Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky
-
@jon-nyc so does the US UN Ambassador have a point or not?
-
Like I already wrote, an abstention would have more than adequately achieved the desired result without the repugnant optics of openly siding with the Kremlin and its vassal states.
-
Donald Trump Jr.:
“I honestly can’t imagine that anyone in their right mind would be picking Ukraine as an ally when Russia is the other option, the US should have been sending weapons to Russia.”
Only non-witches get due process.
- Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
-
Donald Trump Jr.:
“I honestly can’t imagine that anyone in their right mind would be picking Ukraine as an ally when Russia is the other option, the US should have been sending weapons to Russia.”
@jon-nyc said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
Donald Trump Jr.:
“I honestly can’t imagine that anyone in their right mind would be picking Ukraine as an ally when Russia is the other option, the US should have been sending weapons to Russia.”
You just don't understand, this is a cunning plan.
I was only joking
-
@jon-nyc said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
Donald Trump Jr.:
“I honestly can’t imagine that anyone in their right mind would be picking Ukraine as an ally when Russia is the other option, the US should have been sending weapons to Russia.”
You just don't understand, this is a cunning plan.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
@jon-nyc said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
Donald Trump Jr.:
“I honestly can’t imagine that anyone in their right mind would be picking Ukraine as an ally when Russia is the other option, the US should have been sending weapons to Russia.”
You just don't understand, this is a cunning plan.
Say what you will about Don Jr’s plan to send Russia weapons, Biden and Harris didn’t even have a plan to send Russia weapons.
-
Donald Trump Jr.:
“I honestly can’t imagine that anyone in their right mind would be picking Ukraine as an ally when Russia is the other option, the US should have been sending weapons to Russia.”
@jon-nyc said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
Donald Trump Jr.:
“I honestly can’t imagine that anyone in their right mind would be picking Ukraine as an ally when Russia is the other option, the US should have been sending weapons to Russia.”
Too bad it’s fake.
The Brad
-
I will refrain from any comment that could be construed as offensive and insulting until I receive more detailed information on this latest revelation from the most esteemed Trumpigula family.
@Renauda said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
I will refrain from any comment that could be construed as offensive and insulting until I receive more detailed information on this latest revelation from the most esteemed Trumpigula family.
Smart choice.
-
@jon-nyc said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
Donald Trump Jr.:
“I honestly can’t imagine that anyone in their right mind would be picking Ukraine as an ally when Russia is the other option, the US should have been sending weapons to Russia.”
Too bad it’s fake.
@LuFins-Dad said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
@jon-nyc said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
Donald Trump Jr.:
“I honestly can’t imagine that anyone in their right mind would be picking Ukraine as an ally when Russia is the other option, the US should have been sending weapons to Russia.”
Too bad it’s fake.
From where I stand that’s actually a good thing. The positions they’ve taken so far are humiliating enough.
-
What the problem with Snyder’s statement? He’s right, if the Russians soldiers leave and go home the fighting stops. Has been that way since 2014. Ukraine has no desire to attack Russia. Never has had any such desire.
Horace, believe it or not but contrary to what your American Moses maintains, it was Russia that invaded Ukraine not the other way round. Moreover, Ukraine’s aspirations to join the EU and NATO were not the casus belli. The cause was exclusive to the mind of one person, Vladimir Putin. It is that simple.
-
I assume everybody on this forum agrees that Russia is the imperialistic bad guy. My issue with Snyder's statement is that it is meaningless for the purposes of informing a strategy to end the war, or, to use his framing, to get Russia to withdraw its troops. His statement is a tautology, masquerading as an insight. If it existed alongside a plan to get Russia to withdraw its troops, then it would be fine, but it doesn't. But maybe Snyder has written about a plan somewhere, and I've missed it.
-
What Snyder has said is really no different than what Netanyahu and Israel supporter have said about the Palestinians. That is, if the Palestinians stop their terrorist attacks, Israel will stop its air strikes and ground troop actions against Palestinian targets. The difference though is that Ukraine was not terrorising Russia and Ukraine is a sovereign state. Your criticism of Snyder is anchored in something other than the facts of the conflict. That something is probably ideological and wholly out of personal preference on your part.
And as for the Trumpigula Camp and your incessant whining about plans and ideas, all I have heard from that corner is:
(A) no NATO membership
(B) no recovery of territory
(C) various “teams” to be set up to work out how peace process to unfold.An assignment of receivables on resource revenues without a security guarantee does not constitute a peace deal let alone an armistice. So stop trying make it into anything other than what it is - a banker’s assignment of receivables and property. Smacks to me of rather disingenuous ass covering - cowardly even - certainly not anything resembling diplomacy or even an amateurish cosplay of statesmanship.
-
What Snyder has said is really no different than what Netanyahu and Israel supporter have said about the Palestinians. That is, if the Palestinians stop their terrorist attacks, Israel will stop its air strikes and ground troop actions against Palestinian targets. The difference though is that Ukraine was not terrorising Russia and Ukraine is a sovereign state. Your criticism of Snyder is anchored in something other than the facts of the conflict. That something is probably ideological and wholly out of personal preference on your part.
And as for the Trumpigula Camp and your incessant whining about plans and ideas, all I have heard from that corner is:
(A) no NATO membership
(B) no recovery of territory
(C) various “teams” to be set up to work out how peace process to unfold.An assignment of receivables on resource revenues without a security guarantee does not constitute a peace deal let alone an armistice. So stop trying make it into anything other than what it is - a banker’s assignment of receivables and property. Smacks to me of rather disingenuous ass covering - cowardly even - certainly not anything resembling diplomacy or even an amateurish cosplay of statesmanship.
@Renauda said in Gifts for Putin, Demands for Zelensky:
What Snyder has said is really no different than what Netanyahu and Israel supporter have said about the Palestinians. That is, if the Palestinians stop their terrorist attacks, Israel will stop its air strikes and ground troop actions against Palestinian targets. The difference though is that Ukraine was not terrorising Russia and Ukraine is a sovereign state. Your criticism of Snyder is anchored in something other than the facts of the conflict. That something is probably ideological and wholly out of personal preference on your part.
And as for the Trumpigula Camp and your incessant whining about plans and ideas, that lot has come up with is:
(A) no NATO membership
(B) no recovery of territory
(C) various “teams” to be set up to work out how peace process to unfold.An assignment of receivables on resource revenues without a security guarantee is a not constitute an armistice let alone a peace deal. So stop trying make it into anything other than what it is - a banker’s assignment of receivables and property.
I'm seeing some small progress being made by the Trump admin, and I'm happy about it. My "whining" about the lack of alternative plans seems incessant because it is never adequately answered. (Jon's attempt was cute.) I am far from the only one who has noticed that lack, and that lack is in the public conversation, not on this forum.
The implicit answer, lacking any other, is that the Biden admin's status quo is preferrable to whatever is going on now.
-
If it means selling out Ukraine to Putin’s Russia and the neo- totalitarian paradigm it represents, then yes, a return to the Biden status quo would be preferable.
Personally I prefer going ahead with the charade of a peace negotiation and then, when becomes painfully obvious that Russia is not acting in good faith or has any intention honouring Ukraine’s full sovereignty going forward, calling Putin’s bluff and take it to the brink with him. He knows very well NATO will not invade and occupy Russia itself with ground forces and that China, being the fair weather friend it is, will not come to his direct aid, he will understand only then just what power is and how little he actually wields. Won’t be the first time a Russian autocrat or tyrant would be forced to back down at the last minute. Humiliate him with extreme predjudice and see where the cards fall. He will not commit national suicide in his bunker.
Happy now?
-
If it means selling out Ukraine to Putin’s Russia and the neo- totalitarian paradigm it represents, then yes, a return to the Biden status quo would be preferable.
Personally I prefer going ahead with the charade of a peace negotiation and then, when becomes painfully obvious that Russia is not acting in good faith or has any intention honouring Ukraine’s full sovereignty going forward, calling Putin’s bluff and take it to the brink with him. He knows very well NATO will not invade and occupy Russia itself with ground forces and that China, being the fair weather friend it is, will not come to his direct aid, he will understand only then just what power is and how little he actually wields. Won’t be the first time a Russian autocrat or tyrant would be forced to back down at the last minute. Humiliate him with extreme predjudice and see where the cards fall. He will not commit national suicide in his bunker.
Happy now?
@Renauda Thank you. I know you've said most of that before, though I don't recall the last part about what you'd prefer, after Russia establishes that it has no intention of making any deal. I'm hopeful that a deal can be struck that retains Ukraine sovereignty. I don't anticipate the Trump administration flirting with nuclear war over this. (Nor any other recent admin.)
-
Putin has no just cause to resort to nukes. He knows in reality that NATO is not a threat and has never posed a real existential threat. He also knows that even now the Alliance has zero intention to occupy Russia.
His fear is that democracy will someday hold him personally responsible for his own crimes against his nation. For that reason alone he wishes to wipe out Ukraine as a sovereign nation state.
I don't anticipate the Trump administration flirting with nuclear war over this. (Nor any other recent admin.))
I would agree. This one, Trumpigula, is not a war time president. Too much of a micro-manager and scatter-brain. Moreover he is not at all comfortable with foreign affairs files. He is at home with the domestic stuff- like Obama but with a different focus, good or bad. Last president with war time abilities was GHW Bush. He at least had first hand experience of war and the Cold War. Then again, behind the scenes, he might have been carried by Dick Cheney when things got hot with Hussein.
-
Update: 26/02/25 @ 23:05 MDT
I have seen and reviewed an English version, allegedly translated from Ukrainian, of the pending minerals deal between Ukraine and US. Unfortunately I cannot provide a copy here, although I can personally vouch for the source.
Not knowing what the first two draft proposals contained, this version, which Zelenskyi will fly to Washington to sign, is a pretty straight forward joint venture mineral concession agreement to set up a 50/50 fund from natural resource earnings for the reconstruction of Ukraine and from which either signatory can drawn down upon as necessary.
It is not an assignment of receivables as I had been earlier led to believe. That is a good thing for Ukraine in both the short and long term provided Putin or a post Putin Russia behaves like a civilised person or country for once in their respective stained histories.
On the other hand, there are no security guarantees or reference to Ukrainian territorial integrity past or present. It seems entirely dependent on the good faith of the signatories and by implication that as a firm and long term business partnership venture, and assumes the willingness of all non signatory third parties to accept and respective the good faith between the signatories.
A good business deal, but diplomatic and international relations are not business transactions that can be arbitrated through civil courts in the event of a force majeur brought on by a third party act of war and tnings go south. Nevertheless, it is very useful for now.
Not sure if the Kremlin, understands what that could (not would) mean for its attitude and behaviour going forward. Personally, I still do not expect Putin to act in good faith in any diplomatic negotiations ahead or in honouring any armistice agreement arising from the upcoming negotiations.
