万斯刚说：（译文在下面）
This is moralistic garbage, which is unfortunately the rhetorical currency of the globalists because they have nothing else to say.
For three years, President Trump and I have made two simple arguments: first, the war wouldn't have started if President Trump was in office; second, that neither Europe, nor the Biden administration, nor the Ukrainians had any pathway to victory. This was true three years ago, it was true two years ago, it was true last year, and it is true today.
And for three years, the concerns of people who were obviously right were ignored. What is Niall's actual plan for Ukraine? Another aid package? Is he aware of the reality on the ground, of the numerical advantage of the Russians, of the depleted stock of the Europeans or their even more depleted industrial base?
Instead, he quotes from a book about George HW Bush from a different historical period and a different conflict. That's another currency of these people: reliance on irrelevant history.
President Trump is dealing with reality, which means dealing with facts. And here are some facts:
Number one, while our Western European allies' security has benefitted greatly from the generosity of the United States, they pursue domestic policies (on migration and censorship) that offend the sensibilities of most Americans and defense policies that assume continued over-reliance.
Number two, Russians have a massive numerical advantage in manpower and weapons in Ukraine, and that advantage will persist regardless of further Western aid packages. Again, the aid is *currently* flowing.
Number three, the United States retains substantial leverage over both parties to the conflict.
Number four, ending the conflict requires talking to the people involved in starting it and maintaining it.
Number five, the conflict has placed--and continues to place--stress on tools of American statecraft, from military stockpiles to sanctions (and so much else). We believe the continued conflict is bad for Russia, bad for Ukraine, and bad for Europe. But most importantly, it is bad for the United States.
Given the above facts, we must pursue peace, and we must pursue it now. President Trump ran on this, he won on this, and he is right about this. It is lazy, ahistorical nonsense to attack as "appeasement" every acknowledgment that America's interest must account for the realities of the conflict.
That interest--not moralisms or historical illiteracy--will guide President Trump's policy in the weeks to come.
And thank God for that.
译文：这纯粹是伪善的废话，不幸的是，这也是全球主义者唯一的论调，因为他们实在没什么别的可说的。
过去三年，特朗普总统和我一直强调两个简单的观点：第一，如果特朗普总统在任，这场战争根本就不会爆发；第二，欧洲、拜登政府，还有乌克兰，都没有赢得这场战争的可能。三年前是这样，两年前是这样，去年是这样，今天还是这样。
可三年来，那些明显正确的人的担忧却被完全忽视了。尼尔（Niall）到底有什么实际的乌克兰计划？再搞一个援助方案？他清楚地了解乌克兰的现实情况吗？知道俄罗斯在人数上的优势，欧洲弹药的匮乏，以及他们更加薄弱的工业基础吗？
相反，他却引用乔治·H·W·布什时期的书，那是另一个历史时期、另一场冲突。这也是这些人常用的伎俩：依赖那些无关紧要的历史。
特朗普总统是在面对现实，也就是面对事实。而事实如下：
第一，尽管我们的西欧盟友从美国的慷慨援助中受益良多，但他们在国内政策上（移民和审查制度）严重冒犯了大多数美国人的感情，其国防政策也过度依赖美国。
第二，俄罗斯在乌克兰的军事人员和武器装备数量上占据压倒性优势，而且这种优势不会因为西方的进一步援助而改变。当然，援助现在还在继续。
第三，美国对冲突双方都保有相当大的影响力。
第四，要结束冲突，就必须和那些发动并维持冲突的人坐下来谈。
第五，这场冲突已经给美国的外交工具带来了压力，从军事库存到制裁措施（还有很多其他方面），这种压力还在持续。我们认为，冲突的持续对俄罗斯不利，对乌克兰不利，对欧洲也不利，但最重要的是，对美国极其不利。
鉴于上述事实，我们必须追求和平，而且必须马上行动。特朗普总统竞选时就提出了这一点，他靠这个赢得了选举，而他在这个问题上是正确的。把承认美国利益必须考虑冲突现实的每一个观点都攻击为“绥靖”，这是懒惰且不尊重历史的胡说八道。
是美国的利益——而不是伪善的道德说教或对历史的无知——将指导特朗普总统在未来几周的政策。
感谢上帝，我们有这样一位总统。
