The Trump administration has lifted its pause on military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine following talks between US and Ukrainian officials in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday.
US officials said the move came after Ukraine signaled it was open to a 30-day ceasefire if Russia agreed.
“Ukraine expressed readiness to accept the US proposal to enact an immediate, interim 30-day ceasefire, which can be extended by mutual agreement of the parties, and which is subject to acceptance and concurrent implementation by the Russian Federation,” the US and Ukraine said in a joint statement.
“The United States will communicate to Russia that Russian reciprocity is the key to achieving peace. The United States will immediately lift the pause on intelligence sharing and resume security assistance to Ukraine,” the statement added.
The joint statement also said that “both countries’ presidents agreed to conclude as soon as possible a comprehensive agreement for developing Ukraine’s critical mineral resources to expand Ukraine’s economy and guarantee Ukraine’s long-term prosperity and security.”
President Trump said on Tuesday that US and Russian officials could meet in the coming days, which was affirmed by Russia’s Foreign Ministry. Trump also said that he planned on speaking with Russian President Vladimir Putin soon.
So far, there’s been no public reaction from Moscow about the idea of a ceasefire. Putin has previously rejected the idea of a temporary ceasefire, saying in January that he wouldn’t accept “some kind of respite for regrouping forces and rearmament with the aim of subsequently continuing the conflict” and that he wanted a “long-term peace based on respect for the legitimate interests of all people, all nations living in this region.”
Moscow also has the momentum on the battlefield on its side as its forces continue to make gains in eastern Ukraine and are pushing Ukrainian troops out of Russia’s Kursk Oblast.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said after the talks that the US will bring the proposal to Moscow. “We’re going to tell them this is what’s on the table. Ukraine is ready to stop shooting and start talking. And now it’ll be up to them to say yes or no. If they say no, then we’ll unfortunately know what the impediment is to peace here.”
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly rejected the idea of a ceasefire, and his openness to the 30-day truce marks a significant shift in his position. US officials had said the pause in US military aid and intelligence sharing would only be lifted after Ukraine made clear it was willing to work toward peace.
“The Ukrainian delegation today made something very clear, that they share President Trump’s vision for peace,” US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz said after the talks. He said the two sides “got into substantive details on how this war is going to permanently end,” including the idea of long-term security guarantees.
Waltz didn’t elaborate on the potential security guarantees, which will be a major sticking point in any negotiations. Zelensky and his European backers have been pushing for the deployment of Western troops to enforce the ceasefire, a proposal that’s been repeatedly rejected by Moscow.
Trump is being advised by closet warmongers or idiots. He resumed supplies after Ukraine agreed to a 30-day ceasefire:
“Now we have to go to Russia and hopefully President Putin will agree to that, and we can get this show on the road,” President Donald Trump told reporters, adding that his White House team plans to discuss the deal with Russian counterparts.
This is no concession by Ukraine! Its army is in retreat and would love a 30-day ceasefire to build defenses and move supplies to the front. Russia will not even talk about this.
Right! There is no concession here! There is no deal here! But this simple-minded approach ignoring essentials will be presented as brilliant peacemaking up against them Russians them Russians.
And when Russians refuse this BS ceasefire, it'll be back to the old trope, "Russians are evil, gallant Ukrainians are fighting for their freedom and to save democracy in Europe."
Either Trump is an idiot and he let the deep state run circles around him, or his rapprochement with Russia was a ruse.
Since Putin would have told him directly that a ceasefire was a non-starter it's just Rump playing for the cameras. Now the NYT and WaPo can pretend that Rump is interested in peace, and following the regular narrative denounce Putin as an unreasonable warmonger.
Trump is an idiot warmonger.
Trump has approved over $14 billion in military aid & weapons sales to Israel. https://www.trackaipac.com/trump
No ceasefire deal for Netanyahu. Israel does not want this.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/60c67df8bd96832718f33da544d5b2e443bbaf5340a467242fdf6ffdac73c916.jpg
Flip flop, flip flop. Backtrack, backtrack.
What else Trump could do? Now he owns this war. He missed his opportunity to walk away.
He only cares about political optics rather than who wins or who gets killed. With Ukraine likely to collapse militarily by September he may just be deciding that he could claim, "hey I tried to help them and I didn't walk away, but it was always a bad idea to fight the war.” He's already got Zelensky looking unreasonable.
Putin and Lavov are doing some deep cost benefit analysis. Trump is using Ukraine as a pawn to entice Russia into a deal that would redefine and likely end NATO in return for Russia partnering with the US against China. Of course Putin doesn't trust Trump. But geopolitics make strange bedfellows. A decade ago Putin was part of the anti-China G8 and aspiring to be part of NATO.Putin has to be disappointed by China's neutrality in the Ukraine war. The "no limits" partnership has definite limits as far as China is concerned. Russia was forced to get weapons and manpower from Iran and North Korea.
Trump and Putin cpould be deluded into thinking that with almost 90% of the world's nukes, they could jointly dominate the world.
It will be interesting to see what Putin decides in the coming months.
The reality is that even if Zelensky's government capitulates a deal between Putin and Trump won't end the Ukrainian resistance to the Russian occupation. But imperial military powers never learn the limits of their superior military power in asymmetric wars of national resistance.
Not even that: Trump is doing nothing at all, just posturing. His "offer" is totally unacceptable to Russia.
Who knows what the hell Trump is thinking or doing, he is an idiot and only won because he was running against Senile Biden and Kamalala. USA has been led by fools and tools since JFK was murdered. O, where are those JFK files Mr. Trump, do they point a finger at Israel and CIA?? (We know Israel is your true master, MIGA,,hmm).
Sounds assbackwards to me. Maybe there is more to it and I'm missing something, but wouldn't there be a better chance of Russia accepting a ceasefire proposal without the military aid and the intelligence sharing being restarted?
No Why would Russia ever accept a cease fire if the USA is holding back aid and intelligence info? Without USA aid and info all of Ukraine will fall to Russia.
Highly unlikely. A cessation of US involvement would just stretch out the time period before the Russians abandon Kherson and Zaporzhizhia.
Highly unlikely. A cessation of US involvement would just stretch out the time period before the Russians abandon Kherson and Zaporzhizhia.
Not sure I agree with that. If Russia gets a significant military edge why would they stop?
The difference between US aid and no US aid is a difference between the war ending sooner or later, not a difference in likely outcome.
After three years, the Russian forces still haven't even secured Donetsk.
They can probably eventually do that, but that's probably all they can do.
Russia is not the USA, as in V-N, Iraq, Syria, Afg. Three years of fighting the entire West alone shows just how tough and goal oriented Russia is!
“Alone” in what universe?
Reality Thomas. 🙂
They will stop when their goals are met, and that does not mean crushing all of Ukraine. Can you dig that Tim?
They already have a significant miltary advantage even with all the aid Ukraine has recieved. Otherwise they wouldn't be squatting on about 20% of Ukraine's land.
They HAD a significant military advantage three years ago.
And now they've been squatting on about 20% of "Ukraine's land" for more than three years without being able to put a bow on those initial gains.
Well, if they HAD a military advantage 3 years ago and they are STILL squatting on Ukrainian land, I would think they have maintained that military advantage. Otherwise they would have been driven off of Ukrainian land by now.
If they still had that military advantage, they would have secured Donetsk long ago.
It turned out that the only military advantage they had was semi-surprise, and that that wasn’t enough.
I guess it is enough to hold on to 20% of Ukraine's land. So, they have at least MAINTAINED the military advantage otherwise they would have been driven out.
I guess we don’t mean the same thing when we use the phrase “military advantage.”
“Advantage” involves accomplishing, or not accomplishing, objectives.
I guess we don't.
To me it also means being able to hold land you've conquered.
I could have sworn I replied to this comment yesterday. Anyway, here goes:
I guess we don't.
To me, you also have a military advantage if you are able to hold onto land you have conquered.
Being able to hold onto land you have conquered might partially indicate a particular kind of military advantage.
But, for example, the ability of the US regime to hold on to the parts of Mexico it conquered in the 19th century wouldn’t really confer much military advantage on it if it decides to contest a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
So far, the Russian forces have been able to hold on to part of the land they conquered in Kherson and Zaporzhizhia … at the expense of military advantage in Donetsk. At some point they’re going to have to decide which they want worse.
20%???
Wow!
20% after 3 years of war
WINNING!
And if they didn't have a military advantage, they wouldn't have been able to hold that 20%.
And why would the Russians abandon Kherson and/or Zaporozhia?
Because they haven’t achieved, and won’t achieve, control of those two oblasts, and trying to will only delay being able to secure Donetsk so that they can declare “victory” and stop bleeding.
Are you OK Thomas, not feeling well…?
Feeling great.
And still living in the real world instead of just believing whatever the hell I happen to feel like believing.
Glad U are well. 🙂
Says the trump supporting gun wielding fentanyl snorting booze bending couch humping MAGA person
So not controlling all of Kherson or Zaporozhia means that the Russians don’t control the parts of these regions that they do control? And that means that they will be compelled to evacuate all of Kherson and Zaporozhia? I think your analysis is seriously deficient.
Sooner or later, the war will end, or at least return to “frozen conflict.”
It’s not going to do that until the Russian forces evacuate the portions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts that they currently occupy. They MIGHT be able to negotiate a narrow corridor along the Azov coast to Crimea. That depends on whether the Ukrainians want peace enough to let him save a little face.
One of Putin’s bigger mistakes was pretending to have “annexed,” by “referendum,” territory that he does not and never will control.
Thanks for the insight, but Jesus, this is the nonsense the EU leaders believe in. Events will prove my understanding is reality based and yours is based on wishful thinking.
Because the Russians control like 5% of Kherson and like 40% of Zaporozhia
?????
I didn’t think it was unclear.
Stein’s Law: “If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.”
The Russian forces have conclusively demonstrated their inability to establish control of Kherson and Zaporzhizhia.
Therefore, at some point, they will stop trying to establish control of Kherson and Zaporzhizhia.
There’s still a reasonable chance they’ll secure Donetsk, and it would probably be best for everyone if they are able to do that in some less unreasonable amount of time than the 3+ years they’ve so far failed to get the job done. That would give them a fig leaf of “victory” to place over their outing of themselves as a third-rate conventional military power. The fig leaf wouldn’t really hide that ignominy, but it would at least be something to cling to.
I have never heard of Steins law, thanks you
Then the war is ended, problem solved!
Well, between the two, I would think Russia would be more willing to do a ceasefire without the aid and the intelligence sharing being restarted. The other way seems like they are being pressured into accepting a ceasefire and they don't need a cease fire whereas Ukraine does. And Russia has no intention of taking over all of Ukraine. Why would they? If they're having such a hard time securing parts of Eastern Ukraine, they certainly wouldn't be stupid enough to try to conquer all of Ukraine.
It’s clearly an application of stick rather than carrot. Whether it will work remains to be seen and is mostly a function of how desperate Putin is to salvage something out of his fiasco.
Nuh uh'
Russia has never shown willingness to peace, much less with a dictator Putin in power
March of '22 Ukraine could have had a deal that they could only hope for now.
Gee if only i had thoght of that
Meaning what? You said, "Russia has never shown a willingness to peace" and I pointed out that they did.
To the extent that Russia perceives US support for Ukraine as making a difference to the length or outcome of the war, no.
To the extent that Russia perceives US support for Ukraine as making a difference to the length or outcome of the war, no.
Russia won't accept any ceasefire whatsoever, only a true neutral Ukraine. They say it all the time.
I agree.
"Rubio…said after the talks that the US will bring the proposal to Moscow. 'We’re going to tell them…what’s on the table…If they say no, then we’ll unfortunately know what the impediment is to peace here.'"
This looks like a moment of truth re the end game of US meetings with Russia, and its seeming pressure on Ukraine.
I think Russia won't go for a ceasefire without advance assurances on NATO neutrality, territory, and security – a demilitarized postwar Ukraine. Possibly rights of Russian minorities too – though w/Crimea and east Ukraine, the majority of those will now simply be Russian.
Following Mearsheimer's view, I think 'We'll see what Russia says' is theatre – via official and backchannel contacts, seems likely the US agreed on a settlement acceptable to Russia, with the US now in the role of driving Ukraine to accept the US-Russian-agreed-on terms.
And if that is not the case? Then a misled Russia will reject the proposal, and Trump will have to declare, 'I cannot fulfill my election promise because Russkie wouldn't play ball'…
…and go back to financing an unpopular and losing war that will be more unpopular since the Trump admin punctured the Zelensky balloon.
You seem misled.
In 1994, the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, UK, and the US signed a memorandum to provide Ukraine with security assurances in connection with its accession to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state.
To solidify security commitments to Ukraine, the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. A political agreement in accordance with the principles of the Helsinki Accords, the memorandum included security assurances against the threat or use of force against Ukraine’s territory or political independence. The countries promised to respect the sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine. Parallel memorandums were signed for Belarus and Kazakhstan as well. In response, Ukraine officially acceded to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state on December 5, 1994.
Going back to security commitments will be unpopular among pro-Putin Trumpanzees.
One can toss that memorandum out the window as clearly Russia has broken it.
Russia won't accept any ceasefire at all, only a comprehensive peace that guarantees a strictly neutral Ukraine. They have already said that very clearly many times but Western media, including this site, only parrots what Washington and not what the Kremlin says.
"Russia won't accept any ceasefire at all, only a comprehensive peace that guarantees a…neutral Ukraine."
1/ Yes, NATO neutrality was & remains the core issue.
2/ Ceasefire vs comprehensive settlement? See your point, though that sounds like a Russian counterproposal – where it presents core demands as the starting point condition for ceasefire, making the 30 days a period to 'work out details.'
3/ And note the US has already laid ground for such a starting point – declaring NATO will not happen, and that Ukraine will not get back Crimea or eastern Ukraine.
See Rubio, here, e.g., where Ukraine will have to make "difficult" territory concessions…and Russia's 'difficult concession'? Not taking all of Ukraine.
("Rubio suggests Ukraine will have to give up territory — as Western diplomats warn Putin has no intention of compromising," NY Post)
4/ Again – the true shape of things should soon be clear.
2) Not a counter-proposal but their fundamental stand: they already tried the diplomatic way and were betrayed since day one (both Merkel and Hollande admitted to that). “Fool me once…” You could say that Trump is the one making a counter-proposal, although the Russians have stated that they don’t understand it at all, because it’s not even close to their demands.
3) The USA and NATO already declared in 1990 that NATO would not expand, yet it did. Again West is not trustworthy, and thus Russia probably expects UNSC oversight of whatever end treaty and non-NATO peacekeepers, if any. Chinese are already debating if they should send peacekeepers but most are against, so it’ll be something like Egyptian, Nepalese, Indians maybe…
we've both spilled a lotta ink – time should soon tell
Uhm no, I don't know if English is your 1st or 2nd language but it sure sounds like Rubio saying that Russia is the obstacle to peace
I figured that out and English is my second language.
Duh.
"it sure sounds like Rubio saying that Russia is the obstacle to peace….I figured that out"
Great yr English is good enough to figure out the obvious – obviously, the Rubio quote of my first post sounds tough on Russia (though he does not say Russia's an obstacle).
But that wasn't the point – the point was 'mixed messaging': that even as Rubio sounds tough, he frames 'mutual tough concessions' in a way obviously advantageous to Russia. See 2 and 3 of my second post above for that – not gonna baby you through it.
What this seeming mixed messaging means should be clear in a short time, as discussed in my first post.
While Russia will be suspicious and tempted to just fight on since they're winning, I think they'll end up saying yes. The fighting might resume after the month if they can't agree, but the public relations would be too bad to not give talking a chance instead of shooting. Both sides cling to maximalist preconditions, until they don't. I'm cautiously optimistic.
No, they can't and they won't. They have already said that many times: the war won't be frozen again, only a comprehensive peace treaty that secures not just annexations but also a guaranteed neutral Ukraine (or whatever is left of it) will be accepted. The war will continue for the foreseable future.
Maybe they won't, I sure hope they will, but certainly they CAN accept a pause. It's the best way to get to that comprehensive peace they want. There are real risks to both pausing temporarily or fighting on, but fewer less serious ones with a pause.
I don’t share your “hope” because any ceasefire will only perpetuate the war (to the disadvantage of Russia, Clausewitz 101). They cannot accept any pause, except maybe something purely symbolic, cosmetic, in the pre-agreement that it will result in a comprehensive peace within the frame of that very short ceasefire.
The deep issue is that Ukraine/NATO is not yet wholly defeated and Russia needs probably one or two years to achieve that. That’s bad but, if Russia falls again for Western diplomatic traps, then it will need a decade maybe. If Russia would not have signed the Minsk Accords, then Donbass would have thoroughly defeated Ukraine, at the very least liberating all the secessionist region, maybe even causing regime change in Kiev, and this war would never have happened. Much of the same applies to the unfinished Astana Accords re. Syria: the Islamists would have been wholly defeated and HTS terrorism would not exist.
Interesting perspective. I don't really know clausewitz, but this about his book was a relevant central point: "the conduct of war could not be reduced to universal principles.". I don't see how the fundamental Russian advantages would change much in a month of a pause. Maybe Russia should counter with a 2 week ceasefire proposal, that can be extended if progress in talks is being made.
Clausewitz drew on this issue on some Napoleonic truce with Prussia (I’m saying from memory, because it’s been four decades since I read the book), which Napoleon later found to be an error. He generalized on that and maybe other similar cases from history.
A month of truce for Russia now means a month of not advancing towards Kiev. And the enemy is not offering anything anyhow, just demanding a sign of good will, good will that has been betrayed in the past several times (2015, 2022). “Fool me once…”
I'm not sure Russia taking Kiev is or should be the goal. The pundits insist the diplomatic deceit has been almost completely one sided and they're right, they're just wrong about which side.
It’s a reference but Kiev is to Ukraine what Paris is to France, Moscow to Russia, London to Britain, etc.: not just a formal capital but a true vertebrating center for the country. The second largest city is Kharkov, which is rather a Russian city, and at much greater distance come Odessa (main port) and Lvov (capital of Ukro-nazism and almost at the border with Poland/NATO). Taking Lvov would be like that ultimate goal for Russia, if everything else fails to get Ukraine to surrender, but Russians always hope that Poland takes it instead (not really interested, too far away, full of fanatics).
But, Lvov aside, Kharkov and Odessa are definitely two cities and regions that Russia would love to annex (they have sizable ethnic Russian populations, Odessa is also necessary to annex Transnistria), while taking or at least threatening Kiev seems necessary to force the surrender of Ukraine, its acceptance of Russian terms for peace (some Russians also dream of re-annexing Kiev but seems far fetched).
Other than the areas mentioned, Chernigov and Sumy in NE Ukraine are smaller but very important for Russia, because they are too close to Moscow. Ultimately Russia is worried about Kharkov, Chernigov and Sumy in terms military, in terms of NATO deployment.
You're breaking one of the central corporate media rules, which is to notice internal demographics and treat them as relevant. Within pretty easy reach for Russia without needing to take Kiev, most of the fertile farmland and valuable minerals are in the East and South. If Russia cuts off Ukraine's access to Black Sea ports, Ukraine will be economically unviable without money forever pouring in from allies.
Corporate media doesn't pay me, they would never hire me (I'm no mercenary of the pen). I'm a free thinker and an unpaid freelance geopolitical analyst in my spare time.
I partly disagree however with what you say about "most of the fertile farmland and valuable minerals are in the East and South". You seem to be correct re. the most intense black soil ("chernozem") but not so much re. minerals, which do exist in Donbass but also in central and even west Ukraine (where the famous "rare earths" are).
Sure, I was being very general about it. Port access is super important given the weight and volume of grains, and the nonstandard widths and limited capacity of rail lines to Europe.
You assign a level of stupidity to Putin and the Kremlin leadership that really only exists in the MAGA-land. The Russian Foreign Ministry has openly said that the Untied States is "agreement incapable", and multiple Western leaders have openly said that the last agreements were only to buy time to pour weapons into Ukraine. Rump has already started shipping more weapons into the country again, so it's rather obvious what the purpose of any "ceasefire" would be.
From b at Moon of Alabama:
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/03/trump-opts-for-more-war-with-russia-1.html#more
Since 2014 the Ukrainian side has multiple times agreed to this or that ceasefire after its forces received a strong beating. It also immediately broke each of its promises. The defeat of its incursion into the Kursk region of Russia will have motivated it to accept the U.S. position. But what force could make it stick to a ceasefire if Russia would agree to one?
The current situation on the battle field is very much in Russia's favor. Any pause in fighting would allow the U.S. and its allies to accumulate more arms and ammunition for Ukraine. Russian forces are well supplied and not in need of a break in the fighting. Should the Russian leadership agree to a pause it would open itself to considerable critique from Russian nationalists and hardliners.
Russia, at the same time, wants to keep its friends in China and the Global South on its side. Pressure from them is the only reason I can think of that might push Russia into accepting a temporary ceasefire deal. But there has been no public noise in this direction from China or other BRICS and Global South countries so far.
It's rather obvious that your beloved Putin is a despotic war criminal who is "agreement incapable".
Overall, we rate Moon of Alabama Left as Biased and questionable based on the promotion of pro-Russian propaganda and conspiracy theories, the use of poor sources, false claims, and a lack of transparency.
Questionable Reasoning: Lack of Transparency, False Information, Conspiracy, Propaganda
Bias Rating: LEFT
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/moon-of-alabama/
Coming from you that’s an outstanding recommendation.
That’s outstanding irony, coming from an apologist for Putin’s war crimes.
Why would Russia agree to a 30 day cease fire just so Zelensky can build up his military again? Especially after Ukraine attacked Moscow last night: Also Trump is starting to deliver military weapons and targeting information again.
Either Rubio or his staff are not playing with a full deck. Minsk I and Minsk II were both designed to allow time for Ukraine to build up their military forces. Angela Dorothea Merkel admitted to this subterfuge in both Minsk I and Minsk II.
Only an unconditional surrender of Ukraine will lead to an end of this war. Russia has fought 50 nations to a standstill and will continue until the job is done.
Rubio only cares about a "minerals deal" in order to resume deliveries of military aid.
On the eve of the talks in Saudi Arabia, Russia launched air strikes targeting Kyiv and other parts of Ukraine, with the Ukrainian air force saying the country was under a threat of a missile attack.
Russian forces – emboldened after Ukraine lost support from the US – have seized the moment, launching barrages of ballistic missile attacks while attempting to surround thousands of Ukrainian troops who had maintained a seven-month foothold in the Russian region of Kursk.
Ukraine's Deputy Head of the Presidential Office Pavlo Palisa wrote on March 11: "I have confirmation that security assistance from the U.S. has been resumed. The agreements are being implemented."
EU’s top diplomat pledges unified support for Ukraine and global humanitarian aid in dig at US. https://apnews.com/article/european-union-united-nations-trump-russia-ukraine-02dadb854440861864733211e687b9b5
Why do you always sound like a pro-Kremlin troll?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/390eaf404b270b43e4f9aa3291c6c3af8a811b52c9e5d0b00adbb04102bf2b27.jpg
I realized this deal means huge American C-17 transports would land near the frontlines to drop off weapons and ammo to Ukraine's army during this ceasefire.
They won't. Trump and Rubio know it, hence they're lying for the show only.
Zelensky, Rubio and Trump don't know too much about world history, other than Rubio maybe wanting to be Napoleon.
30-day ceasefire during which the US will pump Ukraine full of weapons and Ukrainian forces get to entrench themselves (especially in Kursk). I'm smelling a rat here.
It would also be a 30-day ceasefire during which the Russian forces would get a breather to bring up munitions, etc., and improve their own positions where they’re on the defensive. When it ends I expect the Russian forces to go all-out to secure Donetsk so that Putin can pull his teat out of the wringer with some plausible semblance of “victory.”
A ceasefire is always immensely more beneficial to the retreating side, which is Ukraine right now.
And what kind of "victory" can it be when Ukraine is still occupying a chunk of Russia? It's not victory, it's a national shame!
After today's events I don't think there's much that Ukraine is still occupying, if anything. I am really interested in seeing what the battle maps look like tomorrow.
Ukraine will concede the little it has left in Kursk by the end of this week. That's our new war. Trump spews BS while Russia advances daily. President Trump, you have no cards!
I'm not so sure. Russia is advancing, but only a little step at a time. This Kursk business has been going on for 7 months now. I just can't understand how Putin could mismanage it so badly.
a little step at a time
They're advancing at about the same rate that Soviet troops did against the Germans before the Wehrmacht's sudden collapse when the Western Front overextended their logistics system. I've seen it described as "little by little, then all at once."
Zelinsky (ignoring the advice of his military advisors, like a good coke head) has been pouring Ukraine's best troops and a massive percentage of its armor into maintaining it. Russia has been tolerating the Kursk incursion, and enthusiastically using its home court advantage to destroy Ukraine's prime military assets wholesale. Apparently the Kremlin has decided that they've ripped out the backbone of the AFU and it's time to shut the game down.
Russia is in a position where in a month or two they're going to be encircling or capturing several Ukrainian logistics hubs, and without supplies soldiers become prisoners. The West is out of reserve weapons to send, Ukraine is out of credit to buy more, none of the wonderwaffen have had the game-changing effect they were expected to, the majority of the Ukrainian public wants the war over, and according to the UAF's own numbers conscription isn't coming close to keeping up with casualties. I don't think it's going to be much longer before we see Zelinsky flee to his villa in Tuscany.
"They're advancing at about the same rate that Soviet troops did against the Germans before the Wehrmacht's sudden collapse when the Western Front overextended their logistics system."
The Soviets took less time to get from Stalingrad to Berlin than the Russian forces have taken (so far) to secure Donetsk.
Depends on when you arbitrarily assign a "starting date" to Russian attempts to "secure Donetsk". I put it at the start of 2024, with the fall of Avdiivka; so 14 months, as (except for Bakhmut) virtually all of 2023 was spent on the defensive and 2022 was a washout (far too few troops with far too many different objectives, with the Ukrainians having numerical superiority virtually everywhere; not a recipe for success).
After the 2022 pullback, the reorganization and reinforcement of their army, and the defeat of the Ukrainian 2023 offensive, since the fall of Avdiivka, Russia has made steady progress, against heavily fortified positions that are far outside the experience of any American "expert" to try and take. And Ukraine has been unable to counter effectively anywhere. Krynky and Kursk have been complete disasters.
No historical comparisons are ever really exact; but this is broadly similar to the Winter War, where a poorly planned, overconfident Red Army was badly embarrassed by the Finns in the first campaign; but then regrouped and reorganized under Timoshenko, and in the second phase badly defeated the Finns, completely smashing their "Mannerheim line" and forcing them to capitulate.
Well, someone’s being “arbitrary” there. “They weren’t really attempting to secure Donetsk until it suddenly got very, very difficult?”
They tried to secure Donetsk over the course of eight years of proxy war, and have now been trying to secure Donetsk over the course of more than three years of full-on invasion.
Who is “they”? Russia wasn’t directly involved in the fighting between 2014 and 2022; that was the DPR and LPR militias. supplied by Russia, fighting a NATO supplied Ukrainian army that greatly outnumbered it. What was the “effort” expended in Russia’s “full on invasion in 2022” (an idiotic term if you have any grasp of the actual military situation), given that Russia had at least 4 axes of advance going on at the same time, with maybe 180,000 troops? Doesn’t seem like much of an effort against positions that have been fortified for 8 years by a Ukrainian force that outnumbered the Russians. And what “efforts”, other than Bakhmut, were made in 2023?
This “full on offensive” began in earnest in 2024, once the Ukrainian offensive was shut down, and since then the Russians have taken everything they have tried to take, just maybe not as fast as you think they should have, but what is your basis for “deciding” that? You have never fought in a peer/near peer conflict, so have no basis for evaluating their progress.
“Russia wasn’t directly involved in the fighting between 2014 and 2022; that was the DPR and LPR militias. supplied by Russia,”
In other words, a Russian proxy war (leaving out the fact that hundreds of Russian troops were killed and a number were captured while “not directly involved”).
Oh bullshit. What “Fact” that’s not “reported” (errrr, “made up”) by Ukrainian propaganda and parroted by the captive US media, like the “DPRK involvement in Kursk”? Name one single Russian regular military formation involved in that war. Any Russian “indirect” involvement (and of course there was some) was at least matched by “indirect” US/NATO involvement. In other words, you’re making shit up.
“Name one single Russian regular military formation involved in that war.”
The 76th Guards Air Assault Division was awarded the Order of Suvorov by Putin for their involvement, in which about 80 unit members, including platoon commander Anton Korolenko, were killed in action.
When I ever denied — or failed to denounce — the “indirect” US/NATO involvement (which I’m not sure was entirely “indirect”)?
Show a reference. I just googled; can find none; closest I can get is rumors of “Russian Volunteers”. Certainly nothing close to an entire division.
I'm not your research assistant — and to the extent that I ever work as such, I avoid clients who just want their own biases confirmed.
So you just made it up. OK; that’s what I thought. I did my own research, I’m far more diligent than you; and you simply confirm my findings.
Ah, a variant of the ol’ “I’m rubber and you’re glue” bit.
I wouldn’t dream of trying to stop you from believing what you want to believe because it’s what you want to believe. But neither am I obligated to pretend with you.
Teach you that in the Marines, did they? Here’s one for you, “I know you are but what am I?” And, you still have nothing, just your bias. I’m surprised this site actually alllows you to moderate for them, as there is nothing “moderate” about you.
Yes, in the Marines they taught me to live in the real world instead of believing whatever I happened to want to believe because I wanted to believe it.
My job as moderator is to get rid of stuff that violates the site’s guidelines. That doesn’t require me to agree with you or require you to agree with me. In fact, I’m sometimes required to 86 comments I agree with, and never 86 comments just for disagreeing with me.
Well you must have forgot their teachings because you are an ignorant bigot. But good luck with that. “Moderate” away with your deluded nonsense.
Ah, now the “bigot” card. On what do you base that assessment?
Your endless comments about, well, nothing and inability to document or back up, well, anything. Just a cranky ignorant old man who “believes” things.
Leaving you to do your own damn homework doesn’t imply an inability (or failure) on my part to do mine.
I’m interested in fact and reality.
You’re interested in finding a way, some way, any way, to convince yourself that what you want to be true is true, and apparently believe that in order to do so you must also convince others. Good luck with that. I suggest purchasing some cheese to go with your whine.
No, you make statements; when called on them you can’t substantiate them. That’s the sign of an ignoramus. I researched your false claims, corrected you from the actual sources, and then you act like a child and play the victim.
You jumping up and down and yelling “I bet you got that from THE UKRAINIANS!” is neither research nor correction.
I’m not any sort of victim in this. You making yourself look like some kind of brainwashed moron doesn’t harm me at all.
I didnt do that. So, there you go again. I researched your claim, saw where it came from, and noted that EVEN THE WEB PAGE POSTING IT noted that it had no supporting evidence. So, strike seven Tommy. Or is it eight?
Act the moment, the count would be 3 and 0 if I hadn’t hit it over your head on the first pitch. Fetch.
Never happened Tommy. You’re no athlete.
&6th Guards were involved in the occupation of Crimea; NOT in the Donbas, two entirely separate (by many many miles)_things. NO ONE ever “denied” formal Russian involvement in Crimea; those troops were stationed there, under treaty, long, before 2014. The order of Suvorov was awarded for their actions in Crimea. So, wrong again.
The Ukrainians captured (and publicly displayed, along with Russian KIA soldiers’ ID cards) two of their APCs in an ambush in the Donetsk People’s Republic.
The Order of Suvorov citation didn’t say where the unit was engaged.
Oh yes; Ukrainian “proof”, like the two “north koreans” supposedly captured in Kursk (although one had Russian identity papers and the other had a “wounded jaw and could not speak”. That all you got? That’s your “Proof” of a formal Russian military attempt to seize Donetsk? I think you need to try harder. EVEN the published report of the Russian involvement in the Pskov newspapers says “alleged” and notes that the claim was made “without any conclusive proof”.
“Russia wasn’t directly involved in the fighting between 2014 and 2022; that was the DPR and LPR militias. supplied by Russia,”
In other words, a Russian proxy war (leaving out the fact that hundreds of Russian troops were killed and a number were captured while “not directly involved”).
How many “peer/near peer conflicts” have you fought in?
I guess it’s convenient to conveniently re-set the clock on the “full on offensive” whenever doing so allows you to more vividly fantasize that the side you prefer is “winning,” but it doesn’t leave much room for you to lecture others about others being “arbitrary” with their own clocks.
None; so I have no opinion on how long reducing a fortified city should take. My point is, that for all your arrogant bombast, Neither do you. I only KNOW the FACT that since 2024, whatever Russia has assaulted they eventually TOOK, and Ukraine has accomplished nothing. What you got? Crickets….
And yes; I said that Russian “progress” looks different depending on when you set the starting clock, so thank you for agreeing.
Prove it. I know you like to just make accusations; so tell us all how many Russian troops were involved in trying to “secure Donbas” while at the same time besieging Mariupol, securing the land bridge to Crimea, seizing the Zaporizhia power plant, crossing the Dnieper and seizing Kherson city and advancing towards Nikolaiev, seizing Kupiansk and advancing towards Kharkov, and advancing from two separate directions on Kiev, given the distances involved and the total force of maybe 180,000? I mean, you WERE a marine, did they never teach you how to read a map? Doesn’t seem like much of an “effort” to me. And if by “they” you mean the regular Russian army, once again that’s nonsense; the Russian Army was no more directly involved in the 8 years before 2022 than the US and NATO were, and no one except the neocons and neoNZs pretends they were.
Maybe because Russia is standing alone against NATO and the USA trying to destroy its very existence. Putin mismanaged very little.
You admit you cannot see brilliant leadership from a russian team with a deep bench.
The Russians don't need the "breather"; they are doing just fine right now, and have been since early last year. It's the Ukrainians who, after the latest debacle in Kursk, are on the back foot; the LAST thing Russia should want to do is refrain from bombing the snot out of them while they are on the run. Russia doesn't need a "semblance" of victory; by every measure, they have won. I expect Putin will hold firm; cease fire when Ukraine disengages and withdraws back across the Dnieper, or there's no point in their stopping the shooting.
It's going nowhere, and the Neocon's know it. Trump a 'Peacemaker', looking more and more like a war-maker.
After all the tough talk, Zelensky's position hasn't changed at all; it looks like Rubio and Walz are the ones that folded. I expect they'll talk to Moscow, get berated by Lavrov, and then change their "positions" again.
When you have a president(Trump) that flip-flops on positions everyday would one expect anything different from his emissaries?
That would pretty much be every president in my lifetime; and I’m pretty old. Consistency, pragmatism, common sense, self interest are not this country’s virtues.
This looks like a set-up with a deal designed to fail. Why? Ukraine and the US are holding small cards.
Immediately we see the issue of trust in the US, with Rubio ignoring the crucial condition set by Putin in January. NO ceasefire until Ukraine agrees to neutrality and the loss of the territory taken by Russia.
But Rubio ignores this stipulation and sets up a public relations program: it will be the Russians' fault “if they don't want peace.” This is used-car salesman type negotiating. We said it was a good car; we didn't say it wouldn't break down right away.
It will be interesting to see whether Putin backs off from his “give me everything I’ve been trying and failing to take for more than three years now and have precisely zero chance of getting in the NEXT three years, and I’ll pinky promise to not take any more” position.
Except he IS taking it; just not as fast as you seem to feel is acceptable. And, he is destroying the Ukrainian army a little bit more every day, which is even more important than securing "land" which russia needs like the ocean needs water.
And, in the process Putin is also losing a lot of their young men. Sounds like he's using the JFK/LBJ/Nixon policy of keeping the war going for other reasons than victory. Maybe in the history to come, Putin will be referred to as, 'Putin the Unready'?
Is he? NO ONE, including either of us, has any clue as to just exactly what the actual combat losses are; but regardless, he is likely making a judgement call, that taking the losses now and ending it for good is much better than having to do it all over again, after the nazis rearm and the relative balance of strength shifts. Right now, he has an air force, Ukraine doesn’t. He has an immense firepower superiority, his army is bigger and much better trained than two years ago, while ukraine is running out of trained men (as the debacle with their 6 or 7 “150 series” brigades, that disintegrated or deserted, has shown. MAYBE he’ll be remembered as a national hero who reinvigorated Russia. But NOT if he lets Ukraine recover and this war starts back up again. And I am 99% sure that when it does start back up it will be Ukraine, egged on by the next generation of neocons and eurotrash, who start it.
Unready and grossly incompetent. He's sacrificing young Russian men by the tens of thousands for absolutely no good reason whatsoever. He should have exploded a nuke on day one as a warning to Zelensky and his Western handlers. That would have ended the war very fast and with no causalities on either side.
But he didn't and the West correctly concluded that he's weak and indecisive. So they kept escalating the war; more and more weapons for Ukraine, more and more bloodshed.
"He should have exploded a nuke on day one as a warning to Zelensky and his Western handlers" If Iran and US get into a shooting war, should the US fire a nuclear warhead as a warning to Iran and their Russians handlers?
Don't ask him such complex questions
This response looks like classic Russia-bashing. I'm surprised. The issue for Russia has been Ukraine as neutral for years by now. You are spouting standard establishment narrative. The problem is US-Ukraine have no leverage, nothing to offer, and by conceding to neutrality and ceding territory this is defeat and won't play well with Trump's base. So he's got to come up with something.
But any progress here has to start with basics, one of which for Russia is no temporary ceasefire including support from the US to help re-build Ukraine forces.
Plus in the recent dust-up with Trump Zelensky right afterwards said Ukraine would never give up the lost territories. Trump is up to something additional to the minerals deal and ready to bluster on Russia at fault for the coming failure of his “deal,” which is inadequate to begin with.
Trump's idea to talk instead of send missiles into Russia was good—but not if it's some trick he's trying to pull off so as to end up “lookin' good” on his quest to win the Nobel Prize
"This response looks like classic Russia-bashing."
If that's what it looks like to you, you should visit an optometrist.
It's just the best estimate of the situation I can offer. After more than three years, the Russian forces have yet to even secure Donetsk. They can probably do so eventually. And that's probably all they can do.
I don't give a tinker's dam which regime rules which piece of dirt and treats the people there as its livestock. I have no reason to believe that the Russian regime is any "worse," or any "better," than the Ukrainian regime or the US regime.
"Neutrality" is not and never has been an option. Ukraine will remain a US/EU/NATO imperial satrapy, or it will go back to being a Russian imperial satrapy.
"This response looks like classic Russia-bashing."
If that's what it looks like to you, you should visit an optometrist.
It's just the best estimate of the situation I can offer. After more than three years, the Russian forces have yet to even secure Donetsk. They can probably do so eventually. And that's probably all they can do.
I don't give a tinker's dam which regime rules which piece of dirt and treats the people there as its livestock. I have no reason to believe that the Russian regime is any "worse," or any "better," than the Ukrainian regime or the US regime.
"Neutrality" is not and never has been an option. Ukraine will remain a US/EU/NATO imperial satrapy, or it will go back to being a Russian imperial satrapy.
Call it as you will this last statement at least nails down the key issue.
Why do you pro-Russians always cry foul whenever someone says something slightly critical of Russia
Is he wrong?
You should see an optometrist, I agree.
Or an Ophthalmologist
Exactly: posturing for show, domestic consumption. Would I be Russia, I'd issue a public declaration of no talks happening until the USA recognize Russia's demand for full security guarantees, i.e. a true neutral Ukraine.
The problem with issuing public declarations demanding something you are never, under any circumstances, going to get is that when you don’t get that thing you look weak.
The ceasefire proposition is a non-starter. The value of the mineral resources deal depends on how it would be accepted by future Ukrainian authorities. They have a good ground to denounce it as void if they wish. Now Trump has to continue providing Ukraine with military and financial help. Most Europeans are happy to be helpful with escalation. Everything is going to be decided on the battlefields.
Or with ICBM'S
Now just watch, soon MAGA will be supporting this war as well like the Mideast war.
Also time for MAGA to go out and buy EV's, the boss is setting an example. EV's are in now so get the pennies together.
Anybody notice most of the things Trump said he will do, he's now backtracking and flip flopping? And, remember any money he says he will save, if he does save it, will most likely go to Ukraine and Israel, or will be used in the upcoming war on Iran.
I do.
Every day that passes reinforces the point that Trump is all facade. Incompetence galore. The world's greatest, most spectacular shitshow.
The outcome of the past two elections is proof positive that we Americans don't deserve good things.
I'd say the last 3. Not that those before them left us with nothing but bad choices but Trump/Clinton, Trump/Biden and Trump/Harris were a step above (below?) the rest.
What choice did the two parties give us? Harris and Trump. Of all the people in the USA, these two incompetents were the best they could come up with? Something else is happening in the collective consciousness or metaphysically for such an absurd duo to be the only people they could come up with.
The problems surrounding a 30-day ceasefire include compelling Ukrainian forces to move west across the Dnieper River to maintain said ceasefire.
Whether NATO continues the military and financial resupply pipeline due to or despite an agreement, Ukrainian troops would cross the river to reengage with Russia, post-ceasefire.
The ceasefire is dead on arrival. Zelensky's 'resignation' isn't mentioned.
This is just US posturing and will go nowhere. Russia has already said many times that they won't accept any temporary freezing of the war, which is what the USA is bringing to the negotiating table exactly. Rubio has already stated that if Russia doesn't accept the ceasefire (they won't, it's a well known fact), then they will be declared guilty of "not wanting peace".
Hence the war will continue, I fear, and Trump will keep the USA involved. "24 hrs"? 24 months in the best case scenario rather.
It could be 24 minutes if it all goes wrong.
What do you mean? Nuclear armaggedon? That may happen if NATO miscalculates too much indeed but I don’t think Ukraine is really that important for NATO (it is for Russia however and NATO tries to exhaust Russia with the war but not to trigger a nuclear war).
NATO is in the process to implode, the sooner the better. It lost its purpose which never was what was said it was.
It never had to defend any member, but it provided military power serving imperial American interests.
I also think that NATO will implode but I don’t think that the process has begun at all, not yet. Maybe if the New People’s Front take over France? Certainly not with any of the right wingers, who so far dominate European politics.
You said that “it lost its purpose” but it’s purpose was always to “Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down” (Lord Isnay, first secretary general of NATO). The USA is not pulling out of Europe and Russia is being kept out not anymore of Western Europe but of all non-Russian Europe (except Belarus). But the main goal is to keep the USA in anyhow, to become the 3rd English Empire and project US power not just in Europe but, via Europe into Russia and the Middle East. NATO is the very core of the US Empire.
And that’s why any pathetic rally of the European chieftains to make a statement matters and has Trump worried: he can’t a afford a revolt of the vassals because the USA is not strong enough to stand alone.
Someone should tell Rubio that his deceptions are snow from yesterday. Trump is a dealer and he knows war is business and lots of real estate is involved. He expects to win the deal, the only way peace means anything to him.
I don’t think that Trump is a dealer: he speaks too loud, too arrogantly to be a negotiatior. Rubio is the real dealer here, Trump is just an elephant in the china shop, Rubio is the guy who goes behind with the glue trying to fix everything.
Without details on what Washington/Ukraine is proposing to Russia, it is hard to say what Putin will do. Trump of course just assumes his good buddy Putin will agree. And he might if the terms favorite Russia. Stay tuned.
Russian counter-offer: Cease fire in return for stopping munition supply and intel for 30 days and holding internationally supervised elections.
In principle I would agree. However the "neutral" supervision would likely be selected by Western co belligerent nations.
Same goes for the Trump administration being a co belligerent in this conflict. There isn't going to be trust in a negotiation as long as the US sides with the Kiev regime.
At this stage it's just a chess game while Russia continues it's military advance toward the Dnieper & Odessa; and Ukraine & its Master continue bleeding morale and material.
Which Zelenskyy would win, and where most of Russian occupied Ukraine would vote to stay with Ukraine
And then you and the rest of Moscows shills would whine about some evil western Cabal sent to destroy Russia
I guess the people running our so-called foreign policy are in fact morons. Oh well….
Maybe it's better this way, knowing that we consistently populate DC with incompetent boobs, lest we allow ourselves to be lulled into a sense of superiority.
The Russians don't regard US leadership as an exemplar of galactic stupidity and ignorance for nothing.
Eyes of the world
Trump is making a huge mistake, he has just now made the war HIS rather than Bidens,,stupid MOFUer!!!
Are ALL MAGA freaks schizophrenic?
Antiwar should change forum companies to some other more advanced country than wherever the twisted log in people that work for this forum are from.
Common dreams has an advanced forum though it is a democratic party whiner site,
It looks like Common Dreams uses something called “Global Discourse.” Their mailing address is in Delaware.
It's more progressive oriented versus being pro R or pro D…!
Hah!
Funny one
That's more like it. American Diplomacy: To show us "Good Will," cut your own throat Russia. LOL.
Translation: Russia was offered the same North Korea John Bolton model from 2018.
The Art of No Deal.
Russia is the obstacle to peace
Please explain, why is Russia the obstacle?
There was never a pause on both cases…!
Of course not, same under Biden. They just play to the public adn the public, depending which side you are on, eats it up. Just check out the Right now how great a peace maker Trump is, and elite Dems said the same about Biden.
This is interesting (re public reaction Russian point of view March 11 Tuesday):
Excerpts
It is extremely unlikely that the American side will hear anything sane from the Ukrainians. Judging by today's drone attack, Ukraine has relied on flexing its muscles. The Americans simply will have nothing to bring to Moscow. Therefore, we need to sit quietly and wait for further damage to US-Ukrainian relations . . .
This is a game of nerves. And there are no real conditions. Do you remember the film where two buses rush towards each other, head-on, and there is only one question: who will be the first to turn? And so it is now. They are waiting to see if we will give up, if we will freak out? And all that Russia can do in this sense – and, apparently, will do – is to agree in general, but at the same time, it seems to me, we will offer a number of "corrective conditions". Which, accordingly, will no longer suit the Ukrainian side . . .
https://tsargrad.tv/articles/izvinite-mira-ne-budet-granicy-oboznacheny-russkim-v-dzhidde-predlozhili-sdatsja-na-30-dnej_1183274
LOL
The Russians from tsargrad TV cannot be trusted
Why?
tsar
The Russians play chess, not chicken.
Watch the Lavrov interview and compare with Rubio and Blinken before.
The INTELLECTUAL distance is unbelievable.
Russia would never agree…! This shows US is not interested in a peace treaty… Rather in something that brings the Noble prize for Trump…!
A great interview, must see.
I believe that Washington, the CIA, MI6, and the City of London are trying to prolong the conflict.
The Russians hold explicit policy stances and have done so since before Trump assumed his second term.
The next meeting is designed to fail, which both sides would quietly concur. It leaves one curious about what topics of interest will fill the diplomatic calendar because sanctions and war-related issues are stalemated or deadlocked.
A point of focus is the Russia-UK relationship. The recent tit-for-tat diplomatic expulsions might suggest that influential Brits residing in Russia might also be expelled.
What items of great utility the note does Russia purchase from the UK? Certainly not pharmaceuticals with questionable integrity.
https://www.imidaily.com/europe/uk-lost-10800-millionaires-in-2024-as-non-dom-changes-spark-record-exodus/#:~:text=Europe-,UK%20Lost%2010%2C800%20Millionaires%20in%202024%20As,Dom%20Changes%20Spark%20Record%20Exodus&text=A%20wave%20of%20high%2Dnet,the%20country%20every%2045%20minutes.
AI Overview
In 2024, the UK experienced a net outflow of 10,800 millionaires, exceeding any other country except China, according to New World Wealth analysis, with 78 centi-millionaires and 12 billionaires leaving.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
Net Outflow of Millionaires:
The UK saw a net outflow of 10,800 millionaires in 2024.
Top-End Outflow:
This exodus was particularly noticeable at the top end, with 78 centi-millionaires and 12 billionaires leaving the UK in 2024.
Comparison to 2023:
The number of millionaires leaving the UK in 2024, was a significant increase from the 4,200 who left in 2023, representing a rise of 157%.
Driving Factors:
This outflow is partly attributed to concerns about high UK taxes and the end of the resident non-domicile system."–AI Generative
The birthplace of classical writers and modern Communist doctrine. The Brits have never learned to finesse finance and taxes. They understand alliteration.
Trump is schizophrenic
Today must be a good day
The entire world revolves around Trump. Trump 24/7 everywhere. Trump said the other day that BRICS is dead with some hand gesture of just shoving it aside.
Well, since we hear little if anything about BRICS in the media it might as well be dead. The media gets ratings when everything is about Trump, good or bad.
Yup and thats what he wants
Kiev has made a reluctant step towards peace; therefore, weapons and intel flow should resume so that Kiev may step away from need to negotiate.
I'd ask who's running this low-rent circus, but…
Kyiv is getting more stuff to prevent a Russian attack in the future which we know will happen based on the Russias past actions
No, Kiev is getting a resumption of the weapon and intel flow that keeps them fighting. The ONLY thing keeping them fighting, despite the Ukraine Apologist line that it’s “heroic patriotic heroism winning the fight; that, and gott mit uns of course.”
When the oligarchs are done, Europe, including Poland, will be another Gaza. Would you call that winning?
What would be your benefit, a villa and swimming pool on another planet, maybe the Moon or Mars?
You could have Musk as a neighbor.
We do not have an oligarch problem in much of Europe – not when compared to the US, Russia or much of the rest of the world.
Just try to name a few really politically influential Polish oligarchs.
Oligarchs (really mostly one) are destroying the US currently and Putin has made the Russian oligarchs pay for much of the cost of the war.
So are perhaps you are projecting the US problem of Oligarchs on Europe?
The same American oligarchs in control in Washington are in control in Europe.
Out of the 10 most influential shareholders of Rheinmetall nine are Americans.
Do some research on BlackRock, private equity investors with trillions of $$ investments world wide, Merz was the CEO
responsible for Europe if I am not mistaken, that would be a conflict of interest issue. RoundRock is invested in Ukraine, they were dealing with Zelensky, another corrupt servant.
If the same oligarch were in control in EU as in the US then we would hardly be in a trade war would we?
Some issues: only 27% of the shares of Rheinmetall are held by private investors – of the 57% held by Institutional investors 20 are held by EU institutions 28 by US institutions and9 by others.
So your information is of dubious quality.
I let you do the research – I cannot find what the conflict of interests you are trying to imply:
Merz was Chairman of the supervisory board (2016–2020) so ended his tenure much before the SMO while Germany was still very much partner with Russia, and much before the present elevation to political leader of the coming German government.
And what is RoundRock and how is it tied to European oligarchs and in what way would they be able to influence EU public opinion?
WHAT ABOUT THE PIPELINE SABOTAGE? It damaged the German economy and the EU with it, and most nations are NATO members, US allies. Think about that.
Germany is a NATO member, the US sanctions NATO members if they don't sanction Russia!
The NATO members are not all willing to ruin their nations economies to benefit a non NATO member like Ukraine.
That is why NATO is imploding, with or without Trump. The sooner the better. Europe does not need NATO at all.
Zero relevance to the debate about oligarchs in Europe.
And Btw the pipeline wasn't transporting gas and had not been doing so for a while – so no impact on EU economy – as Germany was already on a path to replace Russian gas with LNG.
EU applies sanctions on Russia and will continue to do so even if the US lifts their sanctions – this is not a place where the US goats EU into actions they would not do absent US pressure.
The Germans just elected a government which had a harder line on Russia as their program – much the same has happened in Denmark, Sweden, Finland and a host of other EU countries – the only exceptions being Slovakia (and perhaps Austria?).
NATO has imploded – in as much as there is no credibility to Trump's article 5 commitment.
However rump-NATO as in a European defensive alliance will survive as clearly shown by Macron's offer to extend the French nuclear coverage and the debates between the European NATO members (including Turkey and Canada).
That defensive alliance has never been more relevant than it is now. If for no other reason then because without it money would be fleeing Europe not flowing back to Europe.
I still agree with Brian Berletic. Continuity of agenda.
Put out a deal that they know will be unacceptable to Russia and blame Russia for keeping the war going. Trump and the U.S. may be playing 'Chinese Checkers' but they hold a very weak hand when it comes to influencing the Russian position.
Trump is not serious, he is a con man, a real estate DEALER.
The oligarchs own the governments of the Western democracies and with that control over NATO. Europe will be the next battleground and provide the cannonfodder. Why else did NATO encircle Russia?
They are playing kick the can down the road to maximize MIC profits. War is good business, peace isn't.
Nobody here is talking about the INCREDIBLE Ukrainian advances in the Toretsk direction. The Ukrainians have pushed the Russians back into Central Toretsk, where if the Ukrainians continue with their current pace, then the Russian army could be ENCIRCLED in toretsk!
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2b5ab60c1bd87fb79f4846004b3237d0b2d8d91f867d5934054a6a4fcf093924.png
The big money wants more war, business is great. BlackRock, the biggest private equity investor, is ready to invest in Ukraine, they can't lose.
But if Russia advances then Ukraine is gonna fall tomorrow
Zelensky needs soldiers, maybe you could volunteer to help Ukraine win.
Putin needs North Korean troops to fight for Russia. Maybe he could use the thousands of children he abducted from Ukraine, instead?
There is no evidence to prove it, as always. The children were never abducted, here too where is your proof?
Face the facts the Ukraine conflict is lost, like Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam before.
ICC judges issue arrest warrants against Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova.
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and
President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin of the Russian Federation, is allegedly responsible for the war crime of unlawful deportation of population (children) and that of unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation (under articles 8(2)(a)(vii) and 8(2)(b)(viii) of the Rome Statute).
Ms Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Commissioner for Children’s Rights in the Office of the President of the Russian Federation, is allegedly responsible for the war crime of unlawful deportation of population (children) and that of unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation (under articles 8(2)(a)(vii) and 8(2)(b)(viii) of the Rome Statute).
Face the fact that you're talking out of your ass.
maybe you should volunter for putin then
Putanic Russia will never agree to peace
Trump is not ready to sacrifice any political capital for peace, he is not ready for peace, no more than Biden.
The ruling elite in DC is morally and intellectually bankrupt.
Washington DC is an intellectual and moral no man's land.
Mar 10, 2025 A Large Group of BRITISH and FRENCH Mercenaries Were Blown to Pieces During Their Escape From KURSK
The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation held a press briefing for journalists, where representatives of the defense department commented on the events taking place in the special military operation zone.
https://youtu.be/MrUJaU-LINg?si=ErvYltnY0rq38rdm
Well, dang!
In April 2022, Russian state-owned news agency Ria Novosti published an article by Timofey Sergeytsev,
"What Russia should do with Ukraine",
Where he argued that Ukraine and Ukrainian national identity must be wiped out, because he claimed most Ukrainians are at least "passive Nazis
Russia are the good guys though I promise 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏 😀
"The US lifted the pause after Ukraine said it was ready to accept a 30-day ceasefire if Russia agreed"
And how do we know it is even true?
To lie is what our politicians know how to do best.
"Putin's political enemies should be locked up in concentration camps and castrated" – Russian state TV.
Russia are the good guys though I promise 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏 😀