6 ms·
I genuinely wish there was an understandable endgame for the USA. The USA seems to be throwing its weight around but I’m not entirely sure to what end. This hea
by sovietmudkipz 2y ago
I genuinely wish there was an understandable endgame for the USA. The USA seems to be throwing its weight around but I’m not entirely sure to what end. This headline/article is just one area where the US is behaving perplexingly.
I understand that Trump wants Zelenskyy to sign the minerals deal and that implicitly there’s security guarantees. Fine there’s at least a through line. However; by demonstrating that the US is willing to revoke access to this war material during an active shooting war over some ego thing they’re showing allies who’ve invested in the US military equipment that they’re vulnerable to suffer this same fate. Now Europe is turning hard away from US tech.
To some degree this is a good thing, I think, from USA’s POV. Trump has said it’s unfair USA spends the most on NATO and that member states should pay more (how many don’t hit the 2% target). However; the point was to spend their 2% GDP on American armaments. Now Europe is taking their demand and money and investing in domestic military equipment. Which will inevitably beg the question in the coming years if NATO, a US establishment, is to be made redundant?
This US administration can’t seem to have their cake and eat it too. They want money, demand for their goods, but every time they act out they drive away their business partners.
- actionfromafar 2y agoWhat would you do if you were a team of US oligarchs with connections to the administration and wanted to increase your share of, and power over, the domestic cake? Tell me it doesn't fit. Edit: this story just dropped off the main page. Currently sitting at 85 points and 77 comments. It had position 2 or so, now it has position 79.
- ncruces 2y agoIf Europe collectively decides they must only buy French and German weapons, there's less US cake.
- actionfromafar 2y agoSure, but are these guys the kind who wants control over the whole cake or a smaller slice of a larger cake? Look at Russia.
- ctack 2y agoSuspicious that it’s not on the front page.
- ctack 2y agoEdit: no disagreement or flagging, just poof, gone. Likely someone knows how to make unwanted conversations go away on platforms like HN.
- cyberlimerence 2y agoIt's because number of comments > number of upvotes, which triggers flamewar detector. > How are stories ranked? Other factors affecting rank include [...] software which demotes overheated discussions, [...]. [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
- eitland 2y agoLaat I think I knew anything it took surprisingly few flags and I think people abuse it all the time to get rid of things they personally don't like. And don't like is a broad category.
- kortilla 2y agoThere is absolutely no interesting discussion going on in the comments here. Lots of political flaming and not much else. Upvote to comment ratio is low and people are likely flagging it too because it’s just world news.
- yowlingcat 2y agoI don't think Hacker News is trying to be Reddit.
- postingawayonhn 2y agoNATO as has existed is already over. Nobody has any faith that the US will follow through on its Article 5 obligations.
- ozim 2y agoThe fun part - US is the only country that called Article 5.
- gotts 2y ago80+ countries to USA: "we want our money back, money spent on your war that shouldn't had happened in the first place"
- PartiallyTyped 2y agoThe clown in the oval office claimed we wouldn't help them. More Danish men died per capita in middle east because of article 5 than men from the US...
- sovietmudkipz 2y agoIf that’s the case that “NATO as has existed is already over” then maybe it is wise for the USA to pull out. Maybe that’s the endgame for Europe? Europe defends Europe (or gets taken over by Russia I guess), and USA isn’t on the hook for its defense anymore.
- JKCalhoun 2y agoIf Europe is taken over by Russia, you don't think the U.S. will be next?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- epoxy_sauce 2y agoIf Russia wants the international version of suicide by cop. Invading US soil is the next tier up from invading Russia in winter in military blunders. No one has been stupid enough to try since 1812 when the British navy ruled. And they couldn't achieve any meaningful goals.
- ratatoskrt 2y agoI think it boils down to the fact that Trump does not understand soft power. Slashing the most powerful and influential aid programme in the world shows that very clearly. The US is as rich as it is because they created an environment of stability (at least on their own territory) and ensuring that there are markets American companies can sell into.
- outer_web 2y agoMaybe not so much that as he sees everything as a bargaining chip and any unused chips as a waste. After all, bribery and favors are more or less what soft power is.
- throwaway_20357 2y ago> I understand that Trump wants Zelenskyy to sign the minerals deal and that implicitly there’s security guarantees. I don't think there are any "security guarantees". What could they be? The "endgame" as far as I understand it: The US wants access to the minerals as a compensation for the money already spent and, perhaps, to restore some of the support currently put on hold (satellite data access). Once the Ukranian resistance is broken, the US and Russia will jointly dictate a peace, gradually install a Russia-friendly regime and split the profit between them. They will happily invite the EU to finance some of the rebuilding of Ukraine that is then mainly performed by US and Russian companies. The US furthermore hopes that by spearheading the lifting of sanctions it will get priority access to some beneficial deals with and within Russia itself.
- anotherhue 2y agoTruer words...
- sovietmudkipz 2y agoI think the implicit guarantee is if American business and workers are harvesting minerals then if Russia attacked the USA would have even more incentive to intervene militarily. That said, I don’t know what more Ukraine would want given the Budapest Memorandum already ties the USA, UK, and Russia to Ukraine’s defense. That’s proven to be a mixed success, as both USA, UK, and other countries have indeed stepped up for Ukraine’s defense.
- AlecSchueler 2y ago> if American business and workers are harvesting minerals then if Russia attacked the USA would have even more incentive to intervene militarily Or Russia just invades while being careful not to damage their buddy's mines. Maybe the US even helps the Russians out once the Ukranian "dictator" is forced to begin fighting in too close proximity to the minerals.
- danmaz74 2y agoThe point is that Russia won't have to attack any more, because Ukraine will already be nothing more than a puppet state after having been forced to sign the kind of peace deal that Putin wants.
- bananapub 2y ago> I understand that Trump wants Zelenskyy to sign the minerals deal and that implicitly there’s security guarantees. I don't think this is true at all, I think Trump wants Ukraine to be conquered and for Russia to win and for people to stop bothering him about any of it. Trump blew up whatever nonsense minerals deal there was, and is actively sabotaging the Ukrainian defence efforts via this, and ending intelligence sharing, and apparently leaning on random American companies to stop them selling services to Ukraine, and by providing diplomatic cover and support to Russia. people haven't seem to have caught on yet - the US has switched sides, it is now part of the Russia bloc.
- tesch1 2y ago> point was to spend their 2% GDP on American armaments Do the NATO agreements specify American armaments? Europe could have spent on European armaments and armies too, just chose not too because they didn't see a reason to. Europe not buying F35 or whatever hurts US arms industry, but probably not the general strategic position of the US. There's even a credible argument (dont know how credible?) that these arms programs actually undermine security by investing crazy money in outdated / ineffective technology. The dumb part would be not learning from the Ukrainians how to fight a modern war. US participation in NATO may be made redundant, but Europe's need for a credible collective defense agreement is not going away.
- bloopernova 2y agoWhat would trump do differently if he had been told explicitly by putin to destroy the usa?
- justin66 2y agoHe would have been asked to be a little less obvious about it?
- nxm 2y agoWhere was it requested/required to spend 2% on solely American armaments?
- perlgeek 2y agoThe endgame isn't for the USA, it's for Trump. I don't really know what it is, but I'm pretty certain that to understand his actions, you have to rid yourself of the idea that he's doing it for anybody or anything else than for himself.
- rad_gruchalski 2y agoBut Zelensky came to the white house to sign the deal. If Trump wanted the deal to be signed, it would have been signed. But he chose to gang up on Zelensky.