We are 46 days into Trump ending the Ukraine war in 24 hours, and so far Trump has produced 0 concessions from Vladimir Putin.

But according to Trump, Ukraine must give up Crimea, give up NATO membership, give their minerals to the US, remove their president, and stop fighting Vladimir Putin, while he has time to build up a stronger force for attacking Ukraine.

This is not a peace deal. This is a Putin deal.

@randahl I always wonder, from whom Trump will claim those minerals, when Ukraine stops existing and is taken over by Russia.
@Bugspriet @randahl i believe he has already promised the minerals as well as Ukraine to his master

@Bugspriet @randahl

It sounds more like a Molotov-Ribbentrop pact to divide Ukraine between the two of them. And my biggest fear is that they'll do the same to the rest of Europe; sure, we're technically stronger than Russia, but are we stronger than Russia+US?

@mcv Stronger - when we unite. I fear the influence of targeted social media is still unterestimated. @randahl

@Bugspriet @randahl

AFAIR the orange toddler is alså negotiating a minerals deal with Vlad, perhaps it is the same minerals, the samle land, the same deal, but with its new master.

@randahl Trump knows who he works for.

@randahl Every day I believe the #agentkrasnov story more and more.

'Agent' is a misnomer, but 'asset', yes, absolutely. And a traitor.

I do wonder how many Russian agents visited the downstairs toilet in #maralago. 🤔

@marcusjenkins @randahl My guess is that he doesn't really think he is but likes the idea. Same result.
@randahl Three years into a three day special operation and 46 days into peace in 24 hours.
@randahl #Trump has turned the #USA into a traitor
@randahl What's crazy is that Trump has Putin by the tail. At any time the US can implement a no-fly zone over the conflict area. If he was truly the deal maker he thought he was he could be negotiating for the vast mineral rights of Russia's Far East instead of the relatively tiny mineral rights in Ukraine's.
@randahl I don't think Russia will attack Ukraine after this "peace deal". They'll "democratically" remove Zelenskyy, install some Russian-friendly sock puppet and hey: job done.
@misjavanlaatum @randahl
Zelenskis oposition stays for Zelenski just now and is against election during the war. Ukrainians are not easy to cheat any more. They know putin more than anyone else.
@Margarita_Stefanova @randahl yes, I agree. But I feel that after a peace deal has been forced, there might be a lot of pressure/manipulation/propaganda (both from Russia as well as the US) to install a Russia friendly government. Of course I also hope the Ukrainian people will not let this happen, but they've been pummelled by 3 years of brutal war, so 🤷‍♂️
@randahl that is why we need to arm us up to the teeth and supply #Ukraine with everything they need, and I mean EVERYTHING, not some gesture and a handful of this and that.
@randahl I suppose you ever heard of the term "Pax Americana" .. that I think it's supposed to be quite ironic .. I remember and old set of Walt Kelly's Pogo comic strip where at some point there was someone saying "Freedom means to have nothing to lose" .. ".. and now I made you all free .. you have nothing left to lose" .. and went away with all stuff stolen ..

@randahl

Trump's "end Ukraine war in 24 hours" was always about forcing Ukraine to concede.

Like Putin, Trump thought Zalensky would fold quickly. They're equally wrong.

@randahl Yes. Trump really is a c*nt, a putin puppet. It's truly evil to cut already signed off arms and intelligence to Ukraine, and to threaten to deport Ukrainian refugees. Every day that fascist us lot find new lows of decency, humanity and intelligence.
Drumph wanted the US to be respected. Well, he's made it reviled and a laughing stock in just a few week.
@randahl tout à fait d'accord avec vous

@randahl

Trump is a valuable Russian asset, and Putin has worked long and hard to accomplish that…

https://mastodon.social/@xs4me2/114117702803519208

@randahl Ukraine should bill everyone who got their nukes when they signed the budapest memorandum. I wonder how much those nukes would be worth nowadays ... maybe 500 billions?! ;)

@randahl
Trump est un politicien qui a fait des tas de promesses durant sa campagne et il veut maintenant montrer qu'il avait raison en les appliquant.

Le temps tourne toujours Mr Trump 24 heures ?? 🕚

@randahl Please if anyone sees this read all my posts
@randahl and anyone who heard the guff about a deal in 24 hours knew it would all be one way.
@randahl It's a protection racket.
@randahl Trump would sell Ukraine soul for anything he can get out of it PATHETIC 😡🚨😡

@randahl
Putin does not want all of Ukraine.
Ukraine has lost Crimea 10 years ago, Crimeans would refuse to go back to Ukraine.
The president of Ukraine is not a legitimate president (imagine if Trump were in that situation).
Why would Ukraine join NATO, an aggressive alliance that a.o. dreams to dismantle Russia?
Peace and understanding is the only winning way through.
imho

@DoomsdaysCW

If you think Putin is going to stop at Crimea, I have news for you. Putin has made it quite clear what his goals are. As for legitimacy, Putin assassinated and jailed opponents. I'd say PutieToot is quite illegitimate. I agree with you on many subjects, @windy, but not seeing Putin for what he is seems like sticking one's head in the sand...
cc: @randahl

@DoomsdaysCW @randahl So, we totally disagree on Putin's intentions.

Disagreeing is a good thing, it pushes us to listen, and reply and even question our views. I deeply thank you, really, I'm not ironic, this is important, at least to me it is.

@windy Trust me, I'm not a big NATO fan. And I'm not a Russophobe (I can even read the Russian language). But I do have friends from both Russia and Ukraine, and Putin has been awful with his own people, as well as the Ukrainians. Putin makes no secret of his Tsarist intentions. Just like King Trump!

@DoomsdaysCW Ok, I follow you up to that point. I know Ukrainians and Russians too. And yes, I follow you there. Ukrainians have also been awful with Ukrainians. I wouldn't liked to live say three years ago as a Russian-culture Ukrainian in the Donbas regions. I know people who are glad that nightmare is over.

I lived in Belgium where there are three communities living side-by-side. And although there are many cohabitation difficulties, I know there is an alternative to persecution.

@windy And yeah, I'm well aware of the attacks on Roma by Ukrainian far-right types. There are bad seeds in every society -- but they don't represent the majority (I hope).
@DoomsdaysCW I wasn't even thinking of the Roma. The Russian communities in Eastern Ukraine were persecuted up until the invasion. Zelinski was elected on the promise he'd implement the Minsk agreements. Instead of that, he setup a system of persecution, f.i. forbidding the teaching of Russian language. That kind of measure alone would create a revolution in Belgium. What would France do if the French speaking community in Belgium were to call for help if teaching French were to be forbidden?
@windy @DoomsdaysCW except Putler used the same excuse to seize it's smaller neighbor, like Hitler used before the WW2 start in Czechoslovakia. Could offer help on their side of border. Obviously Russian language suppression were just excuse for tanks anyway. Putler never intended to help people living anywhere in UA but to restore Sajuz.

@windy @randahl @DoomsdaysCW speaking of Russian agents, here's one, apparently fediverse is important enough now.

Вольно, товарищ майор. Мы всё поняли.

@windy @randahl Ukraine has elected president, unlike RuSSia and BeloruSSia. Crimea were stolen and can be sold if owner wishes, not for Putin to decide. The world's biggest terrorist state needs to be dismantled, because poses only danger to it's neighbors. Nothing positive there but the past. It's a lost country without a future. The only question is who will donate enough blood to demilitarize those clowns.
@pemensik @randahl Ukraine has no president mandated by elections.
@windy @randahl unlike it's aggressor it has, just not in a condition for new regular elections.

@windy @DoomsdaysCW @randahl

Putin is not a legitimate president. Zelensky absolutely is. And many Crimeans did flee to Ukraine when Russia conquered it. Go ask Crimean Tatars who they'd rather see in control of Crimea.

NATO doesn't want to dismantle Russia, Russia wants to dismantle NATO. NATO just doesn't want Russia to attack NATO members. Or anyone else, really. Why does Russia insist on attacking other countries all the time? Don't you have enough land already? Try using that for a change. But it's all dead poor and undeveloped because Putin would rather waste that money on stupid wars.

@mcv

NATO is not a country, it's an alliance. Dismantling NATO isn't a big deal. Inside NATO itself there are voices considering putting an end to the organisation.

Dismantling a country is a completely different thing. If NATO, an agressive and powerful military alliance of many countries with a history of dismantling countries, calls and fights for dismantling Russia, one country alone, using Ukraine to do that, why would Russia not use Ukraine to stop NATO?

@randahl @DoomsdaysCW

@windy

What's the real different thing here, is the difference between NATO members wanting to leave NATO, and a nearby aggressor wanting to dismantle it because he sees his expansionist ambitions cramped by every target he sets his eyes on joining the alliance.

That's why Putin hates NATO. NATO is not aggressive, it's defensive. It defends the countries he wants to attack, and that limits his ability to act on his own aggressive goals.

@mcv
Tell the Serbs that NATO is not aggressive and only defensive.

@windy

That war was well underway before NATO got involved. NATO members just didn't want Serbs to genocide lots of people right on their doorstep. But NATO didn't conquer any land, like Putin is trying to do, and only after Serbian violence had been widely condemned by the entire world. It should have been a UN mission, but that didn't happen because Russia was likely to veto that.

Not the greatest showing of NATO, but hardly comparable to all of the stuff Putin does on a regular basis.

@mcv Well, it is clear we don't analyse the situation with the same facts, so obviously we're not on the same wave lenght. I fear it will become difficult for us to discuss this further without straightening our facts, or at least without agreeing on some fundamentals. I take good note of your views and comments, they are precious to me and I remain open for any attempt to find a common factual ground between us, if possible, that would allow us to carry on. Many many thanks in any case.

@mcv A bit sorry to have cut the discussion short, here's for your information the kind of source I myself use -- among others of course -- to shape my opinion on NATO.

https://scheerpost.com/2024/07/12/nato-from-cold-war-defensive-coalition-to-global-military-behemoth/

NATO: From Cold War Defensive Coalition to Global Military Behemoth

NATO’s anniversary is the perfect opportunity for people to learn about its questionable past and reckless present.

@windy

Yeah, I'm not going to read all of that. Sorry. But I did briefly glance over it, and this caught my eye:

If they didn’t have Putin, they’d have to invent them


That's not how NATO works. NATO was pretty much irrelevant before Putin invaded Ukraine. And people were fine by that. There was even a moment in the late 1990s when there was talk of Russia joining NATO. There was a joint exercise. People really thought that the Cold War was over and we'd just have peace now, and everybody was happy to trade with a peaceful Russia.

Countries in eastern Europe warned against it, but western Europe didn't take them seriously.

But then Putin came to power in Russia, and while he wanted to join NATO, he didn't want to have to go through the same admission process and meet the same criteria as "countries that don't matter" (his words). And that choice of words is very telling: Putin believes that the countries in between Russia and the US don't really matter. He doesn't respect countries weaker than his. He sees them not as equals, but as countries to be controlled. And that's the wrong attitude to be in NATO. NATO is not a vehicle for control, but for mutual defense. Putin doesn't get that, because he's an imperialist.

@mcv I get your message, but I see no evidence of what you affirm. To me this is not historical facts as I have been studying them for the past 40 years. What you say is not what I have learned through my research. I'm not saying I'm right, I'm saying that we could go on like this for days and days and never reach anything. Russia was not a direct threat to Ukraine until 2014. According to my history, it all went bad when NATO and EU lead Ukraine to chose their side against Russia.

@windy

Can you point to specific things I said that you think aren't true? Or is it just the conclusion it leads to, that you don't like?

Russia was a threat even before 2014. Putin had been meddling in Ukrainian politics and trying to prevent Ukraine from developing a closer relationship to the EU, which the people of Ukraine wanted and voted for. The invasions of Crimea and Donbass were in response to the Ukrainian people rising up against Putin's puppet government in Ukraine that rejected the will of the people and moved closer to Russia instead of the EU.

In 2008, Russia had also invaded Georgia and taken parts of their land. Russia had been holding Transnistria from Moldova too. The fears of Russia doing something similar to Estonia have always been present. Russia was absolutely a threat.

@mcv I'm actually overwhelmed by my disagreement on almost all historical references you make. For instance, your second paragraph above is, for me, entirely false. But to pinpoint one issue: you say "Ukrainian people". This is, as far as I know the situation in Ukraine -- a wrong way to place the situation: there are at least two major "Ukrainian people" -- but in your account you totally ignore the Russian Ukrainian people living in the Donbas regions, and this is not correct, as I see it.

@windy

Are you saying the Donbas Ukrainians are completely unrelated to other Ukrainians? The big obvious difference is of course that they've been living under Russian occupation for over a decade now, but that doesn't mean they want to.

Or do you mean that there are Ukrainians who did, before 2014, want closer ties to Russia? That's absolutely the case, but there was also clearly a majority who didn't. Yanukovich did win an election, but it was an election where he campaigned for closer ties to the EU. So when he suddenly turned around and blocked that and went for closer ties to Russia instead, against the will of parliament even, people felt understandably betrayed.

And I don't ignore Russian speaking Ukrainians at all. They're still Ukrainian. Zelensky is a Russian-speaking Ukrainian. But the fact that they speak Russian does not mean they want to be part of Russia; to the contrary. Many Russian-speakers have learned Ukrainian over the past 10 years and are determined to raise their children in Ukrainian. Because Putin has made Russian extremely unpopular in Ukraine.

@mcv To limit myself to one one issue in the above comment: the affirmation that Ukrainians living in Donbas "have been living under Russian occupation for over a decade now" is false, blatantly false. It's so false, that it makes me wonder why you say such a thing, what is your purpose.

Could we agree on the view that they have been living under Russian occupation for the last three years, not decade? That would be somewhat less false, to me.

@windy

Russia invaded and occupied parts of the Donbas in 2014, but you're right that they massively expanded their occupation in 2022.

So some have lived under Russian occupation since 2014, a lot more have lived under Russian occupation for the last few years.

@mcv I find no evidence of any "Russian occupation" of even "some" of the Donbas before 2022.
@mcv You say Yanukovich "campaigned for closer ties to the EU". This was in his general context of neutrality. You say he "turned around and blocked that and went for closer ties to Russia instead" Russia was ok with neutrality, EU was not, EU wanted his to take one side. But internal Ukrainian politics have two clear distinct ethnic sides with their respective political, economic and cultural interests, and both must be respected else Ukraine breaks up as a country. I refer you to Belgium.

@windy

Yeah, that's a thing. Having your own opinions is one thing, but having your own facts is another. And these days everybody wants to have their own facts to justify whatever they want to believe.

So let's discuss a few basic facts: is Russia a threat to Ukraine? Is Russia also a threat to Moldova? To the Baltics? Are you familiar with Russia's long history of conquest? That it dominated and oppressed half of Europe until about 35 years ago?

Because if all of these things are true (and they are), do you really think it's surprising that Russia's neighbours want to join an alliance that can protect them against that aggression?

None of NATO's "expansion" was forced by NATO; all of it was other countries wanting to join. Poland basically blackmailed Bill Clinton into letting them in, because the US originally didn't want to let them in at all. But all those countries that were suddenly free from Moscow's yoke after decades of oppression, wanted to make sure they would stay free, and that they had allies who would protect their freedom.

Ukraine's bad luck is that they missed that boat, and that made them vulnerable to Russia's aggression.

But all the aggression in eastern Europe has always come from Russia, and not from NATO.