This might be the greatest document of pro-Ukrainians-to-the-front talking points ever.

I’m not sure the Trump offer of getting 50% of Ukraine’s mineral wealth was real. The idea didn’t originate from the Trump regime, but it was Ukraine who brought that up first. They’re throwing that back into Ukraine’s face. It seems like they ambushed Zelenski with this ridiculous deal, which was a brazen insult really, and which was immediately rejected (correctly). It might have been the intention to mock them and show them what the actual bill of the US’s Ukraine support would look like, and how Ukraine would never actually be able to pay this debt.

Trump has called for elections, and that’s because they want to get rid of Zelenski. And I’m sure that will happen. They’re basically overthrowing Zelenski.

Either there’s a peace deal, and the fighting stops, or there isn’t (like there isn’t right now) and some poor saps get (insert your rape metaphor here) by the Russian and Ukrainian armies.

In opposite world, peace kills people, and war doesn’t. Maybe you’re from there?

No it isn’t. They may think they have good reasons for not wanting peace talks (they don’t), but definitely every big newspaper, almost all influential Western politicians and your average redditor were against peace talks this whole time. They relentlessly shouted down everyone who even tried to bring it up.

Of course the warmongers say they’re for peace. Peace through superior firepower. Peace through victory. But that is disingenuous. That’s called war.

And I’m no pacifist. I’m for having a war (a class war), but I’m not going around saying war is peace. That’s fucked up.

People are telling on themselves for opposing *gasp* peace talks. Oh no! Not peace!! We want war!!!

This Fehr guy has all the same talking points I’ve seen German politicians use as well. And that’s essentially across all relevant political parties.

For example, Interior minister Faeser called the Palästina-Kongress, which they shut down last year, and which was organized by secular left-wing groups and a Jewish group, “Islamist”. And the press loves to just repeat this stuff. And it’s great propaganda. The average German is afraid of Islamists, hates Muslims in general, and will applaud when the authorities suppress anyone labeled as such, and never look into if it’s actually true.

Foreign minister Baerbock claimed she personally saw, on video, evidence of rape on Oct 7, even though actual investigations by the UN and others have found no footage like that. She was being heckled at the time by pro-Palestine activists and just made that up, so it looks to an misinformed audience like they’re booing rape victims. And people believe this because the press never pushes back on these false claims.

Just straight up inventing blatant lies to cover for the genocide they’re committing. How tf can these people sleep at night?

The “Houthis” (Ansarallah) didn’t shoot at ships without provocation. They did it as a response to the genocide in Gaza, out of solidarity, to implement a blockade. They said as much, and the article explains this.

The author seems concerned that if the people […] are labeled terrorists, they might receive less aid, even though aid exemptions have been added?

First of all, the author is not (only, primarily) concerned with aid, but rather trade.

Secondly, and the article explains that but maybe not clearly enough, but sanctions cause lots of companies to stop all dealings with the sanctioned entity, despite humanitarian exceptions. This causes massive friction not just for trade, but also for humanitarian aid, as the humanitarian aid groups need to contract out e.g. logistics to companies, and they need to be able to do payments. Sanctions always cause collateral damage in this way, because they create lots of paperwork and legal grey areas, and companies do not want to deal with this.

Potentially receiving less aid seems like a reasonable consequence

You are aware that thanks to the previous Saudi (and US backed) blockade and US sanctions on Yemen, hundreds of thousands of people died, mostly due to starvation and such, and most of them children. Starving children may very well be the consequence of the US’s actions. Do you really think that’s fucking reasonable?