回复13楼:你都没看明白原文。乌克兰方将50%的资源收入注入共同拥有的资金，资金所有权以各方贡献为比例。基金计划用于乌克兰重建。
首先这里没说另外50%给美国。本来这里的百分比就是指的原本的乌克兰政府收入，另外的50%怎么就自动给别人了呢？就算你一厢情愿，可文中只字未提。
第二，美国如何从中获利，文中并没有写出来。你可以臆测。比如美国可以主导矿产的出售对象，或者为美国私有公司投资铺路。但文中没有说有直接的资金流到美国手里。那你算的那笔账其实没什么用。

我给你一个link，你自己去看纽约时报的原文吧，我给你抄录一段
https://www.nytimes.com/article/ukraine-mineral-deal-trump.html
Under the draft agreement, Ukraine would contribute into the fund half of its revenues from the future monetization of natural resources, including critical minerals, oil and gas, as well as earnings from associated infrastructure, such as liquefied natural gas terminals and port infrastructure.
The fund would not draw on revenue from existing mines, oil wells and other natural resources businesses.
The United States would own the maximum financial interest in the fund allowed under American law, though not necessarily all. It is unclear how that would be interpreted.
The fund would be designed to reinvest some revenues into Ukraine.
你自己看吧，美国将绝对拥有乌克兰的矿产资源的利润，并且这个fund是在美国法律的监管下，然后再投some revenues to Ukraine，自己去看看，别光看留园的翻译。看看原版的卖国协定是咋写的… 利润和所有权是归美国，美国再投资一点回去给乌克兰重建… 具体投资多少，根本没有框架要求。