While walking with Zack this afternoon, I decided to listen to the Trump-Zelensky meeting to see what all the fuss was about.

Honestly, I’m glad these discussions are being aired live. It makes things more transparent and allows everyone to see the deep-rooted issues at play.

From my perspective, the U.S. wants both an end to the war and a return on its financial investment.

The main issue seems to be Zelensky’s unwillingness to compromise on territorial concessions or rebuilding costs. In his view, Russia started the war and destroyed Ukraine’s cities—therefore, Russia should be responsible for both returning occupied territories and paying for the damages.

In reality, as Trump pointed out, that’s not realistic. There has to be compromise on both sides, whether one believes it to be fair or not.

Zelensky appeared frustrated with the deal as it stands, mainly because there are no guarantees of future security. From his perspective, while Putin may not restart the war while Trump is in office, there’s no assurance he won’t in the future.

Trump countered by arguing that no one can predict the future, and decisions must be made based on present circumstances. His stance is that a ceasefire should happen now, with further negotiations taking place later.

At this point, I think Zelensky is letting his hatred of Putin cloud his judgment. While I understand his concerns, the logical conclusion of his approach is to fight until a definitive winner emerges.

But those are just my thoughts.

I'll search up for others' opinions later and see if I'm missing any context. If you have a different perspective, please feel free to let me know.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

What a rational read. Legend

Thanks friend. I've got biases like everyone else, but I try my best.

I wonder if Trump would be happy to take the same deal if their situations were reversed.

It's a no win situation but sometimes, it's better to cut your losses. To do so, egos must be put aside. Could Trump do so?

You’re right, and I don’t think he could.

I also don’t think Zelenski is wrong in what he said, words on a paper will not stop Putin doing it again.

Meaningless hypothetical argument is retarded.

You’re right, nothing has ever been accomplished by asking “What if…”

Not really no unless you are conducting a real experiment that you actually do. Believing that thinking “what if…” is the same as “finding out” for real is fucking retarded.

Many questions in physics get asked before we have the technology to find out. Should we not bother asking them unless we can find out right now?

For most philosophical questions there is no way of definitively finding out. Would the world be a better place without philosophy?

MLK Jrs famous speech was essentially a what if question. Was that a pointless endeavour?

My interpretation of the interview was that it seemed like JD escalated things. Given Zelenskyys history campaigning for Harris I wouldn't be surprised if they want to force Z out by making him look bad. This was a great way to do that. Would be interesting to know how Z's people at home react to that meeting.

Agreed.

From what I've gathered, JD got triggered at Zelensky's demeanor.

I'm only basing this on information from others, as I did watch the meeting. I only listened to it. But people seem to say Zelensky was rolling his eyes and looked disrespectful, which is what triggered JD.

Confirmation on that would be nice. I'm just not interested in watching the whole thing again.

I did watch it with video here on nostr. There was definitely a visual component to Z's communication. I don't think it was excessive. It seemed like mostly frustration that the press wasn't letting him talk and kept asking Trump questions.

I did find the press quite disrespectful towards Zelensky, to be honest. I could totally see why that'd get to him.

Ukraine's independence and sovereignty was guaranteed by Russia (and other signatories, including the US) in 1994 via the Budapest Memorandum

There should be zero tolerance for Russia's aggression against Ukraine and seizure of their territory

If Trump truly wants peace he can take a hard line with Putin, increase pressure and force a withdrawal

That's, to me, the strongest point Zelensky made as to why he isnt willing to compromise.

If Zelenksy can't trust Putin to honor the existing agreement between their two countries, how do you expect him to trust future agreements?

If Trump no longer wants to support Ukraine, fine. But forcing Ukraine to concede land to an aggressor that they have an existing independence agreement with, in the name of peace, is a scam. What stops Putin from doing it again?

"If Zelenksy can't trust Putin to honor the existing agreement between their two countries, how do you expect him to trust future agreements?"

I don't fault him for not trusting future agreements. I totally get where he's coming from.

"If Trump no longer wants to support Ukraine, fine. But forcing Ukraine to concede land to an aggressor that they have an existing independence agreement with, in the name of peace, is a scam. What stops Putin from doing it again? "

Ukraine doesn’t have to sign the deal if they don’t want to. But from my perspective, not signing would be a mistake. There’s no true victory for Ukraine either way, but refusing the deal could lead to a far worse outcome.

Without U.S. support, could Ukraine continue fighting back, or would they ultimately lose the war? I might be wrong, but I see them losing—meaning even more territory lost and more Ukrainian lives sacrificed.

If they sign the deal, they give up some territory and 50% of their mineral assets to the U.S. Does that guarantee lasting peace? No.

However, with U.S. companies established in Ukraine due to the mineral deal, would Russia be willing to take the risk of invading again? I’d say the probabilities are much lower.

Excellent concise summary

thanks for posting!