JD Vance talks about "the bad guys" in Ukraine war - but doesn't say which side he means
JD Vance said ending the war in Ukraine is possible because the "bad guys" fear the US military - but didn't say who the bad guys were. He made the remarks in a speech to US personnel stationed at RAF Fairford, Gloucestershire - before giving out McDonalds cheeseburgers to the troops. Vance's speech came just minutes after he took part in a conference call with Donald Trump, Keir Starmer and European leaders about the conflict in Ukraine. He said: "The President of the United States came in six months ago and I just talked to him right before I came on the stage. And he said very simply that we are going to make it our mission as an administration to bring peace to Europe once again. But as you all know it is impossible to bring peace anywhere unless the bad guys are also worried that you've got a helluva fine Air Force and a helluva fine military to back up the peace to begin with." It comes after NATO scrambled warplanes as Russia shoots down West's F-16 fighter jet in Ukraine onslaught.
In March (2025) Vance defended Steve Witkoff, Trump's envoy in Russia and Ukraine, after he said Putin was not "a bad guy". "Steve Witkoff is a great guy doing an incredible job," Vance wrote on social media after the gaffe. The people sniping at him are mad that he is succeeding where they failed for 40 years."
Vance gave his speech standing in front of a Lockheed U-2 spy plane, of the type currently being used for recon missions over Russia and Ukraine. Vance is visiting the UK for a family holiday, though he spent the first few days of his trip with Foreign Secretary David Lammy at Chevening. He's understood to have met with Nigel Farage and Robert Jenrick during the visit, but not with Kemi Badenoch - blaming a scheduling conflict.
Mr Vance met Foreign Secretary David Lammy earlier on Wednesday, where he said they 'worked on one of our most important shared security goals in Europe, which is the end of the war between Russia and Ukraine'.
The vice president has previously criticised Europe over its defence funding, with leaked messages from a US Signal group chat showing Mr Vance saying he hated 'bailing Europe out'. He also criticised the UK in February, over a legal case in which a former serviceman who silently prayed outside an abortion clinic was convicted of breaching the safe zone around the centre.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
5 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Do you have faith Donald Trump can end the war in Ukraine? Vote in our poll
Ahead of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin's crucial 'one-on-one' talks in Alaska tomorrow, we're asking Mirror readers if they think the US President can end the war in Ukraine - vote in our poll Donald Trump has warned Russian leader Vladimir Putin that he faces severe consequences if he walks away from the summit in Alaska on Friday without a stop to the war in Ukraine - and we want to hear your thoughts. It comes after Keir Starmer said yesterday there is a "viable" chance of reaching a ceasefire in the Ukraine war as a result of the US President's work. Following virtual calls with Trump, Volodymyr Zelensky and other European leaders, the PM said Britain stands ready to "increase pressure" on Russia if necessary. Briefing the Coalition of the Willing after the calls, Starmer said: "As I've said personally to President Trump, for three and a bit years this conflict has been going on and we haven't got anywhere near the prospect of actually a viable solution, a viable way, of bringing it to a ceasefire. And now we do have that chance because of the work that the President has put in." It comes after Putin warned of nuclear war after unleashing another night of hell on Ukraine. However, Kyiv believes Putin is bluffing about his willingness to end the bloodshed. In a joint briefing in Berlin with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Zelensky said: "I told the US president and all our European colleagues that Putin is bluffing. He is trying to apply pressure before the meeting in Alaska along all parts of the Ukrainian front. Russia is trying to show that it can occupy all of Ukraine." After the talks, Zelensky said Trump supports providing security guarantees for Ukraine if there is a peace agreement. He said: "There should be security guarantees. President Trump said that he supports this and about America's readiness to take part." The Ukrainian President said he hoped the primary focus of the Alaska talks would be an immediate ceasefire, with any discussions on territorial issues to be addressed at a meeting involving all three leaders. Trump warned there will be "very severe consequences" if Putin refuses to stop the killing. When pushed on what these consequences would be, he said: "I don't have to say." He added: "If I do not get the necessary answers during the meeting with Putin, there will be no next meeting." Get Donald Trump updates straight to your WhatsApp! As the world attempts to keep up with Trump's antics, the Mirror has launched its very own US Politics WhatsApp community where you'll get all the latest news from across the pond. We'll send you the latest breaking updates and exclusives all directly to your phone. Users must download or already have WhatsApp on their phones to join in. All you have to do to join is click on this link, select 'Join Chat' and you're in! We may also send you stories from other titles across the Reach group. We will also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose Exit group. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Nato's Secretary-General, Mark Rutte, said after a separate call with Trump, Zelensky and European leaders: "We are united in pushing to end this terrible war. The ball is now in Putin's court." Despite the impending Trump-Putin showdown, Russia's military continued strikes on Ukraine last night. With just hours until the US and Russian leaders meet for crucial talks, we want to know if you think Trump can end the war in Ukraine? Vote in our poll HERE to have your say.
The National
15 minutes ago
- The National
Dale Vince refuses to remove Palestinian flag from Ecotricity HQ
The Ecotricity boss confirmed he intends to challenge the requirement for planning permission by the Stroud district council, which said flying the flag of a state not recognised by the UK counts as an advertisement under town and country planning law and requires permission. Vince has argued that the giant Palestinian flag, which can be seen hanging from the front of the Ecotricity headquarters in Stroud, Gloucestershire, is legal under planning rules. He said planning law states that 'any country's national flag' can be flown without permission and that because Palestine is recognised as a sovereign nation by 147 of the 193 UN member states, the flag falls within the meaning of a 'country flag'. READ MORE: Pro-Palestine protesters greet JD Vance as he lands in Scotland 'We believe the council are wrong to claim this flag needs planning permission and we'd like to establish that for the benefit of others,' Vince told Stroud Times. 'We will not be removing the flag of Palestine from our building. Or applying for planning permission for it. 'Nobody ever got asked to take down a Ukrainian flag. With Palestine it's different and much of this is due to a shadowy group of lawyers acting for Israel. 'They've bullied several councils into forcing the removal of flags and into event cancellations – it's a pernicious stifling of free speech on behalf of a foreign power.' (Image: Simon Marper/PA Wire) Vince has long spoken up for the Palestinian people and received £40,000 in damages from the publisher of the Daily Mail after the newspaper falsely alleged that he supports the proscribed terrorist group Hamas. Vince said he did not accept that a Jewish or Israeli resident in Stroud would feel threatened by the Palestinian flag on his business's building. 'Obviously, what Hamas did on October 7th [2023] was an atrocity but the atrocity visited on Palestine in return in the last two years is off the charts,' he said. 'It's unimaginably bad and this is from a democratic country that we call an ally, not from a terrorist organisation known as Hamas. So they're not comparable and I don't think anybody that's Israeli should look at the Palestinian flag and feel threatened. I don't understand that. 'This is not the flag of Hamas and these are the shadows that UK Lawyers for Israel operate within, conflating the flag of a country with the flag of a terrorist organisation.' Stroud council said it received public complaints about the flag, so 'officers were obliged to take advice on the matter' and had no option but to police planning regulations as required by legislation, the Times has reported. The council said that the display of the flag is currently subject to a live planning enforcement investigation, stating: 'The display of the unauthorised advertisement at Lion House is subject to a live planning enforcement investigation. 'We remain committed to applying planning regulations fairly and consistently, and we will provide guidance to anyone seeking clarification on advertisement consent requirements.'
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Highlanders have the right to be angry over explosion of wind farms
Quite a result for a never previously convened group of volunteers sitting on powerless community councils. But was it a step back for the green transition, a step forward for local democracy or a bit of both? Five hundred people from 56 community councils – representing almost half the Highland population – gathered to highlight the 1305 wind-related infrastructure projects that are either built or going through planning in the Highlands. No-one's denying that's a small avalanche. The big questions are: who is the energy for? (probably not Scots); who benefits financially? (certainly not Scots); who gets to decide? (absolutely not Scots), and how much does net-exporting Scotland or the energy-hungry UK actually need? (Fa kens). READ MORE: Pro-Palestine protesters greet JD Vance as he lands in Scotland It seems Labour and the SNP are bodyswerving all these vital questions, and Highlanders, despite their reputation for feudal cap-doffing and learned silence, have finally snapped, got angry and got organised. So, are they just a bunch of climate-crisis-denying Nimbys? I've been making a film about this unprecedented revolt over the last week and visited folk in straths and glens from Strathdearn near Tomatin to the Dornoch Firth near Strath Oykel. I'm sure there are people who simply hate turbines and are opposed to net zero. I didn't meet any of them. I did meet people from glens with five, seven, or even 13 wind farms already in place who are being told to accept the same again. Without any say. Without any meaningful income. And without the highest energy bills in Europe getting one penny cheaper. They must also watch while those existing wind farms switch off in high wind because the grid can't take their energy. We pay for those constraint payments, and if they are common for existing turbines, how will the new wind farms deliver? (Image: Getty Images) Furthermore, wind farm applications go through planning piecemeal, with complex documents that take hours for community councillors to download and a lawyer's mind to dissect. So far, every application has been approved by the Scottish Government – despite occasional rejection by Highland Council and even a Scottish Government reporter. It feels like a total fait accompli and normally calm people have become stressed, angry, upset and determined not to let this pass. I'm sure some distant pointy heids thought wind farms accepted since 2007 meant Highlanders would be a soft touch. Au contraire. It's a case of once bitten twice, not just shy, but adamant – enough's enough. We met one veteran community councillor who wanted a conversation with the companies, SSEN and the Scottish Government about the totality of wind farms planned for each glen: 'We could negotiate and approve the ones that are completely uncontroversial and try to change or just veto the ones everyone opposes.' If something as reasonable as that isn't even thinkable, what are we saying about local democracy? If Scotland is to house practically all the wind infrastructure for the whole of Britain without any benefit in bills, what does that say about the supposed union of equals? And if all of this happens without opposition by the planning authority, the Scottish Government, we can only assume that they are 100% on side. Or that they worry more about denting the high levels of inward investment to Scotland by placing any restrictions on electricity infrastructure? Or that their green targets and position ahead of the UK will be dented? If so, well done. Every Tom, Dick and Harry (the spivs and speculators from Alex Salmond's era) has a wind company and land on the east coast of the Highlands – near the grid upgrades and the freeports – sitting pretty for the moment when the contracts for difference are awarded and the wind bonanza really begins. No wonder British Energy Minister Michael Shanks declined the invitation to attend the Inverness Convention along with Scottish Energy Minister Gillian Martin and SSEN – the private power company charged with deciding pylon routes and the location of turbines, battery plants and sub-stations. Labour's Western Isles MP Torcuil Crichton did attend and argued for councils to become co-developers of wind cash thereby making money for local services. If it can be done in Stornoway, he argued, why not on the mainland? But he also made no apologies for the huge wind energy targets his government will push through whether local communities like it or not. The audience was not amused. SNP MP Graham Leadbitter drew grumbles for sidestepping responsibility, saying planning is a Holyrood matter and the SNP don't run Westminster. True but unhelpful. SNP MSP Maree Todd prompted snorts of exasperation when she said she was furious about the size of local energy bills and fuel poverty. Fine – why did the SNP not support locational pricing then? And her MSP colleague Emma Roddick was almost shouted down after saying she felt as powerless as the audience and declared the main problem is pitifully low levels of community benefit. They certainly are inadequate – but local opposition has moved way beyond that. Tory MSP Edward Mountain received a roar of approval for saying: 'We in the Highlands are being sacrificed on the altar of net zero. And we need to stop energy companies trying to bribe local communities.' It's supremely ironic. THE Tories are getting ready to clean up in Highland seats in 2026, even though the current situation is almost 100% their fault. Who privatised the energy industry in the 1980s, placing strategic decisions in the hands of private companies like SSE and private operators (many of them the state-owned companies of our European neighbours) – the Tories. Who created a wind energy desert in England that will now be filled with Highland-produced energy – the Tories and their decade-long turbine moratorium south of the border. Who created a devolved settlement that handed energy to Westminster, not Holyrood, unlike every other devolved or federal system – Labour. Who created massive, remote councils like Highland, which has the biggest landmass in the world – the Tories. Who created toothless community councils as a sop to towns, villages and islands when their genuinely local councils were abolished – the Tories. And who's been the implacable opponents of 'Mugabe-style land raids' or for anyone else the overdue process of real land reform that would stop absentee millionaires owning land and taking land use decisions over the heads of local communities – be that for the green transition or any other 'worthy' cause. Yip – the Tories. They've produced chronic disempowerment. Labour have produced the 'ambitious' green energy targets – now set in law – driving the Highland windfarm expansion. And yet it's the SNP who are taking the pounding. Why? Because voters expected them to reverse the tide, stand up for communities, argue, wheedle, deal and protect – and they haven't. Doubtless, some will argue the Scotland Act means they can't. That answer may be right. It may be good law. Great accounting. Satisfactory box-ticking – but it's terrible politics. The Scottish Government believes it must rubber-stamp whatever energy demands the British Government makes of rural Scotland or ... what? If it's a fight where the Scottish Government backs Highland communities, starts a long-overdue process of decentralisation, produces and share an actual strategy and challenges Westminster to do the same and forces Keir Starmer to own an unreconstructed broken, Thatcherite energy market where Scots will never, ever get cheaper bills – then bring it on. Meantime, c'mon the communities.
