Col Doug Macgregor: MORE WEAPONS for UKRAINE is MEANINGLESS

Daniel Davis Deep Dive Merch: Etsy store

President Trump has proposed a major policy shift regarding the Ukraine war. He announced that the U.S. will sell approximately $10 billion worth of ammunition to NATO, who will then supply it to Ukraine. Trump openly said this would be financially beneficial for the U.S. However, critics raised concerns that American arsenals are dangerously depleted, with missile supplies for the Navy and Air Force estimated to last only 8 days in a conventional war — after which the U.S. would face the nuclear option.

Trump also issued a 50-day ultimatum to Vladimir Putin to end the war, warning that if peace talks don’t begin by then, the U.S. will impose 100% tariffs on any country buying Russian oil and gas, aiming to cut off funding to Russia’s war machine.

Commentators criticized this plan as disconnected from military and strategic reality. They argued:

Russia has already destroyed most of Ukraine’s military, so sending more weapons might be pointless if there's no one to use them.

A significant portion of U.S. military aid reportedly ends up on the black market, with examples like Javelin missiles showing up in Mexico.

Statements by Trump-aligned officials like Matt Whitaker and General Jack Keane were dismissed as uninformed or scripted political messaging, not grounded in battlefield realities.

Claims that Russia is weak or failing are considered illusions, with observers noting Russia’s strategy focuses more on destroying forces than capturing land.

The analysis concluded that Europe’s elite leaders, many of whom are unpopular domestically, might be trying to keep the U.S. engaged in the war to maintain power and avoid domestic political upheaval. They may be making promises to Trump (such as increased defense spending) to buy time and continue the current geopolitical order — one that is increasingly seen as unsustainable.