Ian H
Squire
It is indeed. I'm not sure that the US ever apologised properly for Iran Air Flight 655, or the Soviet Union for Korean Air Lines Flight 007
I've never seen an apology for invading another country and massacring the inhabitants.
It is indeed. I'm not sure that the US ever apologised properly for Iran Air Flight 655, or the Soviet Union for Korean Air Lines Flight 007
It is indeed. I'm not sure that the US ever apologised properly for Iran Air Flight 655, or the Soviet Union for Korean Air Lines Flight 007
It is indeed. I'm not sure that the US ever apologised properly for Iran Air Flight 655, or the Soviet Union for Korean Air Lines Flight 007
I've never seen an apology for invading another country and massacring the inhabitants.
You are correct. The USA didn’t and were criticised for it. They did pay out compensation to all the victims families...
IanThe rapid developments have worried Europe that Putin and Trump appear to be negotiating the future of the continent’s security over the heads of the Europeans themselves.
“If Europe is responsible for Ukraine’s security and could even provide troops [under a ceasefire agreement], then we should have a seat at the table and be consulted with the Americans,” said one European official. “And we have not been consulted.”
(from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/12/trump-putin-ukraine-ceasefire)
Reports now appearing that Trump has talked to Putin and US and Russia to start peace talks to end the Ukraine War, without Ukraine involvement it seems.
US has already made significant concessions despite talks not having started eg Ukraine will never join NATO and Ukraine will cede territory to Russia.
Seems US plan is for peace to be secured by European troups (but not under NATO) though Europeans get no say in the negotiations.
Ian
And just like many experts said before they warn for the same now *if* Putin gets anything in this case it's land and no Ukraine in Nato, it will just mean that any peace is relative he will use it to retrain and then attack the next target. Whatever that is.So Trump will get his very own peace in our time moment.
The 2% of GDP is a "guideline" not a membership requirement. It was introduced in 2014 (partially in response to Russia's annexation of Crimea) but based on a 2006 agreement. NATO regard it as an indication of political resolve.You can apply but have to meet the conditions, one of which is to spend a certain % of gdp on Defence. Most Nato countries haven't been meeting this target for years, which is one reason the US can get a bit miffed about Nato;
You can apply but have to meet the conditions, one of which is to spend a certain % of gdp on Defence. Most Nato countries haven't been meeting this target for years, which is one reason the US can get a bit miffed about Nato; they can perceive themselves as doing the heavy lifting defence wise whilst Europe spends its money on other stuff.
Every country has a veto I believe. If the US says Ukraine membership is off the table, it's off the table.
Add on: It's supposed to be 2% of gdp on defence. Most members aren't meeting that figure.
View attachment 7318
View attachment 7319