34 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Yes, you are wrong to assign that issue to Zelensky. Trump owns that meeting and can close it any moment. He and Vance also spoke as much as Zelensky or damn close to it. 

We're all friends here so I don't want to go back and "clock"  the amount of time and points each person made.  Zelenskyy brought up more points than anyone else in the room and every time he made a point, it extended the meeting that much longer. 

Trump was being diplomatic and letting the man speak.  If Trump just cut Zelenskyy off (like he eventually did after 45+ minutes) during the first 5 minutes, the media would have had a meltdown.  The media had a meltdown after he cut him off and ended it after 45+ minutes - essentially saying he was setup and was bullied out of the meeting.  

And I'm not assigning all the fault to Zelenskyy because I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.  It's a very painful and emotional situation he is going through - so of course he's going to want to let the world know what he's going through and what Ulkraine is going through. 

And when emotions run that high, most people are going to get everything out and will defend it until the end.  He just shouldn't of done it during that particular meeting. 

And who knows - maybe the wrong people got in his ear prior to the meeting - instead of - the right people coaching him about the history of the Oval Office, what it represents and the fact that the sole purpose of this meeting is to show UNITY between the US and Ukraine and NOTHING ELSE.  I blame his advisors and the people around him more than anyone else, tbh. 

2 hours ago, UK Eagle said:

Never heard of him; the only Graham Stuart I know of was a Premier League footballer, so he can't be that impactful in a party with such few MPs of any note.

That aside, our general parliamentary attitude is unquestioned and endless support for Ukraine "whatever it takes", so with that in mind, comments like that aren't a shock from the uniparty.  They love their chest thumping Ukraine support and throwing money we don't have at supporting them.

Does Westminster represent the UKs view on Ukraine? Not entirely.  We stopped paying money to pensioners to heat their homes because we broke, but we can find money ASAP to waste in Ukraine. A lot of people are deeply unhappy at that, especially as we have big tax rises coming down the pipe.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, MidMoFo said:

Hypothetically speaking… what is an acceptable amount of tax to pay to push Putin back out of Ukraine? Or keep him from taking the Baltics? Pushing into and claiming Eastern Europe? The further he gets the more expensive (taxes and lives) it will get. At what point do you decide security is something worth paying taxes for?

Quick breakdown from an American standpoint:

Trump claims the US has given $350B aid to Ukraine. He also admitted that may be high… Congress has appropriated $174B in aid. The US Dept of State says right around $100B has actually been sent so far, so the truth is somewhere between one third to a half of what trump claims, but let’s go with his $350B.

The US Federal budget since the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine:

2022 - $6.27 T

2023 - $6.13 T

2024 - $6.94 T

Total $19.34 trillion dollars

$350 B is 1.8% of $19.34 trillion 

Median household income in the US - $78,171

Marginal tax rate for income at $78171 is 12%. Federal income tax owed estimate $9,380.

1.8% of $9,380 is $168.84

So the MEDIAN households paid $168 (really $60-80) in taxes to send our old military equipment to Ukraine and build new for our military.

20 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

 

I'll be nicer over here than I was to the guy that tweeted it  because you guys are awesome, fellow Eagles fans - 2025 SUPER BOW CHAMPIONS!!!

 

If you only want a part of FB post that's exactly what you do. He copy and pasted a post and posted it on his platform. The post is IN 3RD PERSON. What does that mean? It means someone else posted it somewhere else.

This is Intended for the the guy that tweeted it, not anyone here:

It's not  that hard to understand and if you don't understand something so simple, the last thing you want to do is tweet a belligerent R word.  It will only make you look that much worse when you are corrected. 

 

 

I agree with your comment on the procedure here BUT the FB post itself is laughable.  The entire thing was posted by someone in my FB feed and his analysis and conclusion is totally ridiculous.

https://www.aol.com/zelenskiy-calls-trump-clash-regrettable-160104738.html

Zelenskiy calls Trump clash 'regrettable', says 'time to make things right'

 

March 4, 2025 at 10:01 AM

1 minute ago, Ace Nova said:

We're all friends here so I don't want to go back and "clock"  the amount of time and points each person made.  Zelenskyy brought up more points than anyone else in the room and every time he made a point, it extended the meeting that much longer. 

Trump was being diplomatic and letting the man speak.  If Trump just cut Zelenskyy off (like he eventually did after 45+ minutes) during the first 5 minutes, the media would have had a meltdown.  The media had a meltdown after he cut him off and ended it after 45+ minutes - essentially saying he was setup and was bullied out of the meeting.  

And I'm not assigning all the fault to Zelenskyy because I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.  It's a very painful and emotional situation he is going through - so of course he's going to want to let the world know what he's going through and what Ulkraine is going through. 

And when emotions run that high, most people are going to get everything out and will defend it until the end.  He just shouldn't of done it during that particular meeting. 

And who knows - maybe the wrong people got in his ear prior to the meeting - instead of - the right people coaching him about the history of the Oval Office, what it represents and the fact that the sole purpose of this meeting isto show UNITY between the US and Ukraine and NOTHING ELSE.  I blame his advisors and the people around him more than anyone else, tbh. 

Let me make this very very clear.  Trump owned the meeting and any adult with any experience in holding a meeting knows how to kindly but firmly close it up.  It's literally something a junior executive can accomplish with no issue.

If you want to blame them all for the length of the meeting then fine as they all kept talking.  If you want to blame Trump as a procedural item then that is also fine since it was his meeting.

Zelensky describes Oval Office meeting as ‘regrettable,’ says he is ready to negotiate peace

https://share.newsbreak.com/bv5rjpen?s=i16

 

19 minutes ago, Procus said:

https://www.aol.com/zelenskiy-calls-trump-clash-regrettable-160104738.html

Zelenskiy calls Trump clash 'regrettable', says 'time to make things right'

 

March 4, 2025 at 10:01 AM

Question for the four dimensional chess players here: Let’s say Zelensky puts his tail between his legs and apologizes sufficiently enough for trump and Vance. Then he offers enough praise and thank you’s to heal the wounds enough for trump to speak with him.
 

What’s next? Does he have to concede the territories overtaken by Putin? What then?

2 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

Question for the four dimensional chess players here: Let’s say Zelensky puts his tail between his legs and apologizes sufficiently enough for trump and Vance. Then he offers enough praise and thank you’s to heal the wounds enough for trump to speak with him.
 

What’s next? Does he have to concede the territories overtaken by Putin? What then?

The United States needs to put you in charge of the negotiations, because it's obvious that Zelensky is running circles around everybody else.

6 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

Question for the four dimensional chess players here: Let’s say Zelensky puts his tail between his legs and apologizes sufficiently enough for trump and Vance. Then he offers enough praise and thank you’s to heal the wounds enough for trump to speak with him.
 

What’s next? Does he have to concede the territories overtaken by Putin? What then?

He has to agree to a deal without any security guarantee from the US which he has consistently said NO to for weeks now and as late as last night.

He will absolutely have to give up the territory Putin occupies but he is prepared to do that.

6 minutes ago, Procus said:

The United States needs to put you in charge of the negotiations, because it's obvious that Zelensky is running circles around everybody else.

Zelensky got backed into a corner when his neighboring country, with a superior military, invaded him. 
 

After repairing trumps hurt feelings… what’s next?

5 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

He has to agree to a deal without any security guarantee from the US which he has consistently said NO to for weeks now and as late as last night.

He will absolutely have to give up the territory Putin occupies but he is prepared to do that.

Technically it’s not a "deal” or even a negotiation if Ukraine receives nothing.

1 minute ago, MidMoFo said:

Zelensky got backed into a corner when his neighboring country, with a superior military, invaded him. 
 

After repairing trumps hurt feelings… what’s next?

And what precipitated the invasion?  Did it happen in a vacuum? 

Please explain to us how this happened in the context of what happened after re-unification of Germany and breakup of the Soviet Union.  Do you even know?

3 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

Technically it’s not a "deal” or even a negotiation if Ukraine receives nothing.

Well, he'll get a peace deal.

1 minute ago, Procus said:

And what precipitated the invasion?  Did it happen in a vacuum? 

Please explain to us how this happened in the context of what happened after re-unification of Germany and breakup of the Soviet Union.  Do you even know?

No one here except your fellow maga morons GAF about Russian propaganda. Russia has zero justification to invade Ukraine. 

The lefties here have no problem with this because it doesn't involve Trump.  Such knee jerk reactions all the time.  Incapable of any independent thought whatsoever.  What a brainwashed cult.

https://justthenews.com/government/diplomacy/europeans-are-fueling-russias-war-effort-through-gas-purchases-while-their?utm_source=mux&utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=social-media-autopost

Europeans are fueling Russia’s war effort through gas purchases while militaries wither

Europe’s tough talk on defending Ukraine contrasts with Russian oil purchases and faltering military forces.

3 minutes ago, Procus said:

У левых тут нет проблем, потому что Трамп тут не при чем. Такие инстинктивные реакции все время. Неспособны ни на какие независимые мысли. Какой культ с промытыми мозгами.

Fixed so your fellow Russian trolls can read it. 

22 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

Question for the four dimensional chess players here: Let’s say Zelensky puts his tail between his legs and apologizes sufficiently enough for trump and Vance. Then he offers enough praise and thank you’s to heal the wounds enough for trump to speak with him.
 

What’s next? Does he have to concede the territories overtaken by Putin? What then?

 

11 minutes ago, MidMoFo said:

Zelensky got backed into a corner when his neighboring country, with a superior military, invaded him. 
 

After repairing trumps hurt feelings… what’s next?

I get the feeling he doesn't know

If he'd have just said he regretted the way some things were handled on Friday, things wouldn't have gone as far as they have. Too proud and stubborn.

 

Reading Zelensky's latest tweet from a few hours ago he does show an opening toward signing without a full security guarantee.  He is not super clear there but there is an opening.  It reads as if he expects a full security guarantee but perhaps not all in this first step.

 

30 minutes ago, Procus said:

The lefties here have no problem with this because it doesn't involve Trump.  Such knee jerk reactions all the time.  Incapable of any independent thought whatsoever.  What a brainwashed cult.

https://justthenews.com/government/diplomacy/europeans-are-fueling-russias-war-effort-through-gas-purchases-while-their?utm_source=mux&utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=social-media-autopost

Europeans are fueling Russia’s war effort through gas purchases while militaries wither

Europe’s tough talk on defending Ukraine contrasts with Russian oil purchases and faltering military forces.

Stupid argument.  If you want to make any sense of this topic you need to look at the levels purchased BEFORE the invasion as compared to levels purchased now and they are nowhere close.  Obviously, one can't just cut off a necessary energy supply like a light switch.

43 minutes ago, Procus said:

repeating lies over and over does not make them true.

32 minutes ago, Procus said:

And what precipitated the invasion?  Did it happen in a vacuum? 

Please explain to us how this happened in the context of what happened after re-unification of Germany and breakup of the Soviet Union.  Do you even know?

Putin invaded Ukraine on fear of NATO?

Fine.

What’s next? After trumps feelings recover…

2 minutes ago, It Hurts said:

 

Now do Russia. What a ****.