Go to ground.news/linesonmaps to stay fully informed on what's happening around the world. Subscribe before month's end and you'll receive 40% off unlimited access!
I really hope americans aren´t that gulible and vote for incompetent fraudster #Trump again!🙄 As history has often told us: sometimes people had to eat sh*t to learn their lessons...🤔
Trump is free ? I doubt that he will ever recover from prison cause judges will want him to learn a lesson for sure. I still wonder if he still can be a candidate for president once he had spent time in prison .
@@typxxilpsYes it is legal. I think he might even be able to give himself a pardon, but don't quote me on that. Thanks. Glory to Ukraine. God Bless Ukraine and her people. 🇺🇦🇺🇸
I'm really getting tired of these 'if Trump gets elected and does X, what will happen' videos that people keep making. The people saying he for sure will backstab Ukraine are the same people who said that John McCain was a nazi during the 2008 election. This video here is as absurd as a video in 2008 asking what the world's reaction would be to John McCain building literal concentration camps.
@@ryelor123 He's not saying that will happen. He's saying assume "X" where the assumptions are that happens what is the possible outcomes. He started you have to start with a set of assumptions. If you don't except those assumptions then garbage in garbage out. It's like a worst case scenario. Thanks. Glory to Ukraine. God Bless Ukraine and her people. 🇺🇦🇺🇸
those types of americans remind me of KKK members trying to impress SS Officers in Wolfenstein by talking bad German and being verbally abused for it after Nazi Germany has full control over the U.S.
@@erickdavid2412If anything arming Ukraine makes WW3 less likely. A victorious and emboldened Russia would dramatically increase the probability of an invasion of the Baltics and / or Taiwan that would be very likely flashpoints for an actual WW3.
History says, some decades ago, somewhat strong countries didn't properly help Czechoslovakia, Poland, and guess what - the war didn't end, it only got worse.
Same with finland. Russia invaded in 1939 and with more aid there would have been a better chance of Finland keeping it's land. It ended nothing as Finland made a counter-attack to get those lands back, although unsuccessfully in the end. I personally have strong family lineage from those lands that were taken from us by force. Anyway. The point is that not helping my country, they made it so that Finland had to seek help from someone else. That was germany. That of course lenghtened the war as finland made it's counter attack.
True. Rewarding Russia for this invasion is the worst thing to do. It will start up again later on for more land. Possibly Transylvania, nonetheless; any Russian equipment destroyed by Ukraine is one less for us in the west to deal with ourselfs. The only thing that was wrong was not going hard from start. When Russia sent 15 missles from Belarus into Kiev at start, NATO should have sent 15 right back. The only thing an authoritarian understand is power and it’s all Putin understands. All diplomacy is just buying time bs and we seen it before
I’m certain Poland will go into western Ukraine and hold it before Russia even gets close. They would never let Russia come to their border. Nobody dislike Russia more than Poland and there is no way they won’t do that. If US would stop the aid, European countries would act with force themselfs in western Ukraine. Won’t go any other way
It is even worse now. Chamberlain was looking at things from the 1918 perspective, Russia got involved in Austria's civil war in the Balkans, Germany was ally of Austria and helped them, UK and France were allies of the basket cases of Russia and the Tsar after having been their enemy 50 years earlier. In addition to an arbitrary drawing of lines in the Middle East that split ethnic groups like the Kurds and made them minorities in different countries, the same thing happened in Europe German majorities who lived in Germanic kingdoms since the Roman times were shoehorned in with Czechs and Slovaks who couldn't stand each other and who split after the USSR collapsed. Kudos to those who could see things back then. But the problem now is that we have the hindsight of 1939-1945 that Chamberlain did not have and the terror of 1945-1991 that the wanna be Stalin wants to recreate. Some people want to make the same mistake that Chamberlain made when not even Chamberlain would likely make it now.
It would be a massive blow to US's credibility as security provider. No one wants to hedge their bets on a guarantor that is every 4 years a single election away from doing a full 180 on everything they have promised so far. In a scenario like this EU would have to remilitarize itself in a massive way, and so would many Asian nations. As that happens, US would lose most of its political influence over these countries, which would end US's status as the world hegemon. This in turn would reflect in all the favorable trade deals US is now able to maintain, as no one would really need US for anything if they can defend themselves, and even if they couldn't, US would be akin to a bipolar teenager in its foreign policy that couldn't be relied on. US economy would most certainly suffer if they can't leverage their status as a security provider in trade negotiations.
If the USA left NATO then Sweden, Germany and Poland would require nuclear weapons and would develop them quickly. Also if the US got into a war with China for instance then NATO would not help. Consequences.
Just a note: I'm not sure Trump could cancel Ukraine aid. It's been signed into law with a 2/3 supermajority. He would need to get both the House and the Senate to vote to overturn the bill, which would require a supermajority in the Senate. That seems extremely unlikely.
Legally, no obviously he can't, but the President is in charge of basically everybody involved in actually carrying out that process, so he can absolutely intervene and hold it up in practice, just like he did everything else. What are they gonna do, impeach him again?
Legally, no. Practically... the President is in charge of basically everybody involved in actually fulfilling the aid. So he can absolutely intervene and obstruct it, like he did everything else. The only recourse Congress would have is the courts, or impeachment, and well, we've seen how that goes.
@@XIIchiron78 Gotcha. So basically he could do everything he can to obstruct it and nothing could be done without him being impeached, which of course probably won't happen.
I think he is just playing politics and appeasing the isolationist base. But there is no way he will let Ukraine fall, post-election. He saw the damage the fall of Afghanistan did to Biden's poll rating, and that is a far less important country.
America has the worlds strongest military and economy, but what really makes it the most dominant global force is the fact that it has many allies that in exchange for some level of protection are willing to aid the U.S. and follow them in many of their plans. This is why cutting aid to Ukraine would cause tremendous damage to the U.S.´s power projection around the world. Many of their allies would stop believing the U.S. would provide protection in case of emergency. And therefore become much less likely to follow the U.S. in their plans should they ever call upon them. This is ofcourse what Russia and China are hoping for, Trump would play right into their cards while thinking he´s in some way ´putting America first`.
This same moronic view was tried in the Vietnam Era. Sorry, it isn't reality. The same people touting this nonsense are the same ones who reject the US invading Iraq after 9-11. Never mind that the underlying point being Sadam still having intent on being aggressive against his neighbors and the capability to do so, and the primary one of concern was Kuwait which was the ONLY country with an actual treaty with the US for shared defense...Bush and the Conservatives did it so it must be wrong. The US Defense capability is shrinking by the rule of its people and their Representatives. The amount of GDP spent on defense keeps dropping and with that, the capability to achieve the missions the Govt has charged them to achieve. When you are spread thin, as the US DoD has been for decades, you have to cut back on missions, and to do this, you have to reduce your obligations, which means reducing your allies which depend on your defense. For over a decade the people of the US have been shouting to the world to start participating in the cost of their defense so the US can reduce its investments and obligations smoothly, but the world was deaf and blind by their own selfish demands.
I don't think it matters if allies believe in US protection. History has shown that sometimes ingrates don't do what America wants despite getting American protection. So who cares if they believe in it? If the thought process was "USA has my back, I should stay on their good side" it would be fine, but in practice it's more like "USA has my back. Well, let me do my own foreign policy based on what I want." Has France ever did something America wanted that they didn't want to do themselves? Replace "France" with almost any other ally. American allies have only ever followed American plans when it suited them. You could say they are their own soveign states and have the right to make their own decisions. But by that logic, the supposed power projection is not very valuable.
@@robertevans2450 Thus speaks the isolationist. I'm sorry, but there is no comparision with Vietnam, not even in the slightest. Nobody is asking the U.S. to fight with boots on the ground in Ukraine. It's fine if the U.S. wants to stop helping allies, but then also don't expect those allies to help the U.S. should they find themselves in a fight with China over Taiwan for example. Basically you're doing exactly what Putin and Xi want, weakening the west with a short sighted isolationist strategy.
I don't think the us has the most powerful economy pretty sure China dominates the us in that. Historically China has always been passive so they're not a huge threat imo.. I don't see why the us really needs nato, historically the us has funded all of nato and the real issue is the other countries would have massive issues with defense so they're not for a second going to half hazardly "cut ties" with the us because "ukraine is a great place"(lmfao) us keeps nato going the rest of nato countries would take a huge loss by trying to cut ties, they'd lose the vast majority of military technology, patriot missile systems,f35s,ect. You're not thinking logically, the nato countries would be sitting ducks without the us and they know that so they can't afford to lose the us or really do anything
Ucraine has lost the War. and United States needs to focus on the Pacific , of course if Trump Wins, the (defeat) of UCraine will end more quickly. its just a matter of Time.
@@meteorknight999 this war can simply end by Putin pulling back to his borders. We clearly have seen in 1939 what happens when you give an expansionist dictator what he wants, he goes for more.
we've already seen what happens when Ukraine isn't supported over the last 2 months. If aid to Ukraine is stopped then Russia won't stop, it's as simple as that.
I know right? If funding continues, it just ends up in a stalemate. Ukraine makes no advances, just holds the line. How long can they keep holding it until the next cutoff of the aid comes, and then boom, Russia advances again. Ukraine is just fighting an unwinnable war at this moment. Their situation is loke to a rigged or broken tower defense game, without levels or stages, just an endless onslaught of enemies that doesn't cease until you exhaust your gold/money to repair your towers and build another towers..
So, why NATO expanded? Russians won't let a genocide against their people. Do you want to die trying to kill a Russian? they are aware of your indoctrination and Rusophobia. The rest of the planet does not like your ideas.
Your comment appears to be a short version of what I've said elsewhere ... They attempted negotiating in order to try and appease Hitler, but I doubt whether he would've negotiated in the long term even if the stronger countries had entered the war earlier. Similarly with Putin, I can't see how you could negotiate long term with him. Putin would only play "lines on maps" for a period of time, if it suited him, before continuing on.. In other words, "lines on maps" assumes both parties would negotiate, whereas in reality you cannot negotiate with the likes of Putin & Hitler. Putin will just continue when the time's right to eat away at Ukraine, and his other targets too if and when he gets the chance. And there's no possibility that Putin wants any of Ukraine to exist in the future, thus giving validity and credence to their ethnicity and culture. Russia effectively had the Soviet Union before, and thus I cannot see that he would be satisfied if Russia wasn't constantly striving to regain that territory again over time, but this time it would be called the Russian Empire (as used before the Soviet Union). To repeat once more, I just don't think that Putin plays "lines on maps" in the long term.
oh no, Ukraine falls and then... nothing because there is finally a buffer state between NATO and Russia. It would be better to have negotiations now and perhaps save Ukraine as an independent buffer state that can't join NATO. This isn't hoi4 he's not invading for the sake of it
Ucraine has lost the War. and United States needs to focus on the Pacific , of course if Trump Wins, the (defeat) of UCraine will end more quickly. its just a matter of Time.
In addition, it seem like Trump is making the same mistake that Merkel, Macron, Poroshenko, and Zelensky made since 2014. It was believing that it's possible to stop the war by just talking to Putin.
Well, Poroshenko in 2014 haven't a normal army (50 tanks in good state and population unprepared for war) so, it was necessary for have time for reforms.
And any negotiations that could be achieved on the basis of lines on maps would be in force until Putin creates the conditions to go again in getting back "Russia's" old Soviet Union territory.
But that's why the war started. Because they didn't negotiate with Putin. Boris Johnson personally told Zelenskyy to fight Russia under Washington influence. War only starts when diplomacy fails. Also, ironic coming from NATO that keep expanding ever eastwards despite promises not too. How was that ever a good idea for maintaining peace?
Why do people assume that's his plan ? He could easily talk with Zelensky and this war would be over instantly. We know what Zelensky and his wife do with Ukrainian children... And it warrants the death penalty.
One thing you forgot to mention is that if Trump were to hypothetically win, the lame duck phase of the Biden presidency would consist of basically all remaining aid and money allotted being rushed over before it can be cancelled. Usually this phase wouldn't mean much but with the new package being so large who knows how long it may take to exhaust it.
Russia spends $10-15 billions per month. USA's aid was 1 billion, and falled to 0.6 billions. Last months USA's aid is only 0.3 billions. It's disgusting small aid. It's crime of Biden and his administration. Proper aid should be at least 30 times bigger than now.
Watching how Europe reacted to Trump claiming he was going to cut aid and let Russia do what they want, (Europe stepped up in a HUGE way) makes it a coin flip whether Trump was an idiot for saying that or a genius. Regardless, it got Europe moving.
Trump is an idiot. If you think he was secretly playing 4D chess and just said it to motivate Europe into acting.. Well, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell ya...
It's gonna cause the world to rely less on the USA and therefore giving us less leverage and possibility for us to lose many other economic opportunities due to Europe strengthening their infrastructures. this will literally make the United States less influentual
I think ultimately it was idiotic of him. All those Trump supporters saying "Europe must step up" dont understand, once Europe steps up, Europe also steps up against USA. No more US influence, or at least less. And no more US access to the Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean Sea. Or at least very expensive access to those Seas, which the US have to pay to the EU. See how this will change the security structure of US allies in the Middle-East. And then also think about how this will negatively influence the stability of the USD.
I am responding having watched to the 8:30 mark. This is deliberate. US trade with Russia? Frankly, having Russia out of the oil and gas trade with the EU is a great boost to the US economy. Russia's economy overall is relatively small. Russia's economy is about the size of Canada, Mexico or Italy. All in the $2T range. To put it in another context, the two-way trade between Russia and China grew to $200B recently. For further context, Apple's sales worldwide were $383B in 2023. Apple's reserves, cash and investments are over $165B. One other way to look at it is that the major companies affected by the sanctions and divestments were not materially impacted. Russia is not, outside of oil and gas, a big player. In fact, for the US in those markets they are a competitor. I really don't see why resuming trade with Russia is in anyone's long term interests.
You answered your own question: cheap energy. America & Canada could step up to fill the void, but neither have. Biden crippled domestic energy production early in his administration by revoking the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. Various heads of government have visited Trudeau to ask Canada to open and/expand its energy market, but have been rejected every time. The West has had a strange, often asinine infatuation with green energy - to the point where they hamper their own energy production, and then turn to more authoritarian governments to fill the void, such as Saudi Arabia & Russia.
Russia is small, as Europe is tiny. Russia is waging a war that has depleted most of NATO's excess weapon stocks. If it wasn't for a unified NATO there would probably be no weapons left.
One overlooked point in your comment is that russia is compettitive outside of oil and gas one of russias other major export is its food russia is the worlds 1st or maybe 2nd largest food exporter and producer , russia also exports significant amount of fertilizers
Businesses only conduct trade when it is profitable for them, so if an American business buys something from Russia, it must be profitable. Macroeconomic models usually don't look at _why_ trade is good on a micro level, just that it assumes it must be good otherwise trade would not have been done in the first place. And given history of international trade, I think that is a fair assumption
You answered your own question: cheap energy. America & Canada could both fill the void, but don't for some reason. Biden revoked the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline in this first year of office, crippling America's energy production. Canada is sitting on massive deposits of natural gas, and multiple heads of government have come to Ottawa to plea to Trudeau to expand Canada's energy industry, but the Canadian government refuses.
Trump sent the Ukrainians javelins and all the people who support Ukraine now said it was a mistake and would start WW3. Putin's war chest was filled by Europe buying gas. European leaders laughed when he said it would. He also pressured them to increase defense spending which is where a lot of the early aid came from.
Totally agree. They blew him off when he told them that their energy dependency is only making the Russians richer and more stronger and now they are seeing the repercussions from their actions
Trump is the only US president who authorized US forces to decimate Russian forces in Syria in 2018. Trump also led an energy policy that crushed the Russian economy.
The US spent more than 46 billion in one month when they were fighting in Iraq.They spent hundreds of billions fighting there for nothing,now when democracy is on the line they fight over every dollar to Ukraine even though most of it is spent restocking their armory with new weapons and send Ukraine old equipment at the end of it's usable life.Slava Ukraini.
As someone who started learning about politics around the Iraq invasion, it's so weird seeing the warmongering US of my youth decide to pinch pennies while some other country fights their stated geopolitical foe. One that is actually fighting for democracy, no less.
and remember 100 billions a Year in Afganistan, I remember that figure in 2006 newsweek, and they pretend sending 61 billions or 90billions to defeat the Russians. Joe Biden is just Simply delusional, and by the Way. if Bajmut is the Stalingrad, Avdiivka is like the Dnieper Battle, the Army of Ucraine has lost the war, and now it is only prolonguing or lasting months the suffering of this beaten country. the Defeat of Ucraine is only a question of when? summer? novembre before elections? next year? all this strategy on Ucraine was bad decisions since the beginning. and China gets stronger because they are winning time while this Ucranian Front still open.
For the ones that do not know, it is a reference to a South Park episode. Their underwear kept disappearing and they found gnomes that stole it out of their drawers. They could not explain how their business worked. They had those 3 steps on a blackboard and insisted that it's how they make a living.
russia doesn't "just want to" annex parts of Ukraine. They already did it, and as I'm certain you know, signed it into law. This happened without even having full control of these areas which to me is completely laughable. That's a little bit like me moving my shed further and further back until it's in my neighbor's backyard and me 'annexing' my neighbors property because I physically put something there and then stated that it's mine and so is the land. If you think that they'll stop there then I have a piece of property right behind my house to sell you.
and right now, if UCraine accept Surrender, perhaps they could preserved Odesa, but of course, they will continue, and will Loose more lands. its obvious , Ucraine has lost the War. and TRump is only speaking about Euthanasy.
Usa did the same with emancipation proclamation. Declared all slaves free in rebelling territories despite not controlling them. While allowing any slaves states in occupied and union territory to remain. It is a way to draw up political support, that is why usa back then and russia today announced something that isn't true yet.
@@JamesTodorovich the difference between the two is that one is a civil war where a single country attempted to split into two. This is two countries, where one wants to forcibly combine one into itself, and the other is fighting against it. One is basically legally allowed to do that, as agreed upon in the constitution for secession by those states, while the other is a full blown invasion of another country multiple times across history. It's hard to compare that way because they were two seperate conflicts entirely, under completely different situations.
Tired of Biden, he is our President, and he's paling up with anti semites, the Jew-hating protestors at our college campuses, and his letting in illegal aliens, so I think I will vote for the one who is not currently our president and hope for something better to come along with this change!
If a failure in Western aid allows Russian lines to touch Moldova then the theatre war could grow significantly. Moldova is small both in population and military, without the protection of NATO. I can't imagine Putin stopping at the Moldovan border. As you say, Trump dropping aid, could explode the war rather than end it.
Why? Russia is terrified of nato involvement hence them flat out saying if you send soldiers well send nukes. People have seriously unrealistic ideas of what's going on and going to go on. Ukraine isn't a civilized western country. They're tied for the most corrupt country in euope with Russia lol. One side says send aid cuz it's the right thing to do because they all know a bunch of that cash will get sent back to them into their pockets, because ukraine is... you got it corrupt. Look no further than ukraine paying hunter millions of dollars to sit on the board of an energy company, you'd be ignorant to think other politicians aren't pocketing "aid" for themselves. "On paper you'll get 60B but in reality you're going to send us back some of that money through corrupt means or we'll just not send you anything" and since ukraine is a corrupt country with no values they say sure thing how do you want your money? Only the dems can get away with the quid pro quo.. heavin forbid someone look into the corrupt illegal dealings, they'll just charge you with what we're actually guilty of. "If you don't fire the guy that's looking into the company that funneling money into my pocket I won't send you that extra 100mill" "and son of a bitch he was fired"
Hear me out...what if people just stop agreeing to go fight strangers just because a politician told them to. Take care of you family and protect your local area. Stop letting politicians tell you when you have to die.
What if Putin believes that Trump has a good chance of winning? Will Russia decide it's a good option to hunker down for now and wait for the November election, and then push hard once Trumps second term starts?
Putin would have looked for a way out of this war a year ago if both Democrats and Republicans agreed on protecting democracy. Instead, Putin is gambling on a Trump victory.
Doubtful. Trump was the first to provide weapons to Ukraine. Most of the gear Ukraine used to stop the Kyiv offensive was originally provided during the Trump years, after the Obama admin refused to provide weapons. Not to mention how the US and western militaries were in Ukraine training the AFU throughout his administration. Trump is not pro Russia, and the Russians know that better than anyone. Putin meant it when he said he preferred Biden win.
@@scherzva food stamps is for poor American civilians Americans pay their taxes some of that money goes into a big pot where body who has applied and is eligible for food stamps can now feed their family nothing wrong with being on food stamps better than starving. all military members have to do it their starving is simply find a military base and go get some food since it's free for them. And no Americans don't give a fuck about Ukraine because we don't give a fuck about Europe, if there is no business being done the average American doesn't give a s*** about Europe especially ones that don't have European heritage. if the Europeans wanna turn sections of their continent into the third world go for it theirs a million different ways my country can and will capitalize off that just like we did in both world wars.
@@dembones9275 That's already a massive red flag. Navalny was poisoned, trump didn't say anything and the same when he died. Not to mention he wanted to build a hotel in moscow, hosted a beauty pagent there with putin in attendance, his son said they get "all the funding they need from russia", his various dealings with him and then around 2016 acting as if he had never even spoken to him once before. That's extremely suspect. Saying he'll end the war in Ukraine in 1 day when we all know the only way to do that is giving putin land. Saying he'll let putin do whatever he wants to NATO member states even though the NATO members that border russia have always paid the 2% and have been warning against russia from the very beginning, so exactly which countries was trump saying putin could invade? Sure seems like he's fine with the Baltics and Poland being taken over. And now he still praises putin constantly to this day. I used to be a trump supporter before Ukraine. But everything that came out of him since then has completely destroyed my faith in him. He's not only just another politician, he's one of the worst.
I really appreciate how you illustrate your thinking, especially in a dynamic situation, by using lines on a map instead of just going into paragraph by paragraph of specific hypothetical situations that are self evident when you look at the lines on the map.
People think Trump plans to end the war in one day by forcing Ukraine to surrender. They are giving Trump too much credit. Trump is just lying. Like promising that he could get Mexico to pay for a border wall, Trump uses lying to avoid nuance policy debates.
I hate saying this, but I don't think lines on maps works in the long term with the likes of Putin. I wouldn't trust any agreements made with him, as he wants the territory of the Soviet Union back over time, and all things Ukrainian extinguished for good.
Trump does has a point on how the usa is paying a majority to Ukraine and is putting a financial burden on us citizens tax money while western european countrys are barely sending aid even though they are one of the richest countries in the world and right next door to Ukraine
Thats is fairly false, since most of the aid and weapons giving to ukraine are wepaons that are already paid and were in storage, like if what said in the video europe is the one who supplies ukraine with most of the military stuff and with most of the humanitarian and financial aid, and come on, 67 billion dollars in a wet fart compare with with the whole economy
Yet, if America withdraws, can we afford Russia, China and other non-democratic filling in that vacuum ? Also the current balance favors America economically. If you want massive inflation , increase the number of hostile states.
If you want to know what Moscow wants to get, without any military or other restriction, look at Europe map, and everything that is not water, is what Putin wants. And probably some water too.
His goals are to, at least, occupy all the lands until Central Europe (Berlin-Vienna line). If you look at Russky Mir theory about "state defense" you'll see that the whole idea is to go to the place where the European Plains are shortened by the Alps and Carpathians, a.k.a. more defensible ground. This is an old and outdated idea from the times of the Russian Empire that was revived by Putin in the last 20 years.
He's made it clear that he doesn't want borders with NATO. And Ukraine showed that paying influencers doesn't turn the populace quite so easily... it can seem like it, but then when your military actually shows up, as an invading force, they don't greet you with smiles and flowers. He might gain spheres of influence in Hungary and Slavic countries, but not Poland, Germany, Scandinavia, as they're presently constituted. But he doesn't have that chance unless the USA stops aid, and Europe doubles down on military aid, to the point where they leave themselves vulnerable. If Russia still takes Ukraine despite that European support, Putin could use that support as an excuse to go further into Europe. He would have to have made a deal with Trump for the USA to turn away from NATO, before that would happen, I think. These things all seem unlikely to happen, especially every single one of them, but it's possible. If Trump got elected, and China attacked Taiwan, suddenly people would be talking about the possibility. I'm not hoping for that, because I think a world war would cause much more widespread suffering than otherwise, and a small mistake in judgement could snowball into extremely detrimental outcomes for the planet. The benefit doesn't seem to be worth the risk, so I hope there are better reasons for Russia invading Ukraine, than what Putin told Carlson in his interview. He kept mentioning Poland - he said Poland actually started WWII, that it was their fault. And he said Poland created Ukraine as a country... so in a sense, he was blaming Poland for the current invasion, too.
@@GizzyDillespee If he didnt want borders with NATO, he could have just NOT invaded Ukraine. Because of Putin's invasion into Ukraine, Sweden and Finland have joined NATO increasing the Russo-NATO-border by like 3x or so. Because Putin invaded Ukraine, Ukraine wants to join NATO more than ever. In fact if Russia hadnt stolen Crimea back in 2014, Ukraine's opinion about Russia would still be positive and their opinion about NATO would still be negative.
@@GizzyDillespee Nonsense. If Putin's main goal was to stop NATO expansion then he failed miserably, as Sweden and Finland joined NATO and the popularity of NATO in Ukraine increased significantly - I remember you that even while the war in Donbass was going on, a year before the full-scale invasion, the percentage of people that supported Ukraine joining NATO was only about 40%, and before Russia annexed Crimea 64% of Ukrainians had a positive opinion about Russia. Right now, two years onto the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, 90% of Ukrainians want the country to join NATO. Again, Russia's goal failed miserably.
It was political move or maybe he so thin skinned that he couldn't listen anymore of people complaining about him withholding Ukraine aid either way I think you are right or then he will stop the aid
None-too-bright narcissists react in the moment. Their choices depend on which action they can be convinced is optimal for their only consistent goal --- namely, self-aggrandizement.
@@allo-otheror, more likely, the whole cutting aid thing was a bluff. Europe by and large isn't going to step up until the 11th hour, seen by the 2014 invasion of Crimea that Europe barely responded to. So by bluffing about Ukraine support, he's suddenly made a ton of European countries step up and provide NATO funding and foreign aid. Now, US aid can resume with European aid and now Ukraine gets double
@@janitorizampedHow so? Russian politicians have made plenty of extreme remarks and statements about Ukrainians during this war. Not to mention the torture and executions of civilians that has been reported with mass graves being unearthed in fomerly occupied areas. This is Russia we are talking about, human rights are the countrys door mat, you walk all over it and leave it at the door.
I really hope americans aren´t that gulible and vote for incompetent fraudster #Trump again! As history has often told us: sometimes people had to eat sh*t to learn their lessons...
I always enjoy coming to comment sections on videos like this. The vast majority bicker back and forth about whether the US is trying to save Ukraine and the rest of Europe from big, bad Russia. Or, Russia is going to wipe the floor with Ukraine in spite of US aid. It's never been about who wins or loses for the US. The GWOT is over, so defense companies needed another war to keep the profits flowing in. We've been meddling in Ukraine for decades. People really don't appreciate the long game the US plays when it comes to geopolitical hotspots. The Ukrainian War is a win-win! We dump BILLIONS into the defense companies via Ukraine with no American blood spilled. Defense CEOs get rich, politicians get rich via insider trading, and the only collateral damage is just faceless Ukrainians and Russians....
Hey, i watch your stuff ALOT when stoned, and honestly I cannot thank you enough for spelling out methodology and process before getting into it. Makes it much easier to retain info later.
Trump didn’t say that he wanted to cut off aid entirely. He said he’ll negotiate an end to the war and if Putin doesn’t want to accept then he’ll give even more than ever to Ukraine
The only way putin will end the war if Ukraine give up the rest of donbass under their control and recognise these territories as russia... also if Ukraine never joins nato... Ukraine can't agree on these terms as it is basically suicide... whoever believes that trump is the smartest person In the world and has some incredible knowledge on how to negotiate to end the war in Ukraine... which thousands of world leaders haven't tried before... who ever believes that is stupid as f...k
You get it (It’s sad to see this so few people do have basic comprehension & analytical skills). There are a lot of semi-literate soy boys and Karen’s (the “Orange man bad!” types) in the comments who really truly are dumb or they just pretend to be (I.e. they’re either ignorant or willfully ignorant (Which is even worse)). They are completely oblivious to the world going up in flames the past ~3+ years with Biden, while the Trump years were historically peaceful.
I think it would be a good thing to shift more of the responsibility onto European countries. The fact that aid contributions from the US, a single nation, rival the contributions from the entire continent of Europe supports Trump's point of view, that European countries ought to be pulling their own weight.
Polls no longer reflect what happens in actual elections, where Blue does far better than expected. (Some would say, polls have never reflected what happens in elections.) Ignore the polls other than to compare the same pollster over time.
Yes it is important to remember that most polls consist fundamentally of people who answer their phone to unknown cold calls, and then spend long enough talking to actually participate instead of hanging up. Suffice it to say, this is not a representative sample of America.
1 thing I have been thinking about the scenario if the US where to suddenly stop aiding Ukraine is what the response would look like from Europe? I base this idea about the success from the first Ukrainian counter-offensive, after the offensive the russians or Putin went into desperate mesaures to secure the front he still controlled with minefields, dragons tooths obstacles, more effective trench systems and lots more defensive strategies. From that success Putin really had a fright and decided to act in a way that as of this current moment helped him stabilize the front to make sure he didnt lose the war. Now Im very concerned of the current status of the war since it looks like the russians have been able to fix a majority of the problems they had a beginning of the war and can now advance in a pase the russians seems to handle. What makes me scared is that this current trend will make it look like this conflict will take years to end and make more countries more "aid" fautiged and not be willing to aid Ukraine, in this case the US. If Trump were to make his into office and just end the aid I dont think the war will end but I would rather think this would send a clear message to the EU and its leaders that they are on their own. Which I think will both scare them and make the very nervous, wich in turn will make them take desperate measures in the ukrainian conflict. What those desperate measures could look like I dont really know but with Macron's suggestions with nato troops in Ukraine we could see something like that a reality, but It could also see something like maybe EU volunteers for the Ukrainian forces, a joint EU air command where EU sends its air fleet to aid the Ukrainians or EU straight up blockading russian harbours to prevent any trade. Its all theories at this point but fact remains that the future is still uncertain and that the EU needs to do more inorder to prepare for the future and a potential conflict, because at this state we are still waiting for the artillery production to kick in and Russia is already in a war economy so we are in my opinion in a unprepared state for a conflict with Russia so we must take desperate measures to make sure the Ukrainians can win this war.
Regarding Assumption #2 about President Trump's future actions. The moderator in the debate specifically asked Trump if he would cut all aid to The Ukraine and he answered "no." Is that not clear enough?
You are missing a glaringly obvious potential variable. The US supplies the most aid per country. If the US withdraws aid, other countries may very well follow suite and cause a domino effect.
Does he make these videos with PowerPoint? It kind of reminds me of the slide changing effects from power point sometimes. Very long PowerPoint presentation tho and 1000 times better than my collage professors 600 slides PowerPoints that they ram trough my brain the last 2h on a Friday.😵💫😭
Are we just going to ignore that the president doesn't have the authority to override congressional spending? The money is spent, and the shipments are mandated by law. Even if Trump wanted to, he couldn't block Ukraine aid.
Yeah but he could veto any bills congress passed to give aid and congress is so split down the middle right now that they probably won’t have the votes to override a trump veto in 2025
The problem is that he will attempt to and some of his cultists will try to see his vision through lest they dissatisfy their fuhrer and he starts calling them the kinds of names that you would hear on a...school playground.
I have a feeling that eventually Trump will try to do anything he wants. After all he doesn't seem to be a fan of the current system of government in the US and democracy in general. Yet despite this a lot of people will vote for him... once. 🤦♂️ But what do I know, I'm just a Brit and we get on with our royalty. 🇺🇦🇬🇧
I’m a conservative. In 2020 I voted for Trump and thought I’d do it again in 2024 if he ran again, but his stance on American support for Ukraine among other things means I don’t like him enough anymore to want to vote for him.
So... 200+ Billion provided to Ukraine from the rest of the world? I'd love to see the breakout of those numbers for real... Or is it 200 billion pledged over the next 50 years ? That's Madoff level accounting.
Not immediately. His first steps will be securing the ability to pardon himself from all his current legal problems. After that he will then have to start the legislation that will let him maintain immunity for life. I'm not sure he will try to become President for Life in order to gain eternal legal immunity, his advisers will probably tell him that just won't work, but who knows? After the last 4 years he will know that the DOJ needs to be purged of all staff that aren't 100% loyal to him, and that will take time. That will probably eat up his first year in office. Putin can hold off for a year, thus causing the American public to sort of forget about Ukraine. They will not be focused on that War when there is already a possible Civil War in the making at home. His 2nd, 3rd, 4th year will be devoted to a reorganization of Congress, as well as the USA's withdrawal from NATO and other military alliances. Conservatives will cheer him, and LIberals will be too worried about their own skin to really fight him on this front.
I have this feeling that he is more likely to increase aid, because Trump doesn't like to loose. Trump will say whatever he thinks will get him elected, he has no moral compass other than to win. And if he wins the election then he will say or do whatever is needed to win the next thing. This is core to Trumps psychology.
@@tatuvarvemaa5314 there is a very big difference between cheap populism and actually making decisions with consequences for generations. Trump is unpredictable, he is just as likely to become a nightmare for the Kremlin
Biden will fulfill as much of the aid that has been passed as possible under his term. Ukraine will be able to fight for at least 2 years. That gives Europe time to find the resolve to help Ukraine in the future I hope.
What exactly is Ukraine's path to victory at this point, with or without American money? I honestly don't see one, especially given Ukraine's manpower issues. Meaning I'm of the opinion this is a complete waste of money, much as the money spent in Iraq and Afghanistan was. In any event, how does Ukraine win here?
@@agentorange9867 That's not an option. There haven't been any nuclear weapons in Ukraine for almost 30 years. After agreeing to the Budapest Memorandum, they got rid of them.
One of the private motivations you did not mention is that Trump does not want to look weak especially in a negotiation, he frequently claims to be the best negotiator. I don't think he will just pull out without some consession from Putin. Putin equally does not want to look weak and will likely not capitulate to any concession from Trump without a significant threat.
Washington’s Farewell address went over why we should stay out of euro wars and that we need to put ourselves first and not send our sons, daughters, and money to fight in a area of the world that has always killed each other in massive numbers. At this case I don’t care how we do it but we need to work on ourselves first and foremost and not even think about helping others with handouts until our top 10 issues are under control. This doesn’t mean that we don’t do business with other countries but free shit needs to stop.
Trump never said he would stop all aid to Ukraine. He just said he would end the war. Let's apply some logic here. The US ending all aid would not end the war. Ukraine would fight on with whatever they had. What would end the war would be major increases in military aid and the free ability to use all those weapons where and how Ukraine would want. Russia would then be forced to end hostilities and leave Ukraine. Either that or their military would be completely destroyed. That is the only way the war could end quickly.
Your argument is faulty. Trump has explicitly said, "Aid to Ukraine ends day one." Your argument that ending the war requires more aid, while accurate, is a polar opposite of what Trump has said and thus contradicts your predicate. He will not increase aid; he will pressure Ukraine to sue for peace.
@@spinningsquare1325this commentary simply coping with the cards he's been dealt Americans are going to vote Trump in office and I pray to God from stop supplying aid to ukraine to be honest I don't believe that me and the majority of Americans care about any geopolitical implications not supporting Ukraine may have. Majority of Americans have a mindset of before and not helping Americans we don't want to help we have too many problems at home better far more important to us than ukraine I feel that the majority of Americans don't even really want to be a world superpower we just want to have an exceptionally strong military.
There's one hypothetical war ending scenario you didn't mention. You could argue that ending US aid pushes the "white line" so much to the west that all of Ukraine ends up occupied by Russia.
Russia couldn't hold Afghanistan. Putin is well aware of that, so I doubt that even he thinks that that is a realistic outcome. Holding Ukraine would require even more conscription as every square metre of a huge country would require a military presence to combat freedom fighters. This is obviously politically impossible or he'd have already called up these extra people for the current war phase.
@@SmileyEmoji42Afghanistan is better than ukrn they have fought Chengis khan british empire america, Ukrn didnt win single war in history and wasnt even a thing
@@meteorknight999 Russia took control of Kabul in days. Russia failed to get anywhere near Kiev in over a year. I don't see the relevance of Afghans being good against bowmen on horseback.
@@SmileyEmoji42 ukrn courage is infinitely weak compared to Afghanistan Ukrn is losing with best weapons tanks, missiles,drones,IFV,air defense on planet afghan won with rusted AK
What if ending American aid would also end constraints on Ukrainian actions and they hit harder inside Russia, including destroying all the pipelines exporting oil and gas to Europe?
He’s another Russian bot. That’s less than 10% of the US ANNUAL defense budget. The money was spent upgrading AMERICAN equipment and Ukraine gets our old equipment. We pay for our own upgrades and as a happy side effect, Ukraine keeps its sovereignty, and Russia gets bleed out.
Seriously. His lawyers are currently arguing that he is completely immune for anything he does while president. Including, hypothetically overthrowing democracy.
@@tartrazine5 Someone who cheated to get better interest rates than he deserved, you mean, which lost the banks some income. Not to mention he then minimized properties' value for tax purposes which cost NY State considerable tax revenue.
Because he didn’t do anything that would put him in jail (or at least hasn’t been convicted of anything that would yet) and in America we take innocent until proven guilty very seriously.
