- Aug 24, 2020
- 8,056
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)
- Thread starter vegster
- Start date
- Jan 25, 2025
- 188
<adopts Bernard voice>
“Actually minister, it’s not possible to back off and advance at the same time”
Back off from what? Trump called Zelenskyy a dictator. @raymondo said that doing so was using the term 'dictator' lightly.
You're saying that's an opinion, not a fact, which I find quite odd. Of course Zelenskyy is not a dictator, and I agree with raymondo that Trump saying so shows that he uses the term lightly (despite his claim that he doesn't).
Why do you think it's an opinion, not fact? Your comment made it seem that you think Trump has a point.
Dorset Seagull
Once Dolphin, Now Seagull
The minerals deal in full
https://kyivindependent.com/exclusive-the-full-text-of-the-final-us-ukraine-mineral-agreement/
https://kyivindependent.com/exclusive-the-full-text-of-the-final-us-ukraine-mineral-agreement/
Well done Ukraine, it's getting interesting.
fly high
Well-known member
Not seen anything re-Canada's input of support to Ukraine. Saw this video where they are promising $5 billion of Russian funds in Canadian banks to go to Ukraine
Sorry, can't seem to download without very annoying ads)
fly high
Well-known member
ISW video seemed to think the only really meaningful guarantee Ukraine should accept would be the same as the one US & Japan have whereby US is obliged to directly engage in defense of Ukraine is attacked.
Also interesting in that video was that they considered Article 5 to be a bit woolly & too easy to sidestep.
- Jan 25, 2025
- 188
No guarantee offered by Trump will be meaningful. And no law too rigorous to sidestep.
armchairclubber
Well-known member
Yes of course I deny it. I didn't say it.
Suggest you ask @Triggaaar to provide you with the evidence as he's the one making false accusations.
Then continue to back off in advance (whatever that means)
- Aug 24, 2020
- 8,056
I think I get this. I assume this is a 'pre-agreement' to publish their agreement on the minerals deal, subject to the inclusion of a security guarantee which, if it exists yet, will remain classified and well away from Russian eyes.
If. If this is correct, then boy is it interesting, for it may mean that Trump is on the side of Ukraine.
Yes, I'm guilty of wishful thinking. But the security guarantee has always been left out, because it is classified. Is Zelensky in on it?
armchairclubber
Well-known member
This is confusing. BBC news on the radio say that they've agreed a deal - this quote above says they've agreed a deal - and then the same piece goes on to say they won't sign it. If they won't sign a deal, then they haven't agreed a deal
I've posted enough on this thread that people know I'm not here to troll, so why don't you answer the rest of the points?
"
Trump called Zelenskyy a dictator. @raymondo said that doing so was using the term 'dictator' lightly.
You're saying that's an opinion, not a fact, which I find quite odd. Of course Zelenskyy is not a dictator, and I agree with raymondo that Trump saying so shows that he uses the term lightly (despite his claim that he doesn't).
Why do you think it's an opinion, not fact? Your comment made it seem that you think Trump has a point.
"
I agree it's confusing. It sounds like the first part of a deal is agreed in principle (the minerals), on the understanding that a second part (a security guarantee) is on it's way. But as you say, there can't be a deal until the whole package is agreed.This is confusing. BBC news on the radio say that they've agreed a deal - this quote above says they've agreed a deal - and then the same piece goes on to say they won't sign it. If they won't sign a deal, then they haven't agreed a deal
armchairclubber
Well-known member
You're still trolling me, in my opinion (please try and understand)
I really don't want you to be the very first person on this whole message board that I have to put on ignore (seriously)
as suggested by @Goldstone1976
Will you just leave it?
I'm not going to answer your questions.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,375
- Thread starter
- #22,116
I think the deal is done subject to Zelensky receiving security guarantees from the U.S. But, there were meant to be security guarantees in place for when Ukraine gave up the nuclear weapons on their soil ? what happened to that ?
Fast forward to Trump#2 and we see a world leader who simply can't be trusted, I for one, would never rely on Trumps word and I think Zelensky would be mad to agree anything with the US under its current government.
I can try to understand, but I don't understand.
If you're going to question people like @raymondo , but don't want to answer questions yourself, then yeah, put me on ignore
armchairclubber
Well-known member
I know what you mean about not trusting a deal with Trump, but the alternative of not dealing with the US at all is not a good one for Ukraine. Ukraine can survive with help from Europe, but it would be much better for them if they also had the US on their side. If there's a peace at some point in the near future, Putin will probably not want to attack again while Trump is there, and when he's gone (assuming the US stays as a democracy), Ukraine could get better guarantees from a new POTUS.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,375
- Thread starter
- #22,120
It's just that I feel he ( Trump ) will say anything to try to be the great statesman and be seen brokering a deal that suits his ego but, will he even remember what he said the day after signing anything ? We need a major sea change in the US and I can't see where and when its coming. The new reality is they are untrustworthy and divisive.