European leaders praise Trump for offering US military support for future peace force in Ukraine

AP via Yahoo ^ | August 15th, 2025 | LORNE COOK

[Mariner]

BRUSSELS (AP) — European leaders have praised President Donald Trump for agreeing to allow U.S. military support for a force they are mustering to police any future peace in Ukraine — a move that vastly improves the chances of success for an operation that could prove essential for the country's security.

The leaders said Trump offered American military backup for the European “reassurance force” during a call they held with him ahead of his planned summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday. They did not say what the assistance might involve, and Trump himself has not publicly confirmed any support.

The effectiveness of the operation, drawn up by the coalition of about 30 countries supporting Ukraine, hinges on the deterrent effect of U.S. airpower or other military equipment that European armed forces do not have, or have only in short supply.

No U.S. troops would be involved, but the threat of American airpower, if needed, behind the European force would likely help to dissuade Russian troops from testing Europe's resolve.

Senior Russian officials have repeatedly rejected the idea of European peacekeepers in Ukraine, even though a traditional U.N.-style peacekeeping force is not being planned.

EU leaders have regularly underlined how the United States is “crucial” to the success of the security operation dubbed Multinational Force Ukraine. But the Trump administration has long refused to commit, perhaps keeping its participation on hold as leverage in talks with Russia.

[Mariner]

Either POTUS led them to believe the US had their back with air power, or they're lying.

What's your assessment?

[BobL]

“What’s your assessment?”

They’re Neocons, so they’re lying, or the ‘backstop’ is limited to a couple of cap guns. I’ll wait until I hear something from Trump.

[Owen]

If is says no troops, well, pilots are troops.

If Putin gets all the land he wants, he likely won’t object to 200 EU military people who hang out in the remnant Ukraine as tripwires.

Though it has never been clear I suppose that even if there are 20,000 EU troops, what law of the universe says the US comes to their aid.

[Mariner]

FTA

““The appearance of troops, armed forces from the same NATO countries, but under a foreign flag, under the flag of the European Union or national flags, does not change anything in this regard. This is, of course, unacceptable to us,” Lavrov said.”

[McGruff]

My assessment. Fake News!

[BobL]

Obviously - Russia has already demonstrated that ANY foreign troops in Ukraine are fair game, and Neocon losses appear to be in the hundreds, so far.

[Bikkuri]

Reminds me of between 1992 and the early 2000s, when Iraq constantly broke the No Fly Zone, yet the U.N. wouldn’t allow us to keep them in check.

[Biblebelter]

My assessment is AP via Yahoo is that each liar has the other’s back.

[DownInFlames]

NO! This is not our fight, not our Vietnam.

[iamgalt]

There is entirely too much AP/Yahoo trash posted IMHO.

[ducttape45]

Lying, pure and simple

[rellic]

The thing that everybody seems to miss is this simple fact;
If you lose a significant portion of your young men due to a war, you have lost your people.
Russia has lost a lot of men. They used up the ones they considered dispensable eg. non Slavic, but there aren’t that many Slavic Russians and they are now losing them.
Ukraine is really lost.
Russia will never be the same.
Everybody tends to ignore the effects a war has on a culture.
Y’all kill off all the young men you have invested so much in, in terms of time and effort, who is left to run the society you hold so dear?
We think of war’s effects in terms of years, when in reality it is in decades.

[CapandBall]

American military backup for the European “reassurance force”

Could mean anything, or nothing. A nonsense phrase, lawyereze diplomat double speak.

[House Atreides]

“ The thing that everybody seems to miss is this simple fact;
If you lose a significant portion of your young men due to a war, you have lost your people.
Russia has lost a lot of men”
************************************************

Your post has a lot of truth in it. But, IMHO, the Ukrainians, their European supporters, neocons and globalists do a lot of exaggeration of Russian casualties. My belief is that Trump has been convinced that those exaggerations are correct or at least he pretends to believe them.

But when it comes to repatriation of dead soldiers there is a huge disparity between Ukraine and Russian numbers.

Here is a an extract from a recent BBC (certainly not a source which would slant news to benefit Russia) article:

“ Ukraine and Russia have completed an exchange of dead bodies - the final stage of a deal to bring home fallen soldiers.
Kyiv said Moscow handed over 1,245 bodies on Monday, bringing the total to 6,057 in the past few days. It said it was now verifying whether all the bodies were indeed of Ukrainian soldiers.
Russia put 6,060 the overall number of bodies transferred to Ukraine. It also said 78 bodies of Russian soldiers had been repatriated.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgeqddw1v1do

Make of that 6,060 to 78 ratio what you will but it certainly doesn’t line up with Ukrainian and Western neocon propaganda. Just sayin’.

[rxh4n1]

“Could mean anything, or nothing. A nonsense phrase, lawyereze diplomat double speak.”

Anyone counting on the Eurofags for protection should remember the Srbenica massacre.

[If You Want It Fixed - Fix It]

Trump probably told them they will have his prayers and “Godspeed”. They then spun this headline like a Shluck Schumer would.

[nathanbedford]

Perhaps each side should consider the point of view of the other.

Supporters of Ukraine should concede that an American guarantee of some sort running to peacekeepers in Ukraine carries a risk to the United States of deeper involvement in Ukraine and, potentially, even in kinetic war.

Opponents of United States support of Ukraine should concede that peace in Ukraine, even at the cost of the risks noted above, carry benefits for the United States that might outweigh the risks. The benefits include retention by the United States of the power to deter aggression against places like Taiwan and, ultimately, against the United States itself or United States' vital trade interests. The benefits might also include prying Russia away from its alliance with China, a development clearly in American national interest.

Donald Trump has evidently had his epiphany. He has expressed willingness to send arms to Ukraine and, reportedly, a willingness to guarantee a cease-fire with American military power. In doing so he has presumably weighed the risks against the benefits.

In making a risk-benefit analysis we are actually speculating about future consequences. We might at least muster the humility, born of limited vision, to concede that there is merit as well as risks to both points of view.

[BobL]

“Donald Trump has evidently had his epiphany. He has expressed willingness to send arms to Ukraine and, reportedly, a willingness to guarantee a cease-fire with American military power.”

You mean a DIRECT VIOLATION of what he ran on and what us MAGAs voted for...I’ll believe it when it happens.

[Sacajaweau]

We have 25,000 troops in South Korea.

[nathanbedford]

You mean a DIRECT VIOLATION of what he ran on

Sounds like Woodrow Wilson about World War I, Franklin Roosevelt about World War II, Lyndon Johnson about Vietnam.

Historically, presidents have elusive memories when deciding war or peace.