Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 08/18/2025 9:29:14 AM PDT by RandFan
European leaders may have rushed to Washington ostensibly to throw a protective arm around President Zelensky and head off any repeat of February's Oval Office bust-up.
But their real aim is to stop US President Donald Trump threatening long-term European security after his abrupt change of course over how best to end the war in Ukraine.
Not only did Trump drop calls for a ceasefire as a prerequisite for talks about long-term peace, he also - diplomats say - made clear he had no intention of imposing further economic sanctions on Russia.
In short, the travelling European heads of government – plus EU and Nato leaders - want to avoid not just confrontation, but also capitulation.
President Macron of France was the latest to use the C word, saying on Sunday: "There is only one state proposing a peace that would be a capitulation: Russia."
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Ukraine needs to accept this deal IMO!
Threaten away, President Trump. Just get us out with no ongoing financial, warfare, or manpower commitments.
Zelenskyy himself used to be a fixture on Russian television.
At the time, the relationship between Ukraine and Russia was not unlike the one between the United States and Canada.
“kraine needs to accept this deal IMO!”
What are the exact terms of this “deal” you speak of?
Be specific.
L
A lot of people don’t know, but just before this war began, Ukraine basically had an agreement to prevent it, and Boris Johnson (then UK Prime Minister) rushed in to tell Ukraine no.
Trump should walk away and let EU Countries deal with Zelensky
and fund his War.
I don’t understand how the security conditions being discussed are really any different from NATO involvement...
The ONLY thing
“threatening long-term European security”
is Europe’s failure to provide and fund fully and fight for their own damn security.
Maybe they should draft all the jihadis they’ve all imported to go fight instead of expecting Americans to come die for them.
The only thing Ukraine had was a promise from Russia, UK, and the US to bring the issue to the UN Security Council, if there were issues that could not be resolved between Ukraine and Russia.
‘No-one was expecting this’
really? shouldn’t these fools have come to expect the “unexpected” from a REAL President by now?
I agree.
5-1 against Trump, not fair, I feel bad for them, more like sympathy.
Seriously?
Ukraine is NOT part of NATO
Try and keep up bro.
They are funding Putin by buying his oil. But they can’t be inconvenienced, only Americans should be inconvenienced.
Trump got Putin to move substantially by:
a) dropping his objective of seizing all of the left bank of the Dnieper;
b) agreeing to some sort of swap of occupied territories;
c) allowing some kind of external security guarantees for Ukraine
All of these were big concessions in light of Russia's previously stated war aims. Now Trump has to hear Ukraine's concessions. Trump's comments about Ukraine ceding Crimea and no NATO (at least at the moment) simply reflect reality.
I think Ukraine would be right to demand the return of the occupied parts of Kherson and Zaporizhia while offering water rights and possibly transit rights to Russia for Crimea in exchange for ceding the rest of Donetsk. Russia's continued possession of those areas is a grave strategic threat to Ukraine, especially if Donetsk is ceded.
As far as I’m concerned, Ukraine’s treatment of the people in the Donbass was a borderline act of forfeit. Russia’s intrusion, supposedly on their behalf doesn’t justify its accession. but the public will in that region should have the opportunity to express their preferences at this point.
Trump is right that a permanent solution set must be found pursuant to the dissolution of the Soviet Union, to which I would add Kaliningrad. The nagging remnants of a turbulent history leaving an ethnic archipelago have made themselves too apparent.
From what I can tell, the former “Soviet Satellites” of Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Poland, and the Baltic States should form their own bulwark alliance against Russian aggressions instead of leaning on the rest of the world. Perhaps Finland too. That alleviates Russian paranoia about NATO and provides more motive for those nations to prepare to defend themselves.
Trump has proven, beyond a doubt, this was ALWAYS a rump-British-empire, EU and Davos-globalist war
the USA was sucked into the conflict by the corrupt DC deep-state made up of Atlanticist allies of the rump British Empire, and fellow travelers of the NWO/Globalist neo-marxists.
5-1 against Trump, not fair
“That simplifies the problem.”
I smell BS!
The security arrangements being demanded would amount to a de facto NATO membership = - one of the correspondents on FOX just called it ‘NATO Lite’. Depending on the terms, I don’t see it very different from the assurances of Article V.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.