Latest Ukraine/Russia Thread

[Rafael Thundercat]

25 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

Reporter: Trump would you call Putin a dictator?

Trump: I don’t use that word lightly.

Gosh,Trump saying twice of WW3 . But weird. While listening Trump I didnt felt the anger or normal disgust as normal. I can somehow understand the ones that have bias in favor of him. Is that Charisma thing Leo taked somewhere. But not forgeting that this is the same Trump who recently put very Shady figures on FBI. 

[PurpleTree]

I don’t find it weird that Trump is cozying up to Putin and Russia i mean he’s just being Trump the orange narcissist authoritarian joker.

But i do find it odd that the intelligence services, pentagon etc. Just let him do it. They surely know about the threats of Putins Russia.

[Raze]

United States, Russia, Belarus, Hungary, North Korea and Israel vote against UN resolution condemning Russia for invading Ukraine at the United Nations. Iran and China abstained. 
 

 

I’m shocked they’re shifting this fast. I initially thought Europe primarily supported Ukraine due to US pressure, but if they keep the support up after the US abandons them I’ll admit that was a wrong assumption.

Edited Monday at 10:05 PM by Raze

[PurpleTree]

14 minutes ago, Raze said:

United States, Russia, Belarus, Hungary, North Korea and Israel vote against UN resolution condemning Russia for invading Ukraine at the United Nations. Iran and China abstained. 
 

 

I’m shocked they’re shifting this fast. I initially thought Europe primarily supported Ukraine due to US pressure, but if they keep the support up after the US abandons them I’ll admit that was a wrong assumption.

Belarus, Russia, North Korea, Nicaragua,  Sudan, Mali etc. all dictatorships or authoritarian governments.

Also Hungary  been to Budapest twice last year. Nice city but smh. Budapest is quite against Orban though while more rural areas are very pro.

Edited Monday at 10:19 PM by PurpleTree

[PurpleTree]

 

[zazen]

13 hours ago, Raze said:

I’m shocked they’re shifting this fast. I initially thought Europe primarily supported Ukraine due to US pressure, but if they keep the support up after the US abandons them I’ll admit that was a wrong assumption.

Same, this is a clear pivot in foreign policy to rehabilitate the US-Russia relationship. Some are saying this is for the purpose of saving attention and resources in order to counter China which is a much greater rival to US hegemony. This aligns with much of project 2025. Ukraine is just secondary to this goal, and something that needs to be dealt with to free up those resources and energy. 

From the 2025 Mandate - https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf

''In this light, U.S. defense strategy must identify China unequivocally as the top priority for U.S. defense planning while modernizing and expanding the U.S. nuclear arsenal and sustaining an efficient and effective counter terrorism enterprise. U.S. allies must also step up, with some joining the United States in taking on China in Asia while others take more of a lead in dealing with threats from Russia in Europe, Iran, the Middle East, and North Korea. The reality is that achieving these goals will require more spending on defense, both by the United States and by its allies, as well as active support for reindustrialization and more support for allies’ productive capacity so that we can scale our freeworld efforts together.''

On Ukraine specifically, note how they mention China again (also note that Russia is metioned 108 times vs China's 483 times) :

''Another school of conservative thought denies that U.S. Ukrainian support is in the national security interest of America at all. Ukraine is not a member of the NATO alliance and is one of the most corrupt nations in the region. European nations directly affected by the conflict should aid in the defense of Ukraine, but the U.S. should not continue its involvement. This viewpoint desires a swift end to the conflict through a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia.  

The tension between these competing positions has given rise to a third approach. This conservative viewpoint eschews both isolationism and interventionism. Rather, each foreign policy decision must first ask the question: What is in the interest of the American people? U.S. military engagement must clearly fall within U.S. interests; be fiscally responsible; and protect American freedom, liberty, and sovereignty, all while recognizing Communist China as the greatest threat to U.S. interests. Thus, with respect to Ukraine, continued U.S. involvement must be fully paid for; limited to military aid (while European allies address Ukraine’s economic needs); and have a clearly defined national security strategy that does not risk American lives.''

Another view I've seen is that China needs to be countered sooner rather than later when it becomes too big to be able to counter, hence the speed of the shift we are seeing.

The thing about being a vassal state is that you don’t always get the memo when the empire changes course. Europe is suffering from inertia. The war machine needed Europe to be hysterical about Russia, and now that it’s wound up, it’s running on autopilot. The real irony is that Europe should be the one pushing for peace as they can’t escape geography, but US's geography allows it to play imperial games with little consequence. 

Edited Tuesday at 11:50 AM by zazen

[zazen]

On 2/21/2025 at 0:49 PM, Elliott said:

You can't blame the u.s. for the things that other nations do just because the u.s. trades with them, they sell weapons and buy oil, they don't supply and fund entire regimes, they just don't sell to ones they don't trust.

Iraq and Afghanistan are so destabilized now huh?..... Panama, destabilized? Not that I'm suggesting what was done was right, i think it was wrong. The West is the global trader and protects it's trade routes, foreign assets, investments, and attacks groups that attack any of those.

China is supplying Russia against Ukraine, and African Rebels, along with Russia, you don't see them with American weapons, it's Russian and Chinese, same with South America.

Selling weapons isn't the issue. Creating and sustaining a global war economy, using think tanks and policy manipulation to ensure constant war, and systematically destabilizing entire regions for strategic control - is the issue.

Meeting demand is business, creating demand is a racket. That's a helpful distinction between commerce and a imperial empire. A store selling cigarettes is business. Tobacco companies spending billions convincing people they need to smoke, manipulating science, buying politicians, and addicting generations is a racket.

The US doesn't just sell weapons, it sells the need for them. They run a global protection racket so sophisticated it makes the mob look like amateurs.

Western imperialism is not a series of isolated mistakes, or a occasional lapse into brutality - it's a continuous, characteristic, and catastrophic system of domination that no other nation or civilization has ever matched or could even hope to replicate.

Other countries commit wrongs, but their wrongs are events that happen in response to crises, conflicts, or shifts in power. Western wrongs are not events - they're just the backdrop against which the modern world operates.

And a false equivalence is attempted to be made between the West's wrongs and other countries' wrongs, and then there are complaints of why the West is so talked about and critiqued in comparison to others. Because in comparison to others there is no equivalence, and that is the bottom line. Just to illustrate this point, what is the equivalent of another nation dropping not one, but two atomic bombs on a country that is already defeated (Japan), just to showcase a point of strength to the Soviets?

The wrongs of China, Russia, or other powers are events bound to specific historical contexts. The wrongs of the West are structural in that this is the civilizational modus operandi. The historic scarcity of Western Europe baked a imperial DNA into the culture which necessitated expansion, conquest, domination and extraction - in order to survive.

Edited Tuesday at 12:33 PM by zazen

[Elliott]

22 minutes ago, zazen said:

Selling weapons isn't the issue. Creating and sustaining a global war economy, using think tanks and policy manipulation to ensure constant war, and systematically destabilizing entire regions for strategic control - is the issue.

Meeting demand is business, creating demand is a racket. That's a helpful distinction between commerce and a imperial empire. A store selling cigarettes is business. Tobacco companies spending billions convincing people they need to smoke, manipulating science, buying politicians, and addicting generations is a racket.

The US doesn't just sell weapons, it sells the need for them. They run a global protection racket so sophisticated it makes the mob look like amateurs.

Western imperialism is not a series of isolated mistakes, or a occasional lapse into brutality - it's a continuous, characteristic, and catastrophic system of domination that no other nation or civilization has ever matched or could even hope to replicate.

Other countries commit wrongs, but their wrongs are events that happen in response to crises, conflicts, or shifts in power. Western wrongs are not events - they're just the backdrop against which the modern world operates.

And a false equivalence is attempted to be made between the West's wrongs and other countries' wrongs, and then there are complaints of why the West is so talked about and critiqued in comparison to others. Because in comparison to others there is no equivalence, and that is the bottom line. Just to illustrate this point, what is the equivalent of another nation dropping not one, but two atomic bombs on a country that is already defeated (Japan), just to showcase a point of strength to the Soviets?

The wrongs of China, Russia, or other powers are events bound to specific historical contexts. The wrongs of the West are structural in that this is the civilizational modus operandi. The historic scarcity of Western Europe baked a imperial DNA into the culture which necessitated expansion, conquest, domination and extraction - in order to survive.

Could you give an example.

The atomic bombs were dropped in defense, retaliation from being attacked by japan.

[Rafael Thundercat]

 Not latest news  but a perspective 

 

 

[puporing]

"you deal with the devil you do and the devil you don't and the devil you don't want to"

 

[Elliott]

Reuters

https://www.reuters.com › world › europe

Spanish PM announces new 1-billion-euro aid package for Ukraine

3 days ago · Spain will provide Ukraine with a new military aid package worth 1 billion euros ($1.05 billion) this year, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez …

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

Reuters

https://www.reuters.com › world › europe

Spanish PM announces new 1-billion-euro aid package for Ukraine

3 days ago · Spain will provide Ukraine with a new military aid package worth 1 billion euros ($1.05 billion) this year, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez …

That is such a drop in the bucket.

[puporing]

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

Reuters

https://www.reuters.com › world › europe

Spanish PM announces new 1-billion-euro aid package for Ukraine

3 days ago · Spain will provide Ukraine with a new military aid package worth 1 billion euros ($1.05 billion) this year, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez …

You forgot to mention it was more like 100+ billions from European/other allies, combined.

As well as non-monetary support which cannot be monetized.

Edited Thursday at 04:45 AM by puporing

[puporing]

https://u24.gov.ua/

This seems to be the most direct method if you feel inclined to contribute financially to Ukraine.

[Leo Gura]

It dawned on me that Trump could screw Ukraine up really badly. He can offer Zelensky security guarantees but later never deliver on it when Putin reinvades a few years from now. And then Ukraine will be totally screwed and Putin will surely exploit this.

Zelensky better be super careful not to accept any of Trump's empty words.

Edited 23 hours ago by Leo Gura

[puporing]

I get the sense that he and the other allies have been coming up with various plans, not necessarily all shared with the Trump adminstration due to his "incompetency" and untrustworthiness at this time.

There're no apparent security guarantees with the mineral deal, it is simply to keep the US engaged since that's Trump's interests/demands. I think they are hoping that by having Trump involved with the mineral deal he would feel more inclined to protect it from invasion by having workers/a stake in it. So it is like a business deal. 

It seems to me that Zelensky and the allies are forming an alliance that is semi-independent of the US at this time. And they will one by one try to persuade Trump to be on Ukraine's side. 

I think they all know what they're dealing with based on what I'm seeing so far with the leaders...a "child". 

[PurpleTree]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

I dawned on me that Trump could screw Ukraine up really badly. He can offer Zelensky security guarantees but later never deliver on it when Putin reinvades a few years from now. And then Ukraine will be totally screwed and Putin will surely exploit this.

Zelensky better be super careful not to accept any of Trump's empty words.

Hopefully they can get nukes in the meantime.

[Leo Gura]

17 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

Hopefully they can get nukes in the meantime.

Lay off the drugs.

[PurpleTree]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

Lay off the drugs.

Says you.

They already had nukes and gave them up because they were granted security affirmations by the US and UK. It’s the only way for Russia to back off. The US invaded Iraq, they don’t invade North Korea.

[PurpleTree]

May explore nukes