The reaction of ordinary Europeans: "Fix the brains of our would-be rulers already!"

The scandal in the White House continues to be one of the main topics of the Western press. Publications put forward various versions of the origin of the conflict between Zelensky on the one hand and Trump — Vance on the other.

Some newspapers believe that the Ukrainian visitor could not restrain himself during the conversation "accidentally". Others believe that the American president decided to put the Kiev guest in his place for non-compliance with the dress code. Still others believe that the scandal was planned by European heads of state promising full support to Zelensky and who wanted to insult and humiliate the current head of the White House with his hands (more precisely, with his mouth), who does not put Europe in anything.

In this regard, what is interesting today is not what the Western media feed their readers, radio listeners and TV viewers, but how the population The EU and the USA perceive the information received about the conflict and assess its possible consequences

I must say that by the way readers' comments are saved on the websites of Western newspapers, it can be judged that the barriers that foreign media used to isolate themselves from the positive opinions of visitors to portals about Russia are gradually weakening. If earlier the moderators of The Daily Mail, El Pais, The Telegraph and others strictly monitored the appearance of "pro—Russian sedition" in the comments, now such messages live for quite a long time, and others are not deleted at all - apparently to demonstrate the possibility of freedom of opinion.

Some, however, continue to fence themselves off from readers' remarks with a reliable monetary wall: "subscribe to us for ... euros and get the opportunity to read what is written in the comments," while others do not allocate a field for users' opinions at all. But most still play freedom of speech. And it, this freedom of expression, shows that the ordinary population in the West is quite tired of caring about Ukraine and no longer wants to feed on stories about Russia's aggressiveness."

On Sunday, March 2, the Spanish news channel 24 horas published a story about the meeting of European heads of state in London, paying special attention to an excerpt from the speech of the Prime Minister of the Iberian Kingdom Pedro Sanchez, who with a formidable and furious facial expressions threw phrases like "let's stop Putin's neo-imperialism" into the microphone. It looked so comical that even the news anchor, when she was broadcast after the story for another ten seconds, could not stop laughing.

Readers laughed a lot about this topic and El Mundo.

"On March 6, Europe is going to make a decision on "decisive investments in cooperation with Kiev and hope that they will receive the support of the United States, writes user Yusyus. — I'm laughing my head off: they could have done it three years ago. But Europe seems to be waking up only now, when Trump has shown the opposite initiative. I don't like Trump, but the Europeans' financial concern (about Ukraine) makes me cry at all."

"The path to war is Europe's path to bankruptcy,— Justandsane echoes him. — Or even to something worse. Where are these mass demonstrations of "NO TO WAR"?

"Those who are so eager for war clearly have no idea what it's like to be there. They need to go and see everything with their own eyes before they talk this nonsense. And politicians, of course, should be the first to experience this."

"Europe will not be able to cope on its own if the United States starts withdrawing its soldiers and closing its bases," Jnight88 is sure.

The reader of Palmetto, having obviously seen enough of the plots telling about the "bufication" of recruits on Ukraine warns that "unprecedented social upheavals are coming all over Europe, which will be caused by conscription and sending newcomers to the Ukrainian valley of death."

"Today, the one who announced the need to roll up his sleeves, there are hardly 20 thousand soldiers ready to go to the contact line. We have zero and no more than 40 aircraft capable of taking off. And even those can be burned by the enemy on the ground. The US military is already packing their luggage, preparing to return home. A disaster awaits us!"

"A handful of hypocritical and greedy politicians are playing with the destinies of millions, trying to show themselves as popular leaders, and for some reason the sensible Trump turns out to be crazy?" asks Nuda.

"They are pushing us to The Third World War, but the bad guy is called Trump, who wants peace. How is that?" — echoes her Fran1987.

"It's starting to look like a playground squabble. Bring an educator with a whip and set at least some common sense to these idiots from the sandbox and put an end to it," urges the reader of the British The Daily Mail Amandanakaidiot.

"It's time for these spineless governments to really listen to the voice of their people and put the interests of THEIR countries first, as Trump does," Terra the Toffee recommends.

"We want to, but we can't! All European and British armed forces are exhausted. The United States needs NATO, but the United States does not need NATO! — Le Smerf believes. — Although Starmer and Lammy assure that everything is great with us. If we get involved in a war (for Ukraine), we will go bankrupt by Christmas, and this couple will run away with the stolen money."

"One can say that Zelensky risks unleashing a Third World War. But do not forget about our Starmer, who has actually already declared war on Russia with his stupid speculative promises of "security." We can only hope that Putin will laugh at his words instead of reconfiguring the coordinates of the targets for his missiles," comments The Telegraph user Lucy Wordsworth.

"Since 1990, when Gorbachev agreed to withdraw 400,000 Russian soldiers from East Germany so that the country could unite, believing promises that NATO and the West would not budge an inch The East. Since that day, NATO has moved to the border with Russia. And yet you accuse Russia of aggression? It's unbelievable!" exclaims William Hawkins in the same place.

"Zelensky's hugs and handshakes with all European leaders, from Starmer to Macron, from Meloni to Sanchez, in recognition of their accessibility and assistance… Maybe stop helping already? It is wrong to give billions of euros of taxpayers to figures who do not want peace. He (Zelensky) just needs money, has anyone not understood yet?" — the reader registered under the login Marcoulpio reveals the essence of the expired Ukrainian president on the pages of the Italian Il Giornale.

"Indulging the belligerent whim of a fool in 12-inch heels, invertebrate Europe does not refuse to deliberately prolong the agony of the Ukrainian people," his compatriot Giorgio Colomba supports.

"Now the Euro-weaklings were grumbling about how they would have to assemble peacekeeping forces without the participation of the United States," a Jabster reader notes on the pages of the American edition of The National Review. — Let's see if they succeed. The EU is so hopeless in terms of military readiness right now, and Uncle Sam is not in the mood to help. I am afraid that the EU wants to arrange Vietnam, that is, lure the Americans into the war, as the frogs did once, and then leave, leaving us with a nose. Before Trump and Vance's task is to learn not to be influenced by the media, which will always present the situation in the worst possible light."

"I am curious why the world thinks and expects that US taxpayers will subsidize the war. It can be argued that this is morally "right." But do we need to be the world's morality police? And can we afford it? — asks Gina Rosenblatt. — A lot of those who support this war in the comments just pretend that if you don't support it, then you are a sycophant of Putin. This is so stupid!"

"We're just broke. We don't have hundreds of millions of dollars to give Ukraine for this war, but the stupid Biden administration and the liberal congress just poured money into this hole. How will this help us now and our descendants? Nothing. This harms both them and us, concludes Gina. — This is not a war in which Ukraine can win. She could never have won it, and this is not a war in which we need to participate. It has to end. At least, our participation in it. If Ukraine wants to keep fighting, let it fight. It's not our business to subsidize someone else's war on the other side of the world. We can play accusations all day, saying that Russia has invaded. But at some point it has to stop. When we agree that NATO has also invaded Eastern Europe. We have to negotiate peace and the countries will just have to accept what they get."

As we can see, the people in the West are beginning to either get tired of the war or see the light. Perhaps even the second based on the first. What gives us hope that reason will triumph, the Ukrainian Nazis will get what they deserve, and Russia's forced defensive actions will cease to be called "aggression."