That face when you are weaker than India but still better than America and remind them all the time, but then the fascists turn off the free money tap.
Reported by:
-
KawaiiFembee
: PER CRAPITA
Why are europoors so butthurt : a guide
- 108
- 68
Top Poster of the Day:
trickleyum
Current Registered Users: 31,287
BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS
SITE GUIDE
HOLES
PING GROUPS
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Well the proposed way was to have American companies positioned along the new border doing mineral extraction, ergo giving America a protective interest and making Ukraine an unofficial territory in our sphere of influence, but without triggering the Russians by officially calling them NATO. I'm not sure that would have worked, and Ukraine would have had to give up territory permanently, but I'm also not sure what any other better option for Ukraine is.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It wouldn't have worked because Russia gives zero shits about US corporate interests unless fricking with them risks drawing the ire of the US military. You know, the thing Trump explicitly said was never going to be part of it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Trump said he wasn't going to put boots on the ground into the current stalemate. I think the clear implication was that once there's a truce and US companies are working on the ground, aggression would be taken differently. Or at least there'd be the threat of it being taken differently, which could well be enough.
I don't blame the Ukrainians for wanting a more explicit guarantee. But I also don't blame the Americans for not wanting to make any protection guaranteed and explicit when the result could be war with Russiaβ¦there's a desire for deniability I can't blame them for either.
It's not the best deal for Ukraine but realistically I don't know what better deal the could get, unless the EU decides to actually start sending in considerable boots on the ground. And I don't think they want to escalate in that manner either.
It's very sad for Ukraine but it is what it is. People upset with it doesn't seem to have a better option other than keeping the meat grinder spinning, which is its own heck.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Because of the implication. Right. There's nothing to keep him from making security guarantees conditional on a peace treaty.
This is just it. The US is unwilling to provide security guarantees because ultimately those mean that you might have to honor them and get dragged into fighting. But that also means there absolutely nothing to keep Russia from restarting the conflict when better prepared and rearmed.
This makes the whole deal a nothing burger. It's a deal where Ukrainie doesn't actually get anything out of it.
Idk, the EU could probably make vague promises to work something out later in return for compensation too.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The implication is a big deal. It's basically banking that the bear wants the directly poke the eagle little as the eagle directly wants to poke the bear. Is it perfect? No. But again, what's the alternative?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Actual security guarantees? Formal ones are more binding, and thus scarier to frick around with. The only reason you'd want to extend "implications" instead is if you weren't planning on doing shit in the first place. Implications ain't worth shit, especially with how notoriously unreliable Trump is.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Well no, the other reason is to avoid triggering Russia which gets super spastic about border countries outwardly joining Western alliances.
And yes, it's true it's also to give the US an out in case Russia gets stupid again and the US decides it isn't worth a war with Russia over. But the US isn't going to do anything that doesn't give it that out because it does not want direct war with Russia. It cares about avoiding war with Russia more than it cares about a victorious or secure Ukraine. That being the reality takes us back to implicit guarantees being the best thing you can expect, even if it's not the best for Ukraine.
FWIW I do think you underestimate the strength of implicit 'sphere of influence' protection, even as I sympathize with the Ukrainian desire for more.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yeah. I know it, you know it, Russia knows it, Ukraine knows it. You can still back out on your commitments if you make them official (as Trump has demonstrated repeatedly) but by being entirely unwilling to even make them in the first place is to admit to being a little b-word.
Which means Ukraine would give away stuff for absolutely nothing.
It's a poison pill to give conservatives a talking point when they have to make excuses for why getting cucked by Russia is a good thing actually.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I guess the crux is that you see the implicit guarantee as worthless and I don't. Hard to argue around that
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Is that not implied?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
When Trump keeps saying that he won't put US troops in Ukraine? No, not at all.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You have autism
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yes, but that is unrelated to the topic at hand.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context