Russia-Ukraine War

[Observe]

Observe, to me you sound exactly like the type of folk prior to WWII who were advocating for "peace" with Nazi Germany. Your supposed advocacy for peace is the thing that will lead to larger scale war, because it rewards the aggressor and reinforces their conviction that we will not stand up to them, that they are free to bully smaller nations without fear of serious consequences.

How so? I said that if Russia refuses to stop, we should support Ukraine "all the way to world war". The reality on the ground, is that close to 20% of Ukrainians have left the country. Shortage of weapons is not the problem. Too few soldiers to field those weapons is a bigger issue. For the first time, the majority of Ukrainians want the war to stop - even if it means giving up land.

I don't know how much longer Ukraine can continue. Not very much longer I suspect. Russia is pretty much marching forward with little more than drones to contend with, because Ukraine has too few soldiers to fight back with. Does Ukraine want to lose their whole country? That is what will happen unless they surrender and ask for a peace treaty. I hear lots of fantasies about Europe being able to pick up the slake if the US pulls out. That is little more than a pipe dream. Europe can barely take care of their own problems or produce enough weapons for their own depleted stocks. The European will to continue with this is waning.

Bottom line: If the US pulls out, Ukraine will have no choice but to wave the white flag.

[Vertigo 7]

Observe, to me you sound exactly like the type of folk prior to WWII who were advocating for "peace" with Nazi Germany. Your supposed advocacy for peace is the thing that will lead to larger scale war, because it rewards the aggressor and reinforces their conviction that we will not stand up to them, that they are free to bully smaller nations without fear of serious consequences.

How so? I said that if Russia refuses to stop, we should support Ukraine "all the way to world war".

Yeah? Russia HAS refused to stop for years now and you've only ever said Ukraine should give up and turn over their land to Russia. Every attempt to negotiate with them met with unserious demands. But now your orange overlord is in the middle of it and somehow you expect Russia's attitude is going to be any different? So why would that be any different for you? Be honest with us, if not yourself; it's because it's someone you actually like getting involved, isn't it? No real reason other than your devotion to your cheto christ?

[mr.WHO]

I hear lots of fantasies about Europe being able to pick up the slake if the US pulls out. That is little more than a pipe dream. Europe can barely take care of their own problems or produce enough weapons for their own depleted stocks. The European will to continue with this is waning.

Bottom line: If the US pulls out, Ukraine will have no choice but to wave the white flag.

US help to Ukraine, percentage wise is around 38% of total help, Europe is 43% and the rest of the world is 19%.

US contribution is big, but EU is bigger and the rest of the world seems to starting to pay more attention (Australia, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan).
Even if, and that's a big if, all US support stop, this will be serious blow, but not war ending.

Trump might be completely fine in taking those 300 bil $ of Russian assets and let Ukraine purchase US produced stuff using it - it won't be a "help/donation", it will be a transaction...and Trump like transactions.

We'll see in a few months...a few months of Russia Rubel hitting the bottom, inflation rising and rising and high credit rates obliterating Russian companies.
Russian markets starts to lock cubes of butter, coz lately people keep stealing them more and more - that's definetly not a sign of healthy economy.

[chew-ie]

Stealing... butter...

[fiksal]

Wouldn't it be better to really help the UKR than just try to win the war online and drive out the RU,

I missed when you became supporter of Ukraine in this war

[fiksal]

Observe, to me you sound exactly like the type of folk prior to WWII who were advocating for "peace" with Nazi Germany. Your supposed advocacy for peace is the thing that will lead to larger scale war, because it rewards the aggressor and reinforces their conviction that we will not stand up to them, that they are free to bully smaller nations without fear of serious consequences.

How so? I said that if Russia refuses to stop, we should support Ukraine "all the way to world war". The reality on the ground, is that close to 20% of Ukrainians have left the country. Shortage of weapons is not the problem. Too few soldiers to field those weapons is a bigger issue. For the first time, the majority of Ukrainians want the war to stop - even if it means giving up land.

I don't know how much longer Ukraine can continue. Not very much longer I suspect. Russia is pretty much marching forward with little more than drones to contend with, because Ukraine has too few soldiers to fight back with. Does Ukraine want to lose their whole country? That is what will happen unless they surrender and ask for a peace treaty. I hear lots of fantasies about Europe being able to pick up the slake if the US pulls out. That is little more than a pipe dream. Europe can barely take care of their own problems or produce enough weapons for their own depleted stocks. The European will to continue with this is waning.

Bottom line: If the US pulls out, Ukraine will have no choice but to wave the white flag.

I need an explanation how you think you don't contradict yourself

Consider the above plus last page:

Russia simply cannot be permitted to continue.

Likely: Russia keeps what they have stolen, or that area becomes some kind of neutral ground with special governance to be determined. That is a fait accompli. No getting it back in the short-term. Ukraine forgets about joining NATO for twenty years or so.

Russia keeps (only) what has stolen, social governance
versus
Ukraine surrenders

The word surrender implies unconditional. This means you draw the word Russia over the whole territory, including Kursk and large parts of Ukraine they don't control.

If you present that plan to Russia, they will accept.

Did I misrepresent what you said?


About going alone, if USA starts financially helping Russia, but removing sanctions, then Ukraine can't win. But it can make Russia hurt by blowing up every single pipeline in reach, and getting itself nuclear weapons. It's still has room potentially for that.

But Ukraine shouldn't be in this alone, Europe has weapons and troops as well. Russia is big, but it's not that big, it's empty. Europe is finally getting that US can't be relied on here. That is I think Trump's best accomplishment so far

[Observe]

The word surrender implies unconditional.

There is conditional and there is unconditional surrender. The reason I use the word "surrender" is because Ukraine has lost already and losing more every day. The reason I use the word "lost" is because with an army that is struggling to exist, citizens fleeing by the millions (probably mostly to never return), and those remaining wanting to stop the war, the word "lost" comes to mind. Use whatever word suits you.

[mr.WHO]

Another thing that is hard for me to imagine, is lifting the sanctions as long as Russia occupy lands outside Crimea and 2014 held Donbas.

I imagine that, if Russia want to keep them then sanctions would be held perpetually - otherwise it's complete stupidity on Western side.


I might be wrong, but I think the little few sanctions that were imposed on 2014 Russia/Crimea/Donbass were still in effect when full scale war started.

[Observe]

Another thing that is hard for me to imagine, is lifting the sanctions as long as Russia occupy lands outside Crimea and 2014 held Donbas.

Good point. No doubt that will be a stickler when negotiations ensue. Same as the Russian money that has been seized. That is in the 100's of billions from what I recall. What will Russia "give up" to have sanctions lifted and money returned? Should the seized money be applied to reconstruction?

[EDIT] I notice talk about using the seized money to pay for (waste) more weapons. Better to save it for rebuilding damage already done.

[fiksal]

Add also sanctions against people and International Court order for Putin and his thugs.

Remember this role playing game that didn't finish?

Which conditions presented by Russians do you think Trump will honor? I can refresh your memory
- Ukraine is demilitarized
- Ukraine government is substituted with pro Russian
- Zelensky and his supporters are tried in Russian courts as terrorists
- Ukrainians are to be sent to courts for every case of slander against Russian Army (that's a real law btw)
- Russia conducts "denazification" of Ukraine
- Ukraine withdraws from Kursk, and all previously annexed territories that Russia never controlled. You recall that Russia referendum-ed a much larger chunk of Ukraine
- all sanctions are off, for Crimea as well ( I too think those are active)
- all sanctions against individuals are off
- Russia allowed to trade with banks, access to money transfers
- IC case against Putin and others is off, for stealing children
- Ukraine can't ever join NATO and EU

What Russia offers, it will not nuke anyone. There was a recent law passed, mainly saying that it guarantees Russia can't possibly lose the war. Should be pretty effective against Trump supporters.

And to keep in mind, Observe said Ukraine had lost, so Russia is about to win already without any proposal.

The list might be incomplete, I didn't check last Minsk "peace" proposals, just going of what Putin said recently and what Tv said.

so starting bets, what's Trump gonna give Putin in exchange of Ukraine's surrender?


I have an idea

The word surrender implies unconditional.

There is conditional and there is unconditional surrender. The reason I use the word "surrender" is because Ukraine has lost already and losing more every day. The reason I use the word "lost" is because with an army that is struggling to exist, citizens fleeing by the millions (probably mostly to never return), and those remaining wanting to stop the war, the word "lost" comes to mind. Use whatever word suits you.

and surrender that you use is which?

you seem to have a better idea than me what Trump's team will offer, can you check mark the list above?

please explain to me your view and the view of Trump supporters on the question I asked you a year ago

[Observe]

Add also sanctions against people and International Court order for Putin and his thugs.

True

Which conditions presented by Russians do you think Trump will honor? I can refresh your memory

- Ukraine is demilitarized - not going to happen
- Ukraine government is substituted with pro Russian - same
- Zelensky and his supporters are tried in Russian courts as terrorists - same
- Ukrainians are to be sent to courts for every case of slander against Russian Army (that's a real law btw) - same
- Russia conducts "denazification" of Ukraine - same
- Ukraine withdraws from Kursk, and all previously annexed territories that Russia never controlled. You recall that Russia referendum-ed a much larger chunk of Ukraine - negotiable but probable
- all sanctions are off, for Crimes as well ( I too think those are active) - negotiable
- all sanctions against individuals are off - negotiable
- Russia allowed to trade with banks, access to money transfers - sanctions negotiable
- IC case against Putin and others is off, for stealing children - determined by IC
- Ukraine can't ever join NATO and EU - NATO not for 10 years. EU no restriction

What Russia offers, it will not nuke anyone. - good

And to keep in mind, Observe said Ukraine had lost, so Russia is about to win already without any proposal. - conditional surrender

so starting bets, what's Trump gonna give Putin in exchange of Ukraine's surrender?

Hold the dogs of war at bay. If Putin doesn't listen, then all hell breaks loose on him to end this madness.

and surrender that you use is which?

Conditional

you seem to have a better idea than me what Trump's team will offer, can you check mark the list above?

I have no idea what Trump's erratic thinking will produce depending on the crowd size of his latest rally or on how many McDonalds fries he consumed that day. My guesses are based on what I understand he has said and based on what some of his relevant appointees have said.

[EDIT] Some insights: How does Trump envoy Keith Kellogg want to end the Russia-Ukraine war?

In April this year, Kellogg co-authored a strategy paper, with former US government official Fred Fleitz, saying that the US should negotiate a ceasefire in Ukraine.

The paper blames President Joe Biden’s administration for the continuing Ukraine war. Specifically, it faults the US decision to arm Ukraine and the failure of diplomacy with Russia. It additionally accuses Biden of promoting a proxy war with Russia, through Ukraine.

So there is that. Make of it what we might. Perhaps Trump will require that Biden be put behind bars as part of the peace deal?

[fiksal]

okay thanks for the answer, we'll see what will happen,

with Putin in power, I don't think he will negotiate on the terms you have crossed out. That's my personal observations, and of some Russian journalists. Plus this doesn't accomplish any of the war goals and will be viewed as defeat. I don't see that Kremlin was weekend to be ready for a defeat

That guy's plan still needs to include security guarantees for it to come even close to your check list. For those in Ukraine and for those under Russia. Otherwise nothing stops Putin from say signing this and in the next year rolling through Ukraine with better prepared army. Then negotiating same exact peace agreement again, but this time controlling 70% of Ukraine.

Plus how does one rebuild a country when it can be again destroyed right away, who would come to work or live there

[Observe]

with Putin in power, I don't think he will negotiate on the terms you have crossed out.

Well, he is directly responsible for ordering all the death and destruction. Even if one levels blame at the failure of others to prevent it. The only possible legitimate complaint he has is the NATO one. The NAZI excuse is just that. Also, it's none of his business if Ukraine pursues EU membership.

That guy's plan still needs to include security guarantees for it to come even close to your check list. For those in Ukraine and for those under Russia. Otherwise nothing stops Putin from say signing this and in the next year rolling through Ukraine with better prepared army. Then negotiating same exact peace agreement again, but this time controlling 70% of Ukraine.

Yes. Outside of NATO, it's hard to see how that would work. Perhaps some kind of pre-NATO arrangement with Ukraine being a special case. None of this will prevent Putin from having other adventures elsewhere. Ultimately, it would be best if Russia joined NATO, or if there was some other world-wide organization (UN successor) with enough teeth to bite anyone daring to invade any other country. But that's for a possible future. Unfortunately, it might take a world war for humans to come to their wits - except we tried that a few times already.

[fiksal]

with Putin in power, I don't think he will negotiate on the terms you have crossed out.

Well, he is directly responsible for ordering all the death and destruction. Even if one levels blame at the failure of others to prevent it. The only possible legitimate complaint he has is the NATO one. The NAZI excuse is just that. Also, it's none of his business if Ukraine pursues EU membership.

I think you misunderstand the reason for this war, or you don't believe me when I repeatedly describe it.

Russia doesn't fear NATO, it doesn't have defenses against the borders with NATO.

The war is with Ukrainian people who decided without asking Putin that they will want to be closer to EU and have EU membership. This was spoken about early on. Putin doesn't see Soviet States as independent countries, in fact, many Russians do not.

So he saw a problem, a rogue agency took over legitimate Russian rule. First he took a foothold in the country in Donbass and Crimea. Turns out that went really well. Donbass due to various issues was made into a half State. Next step was Ukraine itself, which was only a matter of time for him. He expected an easy walk, removal of the illegitimate rule, and restoring this territory as rightfully part of Russia. Ukraine would be a country on paper only. A week long mission, just how he did in Georgia which was an amazing success.

If you think not giving NATO membership to Ukraine is the carrot Putin is looking for, it's not. Independent Ukraine is the worst case scenario that he can imagine. The worst case. Ukraine was supposed to be only a small stop towards the bigger goals.

For Z crowd calling defeat on this by Putin might even spell the end of Putin. Which can't be, because Putin is literally Russia and Russia is Putin. This is the one and only ideology in Russia.

Russia also doesn't fear nukes. Putin publicly said a couple times, a world without Russia can't exist.

I had a long chat with a friend of mine over there, who used to be a smart guy. He recently told me, he is against the war, but all Slavic people need to be made to live under the same (Russian) government. This is a much less intense view than of others

Feel free to not believe me, but my sources are basically Kremlin and Russians.

Yes. Outside of NATO, it's hard to see how that would work.

Very, which is why I call bs on any plan that doesn't say what it'd look like.

So US is trying to appease Putin, while Putin is actually looking to buy time and cause instability to US.

[notaterran]

The ruble is not doing great right now. If the falling trend continues then the next couple of months are going to be somewhat uncomfortable for the average Russian (as in, going back to a barter system). Not that anyone in the Kremlin would care, they just need to hold on until Trump becomes president.

[fiksal]

I feel like writing more,

let's list all the most significant cards at the current table

Trump has first drawn a card, that Russia has legitimate concerns and legitimate historical claim to Ukraine. A point, Observe, you brought up a year or two ago. (That claim was for Ukraine by Moscow kingdom, and not by Kievan Rus that would claim modern Russia's land)

So Trump draws another card, that Ukraine will lose and must not get any more weapons

This was "the plan".

Trump improvised and drew another card, that if Russia doesn't agree to unspecified terms, US will give more weapons.

Let's see Putin's hand.

His card says, that US will not risk nuclear war over Ukraine.

All cards down.

So, whose hand is stronger? Can you see a winner between US and Russia yet? Can you see why Putin would laugh at proposed negotiations?


(And he didn't pull a card that isn't a secret to any Russian, that US will not risk a nuclear war over Poland. That one is for later)

[Observe]

Let's see Putin's hand. His card says, that US will not risk nuclear war over Ukraine.

The question also is would Putin risk nuclear war over Ukraine? What would be the world response if Putin dropped a nuke on Kyiv? Certainly, the risk of fallout into neighboring NATO countries could and probably would be considered an attack on NATO. The response would be automatic and devastating to Russia. Is Putin that stupid? I don't think so. Trump, on the other hand? We'll see.

Unless Putin has a grand scheme to pull his allies (including China) into a final glorious nightmare solution, with winner sorting through the radioactive debris. In such event, there could be no assurance that what would be left of Russia would come out on top. In spite of his threats, I'm guessing Putin is as afraid of a nuclear war as the rest of us.

So, if we go on the basis that nukes are realistically off the table, we are left with the current situation. If Putin refuses to cooperate, he gets clobbered by a renewed enthusiasm to push him back where he belongs out of Ukraine and out of Crimea. Given the current state of the Ukraine army, that would require other countries to put boots on the ground. Something that Ukraine's allies have been loath to do, but they are talking about it.

[mr.WHO]

[EDIT] I notice talk about using the seized money to pay for (waste) more weapons. Better to save it for rebuilding damage already done.

It reminds me (fortunately short) discussion here in Poland, if we should spend +4% of GDP on military, or is it better to spend them on hospitals, shools, roads, farms, powerplant or people.
Here is why this discussion was very short - we have seen Russia bomb the sh*t out of everything mentioned above in Ukraine.

You can't have economy, investment or future, if you don't have military to protect those.
You can't even farm or build anything easily coz you will dig out dud explosives for decades to come (Here in Poland we still dig out WW2 explosives from the ground and in France there are literal Dead Zones which got ungodly amount of explosives and chemicals from WW1).


With peace or without, Ukraine will have to put a lot resources into military, not because humanity is stupid, but because there is no other way...
...unless Ukraine would join NATO.


Personally, I think that for Ukraine, NATO memberships would be the only thing worth giving away occupied lands - proven historical case with South and North Korea.
Best case scenario that we could bet is Ukraine accepting, but not recognizing that Russia occupy their lands, but get into NATO and later into to EU (another proven historical example West Germany), while Russia and occupied lands degrade into North Korea under weight of sanctions.

We would have new large DMZ and Cold War 2.0, but well, that wouldn't be our first rodeo.

[Vertigo 7]

[EDIT] I notice talk about using the seized money to pay for (waste) more weapons. Better to save it for rebuilding damage already done.

It reminds me (fortunately short) discussion here in Poland, if we should spend +4% of GDP on military, or is it better to spend them on hospitals, shools, roads, farms, powerplant or people.
Here is why this discussion was very short - we have seen Russia bomb the sh*t out of everything mentioned above in Ukraine.

This is an outstanding point. The job of the military first and foremost is to save lives. Sure, they're not running around like EMTs or pulling people from burning buildings but taking the life of the enemy in defense of your own saves lives just the same.

I still remember the earliest days of this war with the videos coming out like the Russian tank passing through a neighborhood stopped to blast a civilian car just because, or the video of the small unit passing through a busy town and the tank swerves into oncoming traffic and rolls over a civilian vehicle for kicks. It's not like those instances are isolated and few between. Russia has shown an incredibly half-assed approach towards avoiding civilian casualties, when they're not outright targeting civilians.

[fiksal]

.

So, if we go on the basis that nukes are realistically off the table, we are left with the current situation. If Putin refuses to cooperate, he gets clobbered by a renewed enthusiasm to push him back where he belongs out of Ukraine and out of Crimea. Given the current state of the Ukraine army, that would require other countries to put boots on the ground. Something that Ukraine's allies have been loath to do, but they are talking about it.

See now you are taking more like Democrats, who btw have no plan either, but with Trump elected any chances to call Putin's bluff, me thinks are over.

You can see that the current message from Trump that in worst case, we'll just give more weapons. No mention of what weapons, no mention of helping taking territory with people back, no mention of defeating Russia, no mention of nuclear response. Trump's hand currently is really weak.

Would Putin risk nuclear war? Only if it means that Russia has no way out, yes, he would, because it's not a risk, it's a final attempt to save Soviet Union.

Putin has been preparing Russians for inevitability of nuclear weapons for last year or so. Most Russian seems to think of it's necessary Russia should use them soon. See, population is being mentally worked on.

No country clearly yet said if nukes would be used against Russia if Russia uses nukes in Ukraine. So currently everyone assumes it's a no.

Unless Europe has a plan, to make Putin not be able to make this call.