At the start of the Russia-Ukraine war in 2022, President Joe Biden declared America would support Ukraine “for as long as it takes,” and he declared that such support would leave “Russia weaker and the rest of the world stronger.” Three years later, however, as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to reenter the White House, it is becoming painfully obvious that the policies Biden employed produced nearly the opposite outcome.
Instead of imposing a strategic defeat on Moscow and a victory for Kyiv, Ukraine is at real risk of suffering an outright military defeat.
Last September, after sending Ukraine thousands of American combat vehicles, millions of rounds of ammunition, and over $100 billion in U.S. taxpayer dollars, U.S. Air Force General James Heckler admitted that despite such extraordinary expenditures, the Russian military had become bigger, stronger, and more capable than it was in 2022. That is an astounding confession. It is also unsurprising.
It is not merely important, but a paramount obligation for any American president to soberly assess any situation from the framework of “ends and means.” It is not enough to merely state a preferred outcome – “weakening Russia” in this case – but to make certain we have the means to bring that end to successful fruition.
Clearly, the Biden Administration never conducted such an assessment, choosing instead to lead with emotion, anchoring American interests to the unsubstantiated hope that something good would result. It should have been obvious to senior Administration officials from the outset that Russia had an overwhelming advantage over Ukraine in the key metrics that determines a nation’s war-making capacity.
Russia had millions more men from which to mobilize or recruit into its Armed Forces than Ukraine. It had enormous quantities of natural resources within its borders, and perhaps most crucially, a defense industrial base to indefinitely maintain production of all war material necessary to sustain a war of attrition. Ukraine has comparative deficiencies in all such categories.
Further, when Biden first committed the United States to open-ended support to Ukraine, Russia had a lukewarm relationship with China and was at arm’s length from North Korea and Iran. Today, China and Russia have a stronger military relationship than before, as well as an advanced economic interdependency.
Worse for American interests, Russia now has outright military alliances with both North Korea and Iran. None of these developments are good for America’s global interests. It didn’t need to be this way. There were alternatives available, at several different stages, that could have benefitted American national interests and helped to preserve Ukrainian lives and political independence.
Biden punted at each moment of opportunity, refusing to take either preventative measure that might have avoided war or multiple off-ramps that could have ended the war and limited the damage to U.S. and Ukrainian national interests.
First, the war should never have happened. Biden was given a golden opportunity to prevent war in the autumn of 2021. Almost a year into the war, then-NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg admitted that almost six months before the outbreak of war, Putin privately sent a proposed treaty to NATO that would have declared neutrality for Ukraine by vowing not to expand NATO further. Stoltenberg seemed to brag about rejecting this opportunity to avert war, confirming that Putin promised such a declaration would be “a pre-condition to not invade Ukraine. Of course, we didn’t sign that.”
And of course, war did come.
Regarding hypothetical NATO membership for Ukraine, it is vital for every American to understand the truth: Ukraine was never going to be invited by the Alliance. They were the most corrupt country in Europe at the time. They had an active civil war that had been simmering for eight years, with no resolution in site. There was considerable enmity between Ukraine and Russia that would keep relations unstable and volatile for the foreseeable future.
What NATO country in its right mind would willingly place its own national security at risk by tying itself to an Article 5 guarantee that could see it plunged into war against a nuclear-armed Russian state? None. But arrogance and an emotional desire to “look tough” against Russia led Biden and NATO to continue claiming in public that “its only for NATO members” to decide who is invited, not Russia. The cost of that tough-sounding rhetoric – publicly keeping the door open to Ukrainian entrance everyone in NATO knew would never be allowed – resulted in a war that should never have been fought.
Acknowledging such realities does not, in any way, justify Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. As foolish as Biden and other NATO leaders may have been with their statements, there were paths short of war that Putin could have taken to ensure his country’s security, and he was wrong for choosing war. That does not, however, excuse Western culpability in rejecting any diplomatic paths that could have prevented war.
But once war was thrust upon Ukraine and the West, Biden had another golden opportunity less than two months in to end the war through diplomacy. Russian and Ukrainian diplomats met in Istanbul in late March, and both emerged agreeing that the general terms for a deal to end the war had been reached.
But reportedly then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson sabotaged that deal, convincing Ukraine to reject the peace proposal and keep fighting. Far from trying to resurrect the deal to end the war, mere days later Biden announced a new $33 billion to allow Ukraine to keep the war going. Imagine how many Ukrainian men would be alive today if Biden had taken that off-ramp. Unfortunately, that wasn’t to be the last chance for peace the president chose to reject.

Ukraine War Drone Footage. Image Credit: Twitter Screenshot.
The best chance for Ukraine to have gotten a negotiated end to the war, on terms relatively positive from Kyiv’s perspective, came in November 2022, following what would turn out to be the only two signature military victories of the war: driving Russia out of the Kharkiv region and out of Kherson city.
At that time, then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, gave a press conference in which he said as a result of recent Ukrainian offensive successes, the Russian military was “really hurting bad.” As a result, he continued, “You want to negotiate at a time when you’re at your strength, and your opponent is at weakness. And it’s possible, maybe, that there’ll be a political solution.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, fresh off battlefield successes, rejected the opportunity, choosing to continue fighting. Biden mindlessly enabled him to continue.
Zelensky’s exuberance was understandable in that moment, but Biden’s team should have been more sober about the situation, recognizing that though Russia had indeed suffered significant battlefield setbacks, the balance of forces that existed prior to the war at the national level, was still decisively in Russia’s favor, and there should have been every expectation that Russia would recover from its wounds and come back stronger.
Instead of insisting that Ukraine make a deal then, under the best negotiating conditions they would ever get, Biden supported and encouraged Ukraine to launch into a major, country-wide offensive the next year. Evidence available at the time should have made clear to any knowledgeable strategist that the offensive could not succeed. Russia had more than a half year to dig multiple lines of defense in depth, sewed millions of mines, and had overwhelming advantages in air power, air defense, artillery ammunition, and above all, manpower.
Without air power, adequate numbers of personnel, armor, or sufficient engineering support on the Ukraine side, the offensive was doomed before it started. Once that reality did play out and the offensive ran out of steam by early autumn 2023, the Biden Administration had its next opportunity to do the right thing and insist the Ukrainian side reach a negotiated settlement. The terms would then not have been as good as the Istanbul offer in April 2022, but better than it would be later.
But again, the Administration punted that opportunity, allowing Ukraine to continue making claims that it was still going to defeat Russia and, as Zelensky said as recently as June 2024, that Ukraine was going to win, driving Russia all the way back to the 1991 Ukraine borders – which was a clear military impossibility.
In the same month that Zelensky was claiming he would push Russia out of Ukraine, Putin put an offer of a negotiated end to the war on the table. As predicted, it was much more draconian than the April 2022 offer. This time Russia required Ukraine to surrender control of all four oblasts Russia had illegally annexed in 2022 and among other things, required a legally binding declaration that Ukraine would never join NATO.

Old Russian T-62 Tank Fighting in Ukraine. Image Credit: Twitter.
Zelensky rejected the offer, instead vowing to fight on. President Biden made no attempt to encourage Zelensky to explore a diplomatic way out. Instead, one month later, ignoring all military realities, told an audience at the NATO Summit that despite the advances of the Russian army, “the war will end with Ukraine remaining a free and independent country,” adding “Russia will not prevail. Ukraine will prevail.” Such optimism was badly misplaced.
Months before that NATO Summit, then-Senator J.D. Vance published an alternative plan in the New York Times that did acknowledge military reality and offered a plan that, had it been acted upon, would have ended the war then and preserved more territory for Ukraine. If Zelensky had adopted a defensive strategy in April 2024, Vance wrote, the Ukrainian Armed Forces would have been able to “preserve its precious military manpower, stop the bleeding and provide time for negotiations to commence.”
The Administration didn’t have a credible plan for Ukraine to win the war, Vance added, and concluded that the “sooner Americans confront this truth, the sooner we can fix this mess and broker for peace.” But Biden didn’t confront the truth, didn’t so much as attempt diplomacy to find a way out, and as a result, has put Ukraine in a position where it has a higher chance of outright losing the war than getting any sort of positive diplomatic outcome.
Trump was elected in November by the American people in large part because of his strident desire to see the killing in the war stop and a diplomatic end found quickly. Biden could have been helpful, even in that eleventh hour, to work with President-elect Trump to smooth a transition into the new Administration to maximize the chances of getting the best deal possible for Kyiv.
Instead, Biden made the situation worst – both for Trump’s peace-making efforts as well as the Ukrainian people – by authorizing the use of American long-range weapons into Russia and rushing billions more in weapons and ammunition out the door before his departure. The U.S. elections had conclusively placed the United States on a trajectory to end the war through diplomacy. Biden’s actions predictably antagonized the Russians, hardening their position and reducing their willingness to reach a settlement on the least offensive terms possible.
The use of long-range weapons and the surge of arms and money made zero impact on the course of the war. Indeed, just yesterday a strike got through Russian air defenses and caused disruption and pain for Moscow. Yet none of these strikes did anything to slow down the Russian offensives on the eastern front. The cost for Ukraine and the West was, however, high, as the moves angered the Russians. As a consequence of Biden’s actions, Trump will have a much more difficult path to negotiate the war’s end on terms remotely positive for Kyiv, as Moscow will be in no mood to play nice with Kyiv.

Image Credit: Social Media of Ukraine Armed Forces.
President Trump may well be an excellent negotiator and does have some leverage to use in talks with Moscow. But here’s the harsh truth every American and Ukrainian must bear in mind as Trump assumes office next Monday: owing to the astonishing mismanagement by the Biden Administration throughout this war – but especially over the past six months – Putin’s military is now far superior to the Ukrainian Armed Forces and could opt to merely keep fighting until it wins an outright military victory.
I put nothing past President Trump, and he may yet convince Putin that his interests would be best served by accepting a negotiated settlement. But Russia has the military, economic, and industrial capacity to press for maximalist diplomatic demands or to continue fighting, and there is nothing Ukraine could do to stop it.
It is in American, European, and Ukrainian interests to end this war as quickly as possible, at the lowest possible cost, and President Trump should do all in his power to achieve that outcome. But owing to Biden’s unwillingness to find a diplomatic path to avert war prior to February 2022, his refusal to take the negotiated end to the war in April 2022, rejection of a deal in November 2022, his inability to acknowledge the military path to victory was closed after the 2023 offensive, and his reflexive desire to simply pour more money, arms and ammunition onto a force that could no longer effective employ it, a Ukrainian military defeat may no longer be avoidable.
About the Author: Daniel L. Davis
Daniel L. Davis is a retired army Lt.Col. and Senior Fellow at Defense Priorities & host of the Daniel Davis Deep Dive show on YouTube. Davis is a Contributing Editor for 19FortyFive.

Tig
January 16, 2025 at 1:52 pm
I am under no illusion that Trump knows a damn thing about war fighting, and don’t expect to see him make any headway with Ukraine. That being said, Biden had an opportunity to supply Ukraine with overwhelming firepower when Russia invaded. Ukraine, and the entire civilized world, had a window of time to stomp the shit out of Russia once and for all and we blew it. Why am I not surprised? Now it’s Trump’s turn to botch what comes next. We get the “leaders” we deserve.
chrisford1
January 16, 2025 at 7:30 pm
Sorry. The myth that of only Ukraine had enough super duper game changer weapons given it for free they could have readily beaten Russia is a Ukrainian constantly repeated propaganda lie. That all too many in the West willfully believe. Because it makes them feel better or something.
Until; they finally realize the Neocons duped the less clever, less cunning Americans and their leadership. That Ukraine never had a chance. That all peace deals were sabotaged because this was a war of moneygrubbing and buying on to Jake Sullivan and Victoria Nulands delusional belief that wonderwaffen, US sanctions, and the disgruntled Russian population would cause Russia to fall in defeat in Ukraine, then break up so the US and “the rules based international order”could move in and try carving Russia up again.
Instead, a disaster on all fronts and likely to be a more punishing defeat for America than Vietnam was, and make the consequences of losing in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan look trivial.
NewYear2025
January 16, 2025 at 2:15 pm
Blame asmodeus biden for the mindless bloodletting in ukraine. And the EU as well.
Also, all the western media outlets like reuters, BBC, nyt, washington post, etc…
The conflict in ukraine was fotally unnecessary.
But US under obama and biden wanted to do a number on russia because as agents of the shadow agency, they truly hated pitin’s guts.
Spilling massive blood in order to get at putin was regarded as inconsequential.
Thus independent countries today must issue arrest warrants for all the actors involved in starting the conflict after jan 20 2025.
Obama, Joe biden, jens stoltenberg, lloyd austin, scholz, boris johnson and others. Arrest all of them.
After the (deliberate) non-implementation of minsk, the CIA directly aided units like azov battalion and National guards of ukraine to invest in an extensive network tunnels and trenches in donbass where the ukro units shelled & shot at the local russian-speaking inhabitants who were denounced and branded as terrorists by the kyiv fascists.
Putin just could no longer stand aside and allow the neo-nazis to slaughter the donbass like in gaza, so on 24 feb 2022 he initiated his special military operation.
All the while, biden and stoltenberg incessantly dogbarked at russia, exactly similar to what gamal abdel nasser was doing in 1967 to Israel, relentlessly egging on putin to do something.
Putin should have had done his homework thoroughly before directly entering donbass, but sadly he didn’t.
He did a half and half job which has only resulted in unneccessarily massive losses.
But today, in 2025, trump has come back and he’ll put things right. Down with obama and asmodeus biden.
To rikers island with thrm.
megiddo
January 16, 2025 at 2:28 pm
The ukraine conflict is a stark lesson and direct reminder to countries that are lined up on the list of geopolitical targets drawn up by the deep state to be taken down by US DoD and allies.
Conflict should be avoided at all costs where possible, but if conflict becomes unavoidable, the first thing to know & understand is that upon the very first opening shot, the enemy MUST be destroyed immediately.
NO PLAY PLAY. NO FOOLIN’ AROUND. NEVER DO IT.
Kill the adversary with your very first blows. Send his soul STRAIGHT to the pearly gates so that he can never rise to his feet again.
Otherwise, it’s your soul that’s destined to make the one-way journey.
HAT451
January 16, 2025 at 3:07 pm
This article boils the Biden administration down to one statement, “The Biden administration denies reality.” and in four days, the statement will be “The Biden administration denied reality.”
Here are a few other exampled which support the “reality denying” descriptor:
In Afghanistan they denied reality on the ground, did not stick to the conditional based withdraw, but went with the proposed time schedule regardless of what what the other side was not doing. Result, 13 dead American servicemen, collapse of the Afghanistan government, abandonment of ten’s of thousands contractors to death and torture by new Islamic theocracy.
Regarding Title IX, the government denies the reality regarding the physical differences between someone with XX and XY chromosomes. Net result is women on the sports field injured by men, denied Title IX scholarships by men, and in women’s only prisons raped and impregnated by men pretending to be woman.
On our border, the Biden administration denies reality border security and assuming that everyone being smuggled in to the US via our porous borders is a good person. The reality is we now have millions more illegal aliens within the country, like Jose Iberra who murdered Linken Riley, the illegal alien Juan Sierra, who allegedly started the Kenneth fire in California with a blow torch and detained by area residents, Trend de Aragua, the gang that took over and terrorized the American citizens in an apartment complex in Boulder Colorado.
I can go on, and present many more examples beyond the three I presented.
How does denying reality relate to Ukraine Russian conflict? The same reality denying Biden administration, is denying Euro-Asian history, other agreements between Russia, Europe, and NATO; trajectory of combat operations on the the ground; Ukrainian verses Russian logistical systems, energy infrastructure, armed forces staffing, reserves, deep battle capability, and will to fight. The answer is that until the collective west accepts reality, the situation Ukraine will continue to deteriorate.
Jim
January 16, 2025 at 6:02 pm
I’m not sure Nato was off the table. Remember, at the start of the war, Kiev’s forces were basically Nato trained & supplied… and possibly directed, too.
Yes, bringing in Ukraine to Nato would have meant accepting the many problems of Ukraine… but, had Russia backed down and not invaded, likely, the Nato-tization of Ukraine would have continued apace. When would Nato have brought in Ukraine?
Sometime before Nato put (possibly nuclear) missiles inside Ukraine right up on the border with Russia which could hit Moscow.
Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, has stated Nato membership is “irreversible & inevitable.” He still insists, to this day, it will happen sometime down the road.
But for Nato, this war wouldn’t have happened.
Remember, President George W. Bush announced in 2008 Ukraine would become part of Nato. At the time, Ukraine’s founding document & constitution spelled out a neutral, non-aligned, non-Nato Ukraine.
Bringing Ukraine into Nato was a long standing plan… as was the weakening of Russia.
The U. S. purpose of supporting the Maidan violent coup was to put people into government who would want Ukraine to be in Nato.
Frankly, as the author points out there were lots of reasons not to bring Ukraine into Nato, but because this was a long standing plan… institutional inertia and the idea of increasing Nato’s (U. S.) power overcame any reluctance in my view.
Where are we now?
Does Trump actually want to end the war expeditiously?
Depends who he listens to.
N0N0
January 16, 2025 at 7:35 pm
“It is not enough to merely state a preferred outcome . . . but to make certain we have the means to bring that end to successful fruition. . . the Biden Administration never conducted such an assessment, choosing instead to lead with emotion, anchoring American interests to the unsubstantiated hope that something good would result.”
Isn’t this the American Way of War since Somalia (circa 1992-1993)?
We routinely ignore geography and distance, populations and demographics, local politics, economics, and the vital interests of important parties with big stakes in the outcome.
How to expect success in war when your mindset is wrong and you are oblivious to the elementary material and moral factors?
Brett J Andersen
January 16, 2025 at 8:00 pm
Daniel Davis likes revisionist articles. He was certain that Russia would win immediately. When proven wrong, he has clung to his assertion that ‘the fundamentals favor Russia’. If that were true, Russia would have already won and the United States wouldn’t have suffered a defeat in Afghanistan.
The cost to American taxpayers of supporting Ukraine is extremely small relative to the tactical gains that comes from NATO expansion and Russian forces suffering huge material losses in a Ukrainian quagmire.
The Biden administration deserves some blame – but the blame is for not providing more aid, faster. 31 Abrams tanks (enough to equip a single battalion). With 100x more sitting in storage and doing no good for any purpose, those extra tanks may have permitted the Ukrainians to accept increased losses rather than husbanding their resources.
Granting Putin in ‘peace talks’ what he has failed to achieve in 3 years of open warfare is pointlessly defeatist and would represent Western self-determent. Ukraine now has more soldiers than Russia, and Russia cannot commit 100% of their resources to an invasion – they have security interests on their borders and need to maintain a credible stance to oppose Western powers – at least, so they claim.
Russia’s economy is in shambles. Western sanctions continue to bite. Russian debt is a ticking time-bomb of epic proportions. Chinese firms are refusing to do business with Russia. Russia suffered a serious strategic defeat with the fall of the Assad regime, putting their adventurism in Africa in jeopardy.
Russia has been impaling themselves on Ukraine. The west could have done more, but they’ve done enough to keep Ukraine in the war. Russia holds less territory today than they did in the first week of the invasion.
Ukraine may not be winning, but they’re certainly not losing. Russia is sacrificing their future on the altar of colonial imperialism. It doesn’t look good for them.
William Blair
January 16, 2025 at 9:28 pm
The most odious and much over looked issue is that we have driven Russia and China into each others arms. This I believe will severely weaken US national interests for generations. This failure by Biden flies in the face of 7 decades of State Department policy to keep them as far apart as possible. Some of the more rational members of the GOP presidential race such as Vivek Ramaswamy pointed this out continuously. Hopefully they still have the ear of President Trump.
WIthout a doubt Biden has done just about everything wrong possible from his first day in office until it appears his last.
Zordan
January 17, 2025 at 4:59 am
DD claims that Russia had alternatives to ‘not going to war’. Where is the evidence for this ? Lavrov himself stated that Russia had nowhere to retreat. DD is one person & one brain. How is it possible that this one brain can out-think a massive collective of Russian brains involved in the decision to go to war ? … No DD, you are not ‘smarter’ than a collective of Russian brains. Moreover, the Russians probably had access to information which you do not; hence, the decision to go to war.
Swamplaw Yankee
January 17, 2025 at 8:09 am
Holy Moly: Another in the brigade of fellow, academic, military and intelligence publish or die before January 20 failures. Danial D. knows so so much. WOW. Maybe he can publish the biography of all those well paid intelligence luminaries who predicted failure of Ukraine and, therefore, the west. Is DD on the Erdogen MIT fan roll?
NONO + Anderson seem deductive and logical. Nice.
Back in 2014 the West needed to retake the Crimea. Retake Sevastopol and kick the Orc Muscovite genocide parasites back to their lefty/pinkoe paradise.
The WEST, including NATO + EU need to wake up immediately. The funding and implementation of Fortress Europe In Crimea/Sevastopol for the long-term is needed immediately.
Unless Trump has the guts and insight to retake the Volga canal threat today so as to ensure the long term survival of Israel. But Danial D, et al, pretend Ukraine is not connected with Israel geopolitics. Trump will need guts to plug the Volga canal at the Sea of Azov and delay the Gog invasion of Israel. Somehow Danial D, et al, avoid noting Israel and the Bible reference to the Jewish faithful.
Reparation and Restoration of all Ukrainian soil must start on January 20. Trump will have the sharp blade of history in his hand and intellectually adroit that he does not slit the literal throat of the WEST. The same happened 500 years back when Constantinople received the big blab from Europe and the MSM yellow coward weasal words. Gog slit those Christian throats back then and we live the long-term disaster today. Yeah, Is Trump to be a historic winner, or an immediate loser? Place your bets. -30-
George
January 17, 2025 at 10:08 am
Ukraine was free and independent before you sponsored a coup and tried to expand NATO. FAFO.
ben casey
January 17, 2025 at 10:37 am
The author’s main premise is that Putin should have been appeased to avoid war. Have we just completely forgotten the lessons of the 1930s?
Thomas Cole JD
January 17, 2025 at 11:25 am
Well said. And let’s not forget state department Victoria Nuland at state department and the CIA working reverently to start and prolong this war. Zelenskyy was and is a CIA ‘asset’ used to create this huge million man dead war, and to create and maintain the multi billion dollar money laundering project for the US Congress and other assorted corrupt entities. Zelenskyy has several of his very own mega mansion in the US and worldwide. Him and Nuland and Soros are well compensated for the deaths of so many young Christian men.
The Voice of Reason
January 17, 2025 at 12:12 pm
This article is the first sane one 1945 has published on the topic.
Putin has already loudly and publicly presented the off ramp. Ukraine retains nominal independence if his current demands are met.
That is the best Russia is willing to offer because at current trends, even with 100 billion dollars in aid per year and dropping the draft age to 18 Ukraine will have no one left to fight in 3 years.
Fighting for Ukraine is a no win scenario for Trump, and it will be for the entirety of his time in office.
If he can, he should negotiate a graceful exit (meet Putin’s proposal). If he can’t thanks to the swamp, should just ignore the dumpster fire and hold his nose until it runs out of oxygen (without another 50 billion from the US this year it will self extinguish anyway).
Jau
January 17, 2025 at 12:21 pm
I’d chalk up blaming Biden for the war as to this guy simply being dumb & uneducated but he isn’t. So I’m left with being just another Trump stooge. Seems to be becoming more prevalent on this site. Keeping the war going as long as possible without Russia winning is what is most in America’s interest to break Russian power. Biden did just that, Trump seems ready to surrender the country, same as he did with Afghanistan
Jim
January 17, 2025 at 2:00 pm
“Biden assured Putin: no Nato for Ukraine, No Tactical Nukes — MSNBC”
Do you believe Biden… or is there evidence, the U. S. would eventually do both… then explain it away as “necessary” because of supposed Russian provocations?
I think we know the answer.
0N0
January 17, 2025 at 7:00 pm
Why should NATO give Russia what it wants?
It costs NATO so little to wreck Russia’s military, its economy, and its ability to project power globally.
Besides, Ukraine has the moral right to be authentically independent and democratic.
If they’re willing to fight for it, we should help them. We can afford it.
Now if Russia were to propose reasonable terms, then they’d be worth entertaining.
To date Russia demands subjugation.
They haven’t earned that.
They can’t earn it.
So why should we give it away?
Lance Benson
January 17, 2025 at 8:48 pm
Daniel Davis has been an unstinting prophet of disaster for Ukraine from the very beginning, with consistent predictions of inevitable and imminent victory for Russia.
Now he says that if Ukraine is defeated, it will have been Biden’s fault.
I would agree that Biden shares blame with a Europe which did not take seriously enough a threat which it claimed was “existential”, but I’ve never seen Davis suggest that there was a possibility that Ukraine could win.
BillLangfeldt
January 18, 2025 at 9:41 am
Wow, there are still fools out there who believe the propaganda of the 2022 – “Victory is just around the corner for Ukraine”, “Russia is finished” etc.
This statement though is cruel and foolish beyond belief:
The cost to American taxpayers of supporting Ukraine is extremely small relative to the tactical gains that comes from NATO expansion and Russian forces suffering huge material losses in a Ukrainian quagmire.
given that Ukraine has suffered AT LEAST half a million casualties, mostly young men in a population that was already facing demographic collapse.
Ukraine’s population is now estimated to be about 18 million. It was 52 million at independence in 1991.
usikpa
January 18, 2025 at 3:30 pm
Wait till Germany/Russia sue the US for the pipe blown up in Baltics waters
Steveo
January 19, 2025 at 7:13 am
You’re not gonna defeat a nuclear superpower TIG. They have everything from nerve gas to nukes if things get hairy. Russia is fighting with two hands behind back still but it seems sufficient. Whole war was folly and had a zero percent chance of success short of nukes due to Russian relative size/strengths compared to Ukraine. But what does US care for? It’s just Slavs dying like when we sicced Iraq on Iran which had similar disparities.
NeilRoss
January 20, 2025 at 9:08 am
Was not aware that you had returned to this site. Paraphrasing one of the other commenters; Daniel Davis you have been an unstinting prophet of “the truth”, and I thank you.