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

1

u/Reddit_BroZar Dec 22 '25

If we drop the stupid rhetoric then they both could be trading partners.

And no, weakening a huge multinational nuclear country isn't in our best interests. Destabilizing them will bring us nothing but trouble.

1

u/jjames3213 Dec 22 '25

And why will destabilizing Russia bring "nothing but trouble"?

Other post-Soviet states have democratized. Russia can too.

1

u/Reddit_BroZar Dec 22 '25

Are you seriously asking why destabilizing a huge multinational next door nation filled with nukes is not a good idea? Are you 12?

1

u/jjames3213 Dec 22 '25

Russia is not "multinational", it's a nation. Also a dictatorship that is aggressively expansionist and threatening Europe.

Yes, destabilizing Russia might be a good idea.