This basically turns security guarantees into leverage, not protection. No wonder Zelenskyy is pushing back.
1053
mawhrinskeletonMar 26, 2026
+378
At this point the US should be asked to clarify for whom the security guarentees are meant for
All this only makes sense if they are actually intended for Russia
378
bendover912Mar 26, 2026
+136
This entire administration only makes sense if it is secretly being led by Russia.
136
GardimusMar 26, 2026
+17
Hegseth hates gays so much, he would sell his country to Russia if it helps him hate on others.
17
NoSkillzDadMar 26, 2026
+3
I don't think it's that secret tbh.
3
PinstarMar 26, 2026
+95
Not to mention the whole "give up nukes for a guarantee of non invasion" was a lie.
95
StuckinatransporterMar 26, 2026
+44
In 1994, Ukraine signed the
[Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum), receiving political commitments from Russia, the US, and the UK to respect its sovereignty, independence, and existing borders. In exchange for transferring its third-largest nuclear arsenal to Russia for decommissioning, Ukraine was promised that force would not be used against it.
**Key Aspects of the Guarantees:**
* **Security Assurances:** The signatories (Russia, UK, USA) agreed to respect the independence, sovereignty, and existing borders of Ukraine.
* **No Use of Force:** The countries promised to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.
* **Non-Nuclear Status:** Ukraine agreed to join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as a non-nuclear state.
* **Economic Aid:** The U.S. provided roughly $600 million to assist with dismantling nuclear infrastructure.
* **Consultation Provision:** The parties agreed to consult if a question arose regarding these commitments.
**Why These Were Not "Guarantees"**
The agreement provided "assurances" rather than legally binding "guarantees" (like NATO Article 5), meaning there was no specific military obligation for the signatories to act if Ukraine was attacked. Russia violated the memorandum by annexing Crimea in 2014 and invading in 2022.
"Ukraine was promised that force would not be used against it."
44
MisfiringMar 26, 2026
+8
Russia broke the agreement sure, but there is no text stating any country must come to Ukraine's defense.
8
kodapugMar 26, 2026
+24
You're right, there's not. But have you considered that if every agreement our diplomats have a hand in falls apart in 20 years or less we significantly weaken our ability to negotiate anything anywhere else?
We are seeing first hand in Iran right now that using military force as the primary form of leverage is not an effective negotiating tactic.
If promises mean jack shit then those the US negotiates with will demand more tangibles like weapons, resources, and land inorder to accomplish their objectives. That gets expensive and difficult to negotiate fast.
24
Then_Journalist_317Mar 26, 2026
+1
assurance /ə-shoo͝r′əns/
# noun
1. A statement or indication that inspires confidence; **a guarantee** or pledge. "gave her assurance that the plan would succeed."
2. Freedom from doubt; certainty about something. "Do you have any assurance that the work will be done well?"
3. Self-confidence.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition (emphasis added)
1
Major_WaylandMar 26, 2026
+8
Of course that was a lie, because those “guarantees” never existed, and those who spoke of them are unable to read even half a page of the text that constitutes the full Budapest Memorandum.
8
KwisatzHaderach94Mar 26, 2026
+4
if he doesn't push back, donbas will only be the beginning. you do not negotiate with terrorists. terrorists like the potus.
4
secret_squirrels_nutMar 26, 2026
+42
the US already literally guaranteed their security in the 90s under clinton which was the reason they gave up their nuclear weapons to russia. Security guarantees by the US are worthless.
42
bilylMar 27, 2026
+1
Security guarantees aren’t worth the paper they’re on. It’s unclear whether NATO article 5 would stand a stress test aside from 9/11. This isn’t WWI - security guarantees will always have an asterisk and countries need to wake up and understand that.
1
SynensysMar 26, 2026
+12
If im zelensky i see if I can hold out until 2029 and see what a dem president might do
12
HiDHSiknowyouwatchmeMar 26, 2026
+9
It feels like you're being overly optimistic that we're going to have free and fair elections in 2026 & 2028.
9
SynensysMar 26, 2026
+6
Republicans just lost a state legislative seat thst represents mar a lago. If they had nearly as much ability to bend elections to their will as liberals think, that probably doesnt happen.
6
the_gd_donkeyMar 26, 2026
+3
It's a shakedown. It has been since trump got involved.
3
Blackthorn79Mar 26, 2026
+1
I still think one of the motives for Iran was to push up oil prices and force a peace agreement with Russia to lower prices back down by rolling back sanctions. They probably wanted it to be everyone keeps what they currently held, but Ukraine made that huge push and took back the majority of their country, so now they'll play this game to try and get Russia something for Putin's dumb war.
1
Hopeful_Air6088Mar 26, 2026
+972
But US security guarantees are worthless.
972
2HDFloppyDiskMar 26, 2026
+265
And Trump definitely doesn’t have all the cards
265
Savings-Double498Mar 26, 2026
+144
Or marbles
144
SpleenBenderMar 26, 2026
+24
Will any 'politicians' be attempting to invoke the 25th amendment? Because Trump has lost ALL of his marbles, and is more than likely deciding to just take the entire planet with him when he goes. He is and has always been so clearly unfit for the office of the President of the United States. Over all these years, he intentionally just decided to NOT PAY several contractors. He bankrupted some contractors, flat out ruined their livelihood, 'just for funsies'. Just think about the sheer scope of his criminality, even flaunting his thievery as we speak. Just an affront to the entire country, these disgustingly hypocritical billionaires are telling us that they are taking away food assistance from the people that most need it. Health insurance is now astronomically higher than it was less than a year ago. **Now we're 'at war'** with Iran, and thus far, all we know is that our 'leaders' are mostly VERY comprised. Do you believe the 'leaders' in Israel have kompromat (likely) on most of the slugchuds in schlump's 'cabinet'‽ I certainly do.
• Mossad: Handles foreign intelligence and special operations.
• Shin Bet (Shabak): Responsible for internal security and counter-intelligence.
• Aman: The military intelligence directorate.
And why is it that nobody is experiencing ANY CONSEQUENCES for forcibly raping and physically harming countless CHILDREN. Some of these children were murdered. There are so many people that had ties to Jeffrey Epstein, who was a Mossad agent that created all sorts of vile kompromat on so, so many world leaders, as well as any and all people that achieved any power or influence. And Israel most definitely has a lot of proof/kompromat on a LOT of powerful people. Most of the Trump administration are billionaires, and many of them have 'hung out' With Epstein. He's ripping off this country and lining his stinky pockets with OUR TAX DOLLARS. And pissing away billions (WAR with Iran, Venezuela, BigUglyBill, ballroom and a shiny new BUNKER. Yes, there's a bunker under that ballroom.
https://g.co/gemini/share/63ed0a2f20ec
Casually accelerating the adding of trillions to our national debt. This is going to fall onto the shoulders of our children and grandchildren. This person has NO BUSINESS being a president, or doing any complicated job for that matter. He has suffered from dementia for close to a year, and is constantly sundowning and can even talk nonsense at times. So instead, what we have forced upon us, is indeed the MOST fake (impostor/ ACTOR). president, that only cares about himself and how he looks 'on television'. This slovenly, greedy, selfish, narcissist sociopath is forcing this country and it's citizens into astronomical debt. What comes after a trillion‽ killion? The entire administration needs to be held accountable, otherwise we officially have a two tiered 'justice system'. So the moral of the story is ;
Nowadays, billionaires can seemingly just purchase governments and make themselves yet MORE MONEY by stripping it for parts, using the power of the government while stashing your filthy 200 billion dollars in tariffs (yep! WE pay for the tariffs!) to hassle and intimidate hard working, taxpaying citizens that only want what is best for our country and our fellow Americans. Yet you and your incompetent buffoonery, your petty grievances (and let's be honest here - the president molested and struck a 13 year old child). He takes significant bribes from fellow billionaires. He then, again using the weight of the government, 'allows' the largest corporations to just merge and monopolize, so again, the taxpayer foots the bill (ticketmaster/live nation for one example). Almost all media is dominated by the 'MAGA/EpsteinList/billionaires', so they control what we are seeing in the world. It seems that the world that they want to create would be authoritarian, they envision themselves as supreme leaders. The super rich get to run the show. And they really want the other ninetynine percent of the human race to be controlled somehow, or under constant surveillance.
24
DythusMar 26, 2026
+6
Any sane human being would push for an impeachment sadly we all out of sane human being.
Watergate is almost comically laughable now in comparison
6
SpleenBenderMar 26, 2026
+6
Watergate wasn't even a damned parking ticket compared to this horseshit.
6
KDR_11kMar 26, 2026
+8
Ailes built the conservative media system specifically to make sure no Repulican president would ever be held accountable again after Watergate.
8
SpleenBenderMar 26, 2026
+2
Yep, and it's working as intended.
2
DythusMar 26, 2026
+1
He had them... but it looked tasty and ate them all..
1
arthurno1Mar 26, 2026
+1
His never had marbles.
1
bedrooms-dsMar 26, 2026
+8
But have you said thank you? Have you said thank you for once today?
8
JKKIDD231Mar 26, 2026
+39
Unless Ukraine allows US airbase and nukes on their territory otherwise yes US security guarantee is useless. Russia will never accept a US airbase in Ukraine.
39
cement_brick214Mar 26, 2026
+33
They might if the US suddenly left Nato and declared their allegiance to Russia.
Which honestly would not surprise anyone at this point.
33
Hopeful_Air6088Mar 26, 2026
+22
Even if allowed, it’s still worthless. There are US airbases all over Middle East. Isn’t guaranteeing them any security.
22
BluemofiaMar 26, 2026
+2
The US security guarantee has an Israeli veto built in.
Not even a year ago, the US just let Israel airstrike Qatar to try and kill negotiators from Hamas.
2
Punman_5Mar 26, 2026
+4
That’s not even a security guarantee because the US just cannot be trusted anymore. Under the current administration the US would just as likely take over Ukraine and give the whole country to the Russians.
4
NitroLadaMar 26, 2026
+2
Even the gulf countries have US bases and Iran can and does hit them still.
2
bailaobanMar 26, 2026
+36
This is the thing. There's no point in negotiating with a bad faith counterparty.
36
BonhommeCarnavalMar 26, 2026
+11
Yeah, at this point in time I am sure Ukraine is waiting to see if Trump survives the midterms since they don’t have much chance of negotiating any kind of actual peace with him involved.
11
Johannes_PMar 26, 2026
+8
And even after the midterms, Trump could still use his executive powers to screw Ukraine.
Morever, the GOP demonstrated that it could elect toxic candidates. WHo's to say that another Trump isn't goind to be elected POTUS?
8
DreadfulDuderMar 26, 2026
+3
Or just trample the Constitution again and illegally hold back any sort of Congressional aid to Ukraine.
They got away with it last time, and they're somehow even more lawless and corrupt now.
3
Senior-budMar 26, 2026
+5
Worthless just like the president.
5
marshalistMar 26, 2026
+12
The US has very little leverage either. Even before the Iran war the US had virtually only its soft power as a weight on its side of the scale .
12
AnomuumiMar 26, 2026
+8
And as they do not support Ukraine with material their leverage is lower as well. They could very easily use leverage against Russia by threatening to increase support, but for some reason Trump is just parroting Putin's claims. Hmm.
8
za72Mar 26, 2026
+1
any US guarantee is dependent on who is elected every 4 years apparently... since it's a global issue then not allowing the entire planet to decide the outcome is... donno the right word
1
notmyworkaccount5Mar 26, 2026
+227
The trump 2.0 admin has change me to think the only way to guarantee your nations security is to acquire nukes, otherwise countries without nukes are constantly under threat by countries with nukes.
227
PerfectZeongMar 26, 2026
+132
Has been true for many years.
Conservatives in america will tell you straight faced that a gun toting society is a polite society and then act shocked when countries want to acquire nukes.
132
NiceromancerMar 26, 2026
+72
Armed society is polite society is always barked by some of the least polite people I've ever known.
When you boil down that statement they are basically saying "the only reason I'm nice to people is that I'm afraid I'll get killed if I'm not"
72
ManiaGamineMar 26, 2026
+25
"We need them for self-defense" says people constantly picking fights and claiming they are defending themselves.
These people are constantly starting fights then claiming they're defending themselves the moment someone fights back.
25
AtheistAustralisMar 26, 2026
+17
What could possibly be less polite than somebody threatening violence at all times?
17
RyenguMar 26, 2026
+6
Someone committing violence at all times.
6
lazertittiesrradMar 26, 2026
+7
Yes. That's exactly what they're telling you and it's wise to heed that warning.
There are a lot of seriously shitty people in this world.
If you're incapable of inflicting violence to defend yourself? You're not a pacifist. You're helpless. There's a big difference.
When the people oppressing you know that the most they'll have to face are protests with cute signs and slogans? You get fascist regimes.
That's why you always punch the bully in the nose. Always. Bullies, and fascists, are cowards.
You don't have to win all the fights, although you do need to win some, you just need to make sure that they remember that it's going to hurt.
A lot. Every f****** time.
7
ZachMNMar 26, 2026
+2
That’s the same tactic most religions use: behave or you’ll go to hell when you die.
2
PerfectZeongMar 26, 2026
+1
Yeah I mean it's entirely nonsense. I just found it amusing.
1
bp92009Mar 26, 2026
+6
That quote is actually around a paragraph long.
It is said by a man esposing the virtues of a pro-murder, pro-eugenics society, where *literal* gunfights in the streets are seen as a positive thing.
"Well, in the first place an armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. For me, politeness is a sine qua non of civilization. That's a personal evaluation only. But gunfighting has a strong biological use. We do not have enough things to kill off the weak and the stupid these days. But to stay alive as an armed citizen a man has to be either quick with his wits or with his hands, preferably both. It's a good thing." Robert A. Heinlein, "Beyond This Horizon"
You'll notice that pretty much everyone who quotes that saying does *not* use the full quote, or the full context of it.
If they do, and actually believe it is a true saying, they are quite literally esposing the *virtues* of gunfights in the streets, for the *purpose* of eugenics. That if you do not have fast hands or a fast mouth, you quite literally *deserve* to be shot in the street. That's the whole point of that quote and the society the character lives in.
The book explores why that's... bad.
6
Morat20Mar 26, 2026
+8
Nuclear weapons have ended up being a shield, not a sword.
Nobody invades a country with nukes, because a nation with nothing left to use doesn't *care* about MAD. If it's already going to be destroyed, there is nothing holding it back.
8
ManiaGamineMar 26, 2026
+3
Mulford act, Reagan and the Black Panthers.
3
ptwonlineMar 26, 2026
+14
Trump 2.0 has led me as a Canadian to want Canada to acquire nukes.
I don't think Americans have fully grasped just how far away they have pushed their allies, and how reluctant some of them will be to come back after Trump is gone because now there is always a threat of another Trump. He is not a one-off aberration--he got re-elected.
14
notmyworkaccount5Mar 26, 2026
+6
Yeah as much as I get where the people who always chime in going "erm aktually not all Americans support this!" are coming from it's also a super tone deaf thing for them to say.
Like you said, not an aberration since he got elected and transformed half our electorate into a cult around him. But also, we're kind of sleep walking into a dictatorship as people have convinced themselves we can still vote our way out of this. I think there's a lot of people in America in denial over what will inevitably be the only option we have left to stop a fascist dictatorship.
6
iamstephen1128Mar 26, 2026
+21
Regardless of the outcome of the Iran War, this issue is one that will pervade the coming new world order whatever it may be (the U.S.-led era in place largely since WWII is in its death throes). The only way to protect the sovereignty of your nation is clearly limited to the possession and threat of nuclear weapons and/or some other means for effectively crippling the world economy.
21
sedatedrulerMar 26, 2026
+19
More than that, nonproliferation was grounded in the belief that ALL countries were working towards disarmament, including the US and Russia. With this administration’s declarations around nuclear testing, arsenal expansion, etc that’s clearly off the table.
So… if I’m a regional power why am I NOT working toward nuclear weapons?
19
Count_BackwardsMar 27, 2026
+2
>the U.S.-led era in place largely since WWII is in its death throes
The U.S.-led era in place largely since WWII is dead. Something better *may* take its place, but there is no coming back from this.
2
_Iro_Mar 26, 2026
+8
The worst part is Ukraine had nukes but gave them up in exchange for US security guarantees
8
spooky_strategMar 26, 2026
+3
Thats why iran now is set to get them cos when they didnt try to get them they got ambushed
3
daniel_22sssMar 26, 2026
+1
Really? Trump 2.0? And not russian invasion into Ukraine, who got only Cold War era leftovers from the West and was pretty much left to die?
1
quarter_caskMar 26, 2026
+129
Trump is a russian asset and Putin is his handler... change my mind.
129
AdministrativeLeg581Mar 26, 2026
+22
Putin is too rich to be a handler…. He has people for that.
22
Morat20Mar 26, 2026
+8
Yup. Putin absolutely is running him. It's clear by the way that Putin is the one person Trump *never* tries his bullshit 'I'm in charge/I'm the big dog/I'm the alpha male' shit on. He's *obsequious* with Putin. Always trying to impress him, make Putin happy.
Trump has a thing for young girls -- in fact, my money is that he and Epstein were *business partners* with Trump bringing in his love of blackmail and ties and experience with the Russian mob -- and he went to Russia plenty of times.
And Putin's playbook on that sort of thing is *identical* to the one Epstein ended up using. Absolutely bug the f*** out of everything. Provide pedophiles with young girls, and make sure you have proof so they're very *generous* when you ask for something.
So you f****** *know* Trump indulged on his trips to Russia. No doubt about it. And Putin bugs every prominent American businessman who comes into the country, so it's *all* on tape.
I think Trump exported the very playbook that was used on him to Epstein. Bug the whole island. Blackmail the pedophiles. If they're not pedophiles, use whatever k**** sex they got up to or the fact that they were cheating (pre-nups often have an adultery clause, that can be a lot of money). F***, rich people parties often hire young models *and* some discreet high end e***** services to ensure there's plenty of pretty young women around for the rich to feel flattered and their egos stroked. Why not slide some 14 or 15 year olds in, give them targets. Do you think the average rich dude would *bother* to ask if they're really 18? And now you have them on tape f****** a 14 year old.
FWIW, I think Epstein and Trump actually struggled over control of the Epstein's little sex trafficking and blackmail emporium, with Trump coming out the loser. Until, you know, Epstein ended up in jail at exactly the wrong time.
8
DaOldOneMar 27, 2026
+2
Worse, he’s Netanyahu’s puppet
2
Stoic_caveMar 26, 2026
+68
US should give up some of their land then
68
TimothyMimeslayerMar 26, 2026
+107
We already gave Russia the white house, what more do you want?
107
Stoic_caveMar 26, 2026
+16
Fair play.
16
xynith116Mar 26, 2026
+4
You think that’s why Trump demolished 1/3 of it? To make way for his Putin worshipping ballroom?
4
gatvolkakMar 27, 2026
+1
I offer Florida as a tribute
1
SpermWhalenMar 26, 2026
+40
Anything for Putin. He saw how far Bibi got with the Epstein material.
40
thelunarunitMar 26, 2026
+11
Who would trust a deal with trump
11
SonofGrogMar 26, 2026
+22
I would not believe a single thing this Administration says. Sorry world.
22
Lost-Chair4863Mar 26, 2026
+17
Who in the world would ever trust a trump agreement
17
CellulevideMar 26, 2026
+5
An agreement with the US. You elected Trump TWO times and there is no shortage of narcissistic pedos you could elect in the future. That is IF you still have elections...
5
Designer-Salary-7773Mar 26, 2026
+17
Trump and GOP promises are useless
17
CommonConundrum51Mar 26, 2026
+5
To think some people say Trump is in Putin's pocket. Unimaginable, right?
5
PhabioRantsMar 26, 2026
+33
Security guarantees from the US are how we're more than 4 years into a Russian full-scale invasion without a US deployment.
Ukraine relinquished its nuclear deterrent for this.
The US can pound sand. It's NATO accession or bust. This isn't wishful thinking; it's a grave existential mandate. The only thing keeping Ukraine sovereign is their willingness to keep fighting. The only thing that will keep Russia from repeating the invasion in ten years after a ceasefire will be Article 5. There's nothing to argue in the matter.
33
mastrofpenguinsMar 26, 2026
+3
When was the last time Article 5 was successfully invoked?
3
JeatalongMar 26, 2026
+6
2001 September sometime.
6
VegetableWishboneMar 26, 2026
+2
Those nukes were Soviet nukes deployed in Ukraine. Even if Ukraine kept the nukes, they have neither the technical expertise nor the money to maintain those weapons and would’ve relied on Russia’s help.
2
PhabioRantsMar 26, 2026
+9
Ukraine has been, for generations, the backbone of Russia's technical and manufacturing base. With the dissolution of the Union, Russia lost access to the overwhelming majority of its naval and aerospace engineering which had always been Ukrainian. To suggest that Ukraine couldn't have secured the requisite scientists as they fled to open markets is absurd, but it obviously wasn't worth the diplomatic catastrophe, nor was it worth antagonizing both Russia and America at the time.
Furthermore, it would have been a financial black hole at a time when the country could least afford it that would have provided little benefit amid security guarantees that were leveraged at the time. Prioritizing bombs over food and domestic policy was how the USSR collapsed already. But with hindsight, security guarantees to remain a buffer state should have made it obvious they were being sold out as a bi-directional speedbump to be carved up at a later date.
9
fingertraptMar 26, 2026
+8
We only settle for the borders of Ukraine as they were on December 25, 1991. That's the legal boundaries of THEIR democratic country
8
Hexas87Mar 26, 2026
+4
Those guarantees mean shit while trump is in power. Donbas on the other hand is worth a lot.
4
animalcrackerz916Mar 26, 2026
+2
Didn’t mean much to Obama either when Crimea was taken.
2
tsoneysonMar 26, 2026
+5
The f was that mineral deal for then?
5
Basement_ChickenMar 26, 2026
+4
Direct violation of paragraph 3 of Budapest Memorandum on... Security Guarantees.
4
lLikeCatsMar 26, 2026
+4
US can’t offer guarantees for shit. Giving up nukes was supposed to secure Ukraine. It did not.
Don’t trust the US. Not under the Dems. And especially not under the Republicans.
This is basically DEI for land grabs. Trump needs his Nobel Peace Prize and Putin needs the land he can’t get despite invading.
4
TeaAndLiftingMar 26, 2026
+5
When the US threatens to invade its allies and praises its supposed enemies, US security guarantees are worth nothing any more.
5
TheWebCoderMar 26, 2026
+4
Trump is lying . They won’t be guarantees. They’ll be leverage to try to steal something like natural resources.
4
evilpercyMar 26, 2026
+4
Trump and Putin make impossible peace demands where Putin gets everything he wants. Then when Ukraine says no Trump punishes Ukraine. He has been doing this cycle since he was elected.
4
rvretiredlifeMar 26, 2026
+10
NEVER TRUST the US for security guarentees, remember this is why Ukraine is where they're at right now. Europe needs to be the security guarentee not the US. Trump can't be trusted, he's already shown that by loosening sanctions on Russian oil. There are talks now of not supporting Ukraine with weapons and sending them instead to the middle east.
Never trust or rely on Trump for security.
10
H0visMar 26, 2026
+7
To be clear, the US and UK dropped the ball on this from the beginning. Ukraine was protected by both nations in return for nuclear disarmament. That guarantee failed.
Bottom line? Build nukes kids. Big ones. As many as you can. Because people are full of shit, but a nuclear weapon you can trust.
7
ShamanSix01Mar 26, 2026
+12
Didn’t the U.S. give security guarantees when Ukraine gave up their nukes?
12
Cirno-BreastLickerMar 26, 2026
+3
President Putin is an awfull American president...
3
sqwwMar 26, 2026
+3
Yes because the last security guarantee worked out soooo well. /s
3
BluehibiscusEmpireMar 26, 2026
+3
Wasn’t there an existing US security guarantee which was the basis for Ukraine to give up its nukes.
Guess a guarantee means something different if you are a powerful country
3
ChefCurryYumYumMar 26, 2026
+3
Who in their right mind would trust a Trump backed security guarantee?
3
punkasstubabitchMar 26, 2026
+3
Guarantees under Trump mean nothing.
3
BillFree0101Mar 26, 2026
+3
Don’t do it! Do not trust Trump. He is 100% all for Putin.
3
MakachaiMar 26, 2026
+3
Translation: the US is threatening a sovereign nation and ally with withdrawing aid, unless they cede territory to a dictatorial adversary.
And then they wonder why nobody will lift a finger to help them.
You made your bed, lay in it.
3
Mike-SBAMar 26, 2026
+3
Trump rarely keeps his word ! Zelenskyy should lose his number and deal only with his European allies !
3
cement_brick214Mar 26, 2026
+5
Well, I guess I'll see you guys when the 2030 Russo-Ukrainian war breaks out and Ukraine gets Luhansk taken from them too
5
SpinnwebenMar 26, 2026
+2
Luhansk is already taken. „Giving up Donbas“ means handing over the entire five stolen oblasts.
2
ghotierMar 26, 2026
+7
Ukraine had a security guarantee from the US before the war started.
7
RustyOrangeDogMar 26, 2026
+2
The US cant even guarantee food stamps.
2
SignificantDrag6147Mar 26, 2026
+2
Just don’t canot be trust
2
ThePensiveEMar 26, 2026
+2
Also known as *Putin's Position.*
2
mist_kaeferMar 26, 2026
+2
This is like us giving up Florida to Cuba.
On second thought, maybe that’s not such a bad thing.
2
OinkidoinkidoinkMar 26, 2026
+2
American security guarantees from the critters in the Orange House are about as trustworthy as Tzar Vlad.
2
ARazorbacksMar 26, 2026
+2
Security guarantees we won’t uphold.
2
hyperiongateMar 26, 2026
+2
Putin is running the U.S.
2
XivvxMar 26, 2026
+2
Guarantees from Trump are not worth the paper they aren't printed on.
2
CarbongaMar 26, 2026
+2
What, exactly, are those security guarantees? The effectiveness of the US military in Iran like? That's not much of a guarantee.
2
grs86Mar 26, 2026
+2
I don't know why he's even wasting his time with the US, honestly. I know its mostly to keep up appearances, but the quicker they tell the US they're not interested in them towing Russia's line, the better. Means the EU can finally take the lead on diplomacy - which Russia is not going to like and probably isn't going to participate in. The US are just useful idiots to Putin.
2
Positive_Chip6198Mar 26, 2026
+2
They wont honor those guarantees. Putin is seeing trump closer to keeling over and is making a (hopefully last) push to have his nr1 asset win him the war.
Orban and Fico are pushing putins line in europe, preventing the union acting. And to be fair eu leadership has been super-weak to respond to russia.
We need to help ukraine more, sooner rather than later.
2
arbitvarioMar 26, 2026
+2
I don't think US security carries the same weight as it did before.
2
bonfireballMar 26, 2026
+2
There's no point in listening to the U.S about this stuff anymore.
2
shwarma_heavenMar 26, 2026
+2
The US is in no position to dictate any peace agreement. All credibility lost.
2
Plaid_PiperMar 26, 2026
+2
Just don't even f****** negotiate with trump or his cronies. As an American, I recognize how pointless and dangerous it is to engage with the current regime. It's all always going to be in bad faith, and not only would Putin ignore any deal and do what he wants anyway, Trump would too.
Right now our country is not to be trusted.
2
AutoxquattroMar 26, 2026
+2
What security? Hes been giving intel to your enemies ! Only security guarantees that should be accepted is trump turning himself in to the ICC
2
dispelhopeMar 26, 2026
+2
I hope Zelenskyy has the sense of self-preservation for Ukraine to know that anything the U.S. guarantee's can and will be abandoned at the earliest convenience.
2
OlderThanMyParentsMar 27, 2026
+2
Trump's security "guarantees" aren't worth any more than his wedding vows were.
For that matter, didn't Russia "guarantee" Ukraine's protection if Ukraine gave up their nukes? Zelenskyy would have to be a real TACO to buy this.
2
WierdFingerMar 27, 2026
+2
I hope by now Z doesn't trust anything coming from trump. I know I never did.
2
Overall_Curve6725Mar 27, 2026
+2
The U.S. keeps proving their word is no good.
Republican guarantees are a joke. Ask all of their Middle East allies
2
Guntcher_1423Mar 27, 2026
+2
Like we didn't know that. Trump has been insisting all along a settlement that favors Putin. And if Ukraine accepts. in a few years it starts again. Or Putin moves on to another country.
2
IamanimiteMar 27, 2026
+2
Yeah... I go fuxk yourselves.
2
TehnomaagMar 26, 2026
+6
Didnt Ukraine already have US security gurantees for giving up their nukes?
6
TheThebanProphetMar 26, 2026
+3
we gave security guarantees in the 90s if ukraine gave up their soviet nuclear stockpile and look what that's done for them.
3
Ornery_Flounder3142Mar 26, 2026
+5
How about our previous guarantee to protect them for getting rid of their nukes?
5
Vegetable_Quote_4807Mar 26, 2026
+3
trump doesn't honor ANY agreement, including his own. His word is worth less than a pile of dog feces.
3
LordMashieMar 26, 2026
+2
There was no guarantee. The only clause in the Budapest Memorandum on what to do if Ukraine was invaded says to simply "seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance" - you know, to ask for help. Nothing about actually getting said help.
2
SirDalavarMar 26, 2026
+2
US Security guarantees are a lie!
2
revilo-1988Mar 26, 2026
+1
Egal wie das ausgeht es wird in einigen Jahren erneut explodieren zu einem Krieg
1
DividedStateMar 26, 2026
+1
Did Krasnov talk with his puppet master Putler again?
America is officially an ally of Russia by now. Commies and fascist won afterall.
1
MrPatienceXMar 26, 2026
+1
US guarantees aren’t worth the toilet paper they’re written on. And they’re working really hard to make sure nobody is in doubt of that fact any more.
1
McCool303Mar 26, 2026
+1
F*** this treasonous Trump.
1
-Esper-Mar 26, 2026
+1
Putin just told the US theyd stop helping Iran if we dumped Ukrain...
1
BoomdidlidooMar 26, 2026
+1
USA has no credibility at this point. They proved they can't be trusted and don't keep their word on anything. It's not only because of Trump.
1
qlurpMar 26, 2026
+1
That the US government is so thoroughly owned by Russia would see many a patriot roll in their grave.
1
not_just_putinMar 26, 2026
+1
Which f****** guaranties? We all remember how they "worked".
1
UnluckyPlutonMar 26, 2026
+1
The only security guarantees Ukraine can have, is created by their own military power. As you see, EU and US is not enough.
1
RhoOfFehMar 26, 2026
+1
Man, Trump *hates* Ukraine.
1
kaisadilla_Mar 26, 2026
+1
Why does Ukraine have to give up anything? Ukraine doesn't claim any part of Russia, and Russia is ruining itself failing to conquer Ukraine.
1
ForeignExpressionMar 26, 2026
+1
Is this the same security guarantee the Gulf Arab states are now enjoying from the US?
1
GwtheyrnMar 26, 2026
+1
Any guarantee by Trump isn't worth the paper it's written on.
1
VandiracMar 26, 2026
+1
At this point, Ukraine should really commit to returning those "decapitation strike" attempts.
And yes, the US and Trump are to be treated as Russian assets, the EU should step up and funnel some good hardware to Ukraine, nevermind what tantrum Trump will throw.
1
Terra-EmMar 26, 2026
+1
I'm.curuous if Ukraine gets a nuke would.it start ww3 I mean the treaty they signed has already been broken by us and Russia
1
Any-Ad-446Mar 26, 2026
+1
Trump is such a moron and puppet. Ukraine does not want to give up one meter of land to Russia and Trump must realized Russia is running out of troops,tanks.aircrafts,trucks,etc...and money. Ukraine is already making the push to take back Donbas
1
Healthy-Amoeba2296Mar 26, 2026
+1
that's called losing. Who were these guys?
1
FoEQuestionMar 26, 2026
+1
Once again Trump displays that he is nothing but a Putin lap dog. Always has been.
Helps Russia get more oil money to send to Iran to kill Americans for no good reason.
Sells out Ukraine while rewarding Russian genocide.
154 Comments