NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg on Thursday said that only Ukraine can decide when to enter peace talks to end the war with Russia and vowed the alliance’s support for an open-ended conflict.
“It is the Ukrainians, and only the Ukrainians, who can decide when there are conditions in place for negotiations and who can decide at the negotiating table what is an acceptable solution,” Stoltenberg said.
His comments came after his chief of staff, Stian Jenssen, drew a backlash for suggesting on Tuesday that Ukraine could cede territory to Russia in exchange for NATO membership, an idea both Ukrainian and Russian officials scoffed at. Jenssen appeared to walk back his comments on Wednesday, saying he made a “mistake.”
Stoltenberg said that the only path to a settlement is “to support Ukraine militarily. If you want a lasting, just peace, then military support for Ukraine is the way to get there. There is no doubt about that.” The NATO chief has made similar comments throughout the war and previously said sending more weapons is the quickest path toward peace.
But Ukrainian officials are demanding a full Russian withdrawal before negotiations can happen, which is a non-starter for talks with Moscow. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appear ready to keep their forces fighting as long as they have support from the US and NATO despite the fact that the Ukrainian counteroffensive has been failing.
Soon the Ukrainian army will collapse and there will be nobody to negotiate with.
And NATO and EU will go under with Ukraine and with it the hegemon from DC.
“If you want a lasting, just peace, then military support for Ukraine is the way to get there.”
war is peace, for Nato. always
War is peace, black is white, up is down, ….
George Orwell could not have envisioned that it would be this bad.
Yes, only Ukraine can decide whether to negotiate. But only US/NATO can decide whether to keep sending arms and ammunition. Let’s stop the flow of war machinery and let the Ukrainians decide for themselves what they want to do next.
Not a cat in hell`s chance as long as there is money to be made by the US MIC.
Oh yeah, so Putin goes in and takes it all.
If Ukraine said they’d cede territory, Putin would move on his demands. They’d be negotiating tomorrow. More weapons just prolong things.
Show me a single statement or article reliably attributed to Putin in which he states that Russia’s goal is the subjugation of Ukraine. And remember, I said reliably, which means an official statement coming out of the Russian government, not BBC or CNN, or Don Julio.
“Show me a single statement or article reliably attributed to Putin in which he states that Russia’s goal is the subjugation of Ukraine”
At approximately 20:35:
What a great and truthful speech by Putin! He stated the facts that led to his decision to embark on the SMO which is to “DeNazify and Demilitarize” Ukraine which was being built up by NATO and the U.S. to be a battering ram against Russia. Prior to U.S. machinations in Ukraine, Russia wanted a peaceful relationship with Ukraine, but the U.S. said, “NO WAY!”
“DeNazification” and “Demilitarization” entails regime change.
And calling a war a “SMO” doesn’t magically make it into a non-war.
It kinda does. The regime change occurred in ’14, when Washington and its Nazi puppet took over. Putin has sedulously refrained from the all out attacks on government and infrastructure that would be SOP in war, because he knows that the Ukra-Nazi regime is just a stand-in. He doesn’t want war, i.e., to directly attack the enemy, Washington. So it is precisely described as “special”. Preference for the colloquial usage is lazy and contributes to the specious Washington construction.
Obama/Biden/Nuland organized the regime change which created the problem.
The CIA paid the people to demonstrate, some were paid more than they earned in a month.
Stop twisting the facts.
I’m not sure which “facts” you think I’m “twisting.”
I was against the 2014 coup. I was against Ukraine attempting to forcibly hold on to the Donbas. A day or two before the war, I wrote a column noting that the “Munich” comparisons were right — but that NATO was playing the role of the Third Reich, expecting Putin to be a good Neville Chamberlain, and that he was unlikely to accept that role.
I am against any and all US/EU/NATO interference in the matter.
That doesn’t mean that I have to pretend the known facts aren’t facts because they’re inconvenient to your narrative.
My narrative is all about stopping the slaughter of the Ukrainian people, I support the people and that means peace, the only way to benefit the people is peace. It is Biden’s war, he does not see it my way. US/EU/NATO are not just interfering, the truth is that US under Bush started to push for NATO membership and every president with the exception of Trump continued the policy. The biolabs are allegations, we don’t know for sure, the real problem is that we can’t believe the government when they say it is not true.
The existence of US biolabs was publicly confirmed by Victoria Nuland in testimony before Congress.
What’s at issue is whether those biolabs were weapons biolabs — an accusation that’s been made many times, but that I have yet to come across so much as a crumb of evidence for.
I agree that the US/EU/NATO were doing everything they could to bait Russia into doing something stupid. And it worked.
We can’t believe ANY government when they say something is true or not true.
For example, when the Kremlin repeatedly denied that it planned to invade Ukraine, right up to the moment that it invaded Ukraine.
“Ukraine has biological research facilities which, in fact, we are now quite concerned Russian troops, Russian forces, may be seeking to gain control of,” she responded. “So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach.”
So, if these were just innocent bio-labs, why was Nuland so concerned that Russia might gain control of them?
Define “innocent biolab.”
A biolab can work with incredibly dangerous pathogens. It does not automagically follow that its work with dangerous pathogens is weapons development work. And anyone working with, say, smallpox would be concerned that troops might come stomping in and either turn shit loose or send it back home FOR weapons development.
There is no reason for there to have bio labs with dangerous pathogens to be operating in Ukraine. In addition, officially there are no bls 4 labs in Ukraine and only one bls 3 lab in Ukraine. Those labs are the only ones to have the dangerous pathogens you refer to. That bls 3 lab is in Odessa Not under Russian threat. So…. what exactly was Nuland so concerned about?
Likewise your argument that Russia might have absconded with pathogens to use in bio warfare research back in Russia is ridiculous. The Soviets had advanced bio weapons. Russia dismantled that effort in the 1990’s.
Likewise, the claims others have made that the Ukrainian government owned and operated these labs is meaningless. These were largely funded by DTRA a Pentagon agency with its origins in the Manhattan project. Its predecessors were tasked with both development of weapons technologies and defense against such technologies. These technologies included bio weapons.
Again, what was Nuland so concerned about if these bio labs were, at most, bls 2 or, under? In other words, NOT dealing with dangerous pathogens? Something doesn’t add up.
Why keep it so secret if they are doing no wrong?
Since they are pathological liars how can you believe a word they say?
I agree. All regimes and spokespersons for regimes are pathological liars.
Nuland is a real mental case, her Russophobia controls her, she is a liar, a person involved in wars going back more than 30 years. She has left a neocon trail of war crimes of blood, death, terror, and ruins behind, and Biden promoted her for that.
The Kremlin did not plane to invade Ukraine, they said they would protect their borders if Ukraine would station NATO weapons, including American nuclear weapons on their border, they would have no choice to act militarily. USA/NATO Ukrainians refused to provide that assurance in return for a neutral Ukraine like the Austrian neutrality. The de facto NATO member Ukraine chose war instead. Now they pay for it. They pay the price for trusting Biden.
The facts are, after the 2014 Obama/Biden regime change started the arming and training and funding of the Ukrainian Army and NATO exercises in Ukraine. Ukraine became a DE FACTO NATO MEMBER.
The Kremlin spent months massing troops on the border (while complaining that the Ukrainians matching their massing of troops was a “provocation”). The invasion force didn’t just happen to be honyocking around the area. There was a plan. It may have been a CONTINGENCY plan, but there’s absolutely no doubt that there was a plan, and had been since no later than October of 2021 and quite likely earlier.
You have to pretend nothing, but if you were opposed to this why don’t you try to justify the neocons? Why don’t you question our leadership why we are there?
Is there anything Putin said that was false or in any way aggressive.
He spoke of the people and the existential threat to their motherland, nothing about abstract freedom and democracy but the sacrifices the nation made in the last war, no propaganda slogans like hip, hip hurrah which we would hear in the states. Is the US border threatened by Russia or not?
Which known facts are not facts anyway?
WMDs were known facts, all our politicians claimed Iraq had them without any evidence.
Now they know for sure that Ukraine is a democracy and they are winning the war as long as NATO delivers the weapons.
“if you were opposed to this why you try to justify the neocons?”
The next time I try to justify the neocons will be the first time I try to justify the neocons. And there’s not going to be a first time.
“Why don’t you question our leadership why we are there?”
I don’t have to question your leadership to know why they are there. They are there to justify feeding taxpayer funds into the maw of the military-industrial complex. That’s been the chief function of the US government since World War II.
“Is there anything Putin said that was false or in any way aggressive.”
Well, personally I thought that when he threatened regime change (“deNazification and demilitarization”) in Ukraine, he was lying, that his objectives were actually more limited (securing the Donbas and a land corridor to Crimea) and that he was just trying to bluff Ukraine into folding. And I still think that. If his army hadn’t turned out to be a paper tiger that hasn’t even been able to secure the Donbas after 18 months, he wouldn’t still be at this.
“WMDs were known facts, all our politicians claimed Iraq had them without any evidence.”
Yep. Just like pro-war Russia shills claim Ukraine was hosting biological warfare facilities without any evidence.
Anyone who pays attention knows that Ukraine is not a democracy, at least at the moment. And they aren’t winning the war. But they aren’t losing it, either.
Mr. T, perhaps by “de-militarization” Mr. Putin was referring to efforts to keep Ukraine from becoming a NATO member, which would certainly result in “ militarization” possibly even the acquisition of nuclear weapons.
Yes, I suppose it’s possible that words don’t mean things.
But I generally operate on the supposition that they do.
There is no better explanation for the secrecy of existence of the biolabs in Ukraine.
You did not really listen to what he said.
“DeNazification” and “Demilitarization” entails regime change.”……… Interesting. So you accept that the Kiev regime is a Nazi regime.
I don’t know whether “Nazi regime” is an accurate description. Nazi-influenced, absolutely. Given to trying to keep the Nazis happy for fear of assassinations, etc., quite likely.
But it doesn’t matter whether I accept that the Kyiv regime is a Nazi regime. The Russian line was that it was a Nazi regime, and that that was why it had to invade to “de-Nazify” the country, i.e. change the regime.
Regime change would involve assassinating Zelensky. Putin promised Naftali Bennett that he would not assassinate Zelensky. Remember?
“Regime change would involve assassinating Zelensky”
Well, that clears things up, but I find it hard to believe you’d admit the US wasn’t behind any regime change in Ukraine in 2014. After all, Yanukovych is still alive, so obviously no regime change took place, right?
i give you the last word.
Zelensky needs to be on guard against the Azov people.
The US sent 248,000 soldiers to launch the Iraq War and that was preceded by a massive bombing campaign. And still couldn’t govern the country. Russia entered a larger country with a more formidable military with just over 100,000. There was no intent to take the entirety of Ukraine.
I agree. That’s one reason why I assumed Putin was lying when he said that was what he planned to do, and that his real objectives were more limited.
Unfortunately for just about everyone, he got his ass spanked, his military power outed as third-rate, and his regime dragged into a damaging quagmire even with respect to the more limited goals.
If you believe this to be true than you have to trust Biden.
But you pretend to sit on the fence and you don’t know on which side you should jump down on.
“If you believe this to be true than you have to trust Biden.”
Non sequitur.
“But you pretend to sit on the fence and you don’t know on which side you should jump down on”
On the contrary. I’m 100% both feet on the ground in favor of peace, rather than trying to justify the warmongering of either of the gangs of sociopathic warmongers.
You’ve chosen a gang of sociopathic warmongers to support and it just bugs the hell out of you that not everyone drinks your preferred brand of Kool Aid.
The bombing campaign included the bombing of the annihilation of the RETREATING Iraqi troops INSIDE Iraq by Bush Sn. A war crime, that is why Bush/Cheney thought the invasion of Iraq would be a cakewalk.
In what universe is bombing “retreating” troops a “war crime?”
You’re presumably talking about the “Highway of Death” or “Highway to Hell.”
Those troops had not surrendered, remained organized in units, and continued to bear arms. The destroyed vehicles included tanks and APCs.
If a Ukrainian unit attempts to retreat westward from Donetsk while still militarily organized, armed troops driving tanks and APCs, do you think for a hot minute that Russian artillery, rocketry and aircraft won’t be used to destroy that column?
You don’t know because we never deal with such subjects.
The Iraqi troops were retreating the war had ended, they were inside Iraq when the Americans bombed them on their way home , the war had ended and they were on the way home.
If anyone had done that to American soldiers we would never hear the end of it, shame on you to not even understand the war crime after the war.
This nation has never been held accountable for the war crimes they committed. I could tell you about similar incidents I know of at the end of the second WW.
Yes, the Iraqi troops were retreating — in an organized manner, bearing arms, more than 24 hours before the ceasefire. They were conducting an expressly military activity during a war. While the attack on them was ugly, it was only a “war crime” in the sense that war is a crime. And it is very much a crime.
You can’t deal with it, can you, they were retreating, they were inside Iraq, they did not fire back it was a typical from the air American style massacre killing defenseless young soldiers on their way home.
” it was only a “war crime” in the sense that war is a crime.”
By that logic there are no such things as war crimes, at least not when Americans do it. They had not surrendered, they were retreating and inside their own country the war was over.
I could tell you about bombing civilians until the very last minute on the western border in Germany when the troops were already in Berlin in the East just 3 days before armistice, my family lost good friends, The mother and her twins were killed, the house and the store was destroyed while the husband was still a POW, he had nothing when he came home. There was no military target, they bombed bombed and killed because they could. They massacred the Iraqi soldiers because they could, for no other reason. There is no excuse for that. The pilots followed really illegal orders, after the Nurnberg trials they are war criminals. Even 18 year old draftees must refuse unlawful orders.
American presidents are criminal.
The attacks were unnecessary, there was no military justification for that kind of massacre, stop making excuses for war crimes.
I never said the attacks were necessary.
I just pointed out that they weren’t war crimes.
Armed military units maneuvering during a war are “legitimate” targets. That’s just a fact.
Did US troops commit war crimes during that war? Absolutely. I committed at least one myself (and have publicly offered to surrender, plead guilty, and accept sentence if ever charged).
They did not maneuver anywhere near a frontline or any military activity. The troops were RETREATING and there was no military justification for the massacre, they were not near any front outside their country. You can twist it any way you want, it is a war crime, they were massacred because the AAF could kill them without risking one American life and for no other reason. There is no justification, no excuse for the killing of these young people, NONE.
With all the killing in a war, they made no effort to spare lives, not to waste lives, and in Ukraine it is happening again, they are knowingly wasting thousands of lives for no good reason. All the young lives wasted for nothing, where is your sense of moral? I well remember the wailing after 9/11, for years and years hardly a day went by without whining about the loss of life in the WTC. I can understand the pain for the loss of life families suffer, but I also understand the pain for the life lost in Iraq. These young people killed had families and loved ones too. They were killed by professional killers for nothing.
Yes, the troops were RETREATING — in an armed, organized manner and for military purposes.
There’s no need to “twist” something that wasn’t anything resembling a war crime to make it not anything resembling a war crime.
Do you think the Russians don’t attack retreating Ukrainian columns when they have an opportunity, or vice versa?
He should have called it a humanitarian mission like the US does. That makes everything okay.
The nation’s presidents are waging never-ending wars for decades without any consultation or debate or war declaration without any consent of congress.
They always invent slogans and names and obfuscate.
Biden ordered the sabotage of the German LG pipeline, an ACT of WAR against an ALLY of all things and not one elected official or one voice of critic in MSM.
Democracy has become a joke.
Can anyone imagine such a thoughtful speech coming from a President Biden or President Trump or Bush? I can’t imagine, all we get is bumper sticker campaign talk, even the once a year state of the union does not rise above campaign babble and how great they are.
I gave Thomas a thumbs-up for posting the speech. What a statesman the Russian people have as a leader! Compare this to the bumbling, empty- headed ByeDone who can’t even read a teleprompter or probably tie his own shoes, for that matter. And concludes his speeches by doing face-plants over a sandbag.
It reminds me of two other speeches: George W. Bush’s speech on Wednesday, March 19th, 2003, and Adolf Hitler’s speech on Friday, September 1, 1939.
Nothing Putin said was aggressive, no propaganda, he was honest with the Russian people, and he said what he felt and believes.
Yes, just like nothing Bush or Hitler said was aggressive or propagandistic. “Everything I’m about to do is someone else’s fault, and won’t someone PLEASE think of the CHILLLLLLLLLLLDREN?”
Oh YEAH!..
Too funny. “Only the Ukrainians can decide when to negotiate”, unless of course they DO decide to negotiate, in which case the US and their UK lickspittles will do everything possible to prevent them from negotiating, Again.
Zelensky the cocaine addict and porn piano player will do whatever his masters in Washington tell him to do.
If it`s up to Zelenskiy to choose when peace talks begin , how come Biden / Boris stopped him 12 months ago when he could have got a face saving deal from Putin and NS2 would still be intact ? , the fact is there will be no peace talks until Zelenskiy gets the memo from Washington .
“how come Biden / Boris stopped him 12 months ago when he could have got a face saving deal from Putin”
Would that be the deal that Lavrov publicly rejected the day before Boris arrived?
Can you supply his statement regarding the inadequacies of the agreement? I haven’t seen it.
It only confirms the dishonor of the Zelensky/Biden/Boris men.
Do you know the meaning of honest and in good faith? To change the agreed on draft and claim the other side did it, is as dishonest as it gets. Shameful, Zelensky has no honor at all and neither has Boris or Joe.
You seem to not understand how negotiations work.
Have you ever worked as a union member? When it’s contract negotiation time, the union and the company send negotiators. They try to reach an agreement. When they think they have, the union takes the DRAFT agreement to its members for ratification or rejection, and the company negotiators take it to the board or CEO for approval or rejection. If either side rejects the DRAFT, then there is no agreement.
Same thing with the Ankara negotiations. Lavrov and Kuleba and their respective negotiation teams hammered out a draft. Lavrov took the draft to Putin for approval, rejection, or change demands. Kubela took the draft to Zelenskyy for approval, rejection, or change demands. Neither of those two had the power to make a binding agreement. They were underlings.
Zelenskyy had change demands. Lavrov, presumably on Putin’s instructions, announced the rejection of those change demands.
That doesn’t, in and of itself, indicate “bad faith” on the part of Lavrov, Kuleba, Zelenskyy, or Putin. It simply means that an agreement was not reached that both Zelenskyy and Putin were willing to sign off on.
Is it likely that Zelenskyy’s change demands were prompted by western pressure? Of course it was. But pretending that an agreement had been reached is dishonest. Negotiators had taken a DRAFT back to their principals. In order for an agreement to have been reached, those principals had to sign off on it. They didn’t.
What ever, both sides start negotiation with maximal demands, but they have to be rational. they do not start with the impossible, it signals that the party does not want to negotiate.
You know that as well as I do. Zelensky only showed what a dishonest idiot he really is. He gets richer with every day the war goes on.
If you’re suggesting that Ukraine would be better off today if Zelenskyy had accepted the draft that negotiators agreed on in Ankara, you may well be right.
On the other hand, the big change that Lavrov publicly stated was unacceptable (in the Chinese state media video I linked to earlier) was that Zelenskyy declined to give Moscow complete veto power over all Ukrainian military activities.
One way of looking at whether a draft is a good deal is by asking if the other side would accept it if the conditions were reversed.
Do you think for a millisecond that Vladimir Putin would give Volodomyr Zelenskyy complete veto power over all Russian military activities?
Negotiations involve give and take, Mr. T. And they weren’t given a snowball’s chance in hell.
Yes, negotiations absolutely involve give and take. And neither side was prepared to be reasonable — Ukraine because it was under US/EU/NATO pressure to not be reasonable.
He still could have gotten a deal. Boris stopped any future negotiations saying the West wasn’t willing to deal with Putin yet. And Lavrov accused “the West of trying to derail the peace talks, claiming that Ukraine had gone back on previously agreed proposals” as to why Russia rejected the deal.
Did I ever say otherwise?
The fact is that they didn’t have a deal when Boris arrived. Lavrov had rejected the latest draft. Then Johnson arrived and leaned on Zelenskyy to stop negotiating.
Then disregard the part what I said about Johnson. I’ll still point out Lavrov’s reason for rejecting the deal and that if the deal hadn’t been fucked with by the West, at least according to him, there would have been no rejection from the Russian side.
This is how negotiations worked:
– The two sides sent negotiators to (IIRC) Ankara.
– The two sides agreed on drafts.
– The two sides took those drafts back to the regimes which sent them.
– The regimes accepted, rejected, or modified the drafts
In this particular case, the Ukrainian regime modified the Ankara draft, and the Russian regime rejected the modifications.
No biggie.
If you’re suggesting that western pressure was behind the Ukrainian modifications, so as to guarantee rejection, I agree that that’s about a thousand percent likely.
But the idea that the regimes had “reached an agreement” before Johnson arrived to deliver direct pressure is just flat BS. Kyiv rejected the draft the negotiators brought back from Ankara, and Moscow rejected Kyiv’s modifications to that draft, before Johnson arrived. Any pressure he exerted was not to nix a deal that had been reached, but rather to put an end to attempts to reach a deal at all.
If anything is at all surprising, it’s that Kyiv’s negotiators seemed to have agreed to a draft that would have given Moscow veto power over large portions of Kyiv’s future internal policies and activities — basically perpetual occupation without the bother of having to keep troops on site, fraudulently described as “neutrality.”
They had a draft of a possible agreement.
I repeat, look at the link, read it.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/05/06/boris-johnson-pressured-zelenskyy-ditch-peace-talks-russia-ukrainian-paper
Did I say there was an agreement reached?
And I would like to see the complete draft before I would believe that Putin would have had veto power over large portions of Ukraine’s military.
That was Lavrov’s publicly voiced objection to the Ukrainian draft. Russia’s position was that Ukraine would have to receive the permission of all guarantor states, including Russia, before holding military exercises. The Ukrainian draft’s position was that it would only need the permission of a majority of the guarantor states.
Can’t say as I blame Russia on that. Those constant war games were just flat out blatant. I don’t know who the other guarantor states are, but I would imagine Russia would be in the minority as far as friendlies go.
I don’t “blame” Russia on that either.
But they were no more likely to get Ukraine to agree to it than Ukraine was likely to get Russia to give Ukraine veto power over its military exercises.
The US (including their Ukraine satrapy) and Russian versions of “negotiation” remain the same at this point. Each side is perfectly happy with a draft that gives them everything they want and costs them nothing; neither will accept a draft that costs them anything or doesn’t include everything they want. And that’s going to remain true until one side or the other finds itself in a spot where continuing the conflict starts presenting extreme domestic political or economic difficulties.
I confused as to what you think Zelensky originally agreed to. Here was his statement on March 28th:
President Zelensky publicly declares that Ukraine is ready for neutrality combined with security guarantees as part of a peace agreement with Russia. “Security guarantees and neutrality, the non-nuclear status of our state — we’re ready to do that. That’s the most important point … they started the war because of it.”
Was it Russia that added things after the original draft had been agreed to? Doubtful. So, I can only assume that Zelensky was indeed willing to agree to some type of Russian veto authority over Ukraine’s military exercises in the original draft.
What in his statement makes you think that he was willing to agree to something he doesn’t mention in his statement?
I said I assumed. I thought maybe he realized that Russia wasn’t going to rely on a mere promise that Ukraine remains “neutral”. So, why talk about something if he knew Russia wouldn’t move on that issue? Again, it was an assumption on my part.
Zelensky walked out, after the draft had been initialed. Lavrov had rejected nothing, he had initialed the draft and never broke it.
Russians keep their word, Americans don’t.
So you’re calling Lavrov a liar? Interesting.
Zelenskyy didn’t “walk out,” because Zelenskyy wasn’t there. Ukraine’s top negotiator in Ankara was Dmytro Kuleba, Lavrov’s foreign minister counterpart.
And a draft is exactly that, a draft. It still had to be approved or modified by Zelenskyy and Putin. Zelenskyy modified it. Lavrov (presumably after consultation with Putin) rejected the modifications.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/05/06/boris-johnson-pressured-zelenskyy-ditch-peace-talks-russia-ukrainian-paper
Take your time and read it.
Zelensky walked away and voided the draft, no further negotiations, basta.
They already had initialed the draft, so what are you talking about? The Ukrainians voted for peace not NATO in case you don’t know.
There was nothing to reject for Lavrov, Zelensky walked out after Boris arrived. Zelensky signed a degree against any negotiation with Putin. Putin has to go first. The senile Biden silently agreed, the coward.
Anyone who still supports the annihilation of Ukraine and the genocide of the people is a war criminal.
We need to say it out loud and clear, blocking an end of the slaughter, makes people war criminals.
Putin’s door is open, ready to negotiate a diplomatic settlement, the door was always open even in December 2021.
To refuse to in good faith negotiate is absolutely criminal.
There would also be a Ukraine were there once was a country called Ukraine and where people used to live.
***Sarcasm Alert***
Wait a minute here……..
I thought the Empire makes all the decisions for Zelinsky?
So, a failed “counteroffensive” with no option other than admitting defeat, but no chance for negotiation unless there is a complete Russia withdrawal? 😂
Guess the only option is for Zelinsky to run away to one of his villas with a wallet full of money he’s pilfered from US military funding and allow another Empire installed idiot take care of Phase II.
What are we going to do now Victoria?
A great distraction may be to shift attention to Niger. I hear there may be some Wagner forces there you can tango with.
Can’t wait to hear how they spin this.
Have the Ukrainians voted on it?
One would expect Stoltenberg at least to know that there is nothing for Zelensky to decide without funding from the idiots in Washington.
The government members of the leading NATO nations are war criminals without exception.
There should be a tribunal for the criminals. But who would sit on it?
NATO chief is a joke, a perfect exemplar of the Peter Principle.
But he also has a nice big paycheck and more.
The thing that amazes most about this conflict is how imbecilic it was of Ukraine’s government to think they could somehow outmaneuver diplomats such as Lavrov with his years of experience on a global scale. Zelinsky is very worried right now and he should be as his final act is coming to a close. There will be no encore.
Ukraine voluntarily fed itself into the meatgrinder somehow thinking the Empire would grab it’s ankles before it was too late. Those poor souls; civilians and soldiers alike! What a sick joke the Empire played on them. Despicable and evil at the core.
“Oh wait, the F-16s are on the way boys! Turning point for sure”
“Rest assured Zelly, we’ll cripple the Russian economy and blow up their pipeline. You’ll be good!”
The Russians have time on their side. Ukraine does not.
Note: of course the world realizes it’s a proxy war with mindless puppets running amok, but come on now, this is now absolutely obscene!
No Stian… No mistake… You lied moron…!
Reverse psychology to keep the Zelboy keep fighting even with no success…!
Um, the Russians also have a say if there will be talks – or not… Everyday there is less and less for them to talk anout.
NATO Chief Says Only U.S./U.K. Can Decide When To Enter Talks To End War.
Fixed another for free. But I have to start charging next time.
Stoltenberg is a liar, he knows perfectly well that the Ukrainians can only decide when they get the green light from Biden/Nuland.
Nuland invested a lot in the regime change and the war in Ukraine, Biden rewarded her with a promotion, she could get picked to become the VP candidate in 2024 if she can keep the balloon up in the air. She will do all she can to get the senile Botox man Biden reelected, he could resign after election and she would become President Nuland.
Pretty scary if you ask me.
Not even close. If Ukraine sued for peace right now, its western backers would block it.
I’ll bet the talk in DC is different after the current Ukraine leadership is overthrown. Defeat, prolonged and repeated defeat, does lead to overthrow every time.
what’s wrong with thrashing mr. zelensky senseless until he knuckles under and decides that NOW is a really good time? About 1/2 million people have been wounded or killed in this little party and for naught. He owns every coffin, sorry.