Posted on 02/16/2025 11:06:28 PM PST by RandFan
President Donald Trump was asked by a reporter Friday about Sen. Roger Wicker’s (R-MS) comments criticizing Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s speech about Ukraine as a “rookie mistake,” and replied he had not heard about it.
Hegseth’s remarks at the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Brussels Wednesday — his first visit to NATO headquarters — raised eyebrows when he said that Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO or return to its borders before the Russian invasion. These comments were criticized for yielding key negotiation points before the talks had even begun, and Hegseth soon walked them back.
Wicker, who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, shepherded the confirmation hearings for Hegseth’s nomination to lead DOD. He was asked about the new Defense Secretary’s comments at the Munich Security Conference. The Mississippi senator replied that he was “surprised” by Hegseth’s remarks.
Hegseth “made a rookie mistake in Brussels,” said Wicker. “I don’t know who wrote the speech — it is the kind of thing Tucker Carlson could have written, and Carlson is a fool,” referring to the former Fox News host who has frequently bashed U.S. support for Ukraine
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
That said, Wicker should have ended his comment right there. Instead, Wicker makes a similar mistake on the other side when he trashes Tucker Carlson who is a valuable resource against globalist corruption.
And there is no rookie excuse for the old RINO Wicker.
You got a problem Wicker, keep it to yourself.
Well Pete’s comments were accurate.😏
Pete get the military in shape,leave the politics to the President,your not on Fox and Friends anymore
I think you are correct i was talking to my wife about this very thing. Russia has been selling it’s oil at a discount to India and China and getting a bunch of currency it seems to have trouble converting, which i don’t understand. But it seems they are in a cash crunch. with the USA about ready to come on line as the world’s largest producers of oil that’ll decrease the oil price. All of this seems to put lots of pressure on the Russian economy. The USA needs huge growth to offset inflation, these reciprocal tariffs hopefully open the world markets up so a manufacturing boom occurs. Very clear more war is not the answer as it really only helps China. Less war is good for USA.
The alliance between Russia, Iran, North Korea and China s a guaranteed path to nuclear proliferation and an Iranian nuclear weapon capability in the very short term.
The recent Turkish/Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Syria is a major threat to both Russian oil interests and the continued existence of the MBS anti Muslim Brotherhood faction of the Saudi Royal Family that currently runs the country.
There is room for some interesting developments
We live in interesting times.
As Hegseth said after his confirmation, it isn’t the first time a Lance Corporal had to rescue an officer.
E-4 Mafia FTW! (For The Win)
Good Lord, we never even put anything in what was East Germany (the extent of the “not one inch eastward”, per Goby himself.)
We DID put defensive missiles in Poland to counter Russian buildups near the Russian border, however, and correctly so. Guess who did that? His name starts with “T”.
Fast-forward to today: The problem with getting a cease-fire to hold is that nobody exists who is acceptable to both sides to put troops into some sort of DMZ in Ukraine that could actually mean something.
There might be a sliver of a chance that Trump could schmooozzz Putin that he (Trump) really is neutral, making US troops in Ukraine “ok” to Pooty. But, from Pooty’s standpoint, Trump might be gone (impeached and removed) in 2 years, and, besides, most of Trump’s base would never accept US troops in Ukraine.
Nobody without huge skin in the game would be crazy enough to get between these two parties, leaving the Euros - almost surely unacceptable to Pooty, as the only credible force around... except that it turns out that without US as Article 5 backing (ruled out already), the Euros are not presently credible either. The UK’s Defense Chief has already explained that to have 10k troops on the border, you have to have a force of 40k for the mission, for proper rotations and such. All while not shorting other priorities. The UK could maybe do this in 2-3 years.* But to be capable in 2026? Who is kidding who?
*I’m just imagining the recruitment disaster: Sign up and maybe you’ll get assigned to the Ukrainian DMZ? Hey, yeah, maybe you’ll get to experience the sensual pleasure of a drone up your behind. Cheers, bloke!
This is your starting point, and you’re gonna need at least 200k troops.
On another thread some non-serious poster suggested “observers”, not an actual deterrent force. Uh-huh. Without a credible deterrent / penalty, who will do anything about a reported violation? Or be able to, other than restart the whole war?
That headline can be read to mean two exactly opposite things. Pretty sure it is intentional.
I agree completely. The US being the active ground forces is an undue burden on the American taxpayer. Plus all the World Court wanting to prosecute people and all that garbage. It’s in Europe, therefore it’s their problem. We got plenty to do in the Middle East and Taiwan/western Pacific. IMO. Regards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.