Russian Ukraine Invasion

I heard this claim and had to fact check it.

Since the start of the full-scale war, the European Union has cumulatively spent more money purchasing Russian fossil fuels than it has provided to Ukraine in direct financial, military, and humanitarian aid.
The balance of these financial flows is as follows:

Payments to Russia: The EU has paid over €220 billion (and as high as an estimated €255 billion when factoring in broader fossil fuels) for Russian oil, pipeline gas, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) since February 2022.
Support to Ukraine: Over the same period, the combined financial, military, and humanitarian assistance allocated or disbursed by the EU and its member states to Ukraine totals approximately €167 to €200.7 billion.

While the EU has heavily slashed its reliance on Russian energy, countries continue to import substantial amounts of Russian LNG, and some nations still receive pipeline oil under certain exemptions. Consequently, energy trade with Russia has outpaced European aid to Kyiv in several individual calendar years, such as 2024, when EU member states spent significantly more on Russian gas than they sent to Ukraine in direct financial aid.
- Gemini

Not really surprised though. The EU is literally funding both sides of an endless war.

(May 22, 2026 12:42 AM)Syne Wrote: I heard this claim and had to fact check it.

Since the start of the full-scale war, the European Union has cumulatively spent more money purchasing Russian fossil fuels than it has provided to Ukraine in direct financial, military, and humanitarian aid.
The balance of these financial flows is as follows:

Payments to Russia: The EU has paid over €220 billion (and as high as an estimated €255 billion when factoring in broader fossil fuels) for Russian oil, pipeline gas, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) since February 2022.
Support to Ukraine: Over the same period, the combined financial, military, and humanitarian assistance allocated or disbursed by the EU and its member states to Ukraine totals approximately €167 to €200.7 billion.

While the EU has heavily slashed its reliance on Russian energy, countries continue to import substantial amounts of Russian LNG, and some nations still receive pipeline oil under certain exemptions. Consequently, energy trade with Russia has outpaced European aid to Kyiv in several individual calendar years, such as 2024, when EU member states spent significantly more on Russian gas than they sent to Ukraine in direct financial aid.
- Gemini

Not really surprised though. The EU is literally funding both sides of an endless war.

Trump was suppose to stop the war in one day. Isn't it part of the reason US citizens voted him into whitehouse? It just proves how syphant, petty and fickle supporters of him are by them not acknowledging that he didn't live up to his campaign sentiments.

Trump went out of his way to support Orban(Hungary) even arranging for him to have a special clause in sanctions to continue buying Russian oil. It wasn't Europe as a whole that wanted to do it, it was just the US through Trump driving a wedge to keep Europe weak.

Europes have been a "piggy in the middle" between America and Russia since the second world war, with both trying to keep them from pulling their shit together and gaining the strength they once had. I wouldn't be suprised if there has always been an aim to make sure to keep Britain and Europe weak. Thats why the US is not the ally Europe thought it was, it's just a shill that term that the ruleing bunch of sociopaths of the US use to try to control the sentiment in their favour.

(May 22, 2026 04:13 AM)stryder Wrote:

(May 22, 2026 12:42 AM)Syne Wrote: I heard this claim and had to fact check it.

Since the start of the full-scale war, the European Union has cumulatively spent more money purchasing Russian fossil fuels than it has provided to Ukraine in direct financial, military, and humanitarian aid.
The balance of these financial flows is as follows:

Payments to Russia: The EU has paid over €220 billion (and as high as an estimated €255 billion when factoring in broader fossil fuels) for Russian oil, pipeline gas, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) since February 2022.
Support to Ukraine: Over the same period, the combined financial, military, and humanitarian assistance allocated or disbursed by the EU and its member states to Ukraine totals approximately €167 to €200.7 billion.

While the EU has heavily slashed its reliance on Russian energy, countries continue to import substantial amounts of Russian LNG, and some nations still receive pipeline oil under certain exemptions. Consequently, energy trade with Russia has outpaced European aid to Kyiv in several individual calendar years, such as 2024, when EU member states spent significantly more on Russian gas than they sent to Ukraine in direct financial aid.
- Gemini

Not really surprised though. The EU is literally funding both sides of an endless war.

Trump was suppose to stop the war in one day. Isn't it part of the reason US citizens voted him into whitehouse? It just proves how syphant, petty and fickle supporters of him are by them not acknowledging that he didn't live up to his campaign sentiments.

Not for a lack of trying, and we really don't care that much about European ingrates' problems. Not only did foreign wars lag way behind domestic issues as a priority, but Ukraine was a lower priority for US voters than the Hamas war.

Quote:Trump went out of his way to support Orban(Hungary) even arranging for him to have a special clause in sanctions to continue buying Russian oil. It wasn't Europe as a whole that wanted to do it, it was just the US through Trump driving a wedge to keep Europe weak.

No, Europe could have chosen to get along with Trump, by dropping their tariffs on US imports, but they kept EU members from doing so. Since Orban was an ally, Trump did what he could to ease the EU imposed burden on Hungary, an EU member. That wedge was driven by the TDS EU.

Europe has always been the ones keeping themselves weak, through neglect of their own defense spending in favor of socialist/redistributive social programs.

Since the start of the war, the largest EU buyers of Russian products—primarily fossil fuels like oil and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)—are Hungary, France, Slovakia, Belgium, and Spain.

These countries have consistently led European import volumes due to specific long-term pipeline exemptions or their major LNG port infrastructures.
- Gemini

The EU exempted Hungary because it is a landlocked country. That wasn't Trump's doing.

Quote:Europes have been a "piggy in the middle" between America and Russia since the second world war, with both trying to keep them from pulling their shit together and gaining the strength they once had. I wouldn't be suprised if there has always been an aim to make sure to keep Britain and Europe weak. Thats why the US is not the ally Europe thought it was, it's just a shill that term that the ruleing bunch of sociopaths of the US use to try to control the sentiment in their favour.

Weak people always blame others. No one was ever keeping Europe from spending less on social programs and more on their own defense.
It's actually the reverse. Europe isn't the ally the US thought it was because NATO, trade, etc. were always a one-sided proposition favoring Europe.

Playing all aggrieved now just shows a severe lack of historical/economic understanding.

(May 22, 2026 04:40 AM)Syne Wrote:

(May 22, 2026 04:13 AM)stryder Wrote:

(May 22, 2026 12:42 AM)Syne Wrote: I heard this claim and had to fact check it.

Since the start of the full-scale war, the European Union has cumulatively spent more money purchasing Russian fossil fuels than it has provided to Ukraine in direct financial, military, and humanitarian aid.
The balance of these financial flows is as follows:

Payments to Russia: The EU has paid over €220 billion (and as high as an estimated €255 billion when factoring in broader fossil fuels) for Russian oil, pipeline gas, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) since February 2022.
Support to Ukraine: Over the same period, the combined financial, military, and humanitarian assistance allocated or disbursed by the EU and its member states to Ukraine totals approximately €167 to €200.7 billion.

While the EU has heavily slashed its reliance on Russian energy, countries continue to import substantial amounts of Russian LNG, and some nations still receive pipeline oil under certain exemptions. Consequently, energy trade with Russia has outpaced European aid to Kyiv in several individual calendar years, such as 2024, when EU member states spent significantly more on Russian gas than they sent to Ukraine in direct financial aid.
- Gemini

Not really surprised though. The EU is literally funding both sides of an endless war.

Trump was suppose to stop the war in one day. Isn't it part of the reason US citizens voted him into whitehouse? It just proves how syphant, petty and fickle supporters of him are by them not acknowledging that he didn't live up to his campaign sentiments.

Not for a lack of trying, and we really don't care that much about European ingrates' problems. Not only did foreign wars lag way behind domestic issues as a priority, but Ukraine was a lower priority for US voters than the Hamas war.

Quote:Trump went out of his way to support Orban(Hungary) even arranging for him to have a special clause in sanctions to continue buying Russian oil. It wasn't Europe as a whole that wanted to do it, it was just the US through Trump driving a wedge to keep Europe weak.

No, Europe could have chosen to get along with Trump, by dropping their tariffs on US imports, but they kept EU members from doing so. Since Orban was an ally, Trump did what he could to ease the EU imposed burden on Hungary, an EU member. That wedge was driven by the TDS EU.

Europe has always been the ones keeping themselves weak, through neglect of their own defense spending in favor of socialist/redistributive social programs.

Since the start of the war, the largest EU buyers of Russian products—primarily fossil fuels like oil and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)—are Hungary, France, Slovakia, Belgium, and Spain.

These countries have consistently led European import volumes due to specific long-term pipeline exemptions or their major LNG port infrastructures.
- Gemini

The EU exempted Hungary because it is a landlocked country. That wasn't Trump's doing.

Quote:Europes have been a "piggy in the middle" between America and Russia since the second world war, with both trying to keep them from pulling their shit together and gaining the strength they once had. I wouldn't be suprised if there has always been an aim to make sure to keep Britain and Europe weak. Thats why the US is not the ally Europe thought it was, it's just a shill that term that the ruleing bunch of sociopaths of the US use to try to control the sentiment in their favour.

Weak people always blame others. No one was ever keeping Europe from spending less on social programs and more on their own defense.
It's actually the reverse. Europe isn't the ally the US thought it was because NATO, trade, etc. were always a one-sided proposition favoring Europe.

Playing all aggrieved now just shows a severe lack of historical/economic understanding.

The problem Syne is there is ALWAYS more than one way to do something. We don't have to do things the way the US or the way Trump does (or the way you do Syne). The historical understanding is slanted when it comes to the US.

Consider for the moment that Trump moans about legacy media, the reason why he complained so much isn't just down the the unsavoury things he'd been up to being leaked out there, its down to the fact that it's always been used as a propaganda engine. The media you listen to itself is a propaganda engine. Even if you turn around and say you use alternatives, remember the only reason they exist is for propaganda and propaganda for the most part is false.

Since you are pro-Trump/Russian I doubt there is much to be offered in any discourse on the subject at all. You should along with others be a bigger man.

(May 22, 2026 06:34 AM)stryder Wrote: The problem Syne is there is ALWAYS more than one way to do something. We don't have to do things the way the US or the way Trump does (or the way you do Syne). The historical understanding is slanted when it comes to the US.

It's really not. The US has carried the vast burden of defense spending on behalf of NATO. Europe has chosen to take advantage of that by diverting would-be defense spending to social programs. Those are the facts, no matter how much Europeans may really wish to whinge about them.

Quote:Consider for the moment that Trump moans about legacy media, the reason why he complained so much isn't just down the the unsavoury things he'd been up to being leaked out there, its down to the fact that it's always been used as a propaganda engine. The media you listen to itself is a propaganda engine. Even if you turn around and say you use alternatives, remember the only reason they exist is for propaganda and propaganda for the most part is false.

That's rich coming from the country of the effectively state-run BBC. Here, the closest we had was educational PBS, which lost all of it's government funding under the Trump admin. Trying to paint everything as propaganda, to cover for your own, is lame, at best, and conspiratorial, at worst. Every viewpoint can't be propaganda, as actual objective facts do exist.

Quote:Since you are pro-Trump/Russian I doubt there is much to be offered in any discourse on the subject at all. You should along with others be a bigger man.

Europeans seem more pro-Russia than I am. They're the ones who seem happy with the forever war in Ukraine, where I really think they should do more to end that war. Trump has always been about ending the war, to save Ukrainian lives, just not at the naive European insistence that the US risk direct, potentially nuclear, war with Russia... in a conflict that involves zero US interests, but plenty of Europe's. Their usual big talk with zero action... except continuing to fund both sides... and convince Zelenskyy not to accept any deal.

The fact that you think "Trump/Russia" is a thing proves you're a target of propaganda.

Has Zelenskyy been striking Russian diesel facilities to drive up prices ahead of the midterms, in the hopes of getting more Democrats into congress willing to write him blank checks?
https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/YZlwPVhkuqU

(Sep 22, 2026 05:30 AM)Syne Wrote: Has Zelenskyy been striking Russian diesel facilities to drive up prices ahead of the midterms, in the hopes of getting more Democrats into congress willing to write him blank checks?

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/YZlwPVhkuqU

Ukraine is defending itself from an aggressor. Using tactics like hitting their fuel covers a bunch of goals towards doing just that, such as making sure everyday Russians see the wars direct impact, making sure that fuel is in less supply as it doesn't just fuel their military in it's push, it's logistics and putting people on the front line in a timely fashion. Coupled with the fact that those glide bombs are obviously fuelled with something to not just get airborne but as the payload.

if the US's other-left really is clutching at straws to try and counter the potential of a piss poor midterm, it really does prove they are deluding themselves.

Quote: The US has carried the vast burden of defense spending on behalf of NATO.

I thought the agreement was that each NATO country is only required to spend 2% of their GDP. In that department the US isn’t even number one. Chart I looked at has Poland at 4.3% leading the way. Even Latvia spends more of their GDP than America. However this is a BBC article.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyz4nq91wpo

Although Canada didn’t make the top 14 here it does say we meet our 2% obligation.

Is not the USA defence spending countered by its position as the largest arms dealer on the planet? Have to imagine some of these arms are sold to NATO countries, no? One article has American arms sales at 42% of worlds dealers, seven times more than second place S Korea. Can’t vouch for accuracy here but….

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-...s-in-2025/

As long as there are discrepancies there’s no reason to believe anything about NATO spending, I guess.

(Sep 22, 2026 09:44 AM)stryder Wrote: Ukraine is defending itself from an aggressor. Using tactics like hitting their fuel covers a bunch of goals towards doing just that, such as making sure everyday Russians see the wars direct impact, making sure that fuel is in less supply as it doesn't just fuel their military in it's push, it's logistics and putting people on the front line in a timely fashion. Coupled with the fact that those glide bombs are obviously fuelled with something to not just get airborne but as the payload.

So Zelenskyy making a mutual agreement to not hit civilian infrastructure and then doing so anyway is fine. No problem he lied, and no care how ulterior his motive.

Quote:if the US's other-left really is clutching at straws to try and counter the potential of a piss poor midterm, it really does prove they are deluding themselves.

You obviously don't understand US right/left distinctions, as the UK has much more of a uniparty, especially economically.

---

(Sep 22, 2026 01:27 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote:

Quote: The US has carried the vast burden of defense spending on behalf of NATO.

I thought the agreement was that each NATO country is only required to spend 2% of their GDP. In that department the US isn’t even number one. Chart I looked at has Poland at 4.3% leading the way. Even Latvia spends more of their GDP than America. However this is a BBC article.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyz4nq91wpo

Ahem:

In cash terms however, the US is still by far the single biggest spender on defence, spending about $980bn (£720bn) last year, which was 60% of the Nato total. - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyz4nq91wpo

But even by percent of GDP, Europe is obviously letting border countries bear the brunt of defense spending. Similar to how Democrats let border states bear the brunt of their open-borders policies.

Quote:Although Canada didn’t make the top 14 here it does say we meet our 2% obligation.

Is not the USA defence spending countered by its position as the largest arms dealer on the planet? Have to imagine some of these arms are sold to NATO countries, no? One article has American arms sales at 42% of worlds dealers, seven times more than second place S Korea. Can’t vouch for accuracy here but….

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-...s-in-2025/

No, arms sales would actually lower our overall defense spending, as that would be a profit against expenses.

Quote:As long as there are discrepancies there’s no reason to believe anything about NATO spending, I guess.

Sure. Keep looking for excuses.

Syne Wrote:So Zelenskyy making a mutual agreement to not hit civilian infrastructure and then doing so anyway is fine. No problem he lied, and no care how ulterior his motive.

Not telling the truth? From a Trump supporter that seems rather rich.
Putin could stop his invasion with a phone call .. Zelensky can't do that .. he needs to encourage Putin to make that phone call. You point out that you don't like what Zelensky is doing but you don't want to encourage Putin to make that phone call .. fine!