Zelensky has consistently lied in order to get more and more weapons and money.
Let's say, for a moment, that's true - he's leading a nation that faces an existential threat, if he has lied to secure weapons I'm frankly not that upset.
For example, he states that Ukraine has lost (iirc) 45,000 soldiers. Russia estimates that figure to be 900,000.
Most estimates put the RUSSIAN losses at between 800,000 and 1,000,000, and every single observation is that the Russians are chewing through people as a disposable resource, whereas Ukraine are trying their level-best to preserve their own. If Ukraine had lost 800,000 people that would be about 5% of the male population, about 20% of the 'fighting age' men - those sorts of losses would be apparent to the world, and they aren't.
And, of course, again - WHY ARE YOU BELIEVING RUSSIAN PROPOGANDA OUTPUT? How come 'Zelensky lies' is problematic when his country has been invaded (if he has even lied), but Russian lies about the outcomes of their illegal invasion are fair game?
He also suggested that London would be bombed like in WW2 if we didn't give them weapons.
He said that if no-one stood up to Putin that he would continue to expand, and that London could be bombed - that's not a lie, that's an interpretation (and not an invalid one, given Putin's history).
Of course, that was in 2023, about a year after Putin's talking shop was suggesting that, let me check here.... London would be bombed first.
telegrafi.com reportSo when Trump said Z played the Biden administration like a fiddle, that's what he means.
He means that he made a case, Biden - like the rest of the free world - agreed, and supported him. There's no lie there, there's a case made, a warning about a mutual threat, and a request for assistance in combatting it. You want someone being played like a fiddle, take a look at Trumplethinskin 'negotiating' a peace with a country he's not at war with, without one of the countries that is at war, selling his allies down the river for personal gain.
Supposing the real number of casualties is mid-way between the two estimates; does that make it any more believable that Trump cares about them?
Firstly, if Russia makes up a number and rational reports have an estimated range, the truth is not likely to be half-way between them, it's likely to be within the range that the reliable reporting is suggesting.
Secondly, if Trump says he cares about casualties, you can put that up alongside Putin caring them - he's pitching his betrayal of the Western World for personal 'glory' with his dipshit followers as beneficence and they - and you - are credulous enough to believe it.
O.
