So uh, do you guys think Putin will invade Ukraine or what

[twig93]

@The_Polymath

EU also shares some of the blame as they cosied up far too much to Putin for cheap energy.

For sure

[twig93]

@The_Polymath

Letting Russia walk away with 19% of Ukrainian territory is a really bad idea as they will be back for more later on.

Probably sooner rather than later. As soon as they’ve licked their wounds, rebuilt their military, and stockpiled some weapons. This is just a short pause in their operation.

Putin was clear 26 years ago that his aim was to restore the Soviet Union.

He might be smart enough to know that he’s not getting the Balkans back. But I bet he wants the rest. They’re ALL doing better than Russia except I think Moldova.

[Cooke]

I was transfixed by this photo of a Ukrainian man on the front page of today’s NY Times. His facial expression says it all.

[Fish_Actuary]

Besides Trump’s say so, is there any reason why the U.S. needs to be included in the peace talks? It seems to me that Trump/U.S. may have little ability to control the process given it seems like Trump may already be cutting off supplies to Ukraine (or am I wrong on this?), so may lack the carrot to get Ukraine to do what he wants. Particularly if Canada and the EU step up. I’m seeing this morning Britain is talking about boots on the ground and I think France previously discussed it. Plus with the other BS coming from the U.S. perhaps the EU and Britain may be keen to embarrass Trump.

[twig93]

@Fish_Actuary

Plus with the other BS coming from the U.S. perhaps the EU and Britain may be keen to embarrass Trump.

Dear God I hope so.

[Cooke]

@Fish_Actuary

Besides Trump’s say so, is there any reason why the U.S. needs to be included in the peace talks? It seems to me that Trump/U.S. may have little ability to control the process given it seems like Trump may already be cutting off supplies to Ukraine (or am I wrong on this?), so may lack the carrot to get Ukraine to do what he wants. Particularly if Canada and the EU step up. I’m seeing this morning Britain is talking about boots on the ground and I think France previously discussed it. Plus with the other BS coming from the U.S. perhaps the EU and Britain may be keen to embarrass Trump.

Totally agree.

My sense is that Canada and EU both accept the need for significantly more military spending on their parts. Ukraine is primarily a European rather than a US issue. The US should not be the main negotiator with Russia on Ukraine’s fate.

Trump may argue that his country has been the biggest spender on the Ukraine war but that is a hollow argument. Canada has spent as much as the USA per capita on supporting the Ukraine people in this war but certainly doesn’t feel it has a right to Ukraine’s minerals as a result!

This is a very dangerous situation and Trump making deals with Putin on Ukraine is a nightmare situation.

[Maphistos_Sidekick]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/02/17/revealed-trump-confidential-plan-ukraine-stranglehold/

The agreement covers the “economic value associated with resources of Ukraine”, including “mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure (as agreed)”, leaving it unclear what else might be encompassed. “This agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles,” it states.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of “all new licences issued to third parties” for the future monetisation of resources. There will be “a lien on such revenues” in favour of the US. “That clause means ‘pay us first, and then feed your children’,” said one source close to the negotiations.

It states that “for all future licences, the US will have a right of first refusal for the purchase of exportable minerals”. Washington will have sovereign immunity and acquire near total control over most of Ukraine’s commodity and resource economy. The fund “shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions” of all future licences and projects. And so forth, in this vein. It seems to have been written by private lawyers, not the US departments of state or commerce.

[The_Polymath]

There is zero chance that Ukraine will ever agree to that.

[Maphistos_Sidekick]

…which will, of course, give Trump an excuse to cut off aid without alienating some of his worshippers, and potentially set Ukraine up to be forced to a compromise more favorable to Putin (unless other countries increase their support to Ukraine).

[Cooke]

How will Trump respond to Europe’s request for air cover for its anticipated peacekeepers in Ukraine?

US ‘backstop’ vital to deter future Russian attacks on Ukraine, says Starmer

[Rastiln]

@Cooke

How will Trump respond to Europe’s request for air cover for its anticipated peacekeepers in Ukraine?

I think we ought to assume that the US will at best cease helping Ukraine.

If they don’t agree to the ransom the US is demanding, we might see the US provide some form of cover allowing Russia to occupy the country in exchange for some kind of deal/kickback/favors to political cronies.

We should consider cooperative, non-extortion-based US assistance to Ukraine the least likely scenario.

[Vorian_Atreides]

@Cooke

How will Trump respond to Europe’s request for air cover for its anticipated peacekeepers in Ukraine?

@Maphistos_Sidekick

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine the EU from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of “all new licences issued to third parties” for the future monetisation of resources. There will be “a lien on such revenues” in favour of the US.

.

[Fish_Actuary]

One of the quotes I was hearing on this is that Germany got given less extortionate terms after WW1 than the U.S. has offered.

[The_Polymath]

We all know how that ended.

[Cooke]

@Fish_Actuary

One of the quotes I was hearing on this is that Germany got given less extortionate terms after WW1 than the U.S. has offered.

And, unlike Ukraine, Germany was the aggressor.

[The_Polymath]

Yes.

And the Treaty of Versailles set in motion a chain of events that led to WWII (as it empoverished Germany to the extent populists were able to take over).

If they go down the path that Trump wants to go down, they are for sure going to create a situation where armed conflict will arise as a response.

The whole thing is effectively a batshit resource grab (no way Trump understands any of this. This is all Musk and his cronies)

[dr_t_non-fan]

@The_Polymath

The whole thing is effectively a batshit resource grab

See: Die Hard 1, 3, 4, 5. It’s always about the money.
spoilers

It’s not about freeing political prisoners. It is not about putting McClane through a series of tasks or else a bomb will explode in a school. It is not about cyberwarfare messing with infrastructure. It’s not about getting some secret file.

[Ted_Hoffman]

Reminds me of the much-hyped Hanoi summit between Trump and Kim Jong Un where after pleasantries, Trump handed over a note that was “surrender all your nuclear weapons and material” without anything in exchange, and Kim immediately walked out. No deal involving Trump involves Trump making concessions; it’s everyone else giving and he decides if they’ve given enough, and his “concession” is “I could have asked for more, but I didn’t.”

[Maphistos_Sidekick]

I wonder if Zelenskyy feels a little like Polish President Mościcki felt when Molotov and Ribbentrop were chatting in 1939.

[Fish_Actuary]

I wonder if he realizes Ukraine has the option of ignoring his agreement?