Since any member of NATO can veto it, you can say it is a decision for Trump.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Sorry for coming across so abrasive.Source is what @4bars posted: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
This is the most complete and accurate info on it that I know of, all sources are stated and data corrected if/when any error comes to light. Have a look through the downloadable dataset, there's a lot more detail than shown on the site, just wait until tomorrow when they publish the next dataset update (its currently up to October 24).
I don't think it is widely known that Europe has provided as much military aid as the US, like at all, even before looking at the values over and above that have already been committed. Although those 'to be allocated' € includes some long term plans for future security and not necessarily will effect the current war.
To debate about what a US pull out means, we also need to show the increase in Ukraine's own domestic production and its trajectory. Another thing the world seems oblivious to and something Biden contributed to.
I don't have time to dig into it all right now but just off the top of my head, you've got the 4 Rheinmetall factories, 2 already in operation, the Bradley replacement will be coming out of there for one. They are producing their own shells, their own 155m self-propelled artillery, drone production is insane and still expanding. Long range capability... we're seeing the evolution of every day (also can't understate the importance of it being Ukr weapons striking deep within Russia, not US/NATO).
Factor in the price of a switchblade included in those US aid numbers, Ukraine is producing 50 FPV drones for the same amount. Just one example.
Europe will step up, other remaining sane countries around the world will step up, people/civilians will step up. Volunteers are still going to Ukraine from all over the world on a daily basis to join the foreign legion, I help sponsor one of them, I'll be applying to help out another this month.
I've sure got hopes @That_Bloke but I don't rely on them. I'm not too precious about being wrong. Trump will do damage no doubt, but Ukraine has only ever grown stronger as this war has progressed, not weaker, I keep hearing that but there's not a whole lot to back it up with apart from media bile and conjecture. Russia on the other hand has only got weaker, will only get weaker, that is plain for all to see.
I'd be the first one to pop up a bottle of champagne if the EU pulled its finger out of its arse, and decided to become something else other than the US door mat, and do not think for one second that I'm relishing at Ukraine's current situation.
Here's some of my own sources in terms of aid to Ukraine (the military aid is especially relevant):
https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-pol...2025/01/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9477/CBP-9477.pdf
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62002218
https://www.statista.com/chart/27278/military-aid-to-ukraine-by-country/
I just don't understand how one could remotely think that Ukraine would be able to sustain its war effort without the US. It ain't gonna work. Not today, not tomorrow and not in two, three, or ten years.
Trump is really working hard to make Zelensky look incompetent and insignificant.
Worrying times. One of the somewhat underestimated factors is perception. If everyone perceives that Ukraine gets sold out, it could set other things in motion.
New refugee waves, domestic political attacks on the Zelensky gov, increased desertions and draft dodging and so forth. Ukrainian domestic unity could be severely tested by the perception that a major military & intel backer will stop their support.
It could also rejuvenate Putin in thinking that he was right to be patient and he has nothing to worry about.
Anyway, that's my rambling. Good luck convincing non-nuclear armed countries to stay non-nuclear.
New refugee waves, domestic political attacks on the Zelensky gov, increased desertions and draft dodging and so forth. Ukrainian domestic unity could be severely tested by the perception that a major military & intel backer will stop their support.
It could also rejuvenate Putin in thinking that he was right to be patient and he has nothing to worry about.
Anyway, that's my rambling. Good luck convincing non-nuclear armed countries to stay non-nuclear.
That being said, has the Trump administration said something about continuing support if negotiations fail?
You are being defeatist. As one man (actually wizard) said. "Courage is the best defense you have."
And it is true. You mentioned, that Ukraine is holding for dear life. But that is not true (unless we are talking locally about donbass region). Kiev and western ukraine is under no threat of russian army (bar occassional long range missile threats). Blimey, not even Khakriv is under direct threat.
The progress russians are making right now is insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
The issue Ukraine has is internal and its resolve and manpower. As long as they have resolve they can keep fighting. I like to draw a comparison with 90s war in Croatia, where Croatian forces were in much worse position. In fact at the start of war croatia was completely disarmed. However, what we knew is that we were fighting for our survival as a nation. Ukraine has already won that fight. Whatever happens, Ukraine as an independent country will survive. So their resolve may not be as strong.
Losing US support, might be even beneficial for Ukraine in the long war, as it might force them out of this ww1 attritional style warfare and perhaps force them into more assymetrical style again.
He hates his popularity amongst people in the West. Trump is such a small, petty man.
Ah, here come the "defeatism" accusations. Can't wait for the "saboteur", "fifth columnist", "russian bot" and "foreign agent" ones.
Yeah, we just got to toss the ring into Mount Doom's lava. Get the feck out of here.
Yeah, no.
Russia is not interested in annexing all of Ukraine. It's not part of the plan, and militarily as well as economically infeasible. It wants its four oblasts in the East.
No big deal at all. I suppose you found a way to 3D print and equip ready-to-go soldiers.
That's really not the most apt comparison.
In what form and size, is the current question.
Last edited:
All the ingredients are there for a bad outcome for Ukraine:
1. He never liked Zelenskyy, and he always loved Putin. That’s at the personal level.
2. He prefers dictators over elected leaders.
3. He wants to show that he can bring peace quickly. How to do it: sell the Ukraine to Putin. The same in Gaza: take over Gaza and/or force people out, and you will have PEACE!
Ukraine can say no, but it will lose the U.S. support. If it says yes, it will accept a deal that they could’ve accepted a while ago.
What would that deal be though? Even if they cede territory what guarantees will they have there won't be a new invasion? the US doesn't want to welcome them in NATO and to trigger art. 5 in this case why would they even negotiate a deal in the first place?
Any deal that they accept will entail ceding territory. It also means that Crimea is gone for good. It won’t be on the table.
As for another invasion: no guarantees, and that’s why this is bad for Ukraine. They might get some short-term “peace”, followed by another invasion few years from now, to be followed by another land grab by Russia…
It’s a bad fix for Ukraine no matter what they choose to do.
Not if negotiations fail, no, but he did mention briefly about continuing support for now:
But for how long and on what conditions isn't sure.
So it seems.
That said, I would wait a bit before drawing any conclusion. While it indeed looks bleak for Ukraine at the moment, the orange madman is all over the shop and has no idea what he's talking about.
He's on a sort of shock and awe roll, showing "how things get done", blathering one outrageous declaration after another without even knowing what comes next.
If you say so.
Way to miss a point. Are you denying the value of courage in defending forces? History has plenty of examples of dogged and stubborn defenders halting overwhelming offensive forces.
Excellent argument.
Says you. As far as I know, russian goals are denazification, demilitarization and pacification of Ukraine. As far as I know, officially those goals never changed and are impossible to accomplish. Russia, Putin that is, might settle for grabbing those regions in order to have something to spin as a victory.
Oh, more sarcasm. And again missing the point. No military aid has provided manpower to Ukraine. It is an internal resource of Ukraine. Just like resolve is.
Now, with US abandoning Ukraine, resolve will likely waver, but if they can get around that and maintain it, they can still fight effectively.
Excellent argument. Here is mine. Yes it is an apt comparison.
The form? Independent republic.
Size? Ukraine might lose donbas, but even without it, it will be a large country. Just remember the fate of Ukraine 3 years ago. Expectations were they would fall within 3 weeks.
Yeah, I agree with you and that's my point. Peace without guarantee means Ukraine shouldn't accept any deal like that regardless whether they will lose support.
Crimea is done for good even before the invasion. It was occupied for close to a decade and no one did anything about it.
The only way Crimea can be brought back is if regime in Russia collapses completely and whatever new government emerges returns it in exchange for some aid.
Explain that logic please.
In order to accept a new state into NATO all member states need to ratify it. Its not by a majority vote, has to be unanimous. So if Trump says: "no, you are not getting in" there is nothing that can be done. By that time however, US might have pulled out of NATO completely which would render this whole point moot, of course.
Oh I understood that. I thought you were thinking of something else. Both thank you.
Trump has already sold the Palastinians down the river, as well as expecting Jordan and Egypt taking millions of displaced people, but none to the US....
And he now thinks he will do the same to Ukraine.
The man is a human wrecking ball with zero strategy. Just tactical short termism so he can think how clever he is.
It’s hard to blackmail someone like Trump though. There’s already enough public controversies with him to finish a hundred of separate political careers. His supporters just don’t care (and others don’t need any additional proof that he’s, to put it mildly, unfit for office).
Exactly. This notion that "Putin has a kompromat on him" really needs to die. Might have been feasible in his first term , but now he's had a homelander moment already. Nobody gives a feck, and he will get away with literal murder.
I indeed do.
You come at me with a Gandalf quote and expect from me a serious reply? It's your right to believe in fairy tales. I don't.
There's even more that saw those defenders being wiped out. You also tend to mistake battles and war.
The Russians are slowly but surely grinding territory by each passing day. 4,000 square kilometers gained in 2024, seven times more than in 2023. Other than continuously wasting already scarce forces in that foolish Kursk adventure which in return deprived other, more important, fronts from valuable human resources, Ukraine has lost the initiative on the battlefield for more than a year and is more and more confronted to manpower, ammunition and firepower shortage.
So yeah, no.
Yes, I do.
Denazification and pacification are empty words for domestic propaganda first and foremost.
You can't seriously think of annexing a country as big as Ukraine with about 200,000 soldiers. You'd be constantly exposed to daily guerilla operations which would cripple your army and economy. It's not only impossible, it's not worth it. Russia and other countries have already been there and done that. History taught us that occupation never works when the natives don't want you there, unless you kill them all. You always lose in the long run.
What Putin wanted was a Blitzkrieg, followed a rapid fall of the Ukrainian government, and replace it with a puppet regime whilst grabbing the eastern territories (the Donbas especially) where the population would theoritically more amenable to an "annexation" (see Crimea). It massively backfired and to the surprise of everyone, especially the West, Ukraine held its ground, inflicting tremendous casualties to the Russians. The landgrab in the East is still on the table though.
Yeah.
It's a vital resource that's ever shrinking. You don't seem to understand that soldiers must be equipped and trained before being sent to the battlefield, otherwise they'll die within minutes in their first engagement and their death completely pointless. Russia during WWII was (relatively) able to throw bodies at the Germans because it had plenty of them. Ukraine doesn't. Experience is not something that can be replaced and your "resolve" bullshit can't compensate for the losses. When you're out of men and ammo, you're out of the fight.
No, they fecking can't.
Comparing a civil war with a conventional one against one of the biggest military superpowers on this planet is just plain stupid, and not worthy of any further discussion.
I don't think that you truly understand what the loss of Donbas would mean for the Ukrainian economy and Ukraine in general.
Unless the deal includes Ukraine never joining NATO. And I can definitely see Trump wanting to renegotiate/scrap article 5 anyway.