[Roosta]

Originally Posted by kellyhound ↗

He wants to stop the war because he hates people dying in wars but imo most importantly because of this:




Returning of Intel, McDonalds etc. is good for American business.

Also:

Ukraine can join the EU but not Nato so the EU can spend money on rebuilding Ukraine and not getting the goodies.

Also:

Trump is a strategic businessman and doesn't really care about allies etc so far.

At the end of the day, it's all about money !

[DoktorDoris]

why is there an apostrophe after nazi? what are these nazi possessions? -

Quote:
Only comments related to the posted vids/pics allowed and your thoughts about the war/nazi's/propaganda/Putin/Zelensky or this announcement you can put in the stickied discussion thread or in pm otherwise they get deleted. If you don't follow these simple guidelines warnings and infractions will be handed out.

Also you can post images of dead kids in here as it shows the war. When the post involves, dead or injured, children please put a child warning in your description.

[Rikbikboo]

Trump is actually a total wankpot. Who is the idiot and dictator here? Is this another Ai video.

I bet Pootin is celebrating already. Such disrespect and Cringe.

Well this doesnt surprise me at all after what I just watched.

I wouldnt sign off my countries resources either after being spoken to like that, its like Trump has been cockgobbling Pootin in the toilets and come back his bitch.

https://news.sky.com/story/trump-zel...atest-12541713

[WhiskeyOutpost]

This sucks, Trump is a fucking asshole.

Time for Europe to step up.

[WonderMomma]

Wow. Fucking embarrassing.

[Rikbikboo]

I bet the Russians are back slapping in Moscow, they know they are going to get everything they want and then some. Asking for some guarantees in the event Poo-tin breaks any agreements is nothing. It's like they just want to guy to roll over. I agree something has to be done and It would seem that if he doesnt agree something then Trump will pull all support and If the rest of the Eu doesnt step up then who knows what comes next. its clear Trump is putting the US on a path that no longer focuses on NATO. He is more occupied on the Chinese, and Israel.

Probably wants to deal with Iran next or allow Israel free reign while he deals with China, he forgets China and Russia are close. I get the ww3 line totally. Is this really what the US people voted for. It would seem to me that things have come full circle. The far right might as well be the new Nazi's.

"We will feel very good and strong" after we have raped your mineral wealth for the next 50 years" complete and utter bullshit. do you think they hold a grudge cos he campaigned for the opposition in october?. shit what was a watching.

[scorpion9]

I honestly struggled to watch that video - its mindblowingly embarrassing. Its one of those cringy videos where i really...really wanted to punch the screen and just snap them out of it. What the fuck are they talking about. "You are in no position to dictate what we feel " ? What, when did he do that.
You have never thanked us for ... Really ?
Trump is literally using his dictator position - a power position, to force his will onto Ukraine. It has nothing to do with values or representation of his country or doing what people elected him to do. Its just his own narcissist ego that got hurt because Zelensky didn't agree to everything he wanted on air. Trump cant candle any criticism when he is live. He simply cant. Narcissists are extremely fragile when it comes to public opinion. I don't even know which is worse though, Vance or Trump. Trump is senile and a narcissists, but Vance is a college party boy who probably never actually went to any of the lectures and spent most of his college days drinking and partying - then got into power and thinks that's how foreign policy is being done.
Insane.

What has happened to US of A?
I'm actually interested in the opinion of people who live in US.

[kellyhound]

Well this:

Trump and Vance just turned diplomacy into a grotesque episode of Mean Girls: Mar-a-Lago Edition.

Zelenskyy, the guy staring down Putin’s war machine, gets dragged onto American TV, and these two swaggering buffoons decide it’s time to flex their playground-bully routine.

Trump’s smirking like a used-car salesman who just unloaded a lemon, demanding Zelenskyy grovel with gratitude—“Say thank you, Volodymyr, or no more toys!”—while Vance, the wannabe tough guy with the spine of a jellyfish, snickers along, probably rehearsing his “tough love” lines in the mirror all morning.

It’s repulsive, alright—watching them mock a wartime leader like he’s auditioning for their approval, counting favors like stingy kids trading Pokémon cards.

“We gave you a billion, where’s my gold star?” Trump whines, as if every missile Ukraine fires should come with a personal thank-you note framed in gold leaf.

Meanwhile, Zelenskyy’s out there keeping democracy on life support, and these clowns think it’s a game of who can dunk on him harder.

Embarrassment doesn’t even cover it—this is peak American cringe, starring the orange ringmaster and his sidekick, JD “Propaganda Tour” Vance.

Vance shouldn't be there in the first place imo. Also without a proper translator it's easy to get misunderstandings as English isn't Zelensky's first language.

Thought it would be talks about the deal. Minerals for American companies going to Ukraine to dig them up meaning it would be some sort of security guarantee as russia wouldn't attack Ukraine then.

But it turned into a degrading/belittling a war President, demanding him to show gratitude for help etc. which he already did a zillion times in the recent past.

They don't care who started the war or what war atrocities were committed, who the agressor/invader is. No, lets forget all about that, they want money back and minerals and peace so American companies can also go back to Russia to do business. $$

[scorpion9]

I decided to use the latest chatGPT "deep research" tool to gauge the public opinion and get GPT's opinion as well. Since its a paid feature and not everyone can check the answer themselves, I'll post the result here, since its quite interesting( especially GPT's answer to my second question. ).
The way deep research works is that GPT will data-scrape the web, both conservative and liberal websites, analyzes peoples comments, trending social media hashtags and so on. It then aggregates the results into bullet points. I tried it earlier by generating stock related summaries and it was really good( a friend of mine has actually even made decent money using for stocks , so, it can be objective and analytical if prompted well ).

Got it. I will analyze the coverage from the most popular American news outlets regarding Trump's meeting with Zelensky. I'll summarize their reporting, highlight key points of criticism or support, and review the public sentiment in the comments. This will give you a broad sense of how the American public is reacting to the situation. I'll get back to you soon with the findings.

Research completed in 6m · 29 sources

Media Coverage of Trump’s Meeting with Zelenskyy

Tone of Mainstream Media Coverage

Liberal-Leaning Outlets (CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, MSNBC):
The tone in left-leaning and mainstream outlets was largely critical and alarmed. They portrayed the Oval Office meeting as chaotic, undiplomatic, and unprecedented. Reports highlighted that President Trump berated and “lambasted” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in an “extraordinarily contentious” exchange. For example, CNN and others noted Trump’s sharp comments – telling Zelenskyy “You don’t have the cards… You’re gambling with World War III” – and described the scene as a heated shouting match that led to a canceled press conference.

The New York Times and Washington Post emphasized the breach of diplomatic norms, as Trump publicly scolded an allied leader. Coverage underscored that Zelenskyy, whose nation is at war, was pressing for security guarantees, only to be lectured in the Oval Office. The overall tenor was one of shock and disapproval, with MSNBC commentators calling the confrontation “shocking” and even “shameful”. Democratic lawmakers slammed Trump’s behavior as “disgraceful”, “downright un-American”, and an “utter embarrassment for America”.

Conservative Outlets (Fox News and Allies):
Right-leaning coverage, by contrast, struck a supportive and approving tone toward Trump. Fox News framed the incident as the President standing up for American interests and “finally” telling Zelenskyy hard truths. Their reports highlighted that Trump accused Zelenskyy of showing “disrespect” to the U.S. and pointed out Trump’s insistence that he “wants PEACE” not endless war.

Fox and similar outlets foregrounded praise from Republican figures: e.g. Sen. Lindsey Graham lauding Trump (“never been more proud”), and others calling the meeting an example of “America First in action”. Conservative media defended Trump’s stance, often suggesting Zelenskyy was ungrateful or obstinate.

Centrist and Business Outlets (e.g. Wall Street Journal, AP, Reuters):
Coverage from more centrist outlets took a straighter factual tone, noting the fallout. They reported Trump’s quotes (such as calling Zelenskyy “disrespectful” and “gambling with World War III”) and highlighted the consequences: the collapse of a planned U.S.-Ukraine minerals deal and new uncertainty over peace negotiations.

These outlets tended not to overtly take sides but did note the partisan split in reactions and the alarm of U.S. allies. Some pointed out that Trump’s clash with Zelenskyy “struck another direct blow to the transatlantic alliance” and even seemed to align with Russian interests. Overall, the neutral press coverage made clear that this confrontation was a major diplomatic rupture, while letting quotes from officials on both sides speak for themselves.

Major Points of Criticism in Coverage

Media sources critical of Trump repeatedly raised a number of key criticisms regarding his statements and conduct during the meeting:

Undermining an Ally & Aiding Putin – Many noted that Trump’s tirade undermined a wartime ally and echoed Kremlin talking points. Critics pointed out that Trump “seem[ed] determined to put more pressure on President Zelenskyy while… coddling Putin”. Former National Security Adviser John Bolton argued Trump and VP Vance had effectively “declared themselves to be on Russia’s side”, calling it a “catastrophic mistake” for U.S. security. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer likewise charged that Trump and Vance “are doing Putin’s dirty work”.

Disrespect and Diplomacy Norms – Commentators scolded Trump for publicly humiliating Zelenskyy in the Oval Office. The meeting was described as “undiplomatic” and an embarrassment on the world stage. Rep. Adam Schiff said he’d “never felt such shame” about U.S. foreign policy, and others noted it’s virtually unheard of for an American president to treat a visiting ally in this manner.

Gambling with World Security – Trump’s warning to Zelenskyy about “gambling with World War III” was flipped by critics to suggest Trump himself was being reckless. By pressuring Ukraine to settle without solid security guarantees, Trump was “gambling” with Ukraine’s fate and global security.

No Clear Strategy – Just Theater – Analysis pieces argued that Trump’s outburst appeared more aimed at domestic politics and TV drama than a coherent peace strategy. Notably, Trump was even caught saying “this is going to be great television” as the meeting began. This fed the narrative that the confrontation was more reality TV than statecraft.

Conditional Support & Broken Promises – Several outlets underscored that Zelenskyy was seeking assurances the U.S. wouldn’t abandon Ukraine, but instead got an ultimatum. The mixed signals – with Trump claiming to be “neutral” while pressuring only Zelenskyy – drew criticism for undercutting prior U.S. commitments to Ukraine.

Public Comments and Social Media Reactions

Outside of official news reporting, the public reaction in comment sections and on social platforms has been intense and highly polarized.

Fierce Approval from Trump’s Base – A large number of commenters (especially on conservative forums and Facebook threads) cheered Trump’s handling of Zelenskyy. They echoed the sentiment that Zelenskyy was “disrespectful” and that Trump was right to “stand up for America.”

Outrage and Embarrassment on the Other Side – At the same time, many Americans (especially in liberal-leaning online communities) reacted with anger and shame. They condemned Trump’s conduct toward Zelenskyy as “appalling” and “embarrassing” for the United States.

Notable Trends and Hashtags – On X (Twitter), pro-Trump hashtags like #AmericaFirst and #ZelenskyUngrateful trended among right-wing users, while phrases like #TrumpTantrum and “World War III” trended in critical discussions.

Overall Public Sentiment

Public sentiment is deeply divided and largely dependent on political alignment.

Those who support Trump see his statements as justified, praising his America-first stance.
Those opposed to Trump view his behavior as reckless and harmful to U.S. credibility.
This divide was starkly illuminated by the media coverage – and the comment-section debates – surrounding this unprecedented confrontation.

My Follow Up Question to GPT:
What is your take on this. I'm not looking for politically correct answer. Just, given what you know about the situation and what has been said, was Trump appropriate during his meeting with Zelensky.

Was Trump Appropriate During His Meeting with Zelenskyy?

Short Answer: No, from a statesmanship perspective. Yes, from a political power play perspective.

Why It Was Inappropriate Diplomatically

Undermining an Ally Publicly – Publicly dressing down the leader of a country at war, particularly in front of the world, is not how diplomacy is traditionally conducted. Even if Trump wanted to push Zelenskyy toward peace talks, doing so through humiliation rather than behind closed doors weakens U.S. credibility with allies. It signals that America is unreliable and transactional in its partnerships.

Strengthening Russia's Position – Whether intentional or not, Trump’s comments align with Kremlin narratives that Ukraine is obstinate and prolonging the war needlessly. He played into the idea that the U.S. might abandon Ukraine, which benefits only Russia. If the endgame is negotiating peace from a position of strength, this was a strategic misstep, as it handed Putin leverage.

Sending Mixed Messages – Trump claims he can end the war in 24 hours but hasn’t articulated how. If pressuring Ukraine to concede territory is the plan, then it should be framed as a serious diplomatic initiative, not a TV moment. His approach came off as chaotic and performative, rather than a thought-out geopolitical strategy.

Why It Worked Politically (For His Base)

Appeals to Isolationist Sentiment – A significant portion of Americans (especially Republicans) believe the U.S. has done too much for Ukraine and that Europe should take on more responsibility. By confronting Zelenskyy, Trump validated this belief and strengthened his image as someone who doesn’t let foreign leaders push America around.

Creates a Media Frenzy – Trump thrives on controversy. The media backlash further solidifies his "anti-establishment, America First" persona. His supporters see this as him “saying what everyone else is afraid to say,” even if the delivery was brutal.

Redefines the Ukraine Debate – By making Zelenskyy the “bad guy” in the conversation, Trump shifts the debate from “Should the U.S. support Ukraine?” to “Is Zelenskyy being ungrateful?” This is smart optics because it distracts from serious policy discussions and makes the issue emotional rather than analytical.

Bottom Line: A Tactical Win, A Strategic Risk

Trump’s performance in the meeting was a tactical win for his political brand but a strategic risk for U.S. foreign policy.

If the goal was diplomatic progress, it was reckless and counterproductive.
If the goal was domestic political optics, it worked as intended.
Long-term, this kind of approach could weaken U.S. alliances and embolden adversaries who now see America as divided on Ukraine. But short-term, it’s likely to boost Trump's standing among his base and keep the narrative centered on his ability to dominate negotiations, even if the method is unorthodox.

Final Verdict: Trump’s behavior was inappropriate from a statesmanship perspective but effective as a political stunt.

So, long story short, from GPT's point of view, Trump put Himself and his approval ratings first, and sacrificed the reputation and image of the country.

[WonderMomma]

Originally Posted by scorpion9 ↗

I'm actually interested in the opinion of people who live in US.

I can't even form sentences right now.

Marked my calendar today as one of the most pivotal days as an American in my 53 years on this planet.

My beloved who likes Trump and is republican thought it was like watching a reality TV moment. Especially when rehashing all the Russia Russia Russia stuff.

I'm just done. Done. Can't do shit but feel third person embarrassment and shame.