Summary

In a Fox News interview, Donald Trump argued that Ukraine should not have resisted Russia’s 2022 invasion, claiming Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy should have made a deal with Vladimir Putin.

Trump criticized Zelenskyy for choosing to fight, compared the military strength of Russia and Ukraine, and said he could have ended the war quickly through negotiations.

Trump’s stance contrasts with Joe Biden’s strong support for Ukraine, including aid and sanctions on Russia.

  • Log in | Sign up@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Of course he did. Trump would never stand up to a bully, he would never defend the weak against the nasty. That would take courage, but Trump has only cowardice and sycophacny for bullies.

    Trump is a person who sucks up to bullies, and punches down on the bullied, through and through.

  • rational_lib@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    “They’re saying ‘the war is tomorrow’ – this causes panic on the market and elsewhere," Zelensky, Jan 2022 in response to US warnings of imminent Russian invasion.

    Zelensky didn’t “choose to fight” because Russia insisted there would be no fight right up until it crossed the border. It would’ve been considered a sneak attack but for the US telling everyone Russia was invading for a full month in advance. There was no choice offered to Zelensky and never has been since, unless you count Russia’s current stance of basically “give us all your weapons and maybe then we’ll negotiate”/

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Does he really believe this, or is this redirected anger because he’s finally figured out that he can’t, in fact, just solve it?

    Probably, Putin told him to pound sand, and then OPEC basically just ignored him when collapsing oil prices was the next idea.

    • blarth@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Putin didn’t tell him to pound sand. Putin holds the leash. Everything Donald Trump says and does is to advance Russian interests.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        I see little evidence of that. At most Putin has a small amount of leverage on him. Basically, there’s just a lot of stuff good for Putin Trump could do but doesn’t.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            He also has been publicly threatening to economically destroy Russia for the last week, so there, a bit of evidence both ways.

            Meanwhile, he could order assassinations in Ukraine if he wanted to and nobody could stop him.

            • blarth@thelemmy.club
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              Trump says a lot of shit. He also said Ukraine shouldn’t have fought back.

              Actions speak louder than words.

              • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                1 day ago

                His pro-Russia actions are way more weak than I would allow if I were Putin and actually controlled him, though.

                • blarth@thelemmy.club
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Because of the separation of powers and checks and balances we have in the US, he doesn’t have unilateral power to do whatever he wants. He can typically only inch toward Putin’s goals. Why do you think he is trying to weaken our relationships with our allies through tariffs and talk of land grabs?

                • GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  19 hours ago

                  In less than a week, he’s fucked up relations with Mexico, Canada and the EU. California had proposed secession. In less than a week. This is all Putin’s marching orders, being enacted in broad daylight, and your response is “kinda weak”?

                  At least you’ve kept your head warm this winter, placing it firmly up your backside as you’ve obviously done.

    • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      Oh. Wow. You win.

      If that rooftop guy could hit the mark like this comment did, we wouldn’t be having to listen to his chaotic-evil nonsense right now.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      C’mon, if we’re doing WWII analogies he doesn’t get to be an allied leader, even if Chamberlain was a really bad one.

  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    140
    ·
    2 days ago

    Ukraine HAD a deal with Russia ensuring its peace and its borders. It was called the Budapest Memorandum. Russia was the one violating the deal Russia had agreed to.

    • SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      76
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I think you’re confused that was the treaty that said NATO couldn’t come within forty thousand miles of its borders and what about Biden’s Ukrainian money laundering bio-facilities?

      • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 day ago

        In case anyone is thinking of taking this troll seriously, there is no treaty that prevents NATO from expanding east. There was something like it between NATO and the USSR but Russia officially is not the successor to USSR so they have no claim to that guarantee. It’s all Russian propaganda.

          • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Okay. This is a bit more nuanced and what I gave was my opinion, as in they’re not the successor. They are the successor in some cases, but whether they’re actually the successor or not depends on which option is beneficial to Russia. When it comes to NATO Russia likes to act like it’s the successor, but when it comes to reparations for the atrocities the USSR committed that’s when Russia says they’re not actually the successor to the USSR and can’t be responsible for the atrocities committed by the USSR. I’m my eyes you can’t have it both ways and as such I’m just taking cues from the Russian playbook. Whatever guarantees were given they were given to the USSR and not Russia, especially when those guarantees were never on paper.

        • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          There was something like it between NATO and the USSR but Russia officially is not the successor to USSR so they have no claim to that guarantee.

          Like, if you seriously believe that, you should check your reasoning skills.

          This isn’t the ship of theseus. Not everything was exchanged. USSR changed one small thing which is its name and became Russia, that does not invalidate all prior agreements.

          • Danquebec
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 day ago

            USSR dissolved in 1991 when its last member state, Khazakstan, left. Russia, which had left the union prior, found itself with a lot of nuclear warheads. Other ex-member states agreed to hand the nukes they had to Russia. Having nuclear weapons and having the means to maintain them and launch them, Russia naturally joined the Security Council in 1991.

          • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            So why isn’t Russia taking responsibilities for the atrocities and illegal occupations done by the USSR? It’s as if it’s not just a name change.

            Also what agreement do you think gives Russia that guarantee? There’s no paper that says NATO won’t expand east.

            • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              23 hours ago

              Russia’s not taking responsibility for the atrocities and illegal occupations done by Russia.

      • endeavor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Youbare forgetting also the warcrimes of Umranians where they have time travel labs yhey use to travel back in time to kill baby jesus every day and internet hacking centers used to force musk do awkward gestures. Truly the axis of evil.

    • glowing_hans@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      And Canada?

      The 51st state

      In his inaugeration trump literally mentioned he wants the US to grow in territory.

      • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        And freaking why? When people are still struggling with basic shit like food insecurity in the borders we already have.

        I know I’m asking this rhetorically and it’s all ridiculous it’s just…why???

        • Jack@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          20 hours ago

          The one common thread I see is trading routes and security.

          There are articles suggesting new trade routes will open in the antarctic so that maybe explains Greenland and Canada.

          As for Mexico, maybe the gulf of Mexico?

          At the same time he is trying to start a trade war. Maybe in his mind American is so unavoidable market that china for example will pay the tariffs, but as European is it easy to see the time of America market supremacy is going away fast.

          All my opinion and speculation of course.

          • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            17 hours ago

            Thanks for your insight. That at least sheds a tiny bit of logic on this insanity.

            Yeah. As a U.S person it’s unsettling watching an empire crumble around you without much way out when you wanted to just do your thing and get along in life like anybody else. * Sigh*

  • Glitterbomb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 day ago

    You might not believe me but anyone can just walk into maralargo. Trump won’t have you trespassed, he will offer you a cash deal to leave. Trust me, it’s true. Ez money.

    • Nasan@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 day ago

      This is why he’s having such a hard time getting Musk to leave. How do you make a problem go away when your only problem solving skill is bribery and your problem is a higher degree of wealth than your bribing power?

  • DrFistington@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    208
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    So Ukraine, hear me out… Eliminate Trump and Putin during the negotiations, blame it on someone else. Everyone will thank you, and we’ll get over it.

    • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      123
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m sure at this point if Zelenskyy pulled out a wellrod, popped both of them and said “Slava Ukraini” there would be a round of applause.

      • acargitz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        56
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        If he does this, I’m getting Heroiam Slava tattooed on my chest.

      • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        2 days ago

        i honestly don’t think anyone would put him to trial. like suddenly everyone you know was with the president of ukraine at the time of the incident. and sure, that’s not what questions the ICC would be asking, but that’s what we’d all be saying

        • DrFistington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          Exactly I mean, the USA isn’t going to start a war with an ally over a shitbag placeholder president like Trump. As for Russia they’re already fucking war so what are they going to do? If anything set it up so it looks like a Russian assassination attempt on Z went wrong and got Putin and Trump instead. United States should have been at war with Russia since 2016 anyway. Now would be a great time to join in considering Russian combat capacity is at nearly zero, and they’re currently utilizing the zap branigan meat wave tactic.

          At this point if that actually happened China would take a long hard look and go no thank you sir. They ain’t doing shit to defend Russia. Hell, if we promised them a portion of it, they’d help us take it

      • palordrolap@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        It would almost certainly be a requirement to prosecute and then likely lock Zelenskyy up if he did that, even if he might be doing us all a favour. And even the nicest prison is still a prison.

        It would be better if there was a way to have the targets neutralise each other.

        • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          2 days ago

          Requirement from whom? Who would enforce it?

          I know the obvious answer is the ICC, but they currently have warrants for both Putin and Netanyahu, so clearly that’s not an effective threat.

          • Kitathalla@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            Vance. I think he and his puppet masters would love the excuse to join with putin’s past allies. Russia gets the land, united states of stupid gets half the resources contracts to aid in building the ‘infrastructure’ and such to process the resources.

          • palordrolap@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            Straight up killing a known criminal is not the accepted way to mete out justice, no matter how right it seems. We have (international) courts for a reason, even when the case is open and shut, and even if the same courtesy would be unlikely if the situation was reversed.

        • DrFistington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Nah, make the entire operation look like a Russian assassination plot on Z went wrong. People in US intelligence that are currently involved with Ukraine would definitely help facilitate that story.

    • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 days ago

      You’ll have millions/billions of people willing to be your alibi. “According to people calling in, Zelensky was at 300,000 bars, sleeping on 1,250,000 couches, and attending 13 Bar Mitvahs that night, so he couldn’t have killed Trump and Putin.”

      • qarbone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        "Absolutely top-notch guy. Literally omnipresent.

        Like me and all my friends were having individualized, concurrent, and meaningful bottle episodes with the guy.

        Just the consummate gentleman."

        • Corkyskog
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          69
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Vance has no political capital like Trump. He doesn’t have a cult he can use to threaten to primary people. Once Trump is gone all of this loses momentum.

          • jaybone@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            2 days ago

            Will be interesting to watch the power vacuum when Trump dies. It will be a great opportunity for the democrats to make progress. I’m sure they’ll find a way to fuck that up too.

      • Absaroka@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m not sure anybody would rally behind him. He had the lowest likability score of any VP pick since 2000 - even below Sarah “I Can See Russia From My House!” Palin.

        • psmgx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 days ago

          Palin was rocking the MILF vibe and, for better or worse, took her conservative creds mostly seriously.

          Vance is date rapey, nakedly ambitious, and completely owned by Thiel.

    • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      The problem is who will replace them. Does Putin even have an official successor (like the US VP), or would this create a power vacuum?

      • DrFistington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        So believe it or not back when the USA had its shit together we had this thing called the CIA and boy were they pretty good at identifying and exploiting power vacuums to the advantage of our country.

      • meeeeetch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        The Prime Minister is de jure the acting president in case of a vacancy. Given the strength of legal institutions in Russia Mikhail Mishustin would have some work ahead of him to actually hold power.

  • danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is literally all the “anti war” arguments. George Washington should have just stopped resisting the red coats.

    • EvilBit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      2 days ago

      Washington was part of a revolution. This is an invasion. More like Russia should have just let Napoleon have it.

      • Danquebec
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s kind of a revolution though because it all started with Maydan and the ousting of Russian puppet Yanukovitch.

        • EvilBit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          2 days ago

          Fair enough. How about this?

          It’s like letting the SCARY EVIL (mysteriously suddenly nonexistent) IMMIGRANT MEXICAN CARAVAN INVADERS just come in and have the US.