Ukraine Conflict - In the grim darkness of the near future, there is only war!

[Malcador]

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/18/trump-blames-zelenskyy-ukraine-war-020517

Trump losing it.

[Zoraptor]

At the moment the only one who isn't visibly losing it is Putin. Trump being Trump, some ludicrous comments and headless chook behaviour from the Europeans (particularly frustrating, not like they had 3 months to prepare for Trump and had Afghanistan as a blueprint for what to expect), Zelensky all over the place. Which is, at least, highly understandable.

I'm also slightly annoyed- but not surprised- by the outraeg!!!11!! about Zelensky being excluded from the talks and selective memory being applied. Talks without Ukraine are exactly as useful as talks without Russia. And lest we forget- since it seems most journalists have- there were multiple talks held without Russia resulting in a succession of peace plans from Zelensky that were unrealistic, then, and even less realistic now.

[bugarup]

9 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

And lest we forget- since it seems most journalists have- there were multiple talks held without Russia resulting in a succession of peace plans from Zelensky that were unrealistic, then, and even less realistic now.

That's because -- and I am sure you know that as well as anyone -- inviting russia would give legitimacy to its claims. Not to mention that discussing "peace plans" with the aggressor that is sole reason why there is no peace in the first place is rather unsavory if unpragmatical and I, for one, loved that EU showed a little bit of spine here. 

The same legitimacy issue is happening right now as well, with russia sidelining Ukraine and Idiocracy allowing it. I bet sanctions will be lifted in days, and I wouldn't be surprised if orange thing greenlighted selling tech and weapons to russia. 

 

Edited February 19 by bugarup

[Lexx]

Chances for that aren't too bad, I guess. They pretend to do an awesome peace plan now, Ukraine obviously will decline it, then Trump says they tried, and will lift russian sanctions.

Trade between america and russia will pick up again, they make nice money, EU will be left out of the market, since they keep their sanctions up. It's pretty much a double-hurt. For ukraine and for the EU.

[Malcador]

4 hours ago, bugarup said:

That's because -- and I am sure you know that as well as anyone -- inviting russia would give legitimacy to its claims. Not to mention that discussing "peace plans" with the aggressor that is sole reason why there is no peace in the first place is rather unsavory if unpragmatical and I, for one, loved that EU showed a little bit of spine here. 

The same legitimacy issue is happening right now as well, with russia sidelining Ukraine and Idiocracy allowing it. I bet sanctions will be lifted in days, and I wouldn't be surprised if orange thing greenlighted selling tech and weapons to russia. 

 

Is just funny that they gave their diplomats and leaders nice trips to Switzerland or Germany for no real purpose, framing a rally as a peace summit.

Doubt they'll be sending tech and weaoons to Russia, that'd be too stupid a switch even for this clown show.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/47420

Hopefully Trump doesn't throw a tantrum at this.

Edited February 19 by Malcador

[Malcador]

 

 

 

[ShadySands]

I'm shocked anyone expected anything else from Trump

[Malcador]

Biden still living in Trump's head

[Zoraptor]

15 hours ago, bugarup said:

That's because -- and I am sure you know that as well as anyone -- inviting russia would give legitimacy to its claims. Not to mention that discussing "peace plans" with the aggressor that is sole reason why there is no peace in the first place is rather unsavory if unpragmatical and I, for one, loved that EU showed a little bit of spine here. 

The same legitimacy issue is happening right now as well, with russia sidelining Ukraine and Idiocracy allowing it. I bet sanctions will be lifted in days, and I wouldn't be surprised if orange thing greenlighted selling tech and weapons to russia.

I'd have said the most likely outcome of inviting Russia was them not turning up for the first meeting, which would have been even better for Ukrainian and Euro feelings of righteousness. They probably would have for the second though. As it was the results there were hardly lent credibility when a sizeable number of the hand picked participants refused to sign the communiqué precisely because Russia wasn't there (or didn't turn up to it). There's limited practical utility in preaching only to the converted in order to convince oneself of one's moral superiority. It really isn't a peace conference if there's both no prospect of it resulting in peace and it does nothing to progress towards it, that's just one side making demands to an audience- and that's true whether it's Russia or Ukraine missing from the negotiations.

In any case lending legitimacy to claims is something which is always said about negotiations. Said it for Hamas, said it for the IRA, said it for the Taleban, and others; and for far more minor issues than the current one. For practical matters there was always going to be a negotiated settlement unless you Believed the constant barrage of pipe dream fantasies about Russia's imminent collapse- which, it seems, rather a lot of European leaders did. In that scenario by far the most important factor is not making Euros feel righteous, it's that Ukraine would have been in a far better position for negotiations then as opposed to negotiations now.

Edited February 20 by Zoraptor

[Malcador]

Whole MAGA apparatus is turning on Zelensky more now, huh

[Elerond]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/us-opposes-wording-russian-aggression-in-g7-statement/ar-AA1zs7Ka

According to anonymous Western officials, US envoys opposed the phrase "Russian aggression" and similar descriptions that G7 leaders have used since 2022 to describe the conflict.

Two anonymous sources added that the Trump administration's insistence on softening the wording reflects a broader shift in US policy toward describing the war as a "conflict in Ukraine."

 

So not war and Russia is not the aggressor

https://www.msn.com/en-xl/news/other/ukraine-no-joint-statement-after-zelenskyy-us-envoy-talks/ar-AA1zoYPd

Meanwhile, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that Zelenskyy had assured him that Ukraine would sign a $500 billion (€478.5 billion) deal to transfer rights to Ukrainian minerals, but hadn't signed it yet, Bloomberg News reported.

[Malcador]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/22/world/europe/ukraine-trump-minerals.html

"The terms of the new proposal, which is dated Feb. 21 and was reviewed by The New York Times, call for Ukraine to relinquish half of its revenues from natural resources, including minerals, gas and oil, as well as earnings from ports and other infrastructure."

 

[Elerond]

29 minutes ago, Malcador said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/22/world/europe/ukraine-trump-minerals.html

"The terms of the new proposal, which is dated Feb. 21 and was reviewed by The New York Times, call for Ukraine to relinquish half of its revenues from natural resources, including minerals, gas and oil, as well as earnings from ports and other infrastructure."

 

You don't need enemies, when you allies are more than willing to rob you and if necessary point gun towards you

[Lexx]

This is not a deal, it's a robbery.

[uuuhhii]

4 hours ago, Elerond said:

You don't need enemies, when you allies are more than willing to rob you and if necessary point gun towards you

 

superpower doesn't have ally

they have minion and puppet

this extortion are just more naked than before

Edited Saturday at 09:17 PM by uuuhhii

[Zoraptor]

5 hours ago, Malcador said:

"The terms of the new proposal, which is dated Feb. 21 and was reviewed by The New York Times, call for Ukraine to relinquish half of its revenues from natural resources, including minerals, gas and oil, as well as earnings from ports and other infrastructure."

That's far from the most onerous requirement. Assuming the document is genuine there's no way anyone could sign it. That's the sort of document that has a high chance of ending with you literally literally dead, not just politically dead.

"..The new document states that revenues from Ukraine’s resources would be directed to a fund in which the United States would hold 100 percent financial interest, and that Ukraine should contribute to the fund until it reaches $500 billion.."*

In practical terms that is signing away 100% mineral rights, not 50%. If the US decided Ukraine's share would best be used to buy F35s or $1015mn pac-2 patriots then that's where the money would go. If they decided it was best spent on fricking TrumpCoin that is where it'd go.

*there could always be a misinterpretation of the terms, since it's second hand info. As it stands though while the document commits to "[the US] intend[ing] to provide long-term financial support to help Ukraine develop economically" the whole point of the fund is to pay back the 'aid' already delivered. Only logical conclusion is that the US will be 'giving' its 'aid' out of Ukraine's 50%, not from an actual commitment from them.

[Malcador]

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/24/politics/us-joins-russia-ukraine-un-vote/index.html

What a time we're in

[Gfted1]

Joining US, Israel votes against UN motion condemning Russian invasion of Ukraine | The Times of Israel smh

[Hurlshort]

[Malcador]

49 minutes ago, Hurlshort said:

You always were.  

[Zoraptor]

Not just a US thing, there's a bit of an implosion in support for the UNGA condemnation in general. While yeas were still in the plurality (93) it was well down from the ~2/3 majority previous (140ish) and not much above abstentions/ non votes (81). As always UNGA votes are pretty much 100% a chance to do some posturing and nothing more.

OTOH, the US resolution in the UNSC did get adopted, though barely. No veto, but one more abstention and it would not have passed due to not having the 2/3 majority required.

Edited yesterday at 01:50 AM by Zoraptor

[rjshae]

On 2/19/2025 at 4:19 AM, Lexx said:

Trade between america and russia will pick up again, they make nice money, EU will be left out of the market, since they keep their sanctions up. It's pretty much a double-hurt. For ukraine and for the EU.

The Russian economy isn't all that large these days, and their primary trade partners (as of 2017) were China, India, and... Germany. Hence, not much of a win. USA trade with Canada (752 billion) is vastly greater than it ever was with Russia (26 billion), and DJT is working to tank the former. Stable genius is in.

[BruceVC]

10 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

Joining US, Israel votes against UN motion condemning Russian invasion of Ukraine | The Times of Israel smh

Its a UNGA vote that doesnt mean much except for sentiment but it is embarrassing to see the list of countries that voted on the same side of the US 

 

[HoonDing]

"rules based order"

[Malcador]

https://archive.ph/968bf

So deal signed, no security guarantees though.  Seems kind of meh, guess will have to wait for the text, but doesn't seem like a huge win for Trump

Edited 17 hours ago by Malcador