Zelensky shouldn't have listened to manipulative and conniving American Senators acting above their pay grade and messing with international affairs of war they have no understanding of...
The first I’d heard it mentioned was by a member of Trump’s admin… I’m tempted to say Ric Grenell..the day prior to Zelenskyy’s arrival.
My longtime friend ,Bill Whittle, called last night and mentioned the same. Apparently, it was predicated by the Macron and Starmer visits. Which would explain the seemingly odd timing . Bill did spot on Rob Schmitt earlier,discussing it. Bill’s a political analyst/film maker.I caught the 11pm repeat. It’s funny, he sat next to me in high school AP American History. He was a whiz. Brilliant. Very political I’ve no idea how or why I had been chosen for that class, given my interests were getting wasted, not attending class and degeneracy. The teacher despised me and the feeling was mutual, though I deserved it
Regardless,I don’t need an excuse to watch Schmitt. He’s perfection. I also heard Fred Fleitz and Nigel Farage mention it. Why am I rambling?
Apparently, there was a revision that specified the extent of U.S. engagement that made clear under no circumstances would NATO membership or U.S. engagement in military offensive.
One thing that troubled me was Vance accusing Zelenskyy of not once saying thank you. Zelenskyy twice thanked Trump and his admin before they even began to address the issues. That’s where you have to be careful.
I’ve never seen Trump so angry . He’s usually blustering for effect. This was the real thing. And his funniest retort to date was his response to the imbecilic journalist-“ What if Putin doesn’t honor the ceasefire?”. Trump was walking away and didn’t hear her. He turned around and asked her to repeat it and blew up. “ What are you asking me? How would I know? What if a bomb fell on your head?”. It was my turn to explode. With laughter. Particularly because he wasn’t playing her. He ‘d had it. It was the funniest damn thing I’ve ever heard.
I don't see how this agreement would stop Russian aggression. It only mentions Russia once at the beginning, concerning the past. Is Russia expected to just stop the war after America becomes more involved in rebuilding the country and being paid back in minerals and energy? Or does Russia have their own document they are signing with Ukraine to get what they want?
I don't think America should position itself to be Ukraine's forever bodyguard. But, that opinion aside, Zelensky essentially asked to come to DC to sign the deal in front of the cameras in a White House Ceremony, creating a televised situation where he knew (going into it) that he would threaten to back out if he didn't get further concessions...and that's manipulative public antics where honorable statecraft is called for.
Something doesn’t ring true to me about it. If we are trying to broker deals for minerals and energy, and there is a war going on, the other side would try to stop us from getting those resources, right? Such as by bombing the mining sites. I thought such deals were brokered after a war ends.
I actually thought the American media ignored the fact that we have American citizens kidnapped joining October 7 terrorist attack on Israel.
And, it is inevitable that the United States has some steak in the outcome between Ukraine and Russia, I would prefer an implicit level of interest based upon code development in Ukraine, rather than an explicit guarantee that we will go to war on behalf of Ukraine if they are attacked by Russia.
Partly because Ukraine clearly is either vulnerable to being used to harass Russia or wants to do so itself, and if they know that we have promised to back them up, then if they attack Russia or Russia attacks, Ukraine, we are guaranteed a direct war between the United States and Russia.
I don't think anyone is foolish enough to actually want to see that happen, so the safest thing for peace on earth and the option that provides leeway so we can avoid a catastrophic war between two nuclear powers, would be the implicit expectation that Russia will hesitate to attack Ukraine if the United States is actively present in helping with their rebuilding process and the development of minerals, which will help Ukraine pay for its own projects so they stop asking the rest of the world to Pay for everything for them.
Ukraine should want to be economically independent, as it is, and as RFK Junior expressed about a year ago, Zelinski already promised most of the land of Ukraine to foreign corporations, and those agreements have been quietly nailed down and signed, so he was perfectly happy to sell the country out from underneath all of the citizens to huge agricultural corporations owned by foreign nations, but then he jumps up and down and throws a big fit and does when an actor is supposed to do and plays a particular role in pursuit of a particular outcome when he meets in front of the media to talk to Donald Trump and JD Vance.
Under no circumstances, should the United States of America establish a war committed allied relationship with Ukraine, we need to back it up as fast as we can, and find other ways to be supportive that do not fleece our country and put the entire planet at risk of a war between two nuclear powers.
About a year ago, we had already spent enough money on this war in Ukraine, that we could have built a house in the United States of America for almost every single human being in our country who is currently homeless. These are big amounts of money that we are throwing across Atlantic and past Europe into Ukraine and not for a good or legitimate reason, and black rock has its fingers all over this and is making money handover foot.
I agree very much -- missed your comment reply for a while because I did not see it in email at first -- but I agree, and hope and trust that the Trump administration knows what it is doing and that things work out for peace in this country and with Russia. I hope some of this (the contentious White House press conference) is partially for show, to illustrate to the world the conflict of personalities at work, and to make brokering deals look like there is a give and take, where each side is getting something out of it. I probably should not pretend to know what is going on in these parts of the world. I don't think any side of it (if there are three, U.S.+Ukraine+Russia) really wants a larger war. I hope not!
Britain’s Ambassador To U.S.: Zelensky Must Back Trump’s Plan For Peacehttps://www.dailywire.com/news/britains-ambassador-to-u-s-zelensky-must-back-trumps-plan-for-peace
“And, yes, I do think it would be a good idea if he signed the economic and commercial deal put forward by the United States,” he continued. “And the reason I say that is quite apart from the economic gain that Ukraine will derive from that. It will also give the United States a stake in Ukraine’s future. It will mean that U.S. commercial interest, U.S. individual citizens will be on the ground there and that will be an even greater, added incentive for the U.S. to protect the Ukraine in future, make sure that war does not ensue again. That’s what I want to see. That’s what we all want to see.”
That sounds like it could be setting us up for an attack by Russia (or false flag) against U.S. citizens in Ukraine, to become a rallying cry or flashpoint for U.S. troop involvement in the region or against Russia. For instance, with Gaza/Israel special interest in the U.S. media was of course put on the American citizens taken captive.
I was told this was a first draft written by UK and France and rejected by Trump.
The first I’d heard it mentioned was by a member of Trump’s admin… I’m tempted to say Ric Grenell..the day prior to Zelenskyy’s arrival.
My longtime friend ,Bill Whittle, called last night and mentioned the same. Apparently, it was predicated by the Macron and Starmer visits. Which would explain the seemingly odd timing . Bill did spot on Rob Schmitt earlier,discussing it. Bill’s a political analyst/film maker.I caught the 11pm repeat. It’s funny, he sat next to me in high school AP American History. He was a whiz. Brilliant. Very political I’ve no idea how or why I had been chosen for that class, given my interests were getting wasted, not attending class and degeneracy. The teacher despised me and the feeling was mutual, though I deserved it
Regardless,I don’t need an excuse to watch Schmitt. He’s perfection. I also heard Fred Fleitz and Nigel Farage mention it. Why am I rambling?
At the bottom, it is signed by Scott Bessent (Secretary of the US Treasury) and Andrii Sybiha (Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine)
That doesn't look like UK and French representatives to me.
Good to know! Who told you that and why? If I read it correctly, it doesn't mention the "endless security" that Zelensky demanded. Or did I miss that?
Apparently, there was a revision that specified the extent of U.S. engagement that made clear under no circumstances would NATO membership or U.S. engagement in military offensive.
One thing that troubled me was Vance accusing Zelenskyy of not once saying thank you. Zelenskyy twice thanked Trump and his admin before they even began to address the issues. That’s where you have to be careful.
I’ve never seen Trump so angry . He’s usually blustering for effect. This was the real thing. And his funniest retort to date was his response to the imbecilic journalist-“ What if Putin doesn’t honor the ceasefire?”. Trump was walking away and didn’t hear her. He turned around and asked her to repeat it and blew up. “ What are you asking me? How would I know? What if a bomb fell on your head?”. It was my turn to explode. With laughter. Particularly because he wasn’t playing her. He ‘d had it. It was the funniest damn thing I’ve ever heard.
I don't see how this agreement would stop Russian aggression. It only mentions Russia once at the beginning, concerning the past. Is Russia expected to just stop the war after America becomes more involved in rebuilding the country and being paid back in minerals and energy? Or does Russia have their own document they are signing with Ukraine to get what they want?
I don't think America should position itself to be Ukraine's forever bodyguard. But, that opinion aside, Zelensky essentially asked to come to DC to sign the deal in front of the cameras in a White House Ceremony, creating a televised situation where he knew (going into it) that he would threaten to back out if he didn't get further concessions...and that's manipulative public antics where honorable statecraft is called for.
Something doesn’t ring true to me about it. If we are trying to broker deals for minerals and energy, and there is a war going on, the other side would try to stop us from getting those resources, right? Such as by bombing the mining sites. I thought such deals were brokered after a war ends.
I actually thought the American media ignored the fact that we have American citizens kidnapped joining October 7 terrorist attack on Israel.
And, it is inevitable that the United States has some steak in the outcome between Ukraine and Russia, I would prefer an implicit level of interest based upon code development in Ukraine, rather than an explicit guarantee that we will go to war on behalf of Ukraine if they are attacked by Russia.
Partly because Ukraine clearly is either vulnerable to being used to harass Russia or wants to do so itself, and if they know that we have promised to back them up, then if they attack Russia or Russia attacks, Ukraine, we are guaranteed a direct war between the United States and Russia.
I don't think anyone is foolish enough to actually want to see that happen, so the safest thing for peace on earth and the option that provides leeway so we can avoid a catastrophic war between two nuclear powers, would be the implicit expectation that Russia will hesitate to attack Ukraine if the United States is actively present in helping with their rebuilding process and the development of minerals, which will help Ukraine pay for its own projects so they stop asking the rest of the world to Pay for everything for them.
Ukraine should want to be economically independent, as it is, and as RFK Junior expressed about a year ago, Zelinski already promised most of the land of Ukraine to foreign corporations, and those agreements have been quietly nailed down and signed, so he was perfectly happy to sell the country out from underneath all of the citizens to huge agricultural corporations owned by foreign nations, but then he jumps up and down and throws a big fit and does when an actor is supposed to do and plays a particular role in pursuit of a particular outcome when he meets in front of the media to talk to Donald Trump and JD Vance.
Under no circumstances, should the United States of America establish a war committed allied relationship with Ukraine, we need to back it up as fast as we can, and find other ways to be supportive that do not fleece our country and put the entire planet at risk of a war between two nuclear powers.
About a year ago, we had already spent enough money on this war in Ukraine, that we could have built a house in the United States of America for almost every single human being in our country who is currently homeless. These are big amounts of money that we are throwing across Atlantic and past Europe into Ukraine and not for a good or legitimate reason, and black rock has its fingers all over this and is making money handover foot.
I agree very much -- missed your comment reply for a while because I did not see it in email at first -- but I agree, and hope and trust that the Trump administration knows what it is doing and that things work out for peace in this country and with Russia. I hope some of this (the contentious White House press conference) is partially for show, to illustrate to the world the conflict of personalities at work, and to make brokering deals look like there is a give and take, where each side is getting something out of it. I probably should not pretend to know what is going on in these parts of the world. I don't think any side of it (if there are three, U.S.+Ukraine+Russia) really wants a larger war. I hope not!
Ditto!
Check this out:
Britain’s Ambassador To U.S.: Zelensky Must Back Trump’s Plan For Peacehttps://www.dailywire.com/news/britains-ambassador-to-u-s-zelensky-must-back-trumps-plan-for-peace
“And, yes, I do think it would be a good idea if he signed the economic and commercial deal put forward by the United States,” he continued. “And the reason I say that is quite apart from the economic gain that Ukraine will derive from that. It will also give the United States a stake in Ukraine’s future. It will mean that U.S. commercial interest, U.S. individual citizens will be on the ground there and that will be an even greater, added incentive for the U.S. to protect the Ukraine in future, make sure that war does not ensue again. That’s what I want to see. That’s what we all want to see.”
That sounds like it could be setting us up for an attack by Russia (or false flag) against U.S. citizens in Ukraine, to become a rallying cry or flashpoint for U.S. troop involvement in the region or against Russia. For instance, with Gaza/Israel special interest in the U.S. media was of course put on the American citizens taken captive.