US presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump would also be shown the plan, President Zelensky says.
  • Frog@lemmy.caEnglish
    17·
    2 months ago

    Mr. Zelenskyy, please show a different set of plans to Trump. He is a traitor to the US democracy, to its government, to its people, and countries in NATO.

        • smeenz@lemmy.nzEnglish
          1·
          2 months ago

          But the only reason anyone would show plans to Trump would be to get them in front of putin, so they would be assumed to be misinformation.

          Maybe he should show trump the real plans…a bit of reverse psychology maybe ?

      • Visstix@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        2 months ago

        “It may sound too ambitious for some, but it is an important plan for us,” he added, saying that he would also show the plan to both US presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

        • einkorn@feddit.orgEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          This doesn’t answer my question.

          In the current situation, Trump has no influence on decision-making in regard to Ukraine. Until he is possibly elected president, he is just an unnecessary security risk.

          • volkerwirsing@feddit.orgEnglish
            1·
            2 months ago

            This just shows how Trump completely destroyed normal politics. It does make sense for a country in Ukraines situation to talk to both parties and to get both parties on board. Then the plan could move along regardless of who wins the election in Nov. This would have been possible in the past, with George W. Bush, Obama, Clinton & all other presidents and was actually done for other conflicts and topics in the past. Trump… is special.

          • OutlierBlue@lemmy.caEnglish
            11·
            2 months ago

            Because Trump would spill the plan to Putin. He’s already handed over documents regarding the US agents working in and around Russia, several of who “mysteriously” got caught not long after. He’s definitely a security risk.

            • einkorn@feddit.orgEnglish
              3·
              2 months ago

              Neither does your response answer my question.

              I asked why Zelenskyy SHOULD talk to Trump, not for reasons against it.

              • null@slrpnk.netEnglish
                1·
                2 months ago

                Okay, I’ll answer. He shouldn’t talk to Trump.

                Not sure why you’re so fixated on getting an answer to that question, but I hope that helps.

      • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        To hedge his bets. He can’t let the future of Ukraine be entirely decided by a US election that’s out of his control.

      • Squizzy@lemmy.worldEnglish
        02·
        2 months ago

        Yanks secretly want a monarchy thats why the still refer to people no longer in office by their title. Trump could get security briefings but it is apparently not happening at the moment.

        • TransplantedSconie@lemm.eeEnglish
          1·
          2 months ago

          33% do. The rest of us just want the government to do it’s job and protect us from foreign adversaries, corporations who want to poison us, and billionaires who want to go back to the feudal age.

          Unfortunately that 33% has way more pull thanks to the outdated electoral college and are unfathomably stupid thanks to lead pipes and Republicans actively sabotaging the educational system.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      Don’t worry, they’ll dumb it down so Trump can fit it in his tiny little mind, I’m sure, so the end leak of intelligence to Putin will be: “Ukraine says they’re going to BIGLY WIN! WOW! Very few people know that!”

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.netEnglish
    24·
    2 months ago

    I hope it works but honestly I don’t see any path for Ukraine to recover all of its territory at this point. Barring some major shakeup that causes Russian resistance to collapse.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      You do realize they took over a good chunk of russia in less than a week right? With the aid package and kamala having a really good chance at winning, ukraine is sitting pretty good.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.netEnglish
        41·
        2 months ago

        A tiny area of strategically insignificant territory.

        Look at the size of the territory gained compared with what they’ve lost: https://images.jifo.co/21540781_1723737029035.svg

        It’s an interesting gambit but like I said in my initial comment, the Russian resistance would need to essentially collapse for them to gain enough territory to make some kind of exchange for what they’ve lost. Unless they continue to gain ground at the same rate for the next year I don’t see this changing the overall situation which has been near stalemate on the main front for over a year now.

        I don’t see Kamala’s policy being meaningfully different from Biden and it’s far from sure she wins. Trump will almost certainly cut aid and make the situation substantially worse.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.netEnglish
        3·
        2 months ago

        The invasion of Russia has given them at least small gains for the first time in a while but it really doesn’t change the overall situation as of right now. The territory gained is very small compared to what they’ve lost.

        Russia would have just continue letting them gain more and more territory until they have enough for some kind of exchange, but that seems unlikely. They were caught off guard, but now that they’re defending, further advances will become difficult and it’s likely to soon reach another stalemate like the other fronts.