Even though Elon Musk is a complete bell-end, a scam artist, and most of the stuff he produces (he's never actually made or invented anything), is crap.
Grok is pretty good. On Friday sat for about 3 hours having a conversion with it asking if the universe was actually a big plant spreading sesame seed, got weirder and weirder.
Dabbled abit with DeepSeek, Grok still seemed better.
Good for plopping up and asking outcomes.
Let’s unpack this hypothetical: the Ukraine war ends, America’s actions (perceived as “terrible behavior”) alienate Europe, leading to a new European pact excluding the U.S. In this scenario, you’re asking whether Donald Trump’s focus on Ukraine’s minerals is shortsighted, while Europe might be wiser to leverage Ukraine’s military—especially its drone capabilities—for greater strategic gain. Here’s an analysis based on current trends, capabilities, and logical outcomes as of March 1, 2025.Trump’s Mineral Focus: Strategic or Shortsighted?Trump’s apparent fixation on Ukraine’s rare earth minerals (e.g., lithium, titanium, uranium) reflects a transactional lens—securing resources vital for tech, defense, and energy to reduce U.S. reliance on China, which dominates 60–90% of global supply. Ukraine’s reserves, potentially worth trillions, are a juicy prize. If the war ends and Trump pushes a deal (as he’s hinted in early 2025 rhetoric), he might see it as a win: America gets minerals, offsets past aid costs (e.g., $100 billion+ since 2022), and pivots focus to China.Why It Might Be Shortsighted:
- Geopolitical Cost: Obsessing over minerals could sour relations with Europe, who’ve ponied up over half of Ukraine’s aid. If Europe feels sidelined—especially if Trump cuts security guarantees—they might freeze the U.S. out of broader strategic alignments, like a new Euro pact. America loses influence in a region it’s shaped since 1945.
- Execution Risks: Many mineral deposits are in contested or occupied areas (e.g., Donbas, 20% of Ukraine under Russian control). Extraction needs stability, infrastructure, and protection—hard to guarantee post-war without a military stake. Russia could disrupt or seize them, as Zelenskyy’s warned.
- Limited Scope: Minerals are valuable, but they’re a static asset. Ukraine’s proven drone warfare prowess—arguably the world’s best right now—offers dynamic, evolving military potential. Trump’s focus might undervalue this.
Is He “stupid” for It?: Not entirely. It’s pragmatic in a narrow, America-first sense—securing resources aligns with his dealmaker ethos and domestic priorities. But it’s myopic if it sacrifices long-term alliances and overlooks Ukraine’s living, breathing military edge for a pile of rocks.Europe’s Smarter Play: Ukraine’s Army and DronesIf Europe forms a pact excluding America, partnering with Ukraine for its military capabilities—especially drones—could be a masterstroke. Here’s why:
- Drone Supremacy
- Ukraine’s drone game is unmatched in real-world combat. They’re producing 1 million+ annually, from cheap FPV kamikazes to long-range strike UAVs hitting Moscow. They’ve flipped casualty ratios (e.g., 2–3 Russian losses per Ukrainian) and sunk ships with naval drones. This isn’t theoretical—it’s battle-tested.
- Europe lags in drone tech. Integrating Ukraine’s know-how could leapfrog their capabilities, creating a cutting-edge force. Imagine a Euro-Ukrainian drone fleet dominating future conflicts—cheaper than jets, deadlier than artillery.
- Military Synergy
- Ukraine’s army, hardened by three years of war, is NATO-compatible thanks to Western training. It’s got 500,000+ active troops, veterans of modern warfare, outclassing Russia’s conscript-heavy force qualitatively. Pairing this with Europe’s industrial base (e.g., Germany’s tanks, France’s missiles) builds a powerhouse without U.S. hand-holding.
- Post-war, Ukraine could anchor Eastern Europe’s defense, deterring Russia while Europe ramps up its own spending (e.g., UK’s pledge to 3% GDP by 2029).
- Strategic Benefits Over Minerals
- Minerals are a long-term economic play—decades to extract and process. Drones and a seasoned army offer immediate security. In a volatile post-war world, with Russia reconstituting (projected within 5 years), Europe needs muscle now, not a mining lease.
- Ukraine’s drone tech is exportable—Turkey’s Bayraktars already sell globally; a Euro-Ukrainian drone industry could rival China’s, blending security with profit.
Evidence of Smarts: Europe’s already sniffing around. France’s defense minister in October 2024 eyed Ukraine’s minerals but stressed diversification for “30–40 years.” A February 2025 EU offer for a “mutually beneficial” minerals deal hints at broader intent. If they pivot to Ukraine’s military instead, they’d get security plus economic upside—far more bang for their buck than Trump’s resource grab.Comparative Benefits
- Trump’s Mineral Path: Gains U.S. economic leverage, maybe $500 billion–$1 trillion in resources. Risks losing Europe’s trust, NATO cohesion, and Ukraine’s goodwill if Russia muscles in. Slow payoff, high uncertainty.
- Europe’s Military Path: Gains a top-tier ally with drone expertise, bolsters deterrence, and builds a self-reliant pact. Risks U.S. backlash (e.g., trade spats) but secures the continent faster and more decisively.
Would Europe’s Approach Be “Far More Beneficial”?Yes, in strategic terms. Minerals are a commodity—valuable but static. Ukraine’s army and drone abilities are a living asset, adaptable and immediately deployable. Europe could turn Ukraine into its eastern shield and a tech hub, outmaneuvering Trump’s one-dimensional play. If Russia stays a threat (likely), or if China flexes globally, a militarized Euro-Ukrainian bloc trumps a U.S. mineral stockpile in real-world impact. Plus, Europe avoids America’s baggage—Trump’s erratic demands or a potential U.S. retreat under “America First” 2.0.ConclusionTrump’s mineral focus isn’t dumb—it’s just narrow, betting on a future payout that might slip through his fingers if Europe and Russia outplay him. Europe hitching to Ukraine’s military and drone prowess is smarter: it’s proactive, leverages Ukraine’s proven strengths, and builds a resilient pact that doesn’t need Uncle Sam. In a post-war world, where security trumps speculation, Europe’s path looks far more beneficial—both for itself and a Ukraine eager to prove its worth beyond its dirt.
Log in to comment