Zelensky ging in eine Falle

Jonathan Chait: “Trump seems to genuinely feel that he and Vladimir Putin forged a personal bond through the shared trauma of being persecuted by the Democratic Party. Trump is known for his cold-eyed, transactional approach, and yet here he was, displaying affection and loyalty. (At another point, Trump complained that Zelensky has “tremendous hatred” toward Putin and insisted, “It’s very tough for me to make a deal with that kind of hate.”) He was not explaining why a deal with Russia would advance America’s interests, or why honoring it would advance Russia’s. He was defending Russia’s integrity by vouching for Putin’s character …”

“Trump and Vance appear to have entered the meeting with the intention of berating Zelensky and drawing him into an argument as a pretext for the diplomatic break. Why should anyone have expected anything different? Trump has been regurgitating Russian propaganda, not only regarding Ukraine, since before Zelensky even assumed office … In the past few weeks, Trump has made very little effort to conceal his pro-Russian tilt. He called Zelensky a dictator, and when asked if he would say the same about Putin, refused, insisting, ‘I don’t use those words lightly.’ (No president in American history has used words more lightly than Trump). He said Ukraine ‘may be Russian someday’ and blamed Ukraine for starting the war. The U.S. even joined Russia, North Korea, and a tiny bloc of Russian allies to vote against a United Nations resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

“The less-damning explanations for Trump’s pattern of pro-Russia positions have all collapsed in the face of evidence. One line of defense, hauled out by Republican hawks to explain away Trump’s consistent efforts to undermine NATO, is that Trump actually wants to prod Europe into spending more on its own defense. Like a tough football coach, he is merely berating his team to become the best version of itself.

“Except when European countries declared themselves ready to increase their defense spending to 2 percent of GDP, the level Trump claimed to have wanted, he upped the demand to 5 percent. More recently, he advocated for the election of the right-wing, pro-Russian, anti-NATO AfD party in Germany. That is a strange thing to do if your goal is to push the allies to stand up for themselves against Russia, but a perfectly sensible position if your goal is to undermine the anti-Russia alliance.”

Read more here: [https://theatln.tc/f8M5VzEk](https://theatln.tc/f8M5VzEk)

100% agree. Felt like a stitch up from the word go.

Zelensky probably knew it would be a trap, he’s no dummy. But he wasn’t in a position to say no to this invitation

Vance has been extremely clear anti-Ukraine from day one. Constantly backtalking Ukraine and Zelensky. Why Zelensky eagerly went into the White House to sit next to Trump and Vance on camera I just don’t get. Does he not understand American politics? Did no one warn him? At least demand Vance not be in the room. With Trump alone you can get somewhere because Trump likely can’t point to Ukraine or Russia on a map. He doesn’t care either way.

You can’t blame a scorpion for stinging. I knew this would happen. Zelensky is extremely prideful and patriotic. Trump extremely arrogant and Vance extremely narrow-minded, stubborn, and thinks he is a genius. Anyone predicting anything else as the outcome doesn’t understand people. Which makes me fear for the Ukrainian leadership as this is a mistake I would not expect from them.

He walked in it knowing what it is but end up exposing what kind of chumps are Trimp and Vance is. They are Traitors of this country. Russian Puppets

Every country in NATO has increased their budget as a percentage since 2022 the invasion by Russia. In fact it was under Biden that the greatest increase happened. Trump asked for it and Biden delivered it.

„The current target for European Nato members of 2% of GDP on defence by 2024 was agreed in 2014. In that year only three countries (the US, UK and Greece) were spending more than 2% on defence.

Nato members also pledged that by 2024 at least 20% of their defence expenditure should go on acquiring and developing military equipment. 

Shashank Joshi, defence editor of The Economist told BBC News on 9 July 2024 that the reason for that target is so countries are „not just wasting it all on pensions or something that isn’t directly contributing to combat power“. 

In 2024, all Nato members except Belgium and Canada were expected to achieve that.“ – BBC

It was a stupid show meant for Putin.