Europeans Aren’t Concerned About Russian Bear Invading Continent After Ukraine

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

The foreign policy blob in Washington, D.C., would have us believe that Vladimir Putin is Adolf Hitler 2.0 and must be stopped before he rolls over the rest of Europe. It is an intellectually lazy argument.

In the first place, Russia has struggled in its fight with Ukraine—a small nation with one-fourth Russia’s population and far fewer resources. How would Mother Russia fare against the combined firepower of NATO? Likely not so hot: Europe’s economy is six times larger than Russia’s. Likewise, the population advantage of Europe stands three-to-one over Russia.

Aside from Russia’s vast nuclear weapons stockpiles, it is no match for Europe.

Putin knows he would be crushed in a head-to-head with NATO and has repeatedly made clear that he has no interest in going to war with any NATO country, including Poland.

Secondly, if Europe was seriously under threat from the Russian bear, you might think that Europeans themselves would be more alarmed. They don’t seem to be. In fact, across nearly every threat measured by the Munich Security Council, trends show a downward ebb among Europeans. To most, Russia ranks as a threat below radical Islamic terrorism and mass migration. The Germans are more worried about cyber attacks than Putin; to the French, racism is more worrisome.

Aren’t these the very people America is spending $185 billion in Ukraine to protect from Russian expansionism?

Across the European continent, the United States maintains 100,000 troops on 185 major military bases and 78 minor sites (minor being defined as less than 10 acres or $10 million). Taken altogether, American forward operating bases in Europe sprawl over 265,000 acres with an estimated value of $95.5 billion. When one examines the Department of Defense’s annual budget, protecting Europe is America’s largest yearly expenditure—and that’s before Ukraine supplemental funding is added to the tally.

Yet the average resident of Berlin is likely more worried about his email getting hacked than he frets about the Kremlin rolling tanks through Deutschland.

Europe was the world’s center for combat power from roughly 1400 until 1945. No more. Even the larger armies of NATO are struggling to maintain effective combat power. The British Army cannot sustain a complete expeditionary armored brigade. At 23 years old, the Charles de Gaulle, France’s flagship and sole aircraft carrier, is reaching the end of its effective lifespan but sea trials are not expected to begin for its replacement until 2036.

The French have less than 90 heavy artillery pieces—Russia is losing more each month fighting Ukraine. Reporting in October 2022 found that Germany only had enough ammunition for two days of war, far below the NATO 30-day minimum. In 2022 NATO exercises, none of the Bundeswehr’s 18 new Puma infantry fighting vehicles were able to complete the drill.

Ukraine has revealed many of NATO’s weakness. These led a professor of war studies at the University of Warwick, Anthony King, to remark that Europe has “systematically demilitarized itself because it didn’t need to spend the money. They have basically gone to sleep.”

That ambivalence toward defense comes across in another recent survey of Europeans. Sixty percent of Italians, 47% of Germans and 40% of the French are in favor of cutting off arms shipments to Ukraine. Across Europe, 60% think that Ukraine will be an economic burden. Among the French, Spanish and Italians, more than 40% either don’t know or don’t care who wins the war in Ukraine.

Perhaps America’s security blanket for Europe has been too heavy and we have indeed lulled the continent into a stupor. Or maybe Europeans are correct in their assessment of Putin—that his invasion of Ukraine is not a precursor to the reassembly of the U.S.S.R.

In either case, more American taxpayers are questioning the D.C. logic that demands ever-increasing blank checks for a war with no end in sight.

Morgan Murphy is a former DoD press secretary, national security adviser in the U.S. Senate, a veteran of Afghanistan.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Featured image credit: (Screen Capture/CSPAN)

Related Topics:#DailyCaller #EuropeRussia #MorganMurphy #NATORussia #USRussia #USUkraine

Up Next

Toronto, Vancouver named “Impossibly Unaffordable”

Don't Miss

Hydrogen is the most recent impractical green energy blind alley

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Trump puts new price tag on Canada joining “Golden Dome”

Censorship Industrial Complex / 2 hours ago

Jordan Peterson reveals DEI ‘expert’ serving as his ‘re-education coach’ for opposing LGBT agenda

conflict / 2 hours ago

Trump dismisses US intelligence that Iran wasn’t pursuing nuclear bomb before Israeli attack

conflict

Trump dismisses US intelligence that Iran wasn’t pursuing nuclear bomb before Israeli attack

Published on June 18, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Dave DeCamp

When asked about Tulsi Gabbard’s assessment, President Trump said, ‘I don’t care what she said. I think they’re very close to having [a nuclear weapon].’

Ahead of Israel’s attacks on Iran, U.S. intelligence assessed that Iran was not pursuing nuclear weapons and that even if it chose to do so, it would take up to three years for Tehran to be able to produce and deliver a nuclear bomb against a target of its choosing, CNN reported on Tuesday, citing people familiar with the intelligence.

The U.S. assessment goes against the claims from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who launched the war under the pretext of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. But President Trump appears to be taking Israel’s word over his own intelligence agencies, as he told reporters that he didn’t care about his director of national intelligence’s assessment on the issue.

In March, DNI Tulsi Gabbard said that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” Her assessment was reflected in the Intelligence Community’s annual threat assessment.

When asked about this assessment, President Trump said, “I don’t care what she said. I think they’re very close to having [a nuclear weapon].”

Netanyahu claimed in an interview on Sunday that he shared intelligence with the U.S. that Iran could have developed a nuclear weapon within months or a year, although that was not the conclusion of U.S. intelligence agencies, based on the CNN report. But even based on Netanyahu’s own timeline, the U.S. would have had time to continue negotiations with Iran.

Israel attacked Iran two days before another round of negotiations between the U.S. and Iran was set to be held. Trump had been demanding that Iran eliminate its nuclear enrichment program, which was a non-starter for Tehran. Despite the apparent impasse, Iran was set to present a counter-proposal to the U.S., but the talks were canceled after Israel launched its war.

Reprinted with permission from Antiwar.com.

Business

Trump makes impact on G7 before he makes his exit

Published on June 17, 2025

Duane Rolheiser

Trump Rips Into Obama and Trudeau at G7 for a “Very Big Mistake” on Russia

At the G7 in Canada, President Trump didn’t just speak—he delivered a headline-making indictment.

Standing alongside Canada’s Prime Minister, he directly blasted Barack Obama and Justin Trudeau, accusing them of committing a “very big mistake” by booting Russia out of the G8. He warned that this move didn’t deter conflict—it unleashed it, and he insists it paved the way for the war in Ukraine.

Subscribe to The Vigilant Fox

Before the working sessions began, the two leaders fielded questions. The first topic: the ongoing trade negotiations between the U.S. and Canada. Trump didn’t hesitate to point out that the issue wasn’t personal—it was philosophical.

“It’s not so much holding up. I think we have different concepts,” Trump said. “I have a tariff concept, Mark [Carney] has a different concept, which is something that some people like.”

He made it clear that he prefers a more straightforward approach. “I’ve always been a tariff person. It’s simple, it’s easy, it’s precise and it just goes very quickly.”

Carney, he added, favors a more intricate framework—“also very good,” Trump said. The goal now, according to Trump, is to examine both strategies and find a path forward. “We’re going to look at both and we’re going to come out with something hopefully.”

When asked whether a deal could be finalized in a matter of days or weeks, Trump didn’t overpromise, but he left the door open. “It’s achievable but both parties have to agree.”

Then the conversation took an unexpected turn.

Trump went off script and straight to one of the most explosive foreign policy critiques of the day. Without any prompting, he shifted from trade to Russia’s removal from the G8, calling it one of the most consequential mistakes in recent memory.

Standing next to Canada’s Prime Minister, whose predecessor helped lead that push, Trump argued that isolating Moscow may have backfired. “The G7 used to be the G8,” he said, pointing to the moment Russia was kicked out.

He didn’t hold back. “Barack Obama and a person named Trudeau didn’t want to have Russia in, and I would say that was a mistake because I think you wouldn’t have a war right now if you had Russia in.”

This wasn’t just a jab at past leaders. Trump was drawing a direct line from that decision to the war in Ukraine. According to him, expelling Russia took away any real chance at diplomacy before things spiraled.

“They threw Russia out, which I claimed was a very big mistake even though I wasn’t in politics then, I was loud about it.” For Trump, diplomacy doesn’t mean agreement—it means keeping adversaries close enough to negotiate.

“It was a mistake in that you spent so much time talking about Russia, but he’s no longer at the table. It makes life more complicated. You wouldn’t have had the war.”

Then he made it personal. Trump compared two timelines—one with him in office, and one without. “You wouldn’t have a war right now if Trump were president four years ago,” he said. “But it didn’t work out that way.”

Before reporters could even process Trump’s comments on Russia, he shifted gears again—this time turning to Iran.

Asked whether there had been any signs that Tehran wanted to step back from confrontation, Trump didn’t hesitate. “Yeah,” he said. “They’d like to talk.”

The admission was short but revealing. For the first time publicly, Trump confirmed that Iran had signaled interest in easing tensions. But he made it clear they may have waited too long.

“They should have done that before,” he said, referencing a missed 60-day negotiation window. “On the 61st day I said we don’t have a deal.”

Even so, he acknowledged that both sides remain under pressure. “They have to make a deal and it’s painful for both parties but I would say Iran is not winning this war.”

Then came the warning, delivered with unmistakable urgency. “They should talk and they should talk IMMEDIATELY before it’s too late.”

Eventually, the conversation turned back to domestic issues: specifically, immigration and crime.

He confirmed he’s directing ICE to focus its efforts on sanctuary cities, which he accused of protecting violent criminals for political purposes.

He pointed directly at major Democrat-led cities, saying the worst problems are concentrated in deep blue urban centers. “I look at New York, I look at Chicago. I mean you got a really bad governor in Chicago and a bad mayor, but the governor is probably the worst in the country, Pritzker.”

And he didn’t stop there. “I look at how that city has been overrun by criminals and New York and L.A., look at L.A. Those people weren’t from L.A. They weren’t from California most of those people. Many of those people.”

According to Trump, the crime surge isn’t just a local failure—it’s a direct consequence of what he called a border catastrophe under President Biden. “Biden allowed 21 million people to come into our country. Of that, vast numbers of those people were murderers, killers, people from gangs, people from jails. They emptied their jails into the U.S. Most of those people are in the cities.”

“All blue cities. All Democrat-run cities.”

He closed with a vow—one aimed squarely at the ballot box. Trump said he’ll do everything in his power to stop Democrats from using illegal immigration to influence elections.

“They think they’re going to use them to vote. It’s not going to happen.”

Just as the press corps seemed ready for more, Prime Minister Carney stepped in.

The momentum had clearly shifted toward Trump, and Carney recognized it. With a calm smile and hands slightly raised, he moved to wrap things up.

“If you don’t mind, I’m going to exercise my role, if you will, as the G7 Chair,” he said. “Since we have a few more minutes with the president and his team. And then we actually have to start the meeting to address these big issues, so…”

Trump didn’t object. He didn’t have to.

By then, the damage (or the impact) had already been done. He had steered the conversation, dropped one headline after another, and reshaped the narrative before the summit even began.

By the time Carney tried to regain control, it was already too late.

Wherever Trump goes, he doesn’t just attend the event—he becomes the event.

Thanks for reading! This post took time and care to put together, and we did our best to give this story the coverage it deserved.

If you like my work and want to support me and my team and help keep this page going strong, the most powerful thing you can do is sign up for the email list and become a paid subscriber.

Your monthly subscription goes further than you think. Thank you so much for your support.

This story was made possible with the help of Overton —I couldn’t have done it without him.

If you’d like to support his growing network, consider subscribing for the month or the year. Your support helps him expand his team and cover more stories like this one.

We both truly appreciate your support!