No of course I don't. Russia will certainly try again. Ukraine is absolutely right to not want to do this! I'm just pointing out what Trump's motivation is.

The difference is that in the future (assuming the mineral deal goes through), there would be US citizens operating mineral franchises on Ukrainian territory. So if Russia harmed them in the future, we would be drawn into an actual war.

There were US citizens and businesses in Ukraine last time. Russia will just go around them like they did then. Having some US businesses will provide zero protection.

Assuming that USA would not withdraw their citizens prior to Russian attack. It's a big assumption with current administration.

It will take more than 3 years to get a mining franchise operational.

Assuming mining those minerals would actually make economic and strategic sense for US companies, considering significant long-term investments require stability. And that a significant US workforce would even be required for that. And that the US administration doesn't just make a bargain with Putin about leaving these mining operations alone while doing whatever the fuck else they want.

Could Ukraine maneuver around Trump by instead signing a minerals deal with UK+EU? Better to give the $600b (optimistically) to friendly allies. The problem is UK+EU does not have equivalent defense contractors. US gets what it wants as well, by disconnecting from the conflict.

Name one American who would volunteer to fight because a mine got attacked.

Either we have the spine to defend our allies against unambiguous breaches of international law, or we don't.

> Name one American who would volunteer to fight because a Thai ship got attacked by Yemeni rebels while travelling through an Ethiopian straight to an Egyptian canal.

Apparently, the entire US Navy was okay with that volunteer assignment.

Protecting international shipping from terrorists is radically different.