https://nypost.com/2025/02/24/us-news/nearly-all-key-details-ironed-out-in-ukraine-us-mineral-deal/ ‘Nearly all key details’ ironed out in Ukraine, US mineral deal, deputy prime minister says By Reuters Published Feb. 24, 2025, 9:10 a.m. ET Feb 24 – Ukraine and the United States are in the final stages of negotiations on a minerals deal, the Ukrainian deputy prime minister said on Monday on X, though her statement was deleted several minutes after it was posted. In the post, Olha Stefanishyna said Ukraine had offered to sign the deal in Washington during a meeting of the countries’ leaders, and that “nearly all key details” had been finalized.
I think looking at a major conflict from an adversary’s perspective is a rational thing to do. To me, that’s not about trying to justify all their moves, but rather to understand and predict them and figure out the wisest way to respond. Again, haven’t followed the specifics of what he’s been saying very closely. But, for instance, the NATO expansion point seems a valid one in understanding why Russia acted as it did.
I'd say pretty good. The German elections this weekend and what the new Chancellor is saying matters quite a bit. The question is about speed to build up enough to back Ukraine without US support. Even if Russian decided to go on the attack tomorrow with another huge wave of soldiers, keep in mind that at their current rate of gaining territory, it would take 100 years to conquer Ukraine, and cost well over a million soldiers if not much more. Russia has already had to use North Korean troops. Has already emptied out their prisons to use as cannon fodder, and has depleted their Navy. Yes they are on war footing industrially, and will recoup their lost ammunition, tanks, etc. They need a break, and to come back at it with new equipment, and trained recruits. However this is not a war they can win in 3 months to overthrow Zelensky, and take over Ukraine. The loss of Starlink will hurt for sure, but I do think that this is something they've had to deal with prior, and can withstand an outage, and need to revert to slower more old school communications. Right now it looks like the only way Ukraine is defeated in the short term is if China steps in to fully support Russia with troops on the battlefied, the US actively SUPPORTS Russia, and provides them with intelligence, and other support to help them take the Ukrainian high command out, or if Putin uses Nukes, and decimates enough of the country to get them to bend the knee. If Either three of those happen, Trump's support here will plummet. Republican voters... as loyal as they are to the MAGA brand right now, are not going to be a fan of: -China expansion and sphere of influence over Europe if they enter the war -Trump going to war against Europe essentially -Nuclear War .... so I think I feel pretty secure in saying that Ukraine will likely be around for 3 more months. We'll see what happens with Trump, and Xi... who are the two biggest wildcards here, but it looks like Europe is poised to unite, and defend Eastern Europe on their own. All of our military industrial complex companies right now are reliant on Europeans for their orders right now for the next 3 years. If Trump steps in to block Raytheon, Lockheed, Boeing, L3 Harris, etc. from supplying Europe in order to help Russia, those major Republican/MAGA donors will destroy Trump's presidency from within. That's why I feel pretty confident that Europe will get what it wants in terms of weapons, and military infrastructure to build what they need to support Ukraine.
I seriously want to hear how they justify him getting this money "8 million ain't nothing to him . . . " it's up there with "But Trump ain't even taking a salary . . . " But it's something to the rest of the world Rocket River
The NATO expansion talking point is important but you have to contextualize things. If you actually follow what has happened in context, it's a classic self-fulfilling prophecy. It's Russian actions that have led to the need for Finland, etc. to be in NATO. I ranted about this earlier so I won't rehash. Again, I don't think it's too much to ask for Russia and Putin to be given agency here in the debate. We should think about their perspective sure, but that's not what is happening here. How you frame arguments is telling alone on how objective you are. When you are not being objective, it makes me curious as to why?
china have been circling australia with their warships the past week. a couple of days ago they chose to conduct live fire drills with their missiles in the waters between australia and new zealand. trump is enabling aggression. the minerals deal is aggression.
That all sounds pretty fair to me. I think Putin's worldview is that for historical and cultural reasons these countries should be within Russia's sphere of influence and the US/West are trying to keep Russia in a permanently weakened state. These countries are understandably threatened by Russian expansionism and understandably seek the protection of NATO, which in turn makes Putin more convinced in his positions. As you say, a self-fulfilling prophecy.
You actually believe without US support Ukraine can carry on this war? China is not going to change and full support Russia in this war. I am going to guess Germany will not be all in on supporting Ukraine once the new government take office.
Yeah great take - you sound like a complete ignoramus The new German government explicitly campaigned on fighting back against Russia - it's the exact opposite of what you say Since you don't know this - Why should anyone listen to your opinion on this? "I don't think Ukraine can survive blah blah" - you don't have any idea what you're talking about - maybe just shut up?
The new German regime is expected to be more hawkish than Shultz. The far right Neo Nazi party that Elon & Trump wanted did not win although it's alarming how many votes they did get, and the world should take notice given.... you know... History. That being said the new regime is expected to be in line with what you'd expect the pre-Trump Republican party to be. Very hawkish, and I know people who work on some of the key programs at Lockheed, and Raytheon. I'll just tell you that it's pretty obvious that Germany, France, and Poland in particular are gearing up. So yes I do believe Ukraine can continue to fight in a stalemate with European support. Not ideal with the US switching sides, but if they are able to ramp up fast enough, of course it's possible if not likely. Germany alone has in the past shown a terrifying ability to ramp up its war machine domestically very very fast as well. Again that's why America leading is good for the world even though we aren't perfect, and it's still problematic to have our defense industry wield as much power as they do.... but Germany is capable of ramping up in our absence, and they have a terrible track record for leading the world in military output when they have the chance to take the lead.
My point is I don't think we really want to see that do we?? What Trump is doing actually makes war far more likely, and makes the world that much less safe. Again... I know firsthand what Poland, Germany, and France are developing weapons wise, and they aren't getting ready for the Summer of Love. I'll tell you that much. You can believe it when you see it if you'd like but the writing is on the wall that they were preparing for Trump to win, NATO to change, and Europe to act. A full European alliance... yeah I get it. Hard to get them ALL to agree, but we should probably hope for that even though it's likely Hungary, and Turkey at the very least split off, and be more aligned with the US, and Saudi Arabia. But Poland, Germany, Finland, the UK, and France... those countries are all pretty aligned, and if there is a European alliance that emerges out of the US switching sides, any one of those countries could alone give Russia headaches, and likely keep them at bay. Without boots on the ground though... no the US was the only country CURRENTLY that had the arms to fight back Russia WITHOUT boots on the ground. If we assume though that Poland and maybe Finland put boots on the ground in Ukraine, without a massive air campaign, Russia is pretty fcked.
US-backed fighters in Afghanistan managed to force the retreat of the Soviet Union - a far more formidable state than today's Russia. That fact alone challenges the simplistic notion that Ukraine was destined to lose a similar "proxy" war. Spoiler When comparing Afghanistan to Ukraine, the contexts diverge significantly. Ukraine’s struggle is not merely a "proxy" war; it is about national survival and maintaining territorial integrity in the face of a direct and aggressive challenge. External support can influence outcomes, but history shows that even without significant external assistance, an invaded nation can win against all odds - even against major superpowers. Thus, a black-and-white assessment - whether viewed as a fantasy or not - is rather foolish, as there is no guarantee of a clean or successful outcome for either Ukraine or Russia, even in the current situation.
