- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Monday that Ukraine would have to make concessions over land that Russia had taken since 2014 as part of any agreement to end the war.
Mr. Rubio spoke as he was flying to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, for talks with senior Ukrainian officials, and 10 days after a contentious White House meeting between President Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky. The Trump administration halted military aid to Ukraine after the blowup, which centered on Mr. Trump’s refusal to include any security guarantees in a proposed deal involving Ukraine’s natural resources.
You must log in or register to comment.
Okay. Us Europeans want to cede Florida.
Come on now, Rubio. You’re the one who opened up your big mouth.
Please take Florida.
The actual deterrent here being that Putin realizes he has to govern Florida and backs off Ukraine entirely.
Russia must be quite desperate to put that much pressure on them
Does this shithead hold his cards face out when he plays poker?
So, it’s treason then
Yep, it’s treason. And it’s not just one guy.
An entirely treasonous party.
If you support a traitor, you are a traitor.
The old Republican party is dead. Now it’s only grifters and sycophants who are 100% willing to be treasonous to get what they want.
And so far the “land of the brave” is rolling over and letting them do it.
deleted by creator
Someone should invade Rubio’s house and demand the deed to one of his rooms before they’ll leave.
FUCK YOU LITTLE MARCO
shithead.
Has he proved his citizenship?
deleted by creator
“Turns out, Russia doesn’t want to concede anything and demanded more Ukrainian land. Well, we tried. Clearly, it’s high time for Ukraine to stop getting in the way of peace.”
- Little Marco in a week
“we’ve tried nothing and we’re already out of ideas”
I miss the good old ‘we don’t negotiate with terrorists’ US.
If someone breaks into your house, kicks your dog and rapes your wife, you don’t negotiate to let them keep your TV. You shoot that fucker between the eyes. That’s what we need to be doing.
I miss the good old ‘we don’t negotiate with terrorists’ US.
Pretty sure that was only a thing in movies.
We negotiate with terrorists all the time.
US literally funds terrorists, gives them weapons, and gives them CIA training to do terrorism. It’s like all these terrorist leaders went to the same school, of Americas.
Ken: Colonel, the guy you bagged is Dr. Amir Teraki, Pakistani. PhD in Astrophysics, educated at Harvard.
Colonel Tom Devoe: That’s right, people. We educated half the world’s terrorists.
The Peacemaker wasn’t that well received but that line stuck with me.
Negotiate? You mean “hire, radicalize and elect president”
‘we don’t negotiate with terrorists’ US.
That US never existed.
it did in the movies, in here lies the problem.
id probably just try to suck their dick or something
Thanks nutsack
don’t rob my house I’m serious
Never thought I would miss Dubya
Heck, I’ll take any president who lived during my lifetime over Trump.
Dubya definitely got rehabilitated the past decade in many people’s eyes. Of course, he’s still… probably… a war criminal over the whole Iraq / war on terror situation. But I certainly understand the average American wanting him over Trump. I miss when the worst thing a president did was misspeak like his ‘fool me once’.
At the rate we’re going, I wouldn’t be surprised if trump drops all sanctions against Russia, and starts even funding them and providing them US weapons and Intel. I just wouldn’t be surprised.
I would assume they’re getting the Intel already. The entire administration is comprised of Russian assets and useful idiots. Even if the info isn’t being handed to them directly, all the existing security is being ripped to shreds and the teams that would counter any threats have officially been told to ignore Russia completely.
That said, I wouldn’t put it past Trump to publicly give Intel to Russia, but only because he’s an idiot and assuming there is a low he won’t sink to his always a losing bet.
I wouldn’t be surprised if we’re already in a slow rollout for him to go public with support for Russia. The deal could be that Russia and US split Ukraine in some way, whether it stays as “Ukraine” with installed leadership or blatantly annexed.
The problem is the maga cult and the Republicans in congress who would support it. The maga masses will lap up whatever propaganda they’re fed like puppies and a bowl of peanut butter. But what the fuck are the Republican leadership thinking? At that point the US has fallen, but maybe it already has and we just don’t know yet. But maybe not… time will tell.
Trump wants russia blessing when the US invades Greenland.
Tulsi probably hitting Putin with “u up ;)”
I’d say it’s a given at this point.
Trump has offended pretty much all of our major trade partners, so we need a new market to sell US goods as well as replace our imports. As it just so happens, Russia desperately needs goods due to the sanctions and has a reduced manufacturing capacity as a result of marching all their young (and not so young) men into a meat grinder. And even though Putin is a backstabbing, murderous, KGB thug Trump knows that he won’t touch him, because Trump’s just too useful of a flunky.
Granted it’s a morally repugnant move, but when has that ever stopped Trump?
I think he was already pushing for that not too long ago, but all the bad press lately has him backpedalling and promising Sanctions and Tariffs, but still won’t give back the foreign aid he took away.
I wonder what the useful idiot Elon Musk thinks about this, given he’s shown fealty to Putin several times already.
Imagine a hypothetical scenario in which Mexico invades the United States, takes complete control over the state of New Mexico, and right in the middle of the conflict Great Britain says “the war needs to end”, drafts a ceasefire proposal that allows them take control of half of the country’s natural resources, and offers no security guarantees in the event that Mexico decides to attack again. If you refuse, the British will stop sending military aid to help you continue fighting. Oh, and Mexico gets to keep New Mexico.
Who in their right fucking mind thinks that this is a good deal? Any sensible person would rather continue fighting than give up their advantage for some flimsy ceasefire that won’t stand up to an invader hellbent on conquest.
Lol. Remember when a bunch of assholes voted 3rd party or didn’t vote because they were upset with Democrat’s handling of foreign affairs?
Clown country.
both stein and rfk got around 800+k votes. though i suspect many of them R voters on the fence.
I’d do it again, rather get expropriated and deported from this micky mouse country than use what little political input I have to endorse a genocide
I think the point here is that, rather than endorse a genocide, you endorsed 2 genocides, and everything else that this administration does. I get that even one genocide is too much, but for that one you could be calling your representative and writing letters and doing whatever else you can to people who might care about those actions.
you could be calling your representative and writing letters and doing whatever else you can to people who might care about those actions.
my representatives are Democrats, they didn’t care
you endorsed 2 genocides
by lying about Bidens nonfunctioning brain Democrats created this situation. my vote had zero impact
What do you mean 2 genocides?
Do you remember when the Biden Harris administration provided military, financial and diplomatic support for a genocide that lead to hundred of thousands of casualties? No wonder people didn’t want to vote for them.
Removed by mod
And that’s after Mexico violated a non-aggression pact and conquered Arizona.
Removed by mod
I’m sure if you go far enough back in time you could say that anyone in control of any particular swathe of land stole it from somebody else. Past wrongs committed are not a valid casus belli for modern wars of aggression or land grabs.
Regardless, your contrarianism doesn’t change the fact that Mexico surrendered that territory to us after the Mexican-American war. Legally, it belongs to the United States after the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which redrew the border based on the path of the Rio Grande.
That’s not a good example, the US does not rely on the UK to defend itself.
To that point, lets be real, even the united states doesnt really care about new mexico. Crimea in this argument has actual economic value.
Honestly any square foot of what russia has stolen from Ukraine has so much more economic value in comparison to new mexico, its hardly a realistic comparison.
I get what you are saying. But taos vs a warm water sea port is such an insane comparison. Its so much worse. Albuquerque? Let em have it. Santa fe? Please.
You’re looking too far into the details. The value of the territory is irrelevant for this hypothetical scenario. But I’ve been catching a lot of flak in the comments for it, so you know what? I’ll humor you, let’s change the formula.
Let’s say tomorrow, Russia announces that because they feel that they were cheated in 1867, they are refusing to recognize the sale of the Alaska territory to the United States and are reestablishing their control over the land as it’s sole owner. They send an invasion force and they capture the land in a swift blitzkrieg-style assault, the United States is caught completely by surprise.
Now, the United States fights, but we can’t really conduct ground operations without the support of Canada. They are our not just our neighbors, but our staunchest allies in this fight. However, a new Prime Minister is sworn in and they suddenly decide to take a massive shift in foreign policy, and try to broker a “peace deal” between Russia and the USA in which we agree to sign over the rights to future drilling operations to Canada in exchange for a ceasefire from Russia, but Russia gets to keep Alaska since they occupy it now anyway. Refusal means Canada pulls their support, forbids US soldiers from operating in Canadian waters or on Canadian soil, and conducting operations in the occupied Alaskan territory becomes virtually impossible. And, let’s not forget, no security agreements even if we do sign the agreement. So, if Russia decides to attack Hawaii or California next, nobody will be compelled to aid us.
Is that a better comparison? Alaska has massive economic and strategic value, so there’s a good reason for Russia to want it. They’ve been regretting ever selling it to us in the first place.
I mean im an adult that can contextualize the geopolitical reasononing behind why this is a bad deal without relying on heavy handed amerocentric hypotheticals.
To be clear, I never disagreed with your point. I just think that your comparison was dumb. And honestly, using alaska is even worse.
I dont know why you need a comparison in the first place. You already have the actual event to look at. Its in eastern europe. And they are in a war.
I dont know why you need a comparison in the first place.
Evidently, there are a LOT of people who don’t seem to understand just why the deal was so bad to begin with. Not you, of course, but some other comments in these Ukraine threads are either woefully uninformed or intentionally being obtuse about acknowledging facts.
And sorry about it being a series of Amerocentric examples, especially here in World News where it’s probably a bit taboo or tone deaf, but suffice to say it seems like the primary culprit behind much the willful ignorance are Americans with a narrow understanding of foreign affairs. I’m also just sticking to what I know so I don’t embarrass myself with my terrible geography.
Of course the United States cares about Mexico. New Mexico’s GDP is about 15 times higher than Crimea’s.
Maybe the US could give New Mexico to Russia in place of Crimea.
It’s a hypothetical scenario. I could think of some better examples if you really wanted, but that’s the most salient one I could think of off of the top of my head, because you know if the United States was attacked, we would expect the international community to fall behind our right to defend ourselves from any and all threats to our sovereignty.
I don’t see why things should be any different when considering Ukraine’s position.
The scenario just has nothing to do with the current situation in Ukraine. Of course Ukraine has the right to defend itself, nobody is saying otherwise.
Of course Ukraine has the right to defend itself, nobody is saying otherwise.
Article headline: “Ukraine Must Cede Territory in Any Peace Deal, Rubio Says”
Can’t exactly defend yourself when the people trying to broker peace on your behalf are forcing you to capitulate.
Nobody’s forcing Ukraine to sign a peace deal, they can keep fighting if they want.
Likely true if we’re being real but… You don’t say that outloud you incompetent fucking negotiator.
Ukraine is winning. That’s why Trump has stopped supporting them on request from Putin.
If your news isn’t telling you Ukraine are currently stronger on the battlefield, change news outlets.
deleted by creator
Check the other replies in the thread.
Russia is collapsing - this war is absolutely draining their economy. The questions are whether Ukraine could keep that momentum if the US suddenly cuts off communication media and whether continuing a war to a victorious position is worth the cost to Ukrainians. I’m not there, I don’t get any input on the decision, but I’m absolutely understanding of my Ukrainian coworker that fled the country and wouldn’t ill judge Ukraine seeking an earlier peace in exchange for concessions.
51% of respondents in December 2024 said that Ukraine should not give up any of its territories “under no circumstances… even if this would prolong the war and threaten the preservation of independence.”
https://kyivindependent.com/38-percent-ukrainians-territorial-concessions/
Russia is not collapsing, that’s European propaganda.
Mind sharing a source. Latest stories i see is ukraine falling back in kursk and general russian advances on the main front
Both of these links are “Ukraine says”.
I wouldn’t stop supporting Ukraine with everything that isn’t bolted down, because accepting any Russian conquests is worse. But let’s not pretend we’ll know the truth before this conflict ends. Or even much later.
Obviously you have bad news sources if you after three years believe Ukraine isn’t trustworthy regarding what happens on the battlefield.
That’s a you-issue.
I doubt that, why would they agree to the cease fire if that was true
To please the royal highness Trump.
Last I checked Ukraine is ceding a lot of ground in Kursk. Are you saying that’s all a lie?
Kursk is Russia - Ukraine have no intentions of keeping that land. It served its purpose of draining Russian resources well.
He’s a negotiator in the same way the drive thru person at McDonalds is a negotiator.
negotiator
I don’t believe that Rubio has earned that distinction in the slightest, even in a derogatory manner. In fact, I am pretty sure that he has only ever once walked onto a used car lot and that resulted in only two things happening. One, learning that he ought not walk onto a used car lot. And two, the true value of a high mileage Jeep.
Rubio is a Russian asset
Most of our government seems to be.
Removed by mod
get lost troll.
That sounds like Russia. Took 30 years to do something we did in less time
I don’t see any peace deal unless there is security guarantees, it is not peace without guarantees.
This just embolden russia to rape Ukraine again for more lands. Marco Rubio is promoting a forever war.
Ukraine guarantees were taken away when the nukes were taken away.
Why do you put stock in security guarantees now?
Ukraine had security “guarantees” when Russia invaded because they gave up their nukes that Western nation have not followed through on.
Memorandum was not really a guarantee. NATO is more of a guarantee, nukes are more of a guarantee. Guarantee means NATO and/or Nukes.
Don’t need to believe it will work, Nukes and NATO has worked in the past to maintain peace along russia borders.
Security garantee is only worth as much as the nation giving it wants to honour it.
With this president is meaningless
Pretty sure they know better than to trust in the USA alone.
NATO membership is off the table, virtually no NATO country wants Ukraine to join.
Almost all of the NATO countries want Ukraine to join except for Russia’s lapdogs, ergo: Hungary, Slovakia, and the US.
Not really, even France & Germany are not so keen on Ukraine joining NATO now.
Now you’re just parroting talking points from the Kreml.
None of these statements actually back a Ukrainian bid to join NATO today.
NATO is not a guarantee anymore. Trump openly said that if specific European NATO countries will get attacked by Russia then there will be no response.
NATO is more than the US
NATO is pretty much dead now.
Yes, the ones who don’t meet the defense spending targets.
Dang. Anything for you guys to believe “this time!” will work.
Security Guarantees means putting a NATO (or future equivalent) base at the border with soldiers from all over Europe, anything less than that is not guarantee of fuck all
deleted by creator
We don’t negotiate with terrorists my ass
MAGA is a terrorist organization. Their whole missguided ideology of “ruling by strength” is just another way of saying ruling by fear. Using fear/intimidation for a political outcome is by definition terrorism. If someone says it has to be illegal (not true) we can also show the number of arrests and violations of peoples legal rights occuring all over the U.S. Breaking laws pertaining to 1st amendment, 4th amendment, 5th amendment, 8th amendment, 9th amendment, 10th amendment, 14th amendment, 15th amendment, and the outright breaking of the law of the land (constitution) by overriding the legislature, which was the only thing keeping the U.S. a Republic.
The U.S. is negotiating with terrorists every day
Without security guarantees, this isn’t a “peace” deal, it’s a capitulation and an invitation for future aggression from Russia.
What about the security “guarantees” Ukraine already had?
I guess it’s only a guarantee if it’s guaranteed at least twice? Lol.
What guarantees are those? And why are you putting them between the quote marks?
He’s talking about the 1994 treaty Ukraine made with Russia in which Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for Russia’s promise to never invade them.
He put “guarantees” in quotes because Russia fucking lied.
Because that’s what Russia does.
So what good do any kinds of guarantees from Russia or America or anyone else do for Ukraine in regards to this war when they already gave up a powerful means of self defense and were fucking lied to?
If guarantees don’t matter, why is Ukraine insisting to get them?
Right, but I meant guarantees like becoming member of NATO.
