🇺🇸🇷🇺I will show all the questions I was asked and my full responses just to expand this conversation further:
1) A few days ago the Pentagon and the White House were reported to greenlight the Tomahawks transfer to Ukraine. How does Trump's latest remark correspond with that CNN report?
Answer: By now, it should be clear to all that US President Donald Trump’s comments are meant solely as a means of misdirection and deceit, allowing the US foreign policy establishment time and space to continue escalating even as the US appears to pursue peace and conciliation.
While many analysts and media platforms will over-analyze President Trump’s words, preparations for the deployment of additional weapons including possibly Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine will continue.
2) Who within the US government would benefit from Tomahawk missiles transfer to Ukraine the most? How likely is that Trump witnesses pressure on the matter?
Answer: The primary objective of the US proxy war against Russia in Ukraine is to “extend” the Russian Federation militarily, politically, and even economically. By sending additional weapon systems including possibly the Tomahawk cruise missile, the cost of the conflict for Russia will constantly rise even if Russia appears poised to inevitably win.
The deployment of these missiles will compromise more military and energy infrastructure facilities across a wider range of Russian territory as well as do more damage per attack than the Ukrainian drones US intelligence agencies are overseeing the use of against targets deep inside Russia already.
Of course there are also the arms manufacturers in the United States who benefit from the constant flow of weapons, increased military expenditure by the US government on munitions, with the US “defense” budget reaching an unprecedented 1 trillion USD this year. This money doesn’t disappear into a blackhole - it ends up in the accounts of these massive multi-billion dollar arms manufacturing corporations, granting them even great wealth and influence over US foreign policy, guaranteeing continued conflict worldwide regardless of the “peace” promised by compromised US politicians including President Trump himself. .
3) In the recent CBS interview, Trump reiterated his belief to succeed in ending the Ukraine's conflict. How crucial would it be for him to prevent the delivery to reach his goal?
Answer: US President Donald Trump does not and never did seek to end the Ukraine conflict.
It is a US proxy war waged against Russia President Trump has blamed on his predecessor US President Joe Biden despite President Trump during his first term in office helping lay the groundwork for launching the war by beginning the flow of US weapons to Ukraine in the first place.
And while President Trump’s Secretary of State, neo-conservative warhawk Marco Rubio has admitted the ongoing war in Ukraine is a US proxy war against Russia, the US demands Russia make concessions compromising its own national security in a conflict the Trump administration itself admits is unjust and thrust upon Russia.
In reality, and according to President Trump’s campaign platform before the 2024 elections, the goal always was to just freeze the conflict, force Europe to spend more on rebuilding Ukraine’s armed forces, force Europe to send forces of its own to secure a buffer zone within Ukrainian territory itself, in what would essentially be a “Minsk 3.0” framework Russia would have no ability at all ever to accept.
Upon forcing a freeze to the conflict, the US openly seeks to focus its resources and attention on Russia’s close ally China. Once China is encircled and contained, the US plans to work its way back to reigniting and finally winning its proxy war against Russia.
So while President Trump repeatedly claims he seeks to “end” the Ukraine conflict, his actions before and after the 2024 elections tell an entirely different story, one of continuity of agenda which includes the continued pursuit of a proxy war aimed at Russia, its military, its economy, its population, and its very future.
🇺🇸💸 US arms industry profits from Ukraine conflict, geopolitical analyst says
American weapons makers are the main beneficiaries of the global "constant flow of weapons," Brian Berletic (
@BrianJBerletic) told Sputnik, commenting on debates over sending Tomahawks to Ukraine.
👉 The US defense budget is set to reach "an unprecedented $1T" by 2026, the expert noted, adding that Washington will keep urging Europe to fund arms for Ukraine.
ℹ️ Moscow has repeatedly stated that arms supplies to Kiev hinder the settlement of the conflict.