|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On February 14 2025 03:36 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2025 03:21 Gorsameth wrote:
And there isn't much the EU is going to be able to do. They don't have the production to keep Ukraine supplied and haven't ramped up anywhere near fast enough to take over from the US.
I would argue EU loses way too much by letting this stand. Previously, EU was still at the table. Even though USA had the biggest dick in the room and was mostly in charge of how things go, Europe still had a lot of sway and their opinions mattered. They are entirely giving up on having any amount of actual independent world politics influence if they let Trump totally exclude Europe from this. If Europe decided to just ignore the red lines and have their airforce directly involved in Ukraine, it would change everything and it would show they aren't letting themselves drift into officially functioning as an American vassal state. Europe is not powerless. There is an enormous amount they can do, but they would need to muster the courage to go for it. Does it totally suck ass needing to get directly involved? Yes, absolutely. But it sucks 10000x more ass to officially designate themselves as non-powers. Trump just ignoring Europe and throwing away Ukraine is too much of a castration to let stand.
And how it is supposed to work? How do "we" are capable to speak in one voice? I do not believe spanish wanting to die for far foreign nation in eastern Europe and I don't even blame them for that. For them it's not a matter of survival. Even the biggest imperialist moron in Russia doesn't aspire to go that far and everyone knows it.
|
On February 14 2025 04:31 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2025 04:04 Simberto wrote:On February 14 2025 03:33 Dav1oN wrote:Every time I listen to Trump officials it makes me sick. And that's not only about Ukraine but about US foreign policy in general, looks like a fever dream (props to the journalist for the efforts tho) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1890068942246351108US negotiating with Russia directly over Ukraine and EU while Russia is a clear agressor is just beyond any reasoning Not only foreign policy, domestic policy as well. It is just fucking insane. They are making horribly bad choices that will very obviously turn out horribly bad for the country (though maybe they personally may grift enough that it is a net positive for them). And yet that seems to be what (at least half, but i hate having to put that qualifier) of their population wants. They elected this shit. After the shit told them exactly how it was going to smear themselves over their faces, their cars, and everyone around them. And now they are cheering it on, utterly oblivious that they are in for a really smelly future. I'd be happier about America fucking around and finding out if they were not likely to drag the rest of the world down with them.
This is also Europe's fafo. Turns out supporting US foreign policy/looking the other way no matter how heinous isn't really a viable strategy when it is on your own doorstep.
|
Europe basically created Slaanesh by extreme overindulgence in "what if we just let the US handle the entire planet's military stuff and we get to benefit from not needing an actual military?"
I feel like this dynamic went on for so long, its like many Europeans don't realize Europe used to have a military and they used to be more than just a cultural and economic location. Its like "military stuff" is a grayed out button they can't click. Not even choosing not to have any kind of military, but its like the choice/recommendation isn't even valid.
Its always the same "Do you have any idea how long it takes to ramp that up?" as if the world ends in 4 years. Pretend for a moment Ukraine isn't the last military conflict in human history. Europe needs to have an actual military.
|
Northern Ireland26415 Posts
On February 14 2025 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Europe basically created Slaanesh by extreme overindulgence in "what if we just let the US handle the entire planet's military stuff and we get to benefit from not needing an actual military?"
I feel like this dynamic went on for so long, its like many Europeans don't realize Europe used to have a military and they used to be more than just a cultural and economic location. Its like "military stuff" is a grayed out button they can't click. Not even choosing not to have any kind of military, but its like the choice/recommendation isn't even valid.
Its always the same "Do you have any idea how long it takes to ramp that up?" as if the world ends in 4 years. Pretend for a moment Ukraine isn't the last military conflict in human history. Europe needs to have an actual military.
As much as I dig 40K references were a tad less decadent over here. If Europe was any 40K faction it would be a hypothetical Imperium of Man that like, reformed and stopped expanding and killing filthy Xenos on sight and maybe that in retrospect that was kinda bad craic.
I’m not selling Europeans as idyllic peaceniks, but one can’t really understate the impact of both World Wars, and the subsequent loss of eminent status that came there. Both materially and on the collective psyche. It’s less forgetting and more actually remembering.
It’s also nukes my lad, as we’re seeing in this very conflict. They render a ton of conventional military gear redundant depending on the scenario.
Having a much-expanded military has its uses, you can be World PoliceTM like the States, or do Colonialism 2.0, neither of which most Europeans have much appetite for.
|
On February 14 2025 06:36 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2025 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Europe basically created Slaanesh by extreme overindulgence in "what if we just let the US handle the entire planet's military stuff and we get to benefit from not needing an actual military?"
I feel like this dynamic went on for so long, its like many Europeans don't realize Europe used to have a military and they used to be more than just a cultural and economic location. Its like "military stuff" is a grayed out button they can't click. Not even choosing not to have any kind of military, but its like the choice/recommendation isn't even valid.
Its always the same "Do you have any idea how long it takes to ramp that up?" as if the world ends in 4 years. Pretend for a moment Ukraine isn't the last military conflict in human history. Europe needs to have an actual military. As much as I dig 40K references were a tad less decadent over here. If Europe was any 40K faction it would be a hypothetical Imperium of Man that like, reformed and stopped expanding and killing filthy Xenos on sight and maybe that in retrospect that was kinda bad craic. I’m not selling Europeans as idyllic peaceniks, but one can’t really understate the impact of both World Wars, and the subsequent loss of eminent status that came there. Both materially and on the collective psyche. It’s less forgetting and more actually remembering. It’s also nukes my lad, as we’re seeing in this very conflict. They render a ton of conventional military gear redundant depending on the scenario. Having a much-expanded military has its uses, you can be World PoliceTM like the States, or do Colonialism 2.0, neither of which most Europeans have much appetite for.
I think it’s all “justified” or understandable or whatever. Like someone who got into a car crash feels anxious driving soon after. It’s all reasonable.
However, if Russia is bullying Europe in their current state, how on earth is anyone thinking they will bully Europe less when Russia is even stronger?
This is why I am saying it’s like there’s a part of European groupthink that was surgically removed. The reason I used Slaanesh as a cheeky reference is Europe has gotten so deep into the mindset of “military conflict isn’t something we do”, they forgot that was only true for very specific reasons.
It’s like they have used a bridge for 100 years, watched the bridge collapse, and then continue to walk towards the ravine as if the bridge is still there. Then people try to stop them like “whoa, hey man, that bridge collapsed last week. There’s no bridge. If you keep walking, you will fall 100 meters onto a bunch of rocks”, and the person replies “when I walk this direction, I find myself at the other side of the ravine” and keep walking along as if the guy trying to warn him was crazy.
Maybe I’m wrong and Estonia being attacked would be an actual red line. But I don’t think so. I legitimately think France and Germany will let Putin take Estonia.
|
United States43729 Posts
On February 14 2025 04:42 hitthat wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2025 03:36 Mohdoo wrote:On February 14 2025 03:21 Gorsameth wrote:
And there isn't much the EU is going to be able to do. They don't have the production to keep Ukraine supplied and haven't ramped up anywhere near fast enough to take over from the US.
I would argue EU loses way too much by letting this stand. Previously, EU was still at the table. Even though USA had the biggest dick in the room and was mostly in charge of how things go, Europe still had a lot of sway and their opinions mattered. They are entirely giving up on having any amount of actual independent world politics influence if they let Trump totally exclude Europe from this. If Europe decided to just ignore the red lines and have their airforce directly involved in Ukraine, it would change everything and it would show they aren't letting themselves drift into officially functioning as an American vassal state. Europe is not powerless. There is an enormous amount they can do, but they would need to muster the courage to go for it. Does it totally suck ass needing to get directly involved? Yes, absolutely. But it sucks 10000x more ass to officially designate themselves as non-powers. Trump just ignoring Europe and throwing away Ukraine is too much of a castration to let stand. And how it is supposed to work? How do "we" are capable to speak in one voice? I do not believe spanish wanting to die for far foreign nation in eastern Europe and I don't even blame them for that. For them it's not a matter of survival. Even the biggest imperialist moron in Russia doesn't aspire to go that far and everyone knows it.
Russia doesn’t believe in borders, only power.
|
United States43729 Posts
On February 14 2025 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Europe basically created Slaanesh by extreme overindulgence in "what if we just let the US handle the entire planet's military stuff and we get to benefit from not needing an actual military?"
I feel like this dynamic went on for so long, its like many Europeans don't realize Europe used to have a military and they used to be more than just a cultural and economic location. Its like "military stuff" is a grayed out button they can't click. Not even choosing not to have any kind of military, but its like the choice/recommendation isn't even valid.
Its always the same "Do you have any idea how long it takes to ramp that up?" as if the world ends in 4 years. Pretend for a moment Ukraine isn't the last military conflict in human history. Europe needs to have an actual military.
That’s really not the case. Germany doesn’t have a huge military because everyone was super uncomfortable with that idea for historical reasons. They’re still a military industrial powerhouse. France has a serious military, it’s just designed around a colonial mission as an expeditionary force. But they have domestic nuclear carrier manufacturing, domestic nukes, domestic jets for their aircraft carriers etc. Britain also has an expeditionary military with global capabilities. There are only four true blue water navies in the world (more like 3 given Russia’s can’t leave dry dock because it catches fire) and 2 of them are European.
Europe is stronger than you think, it’s just designed with a different mission in mind than this war. Though admittedly they’d shit themselves if they had one week of Ukrainian casualties. They’re not used to peer on peer war.
|
On February 14 2025 08:04 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2025 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Europe basically created Slaanesh by extreme overindulgence in "what if we just let the US handle the entire planet's military stuff and we get to benefit from not needing an actual military?"
I feel like this dynamic went on for so long, its like many Europeans don't realize Europe used to have a military and they used to be more than just a cultural and economic location. Its like "military stuff" is a grayed out button they can't click. Not even choosing not to have any kind of military, but its like the choice/recommendation isn't even valid.
Its always the same "Do you have any idea how long it takes to ramp that up?" as if the world ends in 4 years. Pretend for a moment Ukraine isn't the last military conflict in human history. Europe needs to have an actual military. That’s really not the case. Germany doesn’t have a huge military because everyone was super uncomfortable with that idea for historical reasons. They’re still a military industrial powerhouse. France has a serious military, it’s just designed around a colonial mission as an expeditionary force. But they have domestic nuclear carrier manufacturing, domestic nukes, domestic jets for their aircraft carriers etc. Britain also has an expeditionary military with global capabilities. There are only four true blue water navies in the world (more like 3 given Russia’s can’t leave dry dock because it catches fire) and 2 of them are European. Europe is stronger than you think, it’s just designed with a different mission in mind than this war. Though admittedly they’d shit themselves if they had one week of Ukrainian casualties. They’re not used to peer on peer war.
Based on everything you are describing, we agree. I was probably unclear with my specific point: Europe needs to be able to protect Ukraine from Russia. If Europe can't guarantee its own interests, it ought to build up its military to be able to do so.
The instability with the US proves Europe needs to be self-sufficient. Despite being allies, the US has enormous sway over Europe and most of the world just by being so huge and powerful. The soft power the US wields, even still, passively violates the sovereignty of many nations. The ability to lift a finger often means the finger does not need to be lifted. Russia expanding back into the USSR, or something close to it, can still be a major threat to Europe. Russia does not need to physically conquer Spain because the soft power they would gain by eating up their neighbors would be enough for them to use soft power to get everything they want.
I think people are missing the bigger picture when they talk about Russia never attacking Germany or France. They can dominate Germany and France without a single shot being fired the same way the US has done much of the same.
I do not endorse "might makes right" as a moral philosophy, but I do think "might determines sovereignty" is plainly visible. Letting Russia consume Ukraine is an existential threat to Europe because every little bit of growth Russia achieves makes their next little bit of growth even easier.
|
On February 14 2025 08:04 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2025 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Europe basically created Slaanesh by extreme overindulgence in "what if we just let the US handle the entire planet's military stuff and we get to benefit from not needing an actual military?"
I feel like this dynamic went on for so long, its like many Europeans don't realize Europe used to have a military and they used to be more than just a cultural and economic location. Its like "military stuff" is a grayed out button they can't click. Not even choosing not to have any kind of military, but its like the choice/recommendation isn't even valid.
Its always the same "Do you have any idea how long it takes to ramp that up?" as if the world ends in 4 years. Pretend for a moment Ukraine isn't the last military conflict in human history. Europe needs to have an actual military. That’s really not the case. Germany doesn’t have a huge military because everyone was super uncomfortable with that idea for historical reasons. They’re still a military industrial powerhouse. France has a serious military, it’s just designed around a colonial mission as an expeditionary force. But they have domestic nuclear carrier manufacturing, domestic nukes, domestic jets for their aircraft carriers etc. Britain also has an expeditionary military with global capabilities. There are only four true blue water navies in the world (more like 3 given Russia’s can’t leave dry dock because it catches fire) and 2 of them are European. Europe is stronger than you think, it’s just designed with a different mission in mind than this war. Though admittedly they’d shit themselves if they had one week of Ukrainian casualties. They’re not used to peer on peer war.
Another big part is we would lose the information war. As much as people shit on the MSM they are not going to straight out lie about causalities and how its going. And we also have huge percentages of people from both ends of the spectrum that trust the Russian narrative over that of even the obvious truth. The incumbents are almost certainly going to lose public support if it is not a complete rout.
|
On February 14 2025 09:56 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2025 08:04 KwarK wrote:On February 14 2025 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Europe basically created Slaanesh by extreme overindulgence in "what if we just let the US handle the entire planet's military stuff and we get to benefit from not needing an actual military?"
I feel like this dynamic went on for so long, its like many Europeans don't realize Europe used to have a military and they used to be more than just a cultural and economic location. Its like "military stuff" is a grayed out button they can't click. Not even choosing not to have any kind of military, but its like the choice/recommendation isn't even valid.
Its always the same "Do you have any idea how long it takes to ramp that up?" as if the world ends in 4 years. Pretend for a moment Ukraine isn't the last military conflict in human history. Europe needs to have an actual military. That’s really not the case. Germany doesn’t have a huge military because everyone was super uncomfortable with that idea for historical reasons. They’re still a military industrial powerhouse. France has a serious military, it’s just designed around a colonial mission as an expeditionary force. But they have domestic nuclear carrier manufacturing, domestic nukes, domestic jets for their aircraft carriers etc. Britain also has an expeditionary military with global capabilities. There are only four true blue water navies in the world (more like 3 given Russia’s can’t leave dry dock because it catches fire) and 2 of them are European. Europe is stronger than you think, it’s just designed with a different mission in mind than this war. Though admittedly they’d shit themselves if they had one week of Ukrainian casualties. They’re not used to peer on peer war. Based on everything you are describing, we agree. I was probably unclear with my specific point: Europe needs to be able to protect Ukraine from Russia. If Europe can't guarantee its own interests, it ought to build up its military to be able to do so. The instability with the US proves Europe needs to be self-sufficient. Despite being allies, the US has enormous sway over Europe and most of the world just by being so huge and powerful. The soft power the US wields, even still, passively violates the sovereignty of many nations. The ability to lift a finger often means the finger does not need to be lifted. Russia expanding back into the USSR, or something close to it, can still be a major threat to Europe. Russia does not need to physically conquer Spain because the soft power they would gain by eating up their neighbors would be enough for them to use soft power to get everything they want. I think people are missing the bigger picture when they talk about Russia never attacking Germany or France. They can dominate Germany and France without a single shot being fired the same way the US has done much of the same. I do not endorse "might makes right" as a moral philosophy, but I do think "might determines sovereignty" is plainly visible. Letting Russia consume Ukraine is an existential threat to Europe because every little bit of growth Russia achieves makes their next little bit of growth even easier.
I think you misunderstand how the world works. Cuba is a fairly obvious counterpoint to your show-of-force diplomacy leading to everybody else folding.
|
Northern Ireland26415 Posts
On February 14 2025 09:56 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2025 08:04 KwarK wrote:On February 14 2025 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
Europe basically created Slaanesh by extreme overindulgence in "what if we just let the US handle the entire planet's military stuff and we get to benefit from not needing an actual military?"
I feel like this dynamic went on for so long, its like many Europeans don't realize Europe used to have a military and they used to be more than just a cultural and economic location. Its like "military stuff" is a grayed out button they can't click. Not even choosing not to have any kind of military, but its like the choice/recommendation isn't even valid.
Its always the same "Do you have any idea how long it takes to ramp that up?" as if the world ends in 4 years. Pretend for a moment Ukraine isn't the last military conflict in human history. Europe needs to have an actual military. That’s really not the case. Germany doesn’t have a huge military because everyone was super uncomfortable with that idea for historical reasons. They’re still a military industrial powerhouse. France has a serious military, it’s just designed around a colonial mission as an expeditionary force. But they have domestic nuclear carrier manufacturing, domestic nukes, domestic jets for their aircraft carriers etc. Britain also has an expeditionary military with global capabilities. There are only four true blue water navies in the world (more like 3 given Russia’s can’t leave dry dock because it catches fire) and 2 of them are European. Europe is stronger than you think, it’s just designed with a different mission in mind than this war. Though admittedly they’d shit themselves if they had one week of Ukrainian casualties. They’re not used to peer on peer war. Based on everything you are describing, we agree. I was probably unclear with my specific point: Europe needs to be able to protect Ukraine from Russia. If Europe can't guarantee its own interests, it ought to build up its military to be able to do so. The instability with the US proves Europe needs to be self-sufficient. Despite being allies, the US has enormous sway over Europe and most of the world just by being so huge and powerful. The soft power the US wields, even still, passively violates the sovereignty of many nations. The ability to lift a finger often means the finger does not need to be lifted. Russia expanding back into the USSR, or something close to it, can still be a major threat to Europe. Russia does not need to physically conquer Spain because the soft power they would gain by eating up their neighbors would be enough for them to use soft power to get everything they want. I think people are missing the bigger picture when they talk about Russia never attacking Germany or France. They can dominate Germany and France without a single shot being fired the same way the US has done much of the same. I do not endorse "might makes right" as a moral philosophy, but I do think "might determines sovereignty" is plainly visible. Letting Russia consume Ukraine is an existential threat to Europe because every little bit of growth Russia achieves makes their next little bit of growth even easier.
Europe would have resolutely smacked Russia down, easily if nukes weren’t on the table. Easily. At their current spending.
It’s a semi-stalemate as it is, with Ukraine + aid versus Russia. Europe’s collective military might versus Russia and its a fucking joke. It’s Jake Paul beating up a geriatric Mike Tyson. He might have been great once but it’s a bridge too far.
Except Russia has nukes so you can’t risk that.
Circling back to my prior point, European militaries don’t have that many wars to prepare for. Countries that could threaten them have nukes. Countries that don’t, by and large EU militaries still beat, or at least the ‘great powers’
So what’s the point in pivoting to a big increase in military spending?
|
On February 14 2025 09:56 Mohdoo wrote:
Letting Russia consume Ukraine is an existential threat to Europe because every little bit of growth Russia achieves makes their next little bit of growth even easier.
It may be existential for eastern Europe and a major threat for the Nordics, but you can't treat the continent as united on this.
Russia can't project its power over the whole continent, their NATO rollback demands of 2021 ended at Poland.
|
On February 14 2025 02:48 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2025 16:27 maybenexttime wrote:
It was already pointed out to you several times that Mexico and Canada increased the border security as per agreements made with the Biden administration.
Trump ain't creating any openings. He's closing doors. America's allies are starting to see the US as a hostile country. The master negotiator is paying with a currency beyond his grasp - America's soft power, which is evaporating rapidly. Source? and I already pointed out to them that many additional border security arrangements were made over and above what was originally agreed. off topic about Canada/US relations. + Show Spoiler +Canada's border Czar was not agreed upon during Biden. Trudeau called Trump a "skilled negotiator" DURING the negotiations of additional border measures.
Canada is scared shitless of tariffs dude. It is a huge stick Trump used in 2018 and he is using it again. Closing doors? After Trump slapped tariffs on Canada in 2018 what happened? Did Canada stop selling to the USA? no. Export levels are as higher as they've ever been in Canada's history.
Canada and the USA bicker over their trade deals since the first one was invoked since 1988. Mulroney stated Bush was acting in the manner of a tin pot dictator. There have been numerous incidents over the years.
Canada has painted itself into a corner with a bunch of "really dumb decisions on how the country sells its energy". 80% of Canada's exports go to the US.
Trump will wield these tariffs as a stick to get concessions from Canada in the next USMCA negotiations and get a better deal for the USA. Places like Hamilton, Ontario and Windsor Ontario will lose jobs by Justin Trudeau's own admission. Those jobs will head south as the USA ramps up Steel production.
any time you'd like a serious, in depth discussion that includes facts and sources about Canada/US relations head over to the Canadian politics thread. Your response indicates you probably just read headlines though. I'm in Canada 90 days a year and in the USA ~230 days a year.
Thats "You can see Russia from Alaska" level of discourse....
|
Going to post a little prediction here.
1. Trump have already proposed such a bad minerals deal with Ukraine that they had to refuse (50% forever, no clear commitment). All subsequent attempts will be the same so they can say Ukraine is ungrateful and does not want to deal. Even though they could easily get 500bn of rare earth metals for support untill victory.
2. Europe is excluded from the peace negotiations. The "deal" will be Ukraines surrender to Russia. It will be so bad Europe and Ukraine rejects it.
3. Trump will use this as an excuse to stop all US aid. Ukraine and Europe will figure that even if they can't win Russias economic situation is still so severe that they can get a far better deal if they continue figthing for 6-12 months.
4. Here comes the knife in the back. Trump will talk about normalisation with Russia and will drop all sanctions.
He may also commit to tariffs on Europe and/or stop selling LNG. I doubt he will stop arms sales but it's not impossible.
5. At this point Europe and Ukraine are fucked and will be forced to accept the "deal".
6. US conservatives will absolutely love the entire thing.
|
Northern Ireland26415 Posts
On February 16 2025 02:22 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Going to post a little prediction here.
1. Trump have already proposed such a bad minerals deal with Ukraine that they had to refuse (50% forever, no clear commitment). All subsequent attempts will be the same so they can say Ukraine is ungrateful and does not want to deal. Even though they could easily get 500bn of rare earth metals for support untill victory.
2. Europe is excluded from the peace negotiations. The "deal" will be Ukraines surrender to Russia. It will be so bad Europe and Ukraine rejects it.
3. Trump will use this as an excuse to stop all US aid. Ukraine and Europe will figure that even if they can't win Russias economic situation is still so severe that they can get a far better deal if they continue figthing for 6-12 months.
4. Here comes the knife in the back. Trump will talk about normalisation with Russia and will drop all sanctions.
He may also commit to tariffs on Europe and/or stop selling LNG. I doubt he will stop arms sales but it's not impossible.
5. At this point Europe and Ukraine are fucked and will be forced to accept the "deal".
6. US conservatives will absolutely love the entire thing.
I fucking hope not, but it sounds eerily plausible.
|
On February 16 2025 02:22 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Going to post a little prediction here.
1. Trump have already proposed such a bad minerals deal with Ukraine that they had to refuse (50% forever, no clear commitment). All subsequent attempts will be the same so they can say Ukraine is ungrateful and does not want to deal. Even though they could easily get 500bn of rare earth metals for support untill victory.
2. Europe is excluded from the peace negotiations. The "deal" will be Ukraines surrender to Russia. It will be so bad Europe and Ukraine rejects it.
3. Trump will use this as an excuse to stop all US aid. Ukraine and Europe will figure that even if they can't win Russias economic situation is still so severe that they can get a far better deal if they continue figthing for 6-12 months.
4. Here comes the knife in the back. Trump will talk about normalisation with Russia and will drop all sanctions.
He may also commit to tariffs on Europe and/or stop selling LNG. I doubt he will stop arms sales but it's not impossible.
5. At this point Europe and Ukraine are fucked and will be forced to accept the "deal".
6. US conservatives will absolutely love the entire thing. 5) Europe realises the rest of the world still exists to trade with and itself is one of the biggest markets on the planet. It is not great but acceptable. The US meanwhile is fucked because its in the trade war with literally everyone except Russia.
|
Nah, short term we need the energy.
Long term. We get a lot of nukes, then we start turning economically towards China.
Google, Amazon, Apple, Tesla etc gets booted from European and Chinese markets and become local American companies.
We learn to not question things about China, and Taiwan is no longer a country.
|
On February 16 2025 02:22 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Going to post a little prediction here.
1. Trump have already proposed such a bad minerals deal with Ukraine that they had to refuse (50% forever, no clear commitment). All subsequent attempts will be the same so they can say Ukraine is ungrateful and does not want to deal. Even though they could easily get 500bn of rare earth metals for support untill victory.
2. Europe is excluded from the peace negotiations. The "deal" will be Ukraines surrender to Russia. It will be so bad Europe and Ukraine rejects it.
3. Trump will use this as an excuse to stop all US aid. Ukraine and Europe will figure that even if they can't win Russias economic situation is still so severe that they can get a far better deal if they continue figthing for 6-12 months.
4. Here comes the knife in the back. Trump will talk about normalisation with Russia and will drop all sanctions.
He may also commit to tariffs on Europe and/or stop selling LNG. I doubt he will stop arms sales but it's not impossible.
5. At this point Europe and Ukraine are fucked and will be forced to accept the "deal".
6. US conservatives will absolutely love the entire thing.
I'd rather we sent troops if that happens.
|
On February 16 2025 02:22 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Going to post a little prediction here.
1. Trump have already proposed such a bad minerals deal with Ukraine that they had to refuse (50% forever, no clear commitment). All subsequent attempts will be the same so they can say Ukraine is ungrateful and does not want to deal. Even though they could easily get 500bn of rare earth metals for support untill victory.
2. Europe is excluded from the peace negotiations. The "deal" will be Ukraines surrender to Russia. It will be so bad Europe and Ukraine rejects it.
3. Trump will use this as an excuse to stop all US aid. Ukraine and Europe will figure that even if they can't win Russias economic situation is still so severe that they can get a far better deal if they continue figthing for 6-12 months.
4. Here comes the knife in the back. Trump will talk about normalisation with Russia and will drop all sanctions.
He may also commit to tariffs on Europe and/or stop selling LNG. I doubt he will stop arms sales but it's not impossible.
5. At this point Europe and Ukraine are fucked and will be forced to accept the "deal".
6. US conservatives will absolutely love the entire thing.
I can agree with the parts that don't mention Europe. I too thought the most likely scenario is Trump's administration offering Ukraine a shit deal they have no intention to respect anyway and cutting the aid the moment Ukraine refuses.
I have mixed feelings about the rest.
No one wants peace negotations without Europe. Ukraine doesn't want it. Europe doesn't want it. Trumpkins have this stupid conviction that Europe should pay for the consequences of their dumb ideas, so they have to include Europeans in the negotiations too. Even Russia doesn't want it because they know they won't get anywhere without serious offers on the table.
Europe will keep supporting Ukraine until it gives up. Sadly, we don't have the means to help Ukraine win this war without American involvement. I guess I can agree that the war can continue for 6 to 12 months thanks to European support, but I don't think Russia's economic situation is going to get much worse after Ukraine loses the ability to defend itself actively. I think the peace terms should be more or less the same regardless of whether ceasefire starts now or in 12 months. I'm worried things might get even worse for Ukraine if America chooses to go all in on being a dick, but I don't believe that is going to happen.
The idea that the US will stop selling LNG to Europe is extremely silly. Lifting American sanctions on Russia also shouldn't mean much because the US wasn't a key market to Russian goods and it won't become one anytime soon. American military involvement and diplomatic leadership are the only essential parts.
I maintain that a large part of American conservatives would prefer to continue supporting Ukraine, but I agree that the loud, populist right wingers will probably openly support pro-Russian moves. I wouldn't dumb the whole thing down to the left being pro-Ukrainian and the right being pro-Russian.
|
We do have the means to help Ukraine this war but we'd have to get our hands dirty and bloody. People need to realize that, especially with Trump in power and Putin emboldened, we can either win this war in Ukraine or fight it on our territory in a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
