[CONSOLIDATED][Ukraine Edition] Russian Invasion of Ukraine Has Begun!

[I_am_bored]

Probable outcome is Ukraine lose land, Europe plants troops in Ukraine and no NATO membership for Ukraine.

Although no NATO membership, if EU troops are stationed in Ukraine, it’s more or less the same.

 

[Philipkee]

Only USA turned, the rest still supporting Ukraine

Just a question.

How did the rest still support Ukraine besides the rah rah?

Weapons given are free?
Any troops sent? Who is doing all the dying in the war?

 

[TopGun]

Probable outcome is Ukraine lose land, Europe plants troops in Ukraine and no NATO membership for Ukraine.

Although no NATO membership, if EU troops are stationed in Ukraine, it’s more or less the same.

It's a pyrrhic victory for Russia if EU stationed troops in Ukraine. It's as good as Ukraine being a NATO light member.

 

[fortunecat]

Just a question.

How did the rest still support Ukraine besides the rah rah?

Weapons given are free?
Any troops sent? Who is doing all the dying in the war?

Even if the weapons not free, it's still a support?

It's like when you're in huge financial difficulties, must your friends give you free money then is considered helping you? Loaning you money to tide it over is not? They could well just dun do anything and see you die

 

[TopGun]

Just a question.

How did the rest still support Ukraine besides the rah rah?

Weapons given are free?
Any troops sent? Who is doing all the dying in the war?

Do you hold the view that EU should have sent troops to Ukraine and engage in direct combat with Russia?

 

[Philipkee]

Even if the weapons not free, it's still a support?

It's like when you're in huge financial difficulties, must your friends give you free money then is considered helping you? Loaning you money to tide it over is not? They could well just dun do anything and see you die

But if giving the money and encouraging you to fight on even if it means your death? Then not really

Do you hold the view that EU should have sent troops to Ukraine and engage in direct combat with Russia?

Yes. Actually either that or some peacekeepers physically in Ukraine. Some skin in the game. I do see the possibility that this might lead to ww3 so it’s not an easy thing also.

But yes. I feel the western world should have sent troops over OR seriously encourage “volunteers” from their armed forces to fight (with supplies). This was done during ww2 also (eagle squadron in Britain and flying tigers in China)

 

[TopGun]

But if giving the money and encouraging you to fight on even if it means your death? Then not really

Yes. Actually either that or some peacekeepers physically in Ukraine. Some skin in the game. I do see the possibility that this might lead to ww3 so it’s not an easy thing also.

But yes. I feel the western world should have sent troops over OR seriously encourage “volunteers” from their armed forces to fight (with supplies). This was done during ww2 also (eagle squadron in Britain and flying tigers in China)

By your argument, the converse is that the west would be encouraging capitulation by withholding help.

So you accept an escalation by the West by sending troops to fight Russia? I think there are already "contractors" on the group helping Ukraine just that nothing is said openly. What's more crucial and arguably lethal is the amount of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance the west has been providing Ukraine. How else you think that Ukraine can strike key command nodes and defence itself with the limited resources?

 

[Philipkee]

By your argument, the converse is that the west would be encouraging capitulation by withholding help.

So you accept an escalation by the West by sending troops to fight Russia? I think there are already "contractors" on the group helping Ukraine just that nothing is said openly. What's more crucial and arguably lethal is the amount of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance the west has been providing Ukraine. How else you think that Ukraine can strike key command nodes and defence itself with the limited resources?

In a way, yes. It’s been done many times (balkans, Middle East), it’s just that the enemy now is Russia.

I don’t deny the usefulness of the intelligence, reconnaissance etc but the issue now is manpower and I think Ukraine is starting to feel the shortage of it. So if there is no manpower, no amount of intelligence or weaponry will help.

Not sure about the usefulness or impact of the contractors

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Legion_(Ukraine)

 

[Philipkee]

By your argument, the converse is that the west would be encouraging capitulation by withholding help.

No. Ukraine needs weapons AND manpower. Providing just one is not gonna be useful except ensure more Ukrainian deaths while the west feel good for having helped

 

[TopGun]

In a way, yes. It’s been done many times (balkans, Middle East), it’s just that the enemy now is Russia.

I don’t deny the usefulness of the intelligence, reconnaissance etc but the issue now is manpower and I think Ukraine is starting to feel the shortage of it. So if there is no manpower, no amount of intelligence or weaponry will help.

Not sure about the usefulness or impact of the contractors

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Legion_(Ukraine)

I don't think that the world is keen to move closer towards a world war by fighting Russia. If that happens, Russia will face obvious defeat on the battlefield and Russia has only one last fall back.

As it is today, Russia's mechanized force is finished while the west has thousands of tanks and tracked vehicles ready for war.

 

[Philipkee]

I don't think that the world is keen to move closer towards a world war by fighting Russia. If that happens, Russia will face obvious defeat on the battlefield and Russia has only one last fall back.

As it is today, Russia's mechanized force is finished while the west has thousands of tanks and tracked vehicles ready for war.

Let’s see. Anyway it’s probably reaching a conclusion one way or another without a “final decisive battle”.

 

[nincomp00p]

A bunch of delusional people making plans as if they have won the war.

 

[coutuser]

Ukraine used to do under table business with Biden son , that's why Biden willing to give them so much aid

Trump have no reason to help them at all

How you know?

He knows losing war liao might as well run road now.

Who is the sway guy who has to pick up the 烂摊子？

guys do u all know wat it mean if russia win?

rmb singapore is only sea nation that sanction russia...and we r in a list of unfriendly country to russia....

if russia win, it will be a worse outcome than bet wrong horse

Sigh... during LKY time we remained neutral.

These are the ones I am most worried about. How many will run road at the first sign of trouble? From what I observed they are likely the majority. Those didnt run would likely to pressure the government of the day to just cede our soveignty so that no bombs will cause the hosuing market to collapse. I hope I wont see that cowardice and ugly days in my life time,

If someone aim missile at us, what will you do?

Probable outcome is Ukraine lose land, Europe plants troops in Ukraine and no NATO membership for Ukraine.

Although no NATO membership, if EU troops are stationed in Ukraine, it’s more or less the same.

Poor NSF that kena arrowed?

 

[Jian19]

How you know?

Who is the sway guy who has to pick up the 烂摊子？

Sigh... during LKY time we remained neutral.

If someone aim missile at us, what will you do?

Poor NSF that kena arrowed?

FBI already have Biden hunter laptop with all the information. It's the exact reason why Biden pardon his son for 10 years between 2014-2024

 

[cpuer]

Just a question.

How did the rest still support Ukraine besides the rah rah?

Weapons given are free?
Any troops sent? Who is doing all the dying in the war?

its actually moot that Ukraine cannot be nato member, they have already paid the price of quiting the mafia(russian satelite) with their blood and most likely land

 

[The_King]

Ukraine has agreed the terms of a minerals deal with the US in a significant step towards a peace settlement just days after rejecting the plans, it has been reported.

Kyiv officials have said the war-torn country is now ready to sign an agreement with Washington on jointly developing its critical resources, according to the Financial Times.

'Now government officials are working on the details', a senior Ukrainian official said. 'As of now, we are considering a visit to Washington for Friday to sign the agreement.'

It comes after the US dropped controversial demands for a right to up to $500bn in potential revenue from Ukraine's rare earth minerals.

President Zelensky refused to sign this initial proposal last week - sparking a war of words between him and Donald Trump.

The US president called Zelensky a 'dictator' and appeared to blame Ukraine for starting the war that entered its fourth year yesterday.

However, it is now believed an improved offer has been agreed between the two countries.

According to the report by the Financial Times, under the new terms a fund would be created into which Ukraine would contribute 50 per cent of proceeds from the 'future monetisation' of state-owned mineral resources.

This would include oil and gas, and associated logistics.

It would exclude, however, resources that already contribute to the Ukrainian government's finances.

There is also reportedly no reference to a guarantee of US security for Ukraine in the agreement, which Kyiv previously said was necessary for them to agree any deal.

Ukrainian officials told the Financial Times that the proposal had already been given the go-ahead by the country's justice, economy and foreign ministers.

Olha Stefanishyna, Ukraine's deputy prime minister, who has led the negotiations said: 'The minerals agreement is only part of the picture.

'We have heard multiple times from the US administration that it's part of a bigger picture.'

The agreement of a minerals deal with Ukraine has been one of President Trump's key demands in any peace settlement to end the war.

It is hoped any such agreement would pave the way for a long-term US security commitment for Ukraine.

Ukrainian officials have maintained, however, that the deal is a 'framework agreement' and that no revenue will change hands until the fund is set up.





https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nsky-says-yes-minerals-deal-donald-trump.html

 

[Kiwi8]

Ukraine has agreed the terms of a minerals deal with the US in a significant step towards a peace settlement just days after rejecting the plans, it has been reported.

Kyiv officials have said the war-torn country is now ready to sign an agreement with Washington on jointly developing its critical resources, according to the Financial Times.

'Now government officials are working on the details', a senior Ukrainian official said. 'As of now, we are considering a visit to Washington for Friday to sign the agreement.'

It comes after the US dropped controversial demands for a right to up to $500bn in potential revenue from Ukraine's rare earth minerals.

President Zelensky refused to sign this initial proposal last week - sparking a war of words between him and Donald Trump.

The US president called Zelensky a 'dictator' and appeared to blame Ukraine for starting the war that entered its fourth year yesterday.

However, it is now believed an improved offer has been agreed between the two countries.

According to the report by the Financial Times, under the new terms a fund would be created into which Ukraine would contribute 50 per cent of proceeds from the 'future monetisation' of state-owned mineral resources.

This would include oil and gas, and associated logistics.

It would exclude, however, resources that already contribute to the Ukrainian government's finances.

There is also reportedly no reference to a guarantee of US security for Ukraine in the agreement, which Kyiv previously said was necessary for them to agree any deal.

Ukrainian officials told the Financial Times that the proposal had already been given the go-ahead by the country's justice, economy and foreign ministers.

Olha Stefanishyna, Ukraine's deputy prime minister, who has led the negotiations said: 'The minerals agreement is only part of the picture.

'We have heard multiple times from the US administration that it's part of a bigger picture.'

The agreement of a minerals deal with Ukraine has been one of President Trump's key demands in any peace settlement to end the war.

It is hoped any such agreement would pave the way for a long-term US security commitment for Ukraine.

Ukrainian officials have maintained, however, that the deal is a 'framework agreement' and that no revenue will change hands until the fund is set up.





https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nsky-says-yes-minerals-deal-donald-trump.html

Trump is really an asshole and top notch gangster.

 

[The_King]

Trump is really an asshole and top notch gangster.

 

[mooseolly]

Trump’s tactics working.

 

[cpuer]

LW and team, I assume you do have a plan to deal with siao lang right? right?