The silver lining though is that one of the worst misdeeds was averted. The nominal purpose of this was to make Zelensky kiss the ring/feet. And to sign over mineral rights (for no concrete promises or assurances of support).
Ukraine avoided selling their mineral rights. They failed to suck up before doing so, and by virtue of a little bit of intolerable truth-telling (while being incessantly talked over) avoided selling out the nation to buy a fake worthless useless prospect of maybe having short term support continue.
(Tom Nichols definitely comes to mind as S-tier "awful person you know makes a good point". Incredibly blow hard, full of himself in high degree & actively censoring the world around him / blocking views he doesn't agree with. But at least as far as the premise goes, yes. He is correct here.)
Also worth emphasizing that Zelensky has shown enormous gratitude again and again to America. There's dozens upon dozens of tweets of thanks. The premise that he's ungrateful seems simply untrue.
Europe's reaction was telling: all (except Orban, of course) publicly expressed their support for Zelensky. The silver lining is that it might galvanize Europe to be more united, which would be a good thing.
But for anyone holding on to the idea that America is the "leader of the free world", that is most definitely no longer the case. For the EU foreign minister to state "we need a new leader" is a major shift.
This is one of those events that will be in the history books, to be sure.
Trump and Vance destroyed whatever credibility the US had. They handed the next century to China. China will now court Europe and if this continues, China's currency will probably replace the US Dollar as the world reserve currency.
When that happens, the US will face inflation similar to Germany in the 1920s and 30s.
I wonder at what point China becomes not just a more pragmatic, but also ethically superior partner to Europe. Are we already at that point? Not sure, maybe not. But we're clearly circling close to it.
Not ethically superior yet, but for sure more stable. If your partner is unstable, it's difficult to do anything as they can basically change their opinions overnight.
Europe needs to step up now that it is absolutely crystal clear that America and by extension, Americans, don't give a rat's ass about Ukraine, her people and the threat posed by Russian.
The noises from the EU all look right: realization that US is out, that they need to step up, quick and sharp.
Now the question is, will they put up the cash.
What I think helps is that Europe must have realized it can no longer rely on the US, at all. So aiding Ukraine is what they would be doing anyway. Build up defence, find funding. It's just whether it is the Ukrainians or Europeans at the sharp end.
It's both untrue and unfair. Americans do care, the current administration doesn't. Even among Republicans those who are opposed to helping Ukraine are in minority.
In a normal timeline, the way this was going to get hammered out was behind closed doors where very serious people from the State Department presented a spreadsheet of options for Ukraine's renewal of the Democracy Plus DLC and the ukies, through gritted teeth, chose a mortgage they could live with. This should not be a surprise.
(Absent, say, Europe committing more men or material.)
The US, absent anything else, needs to choose between direct military intervention, continuing sending over material (which is unpalatable long term), or cutting Ukraine loose. Again, none of that should be a surprise--if it _is_, you should get your head examined.
The problem today is that these conversations were had out in public, and in so doing we got to see the top two rungs of the US executive branch act excessively cruel on the one hand and like somebody completely ignorant of the stakes on the other--the "it'll make great TV" being perhaps the icing on the cake. Even worse, it'll probably work, because Zelensky seems to care more about his country than his ego.
Even to the extent that I agree with some of the realpolitick, I cannot abide by the odious behavior adjacent it. Kissinger was evil, but not impishly cruel.
(I also would caution people not to buy into the "Russia owns Trump" narrative when the more depressing--but probably accurate--explanation is simply that he wants the "Look at me, I ended a war I didn't even fight in!" merit badge.)
Readit News
Dead Comment
The silver lining though is that one of the worst misdeeds was averted. The nominal purpose of this was to make Zelensky kiss the ring/feet. And to sign over mineral rights (for no concrete promises or assurances of support).
Ukraine avoided selling their mineral rights. They failed to suck up before doing so, and by virtue of a little bit of intolerable truth-telling (while being incessantly talked over) avoided selling out the nation to buy a fake worthless useless prospect of maybe having short term support continue.
(Tom Nichols definitely comes to mind as S-tier "awful person you know makes a good point". Incredibly blow hard, full of himself in high degree & actively censoring the world around him / blocking views he doesn't agree with. But at least as far as the premise goes, yes. He is correct here.)
Also worth emphasizing that Zelensky has shown enormous gratitude again and again to America. There's dozens upon dozens of tweets of thanks. The premise that he's ungrateful seems simply untrue.
Dead Comment
But for anyone holding on to the idea that America is the "leader of the free world", that is most definitely no longer the case. For the EU foreign minister to state "we need a new leader" is a major shift.
This is one of those events that will be in the history books, to be sure.
When that happens, the US will face inflation similar to Germany in the 1920s and 30s.
Putin must be howling with laughter.
Now the question is, will they put up the cash.
What I think helps is that Europe must have realized it can no longer rely on the US, at all. So aiding Ukraine is what they would be doing anyway. Build up defence, find funding. It's just whether it is the Ukrainians or Europeans at the sharp end.
It's both untrue and unfair. Americans do care, the current administration doesn't. Even among Republicans those who are opposed to helping Ukraine are in minority.
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
(Absent, say, Europe committing more men or material.)
The US, absent anything else, needs to choose between direct military intervention, continuing sending over material (which is unpalatable long term), or cutting Ukraine loose. Again, none of that should be a surprise--if it _is_, you should get your head examined.
The problem today is that these conversations were had out in public, and in so doing we got to see the top two rungs of the US executive branch act excessively cruel on the one hand and like somebody completely ignorant of the stakes on the other--the "it'll make great TV" being perhaps the icing on the cake. Even worse, it'll probably work, because Zelensky seems to care more about his country than his ego.
Even to the extent that I agree with some of the realpolitick, I cannot abide by the odious behavior adjacent it. Kissinger was evil, but not impishly cruel.
(I also would caution people not to buy into the "Russia owns Trump" narrative when the more depressing--but probably accurate--explanation is simply that he wants the "Look at me, I ended a war I didn't even fight in!" merit badge.)