Trump, Vance and Zelenskyy spar over Russian war in tense exchange at White House

Akita Suggagaki said:

Why not? That is at the heart of the entire conflict. Is it democracy v plutocracy or oligarchy or whatever you want to call the Russian system?

It certainly seems to be a clash of world views and governance competing for world dominance.

Should Russia be contained? stopped?

Click to expand...

Democracy as represented by the EU and the US establishment is not something I am committed to. Why should I support a total war with Russia to contain them when Russia has no impact on me or my own? Why not live in a world where there are different systems or must there be endless crusades to expand the Godless western liberal democratic system everywhere on earth? Were you not satisfied with the crusades for democracy in the Middle East, now you want a total war with Russia? Haven't we learned the folly of regime change in the last 20 years? That the Neocons in attempting to maintain US hegemon only weakened the USA?

Akita Suggagaki said:

Why not? That is at the heart of the entire conflict. Is it democracy v plutocracy or oligarchy or whatever you want to call the Russian system?

It certainly seems to be a clash of world views and governance competing for world dominance.

Should Russia be contained? stopped?

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting we escalate to thermonuclear war? Or just maintain the status quo of destruction in Ukraine?

In just war theory if one cannot win a justly started war using just tactics one must sue for peace.

sanderabeer said:

I don't know what you mean by "at its own expense." But, a secure, stable Europe is good for the US and the world.

Click to expand...

Given the decline and weakness of Europe that would not appear true. Europe would better off handling its own security.

sanderabeer said:

This is a false dilemma. There are a multitude of options beyond these.

Click to expand...

Such as?

sanderabeer said:

Russia can pull out. China can stop supporting Russia. Sanctions. Etc.

Click to expand...

Oh so, magical thinking will solve the war. Putin is just gonna feel really guilty one day and pull out huh? It's hard to believe people actually think like this.

sanderabeer said:

This is a disappointing response. I hoped to engage further on the matter, but it seems that's not an option. Have a blessed day.

Click to expand...

Your plan is for Putin to change his mind. That's not a plan. It's wishful thinking. Russia has made it clear that this issue to them is existential. Why would Putin just up and leave? Why would China betray Russia?

JimR-OCDS said:

I don't think Trump looked bad at all. He was honest with Zelensky and it was Zelensky who began yelling at Trump and Vance.

Click to expand...

Trump, after commenting on Zelensky's clothes which was bad mannered, told him that his country is in trouble. Can you imagine how that must have felt coming from someone in a comfortable office, on a different continent, when he (Z) has the weight of his country trying to stave off Russian aggression, with people dying and homes and infrastructure being destroyed, on his shoulders. I felt that was arrogant and insensitive of Trump. I can't imagine that Zelensky hasn't thanked the USA for support, but for Vance to point out that Z was being ungrateful, in front of the cameras, was rude and when Z started to answer, Trump overtalked him. It was very distressing to watch. As for having an ocean between them and the war, it is true and the USA may feel anxious if Russia threatens them. I'm reposting my previous analogy:

rebornfree said:

Actually I thought it was a valid comment. If any of us lived near a river, which was at risk of flooding, and we said to our friends, who live further away, that they would feel anxious if they were nearer to it, is that unreasonable? I think that's all Zelensky was saying.

Click to expand...

Michie said:

There are also full transcripts, word for word to be read. If Trump’s in it, nothing is going to be satisfactory. People seem to feed off it.

Click to expand...

True for some perhaps, but not for all. The opposite is sometimes true too it seems. If Trump is in it, it must be good. I like some of Trump's views: pro-life, anti-transgender etc. but I don't comment on your domestic policies because I'm not American. As I posted, before he was elected, what happens on the world stage affects us all and that is where my concern is.

Confused-by-christianity said:

My wife and I prayed this morning.

We bipassed our “leaders” and went straight to God. We asked him for the right thing to prevail.

I recommend everyone do the same.

Click to expand...

Yes, that is what we should be doing and the Lord can sort it out.

Akita Suggagaki said:

Anyway. It is over. Let's move on. Zelensky told by NATO Mark Rutte, as distasteful as it is, he needs the United State and therefor must stroke Trumps ego, tell him how great he is and how thankful. And, I think, ultimately accept whatever deal is offered no matter how bad. This is what we should have expected from Trump and Vance. This is what we elected. While some of us are appalled others are proud of it.

Click to expand...

I felt a bit sorry for Mark Rutte as he has to tread a careful line, but seems to be doing it well. It was great to see Zelensky warmly welcomed by all the people at the summit today; good to see a smile on his face and I'm glad that he obviously feels that he has friends (in the diplomatic sense of the word).

trophy33 said:

You can guarantee nothing. I live in the center of Europe. Enough of this nonsense.

Click to expand...

I noticed that you are in the EU. I'm in the UK. Maybe we feel sympathy with Zelensky more because Ukraine is on our continent.

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

Europe has embarked on a course of multiculturalism and multiethnic immigration. Europeans are not replacing themselves and Christianity is in decline on the continent.

Click to expand...

In Britain (and I suspect it is the same for some other European countries) we became multicultural in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries when we started to create an empire. Great to take the gospel to other parts of the world, but not so great to rule other people in their own countries. However that gave those people British nationality and they have every right to be here. In fact it seems strange today to even comment about multiethnicity. We are all people and Brits (and I imagine the citizens of all European countries) are multi-ethnic. It's not something we think about unless there is a problem and the problems we have had are from the extreme right white groups. My only concern with migration is that it is legal and the country receiving immigrants can sustain the numbers.

As for Christianity, church going has declined, even in my lifetime (seventy + years), but I doubt that the number of born-again believers has. In fact I think that the Pentecostal denominations are growing and some of the liveliest churches come from African and Caribbean cultures. They taught us something about worship. Other religions are in a minority and seem to understand our desire to worship and serve our God. The people most against Christianity are atheists and I think the rise of that is due to the Theory of Evolution, the idea of the Big Bang and the rhetoric that it is somehow weak to believe in God.

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

Democracy as represented by the EU and the US establishment is not something I am committed to. Why should I support a total war with Russia to contain them when Russia has no impact on me or my own? Why not live in a world where there are different systems or must there be endless crusades to expand the Godless western liberal democratic system everywhere on earth? Were you not satisfied with the crusades for democracy in the Middle East, now you want a total war with Russia? Haven't we learned the folly of regime change in the last 20 years? That the Neocons in attempting to maintain US hegemon only weakened the USA?

Click to expand...

Well, I can't disagree to much with you there. But does it take Russians or Nazis pounding on your door to get you to care?

Akita Suggagaki said:

Well, I can't disagree to much with you there. But does it take Russians or Nazis pounding on your door to get you to care?

Click to expand...

People in the UK already have police knocking on the door if they express the wrong opinions. They are entirely subjugated. What do they have to fear from Russians?

Akita Suggagaki said:

Well, I can't disagree to much with you there. But does it take Russians or Nazis pounding on your door to get you to care?

Click to expand...

Are the modern Russians essentially National Socialists in your mind?

Akita Suggagaki said:

Why not? That is at the heart of the entire conflict. Is it democracy v plutocracy or oligarchy or whatever you want to call the Russian system?

It certainly seems to be a clash of world views and governance competing for world dominance.

Should Russia be contained? stopped?

Click to expand...

Democracy has very little to do with it. In many substantial ways, Russian people have more freedom than the average UK or western European citizen.

The heart of the conflict is the "postwar consensus" - a western liberal elite who hate Russia mostly for the fact that they are a sovereign power that exists outside of that consensus.

You can see a microcosm of this conflict in the liberal/leftist that loses his mind when someone has a different opinion than they do. They are totalitarian in nature.

Russia did not go through postwar liberal revolution of the west following the world wars. They were at first culturally 'frozen' under communism, and then restored to a form of orthodox Christian nationalism after the fall of the soviet union. As a result, they have little respect for western liberal ideology, and so western liberals hate them, religiously.

The Postwar Consensus (NATO) is pushing into Ukraine because of an ideological hatred of Russia's existence as a competing civilization.

Russia's actions in Ukraine are not ideological at all, but existential.

lifepsyop said:

People in the UK already have police knocking on the door if they express the wrong opinions. They are entirely subjugated. What do they have to fear from Russians?

Click to expand...

Are you in the UK? I am. I've never heard of the police doing that. We have free speech but at times it needs to be curtailed. For example, if it was inciting violence, was immoral or harmful or could interfere with the due process of law. I don't see that as subjugation but living in a civilised society.

However we are not a Christian society and sometimes we have to make a stand for our faith which is contrary to the law, such as not wanting to support LGBT+ etc.

rebornfree said:

Are you in the UK? I am. I've never heard of the police doing that. We have free speech but at times it needs to be curtailed. For example, if it was inciting violence, was immoral or harmful or could interfere with the due process of law. I don't see that as subjugation but living in a civilised society.

However we are not a Christian society and sometimes we have to make a stand for our faith which is contrary to the law, such as not wanting to support LGBT+ etc.

Click to expand...

Right.. you have free speech as long as you don't disagree with things like homosexuality or mass immigration, or any other state-approved opinions.

I'm sure you can at least see why Americans find it ridiculous when UK and Europeans talk about fighting Russia to "preserve freedom and democracy". That narrative is a joke.

lifepsyop said:

Right.. you have free speech as long as you don't disagree with things like homosexuality or mass immigration, or any other state-approved opinions.

I'm sure you can at least see why Americans find it ridiculous when UK and Europeans talk about fighting Russia to "preserve freedom and democracy". That narrative is a joke.

Click to expand...

I don't think that there is any restriction on free speech on immigration. There is much discussion about the small boats coming across the English Channel. If the objections were racist then that would not be liked, because it would be seen as unfair discrimination, but discussion about how to cope with the numbers coming here, who is a refugee, who a legal migrant and who an illegal migrant is completely free, as is the dialogue about the desperate plight the people are in, compared to our resources and the fact that we have homeless people here. Generally speaking it's the people smugglers who are seen as the bad guys. I don't see a great contradiction between Government and Christian views on this, although there would have been about the Conservatives' Rwanda scheme I think. However we were perfectly free to express dissent with that.

LGBT+ is a much harder issue to deal with because it is socially accepted and protected in the equality legislation. I think the legislation is trying to make sure that everyone feels included and valued. We believe that people should be valued too, but certain behaviour is wrong and that God's way is best. We are a bit hamstrung with that. The best way, I think, is to introduce people to Jesus and, if they accept Him, He will help them live the way He wants them to. We also try to protect our Christian institutions from having to agree or support LGBT behaviour. It is a bit of a battle but Jesus said that we live in the world and the world does not know Him. I suppose we see it as a spiritual battle rather than a free speech issue, but I accept your point that there are limitations over what is socially acceptable to say. I can't imaging the police knocking on anyone's door though, except when someone is inciting violence.

As for Russia, I think the liberals see becoming Russian as restricting certain behaviours, but the issue is more a matter of not wanting to be taken over by another country. Also the Soviet Union, pre Gorbachev, imprisoned dissenters. Since Putin, Russia seems to be reverting to a less free regime than that brought in by Gorbachev (which followed seven years of prayer for the Soviet Union) where political dissent might incur severe suffering. We have political free speech here unless it incites violence or threatens national security; I don't think that they do

rebornfree said:

I noticed that you are in the EU. I'm in the UK. Maybe we feel sympathy with Zelensky more because Ukraine is on our continent.

Click to expand...

I would say we are simply better informed and that we have historical experience with such things. We are also closer to it and more influenced by it.
More than somebody from New Zealand (or where he is from) pretending to know everything about us and asking questions that are not based in reality.

trophy33 said:

I would say we are simply better informed and that we have historical experience with such things. We are also closer to it and more influenced by it.
More than somebody from New Zealand (or where he is from) pretending to know everything about us and asking questions that are not based in reality.

Click to expand...

I don't pretend to know everything. But I do know of the general situation in Europe. I also lament the future of Europe. Also, yes I'm from New Zealand.

sanderabeer said:

I did watch the video. And he did use the word "feel." But he did not communicate what a handful of people think he was communicating. Let me quote him directly so we get the context. Zelensky said:


What is Zelensky saying we "don't feel now?" Problems. What is Zelensky saying we will feel "in the future?" Problems.

He's not telling what we will feel emotionally. He's not telling us that we should feel a certain way. He's not threatening us. He's telling us that we will experience problems in the future based on the outcome of the war.

This is really a noncontroversial statement.

If Ukraine loses and Russia wins, it creates problems for the US. It would reshape geopolitical matters, and that will lead to problems for the US. It would problem Russia with more resource, and that will lead to problems for the US.

The problem is that Trump is emotionally insecure. And because he's insecure, he took the statement as a threat. This is precisely why he responded in a defensive manner. Trump responded:


If Trump was emotionally secure, a critical thinker, a good communicator, and initially interpreted it as a threat, he wouldn't have responded in a defensive manner. Instead, he would have asked Zelensky what he meant by that. He could have salvaged the meeting.

Click to expand...

So, you're twisting what Zelensky said in order to justify your post.

BTW, I saw Zelensky threaten Vance when he said he would feel war soon in the future.

I hope that security for Trump, Vance and their family members is up as Ukraine is known for assassinating
political leaders who don't agree with them.

sanderabeer said:

This is a false dilemma. There are a multitude of options beyond these.

Click to expand...

No it's not a false dilemma. Put will not be humiliated by loosing a conflict with Ukraine
He will use nuclear weapons if he needs to before being humiliated.

rebornfree said:

Trump, after commenting on Zelensky's clothes which was bad mannered, told him that his country is in trouble. Can you imagine how that

Click to expand...

Trump didn't comment on Zelensky's clothes, a reporter did.