A group of progressive House Democrats is urging President Biden to negotiate with Russia and seek a diplomatic solution to the war in Ukraine.
In a letter to Biden signed by 30 House Democrats, the lawmakers said they have supported Biden’s Ukraine policy but that the risk of nuclear war and “catastrophic escalation” means that the US should be pushing for negotiations.
“We urge you to pair the military and economic support the United States has provided to Ukraine with a proactive diplomatic push, redoubling efforts to seek a realistic framework for a ceasefire,” the letter reads.
The letter was led by Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. In a statement to The Washington Post, she said, “The longer the war in Ukraine goes on, the greater the risk of escalation — to widespread, devastating effect.”
The Biden administration has shown little interest in diplomacy with Russia despite the president’s recent warning that there is a higher risk of nuclear “armageddon” today than at any time since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. The Washington Post reported earlier this month that US officials have ruled out pushing Ukraine to the negotiating table even though they don’t think Kyiv can win the war “outright.”
The lawmakers said in the letter that they agree with the administration’s position that it’s not the US’s “place” to pressure Ukraine’s government. But they added that “as legislators responsible for the expenditure of tens of billions of US taxpayer dollars in military assistance in the conflict, we believe such involvement in this war also creates a responsibility for the United States to seriously explore all possible avenues.”
One avenue the lawmakers said Biden should explore is direct talks with Russia, and they said a framework for a ceasefire could include “some form of sanctions relief.”
The progressive Democrats concluded the letter by calling on Biden to “make vigorous diplomatic efforts in support of a negotiated settlement and ceasefire, engage in direct talks with Russia explore prospects for a new European security arrangement acceptable to all parties that will allow for a sovereign and independent Ukraine, and, in coordination with our Ukrainian partners, seek a rapid end to the conflict and reiterate this goal as America’s chief priority.”
In response to the letter, the White House rejected the idea of diplomacy with Russia. “It’s clear Mr. Putin is in no mood to negotiate,” said National Security Council spokesman John Kirby. “We’re not going to have conversations with Russian leadership without the Ukrainians being represented.”
Some prominent signatories to the letter include Reps. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Ro Khanna (D-CA), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI). Each signatory voted in favor of spending tens of billions on the war, including the $40 billion Ukraine aid bill that was passed in May, which only faced opposition from a small group of Republicans.
219 thoughts on “Thirty Progressive House Democrats Urge Biden to Negotiate With Russia”
I am all for talking him out of Ukraine but I doubt that will work, in the meantime lets keep killing him out of Ukraine.
What an atrocious comment.
I never invaded anybody. That is where the atrocity began.
The atrocities began in 2014 when the west overthrew the legitimate government and started the ethnic cleansing of the Donbass.
Russia has intervened to protect the ethnic population from genocide. This civil war has been ongoing for nearly 9 years.
If Ukraine wants to be sovereign again then they need to oust the illegal Nazi regime in Kiev and hold democratic elections.
That doesn’t make your comment less atrocious. Your flippancy about people dying is what is atrocious. You can’t be that thick.
You setting yourself up for disappointment bub.
You must be lost. This is antiwar.com. Not prowar.com. Nor bloodlust.com. Why don’t you just go away? You support the proxy war. Good for you. Aren’t there enough pro war sites for you to post on? You are trolling here. And that makes you a complete jerk.
I am anti war, but Ukraine got invaded, so rules change I am quite pro border. So I was against Iran Afghanistan, Libya Syria Grenada, whatever the hell we are doing in Africa, did I miss any? I want war as a way of doing business to be discredited. I want the invader to lose, in this case that is Russia.
Nope. You’re pro war.
Should Russia be allowed to take as much of Ukraine as they see fit? Based on some notion of ancient Russia?
Not the issue. You’re pro war.
More like pro border. Does Russia has a right to invade? If no then what?
Nope. You’re prowar. And you add nothing to the discussions with your risible comments, nor with your current attempts to play
Perry Mason. That makes you a troll. You are like a guy who hates skiing commenting on a skiing forum. You serve no purpose, other than to be a disruptive, childishly nay-saying, jerk. For whatever reason, you get off on that.
You can exercise your option to ignore.
They are only anti-war here as long as the war involves American imperialism. Russian imperialism is A-OK.
Sure, I think there is an element of truth to that.
Yeah…not really antiwarry there bruv…
Disappointing that Dave failed to comment on the key passage he quotes:
““We urge you to pair the military and economic support the United States has provided to Ukraine with a proactive diplomatic push, redoubling efforts to seek a realistic framework for a ceasefire,” the letter reads.”
Notice that the progressive Dems are reiterating their position on providing arms to prolong and deepen Joe Biden’s proxy war in Russia, the same position that they have backed with their votes, like the recent $40 billion in Ukraine. They even did a presser today to reiterate their position.
They are voting like Warhawks but trying to write a few ambiguous words about peace to mollify the US peace movement before the November elections.
This hypocritical screed is little more than a Get Out The Vote among the gullible liberal/progessive Kumbayah peacenik crowd to ward off the coming November disaster for the Dems.
Of course, it is just a PR. An effort to improve their position before the elections.
“Notice that the progressive Dems are reiterating their position on providing arms to prolong and deepen Joe Biden’s proxy war in Russia.”
W-e-e-e-ll…continuing the “military and economic support the US has provided”…
There are not much they can talk about. The best decision would be to leave Ukraine the same as they left Afghanistan.
Seeing as only the Russians are in Ukraine (and they too left Afghanistan) I think I can agree with you on this rare occasion 🙂
Russians are leaving Ukraine too. Together with their land. Four Russian regions did it already.
Sure Russians are leaving even Russia to flee from the mobilization – so yes Russians are leaving – that was what you meant by together with their land I guess. Otherwise to leave with the land you need a lot of trucks seeing as they cant hold territory against the Ukrainian army.
They needed no trucks. Just shifted a bit a border and that is all.
Shifting borders only works if you can enforce the new ones – that’s what they are currently failing to do so…
The new border is the subject of negotiations or unconditional capitulation.
Sometime the countries are living in peace, generation after generation, despite disagreements about the border. The democratic way to solve the border disputes is the local peoples’ referendum. If Americans would be democratic people, they should help to organize the referendum. However, they did exactly the opposite. All those years they were sabotaging anything what could help to find a peaceful solution.
Or as it happens currently military reconquest – like it was the case for Bilohorivka.
Agreed that was what they had in 1991.
Very difficult now with the amount of people who have been forced to flee from their homes by the Russian invasion.
You confuse the Ukrainians with the Americans – as it was admitted by tv propagandists on Russian state tv just recently – they were and are fighting the Russian speaking people in Mariupol so not the liberators they try to portray themselves as.
All Ukraine is Russian speaking, including Zelensky. If you thought his mother language is Yiddish or Ukrainian, you are wrong. Before 2014 he talked only Russian, the same as the majority of his team. It is not the conflict between Russians and Ukrainians. It is the conflict between American imperial Satanists and Russian Christians. American oligarchs printed a lot of dollars and bought a lot of people inside America and outside.
No – there is a Ukrainian language somewhat different from Russian which is spoken as lingua-franca in much of western Ukraine – but Zelenskyy is a Russian speaker
I did not think otherwise – if you kook through my comments you would know.
So no it is a conflict between Ukrainians and Russian speaking Ukrainians and Putin as clearly evidenced by the admission of even Russian propagandists.
100% citizens of Ukraine can perfectly speak Russian. Ukrainian dialects differ from each other. The official Ukrainian is in process of creation. Most citizens of Ukraine understand Ukrainian. I am not sure what percent of them is talking Ukrainian home. Maybe 50%. The idea of exterminating Russian language in Ukraine is promoted and sponsored by American oligarchy for the purpose of creation on Ukrainian territory a Russo-phobic state and use it as the headbridge against Russia.
Linguist disagree with you – and as for:
It has not been Ukrainian policy since at least 2019 so you are just as out of touch with Ukrainian policy as you are with the definition of what constitutes a language and what is just a dialect.
Who is linguist? You are linguist?
Are you sure you can distinguish East Ukrainian dialect from West Ukrainian?
First law of the pro-American junta after the coup 2014 was to forbid the official use of Russian language in all Ukraine. The groups of the far-right Ukrainian militants were trained in NATO countries for the purpose to take the power in Kiev and start the inter-ethnic violence. So called “the trains of friendship” with armed militants were sent to Crimea. That’s how “The Revolution of Dignity” started.
No I have linked you to linguists, and yes I would be able to tell Ukrainian from Russian – they are only about 60 odd percent the same, but like Romanian which can sound like Italian spoken by a person from Portugal it can be confusing.
Sure but that is no longer policy and has not been for quite a while – was it not you who just told me that Zelenskyy used Russian in his team? And is it not you who claim that there is no Ukrainian language – if the first then that is proof that the Russian is no longer forbidden, if the second then they could not forbid Russian.
Ukrainians were trained in NATO countries long after the Maidan revolution and only a minority fraction of even the Azov battalion is far right nutters.
“is it not you not you who claim that there is no Ukrainian language” – I never said “there are no Ukrainian language”. I said, there are different Ukrainian dialects. It was time, Ukrainian wasn’t considered as the separate language, but about one hundred years as they made of Ukrainian dialect of Russian language, a separate language. This process was started by professor Grushevsky who worked for Austrians. His job was to create of Ukrainian dialect a separate language. Later Grushevsky was employed by Bolsheviks for the same purpose. They even made him academic. So, it is about one hundred years as Ukrainian language became officially a separate language. Ukrainian state was also created by Bolsheviks at the same time.
No I guess that you can claim to not having said so, though ‘All Ukraine is Russian speaking is kind of claiming that there is no such thing, as you would otherwise know that this is not the case.
In the old days they classified Danish as a German dialect – that is not how we classify languages these days – you know science moves on! And no Ukrainian is not the product of a hundred years of divergence, but the effect of many centuries of divergence going back to the times that Russian took Latin names for the months of the year (so at about the time the were converted to Christianity) while the Ukrainians retained the old Slavic names.
So this is patently wrong – it is not backed up by any of the language differences between the two languages.
It would have taken a massive effort to get the people of the large area to learn a language as different from Russian as Ukrainian this is obviously a made up history that no one with an understanding of how languages evolve would ever believe.
That is a plain fact: 100% of Ukrainians are Russian speaking. About 50% of them also speaking Ukrainian. I mean the situation before 2014. Now as 5 regions don’t belong to Ukraine anymore, and Russian language removed from the schools, the percent of those who speak Ukrainian is of course higher.
It is difficult to have with you a coherent conversation because you are too ignorant. When Austrians started the process of creation of a separate Ukrainian language, most Ukrainians were illiterate. Second half of 19 century was the time when the schools begun to open their doors for the children of lower-class. For Ukrainian children in Austrian empire there were no Russian schools, only Ukrainian. The process of Ukrainization was continued by Bolsheviks.
this is just plainly wrong – I happen to know since the builders on my house were Ukrainian and spoke much worse Russian than my wife who incidentally is also not a native Russian speaker. So at most you can claim that the majority have had Russian in school or been exposed to it frequently in media.
I very much doubt that my builders were all schooled after 2014.
I’m tempted to say right back at you, but rather than engaging in ad hominem I’ll say that you seem to be challenged by a certain bias that allows you to believe e.g. that that the Austrians had the capacity to instill a new language in a very large portion of the Ukrainians they had access to.
Sure as they were after the Austrians had left – and more to the point why would the Austrians opt for old Slavic names for the months of the year etc.
The Russians failed to exterminate Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian – having had more time available to them – this is just a conspiracy theory of yours with no backing from any competent linguists who are not in the pay of Putin.
Of course, you are lying. I never met Ukrainian who couldn’t speak perfectly Russian.
“Russians failed to exterminate Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian” – you are lying again. Google for example Population pyramid of Lithuania in 2022. Those who aged 60 are much more numerous than those aged 20. The highest population was in 1990 – 3.7 million. Now the population of Lithuania 2.8 million. Other two republics not much different. From 1945 to 1990 the Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian population was growing steadily. After 1990 started the decline.
it is a sad day when one realizes that the concept of proof has gone completely AWOL – the fact that you have not seen a black swan does not mean that they do not exist – you could perhaps have been exposed to Ukrainians predominantly from the eastern regions – I know for a fact that many of the builders we get here are form the western parts of Ukraine.
How is this in any way evidence that the Russians did not fail to eliminate the languages of these countries? I said they had failed to exterminate Estonian (the language not Estonians the people) Latvian (the language not Latvians the people) and Lithuanian (the language not Lithuanians the people).
Their languages were cultivated as all the other languages in Russia. Every ethnic group in Russia has the national schools in their language. At the moment in Russian Federation nearly 40 languages are official. In USSR there were, of course, even more official languages. Every republic in USSR had own national university. They had also the cinema industry in their languages. Now, probably, it all disappeared. They are watching now American films. When Crimea was reunited with Russia, one of the first things done by Moscow was the establishment of 3 official languages: Russian, Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar. In time of independent Ukraine, only Ukrainian was recognized as official language. Crimean Tatar language was never recognized in independent Ukraine. They always tried to restrict the use of Russian language even before 2014 despite the fact that everyone knows Russian, and most people prefer to use Russian.
No you are just poorly informed if you think this was the case as seen here (NB as with the Austrians we are debating past events):
You are reading too much of Russo-phobic propaganda. American oligarchy invested huge money in creating the fakes like this.
“You are just poorly informed” – more than half of my life I lived in USSR. By the way, I also been in West Ukraine. In last twenty years I met a lot of different people from former Soviet republics in different European countries: UK, Italy, France and in some others. Recently met some Ukrainians from West Ukraine; there are a lot of them now everywhere.
Probably you don’t know that first president of independent Lithuania Brazauskas was picked up by Gorbachev as the head of Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic. He won the elections against Lithuanian nationalist Landsbergis. Most likely, he would be reelected again in 1998, but refused to participate because of American pressure. They brought a new president from US.
This coming from a person who actually thinks that the Austrians invented Ukrainian, and somehow managed to get everyone forgetting even the name of the months – yes I’m the one who is too easy to fool!
The point of this being?
Any proof that he refused to to participate because of American pressure, and if this was the cause why did he stand again in 2001 where he was elected and served to 2006 – was it the US that forced him out of retirement after a break of only about three years???
Austrians didn’t invented Ukraine. Austrians struggled to exterminate Orthodox Christianity and Russian language in Austrian Empire. That’s why they invested a lot of money and efforts in: 1 – to separate Ukrainians from Russians. 2 – to liquidate any connection of Ukrainian population in Austria to Russia and Orthodox Christianity.
As I said, in 1998 Americans didn’t allowed Brazauskas to participate in presidential elections. So, he created a left coalition and participated in the elections into Parliament. In 2001 Brazauskas was elected chairman of Socialist Democratic Party and in the same year he became Prime Minister.
Any evidence of this assertion? Because the only evidence I can dig up is that he wanted to take time off to rest and write a book.
As for the Ukrainian language – the idea is absurd – that Professor Mykhailo Serhiiovych Hrushevsky borne 29 September 1866, would be able to change the way Ukrainians speak (including introducing a vocative i.e. mostly spoken language) is just too far fetched to be worth my time – you need to provide firm evidence for this assertion to get engagement on this conspiracy theory!
You are just ignorant. And what is even worse, you are always lying. What evidence do you expect from the corporate media? It is the same as expect the evidence of Holocaust from MR Goebbels.
Where did I say that I expected evidence from corporate media? If you are not ignorant you would be able to find evidence for your assertions in university papers or any wealth of other non corporate sources.
1998 was 22 years ago. My opinion is based upon what the participants of those events talked at the time, including Brazauskas himself. Americans needed no color revolutions in Baltic states because they had other means to promote their agents to the top level. In other post-Soviet republics, like Georgia, Armenia, Ukraine, where they couldn’t do it that simple, they organized the coups. Result was everywhere the same. So far, the color revolution failed only in Belorussia. In Turkey it also failed but Turkey isn’t a post-Soviet republic.
There was no need for a revolution in Lithuania not for the Americans nor for anyone lese what on earth are you on about – can you give any hint of why the US should desire a revolution in Lithuania in 1998? It was not as if they were following a policy of rapprochement with the Russians at that time.
I happen to know as I was working in Lithuania at the time on a government project to prepare them for entering EU.
“There was no need for revolution in Lithuania” – you are repeating what I said. My comment was: “Americans needed no color revolutions in Baltic states”.
So what was the point about him exiting politics on account of the Americans?
The Saur Revolution, 1978 brought the People’s Democratic Party (PDPA) of Afghanistan to power. The Revolutionary Council started a provisional democratic program that guaranteed the legalisation of trade unions, equal rights for women and the separation of church and state. The revolutionary leadership also canceled the massive debts that the poor peasants owed to the loan sharks and landowners.
The PDPA constructed schools and hospitals across the country, and trained doctors and teachers, a female Afghan doctor, recalled in the Observer in 2001, “Life was good … Every girl could go to high school and university. We could go wherever we wanted and wear what we liked.”
Unfortunately the ‘mujahedin’ (or holy warriors – the name that the bands of the khans, mullahs and Islamic clergy gave themselves) started a counter revolution that sought to preserve their positions in society. The U.S. saw an ally in the ‘mujahedin’ and through the CIA began sending them money, guns, bombs and special agents. The people of the ‘mujahedin’ included people like Osama bin Laden.
At this point in time, the revolutionary government requested military assistance from the USSR. The USSR first sent only military advisors before finally sending in some 100,000 troops but in 1985 Mikhail Gorbachev became the leader of the Soviet Union.and withdrew troops from Afganistan. By April, 1992, the ‘mujahedin’ entered the capital city of Kabul, and President Mohammad Najibullah was overthrown.
In 1996, one particular Islamic fundamentalist militia, the Taliban, was able to take control of Kabul. The rule of the Taliban, which enjoyed the support of the U.S. was extremely brutal. However in 2001, the U.S. used the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center as justification to invade Afghanistan and overthrow the Taliban, which had refused to bow to their demands.
The last Russian soldier left Afghanistan in 1989. Najibullah was overthrown three years later. So, Najibullah government lasted three years without any foreign military help. Pro-American regime in Afghanistan collapsed even before Americans could evacuate their militaries from Kabul. That is the difference. Russians were invited in Afghanistan. Americans not.
My real point was that the above poster hails the creation of terrorism and the destruction of a civil society in Afghanistan as a win, an example of US success.
He is not alone in that. There are always a lot of people who are supporting their own governments doesn’t matter what.
The real confrontation in the world is between the rule of the oligarchy and those who are opposing it. Unfortunately, there are no forces inside US who could deprive the oligarchs of their political power. They can be counterbalanced only from the outside.
It would be exclusively American business if US don’t interfere in the business of the others.
American oligarchy uses the radical Islamists and the radical nationalists, as the tools in the struggle against their geopolitical opponents. It doesn’t mean, China and Russia are perfect, but in this confrontation, they are on the side of the good.
Anyway, those who want to preserve their culture, their religion and traditions, are automatically on the side of Russia/China.
Your point being?
This is a shift in narrative — but Democrsts are good at that. Come to think Republicans too.
How many Yemen initiatives we had? For election purposes we shall have a feel good, calls for negotiations, while doing all to help.
Considering the messangers, it is designed to please their narrow voting base, while reminding others that this is not the mainstream. Just a test, a little trial baloon.
Still still a valuable addition to the narrative.
This may have something to fo with SecDef call to SecDef Shougu. And SecDef Wallace flying to Washington, and SecDef Shoigu calls to France, Turkey.
There are multiple possible reasons for the flurry of activities. One, Russia has intelligence on Ukraine sabotage, exploding dirty bomb with radioactive material in Russia controlled territory. Nuclear material presumably coming from UK. And Russia is taking it to UN SC.
Second possible reason, slow down Russia’s offensive in November. Initiate a cesse fire talk. Delay works now in Ukrainian favor. They have time to repair infrastructure damage. bting in trained people.
Third and related reason is feeling out a ceasefitre talk, As Ambassador Matlock warned, Europe is in recession with imflation running high. And invreasingly bitter, blaming US, This was meant to be a half-hearted Russian intervention to prevent Donbas from being overrun by Ukrainian troups that were built up on the border. And to satisfy Russian right wingers putting pressure on government.
This is a gross miscalculation on the part of US and NATO. They discounted the public opinion in Rusdia assuming there is no such thing.
For years they watched death squads operating against Russian populatiin with impunity. Imprissoned in famous “reason” charges, losing businesses to nationalization, and jobs in teaching, media, givernment.
Prohibitted parties, and all Russian language media, For a country that was multi-national and multi-lingual for centuries, this persecution shocked Russian public opinion. Putin is very conservative and does not act without a wide and deep oublic support,
As Russia is getting ready to notch up so far rather low key intervention — the two prong strategy is at work. Slow Russia down, and examine the status of yet another spectacular act of barbarism — in the light of possible participant exposure.
And Scholtz is going to China. The shocked Minister of Economy, the Greens appointee is furious, But hundreds of businesses have supported the trip. Germans are tired iof Greens already. Do not fancy themselves eating grass.
Really disappointed in the cynicism I see among some of the regulars, who seem to under the impression that criticizing the Biden WH in any way shape or form with Nancy at the helm, is risk free.
I for one welcome their attempt to communicate something aside from the War War War chants that fill the country with nauseating BS every hour of every day.
Some of you seem to be under the impression that the squad should commit political suicide to do what? Make us feel better? Remember, they’re the crowd who won’t be ancient when the global warming genie craps on their children.
Y’all have a nice day.
Remember when AOC said it was more imperative to fight for things that were important even if it made you only a one term politician than to go along to get along and accomplish nothing?
Yeah . that .was .abandoned .for . theater.
Unfortunately, the House has been rendered moot when it comes to making war. Your mileage may differ, but I salute them for at least trying to make the point.
The rapidity with which they caved is ample evidence of the weight of the MIC in Washington.
I myself no longer consider this to be my government in any sensible way one might view it. AFAIC, the WH has gone round the bend. The remainder of the government is moot when it comes to the priorities and pursuits of the Military Industrial Complex.
I can only imagine the frustration of occupying a branch of Congress that has no power relative to the CEO’s of the military manufacturers.
Yeah, it’s like the whole thing has been given over to the CIA and pentagon (and associated defense contractors and plutocrats). It’s their world and we’re just living in it. But the progressives have been swallowed up by it. They are pointless too.
Thirty Progressive House Democrats Urge Biden to Negotiate With Russia
… “as legislators responsible for the expenditure of tens of billions of US taxpayer dollars in military assistance in the conflict, we believe such involvement in this war also creates a responsibility for the United States to seriously explore all possible avenues.”
Although it is too late for the upcoming elections, thirty progressives have begun listening and learning a bit of reality from the distributed intelligence of humanity at large.
Give these elected representatives credit individually yet note that their new position still proves representative democracy is a dysfunctional form of government. Rather than putting flesh in front of the idea that throwing good money after bad is what underlies humanitarian responsibility there are three steps required to prove sincerity.
1. Representatives with any financial association with war industries immediately declare cessation of this crass commercial interference in their free thinking and action.
2. The democratic party and notion of progressivity are both rotten from association with ugly wars that sacrifice innocent lives for geopolitical pursuit of economic gain.
3. Form a new political party and practice modern real democracy by opening popular discussion of its name and evolutionary purpose.
It all makes no sense as long as the main TV resources are owned by the oligarchs. They will give a bit of their money to the politicians (almost all of them have the close connections to the oligarchy anyway). Then they explain through the corporate media that Ukrainian neo-Nazis and the mercenaries from NATO countries are fighting for the democracy and freedom against the evil dictator Putin. That is enough.
You are correct. Now we are required to fix things. What should we do as united in humanity?
We can only pray and expose the lies of Satanists.
Careful. Kiril is a former KGB agent with a friend in the Kremlin. If you expose him, there will likely be a price to pay.
Satanists penetrated in many important institutions, including Catholic Vatican. Sure, there was a lot of them in KGB. However, it is obvious that in KGB they were minority. Otherwise, we could never have such great increase in number of Orthodox churches in Russia immediately after the collapse of the communist regime. Without KGB Russia would go to pieces. Probably you don’t know, border guards also belonged to KGB.
Yes, I read this without the context of the other article where Biden is signing for MORE money and weaponry and they voted FOR that. Now I know they are full of sh it. They are saying things in advance of the midterms that they know will resonate with some because it is politically expedient.
Anyway, yours was an excellent comment.
Thank you. I have given much thought to this since the US tried to send me to Vietnam.
The Russian MOD is disarming NATO, tank by tank, artillery by artillery, air defense by air defense. What they lose in the Ukraine, they lose for the final war. This is what a war of attrition is.
Russia is inflicting a 10:1 kill ratio. And NATO overall has the following equipment losses;
325 Aircraft, 162 helicopters, 2308 UAV’s, 383 Anti Aircraft systems, 5967 tanks inc APC’s, 874 multiple rocket launchers, 3516 rocket launchers and 6709 military automotive equipment.
Disarm and Denazification, not of Ukraine but EU and NATO. Europe will be Denazified, the US can continue to rot in its own pile of Nazi filth.
Not quite correct there are still no Western tanks in Ukraine – and NATO equipment is being used to disarm Russia as-well. You would have picked up on the fact that the Russians have been burning through their tanks at a high rate – now fielding T62’s that is tanks first used in 1961 i.e. older than most of the troops fighting.
So while the Ukrainians are burning through our stocks of anti tank weapons systems they are doing so taking out Russian tanks and there appears to be no new Russian tank designs replacing them. So all in all I think that the people here suggesting that this is an exchange that NATO is happy about are not wrong.
As for the air defense – NATO is not very dependent on these weapons systems, NATO is pretty much geared to gain air supremacy – so relying on their planes to chase the Russians planes from the skies – seeing as the Russians have not even been able to gain air supremacy over a much weaker Ukraine, there is no chance that NATO is concerned by the idea that Ukraine is burning through the stocks of some of the MANPADS or even some of the non man portable systems – as they do not rely upon these systems.
So what is lost in Ukraine is lost in the kind of battle it was produced to be lost in, rather than just gathering dust on shelves.
Your worst post yet, it just shows you are completely ignorant of the war. Sorry their is no polite way to say it. Your summation is that the T62 are in Ukraine because Russia is running out of tanks? That NATO will have air superiority?
Just no where to go in this discussion, your delusion is just to different from reality to even discuss.
Good to know that you have no actual reply – the writing is on the wall, clear for all to read and you do not have any arguments at all.
Maybe tanks are as old fashioned as aircraft carriers?
They always were if not used properly (like the Russians did in 2022).
Disarm and Denazification.
The Nazis are in Russia and in the Wagner group – all the proof you need is to watch state tv (RT): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lkshypC2Rk
Disarm and Denazification.
Yes of Russia – we should all get behind it!
This guy is a TV personality who got fired for saying what he did. Then he apologized profusely. He isn’t the voice of the Kremlin nor a consultant. This is some truly disingenuous propaganda to manufacture consent for more money and war with Russia. Congratulations, you are on par .
Wrong Anton Kraasovski ‘was a presenter and director of Russian-language broadcasting on the Russian state-controlled broadcaster RT from 2020 until his suspension in October 2022‘ so very far from just a TV personality – as a top executive in RT!
was made by RT the official media of Russia, not me – if you have any complaints about the quality or questions about the position of the people appearing on screen take it up with them!
That he was fired for the statement is evidence of one of two things:
1) His bosses (RT is wholly owned by the Kremlin) didn’t like the statement; or
2) His bosses did want the statement out there, and were willing to throw him under the bus to get it out there.
The first option seems more likely. If they wanted an atrocious statement out there and someone to hang for it for plausible deniability, they’d probably have had a disposable guest say it.
As you may recall, early in the war, an RT presenter conducted an impromptu protest against the war on air and was fired (and, IIRC, arrested). Does that mean the Kremlin directed that there be an anti-war protest on air?
I would like to agree, only it seems to be along the general RT line – just one step further out – so I see it as the guy who said what was the general line but in a clearly unacceptable way – did you watch the other video – the Ukrainians are just mentally ill and we should shoot the ones that cannot be ‘changed’ – there were a long line of similar videos – the fault Aton committed was to speak about children (specifically).
I’m not suggesting that Kremlin is behind every word – I can show a line of people saying similar things – Anton went over the line as clearly shown by him being fired, but watch the other video and you will see that the difference between what is met with approval and what is not is in the age group exposed to ‘special’ treatment.
I don’t disagree . There’s a thread of “regrettably, we’re apparently going to be ‘forced’ to subject the Ukrainians to, effectively, genocide and we should get about it instead of just pussyfooting around” running through RT’s general line.
One question I have about that is whether it’s Putin using RT to generate “public pressure” on himself to do what he already wants to do, or if more hard-line elements in the Russian state have enough control over state media to be generating that “public pressure” on him without him liking it very much.
I have to believe that Putin cannot be horrified by what they are putting out – otherwise they would like many of the non compliant oligarchs have jumped from a high window.
Maybe RT has been “acquired” by Rupert Murdoch…
Now that would be funny….
I’ll go with number 2. I’ve heard for too long, too many times, Kremlin propagandists and officials making horrible statements like that because it is an actual sentiment shared by many Russians.
SO WHAT? Where does it say that he is directed by the Kremlin to say these things? I have a problem with the quality, lack of, in your argument. Prove that is is directed by the Kremlin. And if so, why was he fired?
Well nothing much except that all he did was to take a general trend a step too far – if you follow the channel you would know this, but I can perfectly understand if you’d rather not as it can be pretty disturbing to see what you support:
Again, you have no argument and then rely on ad hominem attack. That is a reflection on you and what YOU SUPPORT which is propaganda intended to manufacture consent for more war.
Which is very clearly your aim, since you have said it in multiple comments now. You’re not fooling anyone.
No I showed you that far from being an extreme outlier Anton is just a bit further from the main line of RT. There is no ad hominem attack there – you asked for proof that he was speaking more or less directed by Kremlin – and I provided the best evidence I could possibly have i.e. that his views are in line with the RT main line.
Kind of hard on RT to claim that they are providing propaganda for consent for more war, but I would certainly agree!
No my agenda is to not allow this war to lead to a long line of copy cat wars where Russia and other nations with an appetite for the territory of their neighbors, try to satisfy that appetite. That leads me and a very large part of the world to have the view that Russian annexations cannot be met with approval, but must be met with consequences.
Your agenda is to attack Russia and to try to associate anything distasteful with government policy. To promote more war. You say it in almost every comment. Then you try to turn what people are saying into something you promote. You are trying to manufacture consent for more war. You are acting as a agent of the pentagon as a warmonger whether you are paid or not.
Again, this man was fired. And frankly, I have seen equally offensive things written in comment sections.
“Then you try to turn what people are saying into something you promote. ”
Isn’t that what most people here do, including you?
No according to you that is the agenda of RT – remember I’m just reporting what they have said!
No to prevent more war this one is quite enough thanks.
Well when people are calling for ‘them’ to leave Ukraine like they did Afghanistan – that is pretty much a given that they must mean Russia, as the US is not in Ukraine, but Russia is.
Again no consent for support for the Ukrainians resisting this invasion suffices.
You are acting as an agent for Putin and I should add against what is the best interest of the Russian people.
Sure but then he was only a bit worse than the others (one of which I just linked), moreover if you have problems accepting that RT speaks for Ukraine how on earth can you take the word of anonymous internet commenters as evidence for the official line of any western administration?
I have not said anything in support of Putin. See how dishonest you are. You are trying to manufacture consent for more war.
So claiming that RT does not speak for Putin when they say as bad things as they did in the two clips I just linked does not count as saying anything in support of Putin? That is a rather remarkable lack of self awareness there!
I said that I have not said anything in support of Putin, it’s right up there in my comment. What other distractive non-sequitur would you like to embrace while manufacturing consent for more war?
Saying nothing in support of Putin also involves not saying that Putin is absolutely not behind the vile line that RT displays daily – so absolving Putin of this is saying something in support of Putin.
I don’t watch RT daily. You do because your job demands it in manufacturing consent for more war. I watched good people like Chris Hedges on RT. He wasn’t a warmonger (like you) nor a Putin supporter.
No but apparently you read every comment here to find suggestions that you think as bad as what the RT line suggests – and still you claim that you do not say anything in support of Putin!
No I rely on others to do most of the work.
By all means then link some of the good stuff so we may judge if they also put out more sane material. I make no secret about my dislike for what Putin has done in Ukraine and Georgia. All I do is to show you what they ‘also’ say and how that betrays that at the very least Putin is not utterly revolted by that very concerning line!
Hedges’ episodes were deleted by censors. He’s strictly on youtube now. You can use your little search engine. I don’t read every comment here. Nor did I say I read every comment here. You really like to make up sh it.
If you cant link the content you think is excellent or proves your point I’m not going to do your work for you!
And for the record I did not say that you claimed to read every comment, just that you must have seeing as you claim to have seen comment as bad as what is said on RT.
At best you can speak to your interpretations of what people and organizations do, assuming you are not responsible for what they say and do. What more do you have to offer?
Your views – as expressed – of Russia in this conflict say everything.
In the videos the people are clearly stating, no double speak, what they think – there is no subtext interpreted by me I merely present what they say if you cannot understand plain text then that is on you.
There is more than one way to interpret this incident. You have yours together with whatever assumptions underly it. In truth you have AFAICT no other way to support your interpretation.
I’m by no means restricting myself to this one video, was it only one video I’d happily admit that it was rather a weak case, but as it happens it is just one in a long series of clips from RT where they speak candidly about killing Ukrainians who fail to embrace the way they are supposed to think and commit war crimes to win this conflict.
I make no assumptions it is all there in plain speak.
If he was fired for making the statement, we have no recourse except to assume his comment was strongly disapproved.
It would not surprise me to find out that he was fired with Putin’s approval, as Putin’s approach so far has highlighted minimizing blanket negative statements about Ukrainians. I’ve not seen any statements from Putin endorsing punishment of the Ukrainian people per se.
Yes indeed he was – but none of the others who said basically the same thing, i.e. that the Ukrainians who were not willing to embrace their Russian future should be killed (they did not specify kids though).
It is Russian state TV so the mere fact that Putin has not intervened to stop this is evidence that he at the very least condones this – you will find that you also cannot find any proof that A.H. endorsed what his henchmen were doing or proposing to do.
Yes, you’re right it wasn’t ad hominem but rather strawmen arguments you have been engaged in. Thank you for the correction:
Are you sure? If so you should have no problem showing at what point did I establish a strawman!
I don’t support that TV Personality or Putin I have said this multiple times, now I’m done.
I have not said that you supported ‘that’ TV personality (i.e. the RT top executive) but I have said that you by saying that he is not in anyway representative of the Kremlin line are excusing Putin seeing as you refuse to see that what ‘that’ Personality said was just slightly harsher than what the other TV personality say on RT which is Russian state TV.
That is not a strawman nor is it twisting what you have said – you really should learn what the different debate concepts are and how they are used, and probably read what people write before you accuse them of twisting your words or strawmaning your arguments.
You said this is what I support which I did not. You really should stop lying and trying to manufacture consent for more war.
So I did, and as it happens that is what you appear to do, as I pointed out Anton is only marginally worse than RT in general and you trying to distance the Kremlin (Putin) from what is being said by Anton thus is a feeble attempt at finding excuses for Putin.
Seeing as RT is government funded there is a very low chance that their general line is not at the very least condoned by Putin and thus you are ‘supporting’ this by trying to claim that this was just an anomaly and that the Personality spoke out of line and the problem has been solved by him being on administrative leave.
It is the general drift of RT and they are the channel that Kremlin controls – trying to distance Putin from this in that feeble manner is supporting their general line (though not the specific one of Anton, who apparently wants to kill even the children), if you fail to see this then I guess it can only be because your are blinded by your resentment of some other party in this war.
The only thing funnier than people who accuse you of every possible logical fallacy when they don’t like the results of your argument are the people who don’t get their logical fallacies right.
Where was his ad hominem attack?
This is YOU NOT LIKING what others that disagree with you write on this blog.
Really? Prove it.
Yes, read your own comments and responses to Michael64.
That person twisted everything I said.
As a liberal democrat – well as a liberal, the democratic party has sold out way too much – I am pleased that this way too little way to late activity is happening.
On the other hand, I read comments here that standard democratic sites are roasting these 30 people, and I am impressed that the 30 are holding their ground.
The sites that lean to the left that I rarely visit anymore have become cesspools of anti-Russian hatred. Democrats across the nation have made it clear that their number 1 priority, above all else, is to destroy the orcs, as in sub-humans, that call themselves Russians and dare to call themselves human. They are willing to sacrifice the US if that is what it takes to kill off a few more orcs. They have contests it seems for who can come up with the most intensely insulting anti-Russia commentary.
On a side note – that “pro-green energy” bill that Biden gleefully took credit for? It seems to have sections in it mandating that going forward, all future green energy production must be made only in the US. As a result, apparently Ford (GM? one or the other) will be substantially increasing it’s prices on electric vehicles in the future, and two Asian car companies said NO to the idea of building electric vehicle factories in the US. It’s hard to know if this is fake news or not, but it would not surprise me at all to find out that the democratic party 100% voted for a bill that guaranteed that fossil fuels remain the energy source for the US for quite a few more years.
Liberalism is completely dead in the US. If there IS to be any opposition to the war, it will have to come from the right. And someone like myself who believes in the necessity of socialism being integrated into our economy will have to be mostly quiet and pick my battles.
The battle to reduce carbon emissions is lost. Hopefully the climate change scientists are wrong. But maybe over time we can start to reduce US support for the total hatred of not only Russia, but of anything even remotely Russian. We are losing that battle as well.
As a certified “lesser of 2 evils” voter, the Biden regime foreign policy has been a disappointment. Then again, I knew very well he was a warmonger going in. The dems have a mixed voting record in foreign policy, opposed by the all war all day right. Good luck on getting a consistent antiwar faction from the gop. Ironically, Justin Raimondo’s goal for this fine site was to encourage an antiwar faction within the right, a fine, tho in the end, impossible dream. The post McGovern dem move was predictable in this militant society. A liberal dem party got hammered by Reagan and religious culture warriors. If they hadn’t moved right, the gop would have been the sole operable ruling party ever since.
Now, the green energy investment is necessary, despite the climate denialism on the right. Getting the power grid to sustainable economy is far more important than who makes the electric cars. Any bill that moves in that direction is superior to any head in the sand, hand in the fossil fuel pocket the gop has to offer. It took the US to go from horses to traffic jams a scant 60 years of government and private sector investments.
Biden is not “the democrats” like trump is “the republicans”. That is a big difference.
I’m not a libertarian but I think this is unfair and not accurate. There is an antiwar faction within the right (the paleos–not antiwar on principle but anti the forever wars of today), and libertarians of all stripes have been on the streets alongside the left in every major mobilization. As I said, I’m on the left but I can’t airbrush the libertarians who stood beside me in demos from the Vietnam war to Iraq to now out of the picture.
True on the libertarians. I should correct myself tho, Justin’s mission statement, which I believe has been removed or changed was not establishing a faction on the “right”, but within the gop. That, has not occurred. I don’t lump all libertarians as “the right”, anyway.
Well I do think there’s a small faction in the GOP that is somewhat resistant to the forever wars. Trump, the head of the GOP, has also made clear that he is sympathetic to that line. I could certainly imagine Trump and Biden or whoever having a knock down fight over Ukraine-Russia during the campaign.
“Trump, the head of the GOP, has also made clear that he is sympathetic to that line.”
When Trump is in the same room with that faction, sure. Otherwise, he concentrates on what’s most important and that is who has undying loyalty towards him and who doesn’t. Nothing else. But his contrarian position towards anything Biden might work with Ukraine but if it makes the Don unpopular, it would be short lived.
“made clear he is sympathetic” I go by what is done, not said. All pols say they want wars to end, they kinda have to, to not appear to be a bloody psychotic. Then the votes come, and, the actual decisions. trump has never come out against arming Ukraine, In fact, he has bragged about arming them himself. He is just calling for diplomacy like many of the others.
Talky talk is better than warry war.
This is the speech you will hear over and over in your future, if we’re still alive that is. I might also point out that he will attract a slice of anti-war working class votes from those abandoned by the Democratic Party on the war issue. Actually. Nixon did this.
One thing is for sure … if biden had stayed out of the war, trump would be criticizing him for not going all in. Call him “chicken joe” or something stupider. Weighing trumps words ?
Deconstruct all you want. Trump is going to scoop up the antiwar vote. Watch and learn.
Yup, he will scoop up all 14 paleo-conservatives
No, they may vote against him for ideological reasons and certainly won’t vote for Biden. But a working class family in Pennsylvania may vote for him because there’s less of a chance Trump will send their son or daughter into some forever war meat grinder or blow us all up in a nuclear holocaust like Biden and his band of Dr. Strangeloves.
Clean, clear and concise and more importantly: highly accurate.
P.S. I’d vote for ya!
Though I would add, being ‘quiet’ is not a good option, exactly the opposite it true. It is precisely at such times, as you have described, to raise your voice loudly and be heard or read…
Finally. The first time “progressives” have done anything at all to even slow down the forced march to catastrophe.
“The lawmakers said in the letter that they agree with the administration’s position that it’s not the US’s “place” to pressure Ukraine’s government.”
I will remember to tell my bank that whenever they demand payment on my $67 billion “loan”.
lol Hey WRU, can you spare a dime?…
I’ll have to owe it to you. I’m paying off my loan at the same pace as Ukraine will be paying back theirs.
“We’re not going to have conversations with Russian leadership without the Ukrainians being represented.”
The United States held discussions about the future of Syria without the Syrians being represented.
Because Syrian government doesn’t take orders from Washington. Ukrainian government does.
Very good article on the madmen in the military-industrial-intelligence state apparatus by Chris Hedges. People don’t realize they’re living in a doomsday movie. Their idea of doing something is to watch Don’t Look Up, a movie I liked, but hey folks.
They withdrew it. And blamed their staff for publishing it in the first place. There are no adequate words in the English language to describe this craven opportunists.
I suspect that the Speaker had a conversation with them. Nancy’s attitude toward the Russia-Ukraine fiasco is not a secret.
I’m sure that’s true. But I’m also sure they knew her position before they released that letter. They are craven cowards who lack either courage or convictions.
I understand your point but respectfully disagree. This was no battle to die for. All anyone can do is speak out. The notion or the implication that in the US people have some kind of power to change policy set in the halls of power, or that the House and Senate are anything more than rubber stamps in this proxy war is incorrect from my POV.
Years ago, our astute Mark Thomason quickly threw cold water on my initial naïve enthusiasm when news broke out that a politician was considering an antiwar approach. He coined it, “it’s like Obama floating a trial balloon.” It turns out, politicians do this when they want to buy goodwill from the voters for cheap. In this case, all it cost is to publicize a letter urging for someone to consider an antiwar approach–worthless deception.
My viewpoint is rather practical: TALKING is far better than the prospects of NUCLEAR ARMAGEDDON! HAVE A NICE DAY!
But lip service is never a proper substitute for action.
Comments are closed.