U.S. and Ukrainian officials say that the best Ukraine’s military can hope for in the coming year, especially without more American aid, is to defend its current positions. Even so, Biden officials say they are not entertaining the idea of pressing Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to negotiate with Mr. Putin.
This is the most eloquent. If you can’t fight a war for win, then it’s reasonable to try to gain some better results through negotiations. But the white masters don’t care about the losses of aboriginals.
Are you implying that white masters exist and implying that a European country can’t decide what’s better for it without consulting with white masters at the same time? Can I say that you are brainwashed by black masters?
Good. Now also please give them the needed financial support
That’s right, fight to the last Ukrainian. It’s a great investment.
It is a great investment for NATO. At the cost of spare inventory of 2nd tier weapons (which need to be replaced soon), they can broom fuck Russia from a safe distance… And Ukraine is begging for this it’s only polite to help out.
Except that’s not what’s actually happening given that it’s Europe and Ukraine being broom fucked, as you put it. Russian economy is growing, as is its industrial output. Russia has successfully diverted trade away from the west and had no problems finding new trade partners. Russian military output now outpaces all of G7 as western media openly admits. Meanwhile, the regime US installed in Ukraine is sacrificing the country for US interests while scumbags in the west cheer this on.
I would recommend people watch YouTuber “Joe Blogs”, his videos are very informative on this topic. The Russian ruble stayed afloat for a while because the central bank had to spend a lot of money to defend it. They cannot afford this now which is why the currency has tanked. They wanted other countries to use rubles when purchasing Russian product but are in such a weak state they had to accept Yuan’s and rupees. Even if the war ended, Russia has lost its most valuable clients in the west. The Russian government controls economic data so it’s hard to know exactly what is happening with economy. Government military spending has increased which would help but how long can they keep doing this? This is artificially lifting the economy and will end when the war ends. Ukraine claims 400,000 Russian casualties, add the Russians who fled earlier in the war, that’s a huge loss in manpower and skills. I see Russian protesters asking for their soldiers to return home since they’ve served their required terms. How many of those loved ones are dead and what will the reaction be like.
If Russia is winning, why are they asking to negotiate a war they started and have not achieved their goals set for this “3 day special military operation”?
Russian military output is greater than the west? I’m not going to check this because it doesn’t matter. Do we need to worry that Russia has more shit tier equipment for their soldiers? You’re also buying weapons from Iran and North Korea.
I feel sorry for the Ukrainian blood being spilled but NATO can easily afford to continue this war indefinitely. Putin might have a strange hold on Russian necks and your bank account but the numbers are working against him.
This is what happens when you get your information from a guy named Joe Blogs as opposed to actual credible sources. 😂
Russian rouble being low actually creates more domestic profit for the Russian government selling resources. Also, last I checked rouble is trading at 91 to a dollar which is hardly tanked. Given that it’s generally been trading between 80 and 90 to a dollar.
Also, not sure where you got the notion that clients in the west were most valuable to Russia. Trading with countries that aren’t trying to undermine Russia is far more preferable from Russian perspective. It’s the western countries, specifically in Europe, that are most hurt by all this. Hence why Russian economy is growing while Europe is going into a recession.
Hilarious that you call military spending an artificial increase. What does that say about US economy then, weird how nobody applies the same logic there.
Ukraine claims a lot of things, like the Ghost of Kiev. Meanwhile, the only western sources that provides any methodology shows Russian casualties to be at around 43k https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng
Russia is not asking to negotiate the war. What they said from the start is that they’re open to negotiations on their terms which have not changed since the start of the war.
Meanwhile, if you think that NATO can afford to continue the was indefinitely then you have no understanding of how industrial economy works. NATO lacks industrial capacity to produce weapons and ammunition at the rate being spent in Ukraine. This is openly admitted by NATO.
It’s incredible that people still believe all the nonsense you wrote even though western media now openly admits that all this is false.
I was going to reply to all the points you made but I read your source and it is excellent, I will use it in the future. https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng
So you make fun of Joe Blog even though he uses Russian (where available) data and other sources. But let’s use your “reliable” source “which shows Russian casualties of 43,000”. If you had bothered to read more than just the head line you would have seen.
“approximately 47,000 Russians under the age of 50 had died in the Ukraine war. However, these figures represent only a partial account and do not reflect the full extent of the casualties.”
“The actual death toll is likely significantly higher.”
“This week, CIA Director William Burns penned a column in Foreign Affairs estimating the total losses of the Russian army—killed and wounded—at 315,000. At first glance, this figure might seem significantly different from our own count, but in reality, it’s not, and we regard Burns’ estimate as close to the truth.”
“43,000 obituaries found on social networks suggest approximately 80–90,000 actual deaths.”
And the 300k estimate is assuming a 3 to 1 wounded to killed ratio. 90,000 killed and (3 times) 270,000 wounded is from Feb 2nd. On that day Ukrainians were claiming ~387,060 casualties, pretty close to the 360,000 from your reliable source.
Nothing in what you quoted contradicts that they can only account for 43k dead using actual methodology. But even if we took your 90k dead with 270k wounded, that doesn’t paint the picture you’re trying to paint because many of the wounded recover and return to service. What you were clearly trying to insinuate in your original comment was that over 400k soldiers were out of action permanently.
Meanwhile, one simply has to look back through the failed predictions Joe Blogs made over the past year to see that the guy is utterly clueless. It’s incredible how hucksters can make a youtube channel to spew utter nonsense and people will gobble it up uncritically.
Also love the implication that you’re a Russian bot “Putin might have a stranglehold on Russian necks and your bank account”
classic liberals
haha right, I love how libs just run around smearing people when they’re unable to muster any actual counterpoint
My question is why is the US rejecting anything, isn’t that a war between Russia and Ukraine?
That’s the reason they’re rejecting it. From the article:
“Barring a Ukrainian demand signal” for peace talks, “there’s unlikely to be a push from Washington,” he said.
Is anybody actually so naive as to believe that Ukraine has any say in this?
See, there’s this slow motion guillotine hanging over Putin right now, and for each month of successive losses, it’ll slowly be lowered until it reaches his neck.
Then, after a new favourite of the oligarchy and the generals have rubbed a few backs and made a few promises, said favourite will come up from behind and place his foot on the blade to force it through Putin’s neck.
That’s only speculation though.
^ this is your brain on western propaganda
based US
America will never allow this war to end.
I mean, Putin won’t either, the negotiations are just for gaslighting and propaganda. Basically it’s about not negotiating with terrorists, America has plenty other wars going on and even without Ukraine intends to increase military spending. They don’t need it, but it’s not up to them if it ends.
Basically it’s about not negotiating with terrorists, America has plenty other wars going on
This level of double think is really amazing. Within one sentence, “US has plenty of wars” -> good guys, Putin has one war -> terrorist, literally Hitler.
I’m not condoning Putin btw. It’s just baffling all the excuses that are made for US aggression vs Russian aggression. Can you imagine if China put their weapons into Mexico? They’d be stupid to do that. But that’s what Ukraine wants. In the end it’s Ukraine, Russia and the tax payer that looses.
If America was actively attempting to annex Sonora I’d be happy to make the same arguments defending China if it armed Mexico
It’s not about moral arguments or right or wrong. No matter the reason or circumstance, the US would never allow it. Any president not being aggressive about “Chinese weapons on our doorstep” would be ousted. My point is that a decision was made which was a red line for Russia. But we only ever talk about Russia not the deliberate crossing of the red line.
It’s not about moral arguments or right or wrong.
Or
It’s just baffling all the excuses that are made for US aggression vs Russian aggression
It can’t be both. Which is it? Because the point here is that America giving Ukraine weapons is more justified specifically because of Russia’s aggression.
Neither. Both can be wrong. Russia protested and warned about NATO eastward expansion for decades. So what do you do?
What pretty clearly happened is that certain elements pushed for NATO inclusion and (mostly exclusive!) EU trade well before 2008. Russia pushed for a more Russia friendly regime. Both sides interfered until the result became a devastating war.
So every sensible person should protest in favor of peace negotiations. But that doesn’t happen. The western media portrays any peace negotiations as useless or as a ploy. I mean read the article.
Russia protested and warned about NATO eastward expansion for decades.
As if NATO is an entity that expands by itself huh.
Countries. Decide. To join NATO. Recent inclusions only prove that Putin’s struggle is not about NATO at all but about Ukraine. Or, more specifically, about repeating a big win in a small war that would get him whatever his ill brain imagined.
US literally occupies a larger percentage of Syria at this very moment than Russia is of Ukraine.
Can you imagine if China put their weapons into Mexico? They’d be stupid to do that. But that’s what Ukraine wants.
You’re clueless. Ukraine was precisely correct in its desire for additional protection from aggression.
You know who has total power to end this war? Putin. Just get the fuck out of Ukraine and it’s over.
There’s really nothing to negotiate.
They literally were negotiating at the start of the war for this exact outcome: Russia pulls out and Ukraine maintains neutrality.
Johnson threw a wrench in those plans.
Ukraine was never going to abort neutrality lol. Being a NATO member does not affect neutrality.
Also remember the Budapest Memorandum? Ukraine literally gave up nuclear weapons as instructed by Russia, for the promise that was broken.
I’d say the wrench was thrown by someone else. Or, rather, someone hit their own head by a wrench good enough to lose all mind.
There’s no negotiation needed. Russia moving out of Ukraine and paying for all damage until everything is pre crimea. If that is all done, rebuild and paid for, then, they can negotiate for less punishment on top. That’s the kind of negotiation you start because both sides have something to gain and not one to keep his unjustified war territory.
I don’t know why people keep repeating this given that it’s obviously not happening.
They’ll be saying the exact same thing next year when the war is still going on.
There’s a pretty good chance they won’t be able to keep this up for another year. Ukraine is running out of manpower, and NATO lacks the industrial base to supply weapons at the rate they’re used now that existing stocks are running dry.
On top of that, US is now getting sucked into a war in Western Asia.
I could see it being over by December no matter which candidate wins, especially if Israel succeeds in starting WWIII by enticing the US into direct conflict with… basically all its neighbors? 👀
indeed
Why hasn’t the cancer killed the mother fucker already?
It looks like dementia is Biden’s bigger concern at the moment.
Not a single paragraph about the actual demands of Russia. Which they have stated often enough. Basically they don’t want NATO right on their doorstep. This is what this whole war was about. But somehow this is never seriously discussed in western media.
But NATO already is on their doorstep. Norway, Estonia, Poland etc. Even USA is only a few mils away across the Bering Strait.
This is not about Ukraine joining NATO, that’s a convenience.
That’s just such galaxy brain logic there. We’ve already built up a threat on your doorstep, so you shouldn’t worry about us expanding that threat further. 🤡
Furthermore, Stoltenberg has now publicly admitted that this is in fact about Ukraine joining NATO
You gotta update your script now.
It is discussed, it doesn’t stand up to any reasoning as to why they captured the Crimean peninsula. They also stated that it was because Ukraine couldn’t stop the rise of Nazism. So which is it? NATO or Nazis?
Ukraine is an independent country and if they want to join NATO they can, having a legitimate grievance doesn’t excuse an invasion.
And even if it was true and was accepted, what a disaster it was because it bolstered a floundering NATO, grew membership and increased military spending across the continent. Truly a genius move.
Ukraine is an independent country and if they want to join NATO they can, having a legitimate grievance doesn’t excuse an invasion.
The context of the thread is that U.S. rejects peace talks. Nothing speaks of Ukraine’s sovereignty more than a foreign country rejecting negotiations on its behalf. 🤡
My friend it was never about NATO. There is no prospective out there based in fact where NATO has anything to do with it.
OK Yeah that’s a pretty big contradiction to what I’ve been told.
Western media is pure propaganda at this point.
I don’t want people like you in my comments but no one acknowledges that. So weird.
I don’t want people like you in my comments but no one acknowledges that. So weird.
If this war was about having NATO on their doorstep, why is it an invasion of a non-NATO country twenty years after the first neighbours of Russia joined NATO? It’s never seriously discussed because it’s either a lie or unfathomably stupid, and whichever of those two it is doesn’t much matter.
Just for a second, imagine you’re a neutral country in eastern Europe. Russia has been fucking with Georgia and Moldova since the fall of the Soviet Union, and now it invades Ukraine for the second time within a decade. Russia has never touched a NATO country despite bordering several of them for literally decades. And then Russia acts all shocked when you say you want into NATO
Yeah and Russia protested strongly every time. But Ukraine was their red line. Just because you didn’t read it in western media doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
I don’t condone the invasion but it was predictable and a colossal “failure” of diplomacy if you look at it charitably. At worst it was a long term plan to force Russia into a conflict with the aid of western media to obscure the reason why this war was happening. Russia is acting just like the US would.
plan to force Russia into a conflict
Please explain how exactly do you force someone (who suggests to be reasonable) into conflict, basically force them to invade anyone.
Did the Poland “forced” Hitler to start the WW2 the same way?
Please explain how exactly do you force someone (who suggests to be reasonable) into conflict, basically force them to invade anyone.
Well imagine if China were to make a military pact with Mexico and started delivering “defensive” weapon systems to them. There would be protests, sanctions, meddling and attempts for regime change, and if those didn’t work there would be invasion.
For the US to invade another country it actually takes far less. Getting bombed is super easy.
Imagine justifying real war by imagining things.
For the US to invade another country it actually takes far less. Getting bombed is super easy.
These sentences don’t make sense as the response for the quotation.
Do you live in some alternative reality where the US didn’t invade Irak and Afghanistan? And is bombing countries all over the world for whatever reason? Oh let me guess that is TOTALLY different!
We all live in a reality where the US did invade Iraq and Afghanistan. And here is the thought process of me trying to understand your reasoning behind mentioning these events in current context:
-
The US asked many times for Iraq and Afghanistan to not try to oppose them. According to the US, Iraq and Afghanistan bombed its own citizens (who call themselves the people of the US) for several (at least 8) years and finally the US decided to intervene.
-
But in fact it must have been caused by someone else, like China or Russia. They provided Iraq and Afghanistan with weapons and/or proposed them the place in alliance against the US, which is why the US didn’t have a choice.
-
From the very start of those invasions, the whole world decided to stand against the US and provided Iraq and Afghanistan with all the weapons and resources they could need in order to protect themselves. Massive sanctions were applied against the US to stop its war machine.
-
The US massively increased pressure on free speech and started to jail its own citizens who speak against the war. This also caused at least 1 percent of the US population to migrate elsewhere.
-
Because this all (or at least some of it) happened with the US, there is no problem in assuming that it would be fine to happen with other country (like Russia) and nobody should say a word against that country’s right for protecting its interests.
If this is what really happened then you are correct and this not “totally different” but exactly the same.
But if there are differences, I hope you can explain them without involving any kind of “injustice” towards Russia.
-
It’s hardly unprecedented. The USA felt forced into an aggressive response to the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
So it was Soviet plan to start the aggression? Is it the same with Finland? When can we expect Putin to invade it?
I don’t get it, what do you mean?
Read the message you were replying to. I asked specifically how do you force a country to invade a other country (that is not yours). You told about Cuba, so naturally I wanted to confirm if you mean the situation was caused by desire of Soviets to start the aggression.
I think you’re missing a paragraph that tells how the border between Russia and NATO increased twofold since (and as the result of) the invasion.
“Hey it’s all about NATO. We always wanted less NATO at our doorsteps, and you can see we tried our best to achieve this. That backfired, yes, but we ask you once again to… Ask all those countries nicely to withdraw from NATO. Having NATO at our borders is not healthy for our people, you see… With all those bio laboratories… And parent№1+parent№2 policy that you force on everyone…”
