Summary

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau opposed any deal letting Russia keep Ukrainian land, saying it would encourage other countries to break international rules.

Speaking to a NATO meeting, he highlighted Canada’s $19.5 billion aid to Ukraine and stressed the need to defend global stability.

Trudeau defended his plan to raise military spending to 2% of GDP by 2032 after criticism of Canada’s low defense funding.

He warned against isolating Ukraine, saying continued support is crucial to stop further global conflicts.

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 days ago

    20 billion

    Man, I’m jealous.

    His country has universal health care and isn’t wasting trillions a year policing the world like we are.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 days ago

        Zelensky has already said the war will end quicker under Trump, which means he’s probably already had a chat with the new regime and is resigned to surrendering most of the land Russia have already taken.

        And none of it will stop Russia regrouping and trying again in a few years.

        • Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 days ago

          I do not know if the war will end quicker under Trump.

          But saying it will not end quicker under Trump (now that he’s elected) will send you back to politics 101.

          IMO.

    • whoisearth@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 days ago

      Agree 100% we can’t rely on our rich bi-polar brother in the methlab of a house next door to protect us anymore.

      • index@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 days ago

        You need protection from greedy politicians and the military industry sucking in public money and fueling wars.

        • etuomaala@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          18 days ago

          Finland has a pretty absurdly strong military. It really is a waste of money. But it has this military because it shares a border with Russia. If Finland did not have such a military, it would be invaded. That is what empires do. Finland’s military does not start war; it prevents it.

          Ideally, neither side would have to waste money on this military, but until Russia gives up theirs, Finland can’t give up theirs either. Good luck convincing Russia to do that.

          Not long ago, I would have been in total agreement with you. The very idea of stealing land through invasion was so antiquated to me that I did not believe even Russia would do it until the moment their troops crossed the Ukrainian border. Now, I reluctantly am forced to conclude that not only is Russia that backward, it probably always was, and the only reason Finland has been safe all these years is because of the military that I thought was so absurd.

          • index@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 days ago

            If Finland did not have such a military, it would be invaded.

            That’s a speculation you are making, russia spend 20 times as much as finland does in war they wouldn’t have much problems invading finland if it was all about military strength.

            That is what empires do

            That’s true USA does the same.

            Ideally, neither side would have to waste money on this military, but until Russia gives up theirs, Finland can’t give up theirs either.

            While finland spend less than russia NATO combined spend 20 times as much as russia does in war. Do you see where your logic leads? To match USA alone russia would have to tenfold their military budget.

            • etuomaala@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Sure Russia could beat Finland in an invasion, eventually, but due to Finland’s army, it would be far more trouble than it’s worth. And let’s leave the USA out of this.

              Buuuut for as long as we’re not leaving the USA out of this, it is worth pointing out that Mexico and Canada do not live in constant fear of being invaded. Finland does, and this fear of invasion is very rational.

  • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 days ago

    2/3rds of Ukrainians want the same. They just need the help to resist the Russian invasion.

    Poll data was part of Perun’s latest video on the latest developments of the war and what the turning point will be:

    https://youtu.be/vf2vSoWsmgI (0:50:38)

      • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        War weariness is a thing.
        I wouldn’t be surprised if a non-insignificant number of that 1/3 that doesn’t oppose Russia keeping some territory are just tired of the war and want it to be over.
        3 years is a long time to live in a war torn country with frequent power outages and food shortages. People tend to disassociate when it doesn’t affect them directly and if they happen to live on the Western side of Ukraine, losing territory on the Eastern border will have less of an effect on them than continued food and power shortages.

  • dgmib@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    If Russia is permitted to annex any part of Ukraine it sends the message that they can attack any country and eventually take over parts of it.

    If the world doesn’t stop Russia from taking Ukraine, Russia isn’t going to stop once they’ve taken Ukraine.

    • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      Exactly! I don’t know why appeasement is even discussed with any seriousness. We’ve all seen this before.

      Previously on: “World History”

      England: “Fine, fine, you can have, like, Poland a slice of Czechoslovakia, but then chill out!”

      Narrator: “He did not ‘chill out’.”

      (Edited for accuracy. Thanks!)