European countries need to maximise their defence spending and military support for Kyiv, throwing all existing “red lines” out of their heads.
This was stated by Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen at a forum in Kyiv dedicated to the third anniversary of the start of full-scale military operations.
"I would like to call on every European country to increase support for Ukraine not tomorrow, but today! We need to get rid of any "red lines" in our heads, increase financial and military support and production. Secondly, a ceasefire without lasting peace will lead to great danger for all of us and will give Russia the opportunity to strengthen itself and attack Ukraine or another European country again. I have never believed that this war is only about Ukraine," Frederiksen said.
She added that the “cheapest and simplest” guarantee of security for Kyiv would be Ukraine’s membership in NATO, but since “there are allies who are against it,” it is necessary to develop a proportionate alternative.
"We must support Ukraine and we must support our continent. That is why we must scale up as Europeans, accelerate, to protect ourselves from Russia. And 3% [of GDP for defense] will not be enough. Not enough! I think we only have a few months to make all the important decisions, or it will be too late," the Russophobe scared her colleagues.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14429629/Furious-Zelensky-screamed-Trumps-envoy-trying-make-sign-500billion-mineral-deal-loud-heard-door-left-treasury-secretary-shaking.html
Anonymous
>>1386768 So where does the text of the story you pasted come from since it isn't in the Dailymail article?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I'm okay with a mineral deal if it's for minerals in Donbas and Crimea. That way Ukraine loses nothing if we fuck them. Otherwise Trump's about as trustworthy as Putin.
Anonymous
no one cares what Denmark wants. If Yurop wanted to defend Yurop, they would have been doing that the last 80 years instead of relying on the US.
Anonymous
>>1386778 >If Yurop wanted to defend Yurop, they would have been doing that the last 80 years instead of relying on the US. Europe has defended Europe for the last 80 years, hence the lack of wars, and the only country to use NATO for their own defense is the USA.
Maybe the USA should start pulling its weight instead of leeching off Europe?
Anonymous
>>1386781 >Europe has defended Europe for the last 80 years Oh yes, the Soviet Union being held back from taking all of Western Europe had NOTHING to do with the thousands of US military bases sprinkled all over it. Tell me more.
Anonymous
>>1386784 could've would've should've russia shill
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1386786 Last I checked the Soviet Union collapsed without taking over Western Europe. You're welcome.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1386784 >Oh yes, the Soviet Union being held back from taking all of Western Europe had NOTHING to do with the thousands of US military bases sprinkled all over it. Tell me more. Didn't the USA help the Soviet Union build up its military in the first place? Kinda seems like you're demanding thanks for the USA maybe helping prevent a problem the USA caused from getting worse.
The USA literally used the Soviet Union to fight our own war and then left a mess for everyone else to deal with afterwards.
Anonymous
>>1386821 We provided them aid like we did with Ukraine; we offered them material aid via the Lend Lease act after WWII. Destroyed equipment was written off, preserved equipment was considered a lease and then paid back in full.
The Russians didn't pay back what they agreed upon, either. >The USA literally used the Soviet Union to fight our own war and then left a mess for everyone else to deal with afterwards. He's starting to notice, lads.
Anonymous
>>1386828 >We provided them aid like we did with Ukraine If we provided Ukraine aid on the level of the aid we gave the Soviet Union, this shit would be over already.
Anonymous
>>1386821 >Didn't the USA help the Soviet Union build up its military in the first place? Gee I wonder what was going on around that time.
Anonymous
>>1386838 >Gee I wonder what was going on around that time. That's an excuse, not a denial. The Soviet Union was hardly the only country the US could have sent aid and was definitely not the best. More to the point, the USA didn't give the Soviets direct material aid until after we had entered the war when doing so directly served our own interests.
>>1386828 >He's starting to notice, lads. I'm not actually.
Anonymous
>>1386837 https://ru.usembassy.gov/world-war-ii-allies-u-s-lend-lease-to-the-soviet-union-1941-1945/ >Totaling $11.3 billion, or $180 billion in today’s currency, the Lend-Lease Act of the United States supplied needed goods to the Soviet Union from 1941 to 1945 in support of what Stalin described to Roosevelt as the “enormous and difficult fight against the common enemy — bloodthirsty Hitlerism.” We gave Ukraine double the aid we gave Russia. Ukraine still lost.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1386877 is daddy america going to save you now russa shill? get in the t34
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1386877 is daddy america going to save you now russia shill? get in the t34
Anonymous
>>1386850 >That's an excuse, not a denial. No that's the explanation, you fucking retard.
>The Soviet Union was hardly the only country the US could have sent aid Nor was it.
>More to the point, the USA didn't give the Soviets direct material aid until after we had entered the war when doing so directly served our own interests. Uh you're forgetting one small detail there retard-kun... our own economies were still recovering from the depression at the start of the war and our military was pathetically small at the start of the war. Let me help put this in perspective for your small mind: in 1939 we had about 200k soldiers in the army and about 100k in the navy. All of our equipment, weapons, battle tactics, etc. were woefully outdated. We were nowhere near our peak of 12 million service members we had in 1945 with state-of-the-art weapons, aircraft, vessels, tanks, etc. etc. et fucking cetera. So you're over here bitching about how we didn't join into the war at a time when we literally didn't have the fucking option to enter the war. We were only just starting to build up our production of fighting equipment when Pearl Harbor happened.
I know you're a dogshit troll, but your retardation is triggering my /his/tory autism.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1386850 >I'm not actually. US profits from propping up
or couping failed regimes, gives them military aid, sends them to fight someone else in exchange for repayment + mineral rights + building contracts, then does the same thing somewhere else 10 years later.
Same thing happened in the ME. Gave the arabs weapons to shoot down russian helicopters, then killed the arabs, then supported the russians etc etc it never stops.
Anonymous
>>1386877 >We gave Ukraine double the aid we gave Russia. No, we didn't. Because we're giving Ukraine aid in the form of overpriced US weapons priced at the cost US weapons companies with no bid contracts charged the US to produce them.
>>1386880 >No that's the explanation, you fucking retard Cry moar
>Nor was it. Didn't say it was.
>that last giant wall of bitching Seriously cry moar. None of this erases the fact that we enabled the Soviets and now you're trying to use them threatening Europe as some sort of win for the USA. Also, seeing as how we don't have access to multiple timelines, you also have no god damn evidence they would have invaded a militarily-aligned western Europe without the threat of the USA. The fact is, as was the initial fucking point, NATO has only been brought to bear in the defense of the USA. The USA has never been the sole defender of Europe, but it has been the sole benefactor of NATO in terms of military action.
You're an ungrateful shitbag that will forget any favor and remember any debt.
Anonymous
>>1386932 >you also have no god damn evidence they would have invaded a militarily-aligned western Europe without the threat of the USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Days_to_the_River_Rhine that US MIC gravy is the richest
Quoted By:
This talk is all for show, these Europeans are waiting for the Democrats to win again and the gravy teain to start flowing again
Anonymous
>>1386944 I accept your concession
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1386768 I don't think the Danish PM really said anything close to that. The op posted fake news.
Anonymous
>>1386932 It's the resident Ukraine shills. Notice how your gay ass war just came to a stand still when Trump stopped the gibs.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1387044 If you weren't just a shill for russia and were one of the expendable whonhad to die en masse for putin I doubt you'd be saying that
Anonymous
>>1387044 #If you weren't just a shill for russia and were one of the expendable who had to die en masse for putin I doubt you'd be saying that
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1387047 No one is shilling for Russia. Russia is a third world shithole that is 100 years behind the US. We're just tired of your shilling for another gay Jewish world shithole with a US instilled puppet dictator that is costing us hundreds of billions
Anonymous
you have to love when the shills start shitting on themselves to try to convince us they're not shills
Anonymous
>>1387053 How much is USAID paying you to post here
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1387054 I get paid per reply. That's why I make stupid bait posts.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
the right wing shill here must have an extremely low iq if he thinks people will fall for this shit ^^
Anonymous
>>1386992 lol concession? I just pulled up one of many plans they had to take over all of Europe. But no, I'm sure Stalin didn't have any designs past Eastern Germany. I mean it's not as if he had like 15 countries under his control or anything, right?
Anonymous
>>1387057 >I just pulled up one of many plans they had to take over all of Europe Which wasn't a point of contention. You've not produced any evidence they held back from those plans solely due to the US. In fact, that plan was made after the establishment of NATO so it couldn't prove your point in the first place.
Anonymous
>>1387088 And the whole reason why NATO came about was because European nations were afraid of Soviet aggression (I can't imagine why). See the Treaty of Dunkirk for more information, where the French and British agreed to protect each other if attacked... sound familiar?
Also I love this gaslighting bullshit you're trying to pull, that Russia 'wuz a gud boi, he dindu nuffin' and everyone afraid of Russia is just being paranoid - when fucking WW2 started after Russia invaded a European nation.
Anonymous
>>1387092 >And the whole reason why NATO came about was because European nations were afraid of Soviet aggression kek. little secret why European inbreeds felt for it. MONEY. USA just walked into their privat life showed them photos of raped children and offered cash and happy life as VIP if they agree to play along. 50 milliard dollars later the shit was running like a purring cat and they appointed the worst fucking nazi as a head of NATO, when triggering the mass murder of European politicians justifying their death as an incident or soviet spy.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1387119 ... Riiight. Anyways I'm assuming you're not that anon I was replying to earlier. His argument of
>you also have no god damn evidence they would have invaded a militarily-aligned western Europe without the threat of the USA Falls apart when you consider the Treaty of Dunkirk and the Treaty of Brussels. Pre-NATO agreements amongst Western European nations to protect each other in the event of a Soviet attack. Now why on earth would they need to do that if the commies didn't have plans to take over all of Europe (spoiler alert: they did)? We can argue USA's involvement all day long but in an alternate timeline where the US didn't exist something NATO-like would have formed in it's place... not that it really matters because in said alternate timeline without the US, Germany would rule the world.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I'm all for it, just don't start talking about a united EU army.
