Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 9. (Read 75246 times)

Right, well your wishful thinking is just not something that the rest of the world is willing to bet their lives on. (Don't think ATACMS can carry nuclear payload either, but it doesn't mean it cannot be modified to do so, plus how would you differentiate it from the profile of a ballistic missile that can at launch).

Did Russia not have the warm water ports in Crimea before this? Once again, this is about spheres of influence, not sure what is so hard for you to understand about this. That means just as with Belarus, the lines on the map don't matter as much as which sphere the whole country falls under. And that includes culture, language, heritage etc... Exactly the reason why Ukrainian government does everything it can to fight it, like by banning Russian books and introduce “language inspectors” to fight against the increasing use of Russian. Whether Russian language and culture will get a protected status or LGBT get protected status during the upcoming negotiations will be a clear indicator which sphere the powers will decide the Ukraine will fall under. (not saying this issue is a root cause but just a good indicator)

Ukraine being an independent country and the global power behind it cannot make it "sit and listen" is just propaganda, delusional belief pushed by Zelenskiy on his poor people. And is just as believable as Cuba saying that its an independent country and makes its own choices towards the end of the cold war. Musk's reaction is harsh, but it's on point

I expect that Ruzzia notices that they cannot distinguish one from another and decide to leave Ukraine so that they do not have any missiles flying towards Moscow. BTW I do not think ATACAMS can carry nuclear warheads.

Russia is absolutely in for the territory. Firstly to have warm water ports (Crimea) and also, not for the territory as for the square meters, but for the territory in terms of keeping distance with NATO and with possible nuclear missiles launch sites. Please, do not make people laugh pretending Putin is on this for the good of the Ruzzian language or the like.

Lol. Well, thanks. So you think Ukraine will build its own guarantees? Perhaps like it has been doing since February 24, 2022? Perhaps like it has taken back the Black Sea Corridor?

Now, I certainly don't know what will happen. But Ukraine is done. Even you see it now, and that is why you continue to project and prophesy. Anything Ukraine can do, Russia can do better and more of. I'm not downplaying the bravery of the Ukraine troops. But there is a time to stop if you want to keep the little you have left, and Ukraine has gone way beyond that stop point.

Regarding US nukes, Churchill didn't mean that at all. The thing that he was referring to was American unity, and the faithful willingness of Americans to unite in FREEDOM in a time of need - like the death of an American soldier. Russian nukes are the deterrent to US nukes, right up to today... even if they weren't quite yet at the time of Churchill. Nukes mean nothing without the desire or guts to use them.

Zelensky made sure that none of that is happening.  Call it "pay-back time":

  https://www.bitchute.com/video/Fg5VB2XvZA8Q

Act-II is the _Trillion_ or so that 'Ukraine' was projected to need for 'reconstruction' to be paid by 'the nations'.  This to be funneled through the current majority owner of Ukraine (Blackrock/Fink) with doubtless the same accounting standards which were used for the NATO weapons and other tens or hundreds of Billions thrown at Ukraine over the last decade or so.

The half-trillion or whatever will go a lot farther without all those Ukrainians to feed and house.

Ah so you're finally starting to pick up on the game, good! But you're once again defaulting to absolutes without context as you usually like to do. Sure, Russia is also attempting to "play" the game, but it's a newcomer to this table. The real question is how are Russian actions around the globe compare to what the "west" is doing? You'll see that the difference is in magnitudes!

Since the Cuban missile crisis, humanity forced the game to adopt few unwritten rules, one being that countries in direct proximity/on the boarder can be considered an existential threats, and are thus off limits, Cuba was in American "backyard". There were challenges in Africa, LatAm, middle east etc.. but we all stayed safe until that rule was broken in Ukraine with the culmination being Nuland's cookies and the "Fuck the EU" comment. That challenged the world's status quo, after which the two outcomes were either a total collapse of Russia (and then China), or the status quo is restored.

As I've mentioned many times before, the weigh categories are different, Russia just cannot compete with the amount of cookies US has. And that's the exact reason why the cookies were chosen for Ukraine. The irony in that is that now China picked up on the game and now spreads it's own "cookies", so in a typical hypocritical manner now everyone needs to be convinced that China should not be allowed to buy influence with their cookies.

When one country managed to make itself totally dependent on the other, even for such basics as the salary of its government, the "commercial partnership" is just a nice name for being a vassal, which has zero leverage to negotiate. It started with Ukraine accepting tasty cookies, it's ending with Ukraine offering it's resources itself, which doesn't even look like the west will even accept. Ingenious foresight and a master play by Ukrainian government.

If you think that in any scenario Ukraine will be allowed to get nukes (by either side), that just shows your total ignorance at what this conflict is all about.

If Ukraine does not get guarantees of protection, Ukraine will build it's own guarantee - just to even things out. It is not that difficult in technical terms and it is obvious that Putin is ok with killing and invading Ukraine, so good incentives indeed.

Really BA? The question cannot get any more stupid.

It starts with "nu" and ends in "kes", but also the US was a winner in WW I and WW II, much more so than Ruzzia. Large country, strong economy, strong army (compared with the rest). There is no secret to it BA your question is stupid.

And the US is going to be again the only winner in the Ukrainian war: sold expensive gas to Europe, gave just enough so that Ruzzia de-militarises itself against Ukraine, gets China and Ruzzia sanctioned, Ruzzian economy in shambles, population issues all over, refugees in Europe, etc. And all that military aid you complain so much about has created death in Ruzzia and Ukraine, but many jobs in the US.

However, it would be foolish to thing that as the world is now the US can take everything on and it seems that the new government is quite confused about who are the allies and the difference between and ally and a servant.

^^^ "I guess that as a result of this war Ukraine may get nukes nuked." Corrected that for you.

---

Now why, do you think, America is so strong that Churchill would make a remark like that?

Look, about the cookies you are getting boring.

I think is time you start acknowledging that you are sitting at a table full of cheaters playing poker - and Ruzzia is no exception - and you are accusing the others of cheating better than you. Ruzzia has massively interfered with every European election, with the US election and has used money to buy anyone for sale in the European parliament, in Ukraine, in Chechenia, in the UK and in half of Africa. You may wish to keep pretending otherwise, but there is a big, ugly trail of reports, news and evidence backing it.

So, if you think that cookies are the reason, then you need to make your cookies sweeter because, again, Ruzzia is doing pretty much all the repertoire of manipulation, interference, money handling, disinformation... And speaking of deals, it has been proven that a deal with Putin makes just good toilet paper.

But to things that matter:

There are many countries that share resources with he western countries- just as many countries "share" resources with Ruzzia, sometimes willingly I guess.

Ukraine is offering a commercial partnership with the right partners that will not threaten an invasion as a negotiation tool. It is clear that the future path of an independent Ukraine is to be ready to defend itself and to be ready for EU investments. And again, if Ruzzia and you personally do not like it, then you'd need to think what did Ruzzia do wrong.

On Ukrainian troops in Europe, I think it is a stupid idea. The whole idea of having US troops in Europe is to make an strike an act of war with the US and the best position for Ukrainian troops strategically is in Ukraine or Kursk

https://carnegieendowment.org/europe/strategic-europe/2014/06/judy-asks-should-nato-have-bases-in-its-east?lang=en

I guess that as a result of this war Ukraine may get nukes.

So, you don't want others do what you just did?

Nothing says independence like offering claims to everything in sight while you still can


Yep, total independence, what else is left in Ukraine that Zelenskiy can give away, perhaps Ukrainians' firstborn?

This is what Ukrainians are fighting for, right? Be a bodyguard for Europe while selling their land, and that's the best case if Trump decides to accept it? Yes, a much better deal for Ukrainian people than what they had in 2013, who wouldn't support such government   Who's next in line to try these delicious freedom cookies?

Regardless of the accuracy, there is a hierarchy of priorities in life, in politics and in country and it is important to get those priorities right. For example, if you are Europe, you may care much more about your survival than about paying gas more expensive.

If you are Ukraine, the priority is to have a viable independent country. This requires as a bare minimum:

- A functioning government to avoid being a failed estate (e.g. Yemen, Haiti).
- A population mass, including young people in working age.
- A territory that is defendable and can be governed.

It is important to have:

- Access to the sea (this is rarely spoken about, but Ruzzia lost the battle for the Black Sea).
- Defensible borders (difficult, Ukraine is quite flat).
- A viable economy.
- Sufficient army.

And then there are the nice to haves like recovering all your original territory. But that is the third level of priority, survival and safety come first. As I am sure Ruzzia would be much happier if the had taken Ukraine in 3 days, but had to re-think what was important and what may not be.

However if by the end of the war you have a free Ukraine, defensible, with a government and a economy that can be rebuilt, you can consider it a reasonable - not good - outcome after having Ruzzia thrown everything they got at you.

I would appreciate that anyone with stupid propagandistic comments would refrain from answering, but I guess that is not really possible here is it?

Putin is running out of money, he has cut payments to soldiers. His end is near.

Nobody knows what the Trump administration will do about the Ukraine war. But it will be weeks before Trump takes office. However, he is starting now.


Trump Expected To Appoint Ukraine Peace Envoy 'Soon': Fox

---

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trump-expected-appoint-ukrainian-peace-envoy-soon-fox
"You're going to see a very senior special envoy, someone with a lot of credibility, who will be given a task to find a resolution, to get to a peace settlement," one of several sources told Fox. The person previewed that the appointment will happen "in short order."

Fox notes that "The job is not expected to be a salaried role - from 2017 to 2019, Kurt Volker had served as special representative to Ukrainian negotiations on a volunteer basis."

This comes amid the last couple days of new members of Trump's future administration being announced. Many Trump supporters have observed that hawks have filled up key posts so far - with most being known especially for their stridently pro-Israel positions, such as Pete Hegseth, nominated for Defense Secretary. Steven Witkoff has also been named as special envoy for the Middle East.

Over the weekend a Washington Post report said Trump held his first phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin wherein Trump warned the Russian leader not to escalate in Ukraine. Strangely, the Kremlin is denying that the phone call ever took place.

As for what a potential Trump peace plan for Ukraine might look like, the WSJ days ago revealed that a main option being considered would see a 'freeze' on the war, which to Kiev's dismay would involve "cementing Russia's seizure of roughly 20 percent of Ukraine" while imposing a 20-year suspension on Ukraine pursuing NATO membership.

Informal Trump adviser Elon Musk responded to a report about that plan on X, writing that "The senseless killing will end soon. Time is up for the warmonger profiteers."

As for who might be named special envoy for Ukraine peace, it's anyone's guess. Most State Department veterans who have worked on the conflict are likely hawks. Thus the "old hands" are unlikely to back any plan which permanently cedes the Donbass to Russian control.

This means Trump would likely need an 'outsider' for his vision of enacting a rapid Ukraine ceasefire to have a chance. But it would also likely be someone commanding respect and influence among the Ukrainian and Russian sides.
...

---

And how exactly do you expect that Russian general, that's tasked with nuclear deterrence/retaliation watching the radar screen, to know if US ballistic missile with possible nuclear payload crossing the Russian boarder from Ukraine, with general trajectory towards Moscow will actually come down from space at some oil facilities before it reaches Moscow? I guess you expect him to know all possible trajectories that are crossing paths with St. Petersburg, Novosibirsk, Yekaterinburg, all RU nuclear cites, RU nuclear power plants, nuke early warning radars etc etc etc... Does anyone care to ask the rest of the world if they're ok with that? Stop playing dumb

Look at the Median Age, Fertility etc if the goal is to get to 100 couples they're doing a good job.

Trump has lied and broken tons of promise before, so I wouldn't read much into his "promises". With that said, if he was serious about it he could just say that there will be no new aid for Ukraine, period, and that Ukraine has until January 21 to make the best deal it can. Then have backdoor talks with Russia decide on the compromise and pass to Ukraine what they should agree to. If Zelenskiy decided to ignore that, his inner circle and generals would quickly make Z understand that he's in no position to go against the will of US, and you're delusional if you think otherwise.

Anyone who has ever looked at the globe realizes that Russia is not in it for the territory. Russia cannot allow Ukraine to fall under US's sphere of influence. So securing Russia's influence, culture, granting Russian language official status in UA constitution... , and no NATO would take priority over square kilometers of land. i.e. agree for UA to hold the land for X years and then referendum, in return of putting Yanukovych (or someone like that) back in Kyiv.

Independent Ukraine is impossible, even Switzerland is not independent anymore. It must fall under some sphere of influence, and as we all see, Russia cannot allow Nuland's cookies in anymore.

Everyone realizes that Russia cannot hold on forever, just as everyone realizes that Russia doesn't have to as Ukraine would collapse socially, politically, and militarily way before Russia does. So continuing this is just an exercise in futility

I read that Trump promised to stop this crazy game of blood.;
Can he?
If he does, I will be happy. Humanity can live in peace and harmony. The mother earth is rich enough to provide in abundance to all humanity only if we go away with greed, hatred and hunger for control and manipulation.

Ukraine is already backpedaling and saying that "territory is not that important"

https://news-pravda.com/ukraine/2024/11/14/851097.html

Ukraine is not asking for long range missiles to strike Moscow, they can and already have hit Moscow recently, even forcing a closure of the airport. There are also a few reports of military helicopters burning mysteriously in the area.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/ukraine-launches-drone-attack-moscow-shutting-airports-rcna179485

But no, there are much more juicy targets that are worth billions and are better hit with ballistic missiles than drones (e.g. protected ammo depots and oil facilities).

There is not such a thing as a "point of no return" in population (other than having less than 100 couples of an species), you are making things up. Populations recover well and the Ukrainian army is made of relatively old soldiers in average.

But to the point: Trump has "promised" to end the war in 24 hours, let's take it as "in a short period of time". That is not possible unless both sides agree to stop the fight. While Ukraine would suffer if the US withdraws the aid, but the war would not be over.

For both sides to agree Putin will ask to keep what he got and take a chunk of additional free land. Zelensky may or may not settle with loosing what Ukraine already lost but he is unlikely to give away land.

But regardless of territorial concession from either side, the key for peace is a guarantee of an independent Ukraine. Any deal that means Ruzzia will recover and have all the incentives to attack again, with any of the usual excuses, a defenceless Ukraine is not going to be accepted by Ukraine - there is no benefit in allowing Ruzzia to re-arm and prepare better. Putin may have a similar view from the opposite side - any deal that means Ukraine is not held hostage to a Ruzzian invasion is not valid.

If it comes to brute forcing a solution it means that Ruzzia will have to keep pressing, with or without success for at least another year. That is doable, but it will also cut deep into the economy, the population and the future of Ruzzia. Even the regime may get scared.

As usual, Ukraine needs to make sure there are plenty of expensive and irreplaceable assets destroyed in Ruzzia daily, so that eventually the scale starts weighting more towards a peace in reasonable terms for Ukraine. One billion here in oil, half billion there in ammo, 100 million destroying planes,... etc. There is a lot to choose from and drones are not expensive.

It's odd discussing unlikely hypotheticals, but i'll entertain it:

-"If Trump increases aid to Ukraine" he'll go against the core of his support, and a growing majority of republicans wanting to reduce the aid and prioritize America. This would undercut his political support within his own party, republicans would get a new populists playing on the growing demands of it's base to reduce the aid to UA. This would be considered an escalation and Russia would respond with its own escalation, like getting Iranian, Belarusian and more North Korean to send their troops to help RU. China would also need to respond, and match it by increasing "unofficial" support for Russia. All this and it would do little for the main issue in Ukraine which is shortage of manpower. Sure UA can start throwing money at soldiers, but that would just further exacerbate the shortage of workers in already barely existing UA economy, and put a further dent in UA's demographics, birth rate etc, which already might be beyond the point of no return. So ton of downside and a little chance on upside.

-"If Trump does nothing" continuing the current rate of aid would lead to continuation of the current dynamics at the front. Bleed out Russia a bit more, for an inevitable total military loss of Ukraine. Achieves little, with huge financial loss, political loss, and still a total Ukrainian loss. Again no up side only downside.

That's why UA is asking for permission to use long ranges US missiles on Moscow. Not that it could change anything in the militarily sense for UA, but that's the only way for UA leadership to drag US/NATO directly into the conflict. What better way to achieve this than to give some Russian general responsible for nuclear deterrence few minutes to somehow make a decision if the US ballistic missile heading for Moscow has nuclear payload or not  , and if he should respond accordingly. Luckily US doesn't seem to want to start a nuclear war, despite how much Z is asking for it.

Judging by your post history, you'll probably understand this translation




Also:

https://x.com/SorokoffSorok/status/1856467306563444979

^^^ paxmao plays around a lot. My thought was that Branko was simply playing back with something that makes sense at the same time. I think that many of the Ukrainian people who fled before or at the beginning of the war, would love to kick the Nazi's out of Ukraine... so they could go back home in peace.