this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
309 points (97.2% liked)

World News

41003 readers
3241 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 [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


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
 

Summary

Donald Trump stated that U.S. aid to Ukraine should be compensated with $500 billion worth of its mineral resources, including rare earth elements.

He claimed Ukraine had "essentially agreed" to this arrangement. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has hinted at allowing U.S. access to these resources to maintain support.

The idea aligns with Ukraine’s "victory plan" for post-war recovery.

Trump's comments drew criticism, with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz condemning his approach as "very egotistic, very self-centered."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DomeGuy 2 points 1 week ago

You're right, the behavior of how Iraq and Afghanistan were handled was entirely different from either Germany or Japan after WW2.

My assertion is that the USA did too much "occupation" and not enough "governance". Both Iraq and Afghanistan essentially had anti-government resistance movements forced into pseudo-national rule without any time to develop local governance.

Once the states were broken W wanted to get out, essentially since he feared accusations of imperialism. Which kept a good twenty year plan from being implemented, and instead led to a twenty year quagmire with one of the two essentially being a failed state.

(Man, that's a lot of essentially's)

I don't mean to defend either invasion as either good for the people or necessarily for American security. I just want to point out that W's position was "go and break things then go home" which is about as imperial as a viking raid.