Russia - Ukraine “peace negotiations”

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 3K
  • Views: 78K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...

It's so....him. 🤦‍♂️

If I were a reporter in that room, my only question would be "Mr President, how will what you're doing bring down the cost of eggs/groceries - one of your signature campaign promises" over and over and over until he threw me out.
 

Trump says he doesn't see need for U.S. security guarantees to end Ukraine-Russia war​



Trump “said that striking a deal with Russia would be the "difficult part," but that adding security is the easy part.

"I have confidence that if we make a deal, it's going to hold," Trump told reporters in a meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

As part of the broader effort, Trump said Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will come to Washington, D.C., on Friday to sign a critical minerals deal. Trump indicated that the deal would serve as a security "backstop."

"I don't think anybody's going to play around if we're there with a lot of workers," Trump said.

… [Meanwhile] Both Starmer and Macron used a mix of praise and flattery to woo the U.S. president. …”
 
This minerals deal could end up working out well for Ukraine. If it comes to fruition, we're now partners with Ukraine in extracting raw materials and earning billions of dollars on the market. Putin, in the future, must now factor that in as part of his analysis of whether to launch a new invasion against Ukraine. This time he would be endangering Trump's deal and the US's property. That might give him pause.

Trump's holding back on giving Ukraine a security guarantee since the negotiations with Russia are abaout to
 
nycfan said:

Trump says he doesn't see need for U.S. security guarantees to end Ukraine-Russia war​



Trump “said that striking a deal with Russia would be the "difficult part," but that adding security is the easy part.

"I have confidence that if we make a deal, it's going to hold," Trump told reporters in a meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

As part of the broader effort, Trump said Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will come to Washington, D.C., on Friday to sign a critical minerals deal. Trump indicated that the deal would serve as a security "backstop."

"I don't think anybody's going to play around if we're there with a lot of workers," Trump said.

… [Meanwhile] Both Starmer and Macron used a mix of praise and flattery to woo the U.S. president. …”
Click to expand...
So, Trump’s proposal is to steal Ukrainian minerals/rare earth deposits AND the jobs to mine them?

How many Americans are signing up to work in Ukraine? It’ll be none. Eastern Europeans work more cheaply.
 
Ramrouser said:
This minerals deal could end up working out well for Ukraine. If it comes to fruition, we're now partners with Ukraine in extracting raw materials and earning billions of dollars on the market. Putin, in the future, must now factor that in as part of his analysis of whether to launch a new invasion against Ukraine. This time he would be endangering Trump's deal and the US's property. That might give him pause.

Trump's holding back on giving Ukraine a security guarantee since the negotiations with Russia are abaout to
Click to expand...
But don’t you see the problem? What we do in regards to Ukraine shouldn’t be based on profit. It should be based on what’s right. And what’s right is helping Ukraine drive the murdering dictator’s armies from Ukraine. Putin started this war, and he should be made to pay a heavy price. Unfortunately, your Dear Leader is only motivated by the $ sign. And all his actions are to be judged accordingly. Wake the fuck up JFC!!!
 
Ramrouser said:
This minerals deal could end up working out well for Ukraine. If it comes to fruition, we're now partners with Ukraine in extracting raw materials and earning billions of dollars on the market. Putin, in the future, must now factor that in as part of his analysis of whether to launch a new invasion against Ukraine. This time he would be endangering Trump's deal and the US's property. That might give him pause.

Trump's holding back on giving Ukraine a security guarantee since the negotiations with Russia are abaout to
Click to expand...
It definitely always works out well for a nation to have their ally turn coat and negotiate with their invader to divvy up the spoils of the invasion.

Let me know how you feel about it when the police split up all your shit with the home invaders in exchange for a promise to protect what you have left from the invaders next time.
 
Patb78 said:
But don’t you see the problem? What we do in regards to Ukraine shouldn’t be based on profit. It should be based on what’s right. And what’s right is helping Ukraine drive the murdering dictator’s armies from Ukraine. Putin started this war, and he should be made to pay a heavy price. Unfortunately, your Dear Leader is only motivated by the $ sign. And all his actions are to be judged accordingly. Wake the fuck up JFC!!!
Click to expand...
This is you assuming maga has a sense of ethics and morality. You assume that bc your brain is wired to see empathy, suffering, and wellbeing of all humans as fundamental to the calculation of collective wellbeing. maga doesn’t have that wiring. maga is an antisocial movement, at its core.

It’s a well worn concept that people with empathy and a belief in collective wellbeing have fierce cognitive resistance to understanding the minds and drive of antisocial people, whether that’s the blatant sociopath, or the blatantly antisocial entity, eg cult. The maga movement is a sociopathic movement, and the people within it aren’t all sociopaths, but are people with some combination of low empathy, insecurity, and poor discernment for bullshit, and therefore can be activated as functional sociopaths by sociopaths. They’ll never break until the consequences of their actions crash upon their heads. maga isn’t new, it just has different toys.

We can’t fathom extorting a cancer patient as we withhold live saving medications, the same as we can’t imagine extorting millions of people who have been invaded and slaughtered by a malignant sociopath. Ram et al. barely pause to consider whether the extortion is moral.
 
Most Republicans (including myself) still have a traditional Republican strong - on - foreign - policy approach. Rubio and Trump's negotiating team fall in this camp. Trump is an outlier in that he looks at diplomacy as making a "good deal." As we all know he's very transactional. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt even though I'm not entirely comfortable with his Soprano like negotiating style with Zelensky. We're going to get to the same place but Trump is just going to go about it differently. He will insist upon a mineral deal to help pay back the American taxpayer. Trump won't immediately announce a Ukrainian security guarantee because he doesn't want to give up too much too soon in the negotiations and he wants to force the EU nations to take the lead on this. Eventually Ukraine will get a US security guarantee with the mineral deal as a bonus. He sees this as winning while traditional diplomacy sees it as crass and unseemly.

But I also give him some credit. We've had more movement on the peace process since Jan 20th than we've had in two years under Biden/Blinken. The Biden Administration would have been content to simply continue pouring additional billions into the World War I meat grinder which Ukraine would eventually lose since it can't win a war of attrition against Russia and no Ukrainian allies (US included) are willing to send in soldiers into the trenches like North Korea is doing for Russia. At least Trump has things moving towards a negotiated settlement. It's just painful watching the sausage being made.
 
If Russia invaded Alaska and we warred with them for three long years and Canada came in and "Negotiated" for Russia to keep Alaska and the United States to sign over mineral rights to Texas for their trouble, would you Trumpers be cool with that?
 
dukeman92 said:
If Russia invaded Alaska and we warred with them for three long years and Canada came in and "Negotiated" for Russia to keep Alaska and the United States to sign over mineral rights to Texas for their trouble, would you Trumpers be cool with that?
Click to expand...
No. Sucks to be Ukraine and have a terrible neighbor like Russia. What's your plan for Ukraine regaining its lost territory? Plus, Canada would never be in a position to negotiate anything for us or anyone else.
 
Why is it so offensive to work with Ukraine on a plan for the US to recover some of the resources it has contributed to their war effort?
 
Purple Nurple said:
Why is it so offensive to work with Ukraine on a plan for the US to recover some of the resources it has contributed to their war effort?
Click to expand...
Pretty much everyone on here has agreed with the plan to work with Ukraine to use their mineral rights to support our war effort. Go look at past posts. What we don't support is a negotiation that requires them to give up a bunch of rights for essentially nothing in return, which is what Trump has proposed so far. If Ukraine can't get a security guarantee, or heck even a promise to continue military aid, then what's the point of them signing an agreement that gives the US rights to their mineral deposits?

Edit to add - The discussion around mineral rights began before Trump took office.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top