Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
33 minutes ago, B00M said:

He’s a fucking idiot and and an asshole parroting Russian propaganda. There’s a 1% chance this is part of some spectacular art of the deal 4D chess. We all know it’s not. He’s overplaying the US’ hand, alienating our allies, and doing what Putin wants because he’s easy to manipulate. 

Well he did just sign an executive order that says he alone interprets the law, so I'm sure everything is gonna work out just fine

  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Captainant said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-ukraine-should-never-have-started-it-remarks-war-russia-rcna192710


Trump says Ukraine 'should have never started it' in comments about war with Russia
Trump made the remark while deriding Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whose country was invaded by Russia in February 2022.

President Donald Trump suggested Tuesday that Ukraine was responsible for Russia's invasion of the country three years ago, arguing Kyiv could have made a deal to avoid the conflict.

“You should have never started it,” Trump said of Ukraine while criticizing President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who had expressed concern that his country was not included in talks between the U.S. and Russia in Saudi Arabia.

"I think I have the power to end this war, and I think it's going very well. But today I heard, 'Oh, well, we weren't invited.' Well, you've been there for three years," Trump told reporters at his Mar-a-Lago resort. "You should have never started it. You could have made a deal."

US, Russia meet to talk end of Ukraine war — without Zelenskyy
Trump went on to say: "I could have made a deal for Ukraine that would have given them almost all of the land, everything, almost all of the land, and no people would have been killed, and no city would have been demolished, and not one dome would have been knocked down. But they chose not to do it that way."

What a miserable pustule of human excrement!

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

I dunno fellas, I think there’s more than nothing going on. Ukraine excluded, Europe excluded, Russia and US talk, both leaders want a Ukrainian election before Ukraine can come to the table. Wreaks of interference. Today it’s US/Russia vs Ukraine/Europe. Yesterday it was the world vs Russia. If Putin and Trump get their election and Putin can interfere enough he will get a pro Russian ally and then it’s game over and in another ten years Ukraine is absorbed into Mother Russia setting up the 20 year attempt at the Balkans and others after Russia retools. And all of that is made possible by lifting sanctions and de-isolating Russia when Trump declares victory and his minions pump their fists claiming he is the greatest!! 

it was just a day, but it was monumental in realigning the pieces on the chess board in geo politics and it will go down as one of the darkest days in the history of democracies.

great distress, it causes great distress.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 8
Posted
4 minutes ago, troph said:

I dunno fellas, I think there’s more than nothing going on. Ukraine excluded, Europe excluded, Russia and US talk, both leaders want a Ukrainian election before Ukraine can come to the table. Wreaks of interference. Today it’s US/Russia vs Ukraine/Europe. Yesterday it was the world vs Russia. If Putin and Trump get their election and Putin can interfere enough he will get a pro Russian ally and then it’s game over and in another ten years Ukraine is absorbed into Mother Russia setting up the 20 year attempt at the Balkans and others after Russia retools. And all of that is made possible by lifting sanctions and de-isolating Russia when Trump declares victory and his minions pump their fists claiming he is the greatest!! 

it was just a day, but it was monumental in realigning the pieces on the chess board in geo politics and it will go down as one of the darkest days in the history of democracies.

great distress, it causes great distress.

Yes, and we have a very good thread in the CR to discuss the political side of this. A few on here have tried really hard to keep it to the news. I applaud them for this.

This is not a CR vs. DT thing Troph. I participate in both. But can we try to leave this one as is? Please?

 

  • Fuck You 2
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Yes, and we have a very good thread in the CR to discuss the political side of this. A few on here have tried really hard to keep it to the news. I applaud them for this.

This is not a CR vs. DT thing Troph. I participate in both. But can we try to leave this one as is? Please?

 

Then don’t act like nothing happened today. History books will be written about what happened today and there will be no artificial DT or CR distinction. I’ll bow out. It’s over anyway. 
 

 

* and if your going to call anyone out read the 3-4 posts above mine. I was actually analyzing the facts of the day not doing drive by gratuitous ad hominem attacks. 

Edited by troph
  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
8 minutes ago, troph said:

Then don’t act like nothing happened today. History books will be written about what happened today and there will be no artificial DT or CR distinction. I’ll bow out. It’s over anyway. 
 

 

* and if your going to call anyone out read the 3-4 posts above mine. I was actually analyzing the facts of the day not doing drive by gratuitous ad hominem attacks. 

I said something to you since you are one of the more rational posters.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

I said something to you since you are one of the more rational posters.

 

The news of today imo could not be more devastating to Ukraine, I’ll just leave it at that. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted (edited)

Sorry about the mess above. It has been reported. Both rich text and plain text were a mess.

 

Revealed: Trump’s confidential plan to put Ukraine in a stranglehold
Panic in Kyiv as US president demands higher share of GDP than Germany’s First World War reparations

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
17 February 2025 4:00pm GMT

Donald Trump’s demand for a $500bn (£400bn) “payback” from Ukraine goes far beyond US control over the country’s critical minerals. It covers everything from ports and infrastructure to oil and gas, and the larger resource base of the country.


The terms of the contract that landed at Volodymyr Zelensky’s office a week ago amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity. It implies a burden of reparations that cannot possibly be achieved. The document has caused consternation and panic in Kyiv.
The Telegraph has obtained a draft of the pre-decisional contract, marked “Privileged & Confidential’ and dated Feb 7 2025. It states that the US and Ukraine should form a joint investment fund to ensure that “hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine”.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS AGREEMENT
DRAFT AS OF FEBRUARY 7, 2025
WHEREAS the United States of America has provided significant financial and material support to Ukraine since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022;

WHEREAS the American people desire to invest alongside Ukraine in a free and secure Ukraine;

WHEREAS the United States of America and Ukraine wish to ensure that hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine following a durable peace;


NOW, THEREFORE, the United States of America and Ukraine intend to enter into an agreement on the establishment of a Reconstruction Investment Fund herein to deepen the partnership between the United States of America and Ukraine.
Parties: United States of America (USG) and Ukraine (GOU)

The agreement covers the “economic value associated with resources of Ukraine”, including “mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure (as agreed)”, leaving it unclear what else might be encompassed. “This agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles,” it states.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of “all new licences issued to third parties” for the future monetisation of resources. There will be “a lien on such revenues” in favour of the US. “That clause means ‘pay us first, and then feed your children’,” said one source close to the negotiations.


It states that “for all future licences, the US will have a right of first refusal for the purchase of exportable minerals”. Washington will have sovereign immunity and acquire near total control over most of Ukraine’s commodity and resource economy. The fund “shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions” of all future licences and projects. And so forth, in this vein. It seems to have been written by private lawyers, not the US departments of state or commerce.


President Zelensky himself proposed the idea of giving the US a direct stake in Ukraine’s rare earth elements and critical minerals on a visit to Trump Tower in September, hoping to smooth the way for continued arms deliveries.


He calculated that it would lead to US companies setting operations on the ground, creating a political tripwire that would deter Vladimir Putin from attacking again.

Some mineral basins are near the front line in eastern Ukraine, or in Russian-occupied areas. He has played up the dangers of letting strategic reserves of titanium, tungsten, uranium, graphite and rare earths fall into Russian hands. “If we are talking about a deal, then let’s do a deal, we are only for it,” he said.

He probably did not expect to be confronted with terms normally imposed on aggressor states defeated in war. They are worse than the financial penalties imposed on Germany and Japan after their defeat in 1945. Both countries were ultimately net recipients of funds from the victorious allies.


A new Versailles
If this draft were accepted, Trump’s demands would amount to a higher share of Ukrainian GDP than reparations imposed on Germany at the Versailles Treaty, later whittled down at the London Conference in 1921, and by the Dawes Plan in 1924. At the same time, he seems willing to let Russia off the hook entirely.


Donald Trump told Fox News that Ukraine had “essentially agreed” to hand over $500bn. “They have tremendously valuable land in terms of rare earths, in terms of oil and gas, in terms of other things,” he said.


He warned that Ukraine would be handed to Putin on a plate if it rejected the terms. “They may make a deal. They may not make a deal. They may be Russian someday, or they may not be Russian someday. But I want this money back,” he said.


Trump said the US had spent $300bn on the war so far, adding that it would be “stupid” to hand over any more. In fact the five packages agreed by Congress total $175bn, of which $70bn was spent in the US on weapons production. Some of it is in the form of humanitarian grants, but much of it is lend-lease money that must be repaid.


Sen Graham told the Europeans to root hard for the idea because it locks Washington into defending a future settlement. “If we sign this minerals agreement, Putin is screwed, because Trump will defend the deal,” he said.


Ukrainian officials had to tiptoe though this minefield at the Munich forum, trying to smile gamely and talking up hopes of a resource deal while at the same pleading that the current text breaches Ukrainian law and needs redrafting. Well, indeed.


Other Terms and Conditions
Offtake: For all future licenses, the USG will have a right of first refusal to purchase exportable mineral, which purchase right can be assigned.
Governance of Reconstruction Investment Fund: The Reconstruction Investment Fund shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions to be used by GOU in awarding and documenting future licenses to extract or otherwise monetize natural resources of Ukraine subject to this Agreement.


Governing Law: This Agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles.
Dispute Settlement: International Chamber of Commerce rules; 3 arbitrators (one selected by each disputing party with a presiding arbitrator selected by consent). Seat of arbitration to be New York and conducted in English.


Duration: Indefinite


Waiver of Sovereign Immunity: GOU to waive sovereign immunity with respect to its liability; also, acknowledge that this arrangement constitutes commercial activity within the meaning of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act; also waive immunity with respect to attachment of and execution against assets as necessary to satisfy any claim the USG (or any USG assignee) may have against GOU.
Expand

Talk of Ukraine’s resource wealth has become surreal. A figure of $26 trillion is being cast around for combined mineral reserves and hydrocarbons reserves. The sums are make-believe.


Ukraine probably has the largest lithium basin in Europe. But lithium prices have crashed by 88pc since the bubble burst in 2022. Large reserves are being discovered all over the world. The McDermitt Caldera in Nevada is thought to be the biggest lithium deposit on the planet with 40m metric tonnes, alone enough to catapult the US ahead of China.


The Thacker Pass project will be operational by next year. The value of lithium is in the processing and the downstream industries. Unprocessed rock deposits sitting in Ukraine are all but useless to the US.


The lithium bubble has long since burst
It is a similar story for rare earths. They are not rare. Mining companies in the US abandoned the business in the 1990s because profit margins were then too low. The US government was asleep at the wheel and let this happen, waking up to discover that China has acquired a strategic stranglehold over supplies of critical elements needed for hi-tech and advanced weapons. That problem is being resolved.


Ukraine has cobalt but most EV batteries now use lithium ferrous phosphate and no longer need cobalt. Furthermore, sodium-ion and sulphur-based batteries will limit the future demand growth for lithium. So will recycling. One could go on. The mineral scarcity story is wildly exaggerated.


As for Ukraine’s shale gas, a) some of the Yuzivska field lies under Putin control, and b) the western Carpathian reserves are in complex geology with high drilling costs, causing Chevron to pull out, just as it did in Poland. Ukraine has more potential as an exporter of electricity to Europe from renewables and nuclear expansion, but that is not what is on Donald Trump’s mind.


Ukraine shale gas is too expensive to extract
Oil and gas before Russian annexation of Crimea

The second violation of Ukraine
Ukraine cannot possibly meet his $500bn demand in any meaningful timeframe, leaving aside the larger matter of whether it is honourable to treat a victim nation in this fashion after it has held the battle line for the liberal democracies at enormous sacrifice for three years. Who really has a debt to whom, may one ask?


“My style of dealmaking is quite simple and straightforward,” says Trump in his book The Art of the Deal. “I aim very high, and then I just keep pushing and pushing and pushing to get what I’m after.”

In genuine commerce the other side can usually walk away. Trump’s demand is iron-fist coercion by a neo-imperial power against a weaker nation with its back to the wall, and all for a commodity bonanza that exists chiefly in Trump’s head.


“Often-times the best deal you make is the deal you don’t make,” said Trump, offering another of his pearls.


Zelensky does not have that luxury. He has to pick between the military violation of Ukraine by Putin, and the economic violation of Ukraine by his own ally.

Edited by Bevo
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 8
Posted
2 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Sorry about the mess above. It has been reported. Both rich text and plain text were a mess.

 

Revealed: Trump’s confidential plan to put Ukraine in a stranglehold
Panic in Kyiv as US president demands higher share of GDP than Germany’s First World War reparations

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
17 February 2025 4:00pm GMT

Donald Trump’s demand for a $500bn (£400bn) “payback” from Ukraine goes far beyond US control over the country’s critical minerals. It covers everything from ports and infrastructure to oil and gas, and the larger resource base of the country.


The terms of the contract that landed at Volodymyr Zelensky’s office a week ago amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity. It implies a burden of reparations that cannot possibly be achieved. The document has caused consternation and panic in Kyiv.
The Telegraph has obtained a draft of the pre-decisional contract, marked “Privileged & Confidential’ and dated Feb 7 2025. It states that the US and Ukraine should form a joint investment fund to ensure that “hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine”.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS AGREEMENT
DRAFT AS OF FEBRUARY 7, 2025
WHEREAS the United States of America has provided significant financial and material support to Ukraine since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022;

WHEREAS the American people desire to invest alongside Ukraine in a free and secure Ukraine;

WHEREAS the United States of America and Ukraine wish to ensure that hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine following a durable peace;


NOW, THEREFORE, the United States of America and Ukraine intend to enter into an agreement on the establishment of a Reconstruction Investment Fund herein to deepen the partnership between the United States of America and Ukraine.
Parties: United States of America (USG) and Ukraine (GOU)

The agreement covers the “economic value associated with resources of Ukraine”, including “mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure (as agreed)”, leaving it unclear what else might be encompassed. “This agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles,” it states.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of “all new licences issued to third parties” for the future monetisation of resources. There will be “a lien on such revenues” in favour of the US. “That clause means ‘pay us first, and then feed your children’,” said one source close to the negotiations.


It states that “for all future licences, the US will have a right of first refusal for the purchase of exportable minerals”. Washington will have sovereign immunity and acquire near total control over most of Ukraine’s commodity and resource economy. The fund “shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions” of all future licences and projects. And so forth, in this vein. It seems to have been written by private lawyers, not the US departments of state or commerce.


President Zelensky himself proposed the idea of giving the US a direct stake in Ukraine’s rare earth elements and critical minerals on a visit to Trump Tower in September, hoping to smooth the way for continued arms deliveries.


He calculated that it would lead to US companies setting operations on the ground, creating a political tripwire that would deter Vladimir Putin from attacking again.

Some mineral basins are near the front line in eastern Ukraine, or in Russian-occupied areas. He has played up the dangers of letting strategic reserves of titanium, tungsten, uranium, graphite and rare earths fall into Russian hands. “If we are talking about a deal, then let’s do a deal, we are only for it,” he said.

He probably did not expect to be confronted with terms normally imposed on aggressor states defeated in war. They are worse than the financial penalties imposed on Germany and Japan after their defeat in 1945. Both countries were ultimately net recipients of funds from the victorious allies.


A new Versailles
If this draft were accepted, Trump’s demands would amount to a higher share of Ukrainian GDP than reparations imposed on Germany at the Versailles Treaty, later whittled down at the London Conference in 1921, and by the Dawes Plan in 1924. At the same time, he seems willing to let Russia off the hook entirely.


Donald Trump told Fox News that Ukraine had “essentially agreed” to hand over $500bn. “They have tremendously valuable land in terms of rare earths, in terms of oil and gas, in terms of other things,” he said.


He warned that Ukraine would be handed to Putin on a plate if it rejected the terms. “They may make a deal. They may not make a deal. They may be Russian someday, or they may not be Russian someday. But I want this money back,” he said.


Trump said the US had spent $300bn on the war so far, adding that it would be “stupid” to hand over any more. In fact the five packages agreed by Congress total $175bn, of which $70bn was spent in the US on weapons production. Some of it is in the form of humanitarian grants, but much of it is lend-lease money that must be repaid.


Sen Graham told the Europeans to root hard for the idea because it locks Washington into defending a future settlement. “If we sign this minerals agreement, Putin is screwed, because Trump will defend the deal,” he said.


Ukrainian officials had to tiptoe though this minefield at the Munich forum, trying to smile gamely and talking up hopes of a resource deal while at the same pleading that the current text breaches Ukrainian law and needs redrafting. Well, indeed.


Other Terms and Conditions
Offtake: For all future licenses, the USG will have a right of first refusal to purchase exportable mineral, which purchase right can be assigned.
Governance of Reconstruction Investment Fund: The Reconstruction Investment Fund shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions to be used by GOU in awarding and documenting future licenses to extract or otherwise monetize natural resources of Ukraine subject to this Agreement.


Governing Law: This Agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles.
Dispute Settlement: International Chamber of Commerce rules; 3 arbitrators (one selected by each disputing party with a presiding arbitrator selected by consent). Seat of arbitration to be New York and conducted in English.


Duration: Indefinite


Waiver of Sovereign Immunity: GOU to waive sovereign immunity with respect to its liability; also, acknowledge that this arrangement constitutes commercial activity within the meaning of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act; also waive immunity with respect to attachment of and execution against assets as necessary to satisfy any claim the USG (or any USG assignee) may have against GOU.
Expand

Talk of Ukraine’s resource wealth has become surreal. A figure of $26 trillion is being cast around for combined mineral reserves and hydrocarbons reserves. The sums are make-believe.


Ukraine probably has the largest lithium basin in Europe. But lithium prices have crashed by 88pc since the bubble burst in 2022. Large reserves are being discovered all over the world. The McDermitt Caldera in Nevada is thought to be the biggest lithium deposit on the planet with 40m metric tonnes, alone enough to catapult the US ahead of China.


The Thacker Pass project will be operational by next year. The value of lithium is in the processing and the downstream industries. Unprocessed rock deposits sitting in Ukraine are all but useless to the US.


The lithium bubble has long since burst
It is a similar story for rare earths. They are not rare. Mining companies in the US abandoned the business in the 1990s because profit margins were then too low. The US government was asleep at the wheel and let this happen, waking up to discover that China has acquired a strategic stranglehold over supplies of critical elements needed for hi-tech and advanced weapons. That problem is being resolved.


Ukraine has cobalt but most EV batteries now use lithium ferrous phosphate and no longer need cobalt. Furthermore, sodium-ion and sulphur-based batteries will limit the future demand growth for lithium. So will recycling. One could go on. The mineral scarcity story is wildly exaggerated.


As for Ukraine’s shale gas, a) some of the Yuzivska field lies under Putin control, and b) the western Carpathian reserves are in complex geology with high drilling costs, causing Chevron to pull out, just as it did in Poland. Ukraine has more potential as an exporter of electricity to Europe from renewables and nuclear expansion, but that is not what is on Donald Trump’s mind.


Ukraine shale gas is too expensive to extract
Oil and gas before Russian annexation of Crimea

The second violation of Ukraine
Ukraine cannot possibly meet his $500bn demand in any meaningful timeframe, leaving aside the larger matter of whether it is honourable to treat a victim nation in this fashion after it has held the battle line for the liberal democracies at enormous sacrifice for three years. Who really has a debt to whom, may one ask?


“My style of dealmaking is quite simple and straightforward,” says Trump in his book The Art of the Deal. “I aim very high, and then I just keep pushing and pushing and pushing to get what I’m after.”

In genuine commerce the other side can usually walk away. Trump’s demand is iron-fist coercion by a neo-imperial power against a weaker nation with its back to the wall, and all for a commodity bonanza that exists chiefly in Trump’s head.


“Often-times the best deal you make is the deal you don’t make,” said Trump, offering another of his pearls.


Zelensky does not have that luxury. He has to pick between the military violation of Ukraine by Putin, and the economic violation of Ukraine by his own ally.

Wow what a completely unpredictable and unforeseeable outcome of trump becoming president 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 5
Posted
21 minutes ago, B00M said:

I’m still not seeing what Russia concedes. Anyone? Anyone? 

13 minutes ago, Nivek said:

you see .........well.....  you are not a master negotiator.  

Russia hasn’t had a fair national election in over 25 years, I’m sure we are asking for Russian elections if they want new Ukrainian elections, right?

watching arrested development GIF

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted

Whoever wrote that proposal did so knowing it would be unacceptable for Ukraine.  Either they were hoping Ukraine would turn it down so they could say “well we tried!”

Or they were hoping that Ukraine would agree to a small portion (probably resources) - the whole ask for $500 billion, but accept $100 billion strategy.

If we end up pulling our forces out of Europe, Russia wins.  We are heading towards the late stages of the British Empire.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, B00M said:

I’m still not seeing what Russia concedes. Anyone? Anyone? 

Putin will agree to stop attacking Kyiv and other cities currently under Ukrainian control... for a while. And then after U.S. troops are gone and Russia has licked its wounds, he'll take another bite of the country. It's so apparent it's like we're living in a fucking Greek tragedy.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Bevo said:

Sorry about the mess above. It has been reported. Both rich text and plain text were a mess.

 

Revealed: Trump’s confidential plan to put Ukraine in a stranglehold
Panic in Kyiv as US president demands higher share of GDP than Germany’s First World War reparations

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
17 February 2025 4:00pm GMT

Donald Trump’s demand for a $500bn (£400bn) “payback” from Ukraine goes far beyond US control over the country’s critical minerals. It covers everything from ports and infrastructure to oil and gas, and the larger resource base of the country.


The terms of the contract that landed at Volodymyr Zelensky’s office a week ago amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity. It implies a burden of reparations that cannot possibly be achieved. The document has caused consternation and panic in Kyiv.
The Telegraph has obtained a draft of the pre-decisional contract, marked “Privileged & Confidential’ and dated Feb 7 2025. It states that the US and Ukraine should form a joint investment fund to ensure that “hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine”.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS AGREEMENT
DRAFT AS OF FEBRUARY 7, 2025
WHEREAS the United States of America has provided significant financial and material support to Ukraine since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022;

WHEREAS the American people desire to invest alongside Ukraine in a free and secure Ukraine;

WHEREAS the United States of America and Ukraine wish to ensure that hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine following a durable peace;


NOW, THEREFORE, the United States of America and Ukraine intend to enter into an agreement on the establishment of a Reconstruction Investment Fund herein to deepen the partnership between the United States of America and Ukraine.
Parties: United States of America (USG) and Ukraine (GOU)

The agreement covers the “economic value associated with resources of Ukraine”, including “mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure (as agreed)”, leaving it unclear what else might be encompassed. “This agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles,” it states.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of “all new licences issued to third parties” for the future monetisation of resources. There will be “a lien on such revenues” in favour of the US. “That clause means ‘pay us first, and then feed your children’,” said one source close to the negotiations.


It states that “for all future licences, the US will have a right of first refusal for the purchase of exportable minerals”. Washington will have sovereign immunity and acquire near total control over most of Ukraine’s commodity and resource economy. The fund “shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions” of all future licences and projects. And so forth, in this vein. It seems to have been written by private lawyers, not the US departments of state or commerce.


President Zelensky himself proposed the idea of giving the US a direct stake in Ukraine’s rare earth elements and critical minerals on a visit to Trump Tower in September, hoping to smooth the way for continued arms deliveries.


He calculated that it would lead to US companies setting operations on the ground, creating a political tripwire that would deter Vladimir Putin from attacking again.

Some mineral basins are near the front line in eastern Ukraine, or in Russian-occupied areas. He has played up the dangers of letting strategic reserves of titanium, tungsten, uranium, graphite and rare earths fall into Russian hands. “If we are talking about a deal, then let’s do a deal, we are only for it,” he said.

He probably did not expect to be confronted with terms normally imposed on aggressor states defeated in war. They are worse than the financial penalties imposed on Germany and Japan after their defeat in 1945. Both countries were ultimately net recipients of funds from the victorious allies.


A new Versailles
If this draft were accepted, Trump’s demands would amount to a higher share of Ukrainian GDP than reparations imposed on Germany at the Versailles Treaty, later whittled down at the London Conference in 1921, and by the Dawes Plan in 1924. At the same time, he seems willing to let Russia off the hook entirely.


Donald Trump told Fox News that Ukraine had “essentially agreed” to hand over $500bn. “They have tremendously valuable land in terms of rare earths, in terms of oil and gas, in terms of other things,” he said.


He warned that Ukraine would be handed to Putin on a plate if it rejected the terms. “They may make a deal. They may not make a deal. They may be Russian someday, or they may not be Russian someday. But I want this money back,” he said.


Trump said the US had spent $300bn on the war so far, adding that it would be “stupid” to hand over any more. In fact the five packages agreed by Congress total $175bn, of which $70bn was spent in the US on weapons production. Some of it is in the form of humanitarian grants, but much of it is lend-lease money that must be repaid.


Sen Graham told the Europeans to root hard for the idea because it locks Washington into defending a future settlement. “If we sign this minerals agreement, Putin is screwed, because Trump will defend the deal,” he said.


Ukrainian officials had to tiptoe though this minefield at the Munich forum, trying to smile gamely and talking up hopes of a resource deal while at the same pleading that the current text breaches Ukrainian law and needs redrafting. Well, indeed.


Other Terms and Conditions
Offtake: For all future licenses, the USG will have a right of first refusal to purchase exportable mineral, which purchase right can be assigned.
Governance of Reconstruction Investment Fund: The Reconstruction Investment Fund shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions to be used by GOU in awarding and documenting future licenses to extract or otherwise monetize natural resources of Ukraine subject to this Agreement.


Governing Law: This Agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles.
Dispute Settlement: International Chamber of Commerce rules; 3 arbitrators (one selected by each disputing party with a presiding arbitrator selected by consent). Seat of arbitration to be New York and conducted in English.


Duration: Indefinite


Waiver of Sovereign Immunity: GOU to waive sovereign immunity with respect to its liability; also, acknowledge that this arrangement constitutes commercial activity within the meaning of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act; also waive immunity with respect to attachment of and execution against assets as necessary to satisfy any claim the USG (or any USG assignee) may have against GOU.
Expand

Talk of Ukraine’s resource wealth has become surreal. A figure of $26 trillion is being cast around for combined mineral reserves and hydrocarbons reserves. The sums are make-believe.


Ukraine probably has the largest lithium basin in Europe. But lithium prices have crashed by 88pc since the bubble burst in 2022. Large reserves are being discovered all over the world. The McDermitt Caldera in Nevada is thought to be the biggest lithium deposit on the planet with 40m metric tonnes, alone enough to catapult the US ahead of China.


The Thacker Pass project will be operational by next year. The value of lithium is in the processing and the downstream industries. Unprocessed rock deposits sitting in Ukraine are all but useless to the US.


The lithium bubble has long since burst
It is a similar story for rare earths. They are not rare. Mining companies in the US abandoned the business in the 1990s because profit margins were then too low. The US government was asleep at the wheel and let this happen, waking up to discover that China has acquired a strategic stranglehold over supplies of critical elements needed for hi-tech and advanced weapons. That problem is being resolved.


Ukraine has cobalt but most EV batteries now use lithium ferrous phosphate and no longer need cobalt. Furthermore, sodium-ion and sulphur-based batteries will limit the future demand growth for lithium. So will recycling. One could go on. The mineral scarcity story is wildly exaggerated.


As for Ukraine’s shale gas, a) some of the Yuzivska field lies under Putin control, and b) the western Carpathian reserves are in complex geology with high drilling costs, causing Chevron to pull out, just as it did in Poland. Ukraine has more potential as an exporter of electricity to Europe from renewables and nuclear expansion, but that is not what is on Donald Trump’s mind.


Ukraine shale gas is too expensive to extract
Oil and gas before Russian annexation of Crimea

The second violation of Ukraine
Ukraine cannot possibly meet his $500bn demand in any meaningful timeframe, leaving aside the larger matter of whether it is honourable to treat a victim nation in this fashion after it has held the battle line for the liberal democracies at enormous sacrifice for three years. Who really has a debt to whom, may one ask?


“My style of dealmaking is quite simple and straightforward,” says Trump in his book The Art of the Deal. “I aim very high, and then I just keep pushing and pushing and pushing to get what I’m after.”

In genuine commerce the other side can usually walk away. Trump’s demand is iron-fist coercion by a neo-imperial power against a weaker nation with its back to the wall, and all for a commodity bonanza that exists chiefly in Trump’s head.


“Often-times the best deal you make is the deal you don’t make,” said Trump, offering another of his pearls.


Zelensky does not have that luxury. He has to pick between the military violation of Ukraine by Putin, and the economic violation of Ukraine by his own ally.

The only thing in that document that isn't crap, assuming it's true, is the following segment, "since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022".  And yet, this is all still somehow Ukraine's fault.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, 27-25 said:

The only thing in that document that isn't crap, assuming it's true, is the following segment, "since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022".  And yet, this is all still somehow Ukraine's fault.

"Stop making me hit you!" says the abusive psychopath boyfriend.  And then Trump steps in and says "well...she knows he likes his toast medium-brown, she shouldn't have let it get so dark."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Chopper said:

ahem someone is already on hands and knees

 

I believe the final agreement for German reuinification wasn't signed until 1991, so would this include former East German territory or nah?

Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, NorthLoop said:

Can we borrow them when they get bored of killing Russians? 

No. They'll be killing us when we commit troops to help Russia. It is only a matter of time at this point. We are the bad guys. 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
On 9/14/2022 at 9:32 AM, SmokeyTheBear said:

It was close to being successful (more than currently anyways) if Trump would have won a second term (fuck the no CR). NATO would not have had the cohesive response it had and we certainly wouldn't be supporting the war effort to the extent we have. Our intelligence and weaponry is the difference here and it exposed any flaws Russia's military has. They would have been exposed eventually, but much easier to take over Ukraine if they are largely alone in the world, then each domino falls behind them if each country (Estonia, Poland, etc) are left to defend themselves alone from the orc horde. 

Crazy to go back to 2022 when this was fresh. Lotta wailing and gnashing of teeth whenever trump was mentioned, along with how glad we are that he wasn't undermining Ukraine's defense.

 

It is fucking crazy town how badly trump is rolling over for putin. I can't believe our country elected a man who is so in love with dictators and evil people. That choice is going to ripple through decades of history and forever stain us.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Rage+1 5
Posted
36 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Well, if you want to push the German's and potentially the Poles into seeking to develop Nuclear Weapons, that's certainly one way to bring it to the table. 

That's the tip of the iceberg.  The South Koreans definitely have to be jonesing for the bomb.  And don't think for a minute that the Japanese are going to sit by and not have a nuclear bomb if the Koreans have it.

The concept of non-proliferation is dead.  Fucking Armenia will probably have a nuclear weapon by 2030.  I mean, they'd be fools not to.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

That's the tip of the iceberg.  The South Koreans definitely have to be jonesing for the bomb.  And don't think for a minute that the Japanese are going to sit by and not have a nuclear bomb if the Koreans have it.

The concept of non-proliferation is dead.  Fucking Armenia will probably have a nuclear weapon by 2030.  I mean, they'd be fools not to.

Yes.  A big part of the reason for the US security blanket is not only did in bring most of the world under our sphere of influence, but it discouraged nuclear proliferation because anyone allied with us wouldn't need them (and we told them not to develop them).

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
On 11/21/2024 at 11:01 AM, PTINS said:

Avatar checks out, pussy.

I'm sorry that reading about innocent people fighting for the right to exist has worn you out. 

Ok tough guy.

Reading about and otherwise devoting mental bandwidth to wars that are so deeply politically infected (by other than the politics of the belligerents), like most of the Middle East, is exhausting and depressing.

And, as was fairly evident back in November, and inevitable now, there's not going to be a happy ending for Ukraine.

I'm glad Russia got exposed and militarily pantsed and wrecked their economy, but I don't think the outcome is going to quite justify that.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted (edited)

WSJ reporting Denmark’s increasing military spending by 70% will cross 3% GDP to go with the Balkans and Poland. US spends 3.4%. Danish PM said buy the best if you can’t buy the best, buy the second best but buy, buy, buy and do it fast. $7B over two years. Drop in the bucket but good for them. 

Edited by troph
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, troph said:

WSJ reporting Denmark’s increasing military spending by 70% will cross 3% GDP to go with the Balkans and Poland. US spends 3.4%. Danish PM said buy the best if you can’t buy the best, buy the second best but buy, buy, buy and do it fast. $7B over two years. Drop in the bucket but good for them. 

Underneath that: and point some of those weapons at the US, because they are a fucking enemy now.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

Well, if you want to push the German's and potentially the Poles into seeking to develop Nuclear Weapons, that's certainly one way to bring it to the table. 

I wouldn't bet against some of ours being for sale soon

  • Rage+1 3
Posted

I'll just keep saying what I've been saying for a while now. If you think things are dark now, just wait! And I'm not talking about Trump, Republicans, or anything along those lines. I'm talking about the fracturing of the US. If and when there's another transfer of power, it's going to be completely reactionary. Regardless of whether it's peaceful or not. 

You guys keep talking about what a dark day this is and how it will be seen that way in the history books. My point of view is we're just getting started with the dark days. This has all been a long time coming. Heck, Ukraine has had multiple crazy shifts back and forth between the West and Russia, both historically, and since declaring independence. The 2000s were a big back and forth. And prior to the invasion Ukraine and Russia had been in a static war for 8 years, even if no one called it that. The US has been becoming more and more angry and polarized as a country for a couple of decades, whether it's the Tea Party or Occupy movement. Any incident along trigger points could erupt into chaos. 

The main lesson to learn from all of this, is if you have possession of nuclear weapons - even if you don't have the launch codes - for goodness sakes don't give them up. Even if it might eventually mean the end of human life, or even all life, on the planet. It's the only thing that's going to truly ensure national sovereignty. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
4 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

The US has been becoming more and more angry and polarized as a country for a couple of decades, whether it's the Tea Party or Occupy movement.

those two things are definitely a 100% apples to apples comparison in terms of size, scope, duration, and social impact lol

 

The bigger death is that of social good and civic-mindedness. We ain't got time for any of that. We gotta keep this goddamn line going up, you hear??

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
50 minutes ago, troph said:

WSJ reporting Denmark’s increasing military spending by 70% will cross 3% GDP to go with the Balkans and Poland. US spends 3.4%. Danish PM said buy the best if you can’t buy the best, buy the second best but buy, buy, buy and do it fast. $7B over two years. Drop in the bucket but good for them. 

How much of that will be kickass American weaponry?  Do they want to buy American?  Do they have any other options?

 

Posted
26 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I'll just keep saying what I've been saying for a while now. If you think things are dark now, just wait! And I'm not talking about Trump, Republicans, or anything along those lines. I'm talking about the fracturing of the US. If and when there's another transfer of power, it's going to be completely reactionary. Regardless of whether it's peaceful or not. 

You guys keep talking about what a dark day this is and how it will be seen that way in the history books. My point of view is we're just getting started with the dark days. This has all been a long time coming. Heck, Ukraine has had multiple crazy shifts back and forth between the West and Russia, both historically, and since declaring independence. The 2000s were a big back and forth. And prior to the invasion Ukraine and Russia had been in a static war for 8 years, even if no one called it that. The US has been becoming more and more angry and polarized as a country for a couple of decades, whether it's the Tea Party or Occupy movement. Any incident along trigger points could erupt into chaos. 

The main lesson to learn from all of this, is if you have possession of nuclear weapons - even if you don't have the launch codes - for goodness sakes don't give them up. Even if it might eventually mean the end of human life, or even all life, on the planet. It's the only thing that's going to truly ensure national sovereignty. 

Don’t forget conference realignment.

  • Haha 3
  • Rage+1 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

May as well just merge this thread into the CR version at this point.

It is unfortunate that the most recent threats to Ukraines sovreignty have come from our country, yes. It's even more unfortunate that ANY discussion of our betrayal of their sovreignty will be cordioned off as "see arrrrr"

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

back on topic, apologies to anyone senstive:

https://www.euronews.com/2025/02/19/zelenskyys-approval-rating-grows-to-57-debunking-trumps-4-support-claim

President and authorities deemed legitimate

The latest KIIS poll, showing Zelenskyy's approval rating at 57%, was conducted even before Trump had his first phone call with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, which paved the way for the US-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia. 

Moreover, Zelenskyy support improved from 52% in December 2024 to 57% in early February.

Commenting on the latest ratings, KIIS Deputy Director Anton Hrushetskyi said Zelenskyy retains a fairly high level of trust in society and, even more so, retains legitimacy. 

"If some international partners and allies are worried about the legitimacy of the President in the context of possible peace negotiations and consider it appropriate to insist on elections, then from the point of view of Ukrainian citizens themselves, there are no problems with this," Hrushetskyi said.

"The current president and the authorities are quite legitimate to conduct complex negotiations, and elections should be held after the war ends and at least Ukraine receives reliable security guarantees," he added.

Ukraine was scheduled to hold a presidential election in March or April 2024, concluding Zelenskyy's first five-year term. The vote was postponed as the country's constitution does not permit elections under martial law, which was declared on 24 February 2022, the day when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. 

The Kremlin repeatedly sought to use the delay to portray Zelenskyy as "illegitimate," a claim rejected by Kyiv as a distortion of the constitution.

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
1 hour ago, SL Xpress said:

Heck, Ukraine has had multiple crazy shifts back and forth between the West and Russia, both historically, and since declaring independence.

And a big chunk of that is due to Russia interfering in their elections and getting Putin’s buddies elected. 2013/2014 started to put a damper on Russian interference and would lead to the start of true Ukrainian independence from Russian-leaning politicians, which is why Russia invaded in 2014.  They saw their influence waning and the possibility of the West getting legitimate access to Ukrainian resources.

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
8 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

And a big chunk of that is due to Russia interfering in their elections and getting Putin’s buddies elected. 2013/2014 started to put a damper on Russian interference and would lead to the start of true Ukrainian independence from Russian-leaning politicians, which is why Russia invaded in 2014.  They saw their influence waning and the possibility of the West getting legitimate access to Ukrainian resources.

But what this current scenario presupposes is....what if the American regime believes that Russian interference in a sovereign nation's election to get its favored candidate elected is a GOOD thing?

  • Hook 'Em 2

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...