Russian invasion of Ukraine

grunge said:
isn't that exactly what he asked for? a peace deal with security guarantee's and the mineral deal was part of that.

the US stance seems to be that the Mineral deal is a key part of it as it puts loads of american staff and companies on the ground and they believe it would make it less likely Russia would attack as they are there.
Click to expand...
What Trump doesn't understand is that Zelensky wants peace but he wants it to be enforced. This isn't on offer from the US, the US offer is give us your rare materials/earths and I promise Putin won't attack, presumably because of whatever the US negotiates with Russia. Zelensky quite rightly said what is the point in this when Putin has ignored previous deals and ceasefires 25 times.

Trump's response is he won't do that whilst I'm president. The problem here is it becomes about ego, Trump still believes the war wouldn't have started with him as president but it did. The war started in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea and then continued throughout his presidency to where it is now. How he would restrain Putin whilst Ukraine continues to exist remains to be seen.

Trump's goal is to essentially isolate Ukraine and force them into peace as negotiated by the US with Russia, whatever that means. He doesn't give a toss about Ukraine, he cares about the benefits to Americans which may well be the profits from rare materials from Ukraine and a renewed trading relationship with Russia.

I can however understand both sides, Zelensky meanwhile doesn't want a deal or peace really, he wants weapons and help. That's because any deal will probably mean giving up parts of his country and so he wants ongoing war and resistance but that seemingly isn't an option for this US administration.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mosssideblue said:
The problem is signing the deal doesn't solve the problem. No matter what peace deal is put before Putin, we know he isn't going to agree and will manipulate Trump to do better for Russia and Trump will oblige
Click to expand...

The problem is that Trump's position is now that he won't sign until Zelensky apologises *and* supports the US peace plan - ie surrenders to Russia.
 
The minerals project is a long-term one. It's very risky and not necessarily economically viable. USA have a stake in Ukraine if it is signed. That could be the "security guarantee", however tenuous it is.

I reckon Ukraine should call Trumps bluff and sign the deal. It will buy time. Ukraine can renegade on it in the future....if is even a practical project given the risks and economic uncertainty.
 
inbetween said:
Trump's goal is to essentially isolate Ukraine and force them into peace as negotiated by the US with Russia, whatever that means. He doesn't give a toss about Ukraine, he cares about the benefits to Americans which may well be the profits from rare materials and then a renewed trading relationship with Russia.
Click to expand...
I think it's much worse than this.

Trump wants to Putinise the US.

Having the EU threatened by Russia - weakening or ideally smashing democracy - suits this purpose.

Hence Orban's support, Musk's support for Tommy Robinson, Vance supporting the AFD etc.
 
Onholiday(somemightsay) said:
I'm not military expert BH (and apologies if I missed the point), but I assume because he isn't getting any assurances from the US who were thought to be providing security moving forward should Russia not retreat / invade again.

Others will keep me honest..........
Click to expand...

I think it's important to remember that we do not know what the proposed agreement says, how much has to be given to the US, what they get out of it, where the deposits are (very important - the graphite resources are miles from the border, I think), how long for...

As you say, all without any actual benefit or security that Russia won't then attack somewhere else in Ukraine.
 
Manchester33 said:
US arms industry going to feel a big hit in the coming years.

The $175b worth of aid that the US has ACTUALLY sent to Ukraine has mainly been spent internally on weapons. EU/NATO countries buy the majority of their military equipment from the US.

I can see this all changing very quickly (similar to how quickly Europe weaned itself off Russian gas and oil). Great time to be invested in EU + UK based arms companies.
Click to expand...

Trump's already talked of slashing the defence spending of the US govt, so the increase in other NATO spending is presumably to cover that.

As you say, I don't see any way that European nations/Canada don't build their own, especially with the experience of the last 3 years - who's going to build a tank army?
 
roubaixtuesday said:
I think it's much worse than this.

Trump wants to Putinise the US.

Having the EU threatened by Russia - weakening or ideally smashing democracy - suits this purpose.

Hence Orban's support, Musk's support for Tommy Robinson, Vance supporting the AFD etc.
Click to expand...

At one level it would seem to be hyperbole to claim we are now at war with the US; but given the nature of Russia's ongoing hybrid warfare campaign against Europe and the recent events, you have to conclude that the US is morphing into a belligerent in that campaign. Just because it's not kinetic doesn't mean we can't find ourselves at war with the US. The best case scenario is that the US is abandoning NATO through indifference and isolationism and/or the gangsters desire to make a quick buck. The worst case scenario is that the anchor member has actually changed sides.
 
roubaixtuesday said:
I think it's much worse than this.

Trump wants to Putinise the US.

Having the EU threatened by Russia - weakening or ideally smashing democracy - suits this purpose.

Hence Orban's support, Musk's support for Tommy Robinson, Vance supporting the AFD etc.
Click to expand...
I agree but I don't think Trump himself is literally on the far-right. He is unfortunately a businessman who happens to be running a country. He sees his 'cabinet' as a boardroom and control of the board is paramount in a business so everyone he picks are loyalists (whether nutters or not). If the total defeat of Ukraine turns out to be good business for the US versus helping Ukraine then that's good enough for him, it's just cold and transactional.

We only have to look at the impact of the Ukraine war in the UK because without that war (ie, had we left Ukraine to fall) then we would be doing measurably better but obviously there is doing what's right at whatever cost. Trump is not interested in doing what's right at whatever cost, he's only interested in what's best for the US.

His view on what's best is almost always in monetary terms only. He's not interested in peace to stop death and wars as he keeps saying because if that was the case then he wouldn't be supporting Israel. The right support Israel and Israeli money also funnels into the US so therefore he supports Israel. The opposite argument of supporting the Palestinians and opposing Israel brings no reward whatsoever so he's not interested.

The other types on the right are just suckling at that teet with the reward to Trump being they're able to bring their support. Him and the rest of the elites following him don't need to worry about this or any subsequent culture wars because those kind of things aren't fought on a private golf course at Mar-a-Lago or on a yacht.
 
It's not a great look that NATO leaders are now coming out and saying that they weren't consulted about the US pausing aid. Starmer said yesterday that that wasn't his understanding.

If that's true, the US have now double-crossed Starmer as well.

I have faith that, in tandem with Europe and Canada, we are doing the right thing. As a country, we can't control the US but can only do our best, which I think Starmer is doing.
 
So Trump wants his America to be Nationalist/Isolationist yet still have his Orange fingers in every pie.
For any lingerers who think the West should cede anything to the two dictators have a delve into the past as it often provides some answers.

Putin is the construct of a people who endemically are bereft of trust, full of duplicity and fear.
Putin, a man who is actively engaging in destabilising the west, using immigration amongst other things as a tool to support the extreme right. His tentacles were all over Brexit and the US Elections.
Putin , a man who cannot get his head out of the history books and his desire to obliterate Ukraine ( the bread basket of the former USSR)

Then we have Trump.
A man who is a narcissist,bully and egomaniac.
A man who thinks in money, real estate or humiliation.
Trumps campaign leader worked with the former pro Ruzzski Ukraine leader.
Trump a man who made a Private visit to Moscow.
Why did Putin want Trump as POTUS?

Trump is dangerous. He is powerful but also insular. In my view he is so determined here he is grossly failing to see the bigger picture. And that is dangerous.
 
Protein Junkie said:
So Trump wants his America to be Nationalist/Isolationist yet still have his Orange fingers in every pie.
For any lingerers who think the West should cede anything to the two dictators have a delve into the past as it often provides some answers.

Putin is the construct of a people who endemically are bereft of trust, full of duplicity and fear.
Putin, a man who is actively engaging in destabilising the west, using immigration amongst other things as a tool to support the extreme right. His tentacles were all over Brexit and the US Elections.
Putin , a man who cannot get his head out of the history books and his desire to obliterate Ukraine ( the bread basket of the former USSR)

Then we have Trump.
A man who is a narcissist,bully and egomaniac.
A man who thinks in money, real estate or humiliation.
Trumps campaign leader worked with the former pro Ruzzski Ukraine leader.
Trump a man who made a Private visit to Moscow.
Why did Putin want Trump as POTUS?

Trump is dangerous. He is powerful but also insular. In my view he is so determined here he is grossly failing to see the bigger picture. And that is dangerous.
Click to expand...
Great post mate
 
r.soleofsalford said:
I don`t know about making America great again, he`s trying his best to destroy America from the inside and turn them into a pariah state. I feel sorry for decent Americans who despise the Orange ****. I also hope Dax 777 and the rest of the nobs get there comeuppance and suffer financial meltdown. It`s the very least they deserve.
Click to expand...
Not wishing to worry anyone but the US made a recession into the Great Depression by implementing tarrifs in 1930
www.ucl.ac.uk

Analysis: The US tried high tariffs and ‘America first’ policies in the 1930s

Writing in The Conversation, Dr Thomas Gift and Dr Michael Plouffe (UCL Political Science) reflect on the similarities between President Trump's plan for trade tariffs and the US Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act enacted in 1930.
www.ucl.ac.uk www.ucl.ac.uk
 
inbetween said:
We only have to look at the impact of the Ukraine war in the UK because without that war (ie, had we left Ukraine to fall) then we would be doing measurably better
Click to expand...

I agree with much of your post, but not this. Imagine a Europe flooded with Ukranian refugees, Russian tanks on the border of the EU.

I don't think we'd be better off. Far from it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top