conflict
Trump Brings Glimmer Of Hope For Peace In Europe

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Morgan Murphy
As the war in Ukraine rages onward, President-elect Donald Trump brings a glimmer of hope for peace in Europe this Christmas season.
An end to the fighting hinges on three key points: (1) Crimea (2) the Donbas region east of the Dnieper River and (3) NATO membership for Ukraine. Many more issues lurk, but without agreement on these major negotiating points, it is unlikely a peace deal will emerge.
Wars often begin with wild optimism that leads to untenable positions. In 1860, Confederates imagined a “short war,” and after early successes at Fort Sumter and Bull Run thought they would be marching through Philadelphia in a matter of months. In 1941, the Japanese strategized they could knock out the U.S. Pacific fleet, shocking and demoralizing the American public long enough for Japan to consolidate their “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere,” capitalizing on resource-rich territories like Southeast Asia, the Dutch East Indies and the Philippines. In both cases, initial optimism led to eventual disaster.
In 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aimed to seize Kiev and roll over the rest of Ukraine. U.S. intelligence agencies predicted he would be successful. Similarly, after an unexpectedly strong defense, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy vowed to reclaim every inch of land occupied by Russia. Until as recently as this fall, he was touting a “victory plan” to force Moscow to surrender.
Yet, as it tends to do in conflict, the specter of death clarifies the mind. One thousand days of bloodshed in Eastern Europe has washed away initial optimism, giving way to grim realism on both sides. With the war approaching its third year, the biggest recent change in the dynamic is Trump’s landslide election in November.
In a word, Trump’s victory crushed any hopes that America might come charging into the war with air cover and boots on the ground. Out too, are further multi-billion “supplemental Ukraine spending packages.” The American people resoundingly voted to shrink government and cut off the firehose of taxpayer dollars spewing out of Washington, D.C.
Last Wednesday, Trump named Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg as the special envoy to Russia and Ukraine. In the announcement, Trump said of Kellogg, “He was with me right from the beginning! Together, we will secure PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH, and Make America, and the World, SAFE AGAIN!” The battle-hardened warrior and former Fox News analyst (and full disclosure — my boss and colleague at the America First Policy Institute) will no doubt bring massive pressure to bear on both sides.
After the election, it did not take long for all parties to adjust to the new reality. Putin said what Trump publicly said “about the desire to restore relations with Russia, to help end the Ukrainian crisis, in my opinion, deserves attention at least.” Last week, Zelenskyy soberly admitted to Sky News that Ukraine would surrender Crimea, Russia’s critical entry point to the Black Sea.
“He’s been saying that quietly for more than a year,” another prominent Ukrainian politician told me privately this week.
Likewise, European leaders are quietly discussing the most likely scenario: Russia keeps Crimea and the Russian-centric provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk. Speaking off the record with several former Senate colleagues, the mood seems the same in Washington.
That leaves, of course, the issue of NATO membership for Ukraine. President Joe Biden and his senior-most cabinet membersr loudly and repeatedly promised NATO membership for Ukraine. The problem with that promise was their resounding defeat. The American people feel great sympathy for Ukraine, but that stops short of committing the lives of our youth to defend Ukraine’s borders.
Since at least 2007, Putin has made clear that NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia are non-negotiable for Russia. Though many Western leaders seem to doubt his resolve, Putin has more than backed up his red line with 700,000 Russian casualties. More American jets or long-range missiles are unlikely to change Putin’s calculus.
Short of NATO membership, perhaps we will see a U.N. peacekeeping mission similar to the armistice on the Korean Peninsula in 1953. Ukrainian membership in the European Union may be in the offing as well.
Either way, a new American president and seeming willingness on both sides to negotiate brings with it the hope of peace in the new year.
Morgan Murphy is military thought leader, former press secretary to the Secretary of Defense and national security advisor in the U.S. Senate.
conflict
Trump dismisses US intelligence that Iran wasn’t pursuing nuclear bomb before Israeli attack

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

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.
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.
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!
-
Business2 days ago
Carney’s Honeymoon Phase Enters a ‘Make-or-Break’ Week
-
conflict2 days ago
Trump leaves G7 early after urging evacuation of Tehran
-
Uncategorized2 days ago
Kananaskis G7 meeting the right setting for U.S. and Canada to reassert energy ties
-
Business2 days ago
Carney praises Trump’s world ‘leadership’ at G7 meeting in Canada
-
Business2 days ago
Trump family announces Trump Mobile: Made in America, for America
-
Crime2 days ago
UK finally admits clear evidence linking Pakistanis and child grooming gangs
-
International1 day ago
Trump not seeking ceasefire with Israel, Iran as he rushes back to White House
-
Business1 day ago
The CBC is a government-funded giant no one watches