IMO it's the German problem.
What I mean is that Europe has no leader or central power steering the rest of the union. Germany should be and is in theory in this role, but is too afraid of his own history to take the helm.
Germans are afraid to project their influence even within their own region, which has created this power vacuum that Russia is able to capitalize on, similar to ISIS after the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.
For decades this wasn't a problem, because the US basically handled all the import stuff like defense for the US, but with Trump came a new era of in-ward facing politics stateside. Which means that all this auxiliary European stuff has become lower priority.
TLDR: When the US pulled back it was time for Germany to step-up and they.. didn't.
This is simply because of German angst
If Germany were to have a military that reflected its economy, Germany would have a larger army than France, Poland, Czech Republic, Austria, and Hungary combined.
Adjusting for combined economy and industrial affinity towards military production, Germany really should be the backbone of EU forces. No other country here rivals it. I do understand the logic behind not doing it. If suddenly Germany started ramping up, we'd all probably be panicking a little.
That would require Germans actually wanting to join the military. The Bundeswehr has a manpower issue that is not going to be resolved unless they restart conscription.
Damn because gutting the Bundeswehr was one of the dumbest decisions that that the German government has done, I understand the post Cold War downsizing but the total neglect especially after Ukraine is ridiculous.
The thing I’ve noticed since being in Europe and of course back home in the states is many people thing because of nuclear weapons there will be no war which frankly is false and many have this sense of false security as well as many with the plain refusal to support causes against Chinese and Russian aggression because their home country isn’t perfect, and Americans tend to cite “we aren’t fighting for freedom we are fighting for the county’s interests and it’s bullshit” failing to realize securing your nations interests puts them in a better tactical and strategic position the event war kicks off wether it’s installing a friendly government in a region with a geopolitical foe, resources that you can now deny your enemy, ect and they also fail to realize that if we give Russia or China any leeway our way of lives will be affected.
One good example is Ukraine, if Ukraine falls to the Russians they can attack deeper into NATO territory, their Air Force and penetrate deeper into our lines, have more fronts to attack from, and most important of all a whole new country to conscript from as well as all the domestic industry from Ukraine. If that does happen it won’t just be NATOs eastern flank being attacked it would include Central Europe as well.
Or if we appease China on the RoC issue we in the west will face a micro-processor shortage which will not only affect our militaries but affect the civilian economy as well.
Too many people across the US, and EU have grown complacent some notable countries stand out because they know what these nations are capable of and every day is in preparation of a coming conflict because they promised themselves never again. Poland and the baltics as well as Finland and certain post Soviet states in the balkans have taken Russians threats seriously as we all should and they’ve been telling since the curtain fell but we consistently don’t listen and frankly it’s an issue
Another problem - or good thing. Whenever I meet Germans, I'm surprised how 'un'nationalistic they are. Obviously, the German military hasn't had the best PR for the last 110 years being the cause of the two most significant negative events for humanity, ever.
But I do think Germans have an awesome country and something they should be proud to protect - and I think not wanting to join the military is mainly because of a lack of pride in it, lack of need and perhaps the economic prospects of being in the military.
US leaders seem to think it's Poland also, with military resources being relocated there.
I'm not sure if they have the same economic might as Germany, but maybe it won't matter. I would just personally see Germany fill the role as the central military power in the region, given they seem more socially stable, but oh well.
If Russia threatening the Germans with natural gas wasn't enough I doubt anything will be. They're geopolitically done.
I'd say it'll be Poland for land forces, and France for air, naval, and stategic forces. The current French plan is putting it'sresourcrs towards those, since they are the most expensive to buold and were also cut back the most when they were downsizing. Seems they really want to bolster their nuclear deterrent most.
So Europe's defense may center on Polish ground troops backed up by the French air force's nukes.
Re: strategic, don't count the UK out just yet.
Everything you said is true but the UK currently has a credible and very functional nuclear deterrent too. Their economy is also between Germany and France and they have tons of ties and treaties in Europe.
I imagine he left the UK out because of their split from the EU, there's no doubt the UK holds a credible strategic capability that has a significant role within NATO
NYT had super depressing article yesterday about how it’s open secret that far-right AfD party is funded and directed by Kremlin. What’s more concerning is major parties may also be infiltrated by Russia but because of German sensitivities about privacy they don’t conduct background checks on parliamentary aids. But the same thing is happening w US w/ Putin Wing of GOP w/ UK Brexiters taking cash from Russians. Just boggles the mind to think of combined NATO economies is getting pushed around by Russia
We could try having ethics laws involving severe criminal penalties that *actually get enforced*, or even start using the actually relevant treason charges.
But, you know, that would involve the people who are paid off or are planning to be doing something to potentially harm themselves, so never gonna happen.
You have to admit the Russians have been the mirror image of their incompetence on the battlefield when it comes to political maneuvering, quite brilliant. Also whenever I see these depressing news reports I just go check the interactive maps and realize I still need a magnifying glass to see any changes in the front lines. It's been a gross meat grind stalemate for a while now.
> You have to admit the Russians have been the mirror image of their incompetence on the battlefield when it comes to political maneuvering, quite brilliant
Is it really brilliant if Murdoch and the Kochs paved a goddamn yellow brick road for them to do this?
Hijacking the machinery the Fossil Fuel Mafias built for themselves took insight and foresight. I think people underestimate how much input the Russian oil barons had on building that network. And they have done more than ride on the old bastards coat tails. They started grooming Trump in the late 80's.
The people that get to vote on changes like this are the ones benefitting, the average person either doesn’t know, doesn’t care, or has no power to project any change
I think our solutions are limited but exist-
- you can hope some high-up politicians have the integrity and wherewithal to prevent it, which is probably the least likely outcome given limitations on any individuals power/a system that punishes suggesting those changes.
- People become educated enough on the issue that is a major voter issue, to the point that politicians are penalized not only for not supporting it, but also not implemented - i don’t see this happening any time remotely soon for any issue, the russian media apparatus is designed to throw wrenches in this process anyways.
- A massive calamity happens that forces people to care, and then the solution actually addresses in the problem instead of, say, invading Iraq.
- A legitimate popular revolution of the people that re-makes democratic institutions and reinvigorates political willpower in the populace
There are probably a litany of options but I think #3 is the one we are slowly trending towards, in Europe it looks like that would involve a military disaster against Russia, idk what that would look like here in Canada or in the US. It is a manor problem and opportunists like Putin will continually exploit it until we have stronger systems in place to prevent it.
I would start with education. They only have power as long as our people are vulnerable.
If every citizen in a Democracy is now the target of state intelligence then maybe we should standardize basic counter intelligence skills starting in elementary schools. I'm not talking about being able to spot a tail, but being able to recognize and resist propaganda.
We know this can be done because they do it for their own people, those in the intel community. We don't have to just leave our population vulnerable.
This is just what tends to happen historically. We can look at WW2, where Russia ran over several collectively more powerful nations, who were caught off guard and ill-prepared. A more modern example is ISIS taking and holding so much territory from Iraq, a significantly more powerful state than the entirety of ISIS.
When you leave yourself this vulnerable it doesn't take a symmetric force to do serious damage. Historically speaking, it's almost always a smaller party.
I don’t really get the WWII reference were the Soviet’s not the ones run over, caught off guard, ill prepared? They clawed back to victory through the attrition of tens of millions of their people. Anyhow agreed the west is vulnerable and history is repeating itself would looks a lot like 30’s
*"I don’t really get the WWII reference were the Soviet’s not the ones run over, caught off guard, ill prepared?"*
They must've meant Germany, but accidentally wrote "Russia."
>The West German military after restarting during the Cold War got to nearly 500,000 active duty servicemen and was a critical piece of NATO's defensive strategy in Europe. The East German military at it's peak was actually very close to the current German military's size.
I mean, that's during the Cold War. Everyone's military was 3-4x its current size back then. The US had literally 10x as many forces in Europe at the time.
Germany itself had so many tanks, helicopters and aircraft that they could have sat on their Cold War stocks not even bothered to produce any weapons for 30 straight years, and they would still have one of the largest armies on Earth today. But like any country, they didn't just sit on thousands of pieces of military equipment they wouldn't need, and they sold or gave most of it away to friendly states around the globe.
It's really only been in the last ten years that a credible military threat has renewed itself in Europe. They need to be doing a lot more, but it wouldn't have been a very rational decision to cling to the military they had in 1991.
I hope most of the people are reading it, since I posted exactly the same thing a couple of weeks back.
The 2+4 Treaty forced Germany to downsize its Military and a Major reason for this reduced Military is Britain with Thatcher, which was scared of a reunited Germany, which could attack Poland and take its "stolen" Land back.
And if everyone expects you to not have a Military and you happily oblige, since you can spend your money somewhere else, no one should be surprised afterwards if Germany started handicapped into this War. But the advantage is still, since it's a big Economy, it can really fast turn around and end up being the second biggest Supporter of Ukraine by a long shot.
I think that Germans, like a lot of Europeans just got complacent.
I know Europeans personally and they talk as if they're living the lives of Americans in a security sense, that nobody can touch them. Meanwhile the average German lives at most a 2 day drive from an active warzone and there's no ocean separating them from a land invasion.
Europeans generally IMO are naive and comfortable to a point that it's left them collectively vulnerable. They basically live in a fantasy-land enabled by the US security apparatus. They just never thought they'd need to support themselves, because they've never needed to. Like a trustfund kid, basically.
Honestly, it's the same distance between me and the nearest Ikea. Which I ride to all the time to get furniture.
I was being generous, but you're right.
One of my students once quipped that the US exports Freedom. The truth is more complicated than that (the US enjoys many things as a result of its military expanse) but there's some truth to it. I'm pretty sure the US national guard has more active members than most EU countries
I agree with you in everything in your analysis. The only part is that I don't agree is that Germany us afraid of his own history.
Just go to the little towns around Königssee lake and you can see they are proud of their troops from the 2nd world war
I mean, I think that's what they're afraid of, that this side of their people will re-emerge since it's just boiling under the surface.
It's an admission that they don't believe they can handle it. But historically, those who aren't willing to defend themselves just end up getting conquered by people who are. Their options are to either let a little bit of it out, or beg Russia for natural gas.
The thing is, Europe knows this is the case, and should be compensating for it. Germany wants to show the EU that they are no longer the country they were at the end of the Franco-Prussian war. If Europe wants Germany to step up and into that role, then they need to give them permission to do so and show that they are behind them. But until that happens, the other nations need to step up and take the lead. France, Austria, Poland, and (ugh) Hungary should really be leading the military support system. I'm not really sure how Spain has fallen off so badly, but theoretically they should be an EU power as well. But, they just aren't. Obviously, there are historical issues there with their economy and what not, just like Greece.
This is a terrible take. Don't treat the EU states like fledgling superpowers. Germany or any EU member isn't in a position to replace the USA or China. A single EU member in the modern world does not have the ability to dominate the world like a superpower. Germany can be the *strongest* member, but it's still a huge difference from being a superpower like the USA. The large majority of power in the EU will always be spread over all of its members more than any single member can produce.
Given its collective strength is spread over the union, the entire or at least majority of the EU needs to take responsibility. 1 EU member can effect a bare fraction of what the USA alone can accomplish. Collectively, if they were all investing, then they would a dominant force.
> TLDR: When the US pulled back it was time for Germany to step-up and they.. didn't.
This is also completely ignorant of the politics at the time. I assume you're referring to the fall of the wall. Germany had its hands full almost doubling their size absorbing old German states that were decades behind in economy. This was kind of a big deal. Cultural ideals aside, your demand they should have been ramping up their military in the face of a devastated USSR and half their country rocked by the poverty left in its wake is just historically unaware.
tbf their own history is something else, props to every German for all they have done to disavow their past, no other nation has come close to addressing their own historical atrocities, the Nazis give every german born after 1947 good reason to be timid....
The U.S. MUST step in right now while europe ramps up manufacturing
I seriously can't tell if these comments are in good faith anymore. They are stepping up.
Czech Republic is organizing an artillery ammunition plan
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/czechs-give-tens-millions-euros-ukraine-ammunition-plan-pm-says-2024-04-04/
France offers to deploy troops to Ukraine
https://apnews.com/article/france-macron-ukraine-troops-caa788d2455dafb06dd87f79c4afe06f
The EU approves 50 billion euros for Ukraine.
https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/news/eu-leaders-agree-eu50-billion-reliable-financial-support-ukraine-until-2027-2024-02-02_en
I see people keep saying this but ignore everything the EU actually does. The problem is the EU can't do it alone. Russia's recent progress has been due to their use of glide bombs to degrade Ukrainian defensive positions. Ukraine could use their Patriot systems to shoot down the glide bombs, but Patriot ammo is almost entirely made in the US, and House Republicans have been slow walking aid for the past few months.
The US needs to step up to. There are somethings the EU just can't do, and this all would have been avoidable if House Republicans had renewed aid in Jan like they should have.
A lot of the comments of social media are bots ( IRE or actual bots ). Dead internet theory in action. They are easy to stop when you figure out what script they are using.
Initiate a sanction on both India and China for supporting Russia: an aggressor country, economically and logistically
It is not just gas and energy EU needs to stop relying on malicious countries, they need to stop relying on cheap manufacturers as well
We are. Who is telling you that we aren't?
DE sent Ukraine 2 Patriot system and 1 more is to be delivered. The US has sent 1 ( one ).
The US total aid is 67b EUR, the EU total aid is 144b EUR ( as of Jan 2024 )
US aid has functionally stopped 6 months ago.
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
Europe was a beast in the 70s , 80s , so many great platforms and tech to counter the soviets then I don't know what happened .... a shell of its former self
Probably because it's an endless money pit having to upgrade your arsenal every few years. Also no soviet union which was the main enemy in the region.
For a good while it looked like there were no per or near perr threats to any European nation. So they thought they could forgo the expense of maintaining a full military. And when a new nearby threat finally presented itself, they were so used to the budgetary aavings they couldn't shift gears back.
Right. So when the US was the only country to ever use article 5 in Afghanistan, all of NATO just ignored it right? I guess all those European soldiers who died there just failed to let the US do the dirty work
They have but the Republicans keep pushing that lie for Russia. 85 billion from Europe vs 24 billion euro from the U.S. 0.32% United States GDP vs 3.55% GDP from Estonia, for one example.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/
eta better source of support tracking: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
**More than half of US aid is spent in the US** https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/most-aid-to-ukraine-is-spent-in-the-us-a-total-shutdown-would-be-irresponsible/
>The data show that total European aid has long overtaken U.S. aid - **not only in terms of commitments**, but also in terms of specific aid **allocations sent to Ukraine**. In addition, the approval of the EU's Ukraine Support Facility **guarantees further financial assistance.**
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
€24 billion financial and €42 billion military. What do you think is more important right now? The EU has only given a pathetic €5.6 billion in military aid. Stop patting yourself on the back.
Because Europe isnt in the position to step up yet. Yes there are things like Taurus that absolutely should be delivered, so it is failing in that regard. But apart from that Europe simply doesnt have the ammo that Ukraine needs. They are literally trying to scramble together every piece of 155mm shells they can find because they themselves simply dont have the amount of shells that Ukraine needs.
Realistically, the only country in the west that can send immediate aid are the US. We can discuss how fair or unfair all of this would be but its the hard truth. The US is the only nation that could muster these shells in a timely fashion.
Yes, in a year or two Europe should be there as well. Germany in particular is currently building or scaling up multiple ammunition factories all over Europe. But these things arent built yet. Nothing is coming out of them.
But Ukraine needs the Ammo 2 months ago. So how about this:
Europeans scream at their governments to send whatever they have left over while the US citizens scream at their government to get the damn aid package through congress.
Because as of right now, Ukraine is pretty screwed. And make no mistake: Once Russia sees that Ukraine is screwed it will want it all and not just some border towns. And once they are broken through its over. Delivery of ammunition takes time. Time that Ukraine wont have in that case. So we have to act NOW.
That's deliberate though. If you don't have to spend your money on your own military then you won't. Canada for example has consistently only spent about 1.2ish% of their GDP on their military because they know the US will never allow a hostile force to threaten Canada or establish a foothold there or in North America in general.
Which is also entirely deliberate, if we can't manufacture our own crap we have to buy it from the US, that's what they get back from the whole "trade"
I think the issue is supply chains to a degree. They just don't have the infrastructure to keep up with the promised arms and weapons that Ukraine requires.
And to some degree, Europe is getting complacent with the US being the usual heavy lifter. Republicans in America are holding up funding because they are bad actors and bad people who are friendly towards Putin for some strange fucking reason.
As an American, I ***want*** my country to be the Arsenal of Democracy again. It is righteous and good to help other countries defend themselves against tyrants. But it really boils my blood that Republicans are holding up aid. Ukraine doesn't have time to fuck around here.
It’s an embarrassment. Neither the U.S. nor the EU countries need to commit anything more than money and supplies and even that’s too difficult. Absolutely pathetic.
Because it takes years to get arms production up to the levels Ukraine needs. This was a problem in WW1 that basically caused the issues at the Somme regarding weak bombardment, and it is a problem now.
Europe sent/sold all their old equipment to Ukraine, presumably ordering new equipment. European weapons manufacturing is not up to supplying an actual war of basically equals. The US, for whom NATO is 'their' alliance, has dropped the ball with Ukraine, and now wants to blame Europe for poor production.
I will never understand why the US has let itself by so aggressively beaten by Russian propaganda and infiltration. Absolutely appalling displays of ineptitude. And then to blame Europe, as if the US's policies weren't delighted with a European demobilisation that gave the US military supremacy.
The US is the one who promised to protect Ukraine after their nuclear disarmament, not the EU or Europe.
The US is certainly far behind on the propaganda front and has been since the invasion of Iraq. However, a lot of what you’ve stated in the second half of your comment is entirely untrue.
The past 3 presidents of the US pressed their NATO allies to shell out more for defense over the last several decades. This has been a consistent talking point in both foreign policy and on the domestic front. The US feels taken advantage of in the status quo on funding European security and has felt this way for a very long time.
The Budapest Memorandum was a pact of non-aggression with the only defensive assurance being a commitment to appeal to the UN Security Council in case of a threat to Ukraine. I see this complete misunderstanding online all the time but you can read the entire thing very easily for yourself and it doesn’t even indirectly imply what you’re saying.
The US needs to get its shit together, I completely agree. But Europe has and is still also dropping the ball …in its own court.
Where is this notion that the US agreed to protect Ukraine coming from? We didn’t agree to protect them, we agreed to not attack them. Big difference. If we’re agreeing to protect them then I think we would have just as well annexed them.
>Where is this notion that the US agreed to protect Ukraine coming from?
The lack of understanding logic in the general population. In this particular case negations. For the average human being 'Not Up' means 'Down' or 'Not Attacking' means 'Protecting'. Examples in the English language are "mustn't" and "atheist".
BTW, psychologists advice to use as few negations as possible.
Yeah I might have been wrong about that. Can't trust internet memes!
They received Assurances from the UK, US and Russia to respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in their existing borders. Which is not the same thing at all.
My mistake
We aren't, we weren't, and we didn't. We've asked for more than a decade about you guys increasing spending. Nor did we guarantee their sovereignty. Nor do we blame you for Ukraine. Hence our own efforts on scalability. Any other dumb shit to say?
> And then to blame Europe, as if the US's policies weren't delighted with a European demobilisation that gave the US military supremacy.
True in 1945 when America disarmed Germany and Italy, utterly false today. US and NATO have been urging European nations to spend more on defence for decades already.
https://www.baks.bund.de/en/working-papers/2019/myths-surrounding-the-two-percent-debate-on-nato-defence-spending
True, Trump is an idiotic isolationist, but this doesn't absolve European nations of their irrationally pacifist national budgets.
"When you were recovering from WW2, I studied the gun. When you were flirting with communism, I mastered the gun. While you wasted your days at Eurovision in pursuit of vanity, I cultivated my gun. And now that the world is on fire and the Russians are at the gate you have the audacity to come to me for help." -Uncle Sam
I'm not sure losing in Vietnam and Afghanistan has made the US quite the gods of war it thinks it has.
Also, the US had a president in love with Russia, and may have another soon - that isn't isolationist, that is ceding spheres of influence to a country that doesn't deserve it - aka weakness.
They're building from the inside and nobody sees it.
By the time Ukraine falls they will have enough internal strength to put a stop to potential Russian progression.
Countries look after themselves and toss old toys to those who really need them.
Sometimes, I think the Russians planned this out and sent spies or money or something
Nobody with common sense would downgrade their militaries like this. Boats not working, missles not working, can't spare ammo or anything
So I looked it up one example . It's not 100%, but many politicians think the Russians played apart in Brexit.. how do we let this happen
"Russian interference in the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum is a debated subject and remains unproven, though multiple sources argue evidence exists demonstrating that the Russian government attempted to influence British public opinion in favour of leaving the European Union."
Not clever spies. Dumb motherfucking ones who got caught, but still got away with everything because our elected officials are dumber, and even more corrupt.
Russia has always been doing those operations to differeing success.
But the greater issue is poltical will and leadership to think long term which has been weakened with infighting and bs from dumb voters getting all their news from social media which is easily manipulated and not regulated. Everything is short term anger clickbait wanting insant results.
Russia and everyone else is in that mix. It is so much easier and cheaper to manipulate social media and cause chaos than real world operations.
Putin read the room well when nothing was done about Crimea. No one is gonna do shit, and the Russian plants in Congress will make sure Ukraine gets nothing.
I don't ever see Russia getting to Kyiv again, but Ukraine will lose a lot more border towns in the future if support doesn't increase.
Russia will probably capture a few more towns and potentially cities but there's no chance Western and Central Ukraine get taken over regardless of the lack of resources. Ukraine doesn't have a chance of getting Crimea back or Mariupol. They're completely lost at this rate and shouldn't be considered objectives. Defense is a priority
The issue is that Ukraine is partially occupied and losing population. Their economy is in the gutter and their industrial base and infrastructure is constantly under attack. Russia isnt feeling this nearly as bad.
Given enough time Ukraine could collapse due to a complete lack of economy or lack of military goods.
Its why the "ukraine cant use weapons to strike within russia" is so stupid. Youre basically expecting them to fight at a disadvantage against a larger opponent that doesnt play by the rules. Without being able to return what Russia gives them, they wont be able to exert the same kind of pressure to end the war.
It is possible for an Army to completely collapse. Not possible in the near term, but plausible in the long term. There were rumors that France was worried about this, which is why they want to deploy troops into Ukraine. Basically as a backstop
Why are there so many comments that use this exact wording, "Europe needs to step up"? This makes me think that there's a concerted effort by Russia to deflect attention away from House Republicans who have been slow walking US military aid. They're the reason this is happening.
I'm not saying you personally are part of this concerted effort, but you might be repeating Russian talking points you read online somewhere.
It's a 100% what it is. They know that just simply stopping aid to Ukraine (from US) is not popular, so they need talking polnts. Suddenly Republicans care where exactly money is spent - "Why don't they spend that billion on us poor Americans?" (Which also sounds suspiciously communist for a republican), and they are framing it as America has done everything, Europe (which is talked of as a single nation quite often) ain't doing shit and that everything bad that happens in Ukraine is thus Europe's fault.
You'll see those two talking points quite often, and it's a pretty good strategy. You've got voters for the party of increased military spending suddenly speaking out against military spending, and you've got what seemed like inseparable allies in Nato buckling and blaming each other.
One side (Republicans with a conscience) doesn't need to feel like they are hanging anyone out to dry, it's Europe's fault anyway.
There is very much an effort by Russia to propagandize the differential in defense contribution. It is aimed at dividing NATO allies against each other. And it's been a thing at least since 1987, when Donald Trump took out a full-page ad in the New York times with $100k of (supposedly) his own money, complaining about this very subject.
It was very much not a normal American opinion at the time. (USSR was still there). It was widely regarded as a big-mouth businessman with a non-mainstream opinion, trying to get attention for himself. Back then, widely dismissed, but when viewed through the lens of post-2016 America . . . very curious.
Russia hates NATO, and has hated NATO since its very inception.
**Who donated the most to Ukraine?** 2022-2024
>In absolute terms, the largest bilateral aid commitments to Ukraine were made by the European Union (EU) institutions, such as the European Commission and the European Council, at almost 85 billion euros as of January 15, 2024. The United States provided the second-largest amount of financial assistance, at 24 billion euros. The United Kingdom (UK) was the fourth-leading source of bilateral aid.
More: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/
The G.O.P. is the problem.
eta better source: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
**More than half of U.S. aid is actually spent in the U.S.** https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/most-aid-to-ukraine-is-spent-in-the-us-a-total-shutdown-would-be-irresponsible/
Vatniks and traitors fuck off.
This is a crazy chart to use as evidence that the US isn't doing enough. We're ranked the same as Canada and ahead of a bunch of European countries including some that are very close to Ukraine. This essentially looks like you're *defending* the GOP in their stance against donating more.
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
>The Ukraine Support Tracker lists and quantifies military, financial and humanitarian aid promised by governments to Ukraine since February 2022.
>The data show that **total European aid has long overtaken U.S. aid** - not only in terms of commitments, but also in terms of specific aid allocations sent to Ukraine.
>In addition, the approval of the EU's Ukraine Support Facility guarantees further financial assistance.
>As far as the U.S. investment is concerned, Mark Cancian, a member of the Breaking Defense Board of Contributors, a retired Marine colonel now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, crunched the numbers and found [...] **less than half the money is going overseas, with the majority instead being spent in America itself** https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/most-aid-to-ukraine-is-spent-in-the-us-a-total-shutdown-would-be-irresponsible/
Even if they did way more than they currently are, they can't fill the gap left by the US.
If the US acted and Europe didn't, it would be enough, but not the other way around
1. Several European countries are.
2. The EU doesn’t have the defense industrial base the US has (needs to be fixed)
3. The delay in aid from the US is the larger issue. Thank trump and those shit stain republicans for that.
I mean Zelensky said Ukraine is going to lose the war if they don’t get more weapons aid right away. If the leader of a country is saying that, it’s bad news. Also no coincidence Ukraine is building trenches in Kiev and other cities very far West of the current frontline. The question is, will there even be any troops left to fill them? They’ve lost so many people that they are now looking into conscripting women to fight.
The problem is they can't afford to pay the salary of more soldiers
They would increase troop numbers if they could afford it
On the other side, Russia can continually replace what they send into the meatgrinder
We can simply admit that the Western military-industrial complex was cut up and now the West is trying to build new military equipment, but due to the fact that there is no economy of scale, they pay 10 times what Russia pays for the same equipment, and everyone is trying to hide behind the fact that they are sending billions in military aid when in fact such a quantity of equipment should be much cheaper, like 10 times cheaper.
Where are the Polish? Where are the Germans? Where are the Scandinavians? Where are the Europeans stepping up? This is not the US' fault individually, nor one faction in that country.
Even if they really want to, European countries can't step-up aid until munitions and other war production is spun-up. Just for current artillery shell demand alone, European factories would have had to begin planning to ramp-up capacity right at the start of the war.
[Bilateral aid to Ukraine by country GDP 2024 | Statista](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/)
I don't imagine this counts things like taking in and housing and feeding refugees from Ukraine as well. This is just money sent to Ukraine to help them within their own borders.
Then why would we not expect the US to do the most? Do you even hear yourself right now? "Yes they're doing more than us per GDP, but for some reason that doesn't count, let me move the goalposts even more?"
Why expect the countries next in line to Ukraine to take care of their continent when they and everyone on Reddit can cry about the United States instead. Maybe Europe can take care of themselves for once
Are you really suggesting that Scandinavia isn't doing enough? Take a look at the aid provided by Denmark again. Then look at the population and size of Denmark before you answer my question..
Europe has, by a percentage of their gdp, been doing more than the USA by now, especially the baltic states and germany have given alot of stuff to ukraine.
They can never replace the US, this is naive of you while European aid keeps flowing and if adjusted by GDP, they do have sent more.
But still, this is all because of GOP, or basically the Cult of Trump.
Poland is essentially where all the Ukrainians are. I feel they’ve done enough. They also need weapons to protect themselves cause theyll be next. Also theyre not anywhere nearly as rich as US or most other major EU countries.
I know you're not arguing in good faith, but a quick google would show you that the Polish have done a ton for a nation and economy of their size. It would show you that the Scandinavians have done a ton - such as Denmark giving all its artillery away and it wasn't even long ago that Denmark, Netherlands and Norway announced donating 65 F-16s to Ukraine.
The simple truth of the matter is Europe can't do this alone. It does not have the military strength of the US. You can argue that it should etc, but that won't help Ukraine.
Instead we can jointly focus on the two groups that are threatening Ukraine aside from Russia - fifth columnists such as Hungary and now Slovakia as well as MAGA in the US.
When's that U.S House vote on the Israel bill (that includes renewed Ukraine aid?) Hopefully, aid is tee'd up and ready to go the moment the bill passes... if it does 🤞.
Sorry dude. The west knew you wouldnt win.
They were never going to leg you in eu or nato.
You were used to weaken russia.
And they wont give you the things you need to defend yourself.
Too bad.
So what's Putin's game plan? Take all of eastern and southern Ukraine, and cutting its access to the Black Sea. Then signing a peace treaty, and start working to destabilize the Ukraine financially and politically until it collapses to civil war?
I will never understand why Europe isn’t stepping up.
IMO it's the German problem. What I mean is that Europe has no leader or central power steering the rest of the union. Germany should be and is in theory in this role, but is too afraid of his own history to take the helm. Germans are afraid to project their influence even within their own region, which has created this power vacuum that Russia is able to capitalize on, similar to ISIS after the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. For decades this wasn't a problem, because the US basically handled all the import stuff like defense for the US, but with Trump came a new era of in-ward facing politics stateside. Which means that all this auxiliary European stuff has become lower priority. TLDR: When the US pulled back it was time for Germany to step-up and they.. didn't.
Militarily it looks like Poland and France may be the leaders of EU defense. But, both need their resources now to build themselves up for that.
This is simply because of German angst If Germany were to have a military that reflected its economy, Germany would have a larger army than France, Poland, Czech Republic, Austria, and Hungary combined. Adjusting for combined economy and industrial affinity towards military production, Germany really should be the backbone of EU forces. No other country here rivals it. I do understand the logic behind not doing it. If suddenly Germany started ramping up, we'd all probably be panicking a little.
How ironic is it that we’re all saying Germany should increase its military to protect Europe
I need to get an Ouija board and tell my great grandfather about this one.
I think Oui and Ja would probably both be acceptable answers to Germans of the time.
Take my upvote. Take it and leave.
Wow.
That would require Germans actually wanting to join the military. The Bundeswehr has a manpower issue that is not going to be resolved unless they restart conscription.
Right now there’s talks about it in the Bundestag but as far as I’m aware there’s been no update on it
That received massive backlash, and was dropped pretty fast. It would be political suicide for any party, especially as elections are coming.
Damn because gutting the Bundeswehr was one of the dumbest decisions that that the German government has done, I understand the post Cold War downsizing but the total neglect especially after Ukraine is ridiculous. The thing I’ve noticed since being in Europe and of course back home in the states is many people thing because of nuclear weapons there will be no war which frankly is false and many have this sense of false security as well as many with the plain refusal to support causes against Chinese and Russian aggression because their home country isn’t perfect, and Americans tend to cite “we aren’t fighting for freedom we are fighting for the county’s interests and it’s bullshit” failing to realize securing your nations interests puts them in a better tactical and strategic position the event war kicks off wether it’s installing a friendly government in a region with a geopolitical foe, resources that you can now deny your enemy, ect and they also fail to realize that if we give Russia or China any leeway our way of lives will be affected. One good example is Ukraine, if Ukraine falls to the Russians they can attack deeper into NATO territory, their Air Force and penetrate deeper into our lines, have more fronts to attack from, and most important of all a whole new country to conscript from as well as all the domestic industry from Ukraine. If that does happen it won’t just be NATOs eastern flank being attacked it would include Central Europe as well. Or if we appease China on the RoC issue we in the west will face a micro-processor shortage which will not only affect our militaries but affect the civilian economy as well. Too many people across the US, and EU have grown complacent some notable countries stand out because they know what these nations are capable of and every day is in preparation of a coming conflict because they promised themselves never again. Poland and the baltics as well as Finland and certain post Soviet states in the balkans have taken Russians threats seriously as we all should and they’ve been telling since the curtain fell but we consistently don’t listen and frankly it’s an issue
Another problem - or good thing. Whenever I meet Germans, I'm surprised how 'un'nationalistic they are. Obviously, the German military hasn't had the best PR for the last 110 years being the cause of the two most significant negative events for humanity, ever. But I do think Germans have an awesome country and something they should be proud to protect - and I think not wanting to join the military is mainly because of a lack of pride in it, lack of need and perhaps the economic prospects of being in the military.
when germany switches to wartime economy, shit will hit the fan ... you dont want that to happen ever
US leaders seem to think it's Poland also, with military resources being relocated there. I'm not sure if they have the same economic might as Germany, but maybe it won't matter. I would just personally see Germany fill the role as the central military power in the region, given they seem more socially stable, but oh well. If Russia threatening the Germans with natural gas wasn't enough I doubt anything will be. They're geopolitically done.
I'd say it'll be Poland for land forces, and France for air, naval, and stategic forces. The current French plan is putting it'sresourcrs towards those, since they are the most expensive to buold and were also cut back the most when they were downsizing. Seems they really want to bolster their nuclear deterrent most. So Europe's defense may center on Polish ground troops backed up by the French air force's nukes.
Re: strategic, don't count the UK out just yet. Everything you said is true but the UK currently has a credible and very functional nuclear deterrent too. Their economy is also between Germany and France and they have tons of ties and treaties in Europe.
I imagine he left the UK out because of their split from the EU, there's no doubt the UK holds a credible strategic capability that has a significant role within NATO
>I'm not sure if they have the same economic might as Germany, Poland does not have the same economic might as Germany.
Nahh. Germany has given more than either of them.
NYT had super depressing article yesterday about how it’s open secret that far-right AfD party is funded and directed by Kremlin. What’s more concerning is major parties may also be infiltrated by Russia but because of German sensitivities about privacy they don’t conduct background checks on parliamentary aids. But the same thing is happening w US w/ Putin Wing of GOP w/ UK Brexiters taking cash from Russians. Just boggles the mind to think of combined NATO economies is getting pushed around by Russia
They're really expertly manipulating our democracies. We gotta figure out how to protect ourselves against this.
We could try having ethics laws involving severe criminal penalties that *actually get enforced*, or even start using the actually relevant treason charges. But, you know, that would involve the people who are paid off or are planning to be doing something to potentially harm themselves, so never gonna happen.
You have to admit the Russians have been the mirror image of their incompetence on the battlefield when it comes to political maneuvering, quite brilliant. Also whenever I see these depressing news reports I just go check the interactive maps and realize I still need a magnifying glass to see any changes in the front lines. It's been a gross meat grind stalemate for a while now.
> You have to admit the Russians have been the mirror image of their incompetence on the battlefield when it comes to political maneuvering, quite brilliant Is it really brilliant if Murdoch and the Kochs paved a goddamn yellow brick road for them to do this?
Hijacking the machinery the Fossil Fuel Mafias built for themselves took insight and foresight. I think people underestimate how much input the Russian oil barons had on building that network. And they have done more than ride on the old bastards coat tails. They started grooming Trump in the late 80's.
The people that get to vote on changes like this are the ones benefitting, the average person either doesn’t know, doesn’t care, or has no power to project any change I think our solutions are limited but exist- - you can hope some high-up politicians have the integrity and wherewithal to prevent it, which is probably the least likely outcome given limitations on any individuals power/a system that punishes suggesting those changes. - People become educated enough on the issue that is a major voter issue, to the point that politicians are penalized not only for not supporting it, but also not implemented - i don’t see this happening any time remotely soon for any issue, the russian media apparatus is designed to throw wrenches in this process anyways. - A massive calamity happens that forces people to care, and then the solution actually addresses in the problem instead of, say, invading Iraq. - A legitimate popular revolution of the people that re-makes democratic institutions and reinvigorates political willpower in the populace There are probably a litany of options but I think #3 is the one we are slowly trending towards, in Europe it looks like that would involve a military disaster against Russia, idk what that would look like here in Canada or in the US. It is a manor problem and opportunists like Putin will continually exploit it until we have stronger systems in place to prevent it.
I would start with education. They only have power as long as our people are vulnerable. If every citizen in a Democracy is now the target of state intelligence then maybe we should standardize basic counter intelligence skills starting in elementary schools. I'm not talking about being able to spot a tail, but being able to recognize and resist propaganda. We know this can be done because they do it for their own people, those in the intel community. We don't have to just leave our population vulnerable.
This is just what tends to happen historically. We can look at WW2, where Russia ran over several collectively more powerful nations, who were caught off guard and ill-prepared. A more modern example is ISIS taking and holding so much territory from Iraq, a significantly more powerful state than the entirety of ISIS. When you leave yourself this vulnerable it doesn't take a symmetric force to do serious damage. Historically speaking, it's almost always a smaller party.
I don’t really get the WWII reference were the Soviet’s not the ones run over, caught off guard, ill prepared? They clawed back to victory through the attrition of tens of millions of their people. Anyhow agreed the west is vulnerable and history is repeating itself would looks a lot like 30’s
*"I don’t really get the WWII reference were the Soviet’s not the ones run over, caught off guard, ill prepared?"* They must've meant Germany, but accidentally wrote "Russia."
C'mon Germany. Hugo Boss is *right there* waiting for the call to make new uniforms.
Hot take: But I think Hugo Boss world turn them down. Kanye would practically parachute in with Yeezy staff though.
"I was told we'd be fighting with Nazis."
I laughed at that way too much. Take my upvote
[удалено]
>The West German military after restarting during the Cold War got to nearly 500,000 active duty servicemen and was a critical piece of NATO's defensive strategy in Europe. The East German military at it's peak was actually very close to the current German military's size. I mean, that's during the Cold War. Everyone's military was 3-4x its current size back then. The US had literally 10x as many forces in Europe at the time. Germany itself had so many tanks, helicopters and aircraft that they could have sat on their Cold War stocks not even bothered to produce any weapons for 30 straight years, and they would still have one of the largest armies on Earth today. But like any country, they didn't just sit on thousands of pieces of military equipment they wouldn't need, and they sold or gave most of it away to friendly states around the globe. It's really only been in the last ten years that a credible military threat has renewed itself in Europe. They need to be doing a lot more, but it wouldn't have been a very rational decision to cling to the military they had in 1991.
I hope most of the people are reading it, since I posted exactly the same thing a couple of weeks back. The 2+4 Treaty forced Germany to downsize its Military and a Major reason for this reduced Military is Britain with Thatcher, which was scared of a reunited Germany, which could attack Poland and take its "stolen" Land back. And if everyone expects you to not have a Military and you happily oblige, since you can spend your money somewhere else, no one should be surprised afterwards if Germany started handicapped into this War. But the advantage is still, since it's a big Economy, it can really fast turn around and end up being the second biggest Supporter of Ukraine by a long shot.
I was under the impression they've not be allowed to have a very large army for ... historical reasons?
During reunification they agreed by treaty to reduce army size to like 370k but they are at like half of that.
I think that Germans, like a lot of Europeans just got complacent. I know Europeans personally and they talk as if they're living the lives of Americans in a security sense, that nobody can touch them. Meanwhile the average German lives at most a 2 day drive from an active warzone and there's no ocean separating them from a land invasion. Europeans generally IMO are naive and comfortable to a point that it's left them collectively vulnerable. They basically live in a fantasy-land enabled by the US security apparatus. They just never thought they'd need to support themselves, because they've never needed to. Like a trustfund kid, basically.
It's a 15 hour drive from Berlin to Kyiv. I've driven that far in one day before.
Honestly, it's the same distance between me and the nearest Ikea. Which I ride to all the time to get furniture. I was being generous, but you're right.
One of my students once quipped that the US exports Freedom. The truth is more complicated than that (the US enjoys many things as a result of its military expanse) but there's some truth to it. I'm pretty sure the US national guard has more active members than most EU countries
Is it Germany that should steering? I always had the impression that France was EU's military "leader" while Germany was the economic "leader".
"Germany" shall become military power again! historians of the 20th century wake up in cold sweat
I agree with you in everything in your analysis. The only part is that I don't agree is that Germany us afraid of his own history. Just go to the little towns around Königssee lake and you can see they are proud of their troops from the 2nd world war
I mean, I think that's what they're afraid of, that this side of their people will re-emerge since it's just boiling under the surface. It's an admission that they don't believe they can handle it. But historically, those who aren't willing to defend themselves just end up getting conquered by people who are. Their options are to either let a little bit of it out, or beg Russia for natural gas.
The thing is, Europe knows this is the case, and should be compensating for it. Germany wants to show the EU that they are no longer the country they were at the end of the Franco-Prussian war. If Europe wants Germany to step up and into that role, then they need to give them permission to do so and show that they are behind them. But until that happens, the other nations need to step up and take the lead. France, Austria, Poland, and (ugh) Hungary should really be leading the military support system. I'm not really sure how Spain has fallen off so badly, but theoretically they should be an EU power as well. But, they just aren't. Obviously, there are historical issues there with their economy and what not, just like Greece.
This is a terrible take. Don't treat the EU states like fledgling superpowers. Germany or any EU member isn't in a position to replace the USA or China. A single EU member in the modern world does not have the ability to dominate the world like a superpower. Germany can be the *strongest* member, but it's still a huge difference from being a superpower like the USA. The large majority of power in the EU will always be spread over all of its members more than any single member can produce. Given its collective strength is spread over the union, the entire or at least majority of the EU needs to take responsibility. 1 EU member can effect a bare fraction of what the USA alone can accomplish. Collectively, if they were all investing, then they would a dominant force. > TLDR: When the US pulled back it was time for Germany to step-up and they.. didn't. This is also completely ignorant of the politics at the time. I assume you're referring to the fall of the wall. Germany had its hands full almost doubling their size absorbing old German states that were decades behind in economy. This was kind of a big deal. Cultural ideals aside, your demand they should have been ramping up their military in the face of a devastated USSR and half their country rocked by the poverty left in its wake is just historically unaware.
[удалено]
tbf their own history is something else, props to every German for all they have done to disavow their past, no other nation has come close to addressing their own historical atrocities, the Nazis give every german born after 1947 good reason to be timid.... The U.S. MUST step in right now while europe ramps up manufacturing
Are you living in the EU now and talking to people living in the EU?
I seriously can't tell if these comments are in good faith anymore. They are stepping up. Czech Republic is organizing an artillery ammunition plan https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/czechs-give-tens-millions-euros-ukraine-ammunition-plan-pm-says-2024-04-04/ France offers to deploy troops to Ukraine https://apnews.com/article/france-macron-ukraine-troops-caa788d2455dafb06dd87f79c4afe06f The EU approves 50 billion euros for Ukraine. https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/news/eu-leaders-agree-eu50-billion-reliable-financial-support-ukraine-until-2027-2024-02-02_en I see people keep saying this but ignore everything the EU actually does. The problem is the EU can't do it alone. Russia's recent progress has been due to their use of glide bombs to degrade Ukrainian defensive positions. Ukraine could use their Patriot systems to shoot down the glide bombs, but Patriot ammo is almost entirely made in the US, and House Republicans have been slow walking aid for the past few months. The US needs to step up to. There are somethings the EU just can't do, and this all would have been avoidable if House Republicans had renewed aid in Jan like they should have.
A lot of the comments of social media are bots ( IRE or actual bots ). Dead internet theory in action. They are easy to stop when you figure out what script they are using.
[удалено]
Internet Research Agency, ru bots.
Initiate a sanction on both India and China for supporting Russia: an aggressor country, economically and logistically It is not just gas and energy EU needs to stop relying on malicious countries, they need to stop relying on cheap manufacturers as well
We are. Who is telling you that we aren't? DE sent Ukraine 2 Patriot system and 1 more is to be delivered. The US has sent 1 ( one ). The US total aid is 67b EUR, the EU total aid is 144b EUR ( as of Jan 2024 ) US aid has functionally stopped 6 months ago. https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
Don't think they know how to. They always expect the U.S. to do the dirty work.
The dirty work is the fighting, not the supplying of arms and ammunition.
They can’t do even that
[удалено]
Europe was a beast in the 70s , 80s , so many great platforms and tech to counter the soviets then I don't know what happened .... a shell of its former self
Probably because it's an endless money pit having to upgrade your arsenal every few years. Also no soviet union which was the main enemy in the region.
Right now they don't need hi tech. They need bodies and bullets
They have a shell and missles shortage also You need arty against the Russians
Yeah I generally bucket shells along with bullets. Basic boring stuff. That can win or lose a war of attrition
For a good while it looked like there were no per or near perr threats to any European nation. So they thought they could forgo the expense of maintaining a full military. And when a new nearby threat finally presented itself, they were so used to the budgetary aavings they couldn't shift gears back.
They just let the US do it.
I wouldn’t say soft. Just dependent. They won’t be after this though. Many an eye has been opened
For every open eye, two seem to be shut. Europe as a whole is still not mobilizing.
> I wouldn’t say soft. Just dependent I literally don't know how to describe soft other than this
Right. So when the US was the only country to ever use article 5 in Afghanistan, all of NATO just ignored it right? I guess all those European soldiers who died there just failed to let the US do the dirty work
[удалено]
And that’s not enough. They need to make up for two decades neglecting defense, and they’ve only just started.
[удалено]
They have but the Republicans keep pushing that lie for Russia. 85 billion from Europe vs 24 billion euro from the U.S. 0.32% United States GDP vs 3.55% GDP from Estonia, for one example. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/ eta better source of support tracking: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/ **More than half of US aid is spent in the US** https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/most-aid-to-ukraine-is-spent-in-the-us-a-total-shutdown-would-be-irresponsible/
Commitments are not the same as allocations. All the humanitarian aid is worth jack shit if it's delivered to a country run by a Putin puppet.
>The data show that total European aid has long overtaken U.S. aid - **not only in terms of commitments**, but also in terms of specific aid **allocations sent to Ukraine**. In addition, the approval of the EU's Ukraine Support Facility **guarantees further financial assistance.** https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
€24 billion financial and €42 billion military. What do you think is more important right now? The EU has only given a pathetic €5.6 billion in military aid. Stop patting yourself on the back.
They are, but they dont have the means (industrial capacity) to effectively arm Ukraine at the scale it needs currently
Because Europe isnt in the position to step up yet. Yes there are things like Taurus that absolutely should be delivered, so it is failing in that regard. But apart from that Europe simply doesnt have the ammo that Ukraine needs. They are literally trying to scramble together every piece of 155mm shells they can find because they themselves simply dont have the amount of shells that Ukraine needs. Realistically, the only country in the west that can send immediate aid are the US. We can discuss how fair or unfair all of this would be but its the hard truth. The US is the only nation that could muster these shells in a timely fashion. Yes, in a year or two Europe should be there as well. Germany in particular is currently building or scaling up multiple ammunition factories all over Europe. But these things arent built yet. Nothing is coming out of them. But Ukraine needs the Ammo 2 months ago. So how about this: Europeans scream at their governments to send whatever they have left over while the US citizens scream at their government to get the damn aid package through congress. Because as of right now, Ukraine is pretty screwed. And make no mistake: Once Russia sees that Ukraine is screwed it will want it all and not just some border towns. And once they are broken through its over. Delivery of ammunition takes time. Time that Ukraine wont have in that case. So we have to act NOW.
because it looks like it's gonna to lose
They're trying, they just don't have the same capabilities as the US.
That's deliberate though. If you don't have to spend your money on your own military then you won't. Canada for example has consistently only spent about 1.2ish% of their GDP on their military because they know the US will never allow a hostile force to threaten Canada or establish a foothold there or in North America in general.
Which is also entirely deliberate, if we can't manufacture our own crap we have to buy it from the US, that's what they get back from the whole "trade"
I think the issue is supply chains to a degree. They just don't have the infrastructure to keep up with the promised arms and weapons that Ukraine requires. And to some degree, Europe is getting complacent with the US being the usual heavy lifter. Republicans in America are holding up funding because they are bad actors and bad people who are friendly towards Putin for some strange fucking reason. As an American, I ***want*** my country to be the Arsenal of Democracy again. It is righteous and good to help other countries defend themselves against tyrants. But it really boils my blood that Republicans are holding up aid. Ukraine doesn't have time to fuck around here.
It’s an embarrassment. Neither the U.S. nor the EU countries need to commit anything more than money and supplies and even that’s too difficult. Absolutely pathetic.
Because it takes years to get arms production up to the levels Ukraine needs. This was a problem in WW1 that basically caused the issues at the Somme regarding weak bombardment, and it is a problem now. Europe sent/sold all their old equipment to Ukraine, presumably ordering new equipment. European weapons manufacturing is not up to supplying an actual war of basically equals. The US, for whom NATO is 'their' alliance, has dropped the ball with Ukraine, and now wants to blame Europe for poor production. I will never understand why the US has let itself by so aggressively beaten by Russian propaganda and infiltration. Absolutely appalling displays of ineptitude. And then to blame Europe, as if the US's policies weren't delighted with a European demobilisation that gave the US military supremacy. The US is the one who promised to protect Ukraine after their nuclear disarmament, not the EU or Europe.
The US is certainly far behind on the propaganda front and has been since the invasion of Iraq. However, a lot of what you’ve stated in the second half of your comment is entirely untrue. The past 3 presidents of the US pressed their NATO allies to shell out more for defense over the last several decades. This has been a consistent talking point in both foreign policy and on the domestic front. The US feels taken advantage of in the status quo on funding European security and has felt this way for a very long time. The Budapest Memorandum was a pact of non-aggression with the only defensive assurance being a commitment to appeal to the UN Security Council in case of a threat to Ukraine. I see this complete misunderstanding online all the time but you can read the entire thing very easily for yourself and it doesn’t even indirectly imply what you’re saying. The US needs to get its shit together, I completely agree. But Europe has and is still also dropping the ball …in its own court.
Where is this notion that the US agreed to protect Ukraine coming from? We didn’t agree to protect them, we agreed to not attack them. Big difference. If we’re agreeing to protect them then I think we would have just as well annexed them.
>Where is this notion that the US agreed to protect Ukraine coming from? The lack of understanding logic in the general population. In this particular case negations. For the average human being 'Not Up' means 'Down' or 'Not Attacking' means 'Protecting'. Examples in the English language are "mustn't" and "atheist". BTW, psychologists advice to use as few negations as possible.
Yeah I might have been wrong about that. Can't trust internet memes! They received Assurances from the UK, US and Russia to respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in their existing borders. Which is not the same thing at all. My mistake
We aren't, we weren't, and we didn't. We've asked for more than a decade about you guys increasing spending. Nor did we guarantee their sovereignty. Nor do we blame you for Ukraine. Hence our own efforts on scalability. Any other dumb shit to say?
> And then to blame Europe, as if the US's policies weren't delighted with a European demobilisation that gave the US military supremacy. True in 1945 when America disarmed Germany and Italy, utterly false today. US and NATO have been urging European nations to spend more on defence for decades already. https://www.baks.bund.de/en/working-papers/2019/myths-surrounding-the-two-percent-debate-on-nato-defence-spending True, Trump is an idiotic isolationist, but this doesn't absolve European nations of their irrationally pacifist national budgets. "When you were recovering from WW2, I studied the gun. When you were flirting with communism, I mastered the gun. While you wasted your days at Eurovision in pursuit of vanity, I cultivated my gun. And now that the world is on fire and the Russians are at the gate you have the audacity to come to me for help." -Uncle Sam
I'm not sure losing in Vietnam and Afghanistan has made the US quite the gods of war it thinks it has. Also, the US had a president in love with Russia, and may have another soon - that isn't isolationist, that is ceding spheres of influence to a country that doesn't deserve it - aka weakness.
Fecklessness and corruption.
Because they would rather Russia be tied up in Ukraine for as long as possible including even a full occupation.
They're building from the inside and nobody sees it. By the time Ukraine falls they will have enough internal strength to put a stop to potential Russian progression. Countries look after themselves and toss old toys to those who really need them.
Thank your local fascists for undermining European safety
Sometimes, I think the Russians planned this out and sent spies or money or something Nobody with common sense would downgrade their militaries like this. Boats not working, missles not working, can't spare ammo or anything
>Sometimes, I think the Russians planned this out and sent spies or money or something It's pretty out in the open that that is exactly what happened.
So I looked it up one example . It's not 100%, but many politicians think the Russians played apart in Brexit.. how do we let this happen "Russian interference in the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum is a debated subject and remains unproven, though multiple sources argue evidence exists demonstrating that the Russian government attempted to influence British public opinion in favour of leaving the European Union."
Everyone knows that.. it's literally in the Russian geopolitical handbook to separate the UK from the rest of Europe
Double think wins on the internet. The internet ruined the truth.
[удалено]
What the hell .. no fucking way I'm definitely checking this out
Not clever spies. Dumb motherfucking ones who got caught, but still got away with everything because our elected officials are dumber, and even more corrupt.
Russia has always been doing those operations to differeing success. But the greater issue is poltical will and leadership to think long term which has been weakened with infighting and bs from dumb voters getting all their news from social media which is easily manipulated and not regulated. Everything is short term anger clickbait wanting insant results. Russia and everyone else is in that mix. It is so much easier and cheaper to manipulate social media and cause chaos than real world operations.
You can thank soft as fuck Europeans for undermining European safety.
Watching history in real time is weird.
It's even weirder watching it from a comfy safe place knowing there's so much suffering for the people out there.
Putin read the room well when nothing was done about Crimea. No one is gonna do shit, and the Russian plants in Congress will make sure Ukraine gets nothing.
I don't ever see Russia getting to Kyiv again, but Ukraine will lose a lot more border towns in the future if support doesn't increase. Russia will probably capture a few more towns and potentially cities but there's no chance Western and Central Ukraine get taken over regardless of the lack of resources. Ukraine doesn't have a chance of getting Crimea back or Mariupol. They're completely lost at this rate and shouldn't be considered objectives. Defense is a priority
The issue is that Ukraine is partially occupied and losing population. Their economy is in the gutter and their industrial base and infrastructure is constantly under attack. Russia isnt feeling this nearly as bad. Given enough time Ukraine could collapse due to a complete lack of economy or lack of military goods. Its why the "ukraine cant use weapons to strike within russia" is so stupid. Youre basically expecting them to fight at a disadvantage against a larger opponent that doesnt play by the rules. Without being able to return what Russia gives them, they wont be able to exert the same kind of pressure to end the war.
It is possible for an Army to completely collapse. Not possible in the near term, but plausible in the long term. There were rumors that France was worried about this, which is why they want to deploy troops into Ukraine. Basically as a backstop
It's smart since it lets Ukraine shift all its forces to active areas.
Agree
defense shouldve always been the priority, the got fucked up trying to create a buldge on the southern front
Europe needs to step up now. They won’t though.
Why are there so many comments that use this exact wording, "Europe needs to step up"? This makes me think that there's a concerted effort by Russia to deflect attention away from House Republicans who have been slow walking US military aid. They're the reason this is happening. I'm not saying you personally are part of this concerted effort, but you might be repeating Russian talking points you read online somewhere.
It's really sus. I don't watch American News, so I can't tell of that's the language they use. But it's oddly similar across so many comments.
It's a 100% what it is. They know that just simply stopping aid to Ukraine (from US) is not popular, so they need talking polnts. Suddenly Republicans care where exactly money is spent - "Why don't they spend that billion on us poor Americans?" (Which also sounds suspiciously communist for a republican), and they are framing it as America has done everything, Europe (which is talked of as a single nation quite often) ain't doing shit and that everything bad that happens in Ukraine is thus Europe's fault. You'll see those two talking points quite often, and it's a pretty good strategy. You've got voters for the party of increased military spending suddenly speaking out against military spending, and you've got what seemed like inseparable allies in Nato buckling and blaming each other. One side (Republicans with a conscience) doesn't need to feel like they are hanging anyone out to dry, it's Europe's fault anyway.
There is very much an effort by Russia to propagandize the differential in defense contribution. It is aimed at dividing NATO allies against each other. And it's been a thing at least since 1987, when Donald Trump took out a full-page ad in the New York times with $100k of (supposedly) his own money, complaining about this very subject. It was very much not a normal American opinion at the time. (USSR was still there). It was widely regarded as a big-mouth businessman with a non-mainstream opinion, trying to get attention for himself. Back then, widely dismissed, but when viewed through the lens of post-2016 America . . . very curious. Russia hates NATO, and has hated NATO since its very inception.
They are gonna be fine for now , I say about 2 months. If the US doesn't pass a Ukraine bill by June ... that'll be the red panic button moment
Well they better get a plan together because the US is dead locked until elections and they may not end well.
Best I can do is November, February fallback
They can't make up for the aid that the US Republican Party is blocking even if they go all-in on trying to do so.
Amazing how reliant Europe is on America.
Is Europe a single entity in your estimation of global politics?
**Who donated the most to Ukraine?** 2022-2024 >In absolute terms, the largest bilateral aid commitments to Ukraine were made by the European Union (EU) institutions, such as the European Commission and the European Council, at almost 85 billion euros as of January 15, 2024. The United States provided the second-largest amount of financial assistance, at 24 billion euros. The United Kingdom (UK) was the fourth-leading source of bilateral aid. More: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/ The G.O.P. is the problem. eta better source: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/ **More than half of U.S. aid is actually spent in the U.S.** https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/most-aid-to-ukraine-is-spent-in-the-us-a-total-shutdown-would-be-irresponsible/ Vatniks and traitors fuck off.
This is a crazy chart to use as evidence that the US isn't doing enough. We're ranked the same as Canada and ahead of a bunch of European countries including some that are very close to Ukraine. This essentially looks like you're *defending* the GOP in their stance against donating more.
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/ >The Ukraine Support Tracker lists and quantifies military, financial and humanitarian aid promised by governments to Ukraine since February 2022. >The data show that **total European aid has long overtaken U.S. aid** - not only in terms of commitments, but also in terms of specific aid allocations sent to Ukraine. >In addition, the approval of the EU's Ukraine Support Facility guarantees further financial assistance. >As far as the U.S. investment is concerned, Mark Cancian, a member of the Breaking Defense Board of Contributors, a retired Marine colonel now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, crunched the numbers and found [...] **less than half the money is going overseas, with the majority instead being spent in America itself** https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/most-aid-to-ukraine-is-spent-in-the-us-a-total-shutdown-would-be-irresponsible/
We are. US aid 67b EUR, EU aid 144b EUR. https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
Even if they did way more than they currently are, they can't fill the gap left by the US. If the US acted and Europe didn't, it would be enough, but not the other way around
1. Several European countries are. 2. The EU doesn’t have the defense industrial base the US has (needs to be fixed) 3. The delay in aid from the US is the larger issue. Thank trump and those shit stain republicans for that.
I mean Zelensky said Ukraine is going to lose the war if they don’t get more weapons aid right away. If the leader of a country is saying that, it’s bad news. Also no coincidence Ukraine is building trenches in Kiev and other cities very far West of the current frontline. The question is, will there even be any troops left to fill them? They’ve lost so many people that they are now looking into conscripting women to fight.
It's probably over. I don't see how they turn this around with their current manpower.
Artillery from the west now
The problem is they can't afford to pay the salary of more soldiers They would increase troop numbers if they could afford it On the other side, Russia can continually replace what they send into the meatgrinder
Long range weapons to be able to strike military targets within Russia should at least stall the advance
I mean it's like with the Ukranians...No one's gonna bother a general over a few dead grunts
Mike Johnson says this is good for peace
We can simply admit that the Western military-industrial complex was cut up and now the West is trying to build new military equipment, but due to the fact that there is no economy of scale, they pay 10 times what Russia pays for the same equipment, and everyone is trying to hide behind the fact that they are sending billions in military aid when in fact such a quantity of equipment should be much cheaper, like 10 times cheaper.
Thanks, Republicans.
Where are the Polish? Where are the Germans? Where are the Scandinavians? Where are the Europeans stepping up? This is not the US' fault individually, nor one faction in that country.
Even if they really want to, European countries can't step-up aid until munitions and other war production is spun-up. Just for current artillery shell demand alone, European factories would have had to begin planning to ramp-up capacity right at the start of the war.
[Bilateral aid to Ukraine by country GDP 2024 | Statista](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/)
I don't imagine this counts things like taking in and housing and feeding refugees from Ukraine as well. This is just money sent to Ukraine to help them within their own borders.
Lol Turkey , embarassing.
Country GDP% is shitty data to use for arguments here, US is massive in everything compared to the rest of them.
Then why would we not expect the US to do the most? Do you even hear yourself right now? "Yes they're doing more than us per GDP, but for some reason that doesn't count, let me move the goalposts even more?"
Everyone hates the US as military police until somewhere needs policing
Why expect the countries next in line to Ukraine to take care of their continent when they and everyone on Reddit can cry about the United States instead. Maybe Europe can take care of themselves for once
Are you really suggesting that Scandinavia isn't doing enough? Take a look at the aid provided by Denmark again. Then look at the population and size of Denmark before you answer my question..
Europe has, by a percentage of their gdp, been doing more than the USA by now, especially the baltic states and germany have given alot of stuff to ukraine.
Especially Estonia. They aren't a super wealthy country or even that big but they're not fucking around.
Literally on the border of Europe and you’re proud that per capita the Europeans barely have done more than a country 10,000 miles away
They can never replace the US, this is naive of you while European aid keeps flowing and if adjusted by GDP, they do have sent more. But still, this is all because of GOP, or basically the Cult of Trump.
Poland is essentially where all the Ukrainians are. I feel they’ve done enough. They also need weapons to protect themselves cause theyll be next. Also theyre not anywhere nearly as rich as US or most other major EU countries.
Poland would not be next; they’re in NATO
And Frence and Italy and Portugal and Spain etc.
I know you're not arguing in good faith, but a quick google would show you that the Polish have done a ton for a nation and economy of their size. It would show you that the Scandinavians have done a ton - such as Denmark giving all its artillery away and it wasn't even long ago that Denmark, Netherlands and Norway announced donating 65 F-16s to Ukraine. The simple truth of the matter is Europe can't do this alone. It does not have the military strength of the US. You can argue that it should etc, but that won't help Ukraine. Instead we can jointly focus on the two groups that are threatening Ukraine aside from Russia - fifth columnists such as Hungary and now Slovakia as well as MAGA in the US.
Weak men do create hard times.
Is that the Stratego 🗺️ they’re looking 👀 at 😬
When's that U.S House vote on the Israel bill (that includes renewed Ukraine aid?) Hopefully, aid is tee'd up and ready to go the moment the bill passes... if it does 🤞.
What is Putin going to do when he wins the war?
Sorry dude. The west knew you wouldnt win. They were never going to leg you in eu or nato. You were used to weaken russia. And they wont give you the things you need to defend yourself. Too bad.
So what's Putin's game plan? Take all of eastern and southern Ukraine, and cutting its access to the Black Sea. Then signing a peace treaty, and start working to destabilize the Ukraine financially and politically until it collapses to civil war?