6 ms·

Can you explain why you think that deal is selling out? It seems reasonable from the point of view of the United States given they don’t want to pour more money

by baiac 11mo ago

Can you explain why you think that deal is selling out? It seems reasonable from the point of view of the United States given they don’t want to pour more money into a conflict they don’t really care too much about. Surely there are some lessons learnt from the “war on terror”

herbst 11mo ago
For not caring to much, they try to take a lot of influence in a conflict that's not theirs
- baiac 11mo ago
  I suppose they have responsibilities as members of NATO. Europe has been completely incapable of stopping the conflict.
  - herbst 11mo ago
    Is that something trump is saying or is that an actual fact? It's hard to tell the difference these days ... And from my stupid European mind this is not at all how things happened. Also the conflict still didn't stop, I don't see how America is somehow more capable of doing something when they didn't do anything?
    - baiac 11mo ago
      Nowhere in my comment did I say that the conflict has stopped. But Europe is the most interested party in this conflict and they haven’t come up with any reasonable proposition to end it. It’s good that someone with power is proposing something workable.
      - mcphage 11mo ago
        > It’s good that someone with power is proposing something workable. But not reasonable.
  - tremon 11mo ago
    I'd say it's more unwilling. Until the will is there, we'll never know if they're incapable.
  - qingcharles 11mo ago
    Europe's forces could probably end it in a day, I would suspect. The problem is everyone is unsure of how unstable Putin is and how he would react to several dozen bombers and cruise missiles flattening all the unfortunate Russian soldiers on the wrong side of the border.
Isamu 11mo ago
It’s selling out the Ukranians, they didn’t get a say in the deal and Putin gets to keep his gains and at home the threat of him being overthrown is lessened. In return Ukraine gets to give up territory and reduce their readiness for the next round of war after giving Putin the chance to build up and regroup.
echelon 11mo ago
The "deal" is a laundry list of Putin's wants. Russia gets everything it wants and Ukraine loses everything it needs. - Ukraine gives up everything they've lost thus far. - Ukraine must surrender additional territory. - Ukraine has to cull its military strength. - It sets up Ukraine to fail to be able to defend itself when the next war begins and does nothing to prevent Russia from restarting the war. - Russia sanctions end, Russia is invited back to the international stage without reprocussuons or restitution - It rather grossly calls on America to invest significant money and resources in Russia's tech industry as restitution. I've heard analysts say that Trump wants this so he can say he ended both the Israel/Palestine conflict as well as the Russia/Ukraine conflict. It's a total abdication by the loser of their sovereignty all for a feather in Trump's crown. Ukraine has been given an ultimatum to accept this deal by Thanksgiving (a US holiday) or lose all American support. Including advanced warning of Russian attacks from US intelligence. We wouldn't tell them the Russians are coming. A total and complete shut down of US support such that Ukraine is completely blinded.
tokai 11mo ago
US is not pouring money into the conflict. They are barely helping. Besides some intel and letting EU countries buy US made weapons for Ukraine.
lokar 11mo ago
Rewarding aggression from Russia won’t save money (or lives) in the long run. Abandoning Ukraine will only save money if the US also abandons NATO. After this the Baltic states are next.
- MomsAVoxell 11mo ago
  The Russians made the same argument about Ukraine's aggression at the beginning of the conflict. The entire world has been saying it about the USA's wars as well. This very mechanism of 'punishing ones enemies so they never do it again' has simply justified the atrocities; it has not ended a single damn thing. If the USA had been punished in the same manner for its atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan, would we have had the rest of the disaster unfold? And we see the end result of this line of thought in Gaza, where literally millions of human beings lives have been irreversibly damaged for generations, because someone decided to punish their enemy at massive scales. And as we can see in the case of Gaza, this is no guarantee of peace, whatsoever. This line of thought has led to genocide and ethnic cleansing at massive scales. And, it simply does not work. Period. There are generations of new terrorists who want vengeance in the Gaza/Israel war, just as vehemently as Americans do, for the Ukraine/Russia war. These children will only be converted back to peace-makers if their lives are _improved_ by the peace plan, not made worse, and there is a long, long road ahead in both wars, for all parties, to attain that condition. At some point, making peace means putting aside any aggression-based arguments and just getting on with the program to bring both sides together, to stop the fighting and start the economic unity required to keep things peaceful. This peace plan seems like an attempt to do just that, so it should be supported. After all, it does contain triggers that will re-ignite the war machine again - and, it could be argued that should those triggers be activated, the war would be more justifiable to the world community, and those who seek a wider, escalated war against Russia, will get their fulfilment if this plan is betrayed. This peace plan would be the first step towards greater forms of punishment - but it works for both sides. If Putin violates the agreement - Russia comes under attack by the entire world. If Ukraine's leadership violates the agreement, Russia gets cart blanche to continue its dismantling of the Ukrainian state. Therefore, the peace-makers must have the reins in lieu of the warmongers, as of now. (Disclaimer: I've read the peace plan, have Ukrainian and Russian friends in my circles who are veterans from the conflict, and their opinion is: yes, it is far past the point where the aggressive warrior narcissists need to be ignored and statesmen and diplomats need to work harder to re-establish peace between the two nations. I personally feel that this plan has to proceed, or else the entire world is going to see the conflict expand to our own borders. This means the hyper-actualisation of warrior narcissism needs to stop, and civilisation-building economic tools need to be better applied - by all parties - to ensure the region is rebuilt again. Trust must be restored through economic unity, first and foremost - that is what this plan aims to achieve.)
gmerc 11mo ago
It's betraying the Bucharest assurances they made to protect Ukraine in exchange for giving up nuclear arms. So fuck that.
- terminalshort 11mo ago
  We have already done that, along with all the other countries who signed it. The problem is signing up for bullshit symbolic treaties that we have absolutely no intent of ever meeting the obligations. Nobody was ever actually serious that they would defend Ukraine against Russian aggression.
  - gmerc 11mo ago
    Nice history retconning there
    - terminalshort 11mo ago
      Did we send our army in to defend Ukraine? I don't think "here's a bunch of old weapons we don't need anymore. Thoughts and prayers!" counts.
  - veeti 11mo ago
    What does that mean for this deal?
ponector 11mo ago
With this "deal" written by russians USA shows the whole world that their security assurance worth nothing. Also shows that NATO is dead. This deal is an invite for president Xi to take back Taiwan and whatever territory he wants.
erentz 11mo ago
The US isn’t pouring money into Ukraine. Under the PURL agreement this year it has switched to selling weapons at a mark up that is being paid for by NATO allies. So this plan is not only screwing our own defense industry in the short term, it is doing so in the long term by showing any agreement with the US can’t be trusted and if you agree to buy weapons from the US you may find your supply cut off randomly as you need them.

by baiac 11mo ago

herbst 11mo ago

For not caring to much, they try to take a lot of influence in a conflict that's not theirs

baiac 11mo ago
I suppose they have responsibilities as members of NATO. Europe has been completely incapable of stopping the conflict.
- herbst 11mo ago
  Is that something trump is saying or is that an actual fact? It's hard to tell the difference these days ... And from my stupid European mind this is not at all how things happened. Also the conflict still didn't stop, I don't see how America is somehow more capable of doing something when they didn't do anything?
  - baiac 11mo ago
    Nowhere in my comment did I say that the conflict has stopped. But Europe is the most interested party in this conflict and they haven’t come up with any reasonable proposition to end it. It’s good that someone with power is proposing something workable.
    - mcphage 11mo ago
      > It’s good that someone with power is proposing something workable. But not reasonable.
- tremon 11mo ago
  I'd say it's more unwilling. Until the will is there, we'll never know if they're incapable.
- qingcharles 11mo ago
  Europe's forces could probably end it in a day, I would suspect. The problem is everyone is unsure of how unstable Putin is and how he would react to several dozen bombers and cruise missiles flattening all the unfortunate Russian soldiers on the wrong side of the border.

Isamu 11mo ago

It’s selling out the Ukranians, they didn’t get a say in the deal and Putin gets to keep his gains and at home the threat of him being overthrown is lessened. In return Ukraine gets to give up territory and reduce their readiness for the next round of war after giving Putin the chance to build up and regroup.

echelon 11mo ago

The "deal" is a laundry list of Putin's wants. Russia gets everything it wants and Ukraine loses everything it needs. - Ukraine gives up everything they've lost thus far. - Ukraine must surrender additional territory. - Ukraine has to cull its military strength. - It sets up Ukraine to fail to be able to defend itself when the next war begins and does nothing to prevent Russia from restarting the war. - Russia sanctions end, Russia is invited back to the international stage without reprocussuons or restitution - It rather grossly calls on America to invest significant money and resources in Russia's tech industry as restitution. I've heard analysts say that Trump wants this so he can say he ended both the Israel/Palestine conflict as well as the Russia/Ukraine conflict. It's a total abdication by the loser of their sovereignty all for a feather in Trump's crown. Ukraine has been given an ultimatum to accept this deal by Thanksgiving (a US holiday) or lose all American support. Including advanced warning of Russian attacks from US intelligence. We wouldn't tell them the Russians are coming. A total and complete shut down of US support such that Ukraine is completely blinded.

tokai 11mo ago

US is not pouring money into the conflict. They are barely helping. Besides some intel and letting EU countries buy US made weapons for Ukraine.

lokar 11mo ago

Rewarding aggression from Russia won’t save money (or lives) in the long run. Abandoning Ukraine will only save money if the US also abandons NATO. After this the Baltic states are next.

MomsAVoxell 11mo ago
The Russians made the same argument about Ukraine's aggression at the beginning of the conflict. The entire world has been saying it about the USA's wars as well. This very mechanism of 'punishing ones enemies so they never do it again' has simply justified the atrocities; it has not ended a single damn thing. If the USA had been punished in the same manner for its atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan, would we have had the rest of the disaster unfold? And we see the end result of this line of thought in Gaza, where literally millions of human beings lives have been irreversibly damaged for generations, because someone decided to punish their enemy at massive scales. And as we can see in the case of Gaza, this is no guarantee of peace, whatsoever. This line of thought has led to genocide and ethnic cleansing at massive scales. And, it simply does not work. Period. There are generations of new terrorists who want vengeance in the Gaza/Israel war, just as vehemently as Americans do, for the Ukraine/Russia war. These children will only be converted back to peace-makers if their lives are _improved_ by the peace plan, not made worse, and there is a long, long road ahead in both wars, for all parties, to attain that condition. At some point, making peace means putting aside any aggression-based arguments and just getting on with the program to bring both sides together, to stop the fighting and start the economic unity required to keep things peaceful. This peace plan seems like an attempt to do just that, so it should be supported. After all, it does contain triggers that will re-ignite the war machine again - and, it could be argued that should those triggers be activated, the war would be more justifiable to the world community, and those who seek a wider, escalated war against Russia, will get their fulfilment if this plan is betrayed. This peace plan would be the first step towards greater forms of punishment - but it works for both sides. If Putin violates the agreement - Russia comes under attack by the entire world. If Ukraine's leadership violates the agreement, Russia gets cart blanche to continue its dismantling of the Ukrainian state. Therefore, the peace-makers must have the reins in lieu of the warmongers, as of now. (Disclaimer: I've read the peace plan, have Ukrainian and Russian friends in my circles who are veterans from the conflict, and their opinion is: yes, it is far past the point where the aggressive warrior narcissists need to be ignored and statesmen and diplomats need to work harder to re-establish peace between the two nations. I personally feel that this plan has to proceed, or else the entire world is going to see the conflict expand to our own borders. This means the hyper-actualisation of warrior narcissism needs to stop, and civilisation-building economic tools need to be better applied - by all parties - to ensure the region is rebuilt again. Trust must be restored through economic unity, first and foremost - that is what this plan aims to achieve.)

gmerc 11mo ago

It's betraying the Bucharest assurances they made to protect Ukraine in exchange for giving up nuclear arms. So fuck that.

terminalshort 11mo ago
We have already done that, along with all the other countries who signed it. The problem is signing up for bullshit symbolic treaties that we have absolutely no intent of ever meeting the obligations. Nobody was ever actually serious that they would defend Ukraine against Russian aggression.
- gmerc 11mo ago
  Nice history retconning there
  - terminalshort 11mo ago
    Did we send our army in to defend Ukraine? I don't think "here's a bunch of old weapons we don't need anymore. Thoughts and prayers!" counts.
- veeti 11mo ago
  What does that mean for this deal?

ponector 11mo ago

With this "deal" written by russians USA shows the whole world that their security assurance worth nothing. Also shows that NATO is dead. This deal is an invite for president Xi to take back Taiwan and whatever territory he wants.

erentz 11mo ago

The US isn’t pouring money into Ukraine. Under the PURL agreement this year it has switched to selling weapons at a mark up that is being paid for by NATO allies. So this plan is not only screwing our own defense industry in the short term, it is doing so in the long term by showing any agreement with the US can’t be trusted and if you agree to buy weapons from the US you may find your supply cut off randomly as you need them.