The so-called "NATO like" protection scheme

[EndlessWire]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Ukraine give up nukes back to Russia in exchange for protection by the US and a couple other countries? What did they get for that? Nothing, apparently.

I wouldn't go for any such "deal."

[Trueblue Texan]

1. They are the ones asking for such a deal, aren't they? nt

[EndlessWire]

4. Ukraine wants to join NATO.

That's what they want. Putin and Trump are offering a poor substitute for Article 5 protection. But, Putin won't settle if Ukraine joins NATO.

[Trueblue Texan]

5. Sorry, I didn't understand it was a substitution....

I understood joining NATO takes more time than they want to spend on achieving a peace agreement. A security plan doesn't necessarily preclude joining NATO. And again, I thought it was Ukraine that asked for such protection.

[Bread and Circuses]

2. Zelenskyy should NOT trust any 'deal' .

Ukraine deserves full NATO membership and EU support to defeat Russia!

[Sparkly]

3. 1994 Budapest Memorandum

And yes, we and the UK were signatories.

So Ukrainians don't exactly trust us. (Or such "security agreements.')

[WarGamer]

6. More people needs to study history

Nukes were taken from ukraine because the launch codes etc were in moscow and Ukraine didn't have the technical expertise do do anything with them and foremost... Western powers were afraid the leaders at the time would sell nuclear devices to terrorist groups.

And the security assurance deal from Budapest? They purposely used the word assurance and not guarantee which is a wiggle word.

They were never "Ukraine's nukes".

[Kaleva]

7. Apparently, Russia has rejected this proposal