Quote Originally Posted by Jampie View Post
Trump has thus far offered no security guarantees that I'm aware of.

There are three paths to ending this war without Ukraine become some kind of puppet or vassal to Russia.

1. Continue the war until putin dies of old age or is removed or because of the damage his war has done to the Russian people, state, military, and economy. This is one of the worst options IMO but it's what "the west" were supporting, effectively, until recently
2. Ramp up assistance for Ukraine so 1) happens a lot faster, minimising harm. This is my preferred option and has been since 2022.
3. A ceasefire and negotiated solution in place. This is also a bad option IMO, not least because Trump and Putin are not honest negotiators and neither of them are remotely interested in what's best for Ukraine. However, it's an option. It requires western security guarantees that extend to the level of going to war with Russia (boots on the ground and all) if they break the agreement. This is the only thing that will stop Putin from just continuing the war when he feels ready again like he did with the last several treaties. It's also a bad option because letting Putin get away with _any_ gains sends a message to the world that you can invade and conquer territories and keep them, again, something that has been emphatically off the table since WWII.
First, sure, you can call the RPGs heavy weapons if you like, but to be clear the heavy weapons (also sometimes referred to as lethal weapons) that everybody else (politicians and media) used as a term to distinguish what Trump was willingness to provide that Obama would not were the Javelins and Tow missiles. These heavy weapons were not part of the weapons package that Trump attempted to use as leverage to acquire a hunter Biden investigation. Those were separate. So my point still stands that Trump would not have provided those if he were a Russian asset (among the other choices I listed).

As for your 3 options, here is my response to them:

1. Continue the war until Putin dies, etc. Among the Russian political class, Putin is a moderate who is viewed as soft on the west. Should Putin no longer be in office, for whatever reason, I do not think you will like the outcome.

2. Ramp up assistance for Ukraine. Given that America is out, this leaves Europe. I do not think there is a lot of ramping up room left to do it in either weapons or money. They don’t have the productive capacity and their cupboards are bare. Ursula just announced she wants to raise nearly a trillion Euros for military spending (some of it private money somehow) but even if they do then where are the weapons to spend it on? And where will Ukraine get the troops to use it?

3. Negotiation, which you say is a bad idea because Trump and Putin are not interested in Ukraines welfare. Trump has already declared himself neutral (but by all means declare him on team Putin if you prefer). Nobody expects Putin to care about Ukraines welfare. So, naturally it is up to Zelensky using whatever cards he is holding to negotiate a settlement that will convince Putin to stop killing Ukrainians and taking Ukrainian territory. Unsurprisingly, that is how negotiations typically work. Or they do not work and Putin resumes killing Ukrainians and taking more territory. I do not think Zelensky is likely to get American security assurances that include American boots on the ground, because as Trump stated, he thinks Zelensky just wants American backing to gain an advantage or to trigger a continuation of the war that draws America in. Trump does not appear to be Interested in that. Starmer does though, as do some of his other allies. Nobody has asked Putin yet, and so far the Kremlin has indicated they will not accept that as part of a settlement, but hey ho - that is what negotiations are for. If they cannot agree, well then, Putin will likely continue the war and take more territory. Istanbul 2022 is looking pretty good right now from the Ukrainian point of view, but unfortunately that ship seems to have sailed.