Public sentiment reflects a complex mix of skepticism, criticism, and some support regarding the US involvement in Ukraine. Distrust towards the motives of the US and Russia is evident, with debates around whether the involvement is driven by geopolitical interests or genuine support for Ukraine. Disillusionment with US interventionist policies and critiques of Russia's expansionism are common. A strong desire for diplomatic solutions contrasts with apprehensions about economic and military consequences. Trump and Musk emerge as polarizing figures in discussions, symbolizing broader political divides.

US Government

Russian Government

Ukrainian Government

Donald Trump

Elon Musk

Please use [Good Faith](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) and the [Principle of Charity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity) when commenting. We are currently under an indefinite moratorium on gender issues, and anti-semitism and calls for violence will not be tolerated, especially when [discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/17ygktl/antisemitism_askconservative_and_you/).


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

I think the U.S., particularly Trump and especially Elon Musk REALLY want those minerals. That’s why they all are outraged about Zelensky but still keep talking about the mineral deal. Not to be cynical, but I don’t buy that, “I don’t care what happens to Ukraine one way or another,” JD Vance all of a sudden is heartbroken about Ukrainians, that’s just not how this administration operates. They see that the war costs money and they want to make money instead. They see that Ukraine is weak and they can squeeze out quite a bit out of Ukraine right now. 

From an “America first” perspective it makes sense. The U.S. gets hundreds of billions of dollars in minerals without having to commit anything to Ukrainian security, Trump can be the “peacemaker,” the U.S. can normalize relations with Russia and cooperate economically. Maybe even squeeze out of Europe something as they’ll be terrified about Russia and the U.S. being in friendly relations and will probably be trying everything to please Trump. Taking geopolitical consequences out of the equation, it really is a win-win-win.

Hot_Instruction_5318

This is a proxy war between the US and Russia. The reality is Ukraine is a small fish in a very very big pond right now.

ImmortalPoseidon

How could we not be in the middle of these negotiations? Zelenskyy has already stated they cannot win this war without US funding. Biden is no longer president, and Trump wants to stop throwing money at the problem and find a way to end it. There is no scenario where the US isn’t a main player in any kind of negotiation.

likeabuddha

Thank you! Let's just walk away and let Ukraine, Russia, and Europe sort it out themselves.

Gaxxz

Why does ukraine and the EU keep asking america for security guarantee's?

G0TouchGrass420

I’m going to be blunt and say that you have not thought this question through. US and EU are paying to keep Ukraine afloat. Thus, US and/or EU are the ones having negotiations with Russia. Then it will be either Russia that declines the ceasefire deal or Ukraine that declines the ceasefire deal. Then US and EU will decide what to do next when that time comes.

closing-the-thread

The US should absolutely help host peace talks between warring states as a neutral third party. 

The issue here is that we are not neutral and are trying to find a benefit for us.

TheGoldStandard35

Trump wants to end the war. Simple as that. It is clear that neither Putin nor Zelinsky have any interest in stopping it.

StedeBonnet1

Yes the true non interventionist position is just leaving the conflict. Heck, the continent.

ILoveMcKenna777

Every peace negotiation ever has had a somewhat neutral arbiter to proside over the negotiations, for the us revolution it was France, for ww2 it was it Switzerland

Gsomethepatient

We're already invovled because we've been funding the war since before it started, and nobody would be happy if we just stopped funding it. Since we're already invovled, it just makes sense to try and end the killing.

soulwind42

[deleted]

Because the US is the global hegemon and the world superpower. America alone as the global empire decides what happens

EsotericMysticism2

Because we allow the war to continue with our aid…

219MSP

We should indeed stop getting involved in other countries' wars.  But we're already involved in this one.  That's why we're involved in the negotiation to end it.  With that said, if Ukraine doesn't want peace and they want to keep fighting this thing until they get all their land back or whatever then as far as I'm concerned we should cut them off and walk away.

B_P_G

\- the US is funding Ukraine's defense, more than any other country

\- the US has a vested interest in the security of Europe and it has been that way ever since WWII ended

\- the US has defense treaties with European nations, has bases in the region, and so it also has major assets invested

\- the US is the only superpower that can really balance Russia, historically and currently

\- for these reasons and more, the US is the most appropriate party to negotiate with Russia

DruidWonder

Because every single peace deal needs a third party broker to oversee it. The USA was the one that oversaw the Good Friday Agreement, for example. It makes sense for the USA to be a broker over literally any country in the world

maximusj9

The Russo-Ukrainian war has been so defined by Ukraine's alignment with NATO, Russian fear of a NATO member or NATO ally on its border, and NATO assistance for Ukraine that it's inevitable for the USA to be involved. 

hope-luminescence

SnooFloofs1778

Because the reality of the situation is we are involved, actions we took helped lead to the war, and we are the biggest supporter of Ukraine. 

&gt;Wouldn’t a true non-interventionist stance mean withdrawing aid from Ukraine and stepping back to let Ukraine and Russia negotiate directly, while the US tends to its own interests at home?

If the previous admin made horrible policy decisions that screwed the Ukrainians, I do think the current president has an obligation to at least TRY not to straight up dump them on their ass. 

If zelensky decides he'd rather fight it alone then so be it. But we should try not to just hang them out to dry since the last admin did set them up for failure

just_shy_of_perfect

don't you want the war to end? or would you rather see it go on rather than having had trump play a hand in ending it?

tnic73

Because Ukraine collapses without US support.   

It's pointless though, because Zelensky has no interest in peace.

JoeCensored

So Ukraine is okay with taking our money and our weapons but if we want to help end the war its fuck us? And we're the bad "ally" in this story?

Inksd4y

Someone has to be a mediator and who else other than the leader of the free world. It's almost our obligation to try to broker peace. Stepping away and focusing on America does not mean abdicating our responsibilities in the world.

GreatSoulLord

&gt;Why is the US involved in negotiations between Russia and Ukraine?

The Ukraine/Russia war is a major foreign policy f-up by the Biden and Obama admins. On top of that, in 2022 it became Biden's proxy war by pumping so much money into the conflict and even encouraging escalation at times. 

Does Trump want out? Yes, of course - that aligns squarely with America First. Trump attempting to negotiate peace is the right thing to do in order to clean up Biden's mess.  It's not about any affinity for Zelensky or Putin - clearly Trump distrusts both.  What has happened has been cruel and unfair especially to the citizens of Ukraine - and that is what you repeatedly hear Trump talking about.

Otherwise, people would be on here asking about why our President is so irresponsible to cut off funding without attempting to negotiate peace.

montross-zero

\&gt;So why is the Trump administration playing a key role in brokering peace between Russia and Ukraine?

Because we have played a key role in arming Ukraine and thereby allowing them to take a far more aggressive posture against Russia than they would otherwise be capable of doing.

\&gt; Wouldn’t a true non-interventionist stance mean withdrawing aid from Ukraine and stepping back to let Ukraine and Russia negotiate directly

Pretty certain that is exactly what he is doing.  Meanwhile it looks like he is going to attempt rapprochement with Russia to prevent more conflicts in the future.

metoo77432

Its because we spent the most on military aid by far and are the sole reason there is still a war, and at the same time are probably one of the few countries that can actually spook russia into behaving (at least for a time).

I personally think if we cannot get the mineral deal or a ceasefire we should just cold turkey from the whole situation and actually give the middle finger to the EU's whining about us "letting russia win" or whatever their spoiled opinion is

Mr-Zarbear

Welcome to r/TrueAskReddit. Remember that this subreddit is aimed at high quality discussion, so please elaborate on your answer as much as you can and avoid off-topic or jokey answers as per [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAskReddit/about/sidebar).

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueAskReddit) if you have any questions or concerns.*

I've been told for 3 years that WWIII was going to start any day now if America didn't give in to Putin. Why do you think it would start now that America is going to give in to Putin?

DiscordianStooge

Yes 


Oh wait I forgot what sub this is so I have to give a mindful comment.


I don't think the US is siding with Russia, I think it's just Trump being Trump this is his (stupid) negotiation style. Read his book it's a drag but very insightful to current events.

i_love_boobiez

It’s not pushing us towards WWIII because the stakes aren’t that high except for Europe’s feeling of safety, Ukraine and Russia. That’s it. The US has (or had until a month ago) an interest to prevent Russia from engulfing more countries by force and blaming it on NATO, but other than that the world is pretty much the same.

Jlchevz

Giving an expansionist empire absolutely everything they want definitely won't make WW3 *less* likely. The main question is whether Europe finally wakes up and starts rearming. Poland seems to be, so I don't think WW3 is too likely to break out in Europe. Assuming Russia keeps the Ukrainian territory they've conquered so far, Russia will more than likely lick their wounds and invade again in 3-5 years. If Europe rearms enough to keep Ukraine alive we end up in the same boat we've been in for 3 years. If not, Russia likely invades Poland, and that could very well start WW3

DAmieba

I think we are actually seeing a de-escalation. It isn’t pretty and Trump’s messaging is terrible. But, the situation is untenable. The West bears some responsibility for this war and for keeping it going. Russian experts have said for decades Ukraine in NATO was a redline for Russia. We pushed anyway. Not defending Putin. But, we are back to an age of pragmatism after an extended period of being a lone super power. 

The truth is, Ukraine cannot win. They are losing their best and brightest while Russia is losing conscripts. Don’t get me wrong, it’s terrible. But, there should’ve been real talks much sooner. There are no great outcomes. Again, aside from Trump’s terrible behavior and rhetoric. 

But, before we totally vilify Trump, keep in mind Russia took over Crimea under Obama without the US batting an eye. So, neither side of the US political sphere can claim greatness here.

Senior-Cantaloupe-69

\#1. Russia should claim victory. They should say they have accomplished what they wanted to accomplish.

\#2. They should then offer to take all the people from Ukraine who want to go.

\#3. Then they need to withdraw from the Ukrainian territories leaving the borders which was original negotiated.

\#4. Ukraine (spelled European Union) needs to pay the people leaving and going to Russia a fair price for their land.

\#5. Russia wants Ukraine as a buffer.  Based on what we have seen, this can not be part of the deal.

I don't think we can get to this point in negotiations quickly.  Russia is going to refuse to withdraw. Ukraine shouldn't be happy giving up territory to an invader. Russia will not be happy with Ukraine being armed. EU has proven that they can exist without Russian oil, so....

  
Russia knows they can not win against the USA and EU and Japan and .... in a conventional war.

ReactionAble7945

It is taking us farther away in my opinion. The most likely way WW3 would have happened is with Russia/China/Iran on one side. Irans cooked, China is going to get Taiwan, Russia is probably going to get the contested regions with Zelensky gone from Ukraine. 

A NATO enforced no fly zone over Ukraine would be the only way to get to WW3 in my opinion.

FearKeyserSoze

ww3 started when russia invaded georgia without repercussions. emboldened by later stealing crimea for a warm water port, russia then officially committed an act of war with bit farms, cambridge analytica, facebook, et al, per documents signed into law by barack obama. israel eliminating an entire country, nko sending troops into eastern europe, and china stealing the s china sea and poised to steal taiwan are other interesting features of this war that most are too dumb to pay attention to.

sharkbomb

As a European, the USA has become untrustworthy and barely an ally anymore.  

So I am open to every European country acquiring their own nukes. As long as Russia and China is this powerful and untrustworthy and the US being unreliable, we need our own deterrents.  

At this point, WWIII is not a question of if, but when.

RedditModsEatsAss

World war 3 was an information war, and it's drawing to a conclusion. There will be no nuclear war because nobody wants his country to be destroyed, which would be a certainty. Better to infect the Stupid half of the populace with lies. Those people don't know how to understand; they only know how to believe in things.

Trump has been spilling a stream of blatant lies and nobody even challenges him on it. It's an infection on the tree of life .

The position of democracy versus tyranny is the same as Ukraine versus Putin. Maybe the stupid people I grew up with in West Virginia are right: it's the Armageddon — the war of good and against evil to see who will take over humanity forever.

Or maybe we're  just a situation comedy for the gods. They sit on their god sofa and and go, "Ahh Haah! Look at the monkeys!"

As for myself, all I can do is experience now, as it occurs and occurs. Y'see:

**There is no "good."**

**There is no "evil."**

**There is only FLESH.**

All I can do is vote and hope the good guys win.

...And smoke  94% pure THC every 10 minutes all day, starting 15 seconds after I wake up. And fuck every guy that walks in this room.

I don't feel like I'm part of it; I feel like I'm watching a Greek tragedy.

Jess_me_nobody_else

The chaos resulting from Trumps presidency is what might be bringing us closer to ww3. The Russia/Ukrainian "peace talks" are a minor issue in comparison.

anonymous_matt

Ukraine isn’t the trigger for ww3. Russia can’t sustain a war in Ukraine, let alone a multi-front war. Taiwan will be the trigger for ww3. China has been preparing for a large war for a decade. They’re gonna do it, it’s just a matter of when, and who will join them. 

Best thing to do is continue the previous admin’s policy of weakening Russia so they can’t be an effective ally with China, and to make Ukraine a fortified long range missile stronghold that can stop China from using Russia to move a war machine West. Trump’s shortsighted bullshit is going to make China’s attack far more complicated, especially if he lets Russia get back on their feet.

DooficusIdjit

Trump's and Musk's plan is extortion, with a compliant military that will absolutely take Greenland, setting the USA as an adversary of some of Europe.

That extortion extends to Ukraine, threatening to switch off Starlink, with Ukraine forced to negotiate away its minerals (to Musk, who invested millions of dollars in Trump's campaign), and its territory already under Russian control.

Russia will continue to infiltrate Europe using his agents (Musk, Trump, Farage) to push politics to the far right in Germany, thus dividing the German/French domination of the EU. See also Reform in the UK, and National Front in France.

Poland and the Baltic states will be next, then Finland: invaded by Russia. War will depend on how successful Russia is in taking back its Soviet era territories, and how compliant the rest of Europe is. I believe the crucial countries are France, Germany, and UK. Europe can't take on Russia without each other.

USA won't be involved because it'll be playing the annexation game itself, as will China. Russia, USA, and China won't step on each others' toes.

Also expect a Mediterranean sideshow with Turkey attempting to take Greek territory.

ShowMeYourPapers

Trump is trying to create pressure on Ukraine to come to the negotiating table. By having unilateral talks without them it raises the fear that Ukraine will get shortchanged or cut out of the deal making process, which (if successful) may incentivize it to offer proposals beyond continuing to fight. 

No idea if it will work but it’s not hard to see that’s what’s going on.

Maximum_Error3083

You have to do some galaxy brain level mental gymnastic to imagine the conclusion of a proxy war between nuclear powers somehow makes world war more likely, rather than less.  

Come on

PigeonsArePopular

I know that our allies are not just going to sit there quietly while we hand Russia Ukraine on a platter. That may lead to the other NATO members taking up arms and if that happens the US will need to step up or admit we have let the president sell out our country to Putin. Hopefully it won't come to that but Trump is a moron and I doubt he understands the gravity of his actions.

Wonderlostdownrhole

First, some context.

When I walk into a certain building on base, there is a digital countdown (720 something days) for anticipated war in the Pacific. 

There was a point years ago as we began talks about preparing for war in the late 2020’s. It has shaped everything the military has focused on for a long time.

Back then it looked like a two front peer fight like WW2. My spidey sense went wild when the Ukraine war started, fearing that was the start. Since then we have watched the Russians lose their army, Black Sea navy, Mediterranean base, and economy. It’s looked great.

Then came Trump. He’s now capitulating to Russia (while they are on a war economy) and alienating our allies. If we back down and the EU goes it alone, that could embolden a direct clash. It will also leave us with less support for any war in the Pacific and could be a signal to China.

We were on a safer path no matter what the MAGA base believed. Now, it’s looking pretty sketchy for the next 4 years.

IMHO_grim

No, they are not.

We have been on the ladder of escalation and there is almost no getting off.

Everyone that supports Ukraine pretty much wants only victory.  No concessions.  No deal.  No losing.

This happens all the time throughout human history.  It's *obvious* childlike logic.

Let's use a real world example so some can gain some understanding.  

Peral harbor:  

While there were people that knew better, the prevailing opinion amongst the Japanese was that "*those fat, privileged, lazy Americans will go crying home and want nothing to do with war if we deal a devastating blow and give them a taste*"

The only way off the ladder of escalation is when someone is willing to accept terms they don't like.  

Just to be clear, I have no problem with supporting Ukraine.  It royally pisses me off that people do not want peace and think they are good people.  See THAT is exactly why we humans keep doing this.  We always prefer to think we are right before we give an inch of compromise. 

It doesn't matter which side has the moral high ground, or is in the right.  Both sides always think it's themselves.  

TLDR: you're an idiot if you think punching a Russian in the face is how you get peace and avoid world War 3.  Just admit you'd rather nuke the planet than look your enemy in the eye.

Ok-Condition-6932

The Big tRUMP admires Dictators, and he intends to be one from now on, so now the USA is no longer a democracy, but a Dictatorship under the rule of tRUMP, so get used to it.

Rajah7

Trump will torpedo these negotiations on purpose, claim this proves Ukraine is the problem, and then either arm Russia or send American troops to cops out Ukraine, handing the country to Russia. Russia will then size more territory with US support. 

The guy's every action for almost a decade has been exactly what Russia would want. He is clearly working for/with them and always has been. If this was a serious country, he would have been tried for treason already.

TheVelvetNo

No. If you listen to Mearsheimer (political scientist) and Sachs (economist), they make compelling arguments that Russia is not on an expansionist tear. Russia will not tolerate Ukraine entering NATO. That is what this is largely about. Trump could reach an agreement with putin that sees Ukraine lose crimea and the 4 eastern oblasks. 
Besides, Russia is winning. They have the upper hand in negotiations, and neither side would use nukes unless their political system was about to be eradicated. Neither the US nor Russia are in that situation.

ilcuzzo1

For there to be a 'World War 3' there would have to be 2 sides representing relatively equal portions of the world's military power.

Trump is being an idiot - he hates Zelinsky because Zelinsky wouldn't help him frame Joe Biden for bribery &amp; the botched framing attempt got him impeached the 1st time....

But the US is not going to ally with Russia. And Russia has the conventional military capabilities of 1990-vintage Iraq.

Which means that any prospect for a greater European war is 'Russia getting it's teeth kicked in by multiple western nations' (of which the US may or may not be a part - since Trump seems to be more concerned with Mexicans illegally looking for jobs than actual threats to the US)....

A 2nd Crimean War - not a 3rd World War.

Dave_A480

WW3, in the sense of nuclear Armageddon, would require a conflict between at least two of Russia, China, and the US. The three of them deciding peacefully how to carve up the world into three empires would involve a lot of war, but they would be a series of short brutal ordinary wars rather than one big world war.

satyvakta

I fear the US taking an isolationist turn and not upholding it's agreements will push the world into a new nuclear arms race. The non-proliferation treaties aren't worth anything now.

New_Kiwi_8174

Yeah, siding with Russia by trying to enter into mineral right deals with Ukraine that would put US in position to fight Russia if hostilities continue. What k8nd of moronsvare even buying the Trump_Russia nonsense at this point?

Human_Individual_928

highly unlikely that this is, in any way, is going to result in WWIII. The worst thing that happens, in my view, is for Trump to wash his hands of the situation and let Ukraine get rolled over. Additionally, both Trump and Putin are rational actors. They aren't going to destroy their countries for some farm land that doesn't really matter.

Remind yourself: the one thing that Trump has be very, very consistent on (and has duely kept his promise on) is that he doesn't like large-scale military involvements. He's fine with a drone strike here, he's fine with brush war in who-knows-where Africa... but he doesn't want a serious, large-scale conflict. His base would flip, especially a lot of the new converts. It's also going against where he is making big gains with moderates by cutting the budget and making a more lean government.

What is an even larger conflict going to do for either side?

Zealousideal_Fail780

A lot of people are saying about the US and Russia not aligning.. My comment is by definition WW3 would have to be global.   I don’t think the US or China would Side with Russia.  More than likely they would stay neutral.  It is pushing closer to a European conflict, but that is on Russia

Unable-Salt-446

It seems like we're heading that direction. I support it, we need a World War, people need to drop the fake civility shit and get militantly partisan. Neo-liberalism + fascism gotta gtfo.

The US withdrawing support for Ukraine against a violent invasion by Russia absolutely increases the chance of WW3. It emboldens Russian, increasing the chances that they will reinvade Ukraine, another country, or even worse Poland. It also makes the US look weak and emboldens China, increasing the chances they will invade Taiwan.

kittenTakeover

Giving Russia the a-ok for a land grab if they can force a country into an agreement under a "do this or you're dead" negotiation can only lead to more war.  Highly doubtful it's world war material, especially since it is incredibly likely that Republicans won't have any power in 4 years and Russia is in no condition to pursue a real war against a real opponent.  Heck, Poland could pretty easily keep Russia in check by themselves at this point.

MoLarrEternianDentis

The US is not siding with anyone, Trump is addressing the reality of the situation.  Ukraine was lost after last years spring offensive failed.  The failed Kursk adventure destroyed 4 of Ukraine's best battalions.  If there was any chance of Ukraine winning, it would have been in the first 6 months with massive NATO support creating a no-fly zone.

Russia could pummel Ukraine into submission if that was their goal.  The only reason Kiev does not look like Baghdad is because Russia has no intentions of tasking over the Ukraine.  Russia wants a secure border, buffer zone from NATO and for Ukraine to stop killing ethnic Russians in the Donbas.  Russia wants Ukraine to abide by the Minsk agreement.

Europe may want war and they can have a go at it but it will be without the US.

Frosty-Buyer298

Well, it was supposed to start from 2016-2020, yet didn't. In fact, things calms down quite a bit.  It's only been the last few years they ramped back up again.  I'm going to go with things calming down based on previous experience.

ninernetneepneep

0

"The US is siding with Russia"

"This is creating tension between the US and Europe"

The US is siding with ending a war, Europe is siding with keeping it going for all eternity because Ukrainian men being sent into the trenches weakens Russia's military and infrastructure and this benefits the EU and NATO. Ukraine does not benefit from this arrangement. 

There is a 0% chance Russia's crippled military attacks NATO members, at this point Poland alone would probably beat the Russian military, and NATO countries possess nuclear weapons. 

Anyone trying to argue this is not the case is warmonger plain and simple

RemoteCompetitive688

WWIII happens if people fight back. Aggressors can take over other nations, and there is nothing for the rest of the world to worry about as long as they don't fight back. 

So, going easy on Russia only brings us closer to WWIII in that it increases the possibility of a future where other countries feel they have to start fighting back. 

But the alternative is to fight now. Who wants their country to put boots on the ground right now? That's the problem.

Coolenough-to

Nato prevented great power wars for the last 70 years. 


Trump backing away from nato and encouraging Russian expansionism is already making the world more dangerous.


Look at the recent German elections or any recent spending bills in the EU. 


The European continent is gearing up for a full scale war.


Putin can sign whatever he wants with Trump, unless Trump is going to send troops to keep Russian territorial gains, Finland and Poland are very willing to invade the dying nation of Russia in order to never have to deal with this problem again.


Biden was doing a lot to keep the Europeans from escalating, they are now freaking right the hell out. 


If the EU starts making pre-emptive wars without nato, we are going straight back to the 1940s but with nukes.

Fleetlog

Definitely not. 

Ukraine refusing to negotiate will just end in them being conquered and destroyed. 

Ukraine is the weaker party in the negotiations and needs to understand their position. Russia is he bad guy in this but they have a much stronger position. Ukraine stands zero chance without help from Europe and the USA and NATO will not get involved because they don't want WW3

goforkyourself86

realistically Russia cant afford WW3 - literally cant afford to pay. Dont forget this was supposed to be a 3 day operation to install a Kremlin puppet govt. 

so for Putin ending this war was about pride and managing the economic fallout. Trump has rather shockingly given him the easiest and safest exit possible at this point which he will sell to the US as bringing peace, but Putin will be ready for his next land grab all the sooner. 

One of many issues trump is creating that wont actually become a problem until he is out of office.

graeuk

Nobody wants ww3.
If Europe, Ukraine, Russia, and the U.S. 
are truly committed to stopping the killing and ending the war, and then it will end. 
War will only come if someone involved in the process allows their hate and greed and get in the way of peace. 
Plus, the Russia haters must understand that Russia won't and can't walk away empty-handed.

Practical-guy5546

Ukraine is doing a much better job defending itself now. It's the biggest military drone manufacturer in the world and has seriously damaged Russias oil capacity. US aid is not what's keeping Ukraine going. I think that's why Trump is siding with Russia. Putin needs help.

Gloomy_Yoghurt_2836

ww3 is all ready happening and has been for decades.

too many people expect it to look like ww1 and ww2, but we live in an era of radically different technology.

rainywanderingclouds

Very little.

Also I don’t see US siding with Russia. Aside from talk Trump has not given Purim anything of substance. And I doubt he will. I think he is giving Putin a way out that saves his face and lets him “claim victory” while not actually giving him anything. And Putin will take it because it is more than anyone else is offering him. 

So my opinion is that the resulting peace deal will be much letter for Ukraine than many people feel now. We will hopefully see very soon.

Soft_Brush_1082

The odds are improving as the only two countries talking are Russia and the US who are in total agreement on Ukraine capitulation to every term and demand Putin has presented. Europe adamantly disagrees, continues to support Ukraine and has been brazenly excluded from any peace talks. The volatility is further enhanced by Trump overtly and covertly signaling to Putin that the US is prepared to betray and abandon Europe/NATO just as it has Ukraine. Europe is quickly realizing that Americans are patently untrustworthy, they need to unite politically and build up militarily, including nukes, against aggression by Russia and its pocket puppet ally the US under the quisling neophyte Trump. The EU would also be prudent to cultivate closer economic and military relationships with China, which views both Russia and the US as adversaries, if not true enemies. So yes, the odds of global instability and conflict are vastly improved.

HalstonBeckett

Bullying, playing mind games and changing course on policy so radically and often undermine trust and international law. That doesn't make the world more peaceful.

projexion_reflexion

Read the resolution put forth by the US. It makes a compelling point. The UN body was created specifically to foster peace and settle disputes. The resolution calls for the UN to embody its mission and work on settling the disputes peacefully. The war has gone on for years and millions dead. The US is the only one in the west talking about peace. And we all know Russia won’t accept a public loss, combine that with the endless money being given to Ukraine, it’s a recipe for a very long conflict.

Alive-Entertainer658

I heard for 4 years between 2016-2020 that Trump was going to start WWIII and was a Russian pawn. I noticed there were no new wars during that time. I’m sick of the panic porn. It’s soooo 2017.

Dachshunds_N_Dragons

Americans need to stop believing it’s our place to police the world. Too many people will watch one news program and then consent to the killing of people thousands of miles away

I’ll put it this way. 

The land that’s currently being fought over, the Gaza and Ukraine, are the SAME, EXACT SAME land fought over that started ww1 which started 2.

AomineDaiki8080

U.S. and Europe are absolutely not in any conceivable scenario going to war, particularly over Ukraine 

Appeasing Putin (like it or not) can help end the killing 

Ukraine never had a chance in hell of winning this war

We now have the possibility of 2 wars being over within a few months, wars that have been going for years .... But you're not satisfied because it doesn't end with your preferred political rhetoric 

You're disgusting 


As for this OP scenario, you're about 10 miles deep in hyperbole, relax

joesbalt

Ukraine can't win. We could dump all the guns and bullets in the world in their laps, and at best, there would be a perpetual stalemate like we have in Korea. Ukraine is out of people to fight. The only way they are getting any of that territory back is if NATO physically comes in and pushes Russia out. Are you personally willing to suit up and go fight the Russians? Maybe we can draft your kids instead? I don't see Germany or Norway or the Danes getting ready for war. Ukraine needs bodies to throw at this war. They are out of bodies.

Muted_Nature6716

The odds are pretty low since the only country that will invest enough to maintain the Ukraine war effort financially is the US and our president is in the pocket of Russia now.

Carlpanzram1916

It’s over. Thank goodness. That one point of light in these cold times. The poor Ukrainians were getting decimated by the Russians.  Watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4bcAVwxUEo

If you don’t know who Jeffery Sachs is read this: 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Sachs

He is not a conservative at all. He is completely devoted to UN Sustainable development goals. And he is one of the few truth talkers in foreign policy.  He was also in control of finding out were Covid came from. Check it out here:  

https://youtu.be/AprmM4pYI6E?si=GHkRN5BnlhsOt6Gr

This is definitely someone people in DC want to silence. That’s why you hear all the bull about out Ukraine wining from propaganda outs let’s like the NYT and Washington Post. They made a lot of money on that war and the poor Ukrainians suffered greatly. 

Open you ears and shut your mouthes. There is so much you don’t know about. You need to find out the truth if only for the sake of the Ukrainian male population. Who do you think is actually fighting that war now?

wrongo_bongos

No idea if ww3 will happen but definitely curious why people see the US actions as an altruistic peace move - I mean I hope it’s right! Just can’t see it. 

I haven’t seen anything that indicates it’s about stopping war for the sake of the people and peace or that the UN want to keep it going to weaken Russian defences - will go look for things that show this 

I could be wrong but the actions seem to be more opportunistic, greed and power driven. 

Not agreeing to help end the war unless a country decimated by 3 years of an unbalanced war agrees to sign over 50% of their countries most valuable resource. 

Saying that it’s owed because they need to pay back the aid given. 

Blaming their president for starting the war because he wouldn’t give into a dictators unreasonable demands to take over their country, and a fascist because he didn’t hold an election while his country was being bombed, even though he stayed the whole time, boots to the ground, with his people, something I can’t imagine Trump or Putin ever doing or many other presidents doing. 

I can’t see ‘peace’ in there - I see vultures picking up scraps wherever they can   

From the outside - I can’t help wonder if other countries will tire of being stomped on and pushed around, or witnessing it happen to other countries while the ‘powerful’ claim altruism and are hailed heroes

Cool_Independence538

Possible, but it would be a very different event than the first two.

The Axis would be Russia (Ukraine -&gt; Eastern Europe), China (Taiwan -&gt; S. ASIA, and the USA (Greenland apparently -&gt; N. America). Then they can plunder Africa and S. America (just like in the good old’ days). 

If the rest of the world get with India and Middle East they could provide painful resistance, but unlike the three ‘Axis’ in my example they are made up of hundreds of countries which could hinder cooperation in the resistance.

I forgot Australia. This would make an exciting book series, but I hope it stays fiction.

If these three decide to not interfere in each other’s shenanigans in their agreed upon geographies, or worse team-up then it’ll be.

KalelRChase

They will continue to do proxy wars as they have for the past 70 years.

Aroundthespiral

Almost nil. It has zero benefit for either side. If Russia and the US get into a real war it’s a real WWIII scenario. It could possibly pull China in.

Had Russia crushed Ukraine in a couple days back in 2022 a real war would look more likely. Jitters would have been felt throughout NATO. Ukraine putting up a fight has ironically probably made huge escalation less likely. Russia has absorbed vast casualties. 

The US have already won in the sense NATO is strengthened. Sweden and Finland have far more value to NATO than Ukraine does. It’s why they are so hellbent on not crossing any more Russian redlines.

That been said, you can’t predict history.

yellowbai

The US doesn't have any interest to go to direct war with russia and russia does not want war with the US either so it's very unlikely. Russia also doesn't have any chance in conventional warfare against the US so it wouldn't make any sense for them to attack.

CmdrAirdroid

I don’t think it’s likely, but assuming that it’s close to 0% is a dangerous habit. When tensions run high, that’s when accidents happen. Looking back, it’s truly frightening how close we came to total annihilation during the Cold War.

auximines_minotaur

Emergency_Evening_63

They don’t need to, their man in Kremlin killed 600000 Russians without a single NATO loss

No-Entrepreneur-7406

WW3 started in 2014. That's what the rodent historians will write after the darkening of the skies.

Unexpectedpicard

The current situation is perfect for the US. Harsh sanctions. Testing weapons platforms without risking Americans. Embarrassing Russia. They'll continue as is for as long as they can.

aaaanoon

ltmikepowell

**From a very layman point of view if anyone has better information feel to chime in:**

Russia has laid several 'red lines' in the proverbial sand that if crossed they would use nukes, like the west loaning certain ammunition/missiles/weapons/tanks etc to Ukraine, or Ukraine going past a certain point, or striking so far this way or that way, and a lot of these have been crossed, and Russia just moves the line.

The U.S. has unequivocally stated that if Russia uses a nuke of any kind in Ukraine they will respond with full conventional arms. With direct application of a contingent of our navy and our air force the U.S. alongside the Ukrainian forces would defeat Russia's army in Ukraine inside of 30 days.

Outside of elite strike forces from the Navy Seals and the Marines, it is unlikely a large amount of U.S. ground forces will be needed to defeat Russia's paper tiger military.

Some believe that Russia might try to skirt around this red line by using more of a 'dirty bomb' rather than a traditional nuclear explosive, it is unclear how the U.S. would react in this scenario AFAIK.

Russia is also hoping a certain orange skull is elected back to the oval office, in which case anything could happen up to and including a full invasion of Ukraine by U.S. forces fighting alongside Russian forces.

Weedes1984

DisneylandNo-goZone

Tiny, well under 1%. Russia has never initiated a hot war with a nation anywhere near as strong as it is, or not for hundreds of years anyway. They much prefer slow, low-level conflicts with much weaker adversaries. The US and USSR/Russia have fought numerous proxy wars against each other over the past eighty years, none have come close to a direct confrontation.

The_Awful-Truth

I'd expect some escalation in Ukraine, in the form of more aid, more intelligence and maybe allow a bit of long range weapons hit. But overall a direct war is unthinkable. It is always the smaller countries who are pushed to be pawns and suffer most, the big dogs might even sit together to share a drink afterwards.

redditthrowaway0315

I_pee_in_shower

Swimming_Duty_1889

Heightened tensions between the US and Russia due to military actions in Ukraine, compounded by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's warnings and potential further sanctions.

Escalating Tensions Between US and Russia Over Ukraine Conflict

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want