EPTThis is likely as close to a 'win' as Trump is going to get here.
Now the question is if he will be trying to push Putin on cease-fire or just announce victory and end engagement.
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 806
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
pmp10
3399 Posts
This is likely as close to a 'win' as Trump is going to get here. Now the question is if he will be trying to push Putin on cease-fire or just announce victory and end engagement. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17831 Posts
Most of it is for after the war, basically creating a joint corporation that will manage some of the Ukraine's resources (aluminum, oil, gas, graphite) with US providing the infrastructure, Ukraine retaining full control and ownership of the resources and income from them being given to UA for the first 10 years and after that being split 50/50. Definitely a much better deal for Ukraine than the previous one where they would basically cease ownership of half of their resources. | ||
KwarK
United States44243 Posts
The deal is essentially signaling only, it contains no actual commercial content or military commitments. Trump got to declare that unlike Biden he made a deal where America gets rare earths, which is a buzzword his supporters like, in exchange for any aid. Ukraine got recognition that Biden era aid was not a debt and a framework for building future deals. Both parties get to walk away knowing they have zero obligations to do anything under the deal. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
I think all of us agree the gist of Putin’s plan was: 1. Undo American maintenance of their hegemony 2. Force Europe to accept Russian dominance because having an actual military rather than cupcakes and rainbows is unpopular to naive voters who believe humanity exists in a post-war culture 3.Gobble up Ukraine, giving Russia the population, resources, and economy needed to genuinely hold their own against the entirety of Europe 4. Gobble up Balkan nations, then everything else after that The great news is, Trump is having a very different effect compared to 2016. He’s revolting the world rather than empowering the right wing. Canada’s election is likely a good example of what is happening across Europe and the world as a whole. Voters hate Trump enough to where they are letting themselves imagine a world without the US as a partner or ally. That seems to help break the illusion of a post-war world. Trump going after Greenland is perfect for that too. Much to my pleasant surprise, Europe seems to have decided to grow up and see the world for the broken chaos it really is. Even if the mineral deal only delays Russia, once Europe has an actual military, all of this Russian imperialism 2.0 stops. It’s very unfortunate things are going how they are and I wish all these people didn’t have to die. But with the shit ass situation we currently have, ending Russian imperialism is the by far least shitty option. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9330 Posts
The only partilally correct part of their primitive 19th century world view is that Europeans are both unwilling and incapable of doing anything outside of its borders because of their "dumb" beliefs in modern values and unreasonable guilt about colonialism and jews. They can't imagine it's possible to be powerful without abusing weaker people around you. Refusing to abuse your power is something like a mental illness in their eyes. Much to my pleasant surprise, Europe seems to have decided to grow up and see the world for the broken chaos it really is. Even if the mineral deal only delays Russia, once Europe has an actual military, all of this Russian imperialism 2.0 stops. It’s very unfortunate things are going how they are and I wish all these people didn’t have to die. But with the shit ass situation we currently have, ending Russian imperialism is the by far least shitty option. This is also wrong. The North is the only reasonable part of Europe and they're a tiny minority. The East doesn't trust Germany and France in military matters, which is why our leaders keep simping for the US because it really is the only Western power that could keep them safe in case Russia decided to go all-in on their post-Soviet imperialist delusions. The South wants to just enjoy sunshine and forget about paying denbts. France is trying but they keep trying to be the Napoleon of Europe instead of trying to build a bigger thing. Germany is still not ready to grow out of the post ww2 trauma. All of those bold statements from European leaders are full of shit. There will be no combat-capable European military in 2035. Some countries will have decent national forces though. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5860 Posts
| ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2867 Posts
On May 02 2025 04:31 Sent. wrote: Point 2 is wrong. The Russian superiority complex makes them believe they're entitled to do whatever they want up to the German border. The Russian inferiority complex makes them see Western Europe as that richer neighbour they can't stop comparing themselves too. They keep inventing random reasons why they will catch up to it any day and Germans should totally be afraid of the rising power of the Russian bear but they know it's all bullshit and the neighbour's daughter will never consider them more than a violent drunkard. The idea that they can dominate (Western) Europe or force it do anything is unthinkable to them. They need Europe as an example of a place where things are better and totally could be similar in Russia too if the evil enemies of the government were properly dealt with. The only partilally correct part of their primitive 19th century world view is that Europeans are both unwilling and incapable of doing anything outside of its borders because of their "dumb" beliefs in modern values and unreasonable guilt about colonialism and jews. They can't imagine it's possible to be powerful without abusing weaker people around you. Refusing to abuse your power is something like a mental illness in their eyes. This is also wrong. The North is the only reasonable part of Europe and they're a tiny minority. The East doesn't trust Germany and France in military matters, which is why our leaders keep simping for the US because it really is the only Western power that could keep them safe in case Russia decided to go all-in on their post-Soviet imperialist delusions. The South wants to just enjoy sunshine and forget about paying denbts. France is trying but they keep trying to be the Napoleon of Europe instead of trying to build a bigger thing. Germany is still not ready to grow out of the post ww2 trauma. All of those bold statements from European leaders are full of shit. There will be no combat-capable European military in 2035. Some countries will have decent national forces though. A nordic military alliance and separate a Polish + baltic alliance with a strong mutual defensive pact would be a quite formidable force compared to Russia with current projected spending. We have the same priorities so I think it would work out well. You don't necessarily need some kind of unified Euro army to protect each other. | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1626 Posts
Assuming no nuclear exchanges, if you took just the members of the top 10 military rankings from EU and add them up: Italy, France and UK: Total Active Military Personnel: Approximately 549,280 Air Force Combat Aircraft: Approximately 606 Support Aircraft: Approximately 100 Helicopters: Approximately 250 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs): Approximately 29 Navy Aircraft Carriers: 4 Major Surface Combatants: Approximately 60 Submarines: Approximately 27 Mine Countermeasure Vessels: Approximately 32 Amphibious Warfare Ships: Approximately 10 Land Forces Main Battle Tanks (MBTs): Approximately 627 Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFVs): Approximately 1,849 Armored Personnel Carriers (APCs): Approximately 2,000 Air Defense Systems: Multiple systems including SAMP/T, Sky Sabre, and Mistral Now, I wouldn't really bet on this force against US or China, but if push came to shove and Russia tried something insane like invading, let's say Poland, US bounced out of NATO and these countries came to help them and their forces: Active Military Personnel: ~200,000 (targeting 500,000 with reserves) Air Force Combat Aircraft: ~106 (F-16s, MiG-29s, Su-22s, FA-50s) Support Aircraft: 33 (C-130s, C-295s, M28s) Helicopters: ~78 (Mi-8/17, Mi-24, W-3 Sokół) Navy Frigates: 2 Corvettes: 1 Submarines: 1 Minehunters: 3 Land Forces Main Battle Tanks (MBTs): ~875 (Leopard 2, PT-91, T-72, Abrams, K2) IFVs: ~1,000 (BWP-1, Borsuk incoming) APCs: ~863 (Rosomak) Air Defense Systems: Patriot PAC-3: 2 batteries delivered, 6 more planned Narew & Poprad short-range systems Would anyone really bet on Russia against that, even if we assume that they stop fighting in Ukraine and have 5 years of parallel re-armament I just see 0 ways for Russia to be able to fuck with this kind of force. If we were to add new NATO members with serious and well trained militaries like Finland and Sweden it just looks like a curbstomp, unless Russia finds some kind of unobtanium in the artic and becomes an economic superpower which can rival EU in GDP all of this is bluster. | ||
|
ETisME
12842 Posts
Trust in Europe is just a misplaced hope, sucking up their publicity stunt and hope for the best. There's a literal war in the continent, close to EU member and they still can't get it together. Even if they have the capacity, it's ineffective and inefficient. I have serious doubt about them doing any good, coordinated tactics. - The US has now officially given up being a mediator between Ukraine and Russia. Not a surprise, given crimera still being a road block. Perhaps the drop in US/global economy leading to collapse in oil&gas price can seriously affect Russia though. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17831 Posts
On May 02 2025 19:55 ETisME wrote: Perhaps the drop in US/global economy leading to collapse in oil&gas price can seriously affect Russia though. It is already affecting them. They're way more in the red than they were expecting to be since the price of oil is around 20% lower than they estimated when they were designing their budget for the year. | ||
|
Yurie
12149 Posts
I will second that this is a very strange point. Prior to Russias most recent war Europe had one point five times the army of Russia. Three times the air force and roughly four times the navy. Russia does have more nukes and more of specific types of equipment. And Europe spent much more money on defence than Russia, even when adjusting for PPP. Adding in NATO so you get Turkey and US there is no comparison. The recent increase in EU military spending is a gross overreaction in my eyes, some increase was required but we are probably tripling what was necessary. Main thing required was increasing depth of ammo stock and shifting more to replacing than maintaining equipment to keep production open. Unless we want to project force, for example stomping out Israel, invading Yemen to secure the red sea or going back into Africa instead of paying third parties to do it for us. We won't invade Russia due to nukes. We would win a costly war if we did it, but they are the only reasonable opponent unless we go to another continent. It sounds nice to fight China when doing armchair stuff but it is more likely they collapse under their own weight than us needing to fight them. Same is true for Europe from a Chinese point of view. If China does go expanding we have a lot of time to rearm before they get through the middle east. Unless Russia becomes a client state. | ||
|
KwarK
United States44243 Posts
| ||
|
pmp10
3399 Posts
On May 02 2025 17:18 Jankisa wrote: Would anyone really bet on Russia against that, even if we assume that they stop fighting in Ukraine and have 5 years of parallel re-armament I just see 0 ways for Russia to be able to fuck with this kind of force. If we were to add new NATO members with serious and well trained militaries like Finland and Sweden it just looks like a curbstomp, unless Russia finds some kind of unobtanium in the artic and becomes an economic superpower which can rival EU in GDP all of this is bluster. We could as well do a Russia vs. EU economic comparison in December 2021 and conclude that sanctions will inevitably crush the former. Except it didn't turn out that way. Turns out that EU is either unwilling or unable to use all that theoretical power. | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2867 Posts
On May 02 2025 21:58 KwarK wrote: European voters would get very upset by days of hundreds of casualties and a diet of Russian social media. If a hot war starts there won't be any access to Russian social media in Europe. It's not the US, you don't think we can censor the shit out of things if we absolutely have to? | ||
|
Broetchenholer
Germany1964 Posts
| ||
|
pmp10
3399 Posts
On May 03 2025 00:49 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: If a hot war starts there won't be any access to Russian social media in Europe. It's not the US, you don't think we can censor the shit out of things if we absolutely have to? An aside, but US absolutely censors when it feels the need to. You could see that when bombing of Gaza started and all the likes of Google or Meta went on a banning spree to stop any chances for opposition organizing itself. US social media might enjoy a longer leash than Chine will ever allow Tik Tok, but they are still expected to bite on command. | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1626 Posts
Sanctioning on behalf of a country and defending a front against whole of EU/NATO is very different so I don't think that failure of sanctions is a valid comparison, if push came to shove the economy, numbers and industrial base of EU would crush Russia, which is why they are pursuing their best chance, hybrid warfare, getting the people they prefer in power in order to get these countries to abandon each-other. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17831 Posts
I'm really surprised that Russia is constantly doing this revisionist history. Especially the extra bullshit ones like this. No idea how they can try and go around the fact that Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was the biggest and most powerful country in Europe in the middle ages. Technically giving Poland and Lithuania even more rights to Belarus and Ukraine than Russia ever had... | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9330 Posts
| ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8760 Posts
On May 05 2025 00:20 Manit0u wrote: In Russia they just printed a new history book, basically saying that Lithuania as a country or people should not exist and it was collaborating with nazis. Very similar to what happened before the invasion of Ukraine. I'm really surprised that Russia is constantly doing this revisionist history. Especially the extra bullshit ones like this. No idea how they can try and go around the fact that Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was the biggest and most powerful country in Europe in the middle ages. Technically giving Poland and Lithuania even more rights to Belarus and Ukraine than Russia ever had... a terrible regime must have a leg to stand somewhere... even if it is in myth. the truth would spread like wildfire the same as a lie does. and in Russia's case it is in the interest of the rulers to spread lies and fear to "keep a lid on things". the truth usually falls out a window, or not necessarily truth but "discontent that goes too far". tragedy is that Russians are actually capable people... they just could not get rid of that yoke as others thankfully did. | ||
| ||
