comment: >
  
  You think they should have defeated Russia already with the given aid?
context: Russians are killing Ukrainians, don’t get it twisted >
  
  Zelensky isn't blaming the west for Russia's actions.
  The point is that a lot of right wingers who support Putin are playing concerned centrists who claim that supporting Ukraine instead of letting Russia get a win, only serves to kill more people on both sides. 
  Zelenaky is turning that around and emphasizing that not sending support is what's causing deaths >
  
  Anyone who says the west isn't sending support is a lying jackass. Even if it's Zelensky. Ukraine has gotten more money and equipment already than they could have provided for themselves in half a century. >
  
  This is true, but it is also true that the aid is not enough.  Western governments are making decisions about what aid to send based on politics, not tactics. >
  
  Thing is, other countries aren't really obligated to send Ukraine aid. This is all politics. Yes, in real life it sucks that people are dying. In the giant poker game that is international politics, they are just more chips in the pot. Nations don't have morals, they have interests >
  
  Destroying Putin’s Russia is in our interest. >
  
  You don't have to go that far. Denying Putin Ukraine is in our interest and the right thing for people who support individual rights and freedoms. >
  
  Before the war yes, after all the rape, torture and other war crimes the goal should absolutely be the destruction of Putin's Russia. >
  
  Revenge is not a good motivation to continue a war. >
  
  War is bad, peace is good >
  
  We all know who’s killing Ukrainians.. >
  
  Russians would have killed fewer Ukrainians if the West finally got their shit together. >
  
  Probably yeah, but headlines like this can definitely rub people the wrong way.. >
  
  Very disappointed here, most commenters are basically saying "We already helped. Be grateful and stop asking for more already!"
  Of course the immense help from the allies is appreciated. Which is spoken every time, in every press conference by every Ukrainian official.
  The misunderstanding comes from two different worlds Ukrainians and the rest of the world are living in at the moment.
  For the rest of the world, the “situation” is “deeply concerning.” Otherwise, the life is pretty regular.
  In Ukraine, there's a war for survival. There are no half measures there – it's either survival or literal obliteration.
  The need for weapons is not Zelenskyy's whim. If the commander-in-chief needs more weapons to fight back, he tells allies: "I need more weapons to fight back."
  Or would you rather he needed weapons but kept silent about it out of (truly!) enormous respect and gratitude. And then die along with millions of Ukrainians in gratitude for the help they already received? >
  
  They don't realise the domino effect Russian victory will have in the future geopolitics >
  
  Almost none? Maybe some flags get changed but Russia has a limit to how much land they can steal. >
  
  If we fail to back Ukraine to the hilt now, given that we’ve already thrown in on their side and they are clearly willing to fight, and let waning support allow them to be overwhelmed, it signals that the west is not as committed to our allies as we claim to be.
  That emboldens adversaries. China can take Taiwan. The whole South China Sea and region would be vulnerable. Russia could look to Georgia. It would probably introduce some uncertainty over the commitment to the easternmost NATO members. >
  
  AFAIK Ukraine was never an ally to the west and always stayed on the fence taking benefits from both sides until Russia started kicking them around. Taiwan is an ally though, so you can't really compare them equally. >
  
  They were put in NATO’s Membership Action Plan in 2008. I have no idea why a Google search could have found this out, but you still needed to act like Ukraine has no relation with the West before 2022 when the Budapest memorandum was negotiated by the US and France with Russia for Ukraine in 1991. >
  
  Budapest was US, UK and Russia. France signed a similar but weaker pledge.
  But the key thing is (I did some research before posting my former comment to not misconstrue things) it does not commit the signatories to the defence of Ukraine. It promises to to attack, but does not pledge to defend, only offered ‘security assurances’ which are sufficiently vague so as to allow signatories to choose how to respond to a specific situation.
  This is pretty similar to Taiwan’s relations with the US which is why I think this war really is also a barometer for China to decide if they could get away with it. >
  
  Bad headline that only divide’s supporters. >
  
  Well, the headline is true >
  
  What indecision? All the tanks and stinger missiles are indecisive? Does he want..... The west to * gasp * fight their war for them? O mean Russia actually has weapons of mass destruction, but I think that reasoning is a bit passé. >
  
  What's with the shitty rhetoric in here? Mans country is under attack, of course he's going to  play to the crowd, his country expects him to.
  If Ukraine weren't under fucking Russian attack I could get being shitty about this. I think I can look past that given that, ya know, Ukraine is being invaded by fucking Russia unprovoked, though.
  Get over yourselves ffs. >
  
  Yes, unprovoked. Fuck off, Russian troll. >
  
  Fuck off, propagandist warmonger. >
  
  LOL, how stupid you have to be to think anyone will believe you when you pretend being anti-Russia makes me a warmonger. Don't you have some glue to eat? >
  
  I imagine that around the world, people who are living through war without the hope of a similar level of Western support might have a laugh about the idea that the West has been indecisive when it comes to Ukraine. >
  
  Not all conflicts and people are equal. Ukrainians are clear victims, with Western values - it's wrong to treat them as being just another "people living through war". They've earned Western support. >
  
  Ain’t no way someone typed this out and didn’t see the stupidity >
  
  Seriously. Such a bad take. 
  What did Ukraine do to earn western support over every other nation? Show up on the news everyday for the last year >
  
  
  What did Ukraine do to earn western support over every other nation? Show up on the news everyday for the last year
  
  Be white. >
  
  What indecision? The west has been on the side of Ukraine and sending aid for several years now. >
  
  About sending Leopard tanks ASAP as Russia is preparing for a new wave as the spring is about to begin. >
  
  Yeah he say the west but actually it is probably a polite way to say Germany.
  Still not sure why Germany is so cautious about greenlight the export of leopard from other countries, all the official explanation we have gotten so far don't make much sense to be honest. >
  
  Is the US sending tanks? >
  
  US is an entire ocean away. Germany is on the doorstep of this war. These countries claim they want to be “independent” from the US but then situations like this arise and all of a sudden it’s up to the US to make the first move or no one does shit. >
  
  It's not about logistics or speed, Germany wants to make the move together with the US so they're not singled out by Russia for any escalation and present a united front, because Germany is much closer to Russia and weaker than the US.
  Forcing Germany to be the "nail that sticks out" and be the potential focus of Russia's escalation is the issue here. >
  
  What Russian escalation? There's a NATO country between Russia and Germany, there is no way Russia could strike Germany before getting wipe out because they set foot in Poland. >
  
  EU and NATO countries - including the US - have all expressed concerns and voiced the need for caution.
  They have more intel than you do. >
  
  This is such a dumb argument
  "Trust the guy in charge - he's smarter because he's in charge"
  Ever heard of democracy? >
  
  Guess what, the German people are divided on sending the tanks, so this is democracy at work. >
  
  It's shitty that no concrete decision was made about the Leopards. But the west is still sending a ton of other good equipment like Bradleys, Strykers, Iris-Ts, and more Gepards. I know Zelensky is amping up the rhetoric because his country and people are on the line, but the west is certainly not as indecisive as it may seem. >
  
  In this headline, Zelensky is not amping up the rhetoric. As for the article:
  
  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky praised the Nato partners for their military assistance, but said "we will still have to fight for the supply of modern tanks".
  "Every day we make it more obvious that there is no alternative, that a decision about tanks must be made."
  Ukraine's current tanks are mostly old Soviet models, often outnumbered and outgunned by Russian firepower.
  More than 2,000 Leopards are sitting in warehouses all over Europe. President Zelensky believes about 300 of them could help to defeat Russia.
  
  Nothing about Z's rhetoric is particularly amped up, since he's staying the obvious: yes Ukraine needs modern tanks, and the best place to source them from is Europe's Leo2 tank fleet, which was primarily built to fight Russians. >
  
  Had to scroll way to far down to find someone who actually clicked the article. I didn't clock it either. Damn reddit. But social media is not the place to get your new anyways >
  
  You mean Germany indecison >
  
  Oh, how many export requests did Germany get that they are not reacting to? >
  
  UK Minister of Defence has stated that at least one nation has in fact formally requested an export license, but Germany has not responded to it.
  Who do I trust, the UK MoD who hasn't lied, or the German government who's spewed no less than 3 different lines so far on this?
  
  
  We won't stop exports
  
  
  We haven't received any export requests
  
  
  We can only consider tanks as part of a coalition
  
  
  We can't export without the US doing the same
  
  
  We can't allow exports because Russia won't know if they're German or another nation's
  
  
  For the "leader" of the EU, acting pretty fucking spineless and cowardly, constantly moving the goalposts in order to justify their refusal to act. >
  
  You should add one important information: According to the MoD the formal request was put in yesterday. >
  
  Sorry, can anyone explain to me why everyone is talking about tanks now? Serious question. 
  Ukraine stopped the Russian attack early in the war without these wonderful tanks. Then pushed the Russians nearly back to the original borders without these tanks. Why is everyone obsessed with tanks now? What’s changed? >
  
  
  Then pushed the Russians nearly back to the original borders without these tanks.
  
  Not true. They pushed back to the Russian border in a part of Kharkiv Oblast. That's it. It's a tiny fraction of the 1000km battle front.  
  Doing the job properly requires at least two armoured brigades which require tanks as well as IFVs and APCs and other support vehicles. They are asking for 300 tanks. There are 2000 Leopard tanks currently sitting in warehouse reserves in the EU just waiting to be used.
  Germany will not grant the export license to allow these to be shipped to Ukraine. They have today asked for another month to consider the matter. Ukraine does not have another month. Russia is preparing for another overwhelming attack predicted for February or early March. >
  
  If Russia is expected to attack in 1-2 months, and even if Germany agreed today, would Ukraine armed forces be ready and trained by then? I asume it’s not just about knowing how to drive the tank, but learning combined arms tactics etc - is it realistic to expect them to be functional in one month even if the tanks were shipped this week? >
  
  They said the Ukrainians can be trained in a matter of weeks. They probably already have some experience with tanks. >
  
  This dude sure loves criticizing countries that are currently saving his ass. >
  
  Pretty sure you underestimate what is needed to prevent the russian meatwall running over your country... >
  
  I’m pretty sure it’s Russians that are killing Ukrainians >
  
  Let's rephrase the headline to "Ukrainians are dying because of West's indecision". Better now? And it's actually true, there is no explanation needed >
  
  Nope.
  “Ukrainians are dying because of Russia’s invasion.”
  FIFY >
  
  It's in US's best interest to drag this out to weaken Russia more, they're not obligated to help Ukraine if there's no benefits to them. Sending just enough to keep the battle going is what the US wants, the only lives lost here are Ukrainians and Russians and that's a price US is more than willing to pay. >
  
  A decisive victory would weaken Russia significantly more. >
  
  It would weaken them too much and at a higher expense the US/Western equipment. Despite what social media generals want, I think most western higher ups want to do everything they can to avoid Russia getting too close to collapsing from this >
  
  Exactly but many people on here think world politics is a video game and believe every fear mongering propaganda or heroic narrative. Global economy doesn't play a role at all, every ukrainian soldier is literally jesus, every russian is literally hitler, also the russians are at the same time weak and laughable and highly dangerous, the US should nuke moscow and everyone lives happily ever after >
  
  Europe is drawing battle lines. The West is waiting and watching as WW3 is within the realm of possibilities. >
  
  Kind of a strange thing to say when his country has received over a hundred billion in aid in under a year. >
  
  Not all aid is equal. 500 million in MREs while useful, isn't the same as 500 million in armored support. >
  
  I support the opposition of Russian invasion, but remain critical of the corruption not yet dealt with in the Ukrainian government (some foreign, much homegrown).
  That said, Podolyak is an ex-journalist who has paid more than once for speaking the truth. So here's his full quote:
  "Afterword to global indecision…
  You'll help Ukraine with the necessary weapons anyway and realize that there is no other option to end the war except the defeat of🇷🇺
  But today's indecision is killing more of our people. Every day of delay is the death of Ukrainians. Think faster" >
  
  Remember when the right wing wanted to fight Russia to the death? Then their orange messiah decides putin is an ok guy and everything’s cool?No fucking consistency whatsoever. >
  
  This is propaganda that benefits nobody but Russia. It is pushed by because it sounds good for political reasons, but it is helping Russians kill Ukrainians.
  Even diehard conservatives hate Russia. I know several who just want to launch nukes and be done with it. >
  
  Careful not to bite the hand that feeds you dude. Many in those countries are freezing or spending a lot of extra money because of you. >
  
  back to victim blaming >
  
  No but if everyone helps you and keeps you alive all of the time maybe it’s better to be a bit humble and thankful. >
  
  
  No but if everyone helps you and keeps you alive all of the time maybe it’s better to be a bit humble and thankful.
  
  If you are singlehandedly defeating the biggest security threat to the entire democratic world, you are entitled to respect and gratitude. Not to neckbeards shouting "Be more grateful!" >
  
  Oh Lord, I hope You’re not American because you’d sound like the biggest hypocrite in the world.
  If you’re Ukrainian I’d understand if you think that way. Even if Ukraine wasn’t particularly democratic at all. >
  
  I'm from an Eastern European NATO member state. Russia is an existential threat to European democracy, and has been extremely open about this. >
  
  Ukrainians are fighting to protect their own country AND the world order. The world that the western world really likes to keep.
  Think about it. >
  
  Hasn't anyone in Ukraine learned feom Melnyks case? Don't be a fucking cunt if your life depends on the goodwill of others. >
  
  No, Russians are killing Ukrainians. >
  
  Oh, has the billions of dollars in aid and supplies not been enough?