Europe won’t be able to finance Ukraine’s defenses against Russia’s invasion on its own if the US withdraws support under Donald Trump’s next presidency, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said Friday.

Orban said recent events vindicated the conclusions from his controversial July diplomatic mission to Kyiv, Moscow and Beijing and showed Ukraine was losing the war.

“The Americans are going to get out of this war,” Orban, who is hosting a European Union summit in Budapest on Friday, said on public radio. “Europe can’t finance this war on its own.”

Archive link

  • makyo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Just because you can cherry pick a dozen articles from the last TEN YEARS about NATO and Ukraine doesn’t make you right.

    I don’t even need an article to refute all of that - Russia attacked a neighbor unprovoked, NATO has attacked NOBODY ever.

          • anachronist@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            History has misjudged Jeffery Sachs according to… Jeffery Sachs!

            Let’s be real, he’s the main guy pushing the “NATO expansion” theory of Russian aggression everywhere, and it exists mainly to cover for his own crimes.

            What’s more likely: that Russian revanchism came from anger over some arcane treaty negotiations, or that it came from the absolute collapse in material condition, civil society, population, daily lived experience and life expectancy that Russians experienced as Sachs and his evil clients dismantled the once-great civilization for their own enrichment? What do you think Marx’s assessment of those two theories would be?

            Sachs is a bag man. He helped the oligarchs destroy Russia and then he made himself useful to the new ruler when they were gone. He also spends a lot of time in Beijing and has a lot of good things to say about Xi as well. The guy’s a serpent.

            • davelA
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              What’s more likely: that Russian revanchism came from

              Well there’s your problem: you believe the imperial core’s narrative that this is about “Russian revanchism” and not about decades of NATO expansion or Western Ukrainian fascists terrorizing eastern Ukrainians for almost a decade.

              Believe what you like, but you don’t seem to be winning any hearts and minds here, and hardly anyone reads this far down conversation threads, anyway.

    • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Please tell me this is sarcasm. The fact that there have been so much consistent reporting over such a long period of time about NATO and Ukraine means it absolutely needs to be considered.

      I don’t even need an article to refute all of that - Russia attacked a neighbor unprovoked, NATO has attacked NOBODY ever.

      Again, please tell me this is satire. NATO has attacked multiple countries over the years. But also, since the advent of nuclear weapons, firing the first shot stopped being the standard. Because the first shot can now be a total annihilation shot, no country is capable of having a strategy that judges threats only by who fired the first shot. It must be judged by who is establishing the positioning to undermine security. Russia is not deploying nuclear capabilities around the world. The USA is deploying nuclear capabilities around the world, and in Europe it is doing so through NATO. This may be a shock to you, but deploying nuclear capabilities to undermine the security of another nation is NOT an act of peace.