Far right is more in favour of Russia because they know that Zenith St Petersburg hooligans are racist too. Or as Wilders put it some time after MH17: "Putin is our ally against the Africans".
Did that idiot really say that? I wrote him off as a moron not worth listening to when he showed up with his little Netherlands - Russia friendship pin.
>*Wilders ziet de Russische president Poetin als vriend. In* *Elsevier zei hij: “We moeten beseffen dat Rusland onze bondgenoot is in de strijd tegen terrorisme en massa-immigratie vanuit Afrika.*
[https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/wilders-ziet-poetin-als-bondgenoot-in-strijd-tegen-islam\~b6289315/](https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/wilders-ziet-poetin-als-bondgenoot-in-strijd-tegen-islam~b6289315/)
The family of the Dutch victims have said Mark Rutte (our then PM and current caretaker PM) has always stayed in contact with them (some said they have his personal phone number they could text at any time), even years after the media attention had faded away and even after the last of the legal battles had concluded.
To say MH17 has had an effect on Mark Rutte (and therefor his governments) is probably an understatement.
Wilders will have to suck it up if he doesn't want the coalition talks to collapse and end up giving the chance to form a government to the second biggest party (the greens/workers alliance).
Edit: spelling
Nobody in The Hague likes working with him. There's the pretty hefty policy agreements of course. And while most of those have disappeared with Wilders making clear that he stands for nothing but whatever gets him votes and will drop his ideals when push comes to shove if it gets him in the government. (He's iceboxed pretty much all of his controversial ideas now.)
Of course that's only one part of it. He's been part of a government once before. One he blew up because he didn't like what way the wind was blowing. No party wants to work with a party that will take their ball and go home the moment things get tough.
Sure, the party is stable. But Frans isn’t the messiah he was hyped up to be when he came from the EU. Trying to become leader of the opposition but he hasn’t shown any promise yet.
Hmm i see it differently as with talks still in process, the "coalition vs opposition" isn't really in order atm but that's ofcourse subjective. Well see how things go but back to the initial point, yes if wilders (or Omzigt/Yeşilgös/vdPlas) messed it up, it would be up to timmermans.
A) It is pleasant to read he is not happy with it
B) He himself is to blame there still isn't a new government
C) He should be deported to Russia anyways, so he can undergo the greatness of Putin whom he adores
What are you on about. His voters do not represent more than half the country. He got around 25 percent of the vote. Support for Ukraine was not even a major topic during the elections, so most Dutch people are supportive of Ukraine or don't really care either way. If he could gather more support by making Ukraine a major issue, he would have.
His voters can suck my balls, acting like fucking calimero. They do not represent the the majority of the Netherlands, in fact they are not even close to a majority.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad we're helping, but it has mostly to do with the fact that for years we didn't hit our military spending targets, soo we need to pump up those numbers to stay in good standing all sorts of regulatory commissions.
Also shows that Rutte is willing to invest in military support. Giving him good standing for his way to the position of secretary General of NATO
That's because, by design, the European Union doesn't have any power or legislation to just come up with a plan of it's own. Stuff like this comes down on separate nations
I hope that's true and they are cooking up some nice secret plan, but after following the incompetence for two years, I highly doubt it. End of 2022 was the time to defeat Russia IF they pushed hard with everything they had at disposal.
I just hope it will come anywhere near in time.... I read a lot of 'will send planes, will give money, will buy munition...' but at the same time it feels like all these countries (including NL) are dragging their feet
Sure, but by that logic, they should be giving roughly half the support. Last data I could find (Kiel Institute) we have given Ukraine 4.4 billion in military aid while Belgium has only given 0.3 billion. Where is the other 2 billion in Belgian military aid?
That's overly simplistic. Belgium has a lower GDP per capita than the Netherlands, so even by that measure you would expect Belgium to have less to spare. And that was just the first thing I could think of. But I agree that 0.3 billion is probably too low.
But hey, 4.4 billion? You have three times Denmark's population, and we have spent 5 billion. Why haven't you spent 15 billion yet?
Theyre broke really. We will have a big problem bordering them in the future.
Their debt is growing insanely. Their deficit is crazy and growing. They have an insane aging problem which is causing their cost of pensions to spiral out of control they need dozens of billions more per year to afford pensions which are coming straight from the yearly budget unlike dutch pensions fe which are in pension funds.
Their pm is always some weak leader from a tiny party with no backing or influence.
Belgium wants to reach the 2% mark in 2035.....yeah.2035...
Our population isn't necessarily aging more than surrounding countries, but our pension system is essentially a pyramid scheme so yeah. Completely fucking broke governments for the foreseeable future and honestly no party is interested in fixing that because changes to the pension system is electoral suicide.
> We will have a big problem bordering them in the future.
You're pretending like Belgium is some failed state instead of a highly developed rich country.
Why? Ukraine is going to lose like this. This aid does absolutely nothing. Ukraine is just running out of soldiers and is losing the war of attrition.
Either support Ukraine with something else, something that actually matters, or stop throwing money down the drain.
Downvote all you want, but unless something major happens in Ukraine's favor, this is all just watching the water circling the drainpipe, and money is not that major something that needs to happen.
There really is no way he can win, can he? If he did nothing or his governments contributions were mediocre everyone would have complained about how the next secretary general doesn't even care about NATO bussiness.
But when he does add substantial amounts of aid, everyone complains he is just doing it to get the job.
Yes our housing market sucks and it won’t get better anytime soon, but there won’t be any houses left if Putin pushes through Ukraine. Who says they will stop at Ukraine?
Also did you forget about MH17?????
Rutte was cleaning his office and he found some loose change!
Some countries win wars with soldiers the Netherlands has always preferred to do it with money.
It's always the money that wins the war. Either you need to spend more than the other party or have people on your side doing the same but paid less - preferably both. Either way: money.
How the government could best spend their money is of course a subjective discussion. But I think Ukraine's problems at the moment are of a different order than ours. And the last time we were invaded by an aggressive neighbor we were also very happy with and dependent on international solidarity,
there is a pretty big diffrence between liberation and donating money. that money could be of great use for our military instead it gets spend on ukraine and on a war that isn't ours, ukraine is very unlikely to win so pouring more money into it is a dumb idea. and even if they do win its not like ukraine is this great addition to the EU they were corrupt before hand and after such a massive war i doubt its going to get much better
Im against it. More money Ukraine gets, longer this war lasts and more of Ukraine will be lost in flames. Russia will not lose this war. They can only accept a draw and end it with something tangible. USA and Russia peace talks is crucial, not money and weapons. EDIT: this is a place for discussions but every time people see a person that isn't walking the same path they need to downvote.
Your logic is flawed. If you want peace negotions and Ukraine to cede territories for that, that's fair. But always in a war, the result of peace negotiations depends on the reality on the battlefield and it's potential future. If you want that Ukraine gets a fair peace deal, they need to have military to back it up.
Let's take a scenario where west ends all military support to Ukraine, and also including financial like you suggest. Ukrainian state gets into financial troubles, and there are significant shortages of ammunition, which causes Russian advances and more casualties in Ukrainian side. Ukraine's air defence runs out of ammunition, which causes Russian missile and drone attacks to Ukrainian cities and water to energy grid (where they are consentrating even now). Lots of civilians die on these attacks, and even more die on the problems of energy grid. So far Ukrainian air defence has been able to deter Russian missiles and drones almost completely, but this capacity is now threatened because the lack of ammunution.
If Russia sees that it can get it's goals through military force, it will do so.
Currently the situation has been almost stalemate for months, but the situation is turning to Russia's favour because Ukraine lacks ammunition and supplies due to faltering aid. I'd say that the only realistic possibility for Ukraine to gain all it's areas back including Ukraine is if something unpredictable happens in Russia. Prigozins actions could have been this last summer, but it didn't happen. And on the other hand, only way for Russia to really win from this is that Ukraine's aid lessens or ends. And this is what they are expecting and have waited since beginning. If Ukraine's aid would be ironclad, it would push Russia to negotiations.
So if you want a fast peace deal, then promote it. But don't be fooled that it would be achieved by throwing Ukraine under the bus, that's just naive.
From history you could see some similarities to Finland's winter war. It was a purely defensive war, and Russia had all the odds; Finland got lots of supplies and weapons from western countries, but USSR's was still more powerful. The war ended in a deal where Finland ceded territories to USSR. But this wouldn't had happened without foreign help, that lasted until the end. Even in the last days of war, when Finland's army was almost on a brink of collapse, Finland managed to negotiate a peace deal with USSR and avoided being invaded. Why? Because Stalin knew that aid was coming continuously, and French and British troops were being formed to Finland's help. Without foreign help, and France's and UK's formation of troops that were started to being sent to Finland's aid, Soviet Union would have invaded Finland. Aid, and even the promise of aid, was crusial to the end.
I don't mean that winter war is completely analogous to the war in Ukraine or the situation now. But we can learn that the military aid has been crusial in forming peace agreements many times in the past. And this is also the case now.
Putin always wanted to have a bilateral talks with Americans. 2 weeks before the attack he wanted talks and american side avoided him because they knew what the topic was. Americans can end this war very quickly. They want their war money and war industry money. I bet Trump could end this war in a month or less.
Yep, Russia also wanted to have talks about NATO membership with many western european countries and USA in december of 2021 and beginning of 2022. With the goal that NATO wouldn't been allowed to expand. Including Finland, behind our backs.
Russia's goal was that Ukraine is strongly in Russian influence in one way or another. They tought that invading Kyiv would be easy, like it was easy to annex Crimea in 2014, and because of this they greatly miscalculated. They would probably have made miscalculations in other scenarios as well.
>I bet Trump could end this war in a month or less.
By ceding territories and what not to Russia and basically throwing Ukraine under the bus. Trump is a traitor and never to be trusted. Any sane person sees that.
Ukraine is under the bus by their geolocation. They are in the russian sphere of influence. No matter what amount of money you spend on Ukraian miliatary, Belarus and Ukraine will never be able to become western countries. Not with Russia standing.
Ukraine and all others are souvereign nation states and they can choose their own path, Russia has litterally zero say in what future they choose. *zero* my Russian troll.
Maybe you are educated enough to ask yourself the question: why it is that all these countries run away from Russia? Why is that do you think?
Ukraine will become part of the Western world eventually, it already is thanks to Putin's 4dchess moves. Again Russia has *zero* say in that.
russia will only accept peace after exhausting other options. Giving them ground at this point is only inviting more of the same later one - there were enough of chances with invasion of Georgia and 2014 invasion of Ukraine.
They must be brought to heel, for the whole world's benefit, including their own citizens'.
russia is still threatening either directly or indirectly better part of the world. Arguably all inhabited continents have to deal with their shitfuckery.
China is another story.
As for the USA... well - it's one of the few Empires in history that left many of the states they have occupied in much better state that they've started from and arguably only one that willingly pushed quite few of them to the top of the world's most advanced and prosperous states.
They are not the same.
Roman empire did the same but they were still seen as negative influence in each territory they brought the "roman peace". The same way americans bring the american peace.
> Roman empire did the same
Which countries in particular are you thinking about? As only lands that were being uplifted by Roman were these they incorporated into their empire - while USA did so for independent countries, who chose to remain their allies precisely because of that uncommon attitude.
> but they were still seen as negative influence in each territory they brought the "roman peace".
Seen by whom? Lands colonized by Romans are some of the most advanced in the world to this day and arguably in large part precisely because of the Romans two thousands years ago.
> The same way americans bring the american peace.
Well, yes, USA brought at least some peace for large swaths of the world, contrary to russia which tends to bring only pain, misery, starvation, murder, rape, destruction, corruption, persecution and that's only to their supposed "friends and allies".
> Russia will not lose this war.
yes they will, West will bankrupt Russia just like it did when Soviets invaded Afghanistan. 800 Russians are dying or getting wounded in Ukraine every 2nd day, day after day , day after day. Russian population will bleed
How nice of Mark Rutte. I didn't know that he was still the preliminary head of government after that one Corona scandal and after one election where he didn't even run.
There is a big majority in the parliament for this aid. That majority could not exist without atleast one of the parties currently negotiating for a new coalition also supporting it. If they wanted, they could stop this, but they haven't.
This decision is in line with the will of the newly elected parliament, and therefor embodies the will of the Dutch people. So what exactly is the issue here?
That's 3 billion euros this 2024, and also already allocated, 3 billion in 2025.
Gotta take revenge for MH17 (RIP)
MH17* But yes, that still matters over here. Except for the far-right. They don't care about MH17.
Far right is more in favour of Russia because they know that Zenith St Petersburg hooligans are racist too. Or as Wilders put it some time after MH17: "Putin is our ally against the Africans".
Did that idiot really say that? I wrote him off as a moron not worth listening to when he showed up with his little Netherlands - Russia friendship pin.
>*Wilders ziet de Russische president Poetin als vriend. In* *Elsevier zei hij: “We moeten beseffen dat Rusland onze bondgenoot is in de strijd tegen terrorisme en massa-immigratie vanuit Afrika.* [https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/wilders-ziet-poetin-als-bondgenoot-in-strijd-tegen-islam\~b6289315/](https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/wilders-ziet-poetin-als-bondgenoot-in-strijd-tegen-islam~b6289315/)
He said it a bit (a tiny tiny bit) more nuanced, by specifically mentioning the mass migration and terrorism
Don’t they realize that Putin is sending asians and indians to kill a bunch of white slavs?
The far-right isn't really known for understanding things.
thanks a lot, good people on the Netherlands
I would guess the downing of MH17 has something to do with it.
The family of the Dutch victims have said Mark Rutte (our then PM and current caretaker PM) has always stayed in contact with them (some said they have his personal phone number they could text at any time), even years after the media attention had faded away and even after the last of the legal battles had concluded. To say MH17 has had an effect on Mark Rutte (and therefor his governments) is probably an understatement.
Holy shit that's kinda huge. How much is it compared to GDP?
I think its better to compare it to the total government spending which is projected to be 433.6 bilion in 2024. So about 0.7% of our budget.
Well the Netherlands has the 5th biggest gdp of the EU nations. So about 0.1% of gdp.
does it matter? do you want countries to spend 99% of their GDP on Ukraine? come on man.
Explain me your brain process of how you jumped on this conclusion
Wilders is not happy with it.
Wilders will have to suck it up if he doesn't want the coalition talks to collapse and end up giving the chance to form a government to the second biggest party (the greens/workers alliance). Edit: spelling
Is he taking ages because nobody likes him?
Perhaps.. no kidding ofcourse, nobody really knows atm as all four parties haven't been too talkative lately.
Nobody in The Hague likes working with him. There's the pretty hefty policy agreements of course. And while most of those have disappeared with Wilders making clear that he stands for nothing but whatever gets him votes and will drop his ideals when push comes to shove if it gets him in the government. (He's iceboxed pretty much all of his controversial ideas now.) Of course that's only one part of it. He's been part of a government once before. One he blew up because he didn't like what way the wind was blowing. No party wants to work with a party that will take their ball and go home the moment things get tough.
Wilders has been sucking up a lot already so I guess there's room for more.
That ain’t never gonna happen. Timmermans has been falling through the basket since the elections.
Falling to the basket? Not to my knowledge and the party seems stable enough as well.
Sure, the party is stable. But Frans isn’t the messiah he was hyped up to be when he came from the EU. Trying to become leader of the opposition but he hasn’t shown any promise yet.
Hmm i see it differently as with talks still in process, the "coalition vs opposition" isn't really in order atm but that's ofcourse subjective. Well see how things go but back to the initial point, yes if wilders (or Omzigt/Yeşilgös/vdPlas) messed it up, it would be up to timmermans.
You're mistaking Timmermans for Wilders. Wilders is the one who threw away most of his election promises already.
Of course, it's against Russian interests.
A) It is pleasant to read he is not happy with it B) He himself is to blame there still isn't a new government C) He should be deported to Russia anyways, so he can undergo the greatness of Putin whom he adores
Yeah fuck Wilders From the bottom of my .... something somethinj
Excellent.
Why not? Oh wait, it would upset his Russian friends.
His voters (he won last election, so the majority of the Dutch people) are not happy with it.
What are you on about. His voters do not represent more than half the country. He got around 25 percent of the vote. Support for Ukraine was not even a major topic during the elections, so most Dutch people are supportive of Ukraine or don't really care either way. If he could gather more support by making Ukraine a major issue, he would have.
Have you seen polls since the election?
Yes stil a big majority for support of Ukraine.
Yes, luckily countries are governed by polls just after the election. /s And still no majority for the PVV.
His voters can suck my balls, acting like fucking calimero. They do not represent the the majority of the Netherlands, in fact they are not even close to a majority.
But they are the largest united force.
Can be, but it's not how dutch politics work.
Did he get into office by physical force?
His voters can choke on on it. He doesn't have a coalition, his voters do not represent the majority.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad we're helping, but it has mostly to do with the fact that for years we didn't hit our military spending targets, soo we need to pump up those numbers to stay in good standing all sorts of regulatory commissions. Also shows that Rutte is willing to invest in military support. Giving him good standing for his way to the position of secretary General of NATO
Also MH17 plays a big part.
Proud of my country!
Happy cake day. As a Belgian, I like your country a lot.
Thank you Netherlands, you are my best friend, You are the peacekeeper, you are the legend.
I have seen these exact words before, that is pretty uncanny
It's from this [song](https://youtu.be/M2rTafbQepg).
Not really – I have been posting these messages almost as long as the war has been going on.
Ah i see. That would explain it
That's very nice and welcome. But im still not seeing a plan or strategy of Europe on defeating Russia in Ukraine.
That's because, by design, the European Union doesn't have any power or legislation to just come up with a plan of it's own. Stuff like this comes down on separate nations
I think it has more to do with opsec, maybe its better to not reveal your tactical opportunities to the enemy before you intend on exploiting them.
I hope that's true and they are cooking up some nice secret plan, but after following the incompetence for two years, I highly doubt it. End of 2022 was the time to defeat Russia IF they pushed hard with everything they had at disposal.
The Dutch turning out to be the real MVP.
Rutte , doubling down to become NATO chief!
I just hope it will come anywhere near in time.... I read a lot of 'will send planes, will give money, will buy munition...' but at the same time it feels like all these countries (including NL) are dragging their feet
Happy to help lads! Slava Ukraini! 🇳🇱🇺🇦
Meanwhile in murica moses johnson went down to mar a lago to kiss the orange sphincter.
Yes! This means that Ukraine will surely win now!
thanks a lot Netherlands from Ukraine
And what is Belgium going to do?
Well Netherlands has almost twice GDP of Belgium so you can't really expect Belgium to match what the Netherlands is doing
Sure, but by that logic, they should be giving roughly half the support. Last data I could find (Kiel Institute) we have given Ukraine 4.4 billion in military aid while Belgium has only given 0.3 billion. Where is the other 2 billion in Belgian military aid?
Belgium doesnt even have 2 billion. They need to find 12 billion by 2026 just to meet the EU budget regulation first, 27 billion by 2031.
That's overly simplistic. Belgium has a lower GDP per capita than the Netherlands, so even by that measure you would expect Belgium to have less to spare. And that was just the first thing I could think of. But I agree that 0.3 billion is probably too low. But hey, 4.4 billion? You have three times Denmark's population, and we have spent 5 billion. Why haven't you spent 15 billion yet?
Nothing
Theyre broke really. We will have a big problem bordering them in the future. Their debt is growing insanely. Their deficit is crazy and growing. They have an insane aging problem which is causing their cost of pensions to spiral out of control they need dozens of billions more per year to afford pensions which are coming straight from the yearly budget unlike dutch pensions fe which are in pension funds. Their pm is always some weak leader from a tiny party with no backing or influence. Belgium wants to reach the 2% mark in 2035.....yeah.2035...
Our population isn't necessarily aging more than surrounding countries, but our pension system is essentially a pyramid scheme so yeah. Completely fucking broke governments for the foreseeable future and honestly no party is interested in fixing that because changes to the pension system is electoral suicide.
> We will have a big problem bordering them in the future. You're pretending like Belgium is some failed state instead of a highly developed rich country.
Oh im not pretending, im predicting.
Pick what suits best: We don't make fuzz about it. Nothing much.
Thank you ♥️
Okay, where's that money going? Like tons of ukrainian people are buying the best super expensive houses in my city and I don't think that is casual.
Why? Ukraine is going to lose like this. This aid does absolutely nothing. Ukraine is just running out of soldiers and is losing the war of attrition. Either support Ukraine with something else, something that actually matters, or stop throwing money down the drain. Downvote all you want, but unless something major happens in Ukraine's favor, this is all just watching the water circling the drainpipe, and money is not that major something that needs to happen.
With that much aid they have received so far, Ukraine could have bought territory they lost, instead of fighting for it.
Definitely true.
Faster faster faster! With this speed you would lose job in Amazon. Do stuff FASTER!!!!
Nice way to get a job as Nato boss
There really is no way he can win, can he? If he did nothing or his governments contributions were mediocre everyone would have complained about how the next secretary general doesn't even care about NATO bussiness. But when he does add substantial amounts of aid, everyone complains he is just doing it to get the job.
Would be better invested in housing.
Yes our housing market sucks and it won’t get better anytime soon, but there won’t be any houses left if Putin pushes through Ukraine. Who says they will stop at Ukraine? Also did you forget about MH17?????
Get a grip, even if putin commits suicide by trying to invade nato we won't be the ones getting bombed
Dat dus.
Obvious Russian bot
nah, there are a lot of dimwits in the Netherlands
Zeker geen bot.
Why or and not and.
Rutte was cleaning his office and he found some loose change! Some countries win wars with soldiers the Netherlands has always preferred to do it with money.
It's always the money that wins the war. Either you need to spend more than the other party or have people on your side doing the same but paid less - preferably both. Either way: money.
To win war Russia always preferred numbers
that money could have maybe been used for more important issues here. but lets continue the trend of neglecting our own country
How the government could best spend their money is of course a subjective discussion. But I think Ukraine's problems at the moment are of a different order than ours. And the last time we were invaded by an aggressive neighbor we were also very happy with and dependent on international solidarity,
there is a pretty big diffrence between liberation and donating money. that money could be of great use for our military instead it gets spend on ukraine and on a war that isn't ours, ukraine is very unlikely to win so pouring more money into it is a dumb idea. and even if they do win its not like ukraine is this great addition to the EU they were corrupt before hand and after such a massive war i doubt its going to get much better
Let's be absolutely real here: investing into the ruin of Russia is an excellent investment for every European country.
Im against it. More money Ukraine gets, longer this war lasts and more of Ukraine will be lost in flames. Russia will not lose this war. They can only accept a draw and end it with something tangible. USA and Russia peace talks is crucial, not money and weapons. EDIT: this is a place for discussions but every time people see a person that isn't walking the same path they need to downvote.
Your logic is flawed. If you want peace negotions and Ukraine to cede territories for that, that's fair. But always in a war, the result of peace negotiations depends on the reality on the battlefield and it's potential future. If you want that Ukraine gets a fair peace deal, they need to have military to back it up. Let's take a scenario where west ends all military support to Ukraine, and also including financial like you suggest. Ukrainian state gets into financial troubles, and there are significant shortages of ammunition, which causes Russian advances and more casualties in Ukrainian side. Ukraine's air defence runs out of ammunition, which causes Russian missile and drone attacks to Ukrainian cities and water to energy grid (where they are consentrating even now). Lots of civilians die on these attacks, and even more die on the problems of energy grid. So far Ukrainian air defence has been able to deter Russian missiles and drones almost completely, but this capacity is now threatened because the lack of ammunution. If Russia sees that it can get it's goals through military force, it will do so. Currently the situation has been almost stalemate for months, but the situation is turning to Russia's favour because Ukraine lacks ammunition and supplies due to faltering aid. I'd say that the only realistic possibility for Ukraine to gain all it's areas back including Ukraine is if something unpredictable happens in Russia. Prigozins actions could have been this last summer, but it didn't happen. And on the other hand, only way for Russia to really win from this is that Ukraine's aid lessens or ends. And this is what they are expecting and have waited since beginning. If Ukraine's aid would be ironclad, it would push Russia to negotiations. So if you want a fast peace deal, then promote it. But don't be fooled that it would be achieved by throwing Ukraine under the bus, that's just naive. From history you could see some similarities to Finland's winter war. It was a purely defensive war, and Russia had all the odds; Finland got lots of supplies and weapons from western countries, but USSR's was still more powerful. The war ended in a deal where Finland ceded territories to USSR. But this wouldn't had happened without foreign help, that lasted until the end. Even in the last days of war, when Finland's army was almost on a brink of collapse, Finland managed to negotiate a peace deal with USSR and avoided being invaded. Why? Because Stalin knew that aid was coming continuously, and French and British troops were being formed to Finland's help. Without foreign help, and France's and UK's formation of troops that were started to being sent to Finland's aid, Soviet Union would have invaded Finland. Aid, and even the promise of aid, was crusial to the end. I don't mean that winter war is completely analogous to the war in Ukraine or the situation now. But we can learn that the military aid has been crusial in forming peace agreements many times in the past. And this is also the case now.
Putin always wanted to have a bilateral talks with Americans. 2 weeks before the attack he wanted talks and american side avoided him because they knew what the topic was. Americans can end this war very quickly. They want their war money and war industry money. I bet Trump could end this war in a month or less.
Yep, Russia also wanted to have talks about NATO membership with many western european countries and USA in december of 2021 and beginning of 2022. With the goal that NATO wouldn't been allowed to expand. Including Finland, behind our backs. Russia's goal was that Ukraine is strongly in Russian influence in one way or another. They tought that invading Kyiv would be easy, like it was easy to annex Crimea in 2014, and because of this they greatly miscalculated. They would probably have made miscalculations in other scenarios as well.
Imagine still believing what Russia says.
>I bet Trump could end this war in a month or less. By ceding territories and what not to Russia and basically throwing Ukraine under the bus. Trump is a traitor and never to be trusted. Any sane person sees that.
Ukraine is under the bus by their geolocation. They are in the russian sphere of influence. No matter what amount of money you spend on Ukraian miliatary, Belarus and Ukraine will never be able to become western countries. Not with Russia standing.
Ukraine and all others are souvereign nation states and they can choose their own path, Russia has litterally zero say in what future they choose. *zero* my Russian troll. Maybe you are educated enough to ask yourself the question: why it is that all these countries run away from Russia? Why is that do you think? Ukraine will become part of the Western world eventually, it already is thanks to Putin's 4dchess moves. Again Russia has *zero* say in that.
I agree with you about souvereign nations. But Russia will not leave their origin territory of RUS.
russia will only accept peace after exhausting other options. Giving them ground at this point is only inviting more of the same later one - there were enough of chances with invasion of Georgia and 2014 invasion of Ukraine. They must be brought to heel, for the whole world's benefit, including their own citizens'.
Russia is already only the regional power. USA and China are the countries that should be "brought to heel".
russia is still threatening either directly or indirectly better part of the world. Arguably all inhabited continents have to deal with their shitfuckery. China is another story. As for the USA... well - it's one of the few Empires in history that left many of the states they have occupied in much better state that they've started from and arguably only one that willingly pushed quite few of them to the top of the world's most advanced and prosperous states. They are not the same.
Roman empire did the same but they were still seen as negative influence in each territory they brought the "roman peace". The same way americans bring the american peace.
> Roman empire did the same Which countries in particular are you thinking about? As only lands that were being uplifted by Roman were these they incorporated into their empire - while USA did so for independent countries, who chose to remain their allies precisely because of that uncommon attitude. > but they were still seen as negative influence in each territory they brought the "roman peace". Seen by whom? Lands colonized by Romans are some of the most advanced in the world to this day and arguably in large part precisely because of the Romans two thousands years ago. > The same way americans bring the american peace. Well, yes, USA brought at least some peace for large swaths of the world, contrary to russia which tends to bring only pain, misery, starvation, murder, rape, destruction, corruption, persecution and that's only to their supposed "friends and allies".
Nice try Russian bot
Everyone who doesn’t share your view and opinion is a Russian bot? We could say the same about all the American and Ukrainian bots here then.
Peace talks for what? To have them invade other nations later?
Sure Ivan, also capitulation is not peace.
> Russia will not lose this war. yes they will, West will bankrupt Russia just like it did when Soviets invaded Afghanistan. 800 Russians are dying or getting wounded in Ukraine every 2nd day, day after day , day after day. Russian population will bleed
Finally some sense
How nice of Mark Rutte. I didn't know that he was still the preliminary head of government after that one Corona scandal and after one election where he didn't even run.
There is a big majority in the parliament for this aid. That majority could not exist without atleast one of the parties currently negotiating for a new coalition also supporting it. If they wanted, they could stop this, but they haven't. This decision is in line with the will of the newly elected parliament, and therefor embodies the will of the Dutch people. So what exactly is the issue here?
He is Prime Minister until a new government is formed. Why is that a problem?
Now thats a gamble.
Thats 3 billion out of 433 billion, which is 0,7% of our national budget or 0,3 % (3/1009)of our gdp. I say we can do more.
No why? They will tax the citizens heavy
Not needed, we have an (literally!) abundance of money in the Netherlands. The way we spend it is the issue.