Trump's actions towards the EU has resulted in a massive increase in military spending by those nations. This is exactly what Trump has demanded of them. This is consequential to Russia and in no way good for them. To think Trump is "controlled by Russia" is such a tired, worn out farce.
The only path to believing this is to accept Trump communications exclusively.
The entire Trump ecosystem is now prohibited from saying that Russia invaded Ukraine. Reality plays no role in any of these narratives.
Trump may or may not be a literal Russian agent. But his actions are indistinguishable from one. I'm sorry you're tired of hearing it, I'm equally tired of seeing it.
I'm not sure if you saw my parent comment which circumstantially refutes your assertion that Trump's actions are indistinguishable from that of a Russian agent. I don't think someone courting the Russian interest would encourage the armorment of it's neighboring continent.
> Trump's actions towards the EU has resulted in a massive increase in military spending by those nations. This is exactly what Trump has demanded of them. This is consequential to Russia and in no way good for them. To think Trump is "controlled by Russia" is such a tired, worn out farce.
I cannot find an objective lens that enable one to view the current administration's policy changes as beneficial to the US and it's interests. This forces ones to explore why US leadership would aggressively espouse policy changes that are almost universally assessed to be damaging to us and our interests.
Is Europe finally stumping up and spending more defence? Yes. But they are also much less likely to buy US made systems in the future, and they will ask for more in exchange for intelligence sharing, or maintaining US military infrastructure domestically. The risk of nuclear proliferation is higher than it would have been without the shift.
Trump even refused to call Russia a dictatorship, not that that is material to policy decisions, but it provides fodder to those who are skeptical of Trump's policy goals and objectives.
Is it possible that he was smart enough to agree with Putin but that neither was smart enough to expect the unintended consequences? It is trivially easy to see things as "obvious" in hindsight, which were not actually, prior.
Did you read the evidence Grok gave, at least? Lots of citations in there.
