Literally the same words said in December 2021 could possibly prevent:
- invasion of Ukraine;
- death of dozens or hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and turning of millions of Ukrainians to refugees;
- destruction of dozens of Ukrainian cities;
- loss of Ukrainian territory to Russia;
- loss of Ukrainian rare minerals to US.
The Trump administration is just saying loud what all the other NATO governors have been hiding. No one ever planned to fight Russia for Ukraine and the only destiny for Ukrainian aboriginals is to be used as proxy cannon fodder to fight one of NATO’s bogeymen.
NATO countries never cared about Ukraine’s casualities to the point that they decided that Ukrainian lives were worth less than a signed piece of paper with the aforementioned statement: ‘No NATO for Ukraine’. Everything that happens to the people of Ukraine is just collateral damage on the way to the main goal – to harm Russia. The colonizer mentality (so well known to many NATO countries) never changes.
I love how you get downvoted for stating the obvious.
Security guarantees? Europe’s picking up the tab while Washington cashes out. Hegseth’s “pragmatic evaluation” means funneling Europe’s GDP into Lockheed Martin’s quarterly reports. NATO’s 5% defense spending target? A $2.3 trillion shakedown disguised as collective security. The Continent’s industrial base is now a Pentagon subcontractor.
Crimea’s gone. Zelensky’s bargaining chips? A lithium deposit map and a graveyard of Leopard tanks. The “non-NATO peacekeeping mission” is just a rebrand for EU cannon fodder patrols. Von der Leyen’s already drafting memos about “volunteer brigades” staffed by unemployed Iberian welders.
The real “negotiated settlement”: Trump’s Mar-a-Lago membership roster now includes Rosneft executives. Europe gets to foot the bill for demining Donbas while Chevron drills the Black Sea.
The fact that Europeans bet their whole future on a politically unstable country that can completely change its entire policy every four years will never stop being hilarious.
Putin’s investments are now paying dividends.
Everyone making decisions in either country for decades has been gunning for a war in Europe or actively profiting off of this one. The war will continue as long as it can by throwing money at it unless there’s simply more to be made buying up the aftermath and installing collaborators to impose World Bank/IMF austerity for generations, or the bottom is rising up.
That’s what Daddy Putin wants, so that’s what Daddy Putin gets.
This is what America wanted. Biden made no effort to provide Ukraine with the weapons to win.
They were never going to get into NATO. Behind closed doors, Ukraine not getting into NATO has been bipartisan consensus for a long time. And Trump is not Putin’s puppet.
Source for any of this? Would be interested to know more about these points.
Behind closed doors, the consensus has been that other countries don’t want to get dragged into the current war in accordance with NATO mutual defense agreements.
But since Trump insists that he can end the war, that’s obviously not a consideration for him - by his claims, there will be nothing more standing in the way of Ukraine membership in NATO.
Which makes this announcement that much more significant - essentially what he’s saying is that even after the main obstacle to Ukraine membership has been eliminated, the US will oppose it.
Why?
Because… no, Trump is not Putin’s puppet. He’s something even worse - a cringing sycophant, desperate for affirmation from his strongman idol.
Because… no, Trump is not Putin’s puppet. He’s something even worse - a cringing sycophant, desperate for affirmation from his strongman idol.
If you keep analyzing the current administration through the lens of Jungian analysis of Trump, you’ll keep being wrong. Great man theory is no way to go about analyzing geopolitics.
You are screaming into the void. The people downvoting you think Butcher Biden is a good person, they are a lost cause.
Wouldn’t this have had value as a bargaining chip in peace talks? The fact that they’re saying this now suggests that they’re about to pressure Ukraine into a truly shitty deal.
We get:
- Nothing
You get:
- Less than nothing
What a fucking great deal!
What a fucking great deal!
Somehow it’s always like that when some country get to serve as US proxy.
Deadbeat dad doesn’t even begin to describe the abandonment.
Hope this guy gets hit by a dump truck
Russia will eye Europe, and USA will keep eyeing Canada and Greenland.
Only a matter of time before they fabricate a reason for the public to believe and then they will invade.
And they will believe it. He’s already saying “matter of national security”. Americans have truly abandoned us. Half of them are still just waiting for the eggs while they prepare to invade other countries to play three player RISK before they die and leave the remainder for the climate.
They’re only divided by a small strait, why can’t we just stop all of the comical geopolitical attention grabs and just watch the US and Russia kiss?
I’m surprised a Nazi like Hegseth wants to help Russia so bad.
This plus Danish intel means a large scale war in Europe is imminent.
Edit: my point is that Russia will escalate things in Europe as Danish intel has indicated. Donno why I’m getting downvoted.
Pretty sure Europe would require basic things like industry and energy production to fight a large scale war.
With no guarantees of safety from future aggression, why on earth would Ukraine accept such a deal? This whole war started with Russia breaking their previous peace agreement.
Because Ukraine doesn’t really have much of a choice in the matter, the entire point of the war was to get to a point where that could be certified. If Ukraine refuses any peace deals, Russia will just continue the war.
If Ukraine doesn’t get any security assurances, then they’re effectively still at war. This war started after supposedly getting promises of security for ceding Crimea.
They’re not the ones pushing this negotiation. If they just wanted to stop the war and give Putin everything he wanted with no guarantees he won’t just regroup and invade again they could have done that at any time.
There’s also the factor of the Euromaidan coup, NATO encirclement of Russia, and the Ukranian shelling of Donetsk and Luhansk at play. Russia, more than anything, wants Ukraine to either be fully demillitarized or forced into NATO neutrality, and has the means to continue whether Ukraine wants it to or not. If Russia genuinely wanted to, it could keep going until Ukraine is just Russian territory, but I doubt that will end up being the case.
It isn’t a moral problem, but a question of who holds the cards. Ukraine can make its loss more devastating for both sides, but has no real path to victory. It is better to sue for peace before more damage is done and lives are lost, clearly Russia is fine to continue as long as it needs to in order to secure its interests.
Ohhh, gotcha. I thought this was a real conversation, not just blindly repeating ridiculous Russian talking points about NATO aggression.
Just because Russia says something doesn’t mean it’s false. Calling something a “Russian talking point,” is not an argument, it’s a thought-terminating cliché.
What part of NATO encirclement is “ridiculous?” Even if I agreed with you that it is “ridiculous,” clearly Russia thinks it isn’t, which means the motives are still there for Russia to continue pursuing its goals until Ukraine gives in.
This feels more like you dodging having to grapple with that reality than anything else.
Why do you assume sincerity from Russian talking points? Russia already has boarders with NATO and didn’t go to war to prevent them. The war pushed Finland to join, which is not exactly a surprising result from renewed Russian invasions of conquest.
The whole reason I subscribe to ml politics is because commenters here are less blindly credulous about the disconnect between the statements of American political actors and their actions, but then you just trade it for an infinite well of trust for foreign regimes that at least until recently were blatantly worse.
have you heard of this little thing called geography? Like mountains and stuff? Have you ever actually looked at a map of the region?
NATO encirclement implies encirclement. Why do you think Russia is going to war in the first place? I don’t trust everything Russia says, I think de-Nazification is a convenient narrative given the presence of Azov and other groups, but isn’t the driving factor of the war (though is part of it). NATO encirclement is a known tactic, as NATO has origins as an anti-Communist, pro-Imperialist group that was formed to attack the USSR, and had Nazis such as Adolf Heusinger in charge. This is readily available information, from Operation GLADIO to Heusinger’s Nazi past.
Why do you think Russia is going to war? What do they gain at the costs associated with the war?
