President Donald Trump flashing a forced smile alongside Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump has morphed into Joe Biden 2.0 as he has moved enthusiastically to escalate Biden’s war against Russia in Ukraine allowing himself to be manipulated by Ukrainian “dictator without elections” to continue provoking World War Three with Russia in a conflict in which no discernible US national security interests are at stake.
It appears Trump has decided to unilaterally surrender to a man he rightly described as “a dictator without elections” Volodymyr Zelensky. In one of his latest Truth Social posts on September 23rd, Trump vowed to fight to win Biden’s war in Ukraine indefinitely “as long as it takes” to use a Biden regime phrase until the last Ukrainian soldier has been killed in battle. This puts Trump on record to continue to give Ukraine what amounts to a blank check of US political and military support, albeit mostly with US weapon shipments delivered via America’s NATO partners likely until the end of his presidential term in office.
Some of my fellow foreign policy realists have mistakenly described this post as Trump’s way of ‘passing the buck’ to our NATO partners. Perhaps, if the US were merely providing defensive arms to Ukraine, cut off all offensive intelligence to Kyiv and withdrew the US presence from Ukraine that might be accurate. However, this ignores the fact that Trump is continuing to send senior US military advisors and intelligence officials to help Ukraine prosecute the war against Russia while sending US weapons technicians and even former USAF F-16 pilots to help target and fire thousands of long-range missiles to conduct deep strikes against prewar Russian territory.
Trump’s post demonstrates he lives in an alternate universe in a neocon globalist disinformation bubble. His post is so full of disinformation, it would take the entire length of the article to rebut each point. With this latest post, it’s abundantly clear that President Trump has become delusional and has completed his transformation into a neocon America Last warmonger President that makes Biden look like a veritable peacemaker by comparison. His post is likely no more than another foolish attempt to bully and threaten Russia into capitulating to US peace terms issued on April 22nd as part of the 22-point Kellogg peace plan which was rejected by Putin on May 8th due to the fact it did not meet Russia’s minimum requirements for a diplomatic end to the conflict.
As Ukraine’s military teeters on the verge of collapse, Trump made the astounding claim that, after fully understanding the military situation, he is confident that Ukraine can win the war and retake all of Ukraine’s former territories (“and maybe more” presumably including another US-backed Ukrainian invasion of Russia) including Crimea while acknowledging it could take years to do so. US intelligence officials have repeatedly stated that a Ukrainian attempt to retake control of Russia’s Crimea oblast would be all but certain to provoke a Russian nuclear response.
No credible national security analyst has assessed Ukraine has the military capability to take back any of its lost territory let alone all of it so if Trump’s top advisors are claiming that Ukraine can do that they must be fired without delay. Trump’s statement that he will support Ukraine retaking all its Russian annexed territories as well as a Ukrainian invasion of pre-war Russian territory stands in stark contrast with his support for Russia’s latest territorial demands in its most recent peace offer discussed at the Trump-Putin Summit. Russia is demanding Ukraine’s surrender of the remaining twelve percent of the Donbass region which remains under Ukrainian control following his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Anchorage last month.
As I have stated, there is nothing the US can do in terms of additional weapons shipments to Ukraine or economic sanctions that will be successful in coercing Russia to accept Western peace terms a fact Trump continues to be blissfully unaware of. The only way Trump can make peace is by pressuring Zelensky to accept virtually Russia’s peace terms which I outlined in a previous article recommending Trump conclude a separate peace with Russia to end US involvement in the war even if Ukraine and the EU demand on continuing to fight it.
During an interview on September 21st, former former Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko urged NATO to invade Russia, capture Moscow and forcibly overthrow Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Trump’s statement follows the absurd declaration of former Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko that “we need to go to Moscow” insanely imagining that Ukrainian forces could join NATO in invading Russia and capturing Moscow a feat that even 315 of the world’s best army divisions were unable to accomplish in four years of fighting against the Soviet Union during World War Two. Yushchenko claimed that the war could not be ended by merely retaking all of Ukraine’s lost territory but that it must end with the forceful overthrow of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Zelensky rightly responded by denouncing him as a “useless blissful idiot.”
While it is true that Russia has only succeeded in capturing a measly one percent of Ukraine’s territory in the past three years of fighting, they have been wildly successful in bleeding the Ukrainian army dry. Three years ago, Ukraine enjoyed a 3 to 1 quantitative advantage over Russia in troops in Ukraine. Today Russia enjoys a 3 to 1 advantage over Ukraine according to General Syrsky. Ukraine has lost over two million military casualties during the first thirty-eight months of the war including 750,000 dead (now likely around 835,000 dead assuming the same monthly death rate) as opposed to just over 132,000 total dead for Russia as estimated by MediaZona since the war began.
This means the Russians are killing over 6.3 times more Ukrainian soldiers for every soldier they lose. Russian military casualties continue to decline as Ukraine runs out of troops to fight them. Meanwhile, the population of Ukraine has been reduced from 41 million before the war to 28.7 million today which is lower than what it was in 1926 due to the Russian invasion provoked by its decision to become a de-facto NATO member state. Furthermore, Russia could force Ukraine’s surrender within a few weeks by re-invading Kyiv oblast with a force of 200,000 troops from Belarus and partially or fully surrounding the Ukrainian capital. Given Ukraine’s total armed forces are about that size, the Ukrainian army would have to abandon the eastern half of Ukraine and retreat to the right back of the Dnipro River if they had any hope of stopping such an offensive.
These facts demonstrate how ridiculous it is for Trump to claim that a hopelessly outnumbered Ukrainian army could retake all its lost territory from a Russian army vastly superior not just in terms of men, but in terms of morale, material and weapon systems. Earlier this month, the Institute for the Study of War assessed that Russia has largely stopped sending more troops to fight in Ukraine assessing that Russia’s army has grown so large it is building up a strategic reserve of nearly 300,000 men in case Russia is attacked by NATO in addition to the 700,000 troops they have in Ukraine.
NATO is the Real ‘Paper Tiger’ not Russia
As noted in his Truth Social post above, Trump mocked Russia as a “paper tiger” that has been “fighting aimlessly for three and a half years a War that should have taken a Real Military Power less than a week to win” implying Russia is incapable of defeating Ukraine. This even though Russia nearly forced Zelensky to sign a peace deal in April 2022 after partially surrounding the Ukrainian capital with a huge, armored force following a Russian blitzkrieg. He would have had no choice but to sign it if Putin hadn'tfoolishly ordered Russian troops withdrawn from all northern Ukraine in anticipation of the signing of the peace agreement ending the war.
Edward Luttwak noted in an article last week that it is not Russia that is a ‘paper tiger’ but NATO which is unable to deploy more than tens of thousands of troops while Russia has deployed 700,000 to Ukraine alone. COL. Douglas Macgregor has also noted repeatedly that NATO’s armed forces are more constabulary forces that excel at marching in parades and are good for little else. While Trump has been boasting of late that NATO has committed to spend five percent of its GDP on defense within the next several years, there is no realistic chance that will ever happen and average NATO defense spending remains just above two percent of GDP far below Trump’s demanded threshold.
The US and NATO have spent the past three and a half years providing Ukraine with every spare weapon system they have and it has not helped Ukraine defeat Russia. The reason is because Russia spends more on its military than NATO’s thirty European member states and Russia is able to outproduce all of NATO combined by up to four times in key munitions and certain other weapon systems enabling it to fight and win a long conventional war with NATO indefinitely if it so chooses. NATO reportedly has sufficient ammunition to fight Russia for two weeks of intense fighting after which they would either have to escalate to the nuclear level or sue for peace likely on Russia’s terms. Furthermore, Russia would likely stage a massive Russian cyber and counterspace attack on the US and its NATO allies on the first day of intense combat likely ensuring a Russian victory over NATO with weeks or even days were a full-scale war to break out.
Russia is 35 times larger than Ukraine with five times more people and overwhelming advantages over Ukraine across the board in terms of tanks, aircraft and other key weapon systems so Russia’s victory over Ukraine is inevitable. According to a leaked top secret Ukrainian Ministry of Defense assessment Russia currently has 16,000 nuclear weapons compared to 3,800 for the US of which only 2,285 are operational with the rest partially dismantled in storage.
It is US military aid that has prolonged the war in Ukraine three and a half years more than necessary. If the US had never sent Ukraine any weapons, this war would have been known as the Six Week War and all Russian troops would have been withdrawn from all Ukrainian prewar territory under the April 2022 Istanbul Agreement and Ukraine would have averted two million brave soldiers being dead and wounded. Trump fails to understand the fact, that the more weapons he sends to Ukraine the longer the war will go on, the more Ukrainians will be killed, the more Ukrainian territory will irretrievably be lost and the closer the US and NATO will get to a Third World War with Russia that would likely escalate to the nuclear level.
President Trump’s speech at the United Nations last week was a confusing mix of America First conservative talking points and neocon war threats which is a perfect summation of the seemingly bi-polar foreign policy he has conducted over the past eight months since returning to office that vacillates from one side to another oftentimes unexpectedly.
During his speech to the United Nations on September 23rd, President Trump said with regards to NATO member states such as Hungary, Slovakia and Turkey, “they’re funding the war against themselves” and added they “are buying oil from Russia while they are fighting Russia” conceding that NATO is in fact at war with Russia which is what Russian officials have been stating and what German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock admitted in January 2023 at a meeting of the European Union. Interestingly, the leaders of Hungary, Slovakia and Turkey have been leading the charge to negotiate a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine since March 2022.
During his meeting with Trump on the sidelines of the UN meeting, Zelensky revealed he had asked Trump to send Ukraine Tomahawk missiles with a 1,550 mile range to strike Moscow. Trump is reportedly seriously considering the request which could cause direct Russian trlaiation against the US. Either way, Trump remains committed to provide Ukraine with 3,550 ERAM missiles with a 270-mile range capable of striking Moscow oblast but not the Russian capital itself.
On September 25th, in response to Trump’s astoundingly ignorant and bombastic Truth Social post, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated at a G20 ministerial conference “NATO and the EU have declared war on Russia using Ukraine’s hands and are directly involved in it.” A Russian translation of his comments referred to the NATO proxy war against Russia in Ukraine as “a real war” noting “NATO and the European Union want to declare, in fact, have already declared a real war on my country and are directly participating in it.” Russian Foreign Ministry Dmitry Peskov had previously declared on September 15th that, NATO is “at war with Russia” over Ukraine. Peskov said Monday it was “obvious” the alliance was “de facto involved in this war.” Newsweek has contacted NATO for comment.
Lukashenko Warns Ukraine Will Lose All its Territory if it Rejects Latest Russian Peace Offer
On September 26th, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said after meeting Vladimir Putin that the Russian leader would announce a “very good proposal” for ending the war in Ukraine that he said was broadly backed by the United States. Lukashenko, who met Putin in Moscow for more than five hours, did not say what the proposal entailed but added that it had been outlined to U.S. President Donald Trump when he held a summit with Putin in Alaska last month.
Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with Europe’s longest-serving dictator Alexander Lukashenko, President of Belarus which has long served as Russia’s closest military ally in Europe.
While the full text of the Russian peace proposal which Putin and Trump largely agreed to at the Anchorage Summit on August 15th, apart from one or two major terms as Trump stated likely Russia’s insistence on the return of the Donbass region and Russia’s demand that Ukraine give up all its long-range offensive strike systems, has not been revealed yet. I believe it likely approximates the terms I outlined in this article, which I agree are all in all much more favorable for Ukraine than Russia’s previous demands as they include a few major Russian concessions.
Lukashenko also directly contradicted Trump in warning that this was Ukraine’s last chance to accept Russia’s terms or else Russia would occupy all of Ukraine starting with Russian forces re-invading Kyiv oblast from Belarus. “If the Ukrainians don’t accept these proposals, it will be like it was at the beginning of the special military operation,” he added, using Russia’s term for the invasion of Ukraine. “It will be even worse; they will lose Ukraine.” “To avoid losing all of Ukraine, (Zelenskiy) must not just negotiate but agree to favorable terms - terms that, by and large, have been approved by the Americans,” Lukashenko said. It is notable that he did so less than two weeks after participating in joint nuclear warfighting exercises with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
ABC News reported on the joint Russia-Belarus Zapad 2025 non-strategic nuclear warfighting exercises held from September 12-16th:
The maneuvers, which wrap up Tuesday, have included nuclear-capable bomber and warships, thousands of troops and hundreds of combat vehicles simulating a joint response to an enemy attack -– including what officials said was planning for nuclear weapons use and options involving Russia’s new intermediate range ballistic missile, the Oreshnik. Russia’s Defense Ministry released videos of nuclear-capable bombers on training missions as part of the drills that spread from Belarus — which borders NATO members Poland, Latvia and Lithuania — to the Arctic, where its naval assets practiced launches of nuclear-capable missiles, including the hypersonic Zircon missile. Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko said in December that his country has several dozen Russian tactical nuclear weapons.
One year ago this month, Putin outlined a revision of Moscow’s nuclear doctrine, noting that any nation’s conventional attack on Russia that is supported by a nuclear power will be considered a joint attack on his country. That threat was clearly aimed at discouraging the West from allowing Ukraine to strike Russia with longer-range weapons and appears to significantly lower the threshold for the possible use of Russia’s nuclear arsenal. That doctrine also places Belarus under the Russian nuclear umbrella. Russia, which says it has deployed battlefield nuclear weapons to Belarus, plans to station Oreshnik missiles there as well later this year. The revamped Russian nuclear doctrine says Moscow could use nuclear weapons “in the event of aggression” against Russia and Belarus with conventional weapons that threaten “their sovereignty and/or territorial integrity.”
On September 27th, the Belarussian Foreign Minister warned that Belarus was forced to deploy several dozen Russian non-strategic nuclear warheads on its territory including Russian Oreshnik IRBMs that can strike every capital city in European NATO because according to him the danger of nuclear war between Russia and NATO has never been greater.
Speaking at the UN this week, Belarus’ Minister of Foreign Affairs Maxim Ryzhenkov, noted how the world is the “closest ever” to midnight on the doomsday clock, as war continues to rage in Ukraine. He said: “The Doomsday Clock shows less than one and a half minutes to midnight, symbolising the moment of nuclear apocalypse. This is the closest the clock has ever been to midnight.” “Belarus was forced to deploy Russian tactical nuclear weapons to guarantee its security. “Russian Oreshnik ballistic missiles will be deployed on Belarusian territory for the same purpose.” The Oreshnik travels at Mach 10 (7,673mph), making it almost impossible to intercept, and can strike at targets up to 3,107 miles (5,000km) away.
The White House’s Idiotic Push for Secondary Sanctions on Russia
On August 22nd, President Trump stated that if Russia doesn’t make peace in two weeks or so that he would enact secondary sanctions on Russia. Sen. Lindsey Graham is boasting he now has 85 US Senate co-sponsors to his Russia secondary sanctions bill which would authorize President Trump to enact up to 500% tariffs on every nation that continues to trade with Russia including the PRC and India. This is without a doubt the most isolationist bill every introduced in the US Congress designed to cut off trade with 85 percent of the world’s nations who have never stopped trading with Russia. President Trump has repeatedly threatened to support the bill stating on September 7th he was ready to impose secondary sanctions on Russia despite the fact he has admitted he doesn’t think they would work. Implementation of these ill-considered Russia secondary sanctions would serve to greatly increase fuel costs for US citizens, increase the cost of living and potentially threaten an economic recession.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaking along with his Russia secondary sanctions bill co-sponsor Richard Blumenthal (R-CT). Graham has been a clown with regards to his outrageous and uniformed statements about Russia and the war in Ukraine.
On September 24th, a US delegation led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and a Russian delegation led by Sergey Lavrov met after Rubio stated in an interview that the US had the ability to force Russia to make peace using secondary sanctions, a very dubious proposition indeed. Trump’s continued claims that secondary sanctions on Russia could somehow force it to end the war have no basis in reality. Russia is going to continue pursuing its national security interests to eliminate the existential threat posed by NATO expansion into Ukraine as long as it takes to succeed regardless of how many sanctions the West passes or how many weapons we send to Ukraine’s dwindling military forces. Even Trump has admitted the sanctions might not work. Thanks in part to massive Western sanctions backfiring, Russia has gone from the sixth largest economy to the fourth largest beating out Germany and Japan while its military spending now exceeds all 30 European NATO members by PPP.
On September 13th, Trump published a lengthy Truth social post a couple of weeks ago in which he threatened America’s NATO partners (Turkey, Hungary and Slovakia) if they didn’t act very soon to stop buying Russian oil pledging to implement 100% secondary sanctions on Russia’s trading partners as soon as they did. Both Turkey and Hungary have responded saying they will not comply, and Slovakia likely will not either meaning Trump’s secondary sanctions may never take effect.
The Hill reported on Trump’s demand that NATO countries stop buying oil from Russia.
“I am ready to do major Sanctions on Russia when all NATO Nations have agreed, and started, to do the same thing, and when all NATO Nations STOP BUYING OIL FROM RUSSIA,” Trump posted on Truth Social Saturday morning in what he said was a letter to the international alliance and the world.
“China has a strong control, and even grip, over Russia, and these powerful Tariffs will break that grip,” “Anyway, I am ready to ‘go’ when you are. Just say when? I believe that this, plus NATO, as a group, placing 50 percent to 100 percent TARIFFS ON CHINA, to be fully withdrawn after the WAR with Russia and Ukraine is ended, will also be of great help in ENDING this deadly, but RIDICULOUS, WAR,” he added.
“This is not TRUMP’S WAR (it would never have started if I was President!), it is [former President] Biden’s and Zelenskyy’s WAR. I am only here to help stop it, and save thousands of Russian and Ukrainian lives (7,118 lives lost last week, alone. CRAZY!),” the president wrote. “If NATO does as I say, the WAR will end quickly, and all of those lives will be saved! If not, you are just wasting my time, and the time, energy, and money of the United States.”
In his message, Trump stated this is not his war but is rather Biden’s and Zelensky’s war and refers to it their war as “ridiculous” suggesting it’s a waste of US “time, energy and money.” Yet after repeatedly pledging to end the war within the first twenty-four hours of his Presidency, he continues to try to out due Biden’s tragic mistake in unnecessarily prolonging the conflict by further escalating his war against Russia with much tougher sanctions and thousands more long-range US missiles with which to strike targets deep inside Russia. In his post, he criticized NATO members for being unwilling to do what’s necessary to win Biden’s war against Russia, a war he claimed he would never have started. However, he provides zero evidence as to how sanctioning 165 of the world’s other countries that are continuing to trade with Russia will either force Russia to stop fighting in Ukraine let alone help Ukraine win the war.
President Trump is mistaken if he thinks that levying 100% secondary sanctions will have any effect on China and India’s decision to continue trading with Russia and buying Russian oil and arms. Both are decades long military allies with Russia. Therefore, both countries will absorb the tariffs and redirect trade to other countries serving to further damage the US economy. The only country that Trump will be hurting with these brain-dead, idiotic sanctions will be the US economy and if he opts to increase the secondary sanctions to 500%, the US economy will go into recession. Then, the Democrats will retake both houses of Congress in the November 2026 midterm elections and Trump will be remembered as a failed President.
Trump’s latest ill-considered tariff hikes on India to punish it for buying Russia arms and oil are already having the exact opposite effect that he intended as they have pushed India into a deeper alliance with Russia with which it has had close security ties since its 1971 Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation was signed with the former Soviet Union. India is entirely dependent on Russia for its security. Indian government officials have expressed openness to resuming meetings of the RIC Forum which is a loose alliance of Russia, India and China which was formed in 1997 by then Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov in response to President Bill Clinton’s foolish decision to expand NATO eastward that both Russia and China have been seeking to revive. The RIC Forum meetings led to the creation of the increasingly successful BRICS economic alliance while Russia, China and India have been formal military allies since 2022 as part of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which Putin has described as “a reborn Warsaw Pact.” On August 8th, it was reported that rather than cancel Russian arms purchases India instead cancelled plans to buy US arms in response to Trump’s 50 percent tariff increase on Indian goods. Furthermore, Indian Prime Minister Modi is now planning a trip to China later this month to attend the SCO summit where he has not traveled for the past seven years due to border clashes with China back in 2020.
Trump’s Abortive Attempt to Negotiate a Peace Deal with Russia Ending the War in Ukraine
In a recent article in The National Interest, where I served as a Contributor from 2018-2023, former Assistant Secretary of State A. Wess Mitchell states that Trump’s decision to convene a summit with Putin in Anchorage last month was a potentially game altering move that could help reduce the dangers of the outbreak of a world war fought on multiple fronts beyond our ability to win. He states the best way to strengthen deterrence in East Asia is to end the war in Ukraine allowing us to reposition limited US combat power to the Western Pacific. Unfortunately, Trump’s decision to abandon diplomacy with Russia mere days after the summit following Zelensky’s veto of his draft peace framework agreement with Russia may have squandered his chances to achieve his laudable objective of transforming Russia from an adversary into a geostrategic partner and thereby neutralize the Sino-Russian military alliance and gravely weaken China.
The recent hardening of Russian president Vladimir Putin’s position on Ukraine has led some critics to claim that the Trump meeting in Anchorage was a waste of time. A few have gone further and alleged that Trump effectively capitulated to Putin in the meeting, drawing the obligatory comparisons to Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of Adolf Hitler at Munich in 1938. This is bad history and poor analysis. In fact, Trump’s diplomacy with Putin was a potentially game-altering move that could pay significant strategic dividends down the road. By focusing on immediate outcomes for Ukraine, critics are missing both the underlying logic of Trump’s moves and their potential benefits for US national interests and international stability.
First, talking to Russia helps alleviate the number one danger facing America, which is the possibility of a war on multiple fronts beyond our immediate ability to win. The reason we are in this predicament is that the United States and Europe didn’t use the last four years to surge defense production while the Russians (and Chinese) did. The Pentagon estimates that it will take between three and eighteen years to replenish the key munitions that have been sent to Ukraine. The quickest way to strengthen deterrence in East Asia is to engineer a denouement in Eastern Europe. Even if that doesn’t transpire quickly, the fact that the United States is spearheading a peace process and dragooning parties to the table means the Chinese have to assume we will have greater bandwidth in Asia than we did previously.
As Mitchell notes, it will take up to eighteen years for the US to replenish key weapon systems and munitions which Biden and Trump have unwisely shipped to Ukraine to fight an unwinnable war against Russia which does nothing to advance US national security interests. Rather, the war has served Communist China’s interests by making the US weaker militarily with US military forces bogged down in Eastern Europe while serving to greatly increase China’s military alliance system.
Former Assistant Secretary of Defense Graham Allison, one of America’s most brilliant strategic foreign policy thinkers speaking on the subject of whether he thinks a US war with the People’s Republic of China is inevitable or not. In 2020, Allison wrote an article on “The New Spheres of Influence” following the publication of my own proposed spheres of influence agreement five months earlier expressing some recommendations similar to mine noting how the US recognition of de-facto Russian and Chinese spheres of influence could help us avert World War Three.
Earlier today, it was reported that the Department of Defense is asking defense contractors to double or even quadruple their production of missiles to prepare for war with China after having its missile stockpile severely depleted by fighting wars in Ukraine, Yemen and with Iran over the past three and a half years as Russia and China continue to vastly outproduce the US across the board in drones and missile systems with their economies on a mass weapons production war footing.
Former Assistant Secretary of Defense Graham Allison, one of America’s premier foreign policy realist theorists, wrote a recent article in which he argued that Ukraine would be wise to cut its losses and accept Russia’s demand to cede another one percent of its territory in Donetsk oblast as the price of peace rather than risk losing hundreds of thousands more soldiers and a lot more territory.
“Whether the bloody war in Ukraine will come to an end in the foreseeable future remains to be seen. But if it does, two brute facts are almost certain. First, Russia will continue to occupy about 20 percent of the land that previously belonged to Ukraine; second, Ukraine will not relinquish its claim to recover its land. The issue this map exercise brings into sharper focus is: how much should Ukrainians care about the differences between the feasible options they face today? If we start with the fact that recovering the equivalent of northern New England now is not a realistic option, the operational question is how much they should care about the further loss of Delaware?
If Russia were prepared to, in return, withdraw from the 400 square miles of territory it now holds in Sumy and Kharkiv—an area slightly larger than Cape Cod—that would by no means be an even trade. But if Ukraine’s alternative is to continue a war in which, at the end of every month, Russian forces have taken another hundred to two hundred square miles of Ukraine—as they have every month this year—then which of these unpalatable options offers the better road ahead? Celebrating his nation’s Independence Day last Sunday, President Zelensky reiterated his nation’s objective. It is to build “a Ukraine strong and powerful enough to live in security and peace.” The question his government now faces is whether to accept an option that will end the war sooner, with all the liabilities that entails, or to continue fighting and risk losing more warriors, citizens, and territory. Having demonstrated such an extraordinary will to fight and defeat Putin’s attempt to erase their country from the map, the choice is deservedly Ukraine’s to make.”
Ukraine Has No Chance of Winning its War Against Russia
Ukraine is part of what former DIA analyst Rebekah Koffler has termed to be Russia’s Strategic Security Perimeter which it deems necessary to keep free of enemy military forces and, most importantly, nuclear-capable bombers and missiles in order to ensure its legitimate security interests from potential enemy attack. The successful US and NATO attempt to transform Ukraine into a de facto NATO member state by November 2021 with the signing of a second US-Ukraine Strategic Partnership Agreement is what provoked Russia to invade to expel NATO troops from Ukraine rolling back de facto NATO imperialist expansion.
Liberals and neocons claim to care about Ukraine, yet they support feeding millions more Ukrainian men into the meatgrinder of an unwinnable war. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is claiming 100,000 Russian troops have been killed in the last six months but actual Russian casualty figures are likely ten times less according to the most reliable Russian dissident media source. Meanwhile, back in January, President Trump correctly assessed that Ukraine has lost 700,000 troops killed in action since the war began--a figure that the administration has covered up in close door briefings with GOP members of Congress.
Comments
Post a Comment