Ukraine has lost the war. There is no way to reclaim lost territory except for NATO boots on the ground => WW3. Do you want that? By giving more money and ammunition, they'll be losing even more territory slower while tremendously straining the economy in the West. China is the laughing third. Trump administration offered to stop the conflict => stop losing even more land. Zelensky didn't show any desire to negotiate. He wants the war to go on as long as possible. The logical consequence was to talk sense into him after he had left the white house. European leaders tried to talk sense into him. It didn't work. Trump stopped all aid.
I agree with him 100%.
All of the MSM act as if Trump acted like a maniac. Nope, he tried to talk sense into someone unwilling to negotiate. The right thing for Zelensky is now to agree to negotiate before all of Ukraine falls. Napoleon syndrome is a bad thing.

This post was edited by babun1024 on Mar 4 2025 02:42am

Ill make a step by step thought process and you can tell me from which point on we disagree:

1. Putin needlessly attacked Ukraine for his delusions to stay relevant in history
2. Ukraine has no chance to actually militarily win this war
3. If we let Putin get away with profiting from the attack it sends a very clear "military might makes right" message to literally every country in the world.
4. The only possible conclusion from 3. is a worldwide military buildup including nuclear weapons
5. Historically this leads to more tensions and in the end, more war. (See the buildup of e.g. WW1)
6. The only way to avoid this is to show that attacking neighboring countries is not worth it

You lost it at 3. Why would Putin be willing to negotiate if he is in a driving seat? The war is also putting big strain on Russia. And how is losing more land and a whole generation of young men preferable for Ukraine? Do you even think about Ukrainians themselves? There is no need to send a message world wide. Nato lost this one.

This post was edited by babun1024 on Mar 4 2025 02:59am

Why make a step by step chart of your thought disorders?
I disagree with all points except #2

Ukraine still wants to fight, the question just is if we want to pay money for it. We are in no position to force them to fight if they somewhen decide that they had enough, we agree on that.

@papapsych: see, super useful to make bullet points. We do not agree on 1 so we can just not interact, since I think best case is that you are brainwashed and most propable case is you are a russian shill.

This post was edited by SkySwallower on Mar 4 2025 03:39am

Your just not an objective third party here, If your reasoning is "For no reason at all" then you are just gaslighting people like CNN.
Either that or you are just as deluded as Mr. Zelensky at a peace negotiation.
From your post history you have surely been calling people Russian bots since Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election.

This post was edited by PapaPsych on Mar 4 2025 03:55am

Objectively, they are losing more territory every day. We are paying for them to continue losing. We are not an uninvolved third party. That's the other logic fault here.

You say that Ukraine is slowly losing territory, this is right but Russia is losing equipment, soldiers and its economy suffers.
Ukraine has a defensive stance because you lose more when attacking, than when defending.
So we dont know who will run out of resources first.
On the other hand if Ukraine capitulates to Russia, they lose 100% territory.
What is better, lose further 10% territory and save the rest of the country, or give up now, disarm and lose 100%?

Russia can stop the war anytime, but a temporary peace is not beneficial to Ukraine, so Ukrainians want a permanent peace, while Trump is fine with temporary peace, because it will be enough for him to declare ending the war.

Finally, someone with logic. You're right from Ukraine's point of view. We, the west, invested a lot of money/resources and suffered economic consequences/inflation by doing so (US and the EU). As you say, the outcome is a speculation but the economy continues to suffer and there is no sign we'll see any of that money ever back. So, Ukraine can continue the war and defend its territory all it wants .. at its own costs. Trump, rightfully proposed a deal to somehow justify further support for Ukraine (mineral deal after the war with 50% for American companies). He was shown in the press as someone who makes deals and cares about himself only. The reality is you have to somehow make the support sustainable.
So again, Ukraine and Zelensky can go on on the course they chose but at their own cost. And you will never have lasting peace without Nato troops in Ukraine.

This post was edited by babun1024 on Mar 4 2025 06:02am

Ah, so in reality it is about the money, not about Ukrainian lifes. That's fair tbh, I think it is wrong but certainly an opinion you can have. Should not try to sell it as empathy for Ukraine, that's just disingenious though.