5 ms·

I don't think there are any multi-trillion dollar deposits of any "minerals" there. If there were, Ukraine wouldn't be so poor. Even pre-war it was the poorest

by ein0p 2y ago

I don't think there are any multi-trillion dollar deposits of any "minerals" there. If there were, Ukraine wouldn't be so poor. Even pre-war it was the poorest country in Europe per capita. One can argue that it was mostly due to their insane levels of corruption, but then again, if there were any multi-trillion dollar deposits of anything there, Western investors (including Hunter Biden, no doubt) would be all over them, and the country would be much richer than it was. I think the whole "minerals" thing is a play. Trump gives Zelensky the "deal" he cannot accept even theoretically. Zelensky predictably plays the tough guy by telling him to pound sand. Trump throws Zelensky under the bus and negotiates repayment of loans with his (now scared) successor. With respect to Taiwan, it is not really possible to "win" in any real sense against China in Taiwan. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a dimwit who can't even do cursory research on industrial capacities of the potential belligerents, not in terms of dollars, but in terms of units/tons/etc. That is where the comparison is very strongly not in our favor. Especially when it comes to shipbuilding. Best case if things kick off (which I hope to god they do not) - only Taiwan gets destroyed, a-la Ukraine. Worst case - both US and China really go at it directly, full bore, and then we will lose due primarily to our weak industrial base, and far more extended logistics. Moreover, a lot of other countries will totally provide "lethal aid" and intelligence to China, if it needs it, in hopes of taking the hegemon down a few pegs. Nothing personal - just business, such alliances happen in every major war. The extreme case one of the sides feels they're gonna lose and presses the red button, in which case everyone dies in a fire. All of these options are objectively extremely shitty and incompatible with prosperity, and in the extreme case, with survival. All of them mean millions of body bags for the parties involved, far more body bags than either country has ever seen. Both Biden and Trump administrations understood this, hence the strong-arming the re-industrialization, especially in higher end fields, which started under Biden. The era where you could just get your stuff made elsewhere for pennies and then charge $$$ for it is coming to an end.

pj_mukh 2y ago
"Moreover, a lot of other countries will totally provide "lethal aid" and intelligence to China, if it needs it, in hopes of taking the hegemon down a few pegs." This seems...not true. The Phillipines especially would like a word. Most of China's neighbors are begging for more American Hegemony (America is just not good at it anymore). China's industrial prowess is clear, but it's also true that. China (esp the CCP) has a lot more to lose from a direct confrontation with America. America could lose a president, China will lose a whole regime.
- ein0p 2y ago
  See the comment above about the intellectual faculties of people who think like you do. We had to hightail out of Afghanistan. What on earth makes you believe that we could win against a peer adversary, let alone do so without a draft or millions of body bags?
  - pj_mukh 2y ago
    America would have to do nothing like invade Mainland China to topple the CCP. War is the authoritarian achilles heel since time immemorial and China knows it (Russia doesn't), otherwise they would've taken Taiwan 10 years ago. China's best case scenario is if it could find a way to take Taiwan like they took Hong Kong, on a technicality and relatively quietly. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_the_Russian_invasion... P.S: I especially question the mental faculties of someone who can't see other angles to a problem. China's hegemony is the mainstream opinion, it's obvious. Maybe try to question what you're not seeing now.
  - shigawire 2y ago
    >had to hightail out of Afghanistan. Not really a good comparison. Trying to build a coalition of people who didn't really care vs supporting countries in the region who are highly motivated by their own self interest.
  - emptysongglass 2y ago
    You don't do anything for your argument by insulting people's intellect who don't share your opinion. Cut it out.
- DeathArrow 2y ago
  >The Phillipines especially would like a word. BRICS will support China. Most of the unaligned countries will do the same. It will be US, EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, Philippines against the rest of the world. And it's not so much about military might as is about industrial capacity, raw materials and logistics.
fatbird 2y ago
Zelensky predictably plays the tough guy by telling him to pound sand. Zelensky flew to Washington to sign the agreement, and fully expected to--they waited an hour after the blown up press conference before being told to get out. Diplomatically, Zelensky wasn't even badly behaved in the press conference. Vance and Trump kept escalating the discussion. If there was a play, it was one constructed by Trump to give himself a reason to withdraw aid from Ukraine when he clearly wants to side with Putin.
- ein0p 2y ago
  Watch _the whole_ press conference, the entire 53 minutes, not the carefully selected morsels that CNN prepared for you in order to mislead. Zelensky failed to read the room, and 23 minutes or so into the conversation he started to self-immolate, something Trump and Vance gladly helped him with.
  - Hikikomori 2y ago
    Big self immolate. Said that cease fire agreements wont work because they have evidently not worked so far as Russia keeps breaking them, they need security guarantees like NATO. I guess failing to read the room was not bootlicking enough and not surrendering to Putin as Trump already has.
  - sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
    I'd watched the whole thing live when it happened. I went back and watched from around 21min in to see what self-immolation you mean. Sequence of events - Trump downplays the need for security guarantees. "Security is maybe 2% of the problem, security is the easy part, I'm worried about getting the deal done." A "reporter" from OAN asks a kiss-ass question that can be summarized as "President Trump, how amazing and courageous are you for negotiating with Putin?" Trump gives a rambling answer including his usual vague statements of how the war wouldn't have existed if he'd been in power and then starts talking about Hamas for some reason. There's a moment of levity where Trump says Zelensky's attire is fine. Zelensky indicates he wants to respond to some of the earlier statements. He says Russia has broken many promises made in past negotiations and this is why security guarantees are actually critical to Ukraine. "Reading the room" in this situation would mean "buying into the Putin-led narrative currently being peddled by the Trump administration." Fuck that.

by ein0p 2y ago

pj_mukh 2y ago

"Moreover, a lot of other countries will totally provide "lethal aid" and intelligence to China, if it needs it, in hopes of taking the hegemon down a few pegs." This seems...not true. The Phillipines especially would like a word. Most of China's neighbors are begging for more American Hegemony (America is just not good at it anymore). China's industrial prowess is clear, but it's also true that. China (esp the CCP) has a lot more to lose from a direct confrontation with America. America could lose a president, China will lose a whole regime.

ein0p 2y ago
See the comment above about the intellectual faculties of people who think like you do. We had to hightail out of Afghanistan. What on earth makes you believe that we could win against a peer adversary, let alone do so without a draft or millions of body bags?
- pj_mukh 2y ago
  America would have to do nothing like invade Mainland China to topple the CCP. War is the authoritarian achilles heel since time immemorial and China knows it (Russia doesn't), otherwise they would've taken Taiwan 10 years ago. China's best case scenario is if it could find a way to take Taiwan like they took Hong Kong, on a technicality and relatively quietly. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_the_Russian_invasion... P.S: I especially question the mental faculties of someone who can't see other angles to a problem. China's hegemony is the mainstream opinion, it's obvious. Maybe try to question what you're not seeing now.
- shigawire 2y ago
  >had to hightail out of Afghanistan. Not really a good comparison. Trying to build a coalition of people who didn't really care vs supporting countries in the region who are highly motivated by their own self interest.
- emptysongglass 2y ago
  You don't do anything for your argument by insulting people's intellect who don't share your opinion. Cut it out.
DeathArrow 2y ago
>The Phillipines especially would like a word. BRICS will support China. Most of the unaligned countries will do the same. It will be US, EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, Philippines against the rest of the world. And it's not so much about military might as is about industrial capacity, raw materials and logistics.

fatbird 2y ago

Zelensky predictably plays the tough guy by telling him to pound sand. Zelensky flew to Washington to sign the agreement, and fully expected to--they waited an hour after the blown up press conference before being told to get out. Diplomatically, Zelensky wasn't even badly behaved in the press conference. Vance and Trump kept escalating the discussion. If there was a play, it was one constructed by Trump to give himself a reason to withdraw aid from Ukraine when he clearly wants to side with Putin.

ein0p 2y ago
Watch _the whole_ press conference, the entire 53 minutes, not the carefully selected morsels that CNN prepared for you in order to mislead. Zelensky failed to read the room, and 23 minutes or so into the conversation he started to self-immolate, something Trump and Vance gladly helped him with.
- Hikikomori 2y ago
  Big self immolate. Said that cease fire agreements wont work because they have evidently not worked so far as Russia keeps breaking them, they need security guarantees like NATO. I guess failing to read the room was not bootlicking enough and not surrendering to Putin as Trump already has.
- sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
  I'd watched the whole thing live when it happened. I went back and watched from around 21min in to see what self-immolation you mean. Sequence of events - Trump downplays the need for security guarantees. "Security is maybe 2% of the problem, security is the easy part, I'm worried about getting the deal done." A "reporter" from OAN asks a kiss-ass question that can be summarized as "President Trump, how amazing and courageous are you for negotiating with Putin?" Trump gives a rambling answer including his usual vague statements of how the war wouldn't have existed if he'd been in power and then starts talking about Hamas for some reason. There's a moment of levity where Trump says Zelensky's attire is fine. Zelensky indicates he wants to respond to some of the earlier statements. He says Russia has broken many promises made in past negotiations and this is why security guarantees are actually critical to Ukraine. "Reading the room" in this situation would mean "buying into the Putin-led narrative currently being peddled by the Trump administration." Fuck that.