As far as I can see, Putin MUST have something on Trump. No I can't prove it. No I don't have evidence.
Have a look at the above opinion piece by Andrey Kurkov, shafting Zelensky makes perfect sense to Trump. It has nothing to do with surrendering to Putin and everything to do with serving US interests whilst conveniently filling his and his mates boots.
And he will be hailed for securing a beautiful deal for America whilst his adoring fans will claim that he was robbed if doesn't get the Nobel Peace Prize for bringing "peace" to Ukraine/Europe
not sure that anyone came out of this well, once again the biggest winner here seems to be Putin
Ukraine needs continued American support but without security guarantees of troops on the ground putin will just invade again in a few years like he did after the last peace deal
as the article above points out
Trump hopes to hand over toEuropeand Britain responsibility for Ukraine’s security in the event of a cessation of hostilities, and responsibility for further military assistance. Given this, it is by no means clear what advantage such an agreement on rare earth metals would give Ukraine.
whatever Putin has on trump to make him so subservient, i don't know, but if trump really wanted to end the war, he could do so tomorrow by deploying American troops in Ukraine
i suspect that is really not what was meant. there is a (totally invalid IMO) suggestion that zelensky is keeping the war going to remain in power.
I'd not heard this until a Trump apologist used it on 5Live earlier - the presenters were struggling to contain their annoyance
even Jenrick piling in
https://bsky.app/profile/edwinhayward.com/post/3ljbecndbdc2z
It has nothing to do with surrendering to Putin
the humiliation of zelensky is essential for Putin, trump has been doing it for a while, (&echoing Kremlin's talking points exactly when he called himma dictator and demanded elections)having failed militarily Putin wants election he can subvert in Ukraine
Last Leg should be good tonight....
but if trump really wanted to end the war, he could do so tomorrow by deploying American troops in Ukraine
That'd just be another Vietnam but possibly involving nuclear weapons.
It would literally be a war that no-one could win other than by total annihilation.
Since the days of the Cold War, there's been an understanding that no matter what else goes on, no matter who is on what side in any other regional spat, Russia and the USA cannot go to war.
Not without nuking the entire planet anyway.
interesting article here about body language and trump being subservient to Putin
That body language (no expert here but guessing) of Starmer trying to "groom the alpha male" and using touch to clam the alpha male down to avoid being "eaten alive". Starmer is basically being submissive by offering the touch.
In related news spineless ****s and FTSE100 listed GSK backing out of DEI messaging https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/feb/28/uk-based-british-pharma-gsk-pauses-diversity-work-citing-trump-orders
GSK brands - Aquafresh, Beechams, Corsodyl, Night Nurse, Lamisil, various Nicotine things, Panodol, Sensodyne, Zovirax
from the article
In the press conference with Starmer, a reporter asked the US president if British troops were attacked by Russian forces while in Ukraine, Starmer could count on the US’s support. Trump replied that the British were incredible fighters and could take care of themselves, relenting in a generalised way that he would “always stand with the British”, accompanied by a little spontaneous hand-hold, coming from underneath, that took Starmer by surprise.
It was not dominant but nor was it what you’d call reassuring.
Only 47 months to go.
I've never, in all the years I've frequented this forum seen anyone spout as much utter bollocks as chewkw has over the last page. Frankly I don't care if I'm banned. You're an absolute moron and genuinely just need to shut the **** up.
That'd just be another Vietnam but possibly involving nuclear weapons.
the point is that without a security guarantee from America / NATO Ukraine will never be safe
just ask Sweden or Finland
and Putin has had his bluff called repeatedly on nukes
but if trump really wanted to end the war, he could do so tomorrow by deploying American troops in Ukraine
Do you really believe that? Because Afghanistan and Iraq went so well for them?
Off the top of my head the only country which I can think of that the United States has attacked, invaded, and successfully defeated, permanently, is Grenada. I'm open to other suggestions though.
IMO there is no country on earth that could militarily defeat Russia. It is geographically massive, it has a huge population, and defence of the motherland ranks very high in the psyche of the Russian people.
what on earth makes you think i said America should invade Russia?
All this talk of a highly unusual second term official state visit of Trump to the UK this year needs to be cancelled after that bait and switch drama today.
Albeit the offer of the state visit should never have been on the table in the first place.
Charlie has unfortunately had another bad turn of health and cannot do offical duties for the forseeable...
You know how everyone says Ad Hominem attacks are no way to debate stuff like this? I’m over that. JD Vance is the biggest ****er I’ve ever seen in politics.
what on earth makes you think i said America should invade Russia?
Because that is the only certain way that the United States could end the war in the Ukraine, by defeating Russia militarily.
Otherwise are you seriously suggesting that Russian troops wouldn't engage with US forces? Have you any basis for such an assumption?
I have little doubt that it would simply lead to a war which neither side could possibly win.
Deploying American troops in Ukraine is not an option for Trump, and it certainly wouldn't end the war tomorrow as you suggested.
Is actually forgotten what a complete **** Chewkw is.
All this talk of a highly unusual second term official state visit of Trump to the UK this year needs to be cancelled after that bait and switch dramatoday.
While we're at it can we have the bust of Churchill back?
IMO there is no country on earth that could militarily defeat Russia. It is geographically massive, it has a huge population, and defence of the motherland ranks very high in the psyche of the Russian people.
this is also a bit confused
not least because no one was talking about invading Russia
but its population is not massive, for its size it is very unpopulated, at 140million its only twice the population of uk and its lost 100k troops and seen 20x? that injured
it has been fighting for 3 years to capture a country with 1/5th of its population who were armed with weapons several generations behind its own, and despite thinking it could capture kyiv in 3 days ....yer after 3 years they had to get it had to get 10,000 troops from north Korea
You know how everyone says Ad Hominem attacks are no way to debate stuff like this? I’m over that. JD Vance is the biggest ****er I’ve ever seen in politics.
J D Vance is actually Jimmy Carr wearing a beard. He takes off when he does comedy.
Last Leg should be good tonight....
When even Giles Brandreth takes the piss with a Ukrainian jumper....
Starmer is basically being submissive by offering the touch.
it's how you deal with a truculent toddler. don't confront directly, steer them.
IMO there is no country on earth that could militarily defeat Russia. It is geographically massive, it has a huge population, and defence of the motherland ranks very high in the psyche of the Russian people.
*cough* the Afghans would like a word *cough*
but its population is not massive, for its size it is very unpopulated, at 140million its only twice the population of uk and its lost 100k troops and seen 20x? that injured
and it's GDP is smaller than italy's
All this talk of a highly unusual second term official state visit of Trump to the UK this year needs to be cancelled after that bait and switch drama today.
Give it to Zelensky instead, watch the Orange Buffoon explode....
Sweden was doing well as a partner nation (without NATO membership) right up until Vlad went over the boarder and the center-right started getting traction over the center/center-left bloc here. At that point people started thinking seriously about NATO membership and, despite being held up by some members because of our stance on things like, say, Kurdistan not necessarily being a terrorist state, we eventually got membership. That may or may not have been the right choice. If we had stayed neutral, maybe it could have been us acting as peacekeepers in Ukraine.
Anyway, NATO != USA, it is much, much more than one country. We (Sweden) manufacture our own aircraft (so do not rely on F35 or the US), our own weapons (Saab/Bofors) and even export them to the US (See the CalleG recoilless rifle) and have a strong standing military reserve force. We have good partnerships with our Nordic neighbours and the EU to back us. If shit hits the fan and Russia comes west, we'll fight, fight hard, and likely die, but we know that Finland, Denmark and Norway will be backing us as we do so, irrespective of what the Orange Shitgibbon says or does.
Otherwise are you seriously suggesting that Russian troops wouldn't engage with US forces? Have you any basis for such an assumption?
based on the fact that every red line Putin has drawn from patriots, to atacms, to f16s Putin has backed down on, yes
and the only actual conflict between US & Russian troops in recent times was over in minutes and saw up to 100 russians killed with 0 US losses
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khasham
like tj i think starmer played as good a hand as he could have
Nowco3mes the real test. Will the European leaders stand together, support ukraine and collectively tell trump to go eff himself? Can Starmer resist being split off from the rest with an offer of no tarriffs?
Both are difficult to do but imo essential
I’m over that. JD Vance is the biggest ****er I’ve ever seen in politics.
Alex Brooker just kicked off tonight’s Last Leg by saying about JD Vance “what a little w___er! An absolute shitbag!!”,
but its population is not massive,
It has the 9th largest population in the world, I don't call that average.
it has been fighting for 3 years to capture a country with 1/5th of its population who were armed with weapons several generations behind its own, and despite thinking it could capture kyiv in 3 days ...
I think you might made the same mistake as Adolf Hitler made and not fully understood the Russian psyche which places defending the motherland on a completely different level to attacking your neighbour.
Hitler saw how badly the mighty Red Army preformed against tiny Finland during the Russo-Finnish War and undoubtedly thought "well Operation Barbarossa is going to be a piece of piss I can see".
It was the single greatest mistake Hitler ever made as Fuhrer. Four years later Winston Churchill announced to the world that the guts of the German army have been torn out by Russian valour and generalship.
Edit : Anyway your suggestion might be interesting but luckily I am fairly sure that Trump isn't such a complete lunatic who believes that he could end the war in Ukraine tomorrow if he simply sends US troops.
Nowco3mes the real test. Will the European leaders stand together, support ukraine and collectively tell trump to go eff himself? Can Starmer resist being split off from the rest with an offer of no tarriffs?
The meeting this weekend needs to end with a clear message that we support Zelensky/Ukraine and other countries are either with us or against us.
Disgraceful scenes. No one likes a bully, let alone two of them ganging up, who also happen to be clueless ego driven gaslighters. Good that it happened before the deal was signed. Just contemplating how much less I can buy from American companies over the next 4 years...
I think you might made the same mistake as Adolf Hitler made and not fully understood the Russian psyche which places defending the motherland on a completely different level to attacking your neighbour.
FFS, no one is talking about invading the motherland, we are talking about helping Ukraine remove them from occupied territory. As the Finns did, as the Afghans did.
defending the motherland on a completely different level to attacking your neighbour
Only you have suggested the USA invades Russia, no one else has. No one is suggesting the USA should ever have troops in Russia. It could (and often does) have troops and other military personal in other countries as part of shared defense, as do we and others.
FFS, no one is talking about invading the motherland, we are talking about helping Ukraine remove them from occupied territory. As the Finns did, as the Afghans did.
FFS read the thread properly 💡
The Idea that the war would end "tomorrow" if Trump just sent American troops to Ukraine is absurd.
Tbh I have no idea why it is even being discussed.
Give it to Zelensky instead, watch the Orange Buffoon explode....
well ive started a petition
need 5 email address to get it going
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/720027/sponsors/new?token=XWTPEBUBTuButCZFQmYR
Signed.
Give it to Zelensky instead, watch the Orange Buffoon explode....
Well ive started a petition
Well done, but you wait until binners hears that you have started a petition criticizing Starmer's diplomatic choices.
Expect to be told why offering an unprecedented second state visit to Donald Trump is absolutely the right thing to do and that if you don't support it you are a miserable joyless placard waving 6th former, or something.
Signed
That meeting was one of the most unattractive spectacles I have ever had the misfortune to witness. Trump and Vance are like primary school bullies. It's just a pity Trump managed to get out of " detention" for his previous offences.
It's going to be really difficult for European leaders now to unite and strongly support Zelensky and Ukraine without antagonising the narcissist in the Whitehouse any more than we have to because any tariff dispute with America is likely to hurt us more than him.
Signed the petition too
I wonder if there will be the same opposition to Trump's next state visit as there was last time ;
David Lammy, the Labour MP for Tottenham, warned that African Americans were afraid of the presidency, saying Trump was supported by the Ku Klux Klan and had white supremacists in his inner circle.
Although perhaps some people feel that second time round Trump isn't quite as bad now as he was the first time?
I’m in on that petition
