Summary

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned that Ukraine would lose the war if the U.S., its primary military supporter, cuts funding.

Speaking to Fox News, he stressed the importance of unity between the U.S. and Ukraine as Russia accelerates its territorial gains.

Zelensky acknowledged Ukraine’s challenges on the battlefield, despite new U.S. weapon supplies, including long-range missiles and anti-personnel land mines.

He criticized German Chancellor Olaf Scholz for engaging with Putin, calling it a risky move.

Trump has pledged to end the war quickly but offered no specifics.

  • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    That was kind of the point. Trump, Putin and Netanyahu are playing everyone. Started the Gaza attack knowing Americans move on and will forget about Ukraine once Gaza is in flames and he was right. Americans don’t care about Ukraine anymore, they’ve moved on and voted with Putin. Just waiting for the next conflict now that will distract everyone away from Gaza

  • vga@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Frankly speaking Russia and China would have a great opportunity to try to appear sane for Europe when Trump gets into office. Like offer an actual peace for the price of giving a huge middle finger to USA. Trump admin seem to be begging for us to do it anyway.

    I suspect that this is a pipe-dream and they will not do that, and also for Russia their credibility is pretty much gone and I don’t see any way they could restore it.

    China might be able to pull it off though.

  • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    If US cuts funding it would be abandoning its allies in violation of the Budapest memorandum which the US signed in '94 to protect Ukraine if Russia invades, and that violation from Russia since 2014 also grants Ukraine back its nuclear program which should have been supported by allies like the US. The only language a dictator like Putin understands is violence or the threat of violence, look at the nuclear saber rattling he does frequently and how people and nations capitulate to it and the only neighbors they avoid are either nuclear armed or NATO allied.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Well, if it violates the Budapest memorandum of 1994, of course Trump will change his mind. /s

      That aside, it only would kick in if Russia used nuclear weapons, anyway. Link to the text. The present effort is all about trying to keep Europe safe through deterrence, and to a lesser degree supporting a democracy that’s under attack.

      • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        The US may yet betray Ukraine and break its agreement under the treaty, I hope not but I don’t expect anything else from Putin’s #1 sycophant.

        1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and The United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

        CSCE final act, not exclusive to using nuclear weapons: https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Final_Act_of_the_Conference_on_Security_and_Cooperation_in_Europe

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah, Russia definitely broke their word here. I just don’t see anything that says the US has to intervene.

          • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            If I sign a treaty that says if someone really fucks you up me and my friends will definitely come help, and one of my friends that signed it comes by and keeps fucking with you because you don’t have the things you gave up in the treaty, then I think there’s a pretty large responsibility on me and the rest of my friends to come help. I think it would be a dick move to help awhile then walk away.

            • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              It doesn’t say the signatories will help, though, it just says they won’t hurt. To “respect” is a passive activity.

              Is there something more specific in CSCE?

          • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            While true, this shit is 10,000% lawyer speak and weasel words. Every country is going to make nukes because guess what… they always needed them to protect their sovereignty.

            No more fooling non nuclear powers that there is any “order” in this world. Just the strong crushing the weak.

            Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was

            Now playing Talking Heads - Once in a lifetime

            • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              I don’t think there’s any weaseling here. Clinton wasn’t about to start a nuclear war over Ukraine, and very deliberately didn’t enter a treaty that said that. Diplomats are famous for arguing endlessly over exact choice of words, even.

              Nobody ever claimed international law was strong and inviolable.

    • Eezyville@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      There is no treaty that the US has with Ukraine that obligates the US to defend Ukraine. Stop spreading misinformation.

    • Gsus4@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      It is technically not a violation, the memorandum just gives the US and the UK “the right” to intervene, but not the obligation…

    • fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 days ago

      Unfortunately the Budapest Memorandum doesn’t obligate the US to actually protect Ukraine.

      Hopefully Europe can fill the gap left if Putin’s puppet cuts support US support

      • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Of course the letter of the treaty can be interpreted, what does “immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine” include in literal obligations? But the intent of the document seems clear that the signatories are there to hold each other accountable to prevent nuclear proliferation, if the guarantees are no longer valid like the repeated Russian violation of Ukraine sovereign borders, the other signatories are expected to either protect Ukraine or reinstate their nuclear arms.

        Edit: including link to the document text https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

        • fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          “seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine”

          That’s the strongest language I see, and that obligation could be filled by just pushing for Ukraine’s defense in the Security Council.

          I think the US has been unfairly reserved in its support of Ukraine. They should have given jets, permission to strike in Russia, and more a long time ago. But I don’t think they’re obligated by that memorandum to do even what they have.

          • whotookkarl@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            It is significant that all of the signing countries including Russia and except Ukraine were all members of the UN SC at the time and 3/5 of the permanent members states. It’s not like they’re getting on the phone to call someone else, they’ll be the same people answering the call to act to provide assistance.

      • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Europe unfortunately has neither the infrastructure nor the reserves to provide armaments in volume to Ukraine. It has only very recently started switching its military from being a small projection force for asymmetric warfare to a much larger self defence army. Completing the change will take some time though.

        • fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          I hope Europe is prioritizing appropriately. Seems they’ve been caught flat-footed in multiple ways and they’re only slowly responding

    • RunningInRVA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      71
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Right? Before the election I had a political conversation with a coworker who leans more conservative and she was excited about Trump “making peace with Putin”. It was a serious wtf moment for me. “Peace” with Putin means pulling funding for Ukraine and letting Russia roll over it.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        I had an argument on here with a supposed green party voter who “hated trump”, but admired him for his sincere efforts to end wars…

        I reminded them about ending the nuclear deal with Iran and then assassinating their most idolized military commander. He just went on to admit he didn’t care about a war with Iran.

        There are so many “green voters” who are just trump supporters turfing as leftist on this site.

        • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          2 days ago

          Love the Pax MAGA:

          1. Russia moves west until Putin doesn’t need to drum up nationalist fervor back home;

          2. Israel gets all the weapons it needs to control every inch of the Mediterranean coast from the Suez to Turkey;

          3. All US troops out of South Korea and IDK probably an arms sale to the DPRK;

          4. The Seventh Fleet gets permanently reassigned to patrol the California coast as some immigration stunt and to make Pooh happy;

          5. Probably a tactical nuke dropped on Tehran.

          Seems awesome, right?

        • Saleh@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          Can you link to it? Because i havent come across this at all. On the contrary third party voters and advocates are usually doing so because of the fucked up US Middle East meddling, war mongering and genociding. The JCPOA was about the only positive coming out of the US for the region in the past decades, probably the last half of a century.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Didn’t anyone learn from his “Peace in Afghanistan”? He literally just gave the Taliban everything they wanted and told the Afghans we were leaving.

        • Saleh@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          That is a bad example. The occupation of Afghanistan went nowhere and well, it eas an occupation fighting the people who actually live there. That is completely opposite to Ukraine wanting to get rid of their Russian occupiers.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Yeah sure, “the people” who actually supported the Republic when polled. The people of Afghanistan never got a say. Trump told the ANG that he was leaving them and all of the governors and tribal leaders immediately made side deals with the Taliban. When the Taliban attacked those leaders told all the government’s most fervent supporters to go fight. And then left them cut off and surrounded to be killed.

            That’s the kind of deal Trump wants to make with Russia. Russia gets everything they wanted and Ukraine has to deal with it. You can also check out the Trump family deal for peace in the middle east that was essentially getting the Arab world to accept Israel and cut off support for Palestinians.

            He doesn’t make actual peace deals. He just gives autocrats what they want and claims it’s peace.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-reviews-plan-halt-us-military-aid-ukraine-unless-it-negotiates-peace-with-2024-06-25/

    Trump’s plan is just to force Ukraine to hand whatever the Russians have taken over to the Russians, or whatever or they stop getting aid.

    The Kremlin said any peace plan proposed by a possible future Trump administration would have to reflect the reality on the ground but that Russian President Vladimir Putin remained open to talks.

    The Kremlin said any peace plan proposed by a possible future Trump administration would have to reflect the reality on the ground but that Russian President Vladimir Putin remained open to talks.

    So Putin’s puppet will let them take what they have under control…and knowing Trump and Putin, probably more, like sanctions or stripping Ukraine of more autonomy.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yep if NK wants to attack SK they should do it directly instead of having their proxy invade one of SK’s arms suppliers.

  • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    2 days ago

    Give em full air support. If it causes world war 3, it causes world war 3. Fuck it. Avoiding that isn’t worth letting Russia just consume its neighbors on a whim - that shit certainly won’t stop with Ukraine.

    • reksas@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      if it causes ww3, it will be a lot less bloody war than what will be if russia is allowed to recover and take over next country

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Maybe if WW3 breaks out, Biden won’t hand over power to the literal fascists that are already making decisions to cause our demise.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        wow yeah I hope we have global nuclear apocalypse so we can avoid the consequences of elections! totally worth.

      • Draces@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        Wtf? That’s such a casual suggestion to dismantle democracy. Yeah let’s do that so we never get a progressive in office /s

        • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          If we’re going to have an autocracy, it may as well be the one that is still somewhat benevolent to the common man.

          • Draces@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            23 hours ago

            If we’re going to have an autocracy

            Yeah I’d rather not. I agree if that that were the only two options it would be preferable but I totally disagree that those are the only two options and I think it’s extremely dangerous rhetoric to say anyone should be an autocrat. Trump is about to be president and is the biggest threat to American democracy we’ve seen in anyone’s living memory. But he’s also about to become deeply unpopular again like every president does after election and particular bad as people start to remember what he’s like. That is a far cry from a guarantee that it’s over. Irreparable damage will be done but it’s just silly to race to the bottom

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          It wouldn’t be the first time a country did that. It’s never ended particularly well though.

      • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        That doesn’t sound very good either. I still want a chance to vote in another election. Trump might be able to dismantle it before then but if Biden held on to power it would be immediately dismantled.

    • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 days ago

      Russia is also already instigating it with having North Korean troops in the combat zone. It’ll just be a tit-for-tat response.

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Up to 100k North Koreans. I don’t care how inept they are, 100k dudes with guns will utterly wreck Ukraine.

        • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Incompetent soldiers still consume a great deal of resources, and may become victims of even cheaper drones.

          But “cheaper” still requires some money.

        • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          I heard rumors of South Korea sending troops to counter. I don’t want world war but that seems fair to me.

          • foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            it would be more fair that every online bellicist (no matter what camp) enlisted voluntarily and got the chance to validate their theories in practice.

    • index@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      2 days ago

      Give em full air support. If it causes world war 3, it causes world war 3. Fuck it

      If you are so willing to die you can join the front and fight russia in ukraine. Don’t drag other people and the rest of the world in.

    • index@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      2 days ago

      Give em full air support. If it causes world war 3, it causes world war 3. Fuck it

      If you are so willing to die you can join the front and fight russia in ukraine. Don’t drag other people and the rest of the world in.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Bold stance. Better to bring about world war 3 than let Russia consume its neighbors? I’ll have to sit with that one for a bit.

      I grew up with the USSR so maybe I’m not quite ready to throw all earthly civilization into the fire to prevent 20% of that empire from being restored.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          The way they’re struggling in Ukraine. 3 years for what they thought would be 3 days, and they haven’t accomplished their goal.

          Plus, several of the former USSR states are formal NATO members: the Baltics. With Russia struggling to hold the worst 1/3 of Ukraine, what on Earth makes you think they could sustain a war with NATO, proper?

      • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Same page as catloaf - I already did my time and got my honorable discharge. If WW3 breaks out, pretty sure I’ll be getting recalled. So, yes.

        Then again, the alternative is wait for shit to destabilize until we get there anyway - again this shit won’t end with Ukraine.

        Call Russia’s bluff. If we’re wrong, it’s not like we aren’t fucked anyway. Might as well go down fighting evil, vs going down with evil’s dick in our throat.

        *looks at recent presidential election*

        …oh yeah. Reality. Pass the lube, my throat is sore as fuck.

        • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Because of you don’t stop Russia now, there is a big chance that in a few years it’s a gangbang with the all the Brics nations who learned to handle the nuclear whip like a pro dom.

        • foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          I already did my time and got my honorable discharge. […] , it’s not like we aren’t fucked anyway.

          you mistakingly switched from your specific miserable situation in singular to a general assumption in the plural form.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          They’d rather have us back as training personnel. Most of us are broken in some way that makes deployment problematic unless we’re actually desperate. Then they can dump most of TRADOC into leadership spots for new units.

        • index@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          You don’t have to wait, instead of wasting time commenting here you are free to join the front in ukraine

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’ve already got my DD-214 but sure I’ll go back in to fight invasion of allies

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m all for America funding as much as possible, but FFS Europe, the monster is ringing your doorbell.

    • Metz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      82
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      That reads as if the EU is just sitting on its hands and doing nothing. Please keep in mind that there is significant financial support coming from the EU:

      image

      Source: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/

      Where the EU cannot compete with the US is in the supply of military goods. For the simple reason that these do not exist to the extent that the US has them.


      Edit: I have to correct myself in a detail. The graph of course shows Europe not the EU. So it includes e.g. the UK as well. The point still stands though looking on the rest of the data.

      • 11111one11111@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        Jesus fuck that really puts it into perspective how much larger the United States military complex is. I want to to see this combined with the Israeli financing. I mean is what we bitch about being bad over budgeting of the defense budget or whatever it falls under really just a means of paying other countries to fight battles they used to send US soldiers to fight? Did I just become pro-military complex?

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Nice sources! Puts things in perspective for me. I really mean that.

        Still doesn’t change the fact that the enemy is at the gates. And has been for decades. And it ain’t America’s gates. Which is not to say, “Not our problem.” It eventually will be our problem.

        Europe has to spin up a war economy. Yesterday. We Americans have the privilege of being able to do that with two oceans buffering us. Europe has no such buffer. Once again, the filthy Russians are knocking.

    • r00ty@kbin.life
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      51
      ·
      2 days ago

      Europe ARE doing a lot. We just don’t have as much of an aging stockpile of weapons as the US does. Also when turned into financial contribution you need to convert it to a percentage of GDP.

      Well, turns out someone made that data available.

      https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/
      https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/

      Europe most certainly are doing their part.

      However, that’s not the real fear. The USA is going into a new presidential term, a term where the house, senate and the supreme court are going to likely side with the president on most things.

      The USA can put significant pressure on European countries. If we’re to believe Trump is really working in Putin’s favour then, as well as stopping US aid, there’s not too much stopping the US pressuring Europe from doing the same. That is my real fear. I think without US support this is hard, very hard for Europe to fill that gap. But, we certainly can still try.

      • deczzz@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        To add some context to the numbers. Coming from Denmark which tops the chart, I can tell you that the top donors are getting sick and tired of big countries e.g. Germany and French providing way less resources. Bigger economies and military industries, yet the small countries of Europe donate the most. Different political situations of course. Still crazy that Germany are sort of “meh” considering their history with Russia.

  • index@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    Ukrainian people and russian people already lost the war, casualties are up to a million

  • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    2 days ago

    so hear me out.

    • Biden baits Russia into attacking US personnel
    • Declares a national emergency which stalls the incoming administration
    • Ramps up war with Russia and declares war on Putin
    • Hands the reigns over to Kamala due to failing health
    • Trump is never allowed office because he’ll die choking on a hamburder

    I think that could happen in 30 days.

    Now if only Joe wasn’t spineless…

    • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I mean all offense when I say this that is a stupid idea and you should be ashamed to have even thought of it. Essentially saying Biden should get some American soldiers killed so he can prevent trump from taking office.

      You can’t claim trump is a fascist and also suggest using fascism as a weapon to prevent fascism.

    • Homescool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Dunno how a state of emergency would stall the transition of power. That’s happening no matter what. On time. Period.

      • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        by declaring a state of emergency it gives the executive branch unfettered powers to maintain the stability of the country. this includes skipping elections and changes to the administration and other branches of government.

        this is especially true in times of war where maintaining the status-quo maintains progression of winning a war abroad.

        It’s within his powers, but would tear the country apart.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          No. It very much is not in his powers.

          Biden’s term ends at noon in 2 months. He can’t just declare that it doesn’t. If he could, Trump would have done that in 2021 instead of trying to overturn the election.

        • Decoy321@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          That’s because there wasn’t any law against it at that time. Now we’ve got the 22nd amendment.