Summary
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau opposed any deal letting Russia keep Ukrainian land, saying it would encourage other countries to break international rules.
Speaking to a NATO meeting, he highlighted Canada’s $19.5 billion aid to Ukraine and stressed the need to defend global stability.
Trudeau defended his plan to raise military spending to 2% of GDP by 2032 after criticism of Canada’s low defense funding.
He warned against isolating Ukraine, saying continued support is crucial to stop further global conflicts.
2/3rds of Ukrainians want the same. They just need the help to resist the Russian invasion.
Poll data was part of Perun’s latest video on the latest developments of the war and what the turning point will be:
https://youtu.be/vf2vSoWsmgI (0:50:38)
Why only 2/3?
War weariness is a thing.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a non-insignificant number of that 1/3 that doesn’t oppose Russia keeping some territory are just tired of the war and want it to be over.
3 years is a long time to live in a war torn country with frequent power outages and food shortages. People tend to disassociate when it doesn’t affect them directly and if they happen to live on the Western side of Ukraine, losing territory on the Eastern border will have less of an effect on them than continued food and power shortages.
20 billion
Man, I’m jealous.
His country has universal health care and isn’t wasting trillions a year policing the world like we are.
Trump will fix that, right?
/s
Zelensky has already said the war will end quicker under Trump, which means he’s probably already had a chat with the new regime and is resigned to surrendering most of the land Russia have already taken.
And none of it will stop Russia regrouping and trying again in a few years.
I do not know if the war will end quicker under Trump.
But saying it will not end quicker under Trump (now that he’s elected) will send you back to politics 101.
IMO.
If Russia is permitted to annex any part of Ukraine it sends the message that they can attack any country and eventually take over parts of it.
If the world doesn’t stop Russia from taking Ukraine, Russia isn’t going to stop once they’ve taken Ukraine.
Exactly! I don’t know why appeasement is even discussed with any seriousness. We’ve all seen this before.
Previously on: “World History”
England: “Fine, fine, you can have, like,
Polanda slice of Czechoslovakia, but then chill out!”Narrator: “He did not ‘chill out’.”
(Edited for accuracy. Thanks!)
The United Kingdom, along with France, ceded Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland, not Poland, to Hitler’s Germany; in fact, it was the Nazi regime’s invasion of Poland the following year that prompted France and the United Kingdom to declare war.
Raise the military spend now. Stop kicking the can. We’ve helped, sure, but we need to do more.
Agree 100% we can’t rely on our rich bi-polar brother in the methlab of a house next door to protect us anymore.
You need protection from greedy politicians and the military industry sucking in public money and fueling wars.
Finland has a pretty absurdly strong military. It really is a waste of money. But it has this military because it shares a border with Russia. If Finland did not have such a military, it would be invaded. That is what empires do. Finland’s military does not start war; it prevents it.
Ideally, neither side would have to waste money on this military, but until Russia gives up theirs, Finland can’t give up theirs either. Good luck convincing Russia to do that.
Not long ago, I would have been in total agreement with you. The very idea of stealing land through invasion was so antiquated to me that I did not believe even Russia would do it until the moment their troops crossed the Ukrainian border. Now, I reluctantly am forced to conclude that not only is Russia that backward, it probably always was, and the only reason Finland has been safe all these years is because of the military that I thought was so absurd.
If Finland did not have such a military, it would be invaded.
That’s a speculation you are making, russia spend 20 times as much as finland does in war they wouldn’t have much problems invading finland if it was all about military strength.
That is what empires do
That’s true USA does the same.
Ideally, neither side would have to waste money on this military, but until Russia gives up theirs, Finland can’t give up theirs either.
While finland spend less than russia NATO combined spend 20 times as much as russia does in war. Do you see where your logic leads? To match USA alone russia would have to tenfold their military budget.
Sure Russia could beat Finland in an invasion, eventually, but due to Finland’s army, it would be far more trouble than it’s worth. And let’s leave the USA out of this.
Buuuut for as long as we’re not leaving the USA out of this, it is worth pointing out that Mexico and Canada do not live in constant fear of being invaded. Finland does, and this fear of invasion is very rational.
These figures require sources.
Raise the military spend now.
Fuck no, cut the military spending and stop fueling wars.
Canada already spend billions of dollars in war, increasing military budget will only get you more war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_highest_military_expenditures
Canada’s expenditure as a % of gdp according to your own source is pretty weak already. Insisting on having no military spending is hardly a real argument. Also, Canada has a very real stake in ensuring russia doesn’t succeed given those coveted waters you guys have along the northern territories.
Canada’s expenditure as a % of gdp according to your own source is pretty weak already.
Billions of dollars every year. You are feed up on propaganda, if mass media were to tell you that a billion is a big number you would be here complaining but propaganda have you thinking that you are not spending enough.
Insisting on having no military spending is hardly a real argument.
I wonder if you have any clue how these money are being spend.
Only works if your adversaries also cut military spending. Unfortunately countries like Russia have shown that they’ll happily attack those unable to defend themselves. This also means that increased military spending can cause less war if it deters those who would otherwise attack.
Only works if your adversaries also cut military spending.
Usa and nato spend 10 times more than what russia does. Open the link and do the math yourself. They have no good excuse to raise the military budget even according to your logic.
Unfortunately countries like Russia have shown that they’ll happily attack those unable to defend themselves.
Go check the history of your country, every authoritarian nation will try to do that. Raising military spending does not make people more secure, it only increase rulers and government power. Wars are fought by people not money.
This also means that increased military spending can cause less war if it deters those who would otherwise attack.
Spending more on war will get you more war. You can see it happening right now in ukraine and middle east.
There is only a war in Ukraine because Pootin illegally invaded it.
War could stop tomorrow if he pulled forces back to Russias border.
Ukraine attacking russia in their territory with US and NATO weapons isn’t going to make russia stop, it will give russia even more claims to keep up with the war. That’s how weapons give you more war.
But it ok for Russia to attack any part of Ukraine?
Typical bully behaviour- attacking someone weaker than themselves and then complaining when the victim fights back.
They are not just complaining about it they are using it as leverage to their propaganda and to send more people into war.
Bullies a lot of times don’t attack you directly, they threaten you and piss you off until you end up attacking them. The reality of this war and pretty much all others is that there’s a bunch of rulers who benefit from war and seek more of it not less. During the past century USA and Russia have been provoking and fighting each others directly and in proxy wars. Cutting military budget to 0 is how you stop wars.
