You're surprised that he's a bit pissed that Donald Dick seems to think he can speak for Ukraine in any peace settlement/ treaty agreement? How would you like Pep picking the Liverpool team next time you play United, despite Arnold still being the appointed manager? * This approach is from Fosse's upcoming book 'Simple Analogies For Simpletons' ...
The days of all the kids getting medals at sports day are over softarses please log in to view this image
He's another ****ing warmonger like Biden, that **** Zelenskyy will end up dragging us all into this war, the **** needs to **** off to the frontline and die.
He’s flapping about now like a defeated man who knows the games up. He’s just emboldening Putin who will see this and make more demands on the peace agreement.
Yup, he knows the end is near so he's trying desperately to drag eveyone else into this. Well he might want his freedom, but he seems to conveniently forget that it's Federalism that caused these problems (USSR) so what's he want to do, create a Federal army. We've already got two mad men in the World under Federalism, Putin and Trump, we certainly don't need anymore crackpots in charge of major establishements. Let alone NATO is a joke at the best of times, we don't need another bunch of misfits just to please a lunatic whose country use to be a part of the USSR. I've got a strong gut feeling though he's been put up to say all this.
He should be grateful to Trump for pulling him out the **** and saving more of his people from dying and more families being destroyed. I noticed Hamas handed over their hostages once Trump had his say despite their claims no hostages would be handed over. I’m not a fan of Trump when it comes to economics or his values and ethics regarding women, but he’s a serious guy on the world stage and his rhetoric works when it comes to sorting **** out. This could be two wars stopped in just a couple of month. That’s some going considering the world was on fire under Biden and the democrats.
Trump’s basically told Europe that Ukraine and Russia are their problem. He’ll ’end the war’ at Ukraine’s expense and Russia’s advantage, so it will set a new precedent for Russian expansionism. European leaders are meeting today to try and work a plan going forward without any support from the US and knowing they need to put more resources into their own defence spending. With possible UK troops on the ground in Ukraine @Sucky might have to dust off his DMs before he gets called up.
How I'm reading it in any peace deal, is that the UK will put troops on the ground in Ukraine, as long as America give us a security backdrop guarantee to deter Russia having a pop at us.
Yeah I’ve just listened to Starmer’s presser saying that the deal will require a US backstop. You would hope that Trump would see an increase in European defence spending and be satisfied that it wont just be the US that pick up the bill, but you just don’t know with him. He could very well just bin us off to get on with it on our own (Europe that is) I’ve just listened to the former chief of defence saying that we can no longer trust the US if a nato country was attacked. I’m not sure it’s as bad as that, but it shows just how much we’ve relied on the ‘special relationship’ with the US, which is now looking very different with Trump at the wheel.
I think it depends on who attacked NATO and where. If someone who can put up a fight attacked a NATO ally, especially in a contested zone, I don't think Trump would honour his NATO commitments. If someone easily defeated attacked a NATO ally in an undisputed region, I think he would. I certainly don't think he would be honour-bound to respect international treaties if he thought that the US would pay a real cost for going to war... but if he could get an easy win, he would. British soldiers bombed by Russia while in Ukraine... no doubt he would blame the British for starting it.
I think Europe certainly needs to be standing on it's own two feet and not relying on the US so much, hence that means defence spending has got to be increased to a more pratical level. By us putting troops on the ground we can take America out of the equasion except if we need back up because Russia starts getting heavy with us. Starmers quite good at this and is sort of acting like a bridge, between Trump the EU and keeping any mention of NATO silent. The latter two matter, because they wind Putin up, so with us in the middle, Putin might be more agreeable, and he don't really see us as a threat even if he did get the hump with our dopey Tory MP's. Seems a sensible 'peace' solution to me.
Possibly, but we still have a close military and intelligence relationship with the US. We are basically their eyes and ears in Europe as part of the five eyes agreement and we share huge amounts of intel to keep both nation’s security in tact. Trump talks a lot of bluster and to a degree it works, because it makes people react. But would it come to the US not backing a NATO member if they were attacked by Russia ? My feeling is that there would be a coup in the US if that happened.
I think they want to or should do, drop the NATO comments, that is just a trigger to Putin, we need to do it as an individual nation. A country outside of the EU, just a mere part of Europe.
