Opinion - How many more useless deaths before we admit Trump was always right on Ukraine?
I thought of these questions while reading two recent columns. The first is by Rich Lowry from the New York Post, titled 'Trump is getting the Ukraine-Russia war all wrong — and he's making it even harder on himself.' The other is by former diplomat Bridget Brink in the Detroit Free Press, titled 'I was U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. I resigned because of Trump's foreign policy.'
There is much Lowry has written over the years that I believe to be spot on. That said, I have disagreed with much he has written about Ukraine since the start of the war — his latest column included. Some believe Lowry to be a megaphone for the neocon class, which always seems to be advocating for the U.S. military to engage in 'forever wars.' Lowry was also the former editor of National Review, a magazine that in March 2016 ran an editorial titled 'Never Trump' and that seemed to become the epicenter of the 'Never Trump' movement for certain neocons and entrenched, elitist Republicans.
The constant theme for those criticizing Trump's consistent stance against the Ukraine war and a much-needed ceasefire is that Putin is evil and must be defeated at all costs. Fine. If using the people of Ukraine as cheap disposable pawns to fight a proxy war against Russia and Putin has been the end game from the start, simply admit it. Don't pretend you are trying to save the people of Ukraine or that nation's infrastructure.
In the lead up to the Iraq War more than 20 years ago, there were a steady stream of neocons, pundits and 'experts' advocating for that invasion to overthrow the 'evil' Saddam Hussein, who were coldly and impassionedly viewing the process as some sort of board game or sporting event, with human pawns to be played with at will.
'Experts' eagerly pushed for war who had no skin in the game. Meaning they were not in the military, they would not be walking point in the coming combat, nor would any of their relatives or friends. How wise or 'courageous' is it to call for a war from luxurious offices thousands of miles from the pending horror?
And what was the end result of that 'justified' war? Approximately 4,500 American soldiers killed; 32,000 wounded; between 100,000 and 400,000 Iraqi deaths, depending upon the study; and a Middle East that is still destabilized, spawning endless pockets of terrorism.
Next, we have the column from Bridget Brink, a former professional diplomat who, to some, seems to be virtue signaling her disgust of Trump to the far-left echo chamber of Trump haters. That is most certainly her right.
In her column, she describes what Putin and Russia have done in Ukraine as 'pure evil.' She further states that: 'Peace at any price is not peace at all — it is appeasement.'
Okay. And just what is her plan for Ukraine to 'win' the war against the 'evil' Putin and Russia? As Trump has asked from day one, how many more lives must be sacrificed before enough is enough? The Pentagon and CIA have estimated that well over 1 million people have been killed or wounded in the war, with much of Ukraine's infrastructure turned into rubble.
Since day one, President Trump has been calling for an end to this war. He has done so for two incredibly important reasons. First, to stop the senseless slaughter of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers as well as Ukrainian civilians. Next, to warn of the many tripwires littering the battlefield, which could be stepped on and trigger World War III — leading to the deaths of millions.
Last week on Truth Social, the president posted in all caps, 'I WILL BE SPEAKING, BY TELEPHONE, TO PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN OF RUSSIA ON MONDAY, AT 10:00 A.M. THE SUBJECTS OF THE CALL WILL BE, STOPPING THE 'BLOODBATH' THAT IS KILLING, ON AVERAGE, MORE THAN 5000 RUSSIAN AND UKRAINIAN SOLDIERS A WEEK…I WILL THEN BE SPEAKING TO PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY OF UKRAINE AND THEN, WITH…VARIOUS MEMBERS OF NATO. HOPEFULLY IT WILL BE A PRODUCTIVE DAY, A CEASEFIRE WILL TAKE PLACE, AND THIS VERY VIOLENT WAR, A WAR THAT SHOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED, WILL END. GOD BLESS US ALL!!!'
Speaking of a ceasefire, last December I wrote a piece for this site titled, 'Were 750,000 additional lives wasted in Ukraine for less than nothing?' That number was extrapolated from a ceasefire reportedly offered to Putin now over 36 months ago, which was also reportedly 'scuttled' and 'sabotaged' by forces within the administrations of President Joe Biden and U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
Now, three years later, to Trump's point, 'more than 5,000 Russian and Ukrainian soldiers' are being killed per week. For what? How many dead or wounded before those advocating that Ukraine fight to the last Ukrainian admit that an immediate ceasefire is the right and humane solution — and has always been?
Haters are going to hate, but if Trump had been listened to three years ago, 1 million people would not have been killed or wounded. What is the worth of those lost and maimed lives?
Douglas MacKinnon is a former White House and Pentagon official.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What is the coalition of the willing?
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has spoken with the UK's allies in the so-called 'coalition of the willing', amid a multinational push to guarantee Ukraine's security once fighting stops in eastern Europe. Here, the PA news agency looks at who is in the coalition and what they can achieve: – What is the coalition of the willing? At least 31 countries have signed up to help defend a peace deal in Ukraine, once one is struck, in an effort to ward off a future attack by Russia. The UK is among those 'willing', with the Government prepared to put 'boots on the ground and planes in the air', Sir Keir said when he unveiled plans for the coalition at London's Lancaster House in March. But it is not the first of its kind. Former US president Bill Clinton suggested in 1994 that sanctions could be imposed by a 'so-called coalition of the willing', to quell North Korea's nuclear ambitions, and his successor George W Bush announced a similar alliance in the early-2000s to disarm the then-Iraqi president Saddam Hussein. – Who has signed up? Leaders from the UK, France, Germany, Finland and Italy have all indicated their willingness to defend a peace deal in Ukraine. They joined Donald Trump, who has not signed up to the coalition, and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky in the White House this month. A total 31 countries are in the coalition, according to the Government's National Security Strategy 2025. Beyond Europe, it has attracted support from the Canadian and Australian prime ministers Mark Carney and Anthony Albanese. – Will British troops go to Ukraine? After Sir Keir's commitment to put 'boots on the ground and planes in the air together with others' to militarily defend a peace deal, No 10 unveiled its support for a Multinational Force Ukraine, in an effort to help regenerate Ukraine's own armed forces. Military chiefs have previously met in Paris to agree a strategy for the force, and to coordinate plans with the EU, Nato, the US and more than 200 planners from 30 international partners. And in Washington, European leaders discussed early-stage proposals for a security guarantee, similar to Nato's article five principle – that an attack one member is an attack on the entire bloc. – What has the coalition achieved? 'The coalition of the willing has been successful in advocating for Ukraine and communicating with Trump and the US administration during its outreach to Russia,' says Edward Arnold from the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) think tank. 'Moreover, it has undertaken lengthy military planning and has established a leadership and command structure. However, much remains uncertain, especially the nature of any agreed ceasefire or whether a broader peace process is on the cards.' But the US's commitment is 'far from certain', he told the PA news agency, and warned that 'European planners cannot progress the planning until the US position is agreed'. – What is Nato's role? Nato's Mark Rutte has attended meetings of the coalition of the willing, and Mr Trump appeared pleased with his efforts at their meeting when he described the secretary general as 'a great, great political leader'. But Mr Arnold warned that an article five-style mutual defence deal could amount to 'de facto' membership of the bloc for Ukraine, something which Russian president Vladimir Putin 'is unlikely to agree to'. He said: ''Nato article five-style' guarantees are being talked about but Nato is a unique alliance which is not able to be replicated for Ukraine. 'Moreover, if any coalition of the willing member signed a mutual defence clause with Ukraine, and then Ukraine was attacked further, that could conceivably draw that Nato member into direct conflict with Russia, thereby potentially triggering article five.' Sir Keir has welcomed 'some sort of article five-style guarantees', which he said 'fits' with some of the coalition's work, and Mr Trump who met Mr Putin in an Alaska summit claimed Moscow will 'accept' multinational efforts to guarantee Ukraine's security.
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
Macron: Putin not ‘very willing to get peace' in Ukraine
French President Emmanuel Macron expressed skepticism in a Monday interview that Russian President Vladimir Putin would be willing to make peace in Ukraine amid President Trump's diplomatic push to end the war in Ukraine that has lasted more than three years. The interview with NBC's Kristen Welker followed a high-stakes series of meetings at the White House, where Trump gathered Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and other European leaders to discuss key issues in ongoing peace talks over the Russia-Ukraine war. Asked about his level of optimism that Putin and Zelensky could make progress toward a ceasefire deal, Macron first stressed that 'I think the optimism of your President is to be taken seriously,' referring to Trump. 'So, if he considers he can get a deal done, this is a great news, and we have to do whatever we can to have a great deal,' the French president said. 'But a great deal is a deal with security guarantees and a robust peace.' 'As far as I'm concerned, when I look at the situation and the facts, I don't see President Putin really willing to get peace now,' he continued. 'But perhaps I'm too pessimistic.' Trump embraced Zelensky on Monday, a dramatic shift from the cold welcome the Ukrainian leader received in February. The president, Ukrainian leader and other European leaders displayed a united front during the Oval Office meeting and used the high-profile talks to increase pressure on Putin to come to the negotiation table. Trump was caught on a hot mic telling Macron that he thinks Putin 'wants to make a deal for me.' Later Monday, he spoke to Putin about arranging a time for a bilateral meeting between the Kremlin leader and Zelensky, after which, Trump said he would personally join them a trilateral meeting. 'Again, this was a very good, early step for a War that has been going on for almost four years,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. Despite his self-described pessimistic outlook, the French leader stressed that he thinks 'it's very important' that Western leaders 'launch the process of this bilateral meeting, this trilateral meeting and this multilateral meeting' and that discussions focus on building out security guarantees. 'But I think at a point of time, probably we will have to increase the pressure on Russia to be sure they want peace,' Macron told Welker, 'Because as long as President Putin and his people will consider they can win this war and get a better result by force, they will not negotiate.'
CBS News
21 minutes ago
- CBS News
Trump working to arrange summit between Putin, Zelenskyy after Monday's White House meetings
Washington — President Trump is working to coordinate a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which would be the first face-to-face interaction between the two leaders since Russia invaded Ukraine more than three years ago. Asked about arranging the meeting on Tuesday, Mr. Trump said on Fox & Friends that he would let Putin and Zelenskyy meet first before getting involved himself, saying "they haven't been exactly best friends." "I hope President Putin is going to be good, and if he's not, that's going to be a rough situation," Mr. Trump said. He noted that he's hopeful Zelenskyy will "do what he has to do," saying he has to "show some flexibility also." Mr. Trump's efforts come one day after an extraordinary series of meetings at the White House between the U.S. president, Zelenskyy and European leaders. In a display of unity, Zelenskyy and the European leaders stressed the importance of security guarantees in a peace deal, which Mr. Trump said could come with U.S. coordination. Attention has now turned to a possible summit between Putin and Zelenskyy. After Monday's meetings, Mr. Trump said he called Putin to set up the meeting, and he "picked it up very happily," despite the late hour in Russia. Mr. Trump called it a "very good call." "I told him that we're going to set up a meeting with President Zelenskyy, and you and he will meet, and then after that meeting, if everything works out OK, I'll meet and we'll wrap it up," Mr. Trump said. He added that it takes "two to tango," and that "they have to have somewhat of a relationship, otherwise, we're just wasting a lot of time." Zelenskyy told CBS News shortly after leaving the White House that a date had not been set to meet with Putin, although German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said it could be within the next two weeks. In a post on X Tuesday, Zelenskyy called the talks in Washington "truly a significant step toward ending the war and ensuring the security of Ukraine and our people." "We are already working on the concrete content of the security guarantees," Zelenskyy said. "Today, we continue coordination at the level of leaders. There will be discussions, and we are preparing the relevant formats." A Russian spokesperson would only say that high-level talks would take place, but would not confirm that Putin would be involved. Mr. Trump, who met with Putin in Alaska last week, expressed urgency around the timing of the next meeting, suggesting that waiting too long would result in thousands of deaths. In what appeared to be a hot mic moment Monday, Mr. Trump told French President Emmanuel Macron that Putin "wants to make a deal for me." The president outlined on Fox that he has been surprised that Zelenskyy and Putin are "getting along a little bit better than I thought," adding that "they're the ones that have to call the shots." "We're going to find out about President Putin in the next couple of weeks, that I can tell you, and we're going to see where it all goes," Mr. Trump said. "It's possible that he doesn't want to make a deal." Meanwhile, security guarantees for Ukraine emerged as a key issue during Monday's meetings, with Zelenskyy calling them a "starting point towards ending the war." Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Monday that the U.S. will work with European and other allies to provide security guarantees for Ukraine after the war, although he did not provide specifics. And Macron said discussions on what the U.S. is willing to provide could begin as soon as Tuesday. On the security guarantees, Mr. Trump said the European leaders are "willing to put people on the ground," and that "we're willing to help them with things, especially, probably if you could talk about by air because there's nobody has the kind of stuff we have." But the president added that "I don't think it's going to be a problem." "There will be some form of security," Mr. Trump said. "It can't be NATO, because that was a — that's just not something that would ever, ever happen."Nancy Cordes contributed to this report.
