5 ms·

If US offered nothing I suppose there is no sense of loss then. What are people upset about if Ukraine lost nothing? Do you think some mining rights are a fai

by ty6853 2y ago

If US offered nothing I suppose there is no sense of loss then. What are people upset about if Ukraine lost nothing? Do you think some mining rights are a fair trade for 'security guarentees' of us going to war with Russia? I think Zelensky is way overplaying his hand. I'm not sending our kids to die in defense of Ukraine because of a 3rd party to the deal.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
The US' whole negotiating position was, "I don't like the status quo so you need to offer more." Sure, you can say that there was an offer to keep the status quo, but it's hard to argue that this isn't a betrayal. Nothing changed diplomatically between the nations before the US decided that Ukraine doesn't deserve their help anymore.
- ty6853 2y ago
  It was Russia who betrayed Ukraine. Not giving more aid, there is a reasonable argument is not betrayal. It's more if a movement from temporary charity to negotiations on a sustainable resolution. Getting Zelensky to take the ego blow needed to end the war is going to be painful, because there is no easy way out.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
    It was also the US who betrayed Ukraine. These events are not mutually exclusive. Refusing to continue aid for no reason other than the US realized they might be able to get more out of it, there is a reasonable argument is betrayal.
    - ty6853 2y ago
      I think your characterization shows the true desperation of the war fuel cries. It's betrayal, ww3, my children marched off to world war, my wife will be raped. I've heard it all. The viciousness against not funding conscripts going into the meat shredder makes me think the war mongers must be desperate their blood sacrifice (and the accompanying money train) is coming to an end.
      - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
        > the war mongers Ah, I thought it was Russia who betrayed Ukraine, per your words yeah? But of course, my reading comprehension isn't that bad. You are genuinely trying to argue that the people decrying this betrayal are war mongers, intent on extending this war; never mind who actually instigated the war, there is no reason to call them war mongers. You don't help your argument when you call your opponents names, especially without any merit.
        ty6853 2y ago
        [flagged]
        _DeadFred_ 2y ago
        It's amazing watching how disingenuous you are as the argument progresses and your true position shows.
        ty6853 2y ago
        I don't think you understand. This isn't an argument, it's been settled and the aid withdrawn. I'm providing the explanation for all the weeping and gnashing of teeth. Y'all have called me everything imaginable and made up horrible stories about the fate of my family, all the while weeping that people willfully fueling the enslavement of conscripts into cannon fodder would be called war mongers. That's how I know the shut down of the war mongers is actually working. The more you degrade me, the more it displays the success of the strategy. I revel in it.
        _DeadFred_ 2y ago
        I didn't do anything, you degrade and expose yourself. Meanwhile unlike the grievance in your head actual innocent Ukrainians died today and you revel in it. Russian used cluster bombs on civilians by the way. And Ukraine couldn't prepare because the US denied them access to intel on what areas strikes would hit. But keep whining about 'internet grievances' and how much pleasure you take at the current outcome because the internet was mean. Those you call 'warmonger' never took the joy that you now claim to have.
  - archagon 2y ago
    So why is the US also easing up on Russian sanctions?
    - ty6853 2y ago
      Sanctions arguably help Russian mobsters and corrupt officials who proxy money and goods through friendly intermediate to launder their origins. They are bypassed easy enough through these black market connectioms, largely impacting normal citizens who don't have means to bribe or cover the margins to these mobsters (or do, but have to cover costs). I think the goal is to hurt Russian corrupt officials and mob by taking away these black market margins.
      - prmph 2y ago
        Oh, so you are in agreement that genuine Russia officials, who decided to start this murderous war, are not supposed to be hurt, right? Only the "corrupt" ones?
        ty6853 2y ago
        They're pretty much all corrupt. It is basically a mob state.
  - jopsen 2y ago
    > Not giving more aid, there is a reasonable argument is not betrayal. Not donating more stuff maybe. But cutting off targeting, intelligence, satellites, and other enablers is pretty much betrayal! Other countries have bought US equipment with certain capabilities and donated that stuff to Ukraine. This makes the US an unreliable provider of military equipment. Yes, of course the US has the ability to cut of things like this, but I doubt people buying HIMARS every feared they'd cutoff from enablers by the US as a negotiation tactic. The US probably also has backdoors in some of the stuff, but using such backdoors is a one time event. Nobody will trust you afterwards.
    - ty6853 2y ago
      A very valid point, although my perspective is destruction of the market for US arms is another healthy prospect in the pursuit of peace. That sweetens the deal for much of the antiwar crowd.
mapt 2y ago
Ukraine began the day expecting Trump to seriously attempt a settlement of the conflict by signing an agreement; Security guarantees were discussed before the agreement was formulated. 1 hour before, they learned they had nothing to gain because there were no security guarantees, and that they would need to establish formal changes to the agreement during the meeting. During the meeting, they learned that politely asking for formal changes to the agreement would trigger performative anger, denial, and insults. That Trump would get self-righteous about his extortion attempt, and that it wasn't "Your money or or life!", but "Your money, now!"

by ty6853 2y ago

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago

The US' whole negotiating position was, "I don't like the status quo so you need to offer more." Sure, you can say that there was an offer to keep the status quo, but it's hard to argue that this isn't a betrayal. Nothing changed diplomatically between the nations before the US decided that Ukraine doesn't deserve their help anymore.

ty6853 2y ago
It was Russia who betrayed Ukraine. Not giving more aid, there is a reasonable argument is not betrayal. It's more if a movement from temporary charity to negotiations on a sustainable resolution. Getting Zelensky to take the ego blow needed to end the war is going to be painful, because there is no easy way out.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
  It was also the US who betrayed Ukraine. These events are not mutually exclusive. Refusing to continue aid for no reason other than the US realized they might be able to get more out of it, there is a reasonable argument is betrayal.
  - ty6853 2y ago
    I think your characterization shows the true desperation of the war fuel cries. It's betrayal, ww3, my children marched off to world war, my wife will be raped. I've heard it all. The viciousness against not funding conscripts going into the meat shredder makes me think the war mongers must be desperate their blood sacrifice (and the accompanying money train) is coming to an end.
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
      > the war mongers Ah, I thought it was Russia who betrayed Ukraine, per your words yeah? But of course, my reading comprehension isn't that bad. You are genuinely trying to argue that the people decrying this betrayal are war mongers, intent on extending this war; never mind who actually instigated the war, there is no reason to call them war mongers. You don't help your argument when you call your opponents names, especially without any merit.
      - ty6853 2y ago
        [flagged]
        _DeadFred_ 2y ago
        It's amazing watching how disingenuous you are as the argument progresses and your true position shows.
        ty6853 2y ago
        I don't think you understand. This isn't an argument, it's been settled and the aid withdrawn. I'm providing the explanation for all the weeping and gnashing of teeth. Y'all have called me everything imaginable and made up horrible stories about the fate of my family, all the while weeping that people willfully fueling the enslavement of conscripts into cannon fodder would be called war mongers. That's how I know the shut down of the war mongers is actually working. The more you degrade me, the more it displays the success of the strategy. I revel in it.
        _DeadFred_ 2y ago
        I didn't do anything, you degrade and expose yourself. Meanwhile unlike the grievance in your head actual innocent Ukrainians died today and you revel in it. Russian used cluster bombs on civilians by the way. And Ukraine couldn't prepare because the US denied them access to intel on what areas strikes would hit. But keep whining about 'internet grievances' and how much pleasure you take at the current outcome because the internet was mean. Those you call 'warmonger' never took the joy that you now claim to have.
- archagon 2y ago
  So why is the US also easing up on Russian sanctions?
  - ty6853 2y ago
    Sanctions arguably help Russian mobsters and corrupt officials who proxy money and goods through friendly intermediate to launder their origins. They are bypassed easy enough through these black market connectioms, largely impacting normal citizens who don't have means to bribe or cover the margins to these mobsters (or do, but have to cover costs). I think the goal is to hurt Russian corrupt officials and mob by taking away these black market margins.
    - prmph 2y ago
      Oh, so you are in agreement that genuine Russia officials, who decided to start this murderous war, are not supposed to be hurt, right? Only the "corrupt" ones?
      - ty6853 2y ago
        They're pretty much all corrupt. It is basically a mob state.
- jopsen 2y ago
  > Not giving more aid, there is a reasonable argument is not betrayal. Not donating more stuff maybe. But cutting off targeting, intelligence, satellites, and other enablers is pretty much betrayal! Other countries have bought US equipment with certain capabilities and donated that stuff to Ukraine. This makes the US an unreliable provider of military equipment. Yes, of course the US has the ability to cut of things like this, but I doubt people buying HIMARS every feared they'd cutoff from enablers by the US as a negotiation tactic. The US probably also has backdoors in some of the stuff, but using such backdoors is a one time event. Nobody will trust you afterwards.
  - ty6853 2y ago
    A very valid point, although my perspective is destruction of the market for US arms is another healthy prospect in the pursuit of peace. That sweetens the deal for much of the antiwar crowd.

mapt 2y ago

Ukraine began the day expecting Trump to seriously attempt a settlement of the conflict by signing an agreement; Security guarantees were discussed before the agreement was formulated. 1 hour before, they learned they had nothing to gain because there were no security guarantees, and that they would need to establish formal changes to the agreement during the meeting. During the meeting, they learned that politely asking for formal changes to the agreement would trigger performative anger, denial, and insults. That Trump would get self-righteous about his extortion attempt, and that it wasn't "Your money or or life!", but "Your money, now!"