dagger pointed at their backside, just waiting for an open conflict to erupt between the US and the EU. Getting rid of Russia would go a long way towards safeguarding democracy and human decency.
Plus, the EU can invest into Ukraine. They have excellent resources, and truly blooded soldiers with expertise in modern warfare. Having them teach the EU how to fight sooner than later would be invaluable if the US attacks the EU.
Be it humanitarian or pragmatic, there is no downside in the EU doing the right thing.
Europe could definitely do more, but I don't think a brute force removal of the current russian elite is feasible without huge loss of life.
Since apparently these days you could just fly into a capital and kidnap a president after a few months of training, simulation and bribery maybe they could do something like that for Putin and the main Russian oligarchs. Clear out the trash in one go and avoid war. But I think this is also too optimistic.
Timidity is a good way to lose control over a situation - be it at a personal or national level. The longer that the EU drags their feet, the harder things will become when the choice to take action is no longer possible.
One way or another, the EU should do more. Support Ukraine directly, declare war on Putin, call in Agent 47. The important thing, is that inaction inherently lends itself to allowing someone more assertive to take control. That someone shouldn't be Putin nor Trump.
I wish the EU would get off the pot and destroy Russia already.
You mean the regime and the mobsters aiming to abolish all restrictions on their wealth.
Have you heard about a guy named Napoleon and also Hitler? History can be interesting. You don't just "get rid of Russia" and also that statement is a little ambiguous. Are you talking government overthrow? Mass genocide? The former takes time and latter is not an option in our global world.
You clearly haven't watched nearly enough Kings and Generals, listened to Behind the Bastards, nor read The Cartoon History of the Universe. Leaders and nations change all the time, be it by death, conquest, reform, or revolution. It happens a ton, we just occupy a slim frame of observable time within our lifespans.
Historians would someday be writing about all sorts of details that aren't visible to us right now.
China is far more likely to do something about Russia than the EU is.
I wouldn't be surprised if China takes a bite out of Russia. It would be a way to look like a 'good and tough guy', and would avoid the risks that comes with trying to take Taiwan. Right now, Russia is in no shape to defend their eastern flank.
Personally I think it is more likely for China to attack Taiwan, but the Russian option is certainly there if Xi gets cold feet.
It's far easier on multiple fronts for China to just buy their way in Russia. They are already doing that around Africa. They just need to buy (or more likely bribe) their way in with infrastructure projects, promise of jobs and wealth and so on to local governments. When they have permission they can then just build whatever they want, bring in chinese workers and transport materials and/or profits back home. No need for complicated politics, military or anything like that. Just a fun little tweak on western capitalism model.
There's zero shot that the US attacks Europe I refuse to believe in that timeline
That was my thinking back in 2016. I was astonished when I woke up to the news because how could he be elected in favour of her? It makes no sense.
The U.S. has a history of fucking around even among "allies" to them so I fully believe that they could invade us.
If we invaded Greenland, that would be tantamount to an attack on Europe. Pretty decent chance of that happening at some point the way things are going.
there is no downside in the EU doing the right thing
I feel like that's a really easy thing to say if one ignores that Europe has lived through two world wars and many of the people who fought them are still alive.
No. Your position is what gave Nazi Germany the opportunity to do all the things it did. Russia is kidnapping Ukranian children, sending drones into EU territory, sabotaging infrastructure with their shadow fleet, manipulating American elections, and more.
Russia is an enemy of the EU, and should be taken care of. Delaying what must be done, will only ensure that Russia and Dogey America can work together to spitroast European nations.
I hardly think it's "humanitarian" to "get rid of/destroy Russia" or any other country full of innocent people just living their lives, simply because their leaders are fucking the world over (and I'm not just saying because as an American, I can relate). Regime change? Sure, absolutely, let's try it. Talking about the whole nation as if they were an infestation with no real purpose other than the eradication of "human decency"? Those are literal, almost verbatim, Nazi talking points my friend. Please be better than that, I know you can
It depends on what is meant by “destroy”. I interpret it as “destroy in its current form”, not “erase from the map”.
Destroy in the way that Nazi Germany was destroyed, or the British Empire was destroyed. The people and places still exist, but are structured differently.
Not in the way that Palestine is being destroyed now where there is literally bare emptiness where the people were.
Destroying a country is "the right thing"? Homey you're part of the problem.
The destruction of Nazi Germany is a good thing. Same goes for Imperial Japan, and the American Confederacy. The Russia we have today sucks, and should be taken out. The people of Russia certainly aren't benefiting from their leadership, and sometimes an forceful change by external powers is the better way out of a bad situation.
As an American, I am expecting a 2nd American Civil War. I would like outside nations to align against Dogey America, be it by pen or sword. What is good for the goose, is also good for the gander.
What about Israel? Should it be "destroyed" as well?
Now you're being willfully ignorant. He's made clear his meaning, definitions, and point. If you still refuse to interpret it in the way he clearly intended, that's your problem.
Marshall Plans are essential for replacing a bad nation with a better one. Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, and much of the EU were put on a much better path because of them.
In my nation, Reconstruction was halted early. Aside from limiting the power of surviving members of the confederacy, a continued Reconstruction would have allowed people of good character to leave a greater mark on Southern society. The building of a better nation, is crucial for rehabilitating a broken one.
With all due respect, you might want to improve your English reading comprehension before participating in English-language political arguments.
It's infuriating that in any way the West stumbles is always a win in Putin's eyes.
The US is dead set against Ukraine now. They just cannot directly repudiate the alliance now, the admin needs the military on their side.
They even want to blow up nato, trying to use greenland to do so, but apparently found the patriotic fervor of expansion could not overcome our fraternity with europe, yet.
The president is compromized by both russia and israel, and in alliance with them. Both have hoardes of kompromat on politicians and swells it is not limited to the president
It really is true, I am surprised how so many could not see it
"A year has passed. And nothing has changed. We are still in a situation where I must say the same words again,” Zelenskyy said.
True and false at the same time. Taken separately, a lot of things have changed. Dozens of prototypes have become experimental products and are being used. E.g. factory A opened, factory B got furnished and is doing test production, factory C is being built, with the understanding that it will give production in 2027. That helps, if you know "I will get a shiny new thingy in 2027", you can donate your old thingy in 2026 (but the old thingy could be obsolete already).
But he's right about attitudes. Attitudes in many offices are complacent. Things are not taken seriously, people are stuck in their routine and helpless.
I would like to deny, but I've had a chance to observe first hand. An office which you'd expect to respond to queries fast, responded slower than moss grows. An office which you'd expect to be constructive and help find a way to legally reserve airspace kept playing table tennis with applications until threatened with civil disobedience. Conditions for a project competition which you'd hope to accommodate agile development turned out to be a bureaucratic jumble in which you can't even sign an application due to severe limitations. I've heard credible stories of drone developers in Eastern Europe driving hundreds of kilometers to Ukraine to test (or testing illegally) because at home, things are overregulated. It's a recipe for falling behind.
On the grand scale, politicians are also relatively passive and not very resourceful. It was sad to watch the situation involving frozen Russian funds. There was a way to help and intervene effectively, but politicians were too risk-averse to use it.
He's not wrong.
Can't crush Russias regime, though. One has to keep an eye on Russia's nuclear arsenal. Some of these ICBMs might actually be able to fly.
And one must be careful to not generate a disbalance of power between opposing (or even neighboring) countries or Gaza happens all over again. Because the stronger one can. It's only human. :( - already some people in France are looking anxiously towards Germany's military buildup.
Still. The argument that you need to have means to steer things your way is correct - military, economically, diplomatic. If you can make the additional expenses and budget cuts look advantageous to the general public.
Maybe he should look elsewhere for help. Europe is only going to help if there is sufficient profit to be had.
I dunno what he's talking about there are alot more rich western and russian military industrial companies and a lot more dead Ukranians. He's accomplished a lot!


top 92 comments