US presented Ukraine with a document to access minerals but offered almost nothing
-
Contracts like those always have extensive breach clauses for ass coverage for both sides.
-
And who is going to enforce a breach?
trump himself re-negotiated nafta and is now renegging on his own deal placing tariffs on Canada and Mexico
-
So go fuck out of all of security bases in Europe. Let's see how much longer you will survive and thrive without allies and generally hated by everyone.
You think the rest of the world should simply succumb to your scummy practices?
-
You know two wrongs don't make a plus
-
𝘗𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘦
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npDqU47qZ7s
And zelenski just stood there with a silly grin on his face.
-
They had to run in the middle of the night from their last base in Afghanistan.
They are a joke -
LOL
They already lost with all the 'help'.
Remember their great offensive where they got 1 potato field?
It's over.
But sure, let's kidnapp some teens and elderly to die for nothing -
they never had nukes, they were soviet nukes
-
In between the end of the Soviet Union and them signing the Budapest Memorandum and giving the nukes to Russia, there was definitelly a period during which the sovereign nation of Ukraine had nukes under their control.
-
I've known people like this, who just take whatever they want as if they're entitled to it, but never a country. Weird, gives me the same feeling as if it was a person doing it... like, get the hell outta here and go earn your own stuff.
-
OK, but regardless of who supplies them, if Ukraine had a few under their own control, for better or worse it would give them a deterrent they never should have been swindled into letting go of. Sucks, but it seems any nation that doesn't have nukes is at an extreme disadvantage in defending its sovereignty.
-
Your (luckily hypothetical) suggestion is wrong and extremely dangerous in many ways.
WW3 nuclear dangerous.
To name just one reason, Russia did not tolerate Ukraine in NATO since that would mean nukes too close to Moscow and a well known red line.
That will never fly.
All this was stated by them and western expert fully understood and knew this would lead to war.
I'll leave it at that. -
I know how dangerous it sounds. But every time Russia moves the line,the rest of the world is supposed to fall back? Moving arms into NATO countries sends a message, but it isn't starting a war. Putin's the one who actually invaded another country. Merely reinforcing defences is NOT starting the war. He started it and doesn't want to die in a nuclear war any more than we do. So he'd complain bitterly but wouldn't DARE make a move against it. Why hasn't he already just nuked Ukraine (even 'just a few' tactical nukes?) if he believed he could ever survive doing so?
-
It’s a much more complicated issue than that. Think of how much we have given to Ukraine to support them. Some semblance of ‘repayment’ is fair. But taking 50% of their mineral wealth is absolutely ridiculous. That is, practically, their security and future.
What good does it do to exacerbate their post war economic crisis? Nothing.
Why are we giving them security now, if we’re going to take 50% of their security afterwards? It’s so fucking backward.
-
My first thought is that payments are staggered and if they don't arrive the contract ends. Bog standard clause. Wild man trump isn't going to risk American lives over enriching his mates. Americans wouldn't tolerate it either.
Second one that occurred is WTO.
-
Wild man trump isn’t going to risk American lives over enriching his mates. Americans wouldn’t tolerate it either.
Surely you joke?
-
No I don't. What mother is going to happily send their child of to war over a contract?
-
Even with morals and literal colonialism aside, the US is not in any position to make demands as Europe is more than interested and willing to tide Ukraine over, carry it through this all.
If the US wants to have money then stop donating and start selling instead, see if there's buyers. Simple as that. But then also don't expect to get a cut of the reparations.
-
That's not very fair, the US also promised Ukraine protection if they'd removed their nukes in the 90s...
FYI
When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Ukraine had the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal on its territory. When Ukrainian-Russian negotiations on removing these weapons from Ukraine appeared to break down in September 1993, the U.S. government engaged in a trilateral process with Ukraine and Russia. The result was the Trilateral Statement, signed in January 1994, under which Ukraine agreed to transfer the nuclear warheads to Russia for elimination. In return, Ukraine received security assurances from the United States, Russia and Britain; compensation for the economic value of the highly-enriched uranium in the warheads (which could be blended down and converted into fuel for nuclear reactors); and assistance from the United States in dismantling the missiles, missile silos, bombers and nuclear infrastructure on its territory.
