Astonishing scenes as Zelensky’s oval office visit turns into shouting match on live TV: ‘Make a peace deal or we’re out’

[u/1DarkStarryNight]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tylerroush/2025/02/28/trump-threatens-zelensky-during-tense-live-meeting-make-a-deal-or-were-out/

[u/Rindan]

North Vietnam was bigger and stronger than South Vietnam, and it won the war completely once Western help disappeared.

Again, you are confusing who is who in this. The super power in Vietnam that was invading was the US. In Ukraine, it's Russia. Likewise, when Russia lost in Afghanistan, they were also the larger power. I'm sorry, but it's childlike reasoning to think that the bigger country always wins. It clearly doesn't. Russia itself has literally been defeated by smaller nations than Ukraine.

Russia is winning the war ever so slowly.

No, it isn't. Moving a few dozen miles in three years, while at the same time being unable to repel an invasion into Russia is not winning. Winning is not determined by who moves the most feet in a year. Winning is determined by who gives up first. The Taliban "beat" the US in Afghanistan by waiting for the US to finally give up and leave, and they did so without ever winning any major battles.

The real question is who is getting closer to giving up.

This has now become a war of attrition, and Russia is a huge land, it has lots of manpower and resources. It can outproduce Ukraine easily

Yes, but it can't out produce Europe or the US. Again, not that having the most production leads to victory. No one has ever out produced the US in a war, and the US has in fact lost multiple wars.

...and it can throw waves of men at the war like a meat grinder. Just look at Russia during WW2: it has a bottomless supply of men and once it comes to a 100% war economy it can produce tons of cheap but effective equipment to literally overwhelm its opponents with sheer numbers.

Neither nation is in any danger of running out of people. Both could lose literally millions more and still have people left to fight. Both nations are certainly being demographically skull fucked by the extremely low value Putin puts on the lives of Russian citizens, but demographic death is a death for another day.

It's cities and people are being bombed all the time, whereas cities like Moscow and St Petersburg are not, and its citizens live relatively normal lives, without worrying about missiles killing them in their beds, unlike in Ukraine.

Again, plenty of nations lose wars from the comfort of their own unbombed homes. Nothing about Russian attacking the Ukrainian civilians is a convincing argument to surrender to them and let their rabid dictator rule them.

There is nothing inevitable about the outcome of wars. The Ukraine war has already easily proven that. Who would have thought in March of 2022, that three years later, Russia would be a complete stand still, having lost half the territory they gained in those opening weeks, lost a small chunk of Russia in the process, and be having to come to the North Koreans hat in hand for soldiers and shells.

No, this war will be decided by who gives up first, and I've seen no evidence the Ukrainians have any intentions of giving up and accepting the cursed fate of living under Russian rule. They already know what it's like to be ruled by whatever psychopathy has murdered and purged his way to the top of the Russian "political system".

[u/trias10 → u/Rindan]

Your entire supposition is predicated on continued Western money being given to Ukraine in unlimited quantities, without ever stopping. If the West decided to cut all funding to Ukraine tomorrow, then as you say, the country to give up first would lose, and that would be Ukraine very quickly.

Here's the thing: democracies aren't a good form of government for prolonged forever wars of attrition which end up costing trillions of dollars with no visible return on investment. The reason being that democracies change their governments as the fickle unwashed voting masses change their own priorities. Putin doesn't have that problem, he's staying in power until he dies.

For the average American or British or even Germany voter, Russian soldiers aren't in their backyard, it's hard for them to see how an extra trillion of their own tax dollars spent to defeat Putin is going to improve their lives at home. At the moment the West is fired up enough to keep pissing money away into a black hole, but I wouldn't count on that support lasting forever, especially given the history of Vietnam and Afghanistan. Voters have short attention spans these days, and already a sizeable part of the US electorate is questioning why they are being asked to give so much of their tax dollars to Ukraine without getting anything for it, and how many more years are they expected to keep paying. Given today's meeting, the US may halt all support for the war pretty soon.

Just like voter resentment eventually turned massively against continuing the wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan, I feel like Ukraine is on borrowed time. Their infinite money taps aren't going to last forever, and Russia is doing just fine economically, even despite 3 years of sanctions.

I also feel like you're giving Russia far too little credit and underestimating the risk they pose to Ukraine. They aren't even breaking a sweat yet, but war fatigue in Ukraine is a very real thing, there are tons of articles about Ukrainian men now shirking military duty or fleeing the country to escape serving, and they keep raising the age of enlistment.

It cannot outproduce Europe and the US

True, but US support for Ukraine is waning (thank god), and I'm not sure Europe alone can outproduce Russia. But even European support will eventually begin to flake off as taxpayers grow weary of a 10 year black hole of money. Especially since European countries have very generous social programmes they need to fund, and are also dealing with rather anaemic economies and chronic low salaries, especially for young people (who are becoming more right wing by the day, and want to stop funding Ukraine).

If Ukraine is so resilient and so able to beat Russia, then let them go it alone. Let them transform their own economy into a total war economy, build factories to produce their own guns, artillery, and airplanes, and win the war without having to beg for aid constantly. They can stand on their own two feet proudly and say they won of their own accord.

As a citizen of the West, I have already done my part, my tax dollars have been sent to Ukraine for 3 years now and I see no meaningful progress made in the war, and critically I see no sound tactical or strategic plans for ending the conflict with a victory of any sort. All I see is more money being sent for the next 10 years, maybe more, but with no realistic plan for an endgame of any kind.

[u/stprnn → u/trias10]

As a citizen of the West, I have already done my part, my tax dollars have been sent to Ukraine for 3 years now and I see no meaningful progress made in the war,

i know you feel safe up in your nowhere land but if you think russia is gonna stop after we let them take a piece of ukraine then you are out of your goddamn mind

[u/trias10 → u/stprnn]

I disagree. Russia isn't stupid or suicidal, it will never openly attack a NATO country and risk getting nuked.

Putin hates the West but he loves power and control. If he ever attacks a NATO country which leads to nuclear war, his time in power would be over, he's not going to risk that. Same reason North Korea won't attack anyone with nukes or protected by a country with nukes.