Germany depends on Russian fuel to run their economy. It's you who is immersed in wishful thinking, and your guessing is realistically incorrect. If all this is true, why is NATO refusing to engage, including the U.S.?
Inflation is starting to run rampant in Europe, and it gets worse by the day here at home.
I know when the reality starts hitting you here at home you will change your tune. Let's see, Biden allows Russia to build pipelines, while denying them here is the U.S. Do you even see anything wrong with that?
Biden took the U.S. from being energy independent. If Biden had not done so, we could help Europe. But we can't, and Biden is running around to oil producing nations begging them to increase their production with little to no success. Meanwhile Russia is supplying our nations adversaries with all the fuel they desire.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Your heart may be in the right place, but your brain is totally disengaged.
Trump wanted Europe to move away from Russia and its energy, and to strengthen its military forces against Russia.
Russia invading Ukraine is forcing Europe and NATO to follow Trump’s instructions.
If any of that were actually true, there is no way in hell any members of the EU, or the U.S., would still be sending money and armaments to Ukraine. By definition, we'd have stopped, promised that we wouldn't do it again, and be begging Russia to finish its conquest of Ukraine and start shipping fuel again. Because we would all have been brought to our knees. Right?
If all this is true, why is NATO refusing to engage, including the U.S.?
We are and have been very much engaged in terms of providing critical military support. Because Ukraine is not a member of NATO, and we don't want to automatically trigger WW3, we haven't gotten directly involved militarily. But that was also true right at the very outset if this war, long before the loss of Russian fuel had even happened, and long before any possible claim that we were "crippled" or "brought to our knees".
If anything, we have increased our support of Ukraine since the loss of Russia fuel. So if we are "crippled" and "on our knees" before the glory of Mother Russia, we sure have a funny way of showing it.
If any of that were actually true, there is no way in hell any members of the EU, or the U.S., would still be sending money and armaments to Ukraine. By definition, we'd have stopped, promised that we wouldn't do it again, and be begging Russia to finish its conquest of Ukraine and start shipping fuel again. Because we would all have been brought to our knees. Right?
If all this is true, why is NATO refusing to engage, including the U.S.?
We are and have been very much engaged in terms of providing critical military support. Because Ukraine is not a member of NATO, and we don't want to automatically trigger WW3, we haven't gotten directly involved militarily. But that was also true right at the very outset if this war, long before the loss of Russian fuel had even happened, and long before any possible claim that we were "crippled" or "brought to our knees".
If anything, we have increased our support of Ukraine since the loss of Russia fuel. So if we are "crippled" and "on our knees" before the glory of Mother Russia, we sure have a funny way of showing it.