| The carve up of the plunder 08:33 - Mar 17 with 2199 views | Churchman |
Trump’s cosy date with Putin about Ukraine described as ‘dividing up certain assets’. In other words, surrender terms which will be tougher than those imposed on Germany in 1919. The end of Ukraine as a sovereign country and booty in the bank for America..
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/17/trump-says-he-and-putin-will-discu
“We will be talking about land. We will be talking about power plants,” Trump said, when asked about concessions. “I think we have a lot of it already discussed very much by both sides, Ukraine and Russia. We are already talking about that, dividing up certain assets.”
I hope Trump is invited to the Red Square victory parade. He deserves to be having played such an important part in Russia’s conquest and exceeding Putin’s demands.
This is disgusting. If anyone thinks Putin’s ambitions will be satisfied with this hard won victory, they’re living in cuckoo land. I give it six months before a Putin puppet is running Ukraine and it ‘votes’ to join the motherland. Then on to the next meal. Baltics? Poland? Balkans? It’s a tasty menu.
Forget big flags, pressed suits and handshakes, Europe needs to re-arm and fast. |  | | |  |
| The carve up of the plunder on 08:39 - Mar 17 with 2151 views | noggin |
Georgia and Moldova to begin with? |  |
| |
| The carve up of the plunder on 08:55 - Mar 17 with 2100 views | Coastalblue |
I totally agree with all of your sentiment there, I do think however that Poland is something of a different proposition these days and I'm not sure even Putin would fancy that. |  |
| |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:17 - Mar 17 with 2031 views | Pinewoodblue |
Sounds to me as if Trump wants to allow Putin control of areas beyond those they already hold. A complete carve up. |  |
| |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:21 - Mar 17 with 2021 views | Steve_M |
FT reporting that a load of hedge funds are very keen to profit from Trump's capitulation to Putin.
"Investors are turning to sanctions-proof bets on Russian bonds and the rouble to wager that Donald Trump’s rapprochement with Vladimir Putin will send a wave of capital back into Russia’s economy.
"Hedge funds and brokers have been scoping out how to trade Russian assets that have been shunned by the west but which they believe could rally sharply if the US president relaxes sanctions as part of a deal to broker a ceasefire in Russia’s war against Ukraine, investors and traders said."
https://www.ft.com/content/21a7fc36-8244-4806-aecd-fb268344d80c
Aside from the amorality of it, par for the course really, there's a lack of learning here about how difficult it might be to extract money from a country where the rule of law has long become an arbitrary measure. |  |
| |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:23 - Mar 17 with 1994 views | Churchman |
| The carve up of the plunder on 08:55 - Mar 17 by Coastalblue |
I totally agree with all of your sentiment there, I do think however that Poland is something of a different proposition these days and I'm not sure even Putin would fancy that. |
Now is the time if I’m a lunatic dictator. Poland is desperately spending on defence. No paltry 2.5% sometime never for them. The longer Russia leaves it the more difficult it’ll get. If I were Putin, I’d go now. As soon as possible. A battle hardened army of 1.5m, unlimited drones, missiles and experience against a military of 200k. No contest.
There’s nothing to stop them. Go through Belarus, two friendly nations to the south in Slovakia and Hungary and what left of Ukraine has to fall into the fold.
Providing Putin supports Trumps territory grabs - Greenland, Panama first, the US won’t intervene. Trump has made it clear - if you cannot defend yourself or don’t pay protection money, see you later. | | | |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:30 - Mar 17 with 1950 views | mellowblue |
| The carve up of the plunder on 08:39 - Mar 17 by noggin |
Georgia and Moldova to begin with? |
Putin has already had a nibble at Georgia, taking back and ethnically cleansing Russian dominated provinces. Relations have since thawed and I do not see Georgia on Putin's to-do list. Not his priority one, anyway ! |  | | |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:34 - Mar 17 with 1937 views | StokieBlue |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:23 - Mar 17 by Churchman |
Now is the time if I’m a lunatic dictator. Poland is desperately spending on defence. No paltry 2.5% sometime never for them. The longer Russia leaves it the more difficult it’ll get. If I were Putin, I’d go now. As soon as possible. A battle hardened army of 1.5m, unlimited drones, missiles and experience against a military of 200k. No contest.
There’s nothing to stop them. Go through Belarus, two friendly nations to the south in Slovakia and Hungary and what left of Ukraine has to fall into the fold.
Providing Putin supports Trumps territory grabs - Greenland, Panama first, the US won’t intervene. Trump has made it clear - if you cannot defend yourself or don’t pay protection money, see you later. |
Given their performance in Ukraine, Russia wouldn't have much chance in a conventional war against Poland. That is before the EU gets involved as no way they allow an EU country to get attacked in that way regardless of NATO or what the US does.
Not sure where you are getting "battle hardened army of 1.5m from" - most of the fighting in Ukraine has been done by conscripts and a good majority of them have died. They might list their army of being on that size but it's not battle hardened and it's not well equipped anymore.
Russia really isn't in a position to steamroller over Europe, it's not 1985. If they were then Ukraine would have fallen in a few weeks, not still be fighting years later.
SB |  | | |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:49 - Mar 17 with 1837 views | Guthrum |
People are assuming Trump will hand everything to Putin. But what if he's decided it's America's plunder? He will then not be keen to give that away to someone less reliant on US support. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:56 - Mar 17 with 1804 views | Guthrum |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:34 - Mar 17 by StokieBlue |
Given their performance in Ukraine, Russia wouldn't have much chance in a conventional war against Poland. That is before the EU gets involved as no way they allow an EU country to get attacked in that way regardless of NATO or what the US does.
Not sure where you are getting "battle hardened army of 1.5m from" - most of the fighting in Ukraine has been done by conscripts and a good majority of them have died. They might list their army of being on that size but it's not battle hardened and it's not well equipped anymore.
Russia really isn't in a position to steamroller over Europe, it's not 1985. If they were then Ukraine would have fallen in a few weeks, not still be fighting years later.
SB |
Moreover, they have very long borders to guard. Which takes a lot of the available troops. Plus strategic forces need to be taken out as well.
Technically, none of the fighting in Ukraine has been done by conscripts. They are all contract soldiers and "volunteers". Putin has been very careful in that respect, as using conscripts would impact on the metropolitan populations he doesn't want to upset. Recruits from other ethnic regions are much less of a problem. | |
| |
| The carve up of the plunder on 10:06 - Mar 17 with 1776 views | StokieBlue |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:56 - Mar 17 by Guthrum |
Moreover, they have very long borders to guard. Which takes a lot of the available troops. Plus strategic forces need to be taken out as well.
Technically, none of the fighting in Ukraine has been done by conscripts. They are all contract soldiers and "volunteers". Putin has been very careful in that respect, as using conscripts would impact on the metropolitan populations he doesn't want to upset. Recruits from other ethnic regions are much less of a problem. |
You're splitting hairs there.
They are conscripts in all but name drawn from the countryside rather than the cities but they aren't given a choice.
SB | | | |
| The carve up of the plunder on 10:09 - Mar 17 with 1760 views | Churchman |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:49 - Mar 17 by Guthrum |
People are assuming Trump will hand everything to Putin. But what if he's decided it's America's plunder? He will then not be keen to give that away to someone less reliant on US support. |
Well he handed Putin what he’d originally wanted before he even sat down to discuss it. Art of the deal. Putin, if he’s got any sense will be ramping up his demands right here right now. I would. I’d start with demilitarisation of Western Europe as an opening play in return for the raw materials and a nuclear reduction treaty.
I can’t see that being a problem to Trump. He doesn’t see allies - just entities to take from. Two big powers is easier than three to deal with so the quicker Western Europe has its remaining teeth pulled the better. I suspect this is one of a number of aspects where Putin and Trump are on the same page.
Trump’s interest is the Americas and Far East. The dynamic looks pretty obvious to me. This is ‘hard power’ at work - something the soft western countries are way off the pace with. | | | |
| The carve up of the plunder on 12:13 - Mar 17 with 1584 views | Guthrum |
| The carve up of the plunder on 10:09 - Mar 17 by Churchman |
Well he handed Putin what he’d originally wanted before he even sat down to discuss it. Art of the deal. Putin, if he’s got any sense will be ramping up his demands right here right now. I would. I’d start with demilitarisation of Western Europe as an opening play in return for the raw materials and a nuclear reduction treaty.
I can’t see that being a problem to Trump. He doesn’t see allies - just entities to take from. Two big powers is easier than three to deal with so the quicker Western Europe has its remaining teeth pulled the better. I suspect this is one of a number of aspects where Putin and Trump are on the same page.
Trump’s interest is the Americas and Far East. The dynamic looks pretty obvious to me. This is ‘hard power’ at work - something the soft western countries are way off the pace with. |
Thing is, how much in real terms has Trump given to Putin so far?
He's shaken up Europe, but that's with a view to increasing defence spending. He's offered sanction relief, but has actually let some exemptions lapse. The flow of intelligence, weapons and supplies was restored after a matter of days. He hasn't specified Ukrainian territorial concessions, or Russian ones, for that matter.
About the most you can say is he isn't prepared to sponsor total Ukrainian victory. But then neither was Biden. | |
| |
| Part of the problem on 15:15 - Mar 17 with 1456 views | Guthrum |
Is that Trump is such a deeply unpleasant individual, it is very easy to fall into pre-emptive outrage at what it looks like he's going to do (but hasn't yet).
However, this wastes mental energy which will be needed to deal with terrible things he actually is doing. It's part of a deliberate ploy, keeping opponents off-balance and exhausted by continual chaos and extraordinary statements.
In addition, Trump himself feeds off that energy. The upset of others boosts him.
We have to be wary of getting tangled up in this web, getting more trapped as we thrash around, when we're going to need maximum sharpness to overcome the problems he causes. | |
| |
| Part of the problem on 16:52 - Mar 17 with 1367 views | mellowblue |
| Part of the problem on 15:15 - Mar 17 by Guthrum |
Is that Trump is such a deeply unpleasant individual, it is very easy to fall into pre-emptive outrage at what it looks like he's going to do (but hasn't yet).
However, this wastes mental energy which will be needed to deal with terrible things he actually is doing. It's part of a deliberate ploy, keeping opponents off-balance and exhausted by continual chaos and extraordinary statements.
In addition, Trump himself feeds off that energy. The upset of others boosts him.
We have to be wary of getting tangled up in this web, getting more trapped as we thrash around, when we're going to need maximum sharpness to overcome the problems he causes. |
exactly this, also his first aim was to lower Ukraine's expectations to the lowest degree possible. Make negotiating with Putin a lot easier if the concessions are in place, hence the deliberate humiliation of Zelensky, showing the world that Ukraine are very much the junior partner when it comes to the negotiations. Alas it is so, but they cannot win this war and they are the side that needs a settlement. Otherwise they will be fully behind the Dnieper by Autumn. And that will be one of Russia's main war aims completed. | | | |
| The carve up of the plunder on 17:27 - Mar 17 with 1322 views | backwaywhen |
Those assets all belong to Ukraine, why shaft the poor b#ggers after all they have and currently going through ….the world stinks of greed . | | | |
| The carve up of the plunder on 18:51 - Mar 17 with 1216 views | Churchman |
| The carve up of the plunder on 09:34 - Mar 17 by StokieBlue |
Given their performance in Ukraine, Russia wouldn't have much chance in a conventional war against Poland. That is before the EU gets involved as no way they allow an EU country to get attacked in that way regardless of NATO or what the US does.
Not sure where you are getting "battle hardened army of 1.5m from" - most of the fighting in Ukraine has been done by conscripts and a good majority of them have died. They might list their army of being on that size but it's not battle hardened and it's not well equipped anymore.
Russia really isn't in a position to steamroller over Europe, it's not 1985. If they were then Ukraine would have fallen in a few weeks, not still be fighting years later.
SB |
The Russian army is 1.32m, 2m in reserve. 1.5m is an aim so yes as of today I’ve exaggerated it. Apols.
https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id=
For comparison, here’s Poland
https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id= | | | |
| Part of the problem on 19:04 - Mar 17 with 1188 views | pointofblue |
| Part of the problem on 15:15 - Mar 17 by Guthrum |
Is that Trump is such a deeply unpleasant individual, it is very easy to fall into pre-emptive outrage at what it looks like he's going to do (but hasn't yet).
However, this wastes mental energy which will be needed to deal with terrible things he actually is doing. It's part of a deliberate ploy, keeping opponents off-balance and exhausted by continual chaos and extraordinary statements.
In addition, Trump himself feeds off that energy. The upset of others boosts him.
We have to be wary of getting tangled up in this web, getting more trapped as we thrash around, when we're going to need maximum sharpness to overcome the problems he causes. |
I'm not a fan of the Starmer government in general but, for this reason, I think he's handled Trump well so far. React to what he does rather than what he says, so not to be deflected by soundbites.
Though I was aggrieved when I read the 'assets' remark earlier. | |
| |
| Part of the problem on 19:15 - Mar 17 with 1148 views | Churchman |
| Part of the problem on 19:04 - Mar 17 by pointofblue |
I'm not a fan of the Starmer government in general but, for this reason, I think he's handled Trump well so far. React to what he does rather than what he says, so not to be deflected by soundbites.
Though I was aggrieved when I read the 'assets' remark earlier. |
I agree with that, despite the slap in the face delivered by Trump with 25% steel tariffs.
Starmer is working from home a position of extreme weakness (not of his making) so has to go carefully, realistically. I’d tell Trump to go f himself - there’s a reason why I could never have been a politician beyond intelligence and possessing a sense of right and wrong!
For me it’s very much what is happening behind the scenes where the real work is done that really matters. | | | |
| Part of the problem on 19:26 - Mar 17 with 1116 views | bluejacko |
| Part of the problem on 16:52 - Mar 17 by mellowblue |
exactly this, also his first aim was to lower Ukraine's expectations to the lowest degree possible. Make negotiating with Putin a lot easier if the concessions are in place, hence the deliberate humiliation of Zelensky, showing the world that Ukraine are very much the junior partner when it comes to the negotiations. Alas it is so, but they cannot win this war and they are the side that needs a settlement. Otherwise they will be fully behind the Dnieper by Autumn. And that will be one of Russia's main war aims completed. |
What makes you think that the front lines will collapse in Russias favour They are at the moment so short of everything that they are using donkeys to move supplies up to the front!
The strategic stockpiles are nearly exhausted and they cannot replace losses quickly even with old soviet era AFVs !
Ukraine is targeting russias industrial base nightly with drones,they are far from a spent cause despite what Trump would like to believe! | | | |
| Part of the problem on 20:14 - Mar 17 with 1053 views | mikeybloo88 |
| Part of the problem on 19:15 - Mar 17 by Churchman |
I agree with that, despite the slap in the face delivered by Trump with 25% steel tariffs.
Starmer is working from home a position of extreme weakness (not of his making) so has to go carefully, realistically. I’d tell Trump to go f himself - there’s a reason why I could never have been a politician beyond intelligence and possessing a sense of right and wrong!
For me it’s very much what is happening behind the scenes where the real work is done that really matters. |
Thank fk you’re not a diplomat... I like your football posts but you seem way too emotional and invested in the Trump/Ukraine/Russia stuff. Tone the rhetoric down a notch might be good... |  | | |
| The carve up of the plunder on 20:21 - Mar 17 with 1018 views | StokieBlue |
That's not a realistic deployable amount though otherwise they would have steamrollered Ukraine rather than taking men from the countryside to fight.
All the evidence suggests they can't use that number and can't supply that number.
Real world context is more important than theoretical numbers.
SB
Edit: That website suggests that they have 550000 army personnel and the rest is conscription age people. Certainly not well equipped and battle hardened as originally suggested. Just think we need to be wary not to exaggerate the threat which leads to fear and bad decisions. We certainly should increase defence spending across Europe so we aren't reliant on the US though. [Post edited 17 Mar 20:25]
| | | |
| The carve up of the plunder on 22:09 - Mar 17 with 889 views | bluejacko |
| The carve up of the plunder on 20:21 - Mar 17 by StokieBlue |
That's not a realistic deployable amount though otherwise they would have steamrollered Ukraine rather than taking men from the countryside to fight.
All the evidence suggests they can't use that number and can't supply that number.
Real world context is more important than theoretical numbers.
SB
Edit: That website suggests that they have 550000 army personnel and the rest is conscription age people. Certainly not well equipped and battle hardened as originally suggested. Just think we need to be wary not to exaggerate the threat which leads to fear and bad decisions. We certainly should increase defence spending across Europe so we aren't reliant on the US though. [Post edited 17 Mar 20:25]
|
We certainly should increase defence spending across Europe so we aren't reliant on the US though.
[Post edited 17 Mar 20:25]
Hence Canada and Portugal looking likely to cancel their F35 contracts | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
