Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently stated that the end of the war between Russia and Ukraine is still “very, very far away”—a grim declaration as Europe doubles down on financial and military support to sustain the costly conflict.

President Donald Trump wasted no time responding on Truth Social, calling Zelensky’s statement “the worst statement that could have been made” and warning that “America will not put up with it for much longer.”

Then came the bombshell: The Trump administration announced that all aid to Ukraine—including weapons currently in transit through Poland—was being put on hold. The message was clear: It’s time for Zelensky to step down from his high horse and consider a ceasefire that could end the bloodshed. Russia has signaled willingness to negotiate, and if Ukraine truly cares about its people, it should seize the moment.

Some argue that both nations could declare a win. Russia, having exposed its own military weaknesses, could still claim victory under a ceasefire. Meanwhile, Ukraine could benefit from a rare earth elements deal with the United States, giving it a financial boost. Russia would return to selling oil and gas to Europe, and the U.S. would invest in Ukraine’s infrastructure. The most important outcome? The killing would stop.

But this, of course, runs counter to what many world leaders seem to want.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is among those eager to escalate the war, pledging boots on the ground and planes in the air.

That’s a bold strategy considering the UK is struggling to maintain its own national security. With an influx of migrants and increasing domestic threats, the idea of sending troops abroad while failing to protect British soil seems absurd.

Starmer also claims that Europe needs U.S. backing. Let’s do some quick math: 500 million Europeans supposedly need 300 million Americans to help defeat 140 million Russians? The numbers don’t add up.

Crimea has long considered itself Russian. The Donbas region consistently votes for pro-Russian candidates. Ukraine isn’t getting those areas back, no matter how many speeches European leaders make. Yet Starmer is ready to send British troops to fight for a country that has canceled elections, jailed its opposition, and silenced dissent—while his own government punishes citizens for politically incorrect social media posts.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has repeatedly pointed out these contradictions.

Meanwhile, European leaders appear more outraged by Vice President JD Vance’s recent speech than by the ongoing terror attacks within their own borders. Germany suffered another attack just yesterday, yet these politicians are more focused on Ukraine’s frontlines than their own streets.

Maybe, just maybe, they should prioritize protecting their own citizens before rushing headfirst into a war.

So far, an estimated 1.5 million men and women are dead or missing as a result of this war. How many more lives need to be sacrificed?

Yet, the mainstream media is now pushing the idea that war is somehow profitable for America. Fortunately, voices like Congressman Tim Burchett are pushing back.

Before last Friday, peace seemed within reach. The mineral concession agreement would have benefited all key players: Putin’s ambitions would have been checked, American investments would have surged in Ukraine, and a war-torn region could have begun its recovery.

But instead of capitalizing on that opportunity, Zelensky chose to lash out at the only leaders who have brought Russia to the negotiating table. Under Biden, diplomacy was nonexistent. Yet, Zelensky continues to cater to an administration that has done little but prolong the conflict.

Zelensky may not like the MAGA movement, but too bad—Trump is in charge now, and he was the one working toward a real solution.

He fumbled the ball. Badly.

That’s not the behavior of a reliable ally—it’s the tantrum of a petulant child.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu provided a stark contrast in leadership over the weekend.

Consider how differently the U.S. treats Israel compared to Ukraine. The U.S. imposes strict conditions on Netanyahu’s war efforts—dictating everything from civilian death toll limits to cabinet structures. Ukraine, on the other hand, has been handed billions of dollars with zero oversight and zero accountability. And yet, Zelensky had the audacity to enter the Oval Office and insult the very country bankrolling his war effort.

Without U.S. aid, what would Zelensky be left with? Canada?

Trudeau has also floated the idea of sending troops and planes—but let’s be serious. Canada has a grand total of 63 fighter jets. Sending just 10 to Ukraine would reduce their own national air defense by 16%. That’s not a strategy—it’s self-sabotage.

This performative chest-thumping is falling flat. Take a look at this CNN poll on American support for the war:

CNN may act surprised, but anyone paying attention could see this coming.

After three years of war, Zelensky is still saying the end is “very, very far away.” Meanwhile, peace was within reach just days ago. Americans are done with this.

While politicians like Trudeau and Starmer are eager to send their own soldiers into the meat grinder, at least the U.S. has a leader with common sense.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio summed it up best:

Rubio is right. If this war ends under Trump’s leadership, he should receive a Nobel Peace Prize. But instead, we’re left listening to out-of-touch politicians and media talking heads who are more than happy to sacrifice more young men and women for a war without a clear end.

Hopefully, rational minds will prevail, and negotiations will resume. But based on this week’s developments, peace remains frustratingly distant.