this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2025
309 points (98.1% liked)

World News

50896 readers
1612 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

US army secretary briefs ambassadors at ‘nightmare meeting’ in Kyiv on Friday after talks with Ukrainian leader

US officials have told Nato allies they expect to push president Volodymyr Zelenskyy into agreeing to a peace deal in the coming days, under the threat that if Kyiv does not sign, it will face a much worse deal in future.

The US army secretary, Dan Driscoll, briefed ambassadors from Nato nations at a meeting in Kyiv late on Friday, after talks with Zelenskyy and taking a phone call from the White House. “No deal is perfect, but it must be done sooner rather than later,” he told them, according to one person who was present.

The mood in the room was sombre, with several European ambassadors questioning the content of the deal and the way in which the US had conducted the negotiations with Russia without keeping allies informed.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Naevermix@lemmy.world 5 points 38 minutes ago

Ukraine will face worse in the future if they take the deal. Nations which went down fighting rose again, but those which tamely surrendered were finished.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 12 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

A deal with Russia isn't worth the paper it's written on.

This war is only even possible because they've already violated an agreement they had with Ukraine. It would be insane for Ukraine to agree to a different deal for safety when they already did that and got back stabbed.

Meanwhile Europe will push Ukraine not to sign the deal (not that much persuasion will be necessary) because Europe doesn't want to set the precedent that Russia can just eat away at Europe.

As for the threat from the US that Ukraine will get a worse deal if they don't sign, given how crap the current deal is, I can't see how it could reasonably get any worse, unless it's total surrender, but that won't fly because there would be literally no point even considering that. The Trump administration really are useless at negotiating, they think they can strong arm Ukraine, but they don't actually have any cards.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 17 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

russia is losing bad, so putin pressures krasnov to force ukraine into an unfavorable deal or he will release some of the epstein files, or redirect his troll farms to attack krasnov.

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 2 points 53 minutes ago* (last edited 53 minutes ago) (1 children)

While I'm not at all unfriendly towards anti-Russia propaganda.... are they really?

[–] Prior_Industry@lemmy.world 1 points 33 minutes ago

The press around the Alaska meeting was interesting. I remember it being reported that Trump team appearing to look visibly shocked as they left the behind closed doors meeting. That it ended early, etc I wonder what was said....

[–] dellish@lemmy.world 30 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

As horrible as it would be, if Ukraine never backs down and ends up going down in flames it will at least serve as a historical reminder of what happens when you treat the USA as a friend. This is a mark that would not be erased easily; Nazi Germany is still thought of and talked about almost 100 years since it happened, and Backstabbing USA would be no different.

People will remember why Ukraine fell, and they will know who not to trust. The USA has spent a long, long time getting the world hooked on their technology and aid, and in one short year Trump has torn a lot of it down to the point that people globally are actively looking for alternatives.

[–] 6stringringer@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

This scenario sucks about as much as something can in a global game. Per chance it could instill , inversely & conversely for all to aspire to betterness with no bitterness. We really can’t (In the USA) understand the gravitas’s of said scenarios until theses ICE jackboots began hitting the ground full force in these brutally bullshit manners. The planet is kinda upside down for a moment. Just remember ya’ll this is a thrill ride and it’s way more real for some than others. By that I mean I am eternally grateful and mindful of the safety of that which I live daily life. For some on this planet will never know or even comprehend such profound luxury. Just a reminder to share kindness & love for no particular reason. And most importantly, we need to cover each other’s asses & backs! Just because.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 7 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, that was his goal. Either destroy trust to weaken our position globally for the benefit of someone else, or blind adherence to the belief that other countries are the only beneficiary of the relationship we have with them, and they need to "stop freeloading". That in exchange for military defense, technology, aid, and everything else we get unparalleled military freedom, everyone meeting us on our terms and first mover advantage, control of global financial markets and preferential market access basically everywhere. Their boneheaded view that government is a business and everyone who came before just didn't understand somehow is infuriating.

I mean, that was his goal. Either destroy trust to weaken our position globally for the benefit of someone else,

It's not for the benefit of someone else though. Trump wants to intentionally destroy the US government by destroying its credibility both within and abroad. He does this by cutting foreign aid and pissing off all the US' former allies, and by terrorizing the US population.

His goal is to destroy the US as an institution because his key voters, which are southeners, think that they were forced to partake in the United States against their will back in the civil war from 1800, and that they should have a right to secede, and if it's not given to them freely, they have to destroy the entire US just to get away from it.

[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 15 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

There’s that shady salesman tactic of “buy this bad product now for a low price”

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

trumps the shady used car salesman/ car salesman, and putin is the shady car manufactarer/company, includes the wierd teeth grin that used car salesman and ambulance chaser lawyers do on thier ads.(kinda like how mr beast smiles)

[–] Olap@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Art of the deal

Trump always backs down, Zelensky should call and see what he's holding at this stage. Russia has always been the USAs biggest bogeyman, I can't actually see them pulling out completely

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 3 hours ago

ART OF THE STEAL.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 18 points 11 hours ago

If there is a peace deal to be brokered by outsiders, it should be through NATO without the USA. Europe still vaguely recalls what came of the Versailles Treaty, so EURO-NATO would at least try to make sure things turn out alright.

Any deal that is conceived by the USA is inherently bad, because the Childfucker In Chief wants to molest the world and to fill his pockets with misbegotten gains.

[–] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 31 points 13 hours ago (8 children)

Why is anyone listening to the US anymore? They are turning themselves into North Korea and losing any credibility they might have had. Who gives a shit what they say anymore?

[–] Credibly_Human@lemmy.world 13 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Because Europe has had half a decade to fill the void and they can't get it done and continue to act like cost efficiency is the name of the game.

Europeans seem to want to rag on about the US being irrelevant while being completely unwilling to put their money where their mouths are.

I am very supportive of Europe, but they need to wake up to that reality and stop bickering about pennies.

They should have been at wartime production years ago, and yet they still don't even have a 5th let alone 6th gen fighter jet.

The fact that the USA, who is currently chopping its own legs off, is managing to provide just about equally to the Ukrainian war effort to you, who are literally neighbours, should be embarrassing and sobering, but instead people just keep complaining and expecting the US to both shut up, and fix it.

[–] ptu@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Your claim that US and EU aids are about equal is false.

[–] Credibly_Human@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

That was based on military contributions, but as the commenter below points out it turns out the situation is even worse than what I described rather than better unless I read that wrong?

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Your Dropped link, but the data is not clear.

Here we can see that USA gives less militarily and financially.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 24 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

How exactly is this going to be worse? Putin keeps a bunch of territory, gets welcomed back into the global economy, Ukraine gets hard limits on NATO membership and they're on military in exchange for a weak non-guarantee of security. You could sum the whole thing up as 'let's all agree Russia won'.

It's bullshit. It legitimizes military conquest of territory. The only compromise should be that Russia stops their illegal invasion, Russia's internationally held funds are 100% given to Ukraine for reconstruction, and the border territories get to hold a vote to decide which country they want to be a part of.

As this is now, it's just legitimizing the occupation. As an American I am very disappointed that our President would push such a thing.

[–] Bwaz@lemmy.world 6 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Yup. And the only reason for Russia to insist Ukraine never join NATO would be so Russia could attack them again in the future without consequence.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 1 points 7 hours ago

Yup. And the only reason for Russia to insist Ukraine never join NATO would be so Russia could attack them again in the future without consequence.

Exactly.

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 4 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

It’s bullshit. It legitimizes military conquest of territory

Look, don't get me wrong here, I'm Ukrainian on my fathers side, but that line of argument doesn't quite hold water when you look at what the US has been up to for the past 100 years. In some sick sense, I get it, it's like, Putin is saying, fuck you, if the US can wage wars of conquest, so can we.

Clearly not as successfully, but I understand how you could defend that rationale. Jesus christ don't think I'm defending the Russians here, I'm just saying, for real like. Slava Ukraini.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

US is certainly no angel. Saying that as an American.
At the same time, there's a difference between shit we did in the 70s (and so did many other nations including RU) and today. In this millennium the closest we came to conquest was Iraq but we dumped that pretty fast.

'We're going to conquer this territory by force and add it to our own' hasn't been an internationally recognized valid move in decades. We should not validate it.

[–] Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com 1 points 11 minutes ago

At the same time, there's a difference between shit we did in the 70s and today.

No, there is not. You literally are funding genocide in Palestine, and every year half a million people are killed by US and EU economic sanctions.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 4 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

or the argument holds water and also the US has consistently been in the wrong for the same reasons

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 17 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

NATO needs to consider the US as an enemy and act accordingly.

[–] MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 1 points 7 hours ago

I'd expect NATO would have to expel the U.S. (or the U.S. would have to fully, officially leave) before the whole of NATO could consider them an enemy.

[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 4 points 12 hours ago

Whilst Fatboy McPaedo is sitting his obese arse in the ~~w~~shitehouse everyone may as well see the usa as an extension of russia.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 16 points 14 hours ago

What the fuck is the US doing?

Well it's obvious but how in the fuck

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 135 points 23 hours ago (9 children)

Face worse? They are going to get invaded a second time? Because yes, that is the fear and why they won't sign shit.

"HEY, BULLY, AND NERD, STOP FIGHTING EACH OTHER! I DON'T CARE WHO STARTED IT, JUST GIVE HIM YOUR LUNCH MONEY OR IT WILL BE WORSE TOMORROW!"

[–] Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com 1 points 9 minutes ago

why they won't sign shit

69% of Ukrainians are in favour of a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible.

[–] Renohren@lemmy.today 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 58 minutes ago)

And there is no worse than Russia getting territory from an European perspective. It just gives Russia free reign to start again but with EU members this time. So doing this means war, probably nuclear within a few years (France put into it's rules of engagement that countries on which France depends economically getting attacked conventionally are de-facto under the french nuclear umbrella as it would be protecting "the interests of the Nation").

So accepting this diktat means nuclear war. What is the worse outcome than nuclear war they are talking about?

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 76 points 22 hours ago (12 children)

Second? Crimea was the first, this is second.

Russia is hoping third time is the charm

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›