cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/42161794

  • US plan would require Kyiv to give up land, accept curbs to military, sources say
  • French minister: peace cannot mean capitulation
  • US army delegation is visiting Kyiv

European countries pushed back on Thursday against a U.S.-backed peace plan for Ukraine that sources said would require Kyiv to give up more land and partially disarm, conditions long seen by Ukraine’s allies as tantamount to capitulation.

European Union foreign ministers meeting in Brussels were careful not to comment in too much detail about a U.S. peace plan that has not been made public. But they made clear they would not accept demands for punishing concessions from Kyiv.

Moscow played down any new U.S. initiative.

,

A U.S. Army delegation … was in Kyiv [and] met Ukraine’s top military commander Oleksandr Syrskyi late on Wednesday. Syrskyi said he told them the best way to secure a just peace was to defend Ukraine’s airspace, extend its ability to strike deep into Russia and stabilise the front line.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Not just it seems - very literally. He was trumps first foreign visitor to the Oval Office when they colluded in 2016 and he immediately gave up secret intel to him. Didn’t even allow in an official so they could guffaw in corrupt together.

    Trump is a traitor, EU needs to get down to it in Ukraine while we try and rectify his situation.

    • plyth@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Why was there no big rebellion by the patriotic billionaires? How could he be reelected if the people in power knew that he was colluding with Russia?

      • gian
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Why was there no big rebellion by the patriotic billionaires? How could he be reelected if the people in power knew that he was colluding with Russia?

        In this specifica instance, probably because the other side was way worse.

        • plyth@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          What was worse about all other candidates? They could have pushed another Republican or could have helped the Democrats win.

          • gian
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            I said the other side, not between the Republicans.

            Now, obviously Republicans could have pushed for another better candidate, like the Democrats could have done, but the point is that they had to choose between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris and we know the result.

            As I said elsewhere, this time it is not that the Republicans did everything right, but the Democrats did everything wrong, starting with who they choose (which, by the way, got less than 1000 votes in the party primaries for example).

            • plyth@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Kamala was not worse for billionaires. They could have published the Epstein stuff and Trump would have been silenced. Publishing the dirt now stresses that Trump was wanted. Either there is no Russian influence or it does not matter.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Money. He promised them a lot more than the other guy. Any patriotic billionaires are way more billionaire than they are patriotic.

        • plyth@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Shouldn’t there be billionaires who reveal the plan? There must be some patriots.

            • plyth@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              The smaller billionaires must know that the big ones will crush them. Some must be aware of disadvantages.

              • gustofwind@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 hours ago

                No. It really doesn’t work that way at all. They are not loyal to anyone but themselves and money. There are 0 “good ones”, please understand this