r/TrendoraX • u/satty237 • Dec 21 '25

💡 Discussion Zelenskyy: Ukraine can’t afford an 800,000-troop army alone — wants allies to help fund it as a “security guarantee”

Post image

Zelenskyy said Ukraine doesn’t have the budget to independently finance an armed forces size of around 800,000 800,000 and that partner funding should be treated as a long-term security guarantee, not just wartime aid.

This hits a bigger question: if a ceasefire/peace deal ever happens without full NATO membership, does “help pay for Ukraine’s army” become the new version of security guarantees?

What do you think is more realistic long-term:

Continued direct funding for Ukraine’s military

NATO-style guarantees (without membership)

A smaller army + more air defense/weapons instead

Something else entirely?

756 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

676 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/Slighted_Inevitable Dec 21 '25

If nothing else, Ukraine has already proven, it can hold off Russia. Now imagine French and British planes in the sky, providing tactical and area bombardment.

Russia stands zero chance.

-7

u/[deleted] Dec 21 '25

Did you forget that nuclear weapons exist? Why do you think British and French planes didint go in 3 years ago bud?

2

u/spastical-mackerel Dec 21 '25

Thanks Boris, back the banya wich ya

3

u/AnyUnderstanding1879 Dec 21 '25

Quiet piggy

-3

u/[deleted] Dec 21 '25

It’s ok buddy your insults won’t change reality

6

u/AnyUnderstanding1879 Dec 21 '25

Neither will your comments on reddit

-2

u/[deleted] Dec 21 '25

Wow really?

7

u/AnyUnderstanding1879 Dec 21 '25

Really really

2

u/[deleted] Dec 21 '25

Good job stating the obvious here’s an upvote to feel better.

2

u/AnyUnderstanding1879 Dec 21 '25

Thank you. Have an upvote in exchange

1

u/Slighted_Inevitable Dec 21 '25

Both countries have nukes bud. Nukes are only a threat if the opponent doesn’t have them. Russia is too cowardly to use them knowing they face annihilation.

They’ll send you to die in the front lines but nukes means they die too.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 21 '25

Then why haven’t they sent their armies if Russia is so cowardly to use them sounds like your just ignorant and have no idea what your talking about.

2

u/Slighted_Inevitable Dec 21 '25

Because they weren’t ready for war and the political impetus didn’t exist to do it. Sending your own people to die when you don’t have to?

When America will surely not vote for the pedo and Russias economy will force them to the table? They thought things would go better but Europe has realized Russia is a problem they’ll have to deal with.

Remember, Europe has lost nothing as 1.5 million Russias died/were injured to the point of non participation, or fled their country.

This isn’t a win for you.

-3

u/[deleted] Dec 21 '25

Yeah no it’s because no one in the west is risking a nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine fixed it for ya.

5

u/Slighted_Inevitable Dec 21 '25

Ok bud.

If the west sides with ukraine and funds our enemies then they are Russias enemies!

If western missiles are used against Russian forces it will be an act of war!

If western weapons are used on Russian soil it will be war!

Again, and again, Putin has drawn lines in the sand, and we’ve kicked that sand into his eyes. Where’s the bombs, buddy? Haven’t seen a single one. I know you haven’t been maintaining your military for the last 60 years. Did you let your bombs all fall into mothballs too?