EPTSeems Ukraine doesn't even have to decline the deal, EU is doing it for them. Pretty good play to not give Trump another excuse to blame Ukraine for not accepting his own shitty deals
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 885
| 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. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8192 Posts
Seems Ukraine doesn't even have to decline the deal, EU is doing it for them. Pretty good play to not give Trump another excuse to blame Ukraine for not accepting his own shitty deals | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17447 Posts
The point about EU jets being stationed in Poland is very curious. Some people are speculating that's to prevent NATO fighters being stationed in the Baltics, Finland etc. Also, the point about sanctions being put back on if Russia attacks Ukraine again. But no mention of sanctions if Russia attacks the Baltics for example. I really don't know what goes through the minds of people who drafted this deal. Do they really think it's acceptable to anyone except the US and Russia? Do they also think that US and Russia can just dictate whatever they want to everyone else? | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26092 Posts
It’s pretty obvious you can’t make negotiations that depend on third parties to uphold conditions without including said parties. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11638 Posts
On November 21 2025 23:47 Manit0u wrote: The point about EU jets being stationed in Poland is very curious. Some people are speculating that's to prevent NATO fighters being stationed in the Baltics, Finland etc. That is pretty weird. Especially considering that there are already EU jets stationed in Poland. Poland is in the EU. They have jets. The EU itself doesn't have a military beyond that of its member states. On November 21 2025 23:49 WombaT wrote: What’s the US’ endgame with these various proposals? It’s pretty obvious you can’t make negotiations that depend on third parties to uphold conditions without including said parties. I think it is not the US that has any relevant game here, just Trump and his MAGAts. No idea what they are playing at, but Trump has made it very clear that he is only ever acting in the interest of Trump, not in that of the US. It is also quite possible that he thinks he can just state this, and then people will go along with it, or be forced to go along with it because he is so powerful and such an amazing dealmaker. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9249 Posts
On November 21 2025 22:31 Excludos wrote: There's a few laughable gems in there, such as No actual agreement, just an expectation.. so Poland will now be allowed to park their own jets in their own country..? But on a more serious note, a security agree from US without troops stationed on the ground and consitutional ban from joining Nato is a genuine no-go. The US can not be trusted. Even if Trump somehow intended to follow through on it, you're never more than 4 years away from someone who can just decide they don't want to. And lastly This is just greed on another level, and genuine mafia behaviour. Point 14 is one of my favorites. They want to take Russian money, demand additional 100 bilion USD from Europe, invest all of that in Ukraine according to their preferences and get 50% from the profits (not sure if it includes profits from European investments but anything is possible with this administration). How do you even rebuild your credibility as a reliable partner after tabling such proposals? Biden did an okay job at mending the transatlantic relations after Trump's first term but this is going to make everyone distrust the US for years. | ||
KwarK
United States43266 Posts
On November 21 2025 19:49 spets1 wrote: 5. Invading isn’t a better offer “International politics is not a dating service. Great powers use coercion when vital interests are at stake. The United States invaded Iraq, bombed Serbia, droned Libya – all to prevent unfavourable outcomes. Russia is doing the same. You may hate the means, but pretending great-power politics runs on kindness is liberal delusion.” 6. Sovereignty and “it’s not up to Putin” “Sovereignty exists only to the extent it can be defended. Tiny countries next to great powers do not have unrestricted Westbindung rights when the great power says its survival is at stake. Ask Finland in 1939, Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968. Ukraine is not Switzerland floating in the middle of nowhere; it is the most geopolitically sensitive piece of real estate in Eurasia. Great powers decide the security architecture in their backyard – always have, always will.” I enjoy this response because you're just agreeing with me. My argument is that Russia doesn't understand sovereignty. Russia believes it is an empire without borders, that it has a sphere which it is entitled to control that extends far beyond Russia. Russians believe that they, not Ukrainians, have the right to decide the fate of Ukraine. Your argument is that I'm completely right. That freedom is a lie, that tiny countries don't have freedom, that the strong are entitled to rule the weak by virtue of their strength. You make the comparisons with other Russian invasions like the invasion of Finland. Unfortunately for you, and over a million Russians at this point, it seems that the Ukrainians disagree. They seem to think that they have freedom. And, under the terms of your argument, they're actually right. Per your argument a country cannot be free if a nearby great power can simply roll over them the way that the United States did in Desert Storm. A country that can be rolled over in a week long campaign is not a free country. It deserves to be under the thrall of a great power. Ukraine is successfully defending itself. Therefore Ukraine is free. Russia is incapable of rolling its neighbours. Therefore Russia is not a great power. Your argument, not mine. If you believe that the great deserve to rule the weak then Russia does not deserve to rule Ukraine. You're also completely destroying all of your other talking points about Russian speakers or only wanting the Donbas or how Russia can be relied upon not to simply annex the rest of Ukraine if Ukraine were to abandon their defensive positions in the Donbas and disarm. Ukrainians believe that the Russian demands are made in bad faith as a way of weakening Ukraine and that Russia's desire is for total political control over Ukraine. Whereas you're coming in here and telling us that Russia requires total political control over Ukraine, won't settle for anything less, and can only be stopped through force of arms. That if Ukraine is weak enough then Russia deserves to control it. What you're saying about Russia's motives and the bad faith embedded within all of Russia's proposed agreements is exactly what the pro-Ukrainians are saying about it. You're agreeing with all of our talking points. Additionally it's weird that you're still insisting that Ukraine was seduced and corrupted away from Russia, not pushed, in the middle of an argument that also insists that Russia maintains the absolute right to dominate Ukraine. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5672 Posts
| ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1889 Posts
On November 21 2025 23:49 WombaT wrote: What’s the US’ endgame with these various proposals? Trump gets to say he ended a war that Biden couldn't and deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. He's either unaware or doesn't care that he looks like a sniveling, weak fool that keeps getting played by Putin over and over again. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5672 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States43266 Posts
He doesn’t understand why Ukraine doesn’t see that Russia is entitled to their land. Russia wants it and Russia is powerful and so Russia deserves it, why can Ukraine not see that. He would take Ukraine in their place, just like he’d take Canada and Greenland if he had the political dominance Putin had. It’s not strategic. It’s not a move. It’s the rapist inside him looking at Russia and going “game recognizes game”. | ||
| ||
