A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Even if the USA promised total war against Russia until Ukraine is completely free plus 50 years of protection, who would believe a single letter in an agreement with Murica today??
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.
Well they had been receiving aid against Russia until now...
After Russia broke the agreement and attacked Ukraine, the US should have stepped in immediately and this entire was would have been prevented. I mean back in 2014 when the Russians took Crimea.
They had to run in the middle of the night from their last base in Afghanistan. They are a joke
You only offer such a one sided bad faith deal if you are truly an idiot or if the whole point is to make a show of them refusing the deal. Israel does this to Palestinians all the time for makreting purposes, as another example. The problem with trump is that we dont know if he is truly that stupid or if he has a separate malign intent in doing this. My money is on malign intent.
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.
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.
Repayment is not at all what this is about. We are talking about a man who was impeached over demanding Zelenskyy provide political dirt on his opponent in exchange for not disrupting aid shipments.
You said it yourself: given
You’re implying that the military aid was “given”, as in: without expectation of repayment?
Yeah, I thought the US saw this as a way to hurt Russia. Isn’t that what we were supposed to be getting out of the deal? Not fucking mineral wealth.
Though, I still don’t think it’s so preposterous for the US to ask for some sort of repayment, for lack of a better word. Just not what the Trump administration is trying to do right now. What they’re asking for is far too consequential.
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.
They let you do it when you're famous dontchaknow? Or so I've heard.
It is a person doing it. Just happens to be running the country.
Unfortunately, a lot of people in that country support him, so he's not alone.
Trump sounds so weak ngl.
The agreement was performative. It was always meant to “prove” that Ukraine was not interested in peace, and a reason that Trump is the only one who can “negotiate” on Ukraines behalf.
So, basically give up being raped by the Russians to being exploited by the Americans. What a good deal, great deal, maybe the best deal in the history of deals!
Sounds like the "Fart of the Deal"