But Vance watched the reports on TV. Putin's puppets are in charge and their comrades in arms support them.
And just think, they are the very same people who posted on this very board that it was the Democrats that were the communists. Only silence from them now that the real communists have been revealed.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I, personally, have not watched the full unedited clip shared above, but plan to today. I posted the person above's take because he is very pro-Ukraine as someone who escaped Russia at a young age and was very critical of the clips that surfaced yesterday.
At DT, context and meaning are a scarecrow kicking at moving goalposts.
A Russian state media reporter gained entry to the Oval Office for Trump-Zelensky sit-down
A member of Russia’s state-owned news agency gained access to the Oval Office on Friday to cover President Trump’s sit-down with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky – even as the AP and Reuters were barred from the high-level meeting. The White House said the journalist was not authorized to be in the press pool.
A correspondent for TASS, a Russian state media organization, was among a group of hand-picked pool reporters present in the Oval Office for the leaders’ meeting, which is part of the US’ efforts to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. The testy Trump-Zelensky sit-down may yield a signed deal that would exchange US access to Ukraine’s mineral resources for security guarantees.
Though the group of pool reporters in the Oval Office was hand picked, the White House has denied the TASS staffer was permitted entry.
“TASS was not on the approved list of media for today’s pool,” a White House official told CNN in a statement. “As soon as it came to the attention of press office staff that he was in the Oval, he was escorted out by the Press Secretary.”
“He is not on the approved list for the press conference,” the official said.
The apparent gaffe comes three days after the White House announced it would wrest the choice of pool reporters from the White House Correspondents’ Association, breaking with decades of precedent. Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, promoted the move as democratic on Tuesday, emphasizing that the WHCA “should no longer have a monopoly over the privilege of press access at the White House.”
Despite assurances from the White House that the TASS correspondent had not been approved, the staffer’s presence in the Oval Office highlights a significant breach of protocol from the White House. As the White House takes control of the pool roster, the TASS staffer’s presence represents a potential security lapse on the White House’s part.
Though a member of Russia’s state-owned news agency was allowed access to the Oval Office — albeit allegedly accidentally — pool staffers emphasized that the Associated Press and Reuters were not permitted to sit in on the talks.
Reuters was most recently barred from covering Trump’s first cabinet meeting on Wednesday. And the AP, one of the world’s largest news outlets, was banned from the Oval Office and Air Force One indefinitely two weeks ago over the wire service’s continued use of the “Gulf of Mexico” in addition to the “Gulf of America.” The AP has since sued three Trump administration officials over the ban, though a federal judge on Wednesday did not direct the White House to immediately restore the wire service’s access.
The incident is not the first time the Trump administration has been involved in a controversy with Russia’s state-owned news agency. In 2017, the first Trump administration came under fire when Alexandr Scherbak, a TASS photographer, was invited to cover a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. During that sit-down, the Trump administration opted to bar all US reporters from photographing the meeting, allowing access only to White House photographers and Scherbak.
Introducing that new musical group..... The Spin Doctors!
I dont know. I think Trumptards thought it was awesome to see Trump get tough with that upstart guy with a funny accent. They probably think Z should have been on his knees and offering to pucker up to Trumps fat wobbly posterior. If Trump wants to parrot Putin propaganda about how many have died or how many cities are rubble or how Ukraine doesnt have a hope .... Well Z should have shut up and said YES SIR. . . . Trump of Cult is going to lap ot up. Trumptards will spam the boards here with Russian talking points like we've already seen. There is no problem with Trump being best Buds with Putin ... They are both strong leaders. All good bro
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Even Some Republicans Are Shocked by Trump-Zelenskiy Shouting Match
This moment is a point of climax in the GOP’s turn away from Ukraine and toward Russia. But the meeting left at least some Republicans shocked.
“Our White House leaders sound like the Democrats in the 1970s and 1980s in regard to Russia. Reagan was right then,” Representative Don Bacon told The Wall Street Journal’s Olivia Beavers. “A bad day for America’s foreign policy. Ukraine wants independence, free markets, and rule of law. It wants to be part of the West. Russia hates us and our Western values. We should be clear that we stand for freedom.” Bacon was notably one of 35 Republicans who voted with Democrats to establish the investigative January 6 commission in 2021.
Representative Mike Lawler, an otherwise staunch Trump supporter, felt similarly.
“Today’s meeting in the Oval Office was a missed opportunity for both the United States and Ukraine—an agreement that would undoubtedly result in stronger economic and security cooperation,” Lawler wrote on X. “Diplomacy is tough and often times there are serious differences of opinion and heated exchanges behind closed doors. Having this spill out into public view was a disaster—especially for Ukraine. As someone who fundamentally believes that Russia, China and Iran are not our friends or allies and continues to believe it is important to support Ukraine, it was extremely short-sighted to engage in that type of exchange in front of the US and international press as you work towards an agreement. Sadly, the only winner of today is Vladimir Putin.”
I, personally, have not watched the full unedited clip shared above, but plan to today. I posted the person above's take because he is very pro-Ukraine as someone who escaped Russia at a young age and was very critical of the clips that surfaced yesterday.
After watching the video....the vast majority of it is perfectly fine in terms or rhetoric, taking points, seemingly moving in the direction all parties wanted it to go down. At the 43 min mark, it turns into a debate where Zelenksky should not have made his challenge. It was a dumb comment and terribly timed....he should have bit his tongue. That said, Vance's response was way over the top IMO, was not warranted, and he was playing to the cameras. It was not a good look for him and it should be viewed as very poor political theatre during a very sensitive time. I blame the Vance's reaction and response on the quick decline of the talks.
I don't think this really changes things in the end and will get back on the guardrails but this wasn't good.
At DT, context and meaning are a scarecrow kicking at moving goalposts.
I find that a reasonable response. I might be a little more critical of trump and vance overall. 2 on 1 and it looked like they were uber prepared for that theatre. But Z should have handled differently also.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
If Trump doesn’t drop the BS and stand with Ukraine, I for one will be sharpening my pitchfork. I’ve had it with these billionaire silver-spoon babies and their fascist BS. I am not alone. I will always punch NAZIs in the nose.
“JD Vance was traded, by his mom, for perk 30s as a child… now I get that.” ~ a truly American response stolen from a Twitter post.
If anyone is interested in a truly enlightening and interesting perspective from a former Ukraine president, this as a radio interview that is worth 10 minutes of your time. It is on something called global player and you will need to create an account but it's free. The whole 2 hours is interesting and about 1/3 of it has points raised about whats going on right now including a former head of USAID who worked under Trump term 1.
Ukraine former PM is at 23 minutes. Its not bashing anyone or empty rhetoric but more discussing Ukraine from multiple perspectives and what would be required for peace. A peace that was lasting and didn't invite Russia to invade again.
Somebody brought up on tik tok last night that about 25 years ago, the territory of Ukraine was the third largest holder of nukes in the world. It gave those up through the Budapest Memorandum in 1994 in exchange for security agreements and prohibited the other nuke powers from using military force or economic coercion against Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan.
Budapest Memorandum from Wiki
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances Memorandum on Security Assurances in connection with the Republic of Belarus'/Republic of Kazakhstan's/Ukraine's accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
U.S. President Clinton, Russian President Yeltsin, and Ukrainian President Kravchuk after signing the Trilateral Statement in Moscow on 14 January 1994 Signed 5 December 1994
The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances comprises four substantially identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary, on 5 December 1994, to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The four memoranda were originally signed by four nuclear powers: Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom and France.[1] China gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.[2]
The memoranda, signed in Patria Hall at the Budapest Convention Center with U.S. Ambassador Donald M. Blinken amongst others in attendance,[3] prohibited Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom and France from threatening or using military force or economic coercion against Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, "except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations." As a result of other agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons.[4][5]
Russia breached the Budapest memorandum in 2014 with its annexation of Ukraine's Crimea.[6][7] As a response, the US, UK and France provided Ukraine with financial and military assistance, and imposed economic sanctions on Russia, while ruling out "any direct interventions to avoid a direct confrontation with Russia".[6]
From Harvard Kennedy school
Matthew Bunn Photo Matthew Bunn James R. Schlesinger Professor of the Practice of Energy, National Security, and Foreign Policy Abstract On December 5, 1994, leaders of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Russian Federation met in Budapest, Hungary, to pledge security assurances to Ukraine in connection with its accession to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as a non-nuclear-weapons state. The signature of the so-called Budapest Memorandum concluded arduous negotiations that resulted in Ukraine’s agreement to relinquish the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal, which the country inherited from the collapsed Soviet Union, and transfer all nuclear warheads to Russia for dismantlement. The signatories of the memorandum pledged to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity and inviolability of its borders, and to refrain from the use or threat of military force. Russia breached these commitments with its annexation of Crimea in 2014 and aggression in eastern Ukraine, bringing the meaning and value of security assurance pledged in the Memorandum under renewed scrutiny.
Norway fuel giant 'refuses to fill US submarines' after Trump-Zelensky clash Norwegian petroleum giant Haltbakk Bunkers has declared it will no longer help the US Navy. By Alex Evans, Deputy Audience Editor 18:40, Sat, Mar 1, 2025 | UPDATED: 14:30, Sun, Mar 2, 2025 1.1kBookmark Volodymyr Zelenskyy issues statement after Trump meeting A petrol giant in Norway has announced a ban on fuel sales to all US forces following Donald Trump's treatment of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House, it has been reported.
Norwegian firm Haltbakk Bunkers announced it will stop providing fuel to all American forces in Norway as it declared "No fuel to Americans!". The firm posted on social media to declare its support for Zelensky as it dealt a hammer blow to US President Trump following the heated spat televised from the Oval Office.
It said: "We have today been witnesses to the biggest s***how ever presented "live on tv" by the current American president and his vice president. Huge credit to the president of Ukraine restraining himself and for keeping calm even though USA put on a backstabbing tv show. It made us sick. Short and sweet. As a result, we have decided to immediate STOP as fuel provider to American forces in Norway and their ships calling Norwegian ports.
"No Fuel to Americans! We encourage all Norwegians and Europeans to follow our example. SLAVA UKRAINA"
Owner of the firm Gunnar Gran has told Norwegian maritime news site Kystens Næringsliv that 'not a litre of fuel' will be delivered 'until Trump is finished'.
Norway fuel giant 'refuses to fill US submarines' after Trump-Zelensky clash Norwegian petroleum giant Haltbakk Bunkers has declared it will no longer help the US Navy. By Alex Evans, Deputy Audience Editor 18:40, Sat, Mar 1, 2025 | UPDATED: 14:30, Sun, Mar 2, 2025 1.1kBookmark Volodymyr Zelenskyy issues statement after Trump meeting A petrol giant in Norway has announced a ban on fuel sales to all US forces following Donald Trump's treatment of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House, it has been reported.
Norwegian firm Haltbakk Bunkers announced it will stop providing fuel to all American forces in Norway as it declared "No fuel to Americans!". The firm posted on social media to declare its support for Zelensky as it dealt a hammer blow to US President Trump following the heated spat televised from the Oval Office.
It said: "We have today been witnesses to the biggest s***how ever presented "live on tv" by the current American president and his vice president. Huge credit to the president of Ukraine restraining himself and for keeping calm even though USA put on a backstabbing tv show. It made us sick. Short and sweet. As a result, we have decided to immediate STOP as fuel provider to American forces in Norway and their ships calling Norwegian ports.
"No Fuel to Americans! We encourage all Norwegians and Europeans to follow our example. SLAVA UKRAINA"
Owner of the firm Gunnar Gran has told Norwegian maritime news site Kystens Næringsliv that 'not a litre of fuel' will be delivered 'until Trump is finished'.
Not unexpected to see a backlash against the USA for their isolationist attitude and the way they (Trump and Vance) have parroted Putin talking points and propaganda. It may get worse.
Trump is very transactional - takes things personally - holds grudges and lashes out when he feels slighted. Other people in positions of influence are similarly minded. You might see this small step start a movement.
And I can hear all the really stoopid Trumptards thinking this is a good thing.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
BREAKING NEWS: Putin unleashes Iskander-M missile attack to 'sink container ship in Odesa carrying cargo of British weapons for Ukraine'
The Daily Mail is a rag and a mouth piece for the extreme right wing media/politics. It will be interesting to see how they react to the recent events - along with the Telegraph. The Telegraph used to be a respectable broadsheet and my paper of choice 30+ years ago ... it is now a sorry right wing agenda driven pile of poo. Wonder how far they will support Trump and Musk because the tolerance for supporting Russia and Putin in the UK is wayyy lower than in the USA under a Trump administration cosying up to Russia and it's narrative on Ukraine.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
I don't have a problem with the trump-zelensky interaction I do have a problem with them letting putin see it If it was behind closed doors, not an issue to me
Am I perfect? No Am I trying to be a better person? Also no
I don't know man. We are stuck in a war that sits at stalemate. I say us stuck in the war because we are the ones largely funding things for Ukraine. I am not in favor of just tossing billion after billion into an endless hole.
I don't like Putin and Russia, but the reality of the matter is that Russia is the one with the ability to lob nukes around the globe. We should be talking to Russia. At least we are. Under President Biden I don't think we ever talked. To me, that just wasn't responsible. There is truth in the saying about keeping your enemies close.
I am not saying we just bow to Putin, but we sure as hell need to be working to resolve this thing as fast as possible.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
All Z had to do was sign the minerals deal and save his country from further death and destruction. A MAJOR US investment in Ukraine minerals would be an enormous security "force" for Ukraine against Russia...not to mention Europe's (then) involvement there. Russia isn't going to attack non-offensive American interests in Ukraine.
Ukraine has/had NO CHANCE to win this war...it can be prolonged, but only with US $$$. Even then, Ukraine isn't getting back the ground lost in this war...that was never an option. So what is Z's end game here? Keep fighting - with our $$$ - and eventually outlast Putin? That's ridiculous. Just what is the goal in Z's mind?
Trump handed him an 'out' and a way to create financial opportunity to re-build his country...and he clearly and publicly rejected that idea and demanded something he is in no position to demand. Not to mention that Z's demand (NATO/security guarantees) would only further incentivize Putin to continue on / increase the offensive.
I challenge responders to this post to stick with the issue and not degrade discussion into further insults. How does a peace deal get done?
He did, but it was on behalf of the US govt and it was in agreement with EU countries who were giving aid to Ukraine and concerned about corruption. At least that's what i have read from multiple sources.
So not acting alone and not like what we've witnessed today in the oval office.
Maybe I'm only speaking for myself, but if we are going to re-litigate this part of the Ukraine saga then I think a refresher on the timeline is in order.
Before the Russian invasion and before Russia annexed Crimea, there was the Euromaiden protests that eventually ousted the pro-Russian president. It was very much understood that there was a TON of corruption going on in Ukraine at the time, and one of the points of emphasis after his ouster was rooting out said corruption.
Ukraine has, at times (especially early on in the war), been pretty transparent about it's govt corruption investigations (and the results). So Ukraine and the EU going after a corrupt prosecutor around this time really isn't all that hard to believe.
Don't take that as an excuse and/or me thinking the Bidens aren't corrupt as well. Both situations can be true at the same time.
Last edited by oobernoober; 03/03/2510:56 AM. Reason: accidentally hit submit
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
I don't know man. We are stuck in a war that sits at stalemate. I say us stuck in the war because we are the ones largely funding things for Ukraine. I am not in favor of just tossing billion after billion into an endless hole.
I don't like Putin and Russia, but the reality of the matter is that Russia is the one with the ability to lob nukes around the globe. We should be talking to Russia. At least we are. Under President Biden I don't think we ever talked. To me, that just wasn't responsible. There is truth in the saying about keeping your enemies close.
I am not saying we just bow to Putin, but we sure as hell need to be working to resolve this thing as fast as possible.
But you want to send troops into Gaza?
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
I'm going to look, but in case you have it, can you post up a good summary of this "minerals for protection" deal that was passed on?
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
I am not saying we just bow to Putin, but we sure as hell need to be working to resolve this thing as fast as possible.
According to the Kremlin that's exactly what trump is doing and that's the problem. Zelenskyy didn't travel to Washington because he doesn't want to end the war. He traveled there because he does want to end the war. He just doesn't want to, nor expect his biggest ally to sell him down the river by kissing Putin's ass to do it.
His country was invaded by Russia...... twice in just the past 11 years. All we saw him ask for was some guarantee of security should Russia break it's deal and invade him again. A deterrent from further Russian invasions. He and the world has seen Russia break it's agreement with Ukraine when it invaded the second time and as we, as well as Russia has seen, with the backing of the U.S. Russia would pay a heavy cost if it invaded again.
That's all Zelenskyy asked for in return for those minerals and he was treated like crap for it.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
All Z had to do was sign the minerals deal and save his country from further death and destruction. A MAJOR US investment in Ukraine minerals would be an enormous security "force" for Ukraine against Russia...not to mention Europe's (then) involvement there. Russia isn't going to attack non-offensive American interests in Ukraine.
Ukraine has/had NO CHANCE to win this war...it can be prolonged, but only with US $$$. Even then, Ukraine isn't getting back the ground lost in this war...that was never an option. So what is Z's end game here? Keep fighting - with our $$$ - and eventually outlast Putin? That's ridiculous. Just what is the goal in Z's mind?
Trump handed him an 'out' and a way to create financial opportunity to re-build his country...and he clearly and publicly rejected that idea and demanded something he is in no position to demand. Not to mention that Z's demand (NATO/security guarantees) would only further incentivize Putin to continue on / increase the offensive.
I challenge responders to this post to stick with the issue and not degrade discussion into further insults. How does a peace deal get done?
The Kremlin clearly stated trump was mostly in line with Putin. Ending the war shouldn't mean trump kisses Putin's ass. All Zelenskyy asked for was a guarantee of security should Russia break the deal and invade them again as they have done in the past. But I realize that in trumplandia that seems crazy because he didn't bow before your king.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
All Z had to do was sign the minerals deal and save his country from further death and destruction. A MAJOR US investment in Ukraine minerals would be an enormous security "force" for Ukraine against Russia...not to mention Europe's (then) involvement there. Russia isn't going to attack non-offensive American interests in Ukraine.
Ukraine has/had NO CHANCE to win this war...it can be prolonged, but only with US $$$. Even then, Ukraine isn't getting back the ground lost in this war...that was never an option. So what is Z's end game here? Keep fighting - with our $$$ - and eventually outlast Putin? That's ridiculous. Just what is the goal in Z's mind?
Trump handed him an 'out' and a way to create financial opportunity to re-build his country...and he clearly and publicly rejected that idea and demanded something he is in no position to demand. Not to mention that Z's demand (NATO/security guarantees) would only further incentivize Putin to continue on / increase the offensive.
I challenge responders to this post to stick with the issue and not degrade discussion into further insults. How does a peace deal get done?
To the best of my knowledge - and in a speedy reply as I head out the door to meet a friend:
The "deal" was a deal for Minerals - without any gaurantee or safety net to ensure the peace lasts.
In cae you weren't aware - American Companies were already present when Russia invaded. In case you didn't know or see it posted here - Ukraine previously signed a 'lasting peace agreement' and gave up nukes while doing it .... and what happened? Ukraine does not and will not trust Russia with or withough American companies being on Ukraine soil.
So no - Trump didn't offer him an Out. Trump offered him something so Trump could look good today with zero regard to the long term security. Passifying Putin and Bullies is not the way to long term security and peace. History shows us that as factual.
Also - Europe has provided MORE funding for the war. Europe is not getting money back - it is not a loan. EU is not there with their hands out - they are there saying any peace needs to come on the back of a long term gaurantee because it is in everyone's best interest. By everyone - that is globally.
That's the simple facts. Add to it the "Trump Offer" comes off the back of a meeting with Russia in Saudi where the Saudi's wanted Ukraine to also be present but the USA refused to include them. Come s off the back where Trump has recently accused Ukraine of starting the conflict, calling Zelensky a dictator, before any negotiations began stated Ukraine has to ceed territory to the aggrerssors and Ukraine won't be in Nato.
What does Zelensky want? Peace that comes with a gaurantee that we won't be back here again in 4-6-8 or ten years time.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
I don't know man. We are stuck in a war that sits at stalemate. I say us stuck in the war because we are the ones largely funding things for Ukraine. I am not in favor of just tossing billion after billion into an endless hole.
I don't like Putin and Russia, but the reality of the matter is that Russia is the one with the ability to lob nukes around the globe. We should be talking to Russia. At least we are. Under President Biden I don't think we ever talked. To me, that just wasn't responsible. There is truth in the saying about keeping your enemies close.
I am not saying we just bow to Putin, but we sure as hell need to be working to resolve this thing as fast as possible.
No the USA is not largely fudning Ukraine its nearly 50-50 with Europe, EU is slightly more. I don't think we are talking to Russia - we are appeasing Russia. The talking points and the public chastising and rollicking of Zelensky could not have been better for Russia.
Resolve the conflict? See my post to WSU - it needs to come with boots on the ground in Ukraine. Europe is saying they will do that. The US needs to back and support them. It's in all our interests to do that. And as a soverign nation Russia has no authority whatsoever to say Ukraine can or cannot joint Nato or have foreign troops present. Just look at the history if you appease and always look to pander to what Russia demands.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
I don't know man. We are stuck in a war that sits at stalemate. I say us stuck in the war because we are the ones largely funding things for Ukraine. I am not in favor of just tossing billion after billion into an endless hole.
I don't like Putin and Russia, but the reality of the matter is that Russia is the one with the ability to lob nukes around the globe. We should be talking to Russia. At least we are. Under President Biden I don't think we ever talked. To me, that just wasn't responsible. There is truth in the saying about keeping your enemies close.
I am not saying we just bow to Putin, but we sure as hell need to be working to resolve this thing as fast as possible.
One thing that is stated in this article from the BBC that I have not heard is that the UK is looking to put boots on the ground and planes in the air.
Starmer announces 'coalition of the willing' to guarantee Ukraine peace 12 hours ago
Share
Save Vicky Wong BBC News EPA The 18 world leaders gathered around a U-shaped table with their countries' flags behind them in a room with white walls and gold detail. Sir Keir Starmer is sitting in the centre with Emmanuel Macron and Volodymyr Zelensky flanking him.EPA UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced a four-point plan to work with Ukraine to end the war and defend the country from Russia.
The UK, France and other countries will step up their efforts in a "coalition of the willing" and seek to involve the US in their support for Ukraine, he said on Sunday - after calling a summit of 18 leaders, mostly from Europe and including Volodymyr Zelensky - three days earlier.
"We are at a crossroads in history today," Starmer said after the summit while Zelensky said Kyiv felt "strong support" and the gathering showed "European unity at an extremely high level not seen for a long time".
It comes two days after a fiery exchange between the Ukrainian leader and US President Donald Trump in the White House.
"We are all working together in Europe in order to find a basis for cooperation with America for a true peace and guaranteed security," Zelensky said after the summit.
Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron told Le Figaro newspaper that Paris and London wanted to propose a one-month truce between Russia and Ukraine "in the air, at sea and on energy infrastructure".
Speaking at a news conference shortly after the meeting of leaders, Starmer said four points had been agreed:
to keep military aid flowing into Ukraine, and to keep increasing the economic pressure on Russia that any lasting peace must ensure Ukraine's sovereignty and security and Ukraine must be present at any peace talks in the event of a peace deal, to boost Ukraine's defensive capabilities to deter any future invasion to develop a "coalition of the willing" to defend a deal in Ukraine and to guarantee peace afterwards Starmer also announced an additional £1.6bn ($2bn) of UK export finance to buy more than 5,000 air defence missiles. This comes on top of a £2.2bn loan to provide more military aid to Ukraine backed by profits from frozen Russian assets.
"We have to learn from the mistakes of the past, we cannot accept a weak deal which Russia can breach with ease, instead any deal must be backed by strength," he said.
The prime minister did not state which countries had agreed to join this coalition of the willing, but said that those who had committed would intensify planning with real urgency.
The UK, he said, would back its commitment with "boots on the ground, and planes in the air".
"Europe must do the heavy lifting," he said, before adding that the agreement would need US backing and had to include Russia, but that Moscow could not be allowed to dictate terms.
"Let me be clear, we agree with Trump on the urgent need for a durable peace. Now we need to deliver together," Starmer said.
When asked if the US under Trump was an unreliable ally, he said: "Nobody wanted to see what happened last Friday, but I do not accept that the US is an unreliable ally."
Countries at the summit included France, Poland, Sweden, Turkey, Norway, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Romania, Finland, Italy, Spain and Canada.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that there was now an urgent need to "re-arm Europe".
These sentiments were echoed by Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte, who said the meeting had seen European countries "stepping up" to make sure Ukraine has what it needs to "stay in the fight as long as it has to continue".
Watch: Starmer says "coalition of the willing" needed in peace deal
After the summit, Zelensky went to Sandringham where he met King Charles III. He later spoke to reporters at a final press briefing where he said he was ready to sign a deal on minerals with the US.
Ukraine was expected to sign the deal - which would grant the US access to Ukraine's rare mineral reserves - during Zelensky's visit to Washington, but the Ukrainian delegation ultimately left early after a heated confrontation with Trump in the Oval Office.
Earlier on Sunday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned a deal on minerals between the US and Ukraine could not be signed "without a peace deal" with Russia.
But when asked by the BBC about the future of the deal following the summit, Zelensky said it was ready to be signed.
"The agreement that's on the table will be signed if the parties are ready," he said.
Reuters King Charles wearing a grey suit standing next to Volodymyr Zelensky in a wood-panelled sitting room with a fireplace and red sofa with striped cushions.Reuters There was a warm reception for Zelensky as he met King Charles
Sunday's summit concludes a hectic week of diplomacy, which included visits to Washington by Macron, Starmer and Zelensky.
Zelensky's meeting, however, culminated in a heated exchanged with Trump and US Vice-President JD Vance, in which the US president accused his Ukrainian counterpart of "gambling with World War Three".
Trump has said he wants to end the war in Ukraine and has expressed trust in Russian President Vladimir Putin, to the consternation of many of his Western allies.
The US has also begun peace talks with Russia - excluding Ukraine.
At one point, the US leader accused Ukraine of starting the war - even though it was Putin who launched a full-scale invasion of Russia's neighbour on 24 February 2022.
The "deal" was a deal for Minerals - without any gaurantee or safety net to ensure the peace lasts.
This is exactly why I posted earlier asking for someone to post up a link that summarized what was actually in the deal. I don't know about everyone else, but I'm a little murky on what was and wasn't included.
Not that it really matters at this point. Donny J is already past the point of no return in his temper tantrum.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
All Z had to do was sign the minerals deal and save his country from further death and destruction. A MAJOR US investment in Ukraine minerals would be an enormous security "force" for Ukraine against Russia...not to mention Europe's (then) involvement there. Russia isn't going to attack non-offensive American interests in Ukraine.
Ukraine has/had NO CHANCE to win this war...it can be prolonged, but only with US $$$. Even then, Ukraine isn't getting back the ground lost in this war...that was never an option. So what is Z's end game here? Keep fighting - with our $$$ - and eventually outlast Putin? That's ridiculous. Just what is the goal in Z's mind?
Trump handed him an 'out' and a way to create financial opportunity to re-build his country...and he clearly and publicly rejected that idea and demanded something he is in no position to demand. Not to mention that Z's demand (NATO/security guarantees) would only further incentivize Putin to continue on / increase the offensive.
I challenge responders to this post to stick with the issue and not degrade discussion into further insults. How does a peace deal get done?
I would imagine that any peace deal hinges on all parties actually believing that the deal stops the fighting. The Ukraine-US minerals deal didn't include guaranteed US protection, NATO membership, or really anything that would help Ukraine secure itself from Russian aggression. Even continuing US equipment to Ukraine was only on the table "until a Russian deal was put in place".
I'm struggling to see why a person that's looking for security from Russia would sign that deal.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
