[headsman771]

Zelensky went there under the pretext of signing the mineral deal, but changed his mind before arriving.

He's trying to pressure Trump and America in general into giving Ukraine NATO membership or security guarantees against Russia.

Sorry, but Ukraine, which is not in NATO and thus not entitled to unconditional defense, is not worth starting WW3 over.

Its sickening watching Zelensky and Europe act like my country is obligated to go into unlimited debt or die on the battlefield to protect them.

[vsean]

> Zelensky went there under the pretext of signing the mineral deal, but changed his mind before arriving.

That's not true. The agreement that both sides drafted was agreed upon and Zelensky planned on signing it.

> Sorry, but Ukraine, which is not in NATO and thus not entitled to unconditional defense, is not worth starting WW3 over.

No one ever said they needed to. What gives you that impression.

> Its sickening watching Zelensky and Europe act like my country is obligated to go into unlimited debt or die on the battlefield to protect them.

To be clear European NATO partners do expect the US to go unlimited debt or die on the battlefield to protect them. It's called NATO. And the only time it's been used so far was for 911 when all NATO countries came to the US's aid after it was attacked.

As for Ukraine. Firstly the US has give much less than the EU. The number Trump keep pushing, $350BN is lies. Ukraine has seen about $70 Billion. Which Zelensky has thanked the US for on may occasions, notably in front of congress. The US owes no one anything, but is it too much to ask that Trump goes hard on the ones who started the war, Russia, who commited war crimes and abducted children, and continue to bomb civilian areas say after day. Instead of shaking down a country and people at their weakest hour for money that was given to it by the previous president?

[headsman771]

The linked article doesnt mention the agreement changing. Did it? If it did I can understand him not signing it.

However there was reporting prior to his arrival that he didnt intend to sign it, and considered it something that lower level officials could do. This was after the impression was given that he was coming to the US to sign it, as you admitted was his intention.

> No one ever said they needed to. What gives you that impression

NATO membership for Ukraine is an attempt to call Russia's bluff that they wouldn't continue fighting, or escelate to nuclear weapons if Ukraine were admitted. That is a direct die roll on starting WW3 and Ukraine is not worth it.

> To be clear European NATO partners do expect the US to go unlimited debt or die on the battlefield to protect them. It's called NATO.

I think you understood that I meant for Ukraine. If not, well, it wasn't difficult to see that's what I meant.

Yes, the US should, and I and most Americans do support, upholding Article 5 obligations.

> As for Ukraine. Firstly the US has give much less than the EU.

I hope you're joking.

> The US owes no one anything, but is it too much to ask that Trump goes hard on the ones who started the war, Russia, who...

The west collectively went hard on Russia. We gave Ukraine more of a fighting chance than anyone could possibly hope for. But Russia is winning. We will not escalate to risking WW3. Ukrainians are amazingly tough people and what happened to them is a tragedy, but its in their best interest to stop fighting and dying.

[cbg0]

> We will not escalate to risking WW3.

There's zero risk of WW3 due to MAD doctrine, so nobody is dropping nukes. Russia couldn't take on one country, let alone dozens of them in a conventional war, so that's also not happening.

> As for Ukraine. Firstly the US has give much less than the EU.

Definitely "less", though "much" is relative https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crew8y7pwd5o

[tayo42]

Are you familiar with the Budapest memorandum?