Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Zelenski agrees to minerals deal

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by g8orbill, Feb 26, 2025 at 6:53 PM.

  1. PITBOSS

    PITBOSS GC Hall of Fame

    8,379
    890
    558
    Apr 13, 2007
    Imo it’s more apprehension and suspicion. Trump has a history of dishonesty & empty promises. He’s already indicated a shift in our country’s direction - talk of appeasing Putin and turning his back (US back) on our allies. He denied that Russia started the war including us siding with NK and Russia in the UN. He also falsely claims the U.S. provided $350B in aid to Ukraine. So yes, there is a concern about his ‘deal.’ I fully support a sustainable and realistic fair peace in Ukraine. Russia's invasion and war crimes has been devastating for them. And Trump's words & insults have been like a knife in their back. But a partnership could be a win-win. They have valuable resources; we have the capital, equipment and expertise to invest. this could be a big win for everyone, including Trump.
    But, we shall see.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2025 at 9:41 PM
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    34,221
    12,359
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    Would DT go so far as to not sell to EU countries if they wanted to buy? Think raytheon or others want to lose those market? If our allies feel that they cannot rely on our weapons systems, they will develop their own

    would elon alienate every western world by demonstrating his willingness to use starlink as a weapon?
     
  3. PITBOSS

    PITBOSS GC Hall of Fame

    8,379
    890
    558
    Apr 13, 2007
    it also would seem it could get problematic making massive deals with a country that desperately want our armaments and security.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2025 at 10:05 PM
  4. DawgFanFromAlabam

    DawgFanFromAlabam GC Hall of Fame

    2,441
    317
    308
    Apr 18, 2007
    He’ll never live to the end of his term.

    “Zelenski??” Even auto-correct tries to fix it for you I now know your kinship with Trump - neither of you learned to spell.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. g8orbill

    g8orbill Old Gator Moderator VIP Member

    128,022
    58,760
    114,663
    Apr 3, 2007
    Clermont, Fl
    such arrogance makes me laugh
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  6. docspor

    docspor GC Hall of Fame

    6,214
    1,925
    3,078
    Nov 30, 2010
    It might be the more difficult path, but Im in favor of punishing criminals not taking advantage of victims. Doesn’t seems confusing to me
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2025 at 11:34 PM
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  7. DawgFanFromAlabam

    DawgFanFromAlabam GC Hall of Fame

    2,441
    317
    308
    Apr 18, 2007
    Nah, I own you and you HAVE to respond.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Off-topic Off-topic x 1
  8. ATLGATORFAN

    ATLGATORFAN Premium Member

    3,915
    1,033
    2,153
    Aug 10, 2015
    awfully cavalier. Yeah. Let’s punish those Russians by throwing 10,000 more Ukrainians to their death. I would consider this quite the cagey deal. We place Americans in county to mine. Signal to Russians we are going to be there, and unlike Afghanistan we don’t leave it for the Chinese. In addition this brings the fighting to an end without putting military assets on the ground. Win all the way around.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2025 at 5:38 AM
    • Like Like x 1
  9. gaterzfan

    gaterzfan GC Hall of Fame

    2,139
    451
    1,713
    Feb 6, 2020
    It'd be pretty funny if the US downsized its military presence in Germany and France ..... as they follow through in the promise to increase their military capabilities ..... by redeploying those troops to Ukraine. I bet Putin would be miffed.

     
  10. avogator

    avogator VIP Member

    835
    547
    1,988
    Apr 3, 2007
    Does this mean US will send Troops to Ukraine to secure our access.
     
  11. Emmitto

    Emmitto VIP Member

    9,562
    1,865
    933
    Apr 3, 2007
    Well, yes, and to assist Russia of course.
     
  12. dynogator

    dynogator VIP Member

    6,678
    344
    418
    Apr 9, 2007
    Trump says no troops will be sent, just civilian workers (harvesting our new minerals, I guess.) He seems to think their mere presence will deter Putin from military aggression. Maybe it will, who knows what those two have cooked up.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  13. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,170
    1,761
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/02/27/minerals-deal-ukraine-russia/



    The minerals deal negotiated between the United States and Ukraine is a devastating development for Russia. Indeed, it is in some ways more important than any peace deal President Donald Trump might negotiate to end the fighting. Once implemented, it will mean that Russia has effectively lost the war.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to conquer his neighbor. Instead, the United States has just gone into business with Ukraine — entering into, as the agreement puts it, “a durable partnership” with Kyiv to jointly develop Ukraine’s untapped minerals and other natural resources and pledging “a long-term financial commitment to the development of a stable and economically prosperous Ukraine.”


    With this deal, the United States is now invested — literally, not figuratively — in what the deal calls “a free, sovereign and secure Ukraine.” That means the United States now has a massive financial incentive to help safeguard Ukraine’s independence. If Ukraine survives, the United States will stand to gain hundreds of billions of dollars; if Ukraine falls, we get nothing. After all, does anyone think that if Putin conquers Ukraine, he is going to repay the United States for the weapons we gave Ukraine to fight his troops? Of course not.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. PITBOSS

    PITBOSS GC Hall of Fame

    8,379
    890
    558
    Apr 13, 2007

    And if Russia bombs the work site with our workers there?
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2025 at 3:40 PM
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R GC Hall of Fame

    7,128
    613
    443
    Apr 24, 2007
    St. Augustine, FL
    They already do and do pretty well. India went with the Rafale over the F-16/F-18 and that was a very smart move. Better, more modern platform that can be land or sea based and Dassault has a reputation (Mirage) of making supply, maintenance, etc. a LOT easier than the US.

    Then you have platforms like the Gripen which is easy to fly (and learn), has some of the best radar counter-systems in the world, has (I think) six hard points. . . and can be landed on a 2-lane highway and serviced with a handful of techs, only one of which needs advanced training. Upfront cost is the same or more than the F-16, but backend maintenance is a fraction of an F-16.

    Personally, I think we need to bring companies like Dassault and Saab into our procurement system. One of my biggest concerns is the lack of any competition in our defense industry, which is the polar opposite of the environment in WWII. Under our current system, we probably don't get the F4U Corsair (all Hellcats) or the P-51 (you think we'd think about using an English engine under the current climate?). I doubt Lockheed even makes P-38s either, just tons and tons of P-47s.
     
  16. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    9,385
    1,156
    3,218
    Apr 3, 2007
    Which parts of Ukraine though? I assume not the Russian occupied regions which is where Ukraine should try to incentivize this administration.

    The theory is not unlike I posted in advance of the Russian invasion. We all had intel that Russia was going to invade. I would have run UN joint exercises in the regions we knew that Russia planned to invade which would have forestalled their invasion.
     
  17. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    11,363
    1,522
    678
    Sep 11, 2022
    Like the 10-year going bonkers, right?
     
  18. exiledgator

    exiledgator Gruntled

    11,609
    2,103
    3,128
    Jan 5, 2010
    Maine
    Mining was 6% of Ukraines $200b GDP at the onset of the war.

    Add to this that most of Ukraine's mineral wealth is in what is currently Russian controlled regions (hmm, how convenient for someone)

    With significantly less that 6% of a significantly smaller GDP, it would take many, many decades, even at a 50% theft rate reparation fee, to make 100s of billions.

    Lastly, the minerals being discussed are not the typical national-interest type / RE metals. Certainly not at large quantities. Refining is the challenge / bottleneck in these types of resources anyway.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  19. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    34,221
    12,359
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    shhhhhhhhhhh..let em think they won biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggggggly
     
  20. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    22,724
    1,896
    1,763
    Apr 8, 2007
    I'm so old that I remember that the US spent the equivalent of $150 billion in today's dollars rebuilding Western Europe after World War II under the Marshall plan and we didn't request or expect repayment. We also deployed well over 100,000 troops in Europe during the Cold War and didn't expect or receive reimbursement. We lost 36,000 American troops defending South Korea in the Korean War and maintained a permanent presence in South Korea for decades and didn't try to extort payment from the government of that country although that will probably end very soon.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2025 at 4:10 PM
    • Like Like x 1