Meeting of Euro Nations ends with No agreement or funding for Ukraine

[candide]

37 minutes ago, johng said:

 

If so he was "negotiating" with the wrong party  and at the wrong moment,

he was there to sign a mineral deal in payback of the billions that USA has sent

to prop his country up in a proxy war   that according to Lindsey Graham was the best money we have ever spent,   the purpose to weaken Russia and provoke regime change  with no US casualties  only Ukrainian and Russian casualties.

(yes quite sickening )

He should have taken the offer from Russia near the start of the conflict  but instead decided to  listen to Boris Johnson and Co and take on the largest country in the world !!!

 

What were exactly the terms or Russian conditions of this "offer"?

[johng]

12 minutes ago, candide said:

What were exactly the terms or Russian conditions of this "offer"?

 

How would I know ? how would Zelensky know?

neither  of us have  talked to the Russians.

[candide]

26 minutes ago, johng said:

 

How would I know ? how would Zelensky know?

neither  of us have  talked to the Russians.

The Russians have several times publicly stated what their conditions were. If I remember well, it was the annexion of Donbass and Donestk (not only the occupied part), a demilitarised Ukraine and also a regime change. 

 

If this was the offer, it's not surprising that Ukraine was not keen to negotiate under these terms.

[rough diamond]

31 minutes ago, johng said:

 

How would I know ? how would Zelensky know?

neither  of us have  talked to the Russians.

And their answers would not be worth a Rouble!

[johng]

47 minutes ago, candide said:

If this was the offer, it's not surprising that Ukraine was not keen to negotiate under these terms.

 

They now have no choice but to except whatever Russia offers.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, connda said:

Go for it.  "Hey, Millennials and Gen-X.  Wanna die for your elite "leaders!"
No?  But they plan for you to die for their cause and convince you it's "patriotic."  Fools!  It's about the money stupid!  If you're "leaders" aren't armed and at your side in the fight, then it buffalo poop. 

Agree 100%. Sad to say that I was a sheeple in my younger days and actually believed the US BS about Vietnam. After that debacle of western defeat I stopped being a sheeple and am anti war.

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, frank83628 said:

A kiwi cry baby, it was a stupid agreement, organised by MIC funded previous adminstrations, the agreement was broken, just like the no NATO expansion was. 

Eternal protection? That would be till the human race is extinct then .

 

If they promised that they were either deluded morons or lying. IMO.

[TedG]

18 hours ago, xylophone said:

I posted a bar chart which shows that Europe spends more on defence than does the US.

You are full of it.

 

AI Overview

In 2024, the European Union (EU) is projected to spend €326 billion on defense, which is about 1.9% of the EU's combined gross domestic product (GDP). This is a record high and a 10th consecutive year of increased military investment. 

 

[Mike_Hunt]

Europe is like the special needs kids who always need daddy to bail them out.

[xylophone]

5 hours ago, TedG said:

You are full of it.

 

AI Overview

In 2024, the European Union (EU) is projected to spend €326 billion on defense, which is about 1.9% of the EU's combined gross domestic product (GDP). This is a record high and a 10th consecutive year of increased military investment. 

 

Who has given the most aid to Ukraine?

European countries have provided €132 billion in aid (military, financial and humanitarian) as of December 2024, and the United States has provided €114 billion. Most of the US funding supports American industries who produce weapons and military equipment.

[candide]

57 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Yep,quite sickening, the war Hawks don't give a shat about the people, it was all about attacking Russia via Ukraine, indebting them at the same time and then take resourses as payment.

killery Clinton said similar at the beginning too. dragging the war out as long as possible to drain Russias economy, or words to that effect. 

 

"It was all about attacking Russia via Ukraine" 

[frank83628]

12 minutes ago, candide said:

"It was all about attacking Russia via Ukraine" 

Glad to agree, finally opened youre eyes

[candide]

15 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Glad to agree, finally opened youre eyes

Suuure! 

[TedG]

7 hours ago, xylophone said:

Who has given the most aid to Ukraine?

European countries have provided €132 billion in aid (military, financial and humanitarian) as of December 2024, and the United States has provided €114 billion. Most of the US funding supports American industries who produce weapons and military equipment.

That’s now what you said in your original post. 

 

The is what you posted

 

Quote

I posted a bar chart which shows that Europe spends more on defence than does the US

 

Which is false. 

[mfd101]

A quote from the other Donald - Donald Tusk, Polish PM - in today's Politico: "It's striking but it's true. Right now, 500 million Europeans are begging 300 million Americans for protection from 140 million Russians who have been unable to overcome 50 million Ukrainians for 3 years."

[Mike_Hunt]

1 minute ago, mfd101 said:

A quote from the other Donald - Donald Tusk, Polish PM - in today's Politico: "It's striking but it's true. Right now, 500 million Europeans are begging 300 million Americans for protection from 140 million Russians who have been unable to overcome 50 million Ukrainians for 3 years."

 

This quote is accurate.  Europeans are pathetic.  The huge welfare state has made them weak and lazy. 

[metisdead]

Posts using derogatory and toxic nicknames or intentional misspelling of people’s names will be removed. If you don’t want your post to be removed, spell people’s names correctly, this applies to both sides of the political debate.

 

Some off topic posts bickering about member's names have been removed.

[frank83628]

11 minutes ago, MicroB said:

 

 

I hope that was an innocent typo, rather than flouting forum rules. Though "K" is a long way from "H" on a Qwerty keyboard.

Flouting the rules? There is only 1 letter between H&K, easy mistake if typing fast. Lets  not forget there are plenty of names given to trump here that are no where near his actual name. I'm sure HC won't report me. 

[Lacessit]

On 3/7/2025 at 11:37 AM, Cameroni said:

The problem is Europe has no arms to give.

 

Even Germany and the UK have a threadbare armaments and ammunitions cupboard. 

 

Only the US can supply what Ukraine neeeds. That's why Zelensky is kissing Trump's feet now, despite being beatch-slapped in the oval office like a naught boy.

Germany has a force of 350 Leopard tanks.

 

It has donated 18 to Ukraine.

[TedG]

3 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Germany has a force of 350 Leopard tanks.

 

It has donated 18 to Ukraine.

Why not give all 350 to Ukraine, the Germans don’t need any tanks. 

[transam]

Just now, TedG said:

Why not give all 350 to Ukraine, the Germans don’t need any tanks. 

How long did it take you to drive a car wiv no cannon...🤭

[MicroB]

11 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

A quote from the other Donald - Donald Tusk, Polish PM - in today's Politico: "It's striking but it's true. Right now, 500 million Europeans are begging 300 million Americans for protection from 140 million Russians who have been unable to overcome 50 million Ukrainians for 3 years."

 

 

While it was said in the context of Europe increasing defence spend (and there is an analysis that suggests the gap between US and European real spend might not be as great as at first glance, onceyou take into account US non-NATO spend in the Pacific and the DoD effective 60% wastage rate (60% of what the DoD buys they lose), there is a big elephant in the room to why Europe needs to turn to the US. 5,580 of them. Only 3 countries in Western Europe can realistically possess nuclear weapons; the others individually have economies too small to sustain the enormous cost (the burden in the US is 10% of their defence budget). 

 

France has always maintained its own seperate nuclear capability, a decision that now looks prescient. 

 

The UK, following a decision in 1958, essentially handed its stockpile to the US, and in return, purchases warheads from the US stockpile, and rents the missiles themselves from the US. The missile launching equipment in the Vanguards is entirely US supplied. That might have been a pragmatic decision taken at the time, when the UK was losing pretty much all of its weapons testing sites.

 

Post war, the US actively prevented Germany from becoming a nuclear power in several ways, First through occupation army orders, and then through the NPT. Indeed the whole reason the US pushed the non-proliferation treaty was to prevent West Germany from acquiring nuclear weapons.

 

Technically, Germany, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands  have access to around 60 free fall B61 (and other) weapons through the NATO sharing agreement (from US stockpiles, but hosted at national airbases). Canada also has access to some. Perhaps the US will like to donate these, and relieve itself of the maintenance burden.

 

On the eve of WW2, the forces ranged against Germany collectively more than outweighed it, and there was already a degree of interoperability since so much was French. But the free nations were disunited in the face of Nazi aggression, preferring to believe the personal assurances obtained by negotiators at Munich, than tackling those 5th columnists in their own countries who wanted to cosy up to the Germans.

 

In 1950, the US had more than enough people to take on North Korea all by itself, but was grateful for a coalition of united nation troops.

 

In Vietnam, both South Korea and Australia let materiel support to the US. The UK provided more convert support. Yet North Vietnam was a tiny, poorly equipped country facing a superpower.

 

In 1991, the US had enough power by itself to eject Iraq from Kuwait, but valued its allies, chiefly from Britain and France. The British are said to have performed a critical role, through RAF bombing runs, and through the Royal Tank Regiment support of lightly armed US Marines.

 

Multinational patrols in the Persian Gulf and elsewhere have supported the US in maintaining the freedom of trade against a decrepit Iranian navy who had little more than speedboats.

 

When America requested the support from NATO members to support their war against some farmers on donkeys armed with SMLEsm and flipflops, they responded to that call.

 

Of the Western nations, only one country has prosecuted a war in modern times with an adversary anywhere near peer, on their own, and that was Britain, and its war against Argentina over the Falklands. I don't recall the US arguing then that the Falklands weren;t a country. The US wars in Greneda and Panama really don't count.

 

 

Quote

 

I want to extend my appreciation to the 9/11 Memorial and Museum in New York for contributing this remnant of the North Tower, as well as to Chancellor Merkel and the German people for donating this portion of the Berlin Wall. It is truly fitting that these two artifacts now reside here so close together at the new NATO Headquarters.......

........Each one marks a pivotal event in the history of this Alliance and in the eternal battle between good and evil. On one side, a testament to the triumph of our ideals over a totalitarian Communist ideology bent on the oppression of millions and millions of people; on the other, a painful reminder of the barbaric evil that still exists in the world and that we must confront and defeat together as a group, as a world.

 

This twisted mass of metal reminds us not only of what we have lost, but also what forever endures — the courage of our people, the strength of our resolve, and the commitments that bind us together as one.

 

We will never forget the lives that were lost. We will never forsake the friends who stood by our side. And we will never waiver in our determination to defeat terrorism and to achieve lasting security, prosperity and peace.

 

 

US Presidential Remarks, 25th May, 2017.

 

[MicroB]

26 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Germany has a force of 350

Leopard tanks.

 

It has donated 18 to Ukraine.

 

 

In addition, the German reunification agreement forced Germany to scrap thousands of T72, T64 tanks from the DDR (some brand new), which they could have held in reserve. Germany must have reserves, because they fetched all those Marders from some place. remember, at the time, the UK and France expressed grave reservations about German unification, so there wasn't the mood to make the German Army too powerful.

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, mfd101 said:

A quote from the other Donald - Donald Tusk, Polish PM - in today's Politico: "It's striking but it's true. Right now, 500 million Europeans are begging 300 million Americans for protection from 140 million Russians who have been unable to overcome 50 million Ukrainians for 3 years."

Seems that when a country ( countries ) spends all it's ( their ) money on illegal immigrants, foreign "aid" and supporting a couple of wars in foreign countries that don't threaten them in any way ( except in some people's imagination ), they don't have enough left to protect themselves from some orcs peasants driving tanks using washing machine parts, and ( according to some posters ) no ammunition.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Germany has a force of 350 Leopard tanks.

 

It has donated 18 to Ukraine.

A/ it takes a long time to build replacement Leopards in a non war situation. Presumably Germany thinks it might need all it's tanks at some time in the future.

 

B/ They are aware that Russia also has anti tank weapons and don't want all their "gifts" to become scrap metal.

 

[bkk6060]

Hypocrisy.

[Cameroni]

16 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Germany has a force of 350 Leopard tanks.

 

It has donated 18 to Ukraine.

 

Which is 18 too many. Why pour fire on the Ukraine war anyway?

 

To put it into context Russia has 6000 tanks. And you want Germany to reduce its miniscule tank force? 

 

The duty of Germany's arms industry and German politicians is to ensure the defence of Germany. Not of Ukraine. 

 

in case you missed it German politicians are in a tizzy because they are of the view that they have  to re-arm massively. That btw implies there are not enough arms at the disposal of the Bundeswehr at the moment. So to give of your already too few supplies to Ukraine is madness.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, Cameroni said:

 

Which is 18 too many. Why pour fire on the Ukraine war anyway?

 

To put it into context Russia has 6000 tanks. And you want Germany to reduce its miniscule tank force? 

 

The duty of Germany's arms industry and German politicians is to ensure the defence of Germany. Not of Ukraine. 

 

in case you missed it German politicians are in a tizzy because they are of the view that they have  to re-arm massively. That btw implies there are not enough arms at the disposal of the Bundeswehr at the moment. So to give of your already too few supplies to Ukraine is madness.

Probably obsolete ones due to be replaced.

[Cameroni]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Probably obsolete ones due to be replaced.

Yes, hard to imagine Germans want to allow their prize and top Leopard tanks to fall into  Russian hands. They could analyze the world's best tank and find ways to counter it.

 

 

[Hamus Yaigh]

On 3/7/2025 at 9:34 AM, SLOWHAND225 said:

So very predictable

What is so very predictable is people like you posting dishonest bs biased in one political direction only? Why not tell the WHOLE news instead of one biased source?

 

Here's some clues for the uneducated:
 

Western media outlets like The New York Times, BBC, or CNN might report more favorably on Ukraine, emphasizing the need for international support and condemning Russian aggression. In contrast The NY Post is owned by News Corp, a media conglomerate with a conservative leaning. The NY Post's editorial board has historically taken a more right-wing stance and this has turned to more extremist right during the current right wing US administration.

 

e.g. Internet news search (only ONE result comes close to yours and NYP opinionated bs):

 

1. Ukraine summit in Brussels ends with no consensus after .(NY Post)

2. EU leaders back new military spending plans at Ukraine summit (AP)

3. EU leaders vow to re-arm Europe amid US retreat on Ukraine (France 24)

4. European leaders agree on defense spending surge (CNN)

 

Hope this helps.