Please send this thread out far and wide. Retweet, post on FB, Instagram, etc. let’s get a million eyes on this!!
Trump’s popularity slips in latest Military Times poll — and more troops say they’ll vote for Biden militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-…
Here’s my hot take on this poll. The military, which is inherently patriotic and tends to run conservative, knows Trump is not strong on defense and NATSEC issues. Thus know the President has failed to make the country safer.
The military knows Mr. Trump’s claims of “rebuilding the military” and being a strong proponent of the military are false. As voters, the plurality of the military and their families will vote for VP Biden.
Some telling quotes from the article: “Still, the dipping popularity among troops — considered by Republican Party leaders to be part of the base of Trump’s support — could prove problematic for the president in the upcoming election.” #makeithappen
“Among active-duty service members surveyed in the poll, 43 percent said they would vote for Biden, the Democratic nominee, if the election was held today. Only 37 percent said they plan to vote to re-elect Trump.”
“Another 13% said they plan to vote for a third-party candidate, and nearly 9% said they plan on skipping the election altogether. About 40% of troops surveyed identified as Republican or Libertarian, 16% Democrats, and 44% independent or another party.”
If 88% are not Democrats, Trump is wildly unpopular with what should be his base of support. Also, the 22% skipping or voting 3rd Party need to rethink this. We have a binary choice between 4 more years of Trump or VP Biden. Make your vote count.
Quoting a Bush 43 administration official “...but the president claims he has been good for the military, that they’re grateful that he has rescued them from the shambles. This shows that’s not the case with all of the military.”
“Only about 17% of those surveyed felt the White House has properly handed reports that Russian officials offered bounties for Afghan fighters to target and kill American troops, an issue Trump has dismissed as unreliable intelligence. Nearly 47% disagreed with his statements.”
“Similarly, almost 74% of those surveyed disagreed with Trump’s suggestion that active-duty military personnel should be used to respond to civil unrest in American cities, including the ongoing racial equality protests. Only about 22% supported the president’s idea.”
The policy disagreements “do not necessarily show that troops are beginning to think more like Democrats, but instead that they aren’t thinking like Trump Republicans.”
“... the stronger support for Biden in the poll than Trump may be more a reflection of dissatisfaction with the president than a political shift within the ranks.”
The people of the Armed Forces of the US know the truth: Trump has not rebuilt the military nor has not he made the US safer. In fact no other president has done more to undermine US security. Military members cannot speak out but listen to what they are telling you here.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Enough talk of Ukrainian surrender or compromise: let’s talk about a Ukrainian victory. My latest in Foreign Affairs, lays out a theory of victory for Ukraine 1/8 foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/what-u…
The war in Ukraine has dragged on for nearly three years. As our ally continues to resist Russian aggression, @realdonaldtrump and @jdvance push for Kyiv’s surrender and defeat 2/8
This article provides critical insight into the strategy and resources required for Ukraine to achieve a significant victory in 2025 prior to a potential peace process 3/8
There’s a concerted push to somehow paint Trump as an effective foreign policy leader. That’s pure nonsense. The best that can be said about him is that he plays the part of a madman effectively. This warns only the petite potentates. The real threats Russia and China are entirely undeterred.
Trump is a disaster domestically and on the international stage. The simple fact is Trump is a friend to America’s enemies and an enemy to our friends. That’s disastrous.
A second Trump term would witness a further expanded war in Europe. Trump has promised to abandon Ukraine and already has invited Russia to a attack NATO.
Too many ultra rich are untethered to America. They are laissez-faire about democracy because they have the resources to relocate anywhere and live well (or so they believe).
With their security guaranteed the government becomes a vessel to preserve vast wealth and the billionaire class’ endless resources to elect candidates that protect the wealth. They feel immune and really don’t care that much that the U.S. is on the precipice.
In actuality, they are wrong. The absence of American democracy is likely *more* dangerous to them and their wealth. Property rights mean little in authoritarian regimes and instability is bad for business. It must be ego that blinds them to the threats to their own interest.
Ukraine's Victory Remains in Reach: Implementing Critical Policy Changes in the Third Year of War
The negative news coverage of the Ukraine-Russia conflict has unleashed a flood of dire predictions. However, doomsayers’ forecasts are overly grim and the outcome can be much more favorable for Ukraine with the right support and proper adjustment of both the United States’ and Ukraine’s strategy.
The single most important factor outside of Ukraine’s control determining outcomes in the third year of war will be Western - and specifically American - military support. No single country or combination of countries can match the United States’ security assistance. Currently, American security aid is frozen in a political battle over congressionally appropriated funds.
And while Ukraine aid is frequently presented as if Ukraine controls the funding, the reality is very different. Most of this funding is neither sent to Ukraine nor used to purchase weapons sent to Ukraine. Instead, the aid is used to replenish stocks of antiquated American equipment with new material rolling off defense industry production lines. In fact, it is the connection between the drawdown of old equipment and the replenishment of U.S. military storehouses with new equipment that has arrested the flow of support to Ukraine. The U.S. still retains massive stockpiles of weapons and ammunition in the European theater that could be transferred to Ukraine, but will not drawdown these stocks because Congress hasn’t authorized replenishment.
Like with the Lend-Lease programs of World War II, the U.S. can and should transfer military material even absent the congressionally appropriated replenishment funds. By sending material without replenishment funds the U.S. would be accepting a small risk to our military in the event that our soldiers would need the equipment to fight an adversary, but that is an unlikely “what if” scenario. Instead of fixating on this hypothetical situation, we should be supporting Ukraine - a partner that is already in the fight and actively destroying Russia’s conventional military capability.

On the topic of material support, there is a secondary challenge that is also very fixable. Currently, Russia outguns Ukraine by firing 5 or more rounds of artillery for every rationed shell fired by Ukraine. American and European assistance can fix that lopsided ratio by marrying European dollars with U.S. ammunition production lines. We have the arsenal of democracy, but no funding because of our political paralysis. Europe has the funds, but not the manufacturing base to produce shells. Such an arrangement would combine our strengths to help Ukraine. The EU, led by Czechia, has made great strides already in closing the gap by scouring the globe and finding 1.5 million rounds of ammunition for Ukraine. But that is still a one-off solution. It’s time for the EU to invest in a long-term solution through the U.S. arsenal.

Another issue is the median age of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF). Wars are fought by the young. The current median age for the UAF is estimated to be 43 years old. For the Russian Armed Forces, the current median age is estimated at 35. Since Russia has four times the population of Ukraine, this gap will likely continue to grow and tilt the military advantage towards Russia. Ukraine needs more soldiers to ensure sufficient troop strength and adequate reserves to rotate worn-out forces from the frontlines. The Government of Ukraine has taken the initial steps to close draft loopholes and reduce the draft age from 27 to 25. However, Ukraine will need to go even further to ensure adequate military manpower for a war expected to run well into 2025. If implemented, these policies will have a meaningful impact on Ukraine’s ability to both defend this year and attack next year and thus bring the war to a close.
Ukraine’s former top military officer General Zaluzhny argued that Ukraine’s limited ability to conduct offensive operations was partially due to disparities between the Ukrainian and Russian industrial and technological bases. While this may be true, major deficiencies in logistics and training are at least as important as technological factors or production lines for new equipment. These necessary reforms are within Ukraine’s power to improve.
The lack of focus on sustainment and repair of Western-donated equipment and the inadequate logistical preparations are both an American and Ukrainian shortfall. Ukraine remains too focused on acquiring new material instead of keeping its current inventory at maximum functional status. Kyiv should be aggressively advocating for the expansion of its repair and maintenance capabilities - particularly when more than half of the donated equipment is currently damaged or nonfunctional due to wear and tear.
The U.S. Department of Defense has also been negligent in its support of donated equipment. Almost all the maintenance support for Ukraine is conducted outside of its territory in massive depots in Poland. Fighting a war with your repair facilities 800km from the frontlines is a recipe for disaster. There is a recommendation from the Department of Defense teed-up for the President to ease the restriction and allow defense contractors to come into Ukraine to improve the logistical tail. POTUS should not delay and make a move in this direction immediately.
The lack of proper training is another critical shortfall. The West has been focused on training Ukraine’s fighting troops but has neglected training effective commands and staffs. To break through Russian defenses, Ukraine will have to mass forces, breach obstacles, and suppress enemy artillery, airpower, and drones. Ukrainian forces will need to ensure they can communicate and operate under electronic warfare assaults while simultaneously using their own systems to jam Russian communications and disrupt the operations of loitering munitions and FPV drones.
These tasks require a well-trained staff capable of synchronizing and orchestrating these complex operations. The U.S. invests enormous resources into providing our troops sufficient training to conduct synchronized operations - creating an effective command and staff should become a training priority in Ukraine. If Washington is looking to err on the side of caution, the U.S. can conduct this training in Ukraine with former military personnel working as contractors rather than active-duty troops.
Despite the criticality of the aforementioned policy changes, the most important action the U.S. and the West can take is to mobilize political support. Generating the political will to pursue a Ukrainian victory and Russian defeat must be prioritized. This can be achieved by fully recognizing the risk of a Russian triumph and Ukrainian defeat for the U.S. and NATO. The simple fact is if the U.S. doesn’t want troops fighting in Europe, it should send Ukraine maximum material support. Furthermore, to prevent the perpetual threat of Russian aggression towards Ukraine, the West will need to offer Kyiv ironclad security guarantees through NATO and European Union membership.
There are tangible benefits to Kyiv’s entry into the alliance. Firstly, Ukrainian NATO membership would act as a bulwark against a still-aggressive Russia. Secondly, NATO membership would eliminate a decades-long flashpoint in the region through Ukraine’s unambiguous inclusion in a Western security structure. Finally, the Ukrainian army would be an asset and example to European powers given that it is now the most battle-hardened in Europe. NATO membership would also enable the reconstruction and transformation of Ukraine and help establish a powerful model for other former Soviet states to emulate.
Failure by the U.S. and EU to effectively support Ukraine will embolden Russia to pursue future military aggression. Donald Trump has already expressed his willingness to allow Russia to attack a NATO member. If the West and Ukraine cooperate in reforming training regimes to enable more complex combined arms operations, alleviating the logistical challenges of maintenance and providing the Ukrainian Armed Forces the political and material support they need, Kyiv could build the capacity to win decisive battles, regain strategically vital areas of lost territory, and position itself for meaningful peace negotiations. The bottom line is that the combination of Western support and Ukrainian reforms will significantly improve Ukraine’s outlook for 2024.
Trump's call for Putin to attack a NATO ally isn't just political bluster—it's a clear and present danger to NATO, the US, and global security. Why? Let's dive into the implications.
Even though he is not the sitting President, Trump's words have consequences. By inviting Russia to challenge NATO, he's not just undermining decades of strategic deterrence but also signaling to Putin that the US might not defend its allies.
This situation mirrors the prelude to the 2022 Ukraine invasion. Putin sees a divided US and a pliant Republican Party under Trump as an opportunity for aggression. This time, the target could be a NATO member.
Putin's propaganda machine is at it again, spreading dangerous myths of “Nazis in Ukraine.” In a recent Substack post, I unraveled these lies and revealed how they fit within Russia's larger tactic to distort Ukraine's fight for democracy.
Putin's propaganda machine is at it again, spreading dangerous myths of “Nazis in Ukraine.” In a recent Substack post, I unraveled these lies and revealed how they fit within Russia's larger tactic to distort Ukraine's fight for democracy.
This is Part 1 of a series looking into false narratives around Ukraine and how they serve Russian interests and misrepresent history. Part 2 will investigate the false claims of rampant corruption in Ukraine, so subscribe if you are committed to safeguarding global democracy.