Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[tac airlifter]

2 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said:

Trump using Russian talking points.   Not surprised.

I don't mean this disrespectfully, but that line of logic is not intelligent.  For starters, Russian talking points are how Russians feel. If you want to negotiate an end to conflict, you must take into account how the Russians feel.  
 

Secondly does labeling something "talking points" mean the perspective is invalid and not worthy of discussion? That's what's implied whenever I hear that phrase: a complete dismissal of the argument.  I'm sure it makes you feel immune to propaganda, and it's fine if you hold all the winning cards and you're in a winning position. But if you're losing, like Ukraine is, then you kinda have to engage in diplomacy with other people, and that means an outright dismissal of their perspective is infeasible.

Finally imagine if that conversational technique was used against you, would you appreciate somebody dismissing your opinion and refusing to answer the concerns you raise because they categorize your thoughts as illegitimate and talking points from the other side? No, you would not appreciate that, in fact that would be a very dumb way to engage with you or anybody. Because it's dumb.

 

[disgruntledemployee]

25 minutes ago, GrndPndr said:

The full video has been posted in this article from NYPost.  Trump let Zelinski have both barrels:

https://nypost.com/2025/02/28/us-news/trump-says-zelensky-disrespected-the-united-states-of-america-after-heated-oval-office-clash/

Embarrassing display.  Jerry Springer would be proud.

[SurelySerious]

I don't mean this disrespectfully, but that line of logic is not intelligent.  For starters, Russian talking points are how Russians feel. If you want to negotiate an end to conflict, you must take into account how the Russians feel.  
 
Secondly does labeling something "talking points" mean the perspective is invalid and not worthy of discussion? That's what's implied whenever I hear that phrase: a complete dismissal of the argument.  I'm sure it makes you feel immune to propaganda, and it's fine if you hold all the winning cards and you're in a winning position. But if you're losing, like Ukraine is, then you kinda have to engage in diplomacy with other people, and that means an outright dismissal of their perspective is infeasible.
Finally imagine if that conversational technique was used against you, would you appreciate somebody dismissing your opinion and refusing to answer the concerns you raise because they categorize your thoughts as illegitimate and talking points from the other side? No, you would not appreciate that, in fact that would be a very dumb way to engage with you or anybody. Because it's dumb.
 

That’s a lot of words to say you side with Putin. Don’t bloviate, just lay it out.

[SurelySerious]

[disgruntledemployee]

11 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

I don't mean this disrespectfully, but that line of logic is not intelligent.  For starters, Russian talking points are how Russians feel. If you want to negotiate an end to conflict, you must take into account how the Russians feel.  
 

Secondly does labeling something "talking points" mean the perspective is invalid and not worthy of discussion? That's what's implied whenever I hear that phrase: a complete dismissal of the argument.  I'm sure it makes you feel immune to propaganda, and it's fine if you hold all the winning cards and you're in a winning position. But if you're losing, like Ukraine is, then you kinda have to engage in diplomacy with other people, and that means an outright dismissal of their perspective is infeasible.

Finally imagine if that conversational technique was used against you, would you appreciate somebody dismissing your opinion and refusing to answer the concerns you raise because they categorize your thoughts as illegitimate and talking points from the other side? No, you would not appreciate that, in fact that would be a very dumb way to engage with you or anybody. Because it's dumb.

 

In case you missed it, I don't like Russia and their actions.  I don't like anyone in the US Admin making public statements of justifying Russia's invasion.  Why Russia did it is for internal discussions when trying to figure out our strategies and decisions.

Trump hates Zelinski and the video above kinda shows that because, IMO, he was part of the impeachment.  Trump/Vance put on a show.  A stupid show.  That wasn't negotiation or talks, that was bad cop worse cop.  Is that how America is supposed to treat leaders of other nations?  <--- Honest question.

[HeloDude]

16 minutes ago, disgruntledemployee said:

Embarrassing display.  Jerry Springer would be proud.

What’s embarrassing is the hundreds of billions of dollars (that we’ve taken on as debt) that we’ve given to support their cause.  

[Pooter]

I'm sure it was all 4d chess because trump is such a generational negotiating talent /s

Definitely not him getting into a shouting match because he's an easily offended boob with no filter

[tac airlifter]

16 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

That’s a lot of words to say you side with Putin. Don’t bloviate, just lay it out.

I see you lack the ability to convince others or defend your thoughts, that's unfortunate.  I'm sure relationships are difficult.

For the record I don't, he is an evil dictator.  But as a thought experiment, how do you think the war will end?  You'd advocate for more UKR funding and close yourself off even further to discussion.  Ok, we've tried that for many years and UKR is slowly bleeding to death.  Do you have any ideas on how to solve this conflict?

[SurelySerious]

I see you lack the ability to convince others or defend your thoughts, that's unfortunate.  I'm sure relationships are difficult.
For the record I don't, he is an evil dictator.  But as a thought experiment, how do you think the war will end?  You'd advocate for more UKR funding and close yourself off even further to discussion.  Ok, we've tried that for many years and UKR is slowly bleeding to death.  Do you have any ideas on how to solve this conflict?

With Putin’s forces walking back across the sovereign border in the humiliating defeat he deserves; certainly not with the POTUS using Putin’s figures and arguments in public to force “peace.” Russia can end this anytime. Putin is using Trump to achieve his ends, and you argued above in favor of that. F that.

[tac airlifter]

20 minutes ago, disgruntledemployee said:

In case you missed it, I don't like Russia and their actions.  A stupid show.  That wasn't negotiation or talks, that was bad cop worse cop.  Is that how America is supposed to treat leaders of other nations?  <--- Honest question.

Good question (and fair reply in 1st paragraph).  No that was an embarrassing display on all sides. But honest question back: what should Trump have done when Zelensky went out of his way to pick a fight in a public setting? It was very rude and inappropriate, how would you have played it?

 

[disgruntledemployee]

16 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

What’s embarrassing is the hundreds of billions of dollars (that we’ve taken on as debt) that we’ve given to support their cause.  

Copy.  You're against a nation fighting off invasion and trying to keep it's people free, ie, their cause.  War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things.

[HeloDude]

1 minute ago, SurelySerious said:

With Putin’s forces walking back across the sovereign border in the humiliating defeat he deserves; certainly not with the POTUS using Putin’s figures and arguments in public to force “peace.” Russia can end this anytime. Putin is using Trump to achieve his ends, and you argued above in favor of that. F that.

So if European countries don’t pick up the tab, is it because they’re pro-Putin?  Honest question.

[HeloDude]

Just now, disgruntledemployee said:

Copy.  You're against a nation fighting off invasion and trying to keep it's people free, ie, their cause.  War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things.

I’m against us paying for it…most definitely.  If you’re no longer in the military, are you also against a nation fighting off an invasion if you don’t go there yourself and fight with them?  If not, then why not?

[SurelySerious]

So if European countries don’t pick up the tab, is it because they’re pro-Putin?  Honest question.

With what tab are you referring to in trying to distract from the point?

[disgruntledemployee]

Just now, tac airlifter said:

Good question (and fair reply in 1st paragraph).  No that was an embarrassing display on all sides. But honest question back: what should Trump have done when Zelensky went out of his way to pick a fight in a public setting? It was very rude and inappropriate, how would you have played it?

 

Cameras on - Greetings and handshakes.

Back room - talks

All done, cameras on, "We had a productive discussion" and handshakes.

 

Leave the nastiness where it belongs, behind doors.

[tac airlifter]

1 minute ago, SurelySerious said:

With Putin’s forces walking back across the sovereign border in the humiliating defeat he deserves.

So for clarity, how would you achieve this humiliating defeat Putin deserves?  
 

I don't disagree he deserves it, but it's not happening.  Would you just continue more of the same?

I understand your emotion, i'm hoping for a practical answer.

[tac airlifter]

2 minutes ago, disgruntledemployee said:

Leave the nastiness where it belongs, behind doors.

Bro, I agree with all of that, but Zelensky made a gamble by going outside of those norms. Once he picked a fight, what was Trump supposed to do in your opinion?

[jonlbs]

8 minutes ago, disgruntledemployee said:

Copy.  You're against a nation fighting off invasion and trying to keep it's people free, ie, their cause.  War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things.

Corrupt Ukraine or corrupt Russia. I don’t know what their cause is? Sure ain’t worth dying for. But if you insist it is.

[HeloDude]

15 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

With what tab are you referring to in trying to distract from the point?

No, I’m referring to giving Ukraine all the money we would have given them if we stop?

[disgruntledemployee]

2 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

Bro, I agree with all of that, but Zelensky made a gamble by going outside of those norms. Once he picked a fight, what was Trump supposed to do in your opinion?

Maybe this is why you don't take questions from media when doing these negotiations. 

Vance steps off with fortitude on the question and basically says giving arms didn't work, now we'll try diplomacy.   Zelinski probably LnotOL in his head, "diplomacy??!!" and lays it out among multiple administrations.  Vance feels called out.  Trump too.  Fireworks.

When Vance opened his yap to score points, I think that was the opening shot.

[disgruntledemployee]

8 minutes ago, jonlbs said:

Corrupt Ukraine or corrupt Russia. I don’t know what their cause is? Sure ain’t worth dying for. But if you insist it is.

Don't be dense.  If you feel that way, leave the military and don't defend the US because apparently, you and your family's freedom isn't worth dying for.  Would you not defend your house if someone was trying to invade it?

[tac airlifter]

11 minutes ago, disgruntledemployee said:

Maybe this is why you don't take questions from media when doing these negotiations. 

Vance steps off with fortitude on the question and basically says giving arms didn't work, now we'll try diplomacy.   Zelinski probably LnotOL in his head, "diplomacy??!!" and lays it out among multiple administrations.  Vance feels called out.  Trump too.  Fireworks.

When Vance opened his yap to score points, I think that was the opening shot.

Yea, again I agree with that assessment.  However, if Zelensky had the tiniest modicum of common sense he would've sat there calmly or made a short polite rebuttal: "we have different perspectives and are still talking this through" and all is well. Perhaps it's because English isn't his first language or he's dumb but whatever weird lecture/tirade he began was poor form from a practical standpoint given the power dynamics in that room.  Simply put: he's dead without our support.

Now he has a very valid question: diplomacy didn't work earlier with Putin why would it work now? And if we stop here, what's to prevent Putin from assessing he has won and continuing the aggression?  Dude, these are the real questions of the conflict and the attempt at peace.  And I don't have good answers myself, and maybe neither does Trump.  But how a world leader like Zelensky does not understand Trump is thin skinned and that tactic will not work on him is beyond me.  
 

edit to add: this X post articulates my sense of this event

 

Edited Friday at 09:24 PM by tac airlifter

[disgruntledemployee]

On 2/28/2025 at 3:21 PM, tac airlifter said:

Yea, again I agree with that assessment.  However, if Zelensky had the tiniest modicum of common sense he would've sat there calmly or made a short polite rebuttal: "we have different perspectives and are still talking this through" and all is well. Perhaps it's because English isn't his first language or he's dumb but whatever weird lecture/tirade he began was poor form from a practical standpoint given the power dynamics in that room.  Simply put: he's dead without our support.

Now he has a very valid question: diplomacy didn't work earlier with Putin why would it work now? And if we stop here, what's to prevent Putin from assessing he has won and continuing the aggression?  Dude, these are the real questions of the conflict and the attempt at peace.  And I don't have good answers myself, and maybe neither does Trump.  But how a world leader like Zelensky does not understand Trump is thin skinned and that tactic will not work on him is beyond me.  

Maybe Z thought through that chess and decided to pull that lever?  His diplomacy answer was thought out enough. 

I will say my reaction to Trump and Vance talking over Z and not allowing replies, laying into him, ie, getting them both emotional in public, I felt embarrassed that the President of the United States would behave in such a manner.  Maybe that was the chess.  (edit) Or that the deal laid out is not acceptable to Z and he needed a way to tank it and point to Trump and Vance.

What comes from this, I don't know.  I do think that Putin was shouting, "раздавить, раздавить, раздавить" (crush) at his TV.

Edited Tuesday at 07:15 PM by disgruntledemployee
Another reason. And Blue said I can't spellin' right.

[jonlbs]

13 minutes ago, disgruntledemployee said:

Don't be dense.  If you feel that way, leave the military and don't defend the US because apparently, you and your family's freedom isn't worth dying for.  Would you not defend your house if someone was trying to invade it?

Apples to Oranges. A lot of people have died for no reason under the guise of “freedom” and I guess I’m not one that supports that. When real freedom is at stake I have no doubt I’ll be there. 

Also not sure how you keep up with the 1v5 debates on here. Seems like a full time job so kudos for sticking with it 😂 

[blueingreen]

I think we can all agree that the public spat we just witnessed wasn't very statesmanlike for all parties involved. The Hanania tweet that @tac airlifter shared was pretty spot on, though. People on social media are watching short clips and commenting without the full context of the entire event. We all know that these types of arguments happen all the time behind closed doors, so it's interesting to see the kabuki theater disappear for once.

What do people think about that mineral deal?