He’s just taking to the Nth degree the whole train of thought that it was Ukraine wanting closer ties to Europe and nato led to crimea and then a few years later the current conflict. He really is some bell isn’t he, turned that dial way past 11 now
He’s just taking to the Nth degree the whole train of thought that it was Ukraine wanting closer ties to Europe and nato led to crimea and then a few years later the current conflict. He really is some bell isn’t he, turned that dial way past 11 now
11 might be generous, he's pretty much off the grid.
He’s just taking to the Nth degree the whole train of thought that it was Ukraine wanting closer ties to Europe and nato led to crimea and then a few years later the current conflict. He really is some bell isn’t he, turned that dial way past 11 now
11 might be generous, he's pretty much off the grid.
I remember someone saying about Trump, or it could have been the Blonde Bumblecunt but they are just different sides of the same arsewipe, that it was all about being the last person to speak to them in a meeting. It is almost like he wipes clean any memory disc apart from what he has heard in the last few hours and then repeats it without thought. Probably a sign of dementia?
He’s just taking to the Nth degree the whole train of thought that it was Ukraine wanting closer ties to Europe and nato led to crimea and then a few years later the current conflict. He really is some bell isn’t he, turned that dial way past 11 now
11 might be generous, he's pretty much off the grid.
I remember someone saying about Trump, or it could have been the Blonde Bumblecunt but they are just different sides of the same arsewipe, that it was all about being the last person to speak to them in a meeting. It is almost like he wipes clean any memory disc apart from what he has heard in the last few hours and then repeats it without thought. Probably a sign of dementia?
Or tertiary syphilis. Or both.
His statement had all the usual touchstones of sucking up to tyrants which have been his calling card. Shame for the American Century to end this way, but at least hicks in flyover states will be able to buy eggs cheap, at least until the tariffs hit or the bird flu kills them.
TB63 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 18, 2025 10:34 pm
Ukraine started it!..
There just doesn’t seem to be any low benchmark for his idiocy and cuntishness, just keeps on going
Zelensky isn't having it.
"With all due respect to President Donald Trump as a leader....he is living in this disinformation space," he adds.
His comments come after Trump claimed Zelensky - who won a five-year term in 2019 - was "down at 4% approval rating".
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2025 12:42 pm
by Flockwitt
The immature prat will be looking for an excuse to take umbrage. We'll just have to wait and see how this all plays out.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2025 2:14 pm
by tabascoboy
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2025 4:38 pm
by tabascoboy
Again, I see little sense in apprehending any statements while the President of the United States disperses a salad of random bullet points from the Kremlin's daily TV war propaganda and varying facts and figures randomly taken from thin air.
We should look at and react to actions, not these inflammatory streams of consciousness that have no connection with things on the ground.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2025 5:05 pm
by inactionman
Anyway, as an antidote to the misery Trump is causing the Ukes, some interesting work the UK are undertaking with the Ukrainian MoD.
Essentially, utilising a relatively ubiquitous and low-cost Soviet Air-to-Air missile for ground-launch, as a cheap and cheerful remedy to drone attacks. The R-73 has already been used for ground-launch, so the job was more to build (I'd say 'bodge' but it looks solid) a cheap launch platform the pylons from Migs and Sukhois and fit some optics and fire control.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2025 1:18 pm
by tabascoboy
Meanwhile ignoring the aggressive expansionists to the east...
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2025 11:47 pm
by Hellraiser
The EU is now considering redirecting the €93bn left in the Union's COVID recovery fund into the European defence industry, and establishing a "rearmament bank" structured like the EBRD with a €100bn capital starting base that would also be open to partner countries the likes of Ukraine, the UK, and Norway, (I'm guessing Canada would be interested too).
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2025 8:57 am
by _Os_
Going back to the discussion from November with Calculator and some others (too many posts to quote, some quite long).
As a least worst outcome short of a total military victory, Ukraine needs a conflict termination (not a frozen conflict) and enough room to become Finland. Trump has very likely eliminated that possibility by starting from a position of no NATO membership and Ukraine giving up 20% of its territory, those were the cards that Russia should've been made to negotiate for through concessions as significant. Russia has been given them for free.
Instead we have mad dog Trump raging about Ukraine being a dictatorship and demanding Ukraine give the US 50% of its mineral resources (he doesn't seem to realise they're mostly in the land he's given up to Russia). Trump is negotiating for the US to steal resources from a developing country.
Most Western commentators are getting this wrong, they think the US is misinformed or it's just Trump. They're incredibly well informed and it's not just Trump, at a minimum it's Trump and a lot of the Republican party. They see the world the same way Putin does, as spheres of influence within which the powerful can do whatever they want. Up to and including genocide. Trump very obviously wants to end this conflict by sacrificing Ukraine, his calculation is a total Ukrainian defeat is the quickest route to "peace" (the US/Trump thinking looks like: Ukraine is in the Russian sphere of influence let them have it, if the US can steal resources too then it's a win). But the same thinking is at work with his talk of invading Canada/Panama/Greenland, they're in the US sphere. The same thinking is at work when his administration criticises the closest US allies (UK/Germany/EU), other than Israel who are never criticised, they're in the US sphere so he can treat them like shit. Same thinking is behind his raging about Taiwan "stealing US chip manufacturing", he maybe wouldn't care if China attacked Taiwan (Chinese sphere). It's a consistent pattern of thought.
What is actually now happening is two hostile actors are discussing the fate of a third country. As things stand it's a new Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. They're deciding how to leave Ukraine defenceless, carve it up between them, and steal its resources.
NATO is questionable. If Russia attacked the Baltics maybe instead of supporting the Baltics the Americans repeat Russian propaganda, say they're run by dictators, and they need to hand over 50% of their natural resources (wood?) before limited help can be provided. No country will commit ground troops against a Russian invasion anywhere I suspect, and no country is prepared to take 100s of thousands of causalities on behalf of another country. Which turns NATO into a chocolate teapot against any full blooded Russian invasion.
Ukraine will reject all this outright and fight on. Low probability of winning, but anyone would reject a carve up by two hostile powers as long as they have any ability to fight. Possibility the US lifts sanctions on Russia to punish Ukraine if that happens, not just ending military aid but also helping Russia to spite Europe. Trump can then boast about "US companies making big profits in Russia selling machine tools" or something equally mad.
Grim stuff.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2025 1:23 pm
by dpedin
_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 8:57 am
Going back to the discussion from November with Calculator and some others (too many posts to quote, some quite long).
As a least worst outcome short of a total military victory, Ukraine needs a conflict termination (not a frozen conflict) and enough room to become Finland. Trump has very likely eliminated that possibility by starting from a position of no NATO membership and Ukraine giving up 20% of its territory, those were the cards that Russia should've been made to negotiate for through concessions as significant. Russia has been given them for free.
Instead we have mad dog Trump raging about Ukraine being a dictatorship and demanding Ukraine give the US 50% of its mineral resources (he doesn't seem to realise they're mostly in the land he's given up to Russia). Trump is negotiating for the US to steal resources from a developing country.
Most Western commentators are getting this wrong, they think the US is misinformed or it's just Trump. They're incredibly well informed and it's not just Trump, at a minimum it's Trump and a lot of the Republican party. They see the world the same way Putin does, as spheres of influence within which the powerful can do whatever they want. Up to and including genocide. Trump very obviously wants to end this conflict by sacrificing Ukraine, his calculation is a total Ukrainian defeat is the quickest route to "peace" (the US/Trump thinking looks like: Ukraine is in the Russian sphere of influence let them have it, if the US can steal resources too then it's a win). But the same thinking is at work with his talk of invading Canada/Panama/Greenland, they're in the US sphere. The same thinking is at work when his administration criticises the closest US allies (UK/Germany/EU), other than Israel who are never criticised, they're in the US sphere so he can treat them like shit. Same thinking is behind his raging about Taiwan "stealing US chip manufacturing", he maybe wouldn't care if China attacked Taiwan (Chinese sphere). It's a consistent pattern of thought.
What is actually now happening is two hostile actors are discussing the fate of a third country. As things stand it's a new Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. They're deciding how to leave Ukraine defenceless, carve it up between them, and steal its resources.
NATO is questionable. If Russia attacked the Baltics maybe instead of supporting the Baltics the Americans repeat Russian propaganda, say they're run by dictators, and they need to hand over 50% of their natural resources (wood?) before limited help can be provided. No country will commit ground troops against a Russian invasion anywhere I suspect, and no country is prepared to take 100s of thousands of causalities on behalf of another country. Which turns NATO into a chocolate teapot against any full blooded Russian invasion.
Ukraine will reject all this outright and fight on. Low probability of winning, but anyone would reject a carve up by two hostile powers as long as they have any ability to fight. Possibility the US lifts sanctions on Russia to punish Ukraine if that happens, not just ending military aid but also helping Russia to spite Europe. Trump can then boast about "US companies making big profits in Russia selling machine tools" or something equally mad.
Grim stuff.
I have same reading of the situation and the US position. It is very, very scary. Ukrainians will not give in easily, why resign yourself to the rest of your life in a Gulag or unexpected defenestration in a year's time? given the options they face I suspect they will fight tooth and nail, Europe needs to be ready for a mass refugees from Ukraine.
The only problem for the US and their economic future is that if they destroy the world economy then they potentially destroy their own in the process. Demand for US goods is already plummeting and would all but disappear if they turn into Russia.2. They are dependent upon a thriving world economy and demand for their services and products, and for many imports their economy depends on - think of all those fat Americans who wouldn't be able to get their Wegovy jabs! Whilst social media has an important role to play nowadays it is relatively easy for countries to 'turn it off' overnight and suddenly Facebook, X, Instagram, etc are lost and others will quickly take their place ie Bluesky, TikTok, etc. Whatever view of the world they have it needs to generate ongoing demand for their exports otherwise they shoot themselves in both feet pretty quickly! For example as a result of Musk, Tesla sales are falling faster than 'a whores nickers in a brother' in Europe in the last few weeks and there is a huge surplus of supply of EVS, mostly from China, ready to fill the gap created. Once Tesla loses market share it will be very difficult to regain it. Whist the current US Gov hates the nature of the global economy they are entirely dependent upon it for their wealth and power, without a growing world market for their goods and services they will end up destroying themselves in their process of seeking world domination. Twats!
_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 8:57 am
Going back to the discussion from November with Calculator and some others (too many posts to quote, some quite long).
As a least worst outcome short of a total military victory, Ukraine needs a conflict termination (not a frozen conflict) and enough room to become Finland. Trump has very likely eliminated that possibility by starting from a position of no NATO membership and Ukraine giving up 20% of its territory, those were the cards that Russia should've been made to negotiate for through concessions as significant. Russia has been given them for free.
Instead we have mad dog Trump raging about Ukraine being a dictatorship and demanding Ukraine give the US 50% of its mineral resources (he doesn't seem to realise they're mostly in the land he's given up to Russia). Trump is negotiating for the US to steal resources from a developing country.
Most Western commentators are getting this wrong, they think the US is misinformed or it's just Trump. They're incredibly well informed and it's not just Trump, at a minimum it's Trump and a lot of the Republican party. They see the world the same way Putin does, as spheres of influence within which the powerful can do whatever they want. Up to and including genocide. Trump very obviously wants to end this conflict by sacrificing Ukraine, his calculation is a total Ukrainian defeat is the quickest route to "peace" (the US/Trump thinking looks like: Ukraine is in the Russian sphere of influence let them have it, if the US can steal resources too then it's a win). But the same thinking is at work with his talk of invading Canada/Panama/Greenland, they're in the US sphere. The same thinking is at work when his administration criticises the closest US allies (UK/Germany/EU), other than Israel who are never criticised, they're in the US sphere so he can treat them like shit. Same thinking is behind his raging about Taiwan "stealing US chip manufacturing", he maybe wouldn't care if China attacked Taiwan (Chinese sphere). It's a consistent pattern of thought.
What is actually now happening is two hostile actors are discussing the fate of a third country. As things stand it's a new Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. They're deciding how to leave Ukraine defenceless, carve it up between them, and steal its resources.
NATO is questionable. If Russia attacked the Baltics maybe instead of supporting the Baltics the Americans repeat Russian propaganda, say they're run by dictators, and they need to hand over 50% of their natural resources (wood?) before limited help can be provided. No country will commit ground troops against a Russian invasion anywhere I suspect, and no country is prepared to take 100s of thousands of causalities on behalf of another country. Which turns NATO into a chocolate teapot against any full blooded Russian invasion.
Ukraine will reject all this outright and fight on. Low probability of winning, but anyone would reject a carve up by two hostile powers as long as they have any ability to fight. Possibility the US lifts sanctions on Russia to punish Ukraine if that happens, not just ending military aid but also helping Russia to spite Europe. Trump can then boast about "US companies making big profits in Russia selling machine tools" or something equally mad.
Grim stuff.
I have same reading of the situation and the US position. It is very, very scary. Ukrainians will not give in easily, why resign yourself to the rest of your life in a Gulag or unexpected defenestration in a year's time? given the options they face I suspect they will fight tooth and nail, Europe needs to be ready for a mass refugees from Ukraine.
The only problem for the US and their economic future is that if they destroy the world economy then they potentially destroy their own in the process. Demand for US goods is already plummeting and would all but disappear if they turn into Russia.2. They are dependent upon a thriving world economy and demand for their services and products, and for many imports their economy depends on - think of all those fat Americans who wouldn't be able to get their Wegovy jabs! Whilst social media has an important role to play nowadays it is relatively easy for countries to 'turn it off' overnight and suddenly Facebook, X, Instagram, etc are lost and others will quickly take their place ie Bluesky, TikTok, etc. Whatever view of the world they have it needs to generate ongoing demand for their exports otherwise they shoot themselves in both feet pretty quickly! For example as a result of Musk, Tesla sales are falling faster than 'a whores nickers in a brother' in Europe in the last few weeks and there is a huge surplus of supply of EVS, mostly from China, ready to fill the gap created. Once Tesla loses market share it will be very difficult to regain it. Whist the current US Gov hates the nature of the global economy they are entirely dependent upon it for their wealth and power, without a growing world market for their goods and services they will end up destroying themselves in their process of seeking world domination. Twats!
One of the other things to remember is the USA has dominant arms/defence companies because they spend a lot more of their GDP on it. If he pushes Europe to do the same, and makes European defence spending larger and more coherent, all of a sudden the EU becomes another significant pole in the multipolar order. And the domestic tech industries of Europe prosper and can compete with the US ones (in the med/long term).
Basically what Trump is doing here is destroying the USA's position as the leading economy in the world. He's reducing the US to equal placing with China, Russia and potentially the EU. And removing Europe's longstanding allyship to the USA at the same time. He's likely to end up with this multipolar world having all poles against the USA, leaving them completely isolated.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2025 3:36 pm
by Guy Smiley
Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 2:56 pm
Basically what Trump is doing here is destroying the USA's position as the leading economy in the world. He's reducing the US to equal placing with China, Russia and potentially the EU. And removing Europe's longstanding allyship to the USA at the same time. He's likely to end up with this multipolar world having all poles against the USA, leaving them completely isolated.
They'll have Israel, and a semi developed rubble pile on the Mediterranean coast.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2025 6:30 pm
by Flockwitt
Very good, impartial review of the Ukrainian war in 2024 to date by the Austrian army which illustrates the issues Ukraine still has.
_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 8:57 am
Going back to the discussion from November with Calculator and some others (too many posts to quote, some quite long).
As a least worst outcome short of a total military victory, Ukraine needs a conflict termination (not a frozen conflict) and enough room to become Finland. Trump has very likely eliminated that possibility by starting from a position of no NATO membership and Ukraine giving up 20% of its territory, those were the cards that Russia should've been made to negotiate for through concessions as significant. Russia has been given them for free.
Instead we have mad dog Trump raging about Ukraine being a dictatorship and demanding Ukraine give the US 50% of its mineral resources (he doesn't seem to realise they're mostly in the land he's given up to Russia). Trump is negotiating for the US to steal resources from a developing country.
Most Western commentators are getting this wrong, they think the US is misinformed or it's just Trump. They're incredibly well informed and it's not just Trump, at a minimum it's Trump and a lot of the Republican party. They see the world the same way Putin does, as spheres of influence within which the powerful can do whatever they want. Up to and including genocide. Trump very obviously wants to end this conflict by sacrificing Ukraine, his calculation is a total Ukrainian defeat is the quickest route to "peace" (the US/Trump thinking looks like: Ukraine is in the Russian sphere of influence let them have it, if the US can steal resources too then it's a win). But the same thinking is at work with his talk of invading Canada/Panama/Greenland, they're in the US sphere. The same thinking is at work when his administration criticises the closest US allies (UK/Germany/EU), other than Israel who are never criticised, they're in the US sphere so he can treat them like shit. Same thinking is behind his raging about Taiwan "stealing US chip manufacturing", he maybe wouldn't care if China attacked Taiwan (Chinese sphere). It's a consistent pattern of thought.
What is actually now happening is two hostile actors are discussing the fate of a third country. As things stand it's a new Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. They're deciding how to leave Ukraine defenceless, carve it up between them, and steal its resources.
NATO is questionable. If Russia attacked the Baltics maybe instead of supporting the Baltics the Americans repeat Russian propaganda, say they're run by dictators, and they need to hand over 50% of their natural resources (wood?) before limited help can be provided. No country will commit ground troops against a Russian invasion anywhere I suspect, and no country is prepared to take 100s of thousands of causalities on behalf of another country. Which turns NATO into a chocolate teapot against any full blooded Russian invasion.
Ukraine will reject all this outright and fight on. Low probability of winning, but anyone would reject a carve up by two hostile powers as long as they have any ability to fight. Possibility the US lifts sanctions on Russia to punish Ukraine if that happens, not just ending military aid but also helping Russia to spite Europe. Trump can then boast about "US companies making big profits in Russia selling machine tools" or something equally mad.
Grim stuff.
I have same reading of the situation and the US position. It is very, very scary. Ukrainians will not give in easily, why resign yourself to the rest of your life in a Gulag or unexpected defenestration in a year's time? given the options they face I suspect they will fight tooth and nail, Europe needs to be ready for a mass refugees from Ukraine.
The only problem for the US and their economic future is that if they destroy the world economy then they potentially destroy their own in the process. Demand for US goods is already plummeting and would all but disappear if they turn into Russia.2. They are dependent upon a thriving world economy and demand for their services and products, and for many imports their economy depends on - think of all those fat Americans who wouldn't be able to get their Wegovy jabs! Whilst social media has an important role to play nowadays it is relatively easy for countries to 'turn it off' overnight and suddenly Facebook, X, Instagram, etc are lost and others will quickly take their place ie Bluesky, TikTok, etc. Whatever view of the world they have it needs to generate ongoing demand for their exports otherwise they shoot themselves in both feet pretty quickly! For example as a result of Musk, Tesla sales are falling faster than 'a whores nickers in a brother' in Europe in the last few weeks and there is a huge surplus of supply of EVS, mostly from China, ready to fill the gap created. Once Tesla loses market share it will be very difficult to regain it. Whist the current US Gov hates the nature of the global economy they are entirely dependent upon it for their wealth and power, without a growing world market for their goods and services they will end up destroying themselves in their process of seeking world domination. Twats!
I agree it’s truly scary times. It feels quite surreal to feel like you are living through a defining moment in history.
The Orange shitgibbbons already limited faculties have clearly turned to soup.
A wise boss once said about some mad counterparty we were negotiating with “people are very rarely irrational, we just don’t understand their motives” . I think it’s patently obvious Donnie is extracting billions from Russia for him and his family out of this. He’s not even trying to hide what he’s doing.
I think the full truth and scale of this will come out at some point maybe far down the line and it will be a defining moment for western values. The scale of his corruption will shock democracy and result in changes to the constitution, more regulation and more checks and balances (and a reduction in presidential powers).
What can’t be undone in the 50 years of US foreign policy he has unwound in 2 months. No partner will trust the US again. He really is a gift from god for Russian and China.
I think it will also be an economic disaster for the US. it’s hard to quantify but think of the global rewards they have reaped from being the political and cultural reference point for the world.
The world hates them now. On a personal level I always quite liked Americans, American culture, music etc. But I literally have zero interest in it anymore. I wouldn’t bother going on holiday there. I’m not arsed about whatever vapid vacuous media they spew out. I’m totally disengaged now as they’re clearly a nation a racist retards masquerading as Christians. I suspect there are many people around the world who also feel like this.
It wil impact foreign investment into the US and also consumption of US “stuff”.
The US has just spaffed all of their culture and leadership up the wall in barely 2 months. It’’d actually be quite impressive…if it wasn’t so scary.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2025 9:23 pm
by _Os_
dpedin wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 1:23 pm
I have same reading of the situation and the US position. It is very, very scary. Ukrainians will not give in easily, why resign yourself to the rest of your life in a Gulag or unexpected defenestration in a year's time? given the options they face I suspect they will fight tooth and nail, Europe needs to be ready for a mass refugees from Ukraine.
That's what I'm expecting too. "Businessman does politics" is always a total shit show. They never understand it's not the same thing. In a bad business deal you can decline and go back to status quo, or you can take the deal and rely on the courts to enforce the deal. Politics is not the same, in a really bad deal Ukraine has no power which means it eventually doesn't exist, at a minimum UAF officers report to their Siberian gulags, then there's mass forced conscription into the next Russian war. If there's little in the deal for Ukraine, how power works means they'll eventually have less than zero.
dpedin wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 1:23 pm
The only problem for the US and their economic future is that if they destroy the world economy then they potentially destroy their own in the process. Demand for US goods is already plummeting and would all but disappear if they turn into Russia.2. They are dependent upon a thriving world economy and demand for their services and products, and for many imports their economy depends on - think of all those fat Americans who wouldn't be able to get their Wegovy jabs! Whilst social media has an important role to play nowadays it is relatively easy for countries to 'turn it off' overnight and suddenly Facebook, X, Instagram, etc are lost and others will quickly take their place ie Bluesky, TikTok, etc. Whatever view of the world they have it needs to generate ongoing demand for their exports otherwise they shoot themselves in both feet pretty quickly! For example as a result of Musk, Tesla sales are falling faster than 'a whores nickers in a brother' in Europe in the last few weeks and there is a huge surplus of supply of EVS, mostly from China, ready to fill the gap created. Once Tesla loses market share it will be very difficult to regain it. Whist the current US Gov hates the nature of the global economy they are entirely dependent upon it for their wealth and power, without a growing world market for their goods and services they will end up destroying themselves in their process of seeking world domination. Twats!
Agree and disagree.
North America is mostly a closed system (10% of trade comes from outside of that system?). Two oceans between them and everyone else. They don't really need the world. The reason Americans smarter than the ones in power today constructed the international system, was to dominate other regions and prevent them challenging the US, it wasn't to make the US rich it was to make the US powerful (not the same thing). USAID was a patronage system, so was NATO, etc. If the international system and US patronage goes away, so does US power.
Agree the US tech giants need foreign markets, and especially the EU. It's why they're all anti-EU, they don't want to be regulated or pay tax. They're not as important as they think though. China has shown after the US companies are blocked and banned local companies will provide similar/better services. Even in SA this has happened when the US companies refused to offer services (there's a native version of Ebay). The tech giants are really about access to a captive and unregulated market, they're not about having a brilliant product, it's why the US wants to ban Chinese competitors from their own market.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2025 9:51 pm
by _Os_
Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 2:56 pm
One of the other things to remember is the USA has dominant arms/defence companies because they spend a lot more of their GDP on it. If he pushes Europe to do the same, and makes European defence spending larger and more coherent, all of a sudden the EU becomes another significant pole in the multipolar order. And the domestic tech industries of Europe prosper and can compete with the US ones (in the med/long term).
Basically what Trump is doing here is destroying the USA's position as the leading economy in the world. He's reducing the US to equal placing with China, Russia and potentially the EU. And removing Europe's longstanding allyship to the USA at the same time. He's likely to end up with this multipolar world having all poles against the USA, leaving them completely isolated.
Agree. The reason it's not already the case is basically Europe didn't want to anger the US and in the past was scared of a rearmed Germany. The US is already angry for some mad reason and everyone knows now the Germans have changed.
But as things stand Europe is really what's being competed over between the US and China and not so much a competitor in its own right. Basically there's some things Europe doesn't do/imports. If Europe declines to take a strong position against China and instead decides a partnership is better, then it becomes impossible for the US to defeat China. The logical response to American pressure on Europe is for Europe to be more friendly towards China.
The whole situation is stupid. Europe could continue giving Ukraine military aid, which fundamentally undermines the US goal of a quick peace. Europe could become more friendly towards China, which undermines the US ever defeating them. Europe could eject the US from all military bases in European controlled territory (in Europe and outside), which cuts US power outside North America off at the knees. And so on.
Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 2:56 pm
One of the other things to remember is the USA has dominant arms/defence companies because they spend a lot more of their GDP on it. If he pushes Europe to do the same, and makes European defence spending larger and more coherent, all of a sudden the EU becomes another significant pole in the multipolar order. And the domestic tech industries of Europe prosper and can compete with the US ones (in the med/long term).
Basically what Trump is doing here is destroying the USA's position as the leading economy in the world. He's reducing the US to equal placing with China, Russia and potentially the EU. And removing Europe's longstanding allyship to the USA at the same time. He's likely to end up with this multipolar world having all poles against the USA, leaving them completely isolated.
Agree. The reason it's not already the case is basically Europe didn't want to anger the US and in the past was scared of a rearmed Germany. The US is already angry for some mad reason and everyone knows now the Germans have changed.
But as things stand Europe is really what's being competed over between the US and China and not so much a competitor in its own right. Basically there's some things Europe doesn't do/imports. If Europe declines to take a strong position against China and instead decides a partnership is better, then it becomes impossible for the US to defeat China. The logical response to American pressure on Europe is for Europe to be more friendly towards China.
The whole situation is stupid. Europe could continue giving Ukraine military aid, which fundamentally undermines the US goal of a quick peace. Europe could become more friendly towards China, which undermines the US ever defeating them. Europe could eject the US from all military bases in European controlled territory (in Europe and outside), which cuts US power outside North America off at the knees. And so on.
The other thing about China is the impact of the trade war of food imports. US farmers are already bleating about all the crops they've sown that were supposed to be sold in China; so there's an enormous opportunity for the EU, (including Ukraine), & Oz & NZ, & other Countries, to take up the slack in those exports, & fuck up the US trade deficits even further, & make some money at the same time.
It would also put China in an interesting situation; because you can fuck over a lot of people, but it's incredible dangerous to try fucking over the people who feed your population; you know what they say about civilization being 3 missed meals away from anarchy !
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2025 10:21 pm
by Margin__Walker
Fairly long listen, but Justin Bronk from RUSI articulate as ever on the current situation and the US surrendering all leverage at the first opportunity.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2025 10:51 pm
by _Os_
Flockwitt wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 6:30 pm
Very good, impartial review of the Ukrainian war in 2024 to date by the Austrian army which illustrates the issues Ukraine still has.
Good presentation, looks like the first English language vid on their channel. Interesting.
Makes it very clear the US is attempting a carve up with Russia to steal resources (Ukraine is a poor nation ffs!), a new Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
One thing the presentation didn't get into is the Russians are through a lot of the deep honeycombed defences built since 2014. Ukraine in some parts of the front are down to their deepest rear positions of their original defences, the literal last line of defence, which is nothing like the fortified towns/cities they had. Once the Russians are properly through those final lines there's a lot of flat land and not much in the way of geography good for a defence (the vid did mention small hills are being fiercely fought over). Large Russia breakthroughs are becoming quite likely.
Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 2:56 pm
One of the other things to remember is the USA has dominant arms/defence companies because they spend a lot more of their GDP on it. If he pushes Europe to do the same, and makes European defence spending larger and more coherent, all of a sudden the EU becomes another significant pole in the multipolar order. And the domestic tech industries of Europe prosper and can compete with the US ones (in the med/long term).
Basically what Trump is doing here is destroying the USA's position as the leading economy in the world. He's reducing the US to equal placing with China, Russia and potentially the EU. And removing Europe's longstanding allyship to the USA at the same time. He's likely to end up with this multipolar world having all poles against the USA, leaving them completely isolated.
Agree. The reason it's not already the case is basically Europe didn't want to anger the US and in the past was scared of a rearmed Germany. The US is already angry for some mad reason and everyone knows now the Germans have changed.
But as things stand Europe is really what's being competed over between the US and China and not so much a competitor in its own right. Basically there's some things Europe doesn't do/imports. If Europe declines to take a strong position against China and instead decides a partnership is better, then it becomes impossible for the US to defeat China. The logical response to American pressure on Europe is for Europe to be more friendly towards China.
The whole situation is stupid. Europe could continue giving Ukraine military aid, which fundamentally undermines the US goal of a quick peace. Europe could become more friendly towards China, which undermines the US ever defeating them. Europe could eject the US from all military bases in European controlled territory (in Europe and outside), which cuts US power outside North America off at the knees. And so on.
The other thing about China is the impact of the trade war of food imports. US farmers are already bleating about all the crops they've sown that were supposed to be sold in China; so there's an enormous opportunity for the EU, (including Ukraine), & Oz & NZ, & other Countries, to take up the slack in those exports, & fuck up the US trade deficits even further, & make some money at the same time.
It would also put China in an interesting situation; because you can fuck over a lot of people, but it's incredible dangerous to try fucking over the people who feed your population; you know what they say about civilization being 3 missed meals away from anarchy !
US power depends on the allies they've spent all the time since WW2 making, continuing to be their allies. If they burn that down, then they cannot use their power that easily. They're isolated from where most of the world's population is (Asian/Europe/Africa), it means they cannot be invaded, it also means to do anything outside their region they need allies.
Using Trump's own logic, there's no reason for Europe to be enemies with China. Geography means through most of history they've not had to worry about the each other. China gets rich by trading with Europe now and in the past. Possible there could be some future conflict in Africa, but that's it. A stronger China would mean conflicts in Asia that have nothing much to do with Europe, and the US would face the first genuine threat over the Pacific since Imperial Japan also nothing to do with Europe (other side of the world, spheres of influence, etc).
_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 9:51 pm
Agree. The reason it's not already the case is basically Europe didn't want to anger the US and in the past was scared of a rearmed Germany. The US is already angry for some mad reason and everyone knows now the Germans have changed.
But as things stand Europe is really what's being competed over between the US and China and not so much a competitor in its own right. Basically there's some things Europe doesn't do/imports. If Europe declines to take a strong position against China and instead decides a partnership is better, then it becomes impossible for the US to defeat China. The logical response to American pressure on Europe is for Europe to be more friendly towards China.
The whole situation is stupid. Europe could continue giving Ukraine military aid, which fundamentally undermines the US goal of a quick peace. Europe could become more friendly towards China, which undermines the US ever defeating them. Europe could eject the US from all military bases in European controlled territory (in Europe and outside), which cuts US power outside North America off at the knees. And so on.
The other thing about China is the impact of the trade war of food imports. US farmers are already bleating about all the crops they've sown that were supposed to be sold in China; so there's an enormous opportunity for the EU, (including Ukraine), & Oz & NZ, & other Countries, to take up the slack in those exports, & fuck up the US trade deficits even further, & make some money at the same time.
It would also put China in an interesting situation; because you can fuck over a lot of people, but it's incredible dangerous to try fucking over the people who feed your population; you know what they say about civilization being 3 missed meals away from anarchy !
US power depends on the allies they've spent all the time since WW2 making, continuing to be their allies. If they burn that down, then they cannot use their power that easily. They're isolated from where most of the world's population is (Asian/Europe/Africa), it means they cannot be invaded, it also means to do anything outside their region they need allies.
Using Trump's own logic, there's no reason for Europe to be enemies with China. Geography means through most of history they've not had to worry about the each other. China gets rich by trading with Europe now and in the past. Possible there could be some future conflict in Africa, but that's it. A stronger China would mean conflicts in Asia that have nothing much to do with Europe, and the US would face the first genuine threat over the Pacific since Imperial Japan also nothing to do with Europe (other side of the world, spheres of influence, etc).
The other thing about China is the impact of the trade war of food imports. US farmers are already bleating about all the crops they've sown that were supposed to be sold in China; so there's an enormous opportunity for the EU, (including Ukraine), & Oz & NZ, & other Countries, to take up the slack in those exports, & fuck up the US trade deficits even further, & make some money at the same time.
It would also put China in an interesting situation; because you can fuck over a lot of people, but it's incredible dangerous to try fucking over the people who feed your population; you know what they say about civilization being 3 missed meals away from anarchy !
US power depends on the allies they've spent all the time since WW2 making, continuing to be their allies. If they burn that down, then they cannot use their power that easily. They're isolated from where most of the world's population is (Asian/Europe/Africa), it means they cannot be invaded, it also means to do anything outside their region they need allies.
Using Trump's own logic, there's no reason for Europe to be enemies with China. Geography means through most of history they've not had to worry about the each other. China gets rich by trading with Europe now and in the past. Possible there could be some future conflict in Africa, but that's it. A stronger China would mean conflicts in Asia that have nothing much to do with Europe, and the US would face the first genuine threat over the Pacific since Imperial Japan also nothing to do with Europe (other side of the world, spheres of influence, etc).
Also means Israel gets very isolated.
My general impression is many European countries think Israel has gone too far but don't want to piss off the US (can see this in how they treat SA, which is different to the US/Israel position). Israel used to be very good at hedging in its international relations, it always kept a good relationship with Russia, the country wouldn't exist without arms transfers from the Warsaw Pact nations especially the Czechs. They're all in on team America now though.
The big downstream issue in all these moves from Trump/US is the EU's attitude towards China. The US position is: Europe must have tariffs imposed on its exports to the US, domestic policies within European countries must change to reflect US wishes (including the removal of leaders eg Starmer), the US probably will not be there for any European country if it requires help ie NATO is functionally over, Ukraine should be carved up between the US and Russia. All this works if Europe goes along with it, falls apart quickly if enough European countries reassess.
US containment of China depends entirely on Europe playing along. For Europeans opposing China is only really worth it if the US is giving them something. Europe is still the biggest producer of quality machine tools and the only place which produces the highest grade tooling. This needs a deep skills pool/unis/industry, it only comes from a multi generational focus and state support along the way. If you're doing advanced manufacturing the tooling options are Europe > Japan > US > China. If Europe decides the Dutch/ASML can export advanced semiconductor manufacturing equipment to China, then US containment is over. If Europe decides it has fallen behind in AI and collaboration with China is okay, then the US advantage is gone. However strong China gets, the Pacific doesn't have a European coastline.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 22, 2025 6:09 am
by _Os_
Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 10:21 pm
Fairly long listen, but Justin Bronk from RUSI articulate as ever on the current situation and the US surrendering all leverage at the first opportunity.
Good video recommendation.
It's all just a staggering betrayal.
Bronk is correct that Europe requires a list of capabilities it needs from the US which it cannot backfill, so that it knows what it's transacting for in this new transactional relationship. But the bit he hasn't got to yet, is Europe needs to explain to the US what its leverage is, if Europe only has a begging list it'll be told to fuck off. Bronk mentions this at the end (final 2 minutes) regarding Indo-China but also says he literally cannot make sense of it all. I'll explain what the US position means.
Russia not winning is existential for Europe (including the UK). Russia winning means more wars that eventually suck everyone in, potentially killing millions of Europeans/destroyed cities/mass conscription, the full works. The US has made clear it is a competitor who does not honour security guarantees, but Europe needs at least some US capabilities (as Bronk outlines). This is the leverage Europe has:
1. US companies invested in Europe aren't subject to indigenisation laws that force local ownership in return for them being allowed to operate. That can change.
2. Tariffs on US goods.
3. US basing rights being removed (UK and German bases are vital for supplying Israel).
4. Replacing Trident with a non-US system
5. Nuclear weapon proliferation to Germany and Poland (the US opposes all proliferation).
6. Ending support for Israel (the only ally the US actually care about).
7. Ending the containment of Iran, outside of Europe not core to Europe's interests. This can be done on a scale from opening up services to Iran (finance) all the way up to assistance with their nuclear programme.
8. North Korea, same as with Iran.
7. Ending the containment of China, focused on assisting their advanced weapons tech.
That's what Europe does if it's serious. That's the sort of talk Trump will understand, if he doesn't believe it there's a scale of actions Europe can take all the way up to fucking the US completely in the Pacific (out of region for Europe, not relevant to core European interests). If everyone does what the US is doing, it becomes a total shit show very quickly (why would Europe help the US with Asia/China if the US basically supports Russia?). If Europe doesn't do this things are going to get very bad in Europe, Russia + a Ukraine which has been betrayed and undergone a decade of Russian brain washing, is not going to be easy to stop. That's a 1 to 2 million man army, a lot of it with combat experience, with a proven ability to take heavy losses and to keep going. Europe cannot lose in Ukraine, far too much at stake.
The US is correct that the US-Europe relationship is one sided. It's one sided in favour of the US, Europe has subordinated its entire foreign policy to the US since WW2/Suez, all under the assumption there was a security guarantee which it turns out doesn't exist.
Flockwitt wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 6:30 pm
Very good, impartial review of the Ukrainian war in 2024 to date by the Austrian army which illustrates the issues Ukraine still has.
Good presentation, looks like the first English language vid on their channel. Interesting.
Makes it very clear the US is attempting a carve up with Russia to steal resources (Ukraine is a poor nation ffs!), a new Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
One thing the presentation didn't get into is the Russians are through a lot of the deep honeycombed defences built since 2014. Ukraine in some parts of the front are down to their deepest rear positions of their original defences, the literal last line of defence, which is nothing like the fortified towns/cities they had. Once the Russians are properly through those final lines there's a lot of flat land and not much in the way of geography good for a defence (the vid did mention small hills are being fiercely fought over). Large Russia breakthroughs are becoming quite likely.
Breakthroughs with what troops and equipment?
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 22, 2025 11:42 am
by _Os_
Hellraiser wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2025 9:31 am
Breakthroughs with what troops and equipment?
Prisoners riding on Soviet junk, Chinese golf buggies, and Chinese dirt bikes.
The defences built since 2014 are getting very thin in places, you know the maps better than most. The US withholding/ending support, as looks likely, is another body blow. Russia has rebuilt its troop numbers, they may be shit but they're there and it's double what Ukraine have. You know the numbers on Russian equipment better than most too, it's about another year of attrition at the current rate before Russia has nothing.
Ukraine aren't going to stop fighting, the US isn't giving them any alternative option that's remotely credible at the moment, but it wouldn't be surprising if what the fighting looks like changes again. Not really seen anything that suggests Russia has manoeuvre warfare in their toolkit, so may not be all bad for Ukraine.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 22, 2025 12:21 pm
by tabascoboy
A matter of days before he's fired then...
US Special Envoy to Ukraine Keith Kellogg called Zelensky a "brave and courageous leader of a nation at war" and reported a "long and productive day" with Ukraine’s leadership. He mentioned "extensive and positive discussions" with the president and his "talented national security team."
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 22, 2025 12:26 pm
by Uncle fester
Is Kellogg one of the few adults in the room?
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 22, 2025 4:28 pm
by Mr Oizo
Uncle fester wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2025 12:26 pm
Is Kellogg one of the few adults in the room?
No - he was reciting all the Kremlin talking points just last week (no NATO, forfeiture of territory, mineral rights etc)
Probably saying some nice things until the inks on the page on the mineral right theft.
It’s just a reflection of the abject incompetence and disorganisation of the US administration
Flockwitt wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 6:30 pm
Very good, impartial review of the Ukrainian war in 2024 to date by the Austrian army which illustrates the issues Ukraine still has.
Good presentation, looks like the first English language vid on their channel. Interesting.
Makes it very clear the US is attempting a carve up with Russia to steal resources (Ukraine is a poor nation ffs!), a new Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
One thing the presentation didn't get into is the Russians are through a lot of the deep honeycombed defences built since 2014. Ukraine in some parts of the front are down to their deepest rear positions of their original defences, the literal last line of defence, which is nothing like the fortified towns/cities they had. Once the Russians are properly through those final lines there's a lot of flat land and not much in the way of geography good for a defence (the vid did mention small hills are being fiercely fought over). Large Russia breakthroughs are becoming quite likely.
It's a fair point but one that's not critically important in that the Pokrovsk assault that Russia prioritised has been past the Ukrianian defensive lines for some 6 months now and Russia advancement while continuous has been slow to the point now of stalling. A large Russian breakthrough isn't at all likely Os, in that if it was to happen it would have happened by now.
What that video ignores completely (or rather focuses on other aspects) is the relative status of the two sides. Russia's well of meatwave soldiers is drying up and steadily poorer quality. The casualty rates over the last several months have been far higher than the supply, they don't have a pool of soldiers to draw upon for a larger assault. And Ukraine's advantage in drones and the nature of this new drone warfare means a concentration of troops for a large breakthrough is only more targets for the drones, absolutely no guarantee of success.
The actual status of combat is the Russian offensive in Pokrovsk is in trouble, extended forward lines that have stalled without further influx of cannon fodder means the forward based troops are under constant drone assault, supplies aren't getting through, troops can't be rotated out and so forth.
Russia is tidying up behind the Pokrovsk salient and perhaps might go back onto an offensive footing but it'll be more of the same, immense losses for slow gains which Russia can't sustain at this point.
There's several other aspects of that video which should be noted. It talks about the 3 million shells Russia got from Korea - all well and good, but they've now been used, its a one off stockpile. By the end of this year Ukraine will have superiority in 155mm artillery supply as both the ammo and artillery production ramps up. With both Ukrianian drone and artillery superiority alone Russia is going to be badly placed, let alone the other factors like their steadily reduced quality and quantity of tanks and IFV.
The actual status is that Ukraine really only needs one more major resupply through this year and Russia is going to be in trouble.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 22, 2025 6:51 pm
by geordie_6
tabascoboy wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2025 12:21 pm
A matter of days before he's fired then...
US Special Envoy to Ukraine Keith Kellogg called Zelensky a "brave and courageous leader of a nation at war" and reported a "long and productive day" with Ukraine’s leadership. He mentioned "extensive and positive discussions" with the president and his "talented national security team."
Are there any upstairs windows in the White House?
Flockwitt wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 6:30 pm
Very good, impartial review of the Ukrainian war in 2024 to date by the Austrian army which illustrates the issues Ukraine still has.
Good presentation, looks like the first English language vid on their channel. Interesting.
Makes it very clear the US is attempting a carve up with Russia to steal resources (Ukraine is a poor nation ffs!), a new Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
One thing the presentation didn't get into is the Russians are through a lot of the deep honeycombed defences built since 2014. Ukraine in some parts of the front are down to their deepest rear positions of their original defences, the literal last line of defence, which is nothing like the fortified towns/cities they had. Once the Russians are properly through those final lines there's a lot of flat land and not much in the way of geography good for a defence (the vid did mention small hills are being fiercely fought over). Large Russia breakthroughs are becoming quite likely.
It's a fair point but one that's not critically important in that the Pokrovsk assault that Russia prioritised has been past the Ukrianian defensive lines for some 6 months now and Russia advancement while continuous has been slow to the point now of stalling. A large Russian breakthrough isn't at all likely Os, in that if it was to happen it would have happened by now.
What that video ignores completely (or rather focuses on other aspects) is the relative status of the two sides. Russia's well of meatwave soldiers is drying up and steadily poorer quality. The casualty rates over the last several months have been far higher than the supply, they don't have a pool of soldiers to draw upon for a larger assault. And Ukraine's advantage in drones and the nature of this new drone warfare means a concentration of troops for a large breakthrough is only more targets for the drones, absolutely no guarantee of success.
The actual status of combat is the Russian offensive in Pokrovsk is in trouble, extended forward lines that have stalled without further influx of cannon fodder means the forward based troops are under constant drone assault, supplies aren't getting through, troops can't be rotated out and so forth.
Russia is tidying up behind the Pokrovsk salient and perhaps might go back onto an offensive footing but it'll be more of the same, immense losses for slow gains which Russia can't sustain at this point.
There's several other aspects of that video which should be noted. It talks about the 3 million shells Russia got from Korea - all well and good, but they've now been used, its a one off stockpile. By the end of this year Ukraine will have superiority in 155mm artillery supply as both the ammo and artillery production ramps up. With both Ukrianian drone and artillery superiority alone Russia is going to be badly placed, let alone the other factors like their steadily reduced quality and quantity of tanks and IFV.
The actual status is that Ukraine really only needs one more major resupply through this year and Russia is going to be in trouble.
That's all true, but it only remains true if the support Ukraine is receiving doesn't change. The less significant disagreement would be that Ukraine being thin on defence in places is a significant change, not really giving the full picture if that's ignored. They'll have planned for scenarios where Russia uses it's numerical advantage to overload part of the frontline and breakthrough, the Russians have been doing meat assaults for years so that's clearly their plan. I assign a high probability to Russia being able to maintain meat assaults for at least another year, they're going in on low cost Chinese semi-civilian vehicles, they're totally fucking crazy.
The main thing is just how much of a mad dog Trump is. The video Margins posted was good (1 hour so an investment). Bronk from the RUSI speculated he could be madder than people are bargaining for, he could possibly deny other countries (Germany/France/UK) purchasing US weapons/ammo for onward delivery to Ukraine, could ease sanctions on Russia. Europe is providing most of the support now, but last time the US cut support (start of 2024) this greatly harmed Ukraine and set it back (less shells lower Ukrainian artillery fire rate, higher rate of Ukrainian losses). You can totally see Trump saying "I have made a deal, the best deal, the art of the deal, the best deal for America, Ukraine refuse to sign because Zelensky is a dictator I will not support this war!".
Saw an American official talking about "Europe must look after itself, I'm a realist we need to pivot to China and the Pacific, Europe is not our problem, China blah blah". They say all this without considering nowhere has more leverage over the US than Europe, all while Trump is trying to pick Russia as the winner. What happens in Ukraine looks like it's going to come down to how mad dog Europe is prepared to go. All the American "I'm a big swinging dick realist who believes in transactional relationships" swagger, falls apart if Europe makes it clear they can harm US interests in a fundamental way. Does Europe ditch the normal rules and adopt Trump's no holds barred cage fighting way of doing things, or not. If Europe cannot bring itself to do that and prioritises US interest above their own, I fear a lot of your post falls away, how much is anyone's guess.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sun Feb 23, 2025 9:46 am
by _Os_
_Os_ wrote: ↑Sun Feb 23, 2025 1:04 am
The main thing is just how much of a mad dog Trump is. The video Margins posted was good (1 hour so an investment). Bronk from the RUSI speculated he could be madder than people are bargaining for, he could possibly deny other countries (Germany/France/UK) purchasing US weapons/ammo for onward delivery to Ukraine, could ease sanctions on Russia.
Much shorter video of Bronk just focused on backfilling, putting it up for anyone that couldn't get through 1 hour. His view: US cutting direct military aid isn't ideal but could probably be managed (although some space based capabilities would be outright lost), the US going further than that to harm Ukraine's defence and it becomes impossible to know how bad that becomes.
There may be some hints in the new Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. Surely the US knows no Ukrainian leader could ever accept that. Trump reacted very badly after it was rejected, that's when the "Zelensky is a dictator" claims were first made by Trump. If what the US wants is to steal half Ukraine's natural resources (as well as ports and other infrastructure) and in reality Ukraine's entire remaining economy. How would the US force Ukraine to sign? Ukraine only signs if there's literally no other option and they cannot fight. There has to be some doubt about their commitment to maintaining sanctions against Russia and providing any assistance for Ukraine even if Europe is paying.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sun Feb 23, 2025 11:19 am
by _Os_
One of the memorable and defining images of the conflict. An outrageous piece of history.
Everyday there's claims in US media that Ukraine is about to sign. The latest update to the new Molotov–Ribbentrop is: The US taking 50% of Ukraine's revenue from oil/gas/minerals/ports/other infrastructure, to be paid into a 100% US owned fund until it reaches $500bn (Ukraine's entire GDP is around $170bn). For every new $1 of US aid Ukraine has to pay to $2 into the fund. No US security guarantees, security must be provided by Europe and Ukraine.
This is supposedly to pay back the US for supplying predominantly obsolete military equipment that was due for decommissioning and given a value as an accounting artefact, in reality it was a future liability to the US, less than worthless. The new purchases involved US government money going to US arms manufacturers. All of which was gifted to Ukraine as aid.
This is the sort of "transactional" extortion Trump loves. "Build the wall and make Mexico pay" and all that. Not much of a stretch that US will continually demand half a trillion from Europe before any further assistance is provided which will also have to be paid for by Europe. It has been days and isn't going away.
