Excellent but the far left loons will hate it.
Trump Putin summit
- Thread starter FastLane
- Start date
ziggy
Verified User
Trump wants Putin and Zelensky to meet as soon as Friday for a trilateral meeting between the US president and the two leaders.
thepostmillennial.com
NEW: Trump wants Putin and Zelensky to meet as soon as Friday: report
Trump is slated to meet with Zelensky on Monday at the White House.
thepostmillennial.com
TOP
Retired Teacher
it wouldn't be the first time...If their heads don't explode first.
QP!
Verified User
There is no questioning that Putin was the winner at this and Trump the dupe.
Trump went with a hardline threat and promise he made prior that Russia agrees to a ceasefire or they get more sanctions and Ukraine gets more weapons and support.
it did actually look like Trump was finally going to get tough on Putin.
But Putin understood with one face to face meeting and some empty flattery directed at Trump that Trump would leave the status quo in place and that is exactly what happened.
Nothing has changed and instead Putin walked away with one of Trumps 'we will follow up on this two weeks', which we all know with his healthcare plan or more recent declarations to end this war in one day, means nothing will happen for months and years and Putin can continue.
You can literarily see the fawning type fondness Trump has for Putin when he looks at him, in a way he has for no allied leaders.
Trump went with a hardline threat and promise he made prior that Russia agrees to a ceasefire or they get more sanctions and Ukraine gets more weapons and support.
it did actually look like Trump was finally going to get tough on Putin.
But Putin understood with one face to face meeting and some empty flattery directed at Trump that Trump would leave the status quo in place and that is exactly what happened.
Nothing has changed and instead Putin walked away with one of Trumps 'we will follow up on this two weeks', which we all know with his healthcare plan or more recent declarations to end this war in one day, means nothing will happen for months and years and Putin can continue.
You can literarily see the fawning type fondness Trump has for Putin when he looks at him, in a way he has for no allied leaders.
I would call this a win.
President Donald Trump meets with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin Friday, Aug. 15, 2025, at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska. At left is Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and second from right is Secretary of State Marco Rubio. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)
BY JILL COLVIN
Updated 9:49 AM EDT, August 17, 2025
Share
NEW YORK (AP) — Special U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff said Sunday that Russian leader Vladimir Putin agreed at his summit with President Donald Trump to allow the U.S. and European allies to offer Ukraine a security guarantee resembling NATO’s collective defense mandate as part of an eventual deal to end the 3 1/2-year war.
“We were able to win the following concession: That the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in NATO,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Witkoff said it was the first time he had heard Putin agree to that.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, speaking at a news conference in Brussels with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said that “we welcome President Trump’s willingness to contribute to Article 5-like security guarantees for Ukraine. and the ‘Coalition of the willing’ -- including the European Union -- is ready to do its share.”
Witkoff, offering some of the first details of what was discussed at Friday’s summit in Alaska, said the two sides agreeing to “robust security guarantees that I would describe as game-changing.” He added that Russia said that it would make a legislative commitment not to go after any additional territory in Ukraine.
https://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/us-envoy-says-putin-agreed-to-security-20821184.php
US envoy says Putin agreed to security protections for Ukraine as part of Trump Summit.
President Donald Trump meets with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin Friday, Aug. 15, 2025, at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska. At left is Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and second from right is Secretary of State Marco Rubio. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)
BY JILL COLVIN
Updated 9:49 AM EDT, August 17, 2025
Share
NEW YORK (AP) — Special U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff said Sunday that Russian leader Vladimir Putin agreed at his summit with President Donald Trump to allow the U.S. and European allies to offer Ukraine a security guarantee resembling NATO’s collective defense mandate as part of an eventual deal to end the 3 1/2-year war.
“We were able to win the following concession: That the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in NATO,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Witkoff said it was the first time he had heard Putin agree to that.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, speaking at a news conference in Brussels with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said that “we welcome President Trump’s willingness to contribute to Article 5-like security guarantees for Ukraine. and the ‘Coalition of the willing’ -- including the European Union -- is ready to do its share.”
Witkoff, offering some of the first details of what was discussed at Friday’s summit in Alaska, said the two sides agreeing to “robust security guarantees that I would describe as game-changing.” He added that Russia said that it would make a legislative commitment not to go after any additional territory in Ukraine.
https://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/us-envoy-says-putin-agreed-to-security-20821184.php
TOP
Retired Teacher
Thanks!!
Scott
Verified User
To say Putin was "provoked" to invade a sovereign country is Russian propaganda.No, it's the truth. It's how American Professor John Mearsheimer was able to predict Ukraine getting wrecked if it continued along the path it was on then 10 years ago. A good article on the subject can be seen here:
'Ukraine going to be wrecked': After Zelenskyy Trump spat, John Mearsheimer's 2015 prediction goes viral - BusinessToday
In this video, Mearsheimer can be heard making some startling predictions about Ukraine riding high on the backing of the US and other Western powers.www.businesstoday.in
Now you're just repeating yourself. So to recap for the audience, Lurch said he believes that Russia's military operation in Ukraine only happened after years of provocations by the west as "Russian propaganda". I said that no, it's the truth, and I linked to an article from India's Business Today that points out how John Mearsheimer was able to predict Ukraine getting wrecked if it continued along the path it was on 10 years ago. All Lurch did to "counter" my evidence was just repeat his "Russia Propaganda" mantra.
Scott
Verified User
No.Perhaps, but the important thing is that it's true. American Professor and Statesman Jeffrey Sachs got into the details of this in a speech he gave to European Parliament a few months ago. Quoting from an article made out of said speech:
**
As you know, Viktor Yanukovych was elected as president of Ukraine in 2010 on the platform of Ukraine’s neutrality. Russia had no territorial interests or designs in Ukraine at all. I know. I was there off-and-on during these years. What Russia was negotiating during 2010 was a 25-year lease to 2042 for Sevastopol naval base. That’s it. There were no Russian demands for Crimea, or for the Donbas. Nothing like that at all. The idea that Putin is reconstructing the Russian empire is childish propaganda. Excuse me.
If anyone knows the day-to-day and year-to-year history, this is childish stuff. Yet childish stuff seems to work better than adult stuff. So, there were no territorial demands at all before the 2014 coup [in Ukraine]. Yet the United States decided that Yanukovych must be overthrown because he favored neutrality and opposed NATO enlargement. It’s called a regime change operation.
[snip]
Now in 2014, the U.S. worked actively to overthrow Yanukovych. Everybody knows the phone call intercepted by my Columbia University colleague, Victoria Nuland, and the U.S. ambassador, Geoffrey Pyatt. You don’t get better evidence. The Russians intercepted her call, and they put it on the Internet.
It’s fascinating. By doing that, they all got promoted in the Biden administration. That’s the job. When the Maidan occurred, I was called soon after. “Professor Sachs, the new Ukrainian prime minister would like to see you to talk about the economic crisis.” So, I flew to Kyiv, and I was walked around the Maidan. And I was told how the U.S. paid the money for all the people around the Maidan, the “spontaneous” Revolution of Dignity.
Ladies and gentlemen, please, how did all those Ukrainian media outlets suddenly appear at the time of the Maidan? Where did all this organization come from? Where did all these buses come from? Where did all those people come from? Are you kidding? This is an organized effort. And it’s not a secret, except perhaps to citizens of Europe and the United States. Everyone else understands it quite clearly.
Then after the coup came the Minsk agreements, especially Minsk II, which, incidentally, was modeled on South Tyrolean autonomy for the ethnic Germans in Italy. The Belgians too can relate to Minsk II very well, as it called for autonomy and language rights of the Russian speakers of Eastern Ukraine. Minsk II was supported unanimously by the U.N. Security Council. (The Minsk II agreement was endorsed by the United Nations Security Council through Resolution 2202, which was adopted unanimously on Feb. 17, 2015.)
Yet the United States and Ukraine decided it would not be enforced. Germany and France, the guarantors of the Normandy process, also let it be ignored. This dismissal of Minsk II was another direct American unipolar action with Europe as usual playing a completely useless subsidiary role though it was guarantor of the agreement.
Trump won the 2016 election and then expanded arms shipments to Ukraine. There were many thousands of deaths in the shelling by Ukraine in the Donbas. There was no implementation of the Minsk II agreement.
Then Biden came into office in 2021. I hoped for better but was profoundly disappointed once again. I used to be a member of the Democratic Party. I now am a member of no party because both are the same anyway. The Democrats became complete warmongers over time, and there was not one voice in the party calling for peace. Just as with most of your parliamentarians, the same way.
At the end of 2021, Putin put on the table a last effort to reach a modus operandi with the U.S., in two security agreement drafts, one with Europe and one with the United States. He put the Russia-U.S. draft agreement on the table on Dec. 15, 2021.
Following that, I had an hour-long call with [National Security Advisor] Jake Sullivan in the White House, begging, “Jake, avoid the war. You can avoid the war. All the U.S. has to do is say, ‘NATO will not enlarge to Ukraine.’” And he said to me, “Oh, NATO’s not going to enlarge to Ukraine. Don’t worry about it.”
I said, “Jake, say it publicly.”
“No. No. No. We can’t say it publicly.”
I said, “Jake, you’re going to have a war over something that isn’t even going to happen?”
He said, “Don’t worry, Jeff. There will be no war.”
These are not very bright people. I’m telling you, if I can give you my honest view, they’re not very bright people. They talk to themselves. They don’t talk to anybody else. They play game theory. In noncooperative game theory, you don’t talk to the other side. You just make your strategy. This is the essence of non-cooperative game theory. It’s not negotiation theory. It’s not peacemaking theory. It is unilateral, noncooperative theory, if you know formal game theory.
**
Full article:
Jeffrey Sachs: The Geopolitics of Peace
The author explains manipulative U.S. post-war foreign policy to European MPs, explodes myths about Ukraine and urges an independent European foreign policy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjcMoDFU1xg&ab_channel=MichaelvonderSchulenburg This is an edited transcript of Professor Jeffrey Sachs’consortiumnews.com
The final straw was Ukraine's renewed assault on the Donbass Republics. Former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud gets into the details there:
**
In fact, as early as February 16 [2022], Joe Biden knows that the Ukrainians began to shell the civilian populations of Donbass, putting Vladimir Putin in front of a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem or to sit idle and watch Russian speakers from the Donbass being run over.
If he decides to intervene, Vladimir Putin can invoke the international obligation of “ Responsibility To Protect ” (R2P). But he knows that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention will trigger a shower of sanctions. Therefore, whether its intervention is limited to the Donbass or whether it goes further to put pressure on the West for the status of Ukraine, the price to be paid will be the same. This is what he explains in his speech on February 21.
That day, he acceded to the request of the Duma and recognized the independence of the two Republics of Donbass and, in the process, he signed treaties of friendship and assistance with them.
The Ukrainian artillery bombardments on the populations of Donbass continued and, on February 23, the two Republics requested military aid from Russia. On the 24th, Vladimir Putin invokes Article 51 of the United Nations Charter which provides for mutual military assistance within the framework of a defensive alliance.
In order to make the Russian intervention totally illegal in the eyes of the public we deliberately obscure the fact that the war actually started on February 16th. The Ukrainian army was preparing to attack the Donbass as early as 2021, as certain Russian and European intelligence services were well aware… The lawyers will judge.
**
Source:
Former NATO Military Analyst Blows the Whistle on West’s Ukraine Invasion Narrative
Jacques Baud, a NATO expert, denounces western coverage of the Ukraine invasion.scheerpost.com
I must admit, that's a very easy way to dismiss evidence you don't agree with.
Scott
Verified User
Insulting those you disagree with is also a very easy way to dismiss evidence you don't agree with.
Scott
Verified User
Stop making me agree with you.To say Putin was "provoked" to invade a sovereign country is Russian propaganda.No, it's the truth. It's how American Professor John Mearsheimer was able to predict Ukraine getting wrecked if it continued along the path it was on then 10 years ago. A good article on the subject can be seen here:
'Ukraine going to be wrecked': After Zelenskyy Trump spat, John Mearsheimer's 2015 prediction goes viral - BusinessToday
In this video, Mearsheimer can be heard making some startling predictions about Ukraine riding high on the backing of the US and other Western powers.
It's nice to know that those on the left and those on the right here can agree with each other from time to time. It's unfortunate that in this case, the evidence points in the opposite direction. As I told Lurch, it's easy to dismiss evidence that goes against your beliefs by repeating a mantra that supports yours. But isn't the point of discussions between people who disagree with each other to actually look at the evidence presented by those we disagree with?
Scott
Verified User
Seeing how Jarod was the one who used the acronym, I'm guessing he was going for "Putin's Pet" or something like that, but I prefer Peace President in this case
TOP
Retired Teacher
It's just perfect, isn't it?Seeing how Jarod was the one who used the acronym, I'm guessing he was going for "Putin's Pet" or something like that, but I prefer Peace President in this case
QP!
Verified User
Which is why Trump loves the "poorly educated".
Trump understands that announcements that never end up in any written deal are enough for the "poorly educated" to clap like seals while not caring if they see any follow up.
We have all these announced 'sanction trade deals' with the seals clapping and yet we do not see them being put in to written deals.
QP!
Verified User
Putin has been crystal clear that he simply does not accept the independent existence of Ukraine and other States he considers critical parts of the former USSR which he feels losing was the biggest travesty.
He sees no bigger calling for a Russian leader than to rebuild that block.
So while you can point at 'this trigger' or 'that trigger' as the reason Putin felt he had to attack, what you should not do is fail to understand Putin was going to find a trigger regardless.
To deny that is to say Putin himself was wrong about what he said and wanted and that you know better what he wanted and would have done.
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
Kremlin Leaks Footage Showing Trump Fawning Over Putin
The state-run Russian international news network Russia Today (RT) has released behind-the-scenes video from Alaska that appears to show President Donald Trump fawning over Vladimir Putin.
The video shared by the Kremlin shows Trump and Putin standing together backstage near where they delivered public remarks following their three-hour meeting.
Despite walking away without a deal and without sharing any details on progress toward ending the war in Ukraine, the president could be seen laughing as he spoke to Putin.
The only person standing with the two leaders as they spoke was Putin’s translator.
Kremlin Leaks Footage Showing Trump Fawning Over Putin
The state-run Russian international news network Russia Today (RT) has released behind-the-scenes video from Alaska that appears to show President Donald Trump fawning over Vladimir Putin. The video shared by the Kremlin shows Trump and Putin standing together backstage near where they delivered...
Scott
Verified User
Quote him actually saying that then.
Again, quote him actually saying that and you'd have a case.
I've seen absolutely no evidence for your assertion, but by all means, try and find some to present if you can. What I -do- have is evidence to the contrary- that is, before the West's meddling in Ukraine, Russia had absolutely no interest in seizing any part of the country. This was pointed out by American Professor and Statesman Jeffrey Sachs in a speech he gave to European Parliament a few months ago. Quoting:
**
As you know, Viktor Yanukovych was elected as president of Ukraine in 2010 on the platform of Ukraine’s neutrality. Russia had no territorial interests or designs in Ukraine at all. I know. I was there off-and-on during these years. What Russia was negotiating during 2010 was a 25-year lease to 2042 for Sevastopol naval base. That’s it. There were no Russian demands for Crimea, or for the Donbas. Nothing like that at all. The idea that Putin is reconstructing the Russian empire is childish propaganda. Excuse me.
If anyone knows the day-to-day and year-to-year history, this is childish stuff. Yet childish stuff seems to work better than adult stuff. So, there were no territorial demands at all before the 2014 coup [in Ukraine]. Yet the United States decided that Yanukovych must be overthrown because he favored neutrality and opposed NATO enlargement. It’s called a regime change operation.
**
Source:
Jeffrey Sachs: The Geopolitics of Peace
The author explains manipulative U.S. post-war foreign policy to European MPs, explodes myths about Ukraine and urges an independent European foreign policy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjcMoDFU1xg&ab_channel=MichaelvonderSchulenburg This is an edited transcript of Professor Jeffrey Sachs’
consortiumnews.com
Again, quote him if he said it. It's easy to say that Putin said whatever you want, what's hard is to get actual quotes to back up your assertions.