To be disgusted at the talks between Russia and the US

[SunnyDayInFeb]

So Russia and the US are meeting in Saudia Arabia to carve up Ukraine.

And Ukraine, whose people have been fighting and dying since their country was invaded, haven't even been invited to the table.

It's like we are back in the 19th century with the European colonial powers drawing lines on a map to divide Africa between them.

No I don’t think it is!

I think they’re referring to the fact that I said the Tory party had been compromised. Which it has any many levels - the previous government clearly did support Ukraine and a similar agenda to this government but there were those in the party preparing to undermine that stance.

I’m very glad to see Sunak agreeing with Starmer esp as he, Grant Shapps and other Tories who agree with supporting Ukraine have been shouting about how we need to do more!

What has the war in Gaza got to do with Jordan and Egypt? They did not start it and were not involved. Why should they be in any way responsible for the mess that Israel and Hamas have made?

Say something coherent and I’ll respond to you!

Ukraine can “not recognize” the decision all they want but we all know they cannot continue fighting without significant support from the US and EU so I don’t really think they are in a position to insist that the war be funded even if it takes 10, 20 years.

if NATO says it will consider any country that meets its criteria then why don’t NATO accept Ukraine years ago when they wanted to join after the 2014 annexation of Crimea? The US was pushing for Ukraine to join and EU countries refused so sorry your argument is mute.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/09/04/that-time-ukraine-tried-to-join-nato-and-nato-said-no/

In order to end the way we can’t insist on Ukraine joining NATO because that will be a big pill for Russia to swallow especially after Russia is now more surrounded by NATO than before the war following Sweden and Finland's membership so it’s better to negotiate a security agreement with Ukraine instead of membership for now. That doesn’t mean no membership ever but for now to reach a peace agreement.

Remember that in negotiations like this no one gets everything they want.

Zelensky trying to insist that the war can only end if Ukraine gets back all the territories Russia took in 2014 is unrealistic and will not happen, at least not now.

@PandoraSox there were earlier posts on someone being glad it was Starmer and now people are putting up Sunak posts

Make up your minds.

You do sound keen on what Starmer is putting forward as does @GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing regardless of whether it takes us further into fighting. I don't share that view at all.

You can back Starmer on mn as you will. I'm with @SpryUmberZebra on avoiding NATO involvement and what that means. Her post makes sense.

Say something coherent and I’ll respond to you!

Ditto. Actually don't bother

Lib Dems Ed Davey

The PM is absolutely right when it comes to the deployment of British troops in Ukraine to uphold any peace deal and deter Putin.

The Government must look at reversing the Conservatives' 10k troop cuts asap

I’m saying the opposite that I support the efforts to end the war because of the loss of life and destruction that will cost billions to fix after the billions spent fighting.

I am saying Ukraine does not get to dictate that other countries keep funding the war based on unrealistic expectations thy they will get back the land Russia seized in 2014 and unilaterally defeat Russia, things are just at a stalemate in a proxy war now.

OK. Whether you consider it a gift to Russia or not is not necessarily relevant its better to consider the facts outside emotive language. And the fact is, Russia has taken territory. The US have elected a representative who doesn't want to continue funding a war when Europe who are far closer have been happy resting on their laurels and ought to have prepared for. There is always going to be tension along the border between empires, people forgot this and thought the world's policeman would always have their back and got far too comfortable. It is not clear what the benefit is of escalating this war, and the cost in lives and suffering. This is a good time to build golden bridges and if you want to tell Russia that they're being given a gift then that makes Putins job easier in selling it to his people.

While Putin rules Russia there will be no guarantee of safety for Europe, whatever the outcome of these talks, Likewise while Trump is in power Europe needs to understand that it will get little or no help from the US if anything did happen, Europe sadly, needs to significantly increase its military spending to help counter long term threats particularly from Russia

Ed Davey also backing what Starmer has said.

You keep accusing me of being pro- Starmer (I am not particularly) because I want to see peace in Ukraine.

I am starting to wonder if you support Putin's actions in Ukraine? If not, then what do you think should happen next?

What is wrong with talks? We can’t go on like this and if these prelim talks open avenues for peace what is the downside? Surely stalemate fighting in perpetuity is the worst outcome.

@PandoraSox no point in making the claims re Putin for some sort of sparring. It's baseless and pointless.

Re peace in Ukraine are you ready for a deal to be made then?

@SpryUmberZebra says what I wish I could on those who are ready to fight.

It is odd how you never want to answer any questions that are put to you.

Ah well.

@EasternStandard

I am keen on what Starmer is putting forward. For all the reasons I’ve set out on this thread.

But I supported the stance of supporting Ukraine when it was Johnson and Sunak saying it too!

Do you think you might keep having to @ so many posters in one post - all of whom are telling you you’re wrong - because in fact you are very wrong indeed?

@PandoraSox it is an answer. Read the poster I referenced and it reflects my view.

Are you in favour of a deal that excludes Ukraine from the talks?

@GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing you and @PandoraSox?

No it's not surprising Labour voters back Starmer, why would it be?

Granted I'm more interested in others' views now hence saying don't bother continuing

At no point have I actually said I vote Labour. I said I was glad they are back in power as less compromised by russia (at the present time).

As has been said to you, both Rishi Sunak and Ed Davey have shown their support. Grant Shapps (former defence secretary) has been pushing Starmer to do more since leaving office. Ben Wallace too.

Granted I'm more interested in others' views now hence saying don't bother continuing

You mean you have been proved wrong and don't like it.

Because about 80% of Jordan's population is Palestinian. Something like 20% are direct refugees. It has a lot to do with them. Egypt too. They share a border so should probably be involved one way or another.

The downside is that its not a permanent peace. It's a peace that allows Putin's Russia (which is currently running out of money, manpower, everything else) to regroup, rearm, and try again - in Ukraine or somewhere else - in a few years time. When maybe the US might not be so quick to arm whoever it is they try to invade, or European leaders less sympathetic because Russian hackers etc. are simultaneously helping right wing parties.

Russia doesn't have ability to steamroller Eastern Europe like in 1945, but it can certainly carve bits out, piece by piece. Putin has clung on in Ukraine hoping for a Trump victory, and he's got what he wanted. The war is going badly for Russia but they're about to get what they wanted from it. Trump doesn't care about what happens in three years because he'll be old, richer and with his successor lined up.

You'd expect this to be a time in politics where both sides of the aisle come together.

But they haven’t had the talks yet. How do you know what the outcome is?

@PandoraSox er no. You are a Labour supporter, and it's not surprising to see your take on Starmer's proposal.

@GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing you're referencing Conservative politicians anyway, so muddled

My first question was what is the risk if we do this, and it still stands.

Peacekeeping troops might sound more palatable to the public, as seen on here, but if there's a risk I'd like to consider that.

Those in US who say if you want to do this you fund it and fight it, that resonates