By John Q. Hosedrinker 
European leaders, including the UK Prime Minister and the French President, convened with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy at the White House to counter a US-backed plan that would allow Russia to retain occupied Ukrainian territory. This unprecedented display of unity aimed to push back against Trump’s endorsement of the Kremlin’s proposal, which includes Kyiv ceding land in exchange for a ceasefire. The European leaders reaffirmed their support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity, arguing against a land swap and seeking clarity on US security guarantees. While acknowledging Trump’s efforts, they stressed that peace negotiations must involve Ukraine and that Russia must face further sanctions.
Read the original article here
Alright, let’s break down this whole situation: European leaders, including Keir Starmer, are apparently lining up to join Zelenskyy for a meeting with Donald Trump. Sounds like a potentially explosive get-together, doesn’t it? This is a high-stakes moment with a lot of moving parts and strong opinions floating around, and it’s easy to see why everyone is fired up.
The initial reaction seems to be a mix of excitement and trepidation, bordering on outright defiance. There’s a clear sense that Europe and Ukraine are united in this, ready to stand their ground against any attempts to bully or intimidate. The sentiment is that Trump, and his “vice couch-fucker,” won’t get away with steamrolling Zelenskyy this time. The focus is on unity, and a shared sense of determination to face down whatever comes their way.
Adding to the tension is the persistent specter of the Epstein files. The idea is that Zelenskyy, or someone in his entourage, might use this as a pressure tactic, something that’s bound to make things uncomfortable for Trump. However, there’s also a healthy dose of skepticism about Trump actually changing his mind.
Then there are the strategic considerations. Some feel that the meeting will be a waste of time. Trump will do what he wants regardless. Others are hopeful about the potential for pushing back against a larger, bully nation by not giving up their land. There’s the fear of being treated like second-class citizens, the potential for political grandstanding, and the nagging sense that some leaders are primarily there for photo ops. Concerns about what they’re going to talk about and if Starmer is going to announce any new commitments are also prevalent.
There is clear recognition of the power dynamics involved. The consensus here is that Europe is in a weaker position relative to the United States, and it is not the best idea to poke the potential President. There’s a lot of talk about how to navigate this situation, with Macron playing the bad cop, while Starmer attempts to win Trump over with flattery.
The discussion then shifts to a historical lens. It’s interesting to see how many people remember the first election and the subsequent predictions of WW3. It is also mentioned that Trump might not forget the way they openly supported Kamala.
There is a good deal of skepticism about the actual outcome of this meeting. The general sentiment seems to be that Trump will continue to do what he wants, regardless of the arguments presented to him. This is a common refrain throughout the entire discussion.
There’s a lot of speculation about Trump’s motives and his history with Zelenskyy. There’s a feeling that this is partly about personal grudges and settling old scores.
The Budapest Memorandum is brought up and the suggestion that Trump will treat the leaders with disdain is also prevalent. There is a warning about its interpretation and to acknowledge that this is not a war commitment.
Finally, the discussion lands on the individuals involved. People have strong feelings about Starmer, with some viewing him as a weak figure who is all too willing to appease Trump. Others point out that Trump appreciates certain leaders, like Merz and Starmer, and that this familiarity might offer some advantage.