WHAT A DEBACLE THAT MEETING WAS, HUH?

[ResidentAlien]

I'm sure Donald's disciples think it was a show of great strength, but it was nothing short of childish and made the US look very weak.

 

[ResidentAlien]

For such a "great deal maker," the Donald sure does seem to be getting played by Putin.

 

[Texasgal]

Trump is so fixated on breaking up the relationship between Russia and China that he doesn’t realize what a monster he is creating in Europe.

Let’s be honest. In Ukraine there are extreme right wing groups just waiting for the country to collapse and then seize the opportunity. That’s one of the few things Putin is right about.

All this will inevitably backfire heavily on both Trump, Putin and Europe.

 

[Texasgal]

This is also what i've been saying about your thinking.
I mean how?

So far we have spent 200 billion "selling" equipment in Ukraine.
When we sell equipment to Europe we are also wasting money.
For example there is an American base in Northern Italy.
US wanted Italy to buy planes and Italy didn't want them, but US insisted they buy planes even if they didn't want them for two reasons.
For military industrial complex to function and so they don't bleed any more money than they usually do on a daily basis.
I mean, why does the military pay $100 for a hammer when we can get it at HomeDepot for $10?
Hm?

This is what Trump is trying to stop !

I don’t think you get the point.

I agree that overspending and corruption are major issues we have to address.

Unfortunately, we are not addressing those problems by pulling the plug.

Europe is like a bunch of kids who can’t be home alone. Before long they will burn down the house, both figuratively and literally, if we don’t maintain our presence there.

When that show is on you will find that the big, beautiful oceans between us and Europe/Asia will be shrinking by the day.

Someone ought to learn Trump how to cover his bases both politically and militarily before this thing goes south.

 

[Eli1]

I don’t think you get the point.

I agree that overspending and corruption are major issues we have to address.

Unfortunately, we are not addressing those problems by pulling the plug.

Europe is like a bunch of kids who can’t be home alone. Before long they will burn down the house, both figuratively and literally, if we don’t maintain our presence there.

When that show is on you will find that the big, beautiful oceans between us and Europe/Asia will be shrinking by the day.

Someone ought to learn Trump how to cover his bases both politically and militarily before this thing goes south.

Why do you speak with such authority on Europe when you were born in a French-speaking section of the USA?
I don't speak with such authority despite being born in the Mediterranean region.

Here's a summary of Europe on how i understand it.
Europe has been on vacation since world war 2 after the whole continent was destroyed.
Since then, everyone said "wars and guns are bad. Let's all sing kumbaya and let USA, Russia and China take the baton of the empires. We're on vacation now. "
Europe was done being all gun-ho and excited about wars. That's your job now. To be excited about wars and guns.

Trump is now playing them like a fiddle: "Guys, we're going on vacation too. Take care of yourselves and if you need anything, i'll give you a good price"
Bye-bye.

 

[HeIsHere]

For such a "great deal maker," the Donald sure does seem to be getting played by Putin.

You are joking right?

 

[HeIsHere]

All this will inevitably backfire heavily on both Trump, Putin and Europe.

Probably not, globalism is dying.

Just Europe, you are right they are like children, let them figure it out and good luck to them with Starmer and Macron.

 

[cv5]

Ian Miles Cheong on X: "They have the same script. https://t.co/T92HCWm8L6" / X

 

[cv5]

@KobeissiLetter

Overall, the US relies on trade SIGNIFICANTLY less than its allies do. For example, trade in goods and services reflect ~85% of Germany's GDP and ~65% of the UK's GDP. On the other hand, trade in goods and services impact less than 30% of US GDP. This gives Trump an "edge."

The Kobeissi Letter on X: "Overall, the US relies on trade SIGNIFICANTLY less than its allies do. For example, trade in goods and services reflect ~85% of Germany's GDP and ~65% of the UK's GDP. On the other hand, trade in goods and services impact less than 30% of US GDP. This gives Trump an "edge." https://t.co/RLJ370RDtC" / X

 

[cv5]

JUST IN: Italian Prime Minister Meloni rejects offers from France and UK to send troops to Ukraine.
"You can go—not with my soldiers."

 

[cv5]

Right Angle News Network on X: "BREAKING - 3 democrat Senators Schumer, Warren, and Booker have been caught plagiarizing the same script word-for-word. https://t.co/QmjgaiEwyZ" / X

 

[Smoke]

1.) Did any NATO nation assure Ukraine that Putin would not invade prior to 2014 as Zelensky stated? If they did, what did the NATO nation(s) do to stop the annexation of Crimea and the Donbas region?

2.) Do assurances by a nation's leader expire once the leader is no longer in office or are they attached to the country, thereby, making it a country's obligation independent of the current leader?

I am curious everyone's world view on this. I can make an argument for multiple different positions and I'm not sure which one is correct/the best. I do think the US has made many mistakes by promising protections to Ukraine in exchange for their nukes. I also think Zelensky is taking advantage of that promise by not wanting to negotiate a peace agreement. Trump tells the truth that he wasn't the president then and Putin hasn't gone back on his word with him, but I'm not sure that means we no longer have to hold true to our commitments. I do think it's reasonable to expect security guarantees if Russia decides to invade again. From the Russian perspective, I even understand why they are doing what they are doing... The US would do the same thing if it was in their shoes. For me, this is a really difficult conflict to navigate and get behind one of the horses. I don't know what the correct answer is.

 

[ResidentAlien]

1.) Did any NATO nation assure Ukraine that Putin would not invade prior to 2014 as Zelensky stated? If they did, what did the NATO nation(s) do to stop the annexation of Crimea and the Donbas region?

2.) Do assurances by a nation's leader expire once the leader is no longer in office or are they attached to the country, thereby, making it a country's obligation independent of the current leader?

I am curious everyone's world view on this. I can make an argument for multiple different positions and I'm not sure which one is correct/the best. I do think the US has made many mistakes by promising protections to Ukraine in exchange for their nukes. I also think Zelensky is taking advantage of that promise by not wanting to negotiate a peace agreement. Trump tells the truth that he wasn't the president then and Putin hasn't gone back on his word with him, but I'm not sure that means we no longer have to hold true to our commitments. I do think it's reasonable to expect security guarantees if Russia decides to invade again. From the Russian perspective, I even understand why they are doing what they are doing... The US would do the same thing if it was in their shoes. For me, this is a really difficult conflict to navigate and get behind one of the horses. I don't know what the correct answer is.

Zelenskyy wants a peace agreement; he just wants one with assurances from the US for support and protection. I agree with him. Why would anyone give away their mineral wealth without any guarantees in return? You'd have to be a moron to do something like that, especially when you're negotiating with the Donald. Donald has already signaled he's more aligned with Putin, so who's to say he would even honor a peace deal that puts Putin at a disadvantage?

 

[Squigglylines]

1.) Did any NATO nation assure Ukraine that Putin would not invade prior to 2014 as Zelensky stated? If they did, what did the NATO nation(s) do to stop the annexation of Crimea and the Donbas region?

2.) Do assurances by a nation's leader expire once the leader is no longer in office or are they attached to the country, thereby, making it a country's obligation independent of the current leader?

I am curious everyone's world view on this. I can make an argument for multiple different positions and I'm not sure which one is correct/the best. I do think the US has made many mistakes by promising protections to Ukraine in exchange for their nukes. I also think Zelensky is taking advantage of that promise by not wanting to negotiate a peace agreement. Trump tells the truth that he wasn't the president then and Putin hasn't gone back on his word with him, but I'm not sure that means we no longer have to hold true to our commitments. I do think it's reasonable to expect security guarantees if Russia decides to invade again. From the Russian perspective, I even understand why they are doing what they are doing... The US would do the same thing if it was in their shoes. For me, this is a really difficult conflict to navigate and get behind one of the horses. I don't know what the correct answer is.

In the #2 part where you asking if agreements are attached to current leaders or to it's country country could backfire though. The whole argument behind what is considered under Russia's control comes from agreements the USSR and NATO made over the years. One says they agreed to certain things about expanding NATO farther east and others argue that nothing was in writing. Dmitry Peskov the Kremlin spokesman told the press a day or so ago Putin and Russia were humiliated by the expansion into it's territory of influence after the 1989 tearing down of the Berlin wall. So everything from East Berlin to the East is what Putin see's as in the agreement as belonging to Russia or under it's eastern influence.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...make-peace-after-clash-with-trump-2025-03-03/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversy_regarding_the_legitimacy_of_eastward_NATO_expansion

 

[PennEd]

DIVIDENDS! President and VP are to be commended:

Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський

@ZelenskyyUa


I would like to reiterate Ukraine’s commitment to peace. None of us wants an endless war. Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer. Nobody wants peace more than Ukrainians. My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts. We are ready to work fast to end the war, and the first stages could be the release of prisoners and truce in the sky — ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure — and truce in the sea immediately, if Russia will do the same. Then we want to move very fast through all next stages and to work with the US to agree a strong final deal. We do really value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence. And we remember the moment when things changed when President Trump provided Ukraine with Javelins. We are grateful for this. Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be. It is regrettable that it happened this way. It is time to make things right. We would like future cooperation and communication to be constructive. Regarding the agreement on minerals and security, Ukraine is ready to sign it in any time and in any convenient format. We see this agreement as a step toward greater security and solid security guarantees, and I truly hope it will work effectively.

 

[Squigglylines]

Zelenskyy wants a peace agreement; he just wants one with assurances from the US for support and protection. I agree with him. Why would anyone give away their mineral wealth without any guarantees in return? You'd have to be a moron to do something like that, especially when you're negotiating with the Donald. Donald has already signaled he's more aligned with Putin, so who's to say he would even honor a peace deal that puts Putin at a disadvantage?

WW3 has begun the US can stop sending weapons to Ukraine and aid and be a bystander or continue giving them aid and be part of it. The best thing for the US to do is to separate itself from it before it gets real bad. Unless of coarse we decide to go all in and send a half million American troops there and everybody dig a shelter in the US real fast.

 

[Cameron143]

Zelenskyy wants a peace agreement; he just wants one with assurances from the US for support and protection. I agree with him. Why would anyone give away their mineral wealth without any guarantees in return? You'd have to be a moron to do something like that, especially when you're negotiating with the Donald. Donald has already signaled he's more aligned with Putin, so who's to say he would even honor a peace deal that puts Putin at a disadvantage?

Give it away? The first 350 billion has already been paid for. And having US businesses, capital, and manpower in your country is a security assurance.
It's a 3 part plan:
...mineral rights deal,
...armistice,
...negotiated peace.

Zelenskyy jumped the shark trying to negotiate security guarantees before signing the deal. This was the 3rd time, btw, Zelenskyy had opportunity to sign and hasn't.

 

[cv5]

DIVIDENDS! President and VP are to be commended:

Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський
@ZelenskyyUa


I would like to reiterate Ukraine’s commitment to peace. None of us wants an endless war. Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer. Nobody wants peace more than Ukrainians. My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts. We are ready to work fast to end the war, and the first stages could be the release of prisoners and truce in the sky — ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure — and truce in the sea immediately, if Russia will do the same. Then we want to move very fast through all next stages and to work with the US to agree a strong final deal. We do really value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence. And we remember the moment when things changed when President Trump provided Ukraine with Javelins. We are grateful for this. Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be. It is regrettable that it happened this way. It is time to make things right. We would like future cooperation and communication to be constructive. Regarding the agreement on minerals and security, Ukraine is ready to sign it in any time and in any convenient format. We see this agreement as a step toward greater security and solid security guarantees, and I truly hope it will work effectively.

Trump will do a minerals deal with BOTH Ukraine and Russia.
That is how a master tactician would tackle this problem.

Get both of them into line and working to fix the bottom line and start repairing the economic and diplomatic damage.

 

[cv5]

White House Wants Recorded Apology From Zelensky, Who Says He Wants To 'Make Things Right'

Trump wants an explicit public apology from Zelensky - that's according to Fox White House correspondent Peter Doocy, who described the following on Monday...

"Nothing is gonna happen with this minerals deal until Zelensky goes in front of cameras and makes an explicit public apology for the way he behaved in the Oval Office with that meeting," Doocy said in a live broadcast from the White House lawn. President Zelensky on Tuesday is reiterating he's "ready" to sign the minerals deal with the US.

As for the requirement of a recorded apology by Zelensky to make amends, Doocy said he was specifically "told by a senior official" in the Trump administration.

President Zelensky himself had this weekend said he still hopes for "constructive dialogue" with Washington and has expressed willingness to still sign the agreement.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio had just hours after Zelensky left the White House Friday advised the Ukrainian leader to apologize "for wasting our time" and for "turning this thing into the fiasco for him that it became." Zelensky has still not done so. There are these 'regret' statements issues from his office Tuesday:

• the way the White House meeting turned out was regrettable
• Kyiv ready to work under 'Trump's strong leadership' for peace: Zelensky
• Zelensky says wants to 'make things right' with Trump

“My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts,” Zelenskiy said Tuesday on X. “The first stages could be the release of prisoners and truce in the sky — ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure — and truce in the sea immediately, if Russia will do the same.”

 

[Intersection]