Sometimes elections and election results are easy to analyse but more often then not a superficial analysis fails to notice what has actually happened and what it might portend for the future.
Take the Dutch General Election from Wednesday - the quick analysis said it was a "win" for the "far right". Perhaps - perhaps not. It depends if you think Wilders and the PVV, for all their anti-immigration rhetoric, are really "of the Right" or, like UKIP here, a left-wing wolf disguised as a right-wing sheep.
One of the ways to defang the populist wolf is to bring them in to the fold - it doesn't always work (it didn't in Germany in January 1933 when the other right-wingers thought they could "control" Hitler). Wilders actually sounded disappointed the VVD refused to be in Cabinet with him but neither did the defeated centre-right VVD promise not to support a PVV minority - it could be shrewd politics.
The other big winners in Wednesday's elections were Omtzigt's New Social Contract and I suspect they would find it easier to co-exist with the PVV than the VVD so a minority administration of PVV and NSC looks an option with VVD offering the equivalwnt of supply and confidence.
Omtzigt's old party, the CDA, lost badly as did the centrist D66 (both being members of the former Government) and that's the key - the election was, as we're seeing in other places, a decisive rejection of the incumbent administration and the parties within. The previous VVD/D66/CDA/CU coalition went from 78 seats in the previous House of Represntatives to just 41. The big winners were the PVV (up 20) and NSC (new party, 20) but both the Green-Labour bloc (+8) and the Farmer Citizens Movement (+6) also moved ahead.
The winners were therefore those who hadn't been part of the Government whether they were "new" parties (NSC and the Farmer/Citizens) or opposition parties (Green-Labour and PVV).
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
And our job is to say that we will support Ukraine as long as they wish to fight.
Yes, but being realistic if the US doesn't do the heavy lifting is anyone else going to outside the Baltics, who can only do so much?
I just hope there's a crack team within UK government planning how UK will help with the heavy lifting of resisting Russia in general across Europe ready for the Trump 2.0 arrival.
All of europe needs to plan now.
We cannot make our own armed forces decent, or build a railway line properly, I would not be optimistic in that situation. A lot more than half of the US will be praying for a Biden win (even with the US not being as in as they could be, without boots on the ground).
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
If Ukraine has run out of men why would the US/Germany need to force them towards peace? It also seems rather implausible in terms of numbers unless the Ukrainian losses are far, far bigger than we are lead to believe. I just cannot fathom the US approach of refusing to supply long range missiles when the UK did it without escalatory consequences. The Crimean bridge is a sitting duck.
Ukraine has SO run out of men they are now sending women to the front lines
‘If Not Me, Who?’: As Ukraine Seeks Troops, Women Prepare for the Call With so much in the war against Russia hinging on refilling the ranks of soldiers, efforts are underway to draw more Ukrainian women into the army.
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
That said, I agree this Bild article might be some complex psyops - perhaps to embarrass Biden and Scholz into greater effort?
Nonetheless my instinct is that this war is winding down into a sad ceasefire in the frozen mud
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
That said, I agree this Bild article might be some complex psyops - perhaps to embarrass Biden and Scholz into greater effort?
Nonetheless my instinct is that this war is winding down into a sad ceasefire in the frozen mud
Can’t you? If Bild is to be believed then Putin is about to win a war against Britain, France and the USA. As did the Taliban. And various others in recent history.
More to the point you can’t win a war against a nuclear power if you don’t care enough about winning.
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
During COVID we couldn't be so certain about accuracy of reports in German press....wonder whatever happened to those responsible for the damaging lies printed?
It is entirely plausible to me that the Biden administration wants the Ukraine situation settled by the time of the election.
Yes. It deprives Trump and the GOP of an increasingly potent attack line
“Americans are suffering at home as you send trillions to Zelensky”
If Biden can turn around and say The Russian bear has been mauled and won’t try this again, even if Ukraine has lost territory, and now the war is over - a lot of American voters would say Yes, that’s fine, now focus on domestic stuff please
And Trump’s America First shtick is less effective
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
During COVID we couldn't be so certain about accuracy of reports in German press....wonder whatever happened to those responsible for the damaging lies printed?
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
(Snip)
Afghanistan has proved you wrong twice. Vietnam once (not twice, as IIRC France got nukes after it left).
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
Another election where it's easy to draw the wrong conclusion was the Plaistow North contest yesterday.
The various currents and undercurrents of Newham politics flow through this result. The winning candidate, Sophia Naqvi, while nominally Independent, is a supporter of Mehmood Mirza, the winner of the Boleyn contest in July. Along with a defecting member from East Ham North, they now form the official opposition to the Labour administration.
MIrza was once a Labour supporter and an ally of Roksana Fiaz, the current Mayor and Mirza was part of the group which orchestrated her selection success and the ousting of Sir Robin Wales. This was all good while Corbyn ran the party but in the Starmer era, Fiaz has become a loyalist and Mirza and his followers have been expelled.
This vote was therefore much less about Gaza than straightforward factional left-wing politics and personalities. Fiaz even encouraged another ally to run as a spoiler candidate but he only got 10% and made no difference with the Conservative, Green and LD candidates all well behind (it was a dreadful result for the Greens in particular).
Newham is a Borough with a high population of those claiming to adhere to the Islamic faith but the largest Muslim groupings are from Bangladesh, Pakistan and sub-Saharan Africa. Gaza was a peripheral issue and in any case for all Plaistow North is 45% Muslim that means it's 55% non-Muslim so it seems certain Naqvi drew support well beyond the established religious groupings.
There's been a rapid rise in dissatisfaction with the Council in recent times - indeed, almost ever since Fiaz took over from Sir Robin Wales. In the latter's time, and channelling my inner James Cleverly, Newham might have been a sh*thole but it was a well-managed and well-run sh*thole. Now, as with many other Councils, the cracks are starting to show and while it's probably unfair to blame Fiaz in isolation, it's happened on her watch.
What now? I'm sure MIrza will put up candidates in East Ham, West Ham & Beckton and the Stratford & Bow seats next year. I suspect he doesn't have the resources yet to fight all 22 Wards at a full election in 2026 and the history of Respect back in the mid-2000s suggests it's a hard task. It is clear the formerly rock solid Labour vote can't be assumed anywhere in Newham and whether via the Newham Independents or the Greens, 2026 may be a much tougher election for Labour and for Fiaz who will seek re-election as Mayor (I would imagine).
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
That said, I agree this Bild article might be some complex psyops - perhaps to embarrass Biden and Scholz into greater effort?
Nonetheless my instinct is that this war is winding down into a sad ceasefire in the frozen mud
I have to say that Leons assessment of this war is very persuasive to me, although I realise it isn't what people want to hear.
A lot of smart people say that the likely conclusion of this war is that it just gets frozen on pretty much the same lines as present.
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
(Snip)
Afghanistan has proved you wrong twice. Vietnam once (not twice, as IIRC France got nukes after it left).
No, I mean you can’t win a war of OFFENCE against a nuclear power on their home territory
Because in the end they will use a nuke
The only way Ukraine can win this war - now that Russia has laid seven trillion mines making conventional attacks impossibly costly - is by attacking Russia itself, on Russian territory, with long range weapons provided by the US etc
But that risks toppling Putin and WW3 and the Bomb. So America won’t give those weapons to Kyiv
So the result is what we see. Stasis. Neither side can attack successfully
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
It is entirely plausible to me that the Biden administration wants the Ukraine situation settled by the time of the election.
Yes. It deprives Trump and the GOP of an increasingly potent attack line
“Americans are suffering at home as you send trillions to Zelensky”
If Biden can turn around and say The Russian bear has been mauled and won’t try this again, even if Ukraine has lost territory, and now the war is over - a lot of American voters would say Yes, that’s fine, now focus on domestic stuff please
And Trump’s America First shtick is less effective
And as part of any settlement what would the West want? A fast track for Ukraine into the EU and NATO. Which now appears more relevant and critical than ever.
And that creates an attack line against the person who is a NATO sceptic.
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
That said, I agree this Bild article might be some complex psyops - perhaps to embarrass Biden and Scholz into greater effort?
Nonetheless my instinct is that this war is winding down into a sad ceasefire in the frozen mud
I have to say that Leons assessment of this war is very persuasive to me, although I realise it isn't what people want to hear.
A lot of smart people say that the likely conclusion of this war is that it just gets frozen on pretty much the same lines as present.
If that happens, Ukraine and Poland will become nuclear armed powers within a decade.
Edit; in the case of Ukraine that might well be a lot sooner.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
Everyone didn’t say that.
Throughout this war people have all sat in their own positions on two spectrums: optimistic vs pessimistic, and pro- or anti-Russia. There is a difference between the will to victory and belief in victory, although human nature being what it is there is some correlation.
There have been some unrealistic optimists and some constant pessimists. Both have been wrong at times. The former this Autumn, the latter last year.
Personally I’ve turned from cautious optimist to borderline pessimist, but remain convinced this is an existential fight that must be fought until Putin is no more. Sadly it seems across the channel and Atlantic we have rather a lot of people eager to wave a piece of paper. If they do that then they are selling Ukraine down the river into oblivion, in the short or long term.
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
(Snip)
Afghanistan has proved you wrong twice. Vietnam once (not twice, as IIRC France got nukes after it left).
No, I mean you can’t win a war of OFFENCE against a nuclear power on their home territory
Because in the end they will use a nuke (Snip)
LOL. So you got it wrong.
You're also wrong: that 'home' territory is Ukraine, not Russia.
It is entirely plausible to me that the Biden administration wants the Ukraine situation settled by the time of the election.
Yes. It deprives Trump and the GOP of an increasingly potent attack line
“Americans are suffering at home as you send trillions to Zelensky”
If Biden can turn around and say The Russian bear has been mauled and won’t try this again, even if Ukraine has lost territory, and now the war is over - a lot of American voters would say Yes, that’s fine, now focus on domestic stuff please
And Trump’s America First shtick is less effective
And as part of any settlement what would the West want? A fast track for Ukraine into the EU and NATO. Which now appears more relevant and critical than ever.
And that creates an attack line against the person who is a NATO sceptic.
Putin can’t sign any agreement that allows Ukraine to become a NATO and EU country. Indeed, his first demand would be to bar it.
If Ukraine joins either, that would be an existential moment for Putin.
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
Yes. The surprising failure of really quite stringent sanctions was pivotal
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
The Conservatives are now at their lowest for this series, whilst Labour is also polling low (but has another 1% to fall to reach their nadir). LibDems are on their equal highest and Reform and Green are still polling strongly. So a move away from the two main parties.
Let's see whether the Autumn Statement impacts the polling next week.
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
That said, I agree this Bild article might be some complex psyops - perhaps to embarrass Biden and Scholz into greater effort?
Nonetheless my instinct is that this war is winding down into a sad ceasefire in the frozen mud
It is entirely plausible to me that the Biden administration wants the Ukraine situation settled by the time of the election.
Yes. It deprives Trump and the GOP of an increasingly potent attack line
“Americans are suffering at home as you send trillions to Zelensky”
If Biden can turn around and say The Russian bear has been mauled and won’t try this again, even if Ukraine has lost territory, and now the war is over - a lot of American voters would say Yes, that’s fine, now focus on domestic stuff please
And Trump’s America First shtick is less effective
And as part of any settlement what would the West want? A fast track for Ukraine into the EU and NATO. Which now appears more relevant and critical than ever.
And that creates an attack line against the person who is a NATO sceptic.
EU accession talks look to be off the agenda for the moment and there are problems with funding too:
Seems no one is going to escape the coming European Council breakdown over Europe's Ukraine policy unscathed, regardless of supportive language that will be adopted to paper over the cracks “the EU remains committed to Ukraine etc etc”. The blame game is already in full effect. (Thread...)
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
That said, I agree this Bild article might be some complex psyops - perhaps to embarrass Biden and Scholz into greater effort?
Nonetheless my instinct is that this war is winding down into a sad ceasefire in the frozen mud
Vietnam did; Afghanistan did, twice.
I’ve just pointed out what I mean. You can’t attack a nuclear power on its home territory and win
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
Yes. The surprising failure of really quite stringent sanctions was pivotal
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
Not great for them - but serious and well targeted sanctions (completely restricting the supply of machine tool parts, for example) would have collapsed their manufacturing. That still hasn't been done.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
They could have got lucky and it could have worked. But the problem with PB is that there was a vast amount of virtue signalling and groupthink on this topic. There was no analysis going on, the commentary was very poor, like reading some comments on facebook where everyone agrees with each other. It was always apparent to me that the problem for Ukraine is that it cannot ever win, and even now, any 'peace' based on a frozen line is going to be destablising for Ukraine in a way that it is not for Russia.
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
Yes. The surprising failure of really quite stringent sanctions was pivotal
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
Not great for them - but serious and well targeted sanctions (completely restricting the supply of machine tool parts, for example) would have collapsed their manufacturing. That still hasn't been done.
It appears no one sat down with some analysts and said "how do we fuck Russia? At least cost to our economy, and without committing acts of war?"
It is entirely plausible to me that the Biden administration wants the Ukraine situation settled by the time of the election.
Yes. It deprives Trump and the GOP of an increasingly potent attack line
“Americans are suffering at home as you send trillions to Zelensky”
If Biden can turn around and say The Russian bear has been mauled and won’t try this again, even if Ukraine has lost territory, and now the war is over - a lot of American voters would say Yes, that’s fine, now focus on domestic stuff please
And Trump’s America First shtick is less effective
And as part of any settlement what would the West want? A fast track for Ukraine into the EU and NATO. Which now appears more relevant and critical than ever.
And that creates an attack line against the person who is a NATO sceptic.
Putin can’t sign any agreement that allows Ukraine to become a NATO and EU country. Indeed, his first demand would be to bar it.
If Ukraine joins either, that would be an existential moment for Putin.
Then the conflict continues*. In all things, there is a quid pro quo.
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
Yes. The surprising failure of really quite stringent sanctions was pivotal
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
Not great for them - but serious and well targeted sanctions (completely restricting the supply of machine tool parts, for example) would have collapsed their manufacturing. That still hasn't been done.
Third party trade is pretty hard to stop. Lots going via India.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
Everyone didn’t say that.
Throughout this war people have all sat in their own positions on two spectrums: optimistic vs pessimistic, and pro- or anti-Russia. There is a difference between the will to victory and belief in victory, although human nature being what it is there is some correlation.
There have been some unrealistic optimists and some constant pessimists. Both have been wrong at times. The former this Autumn, the latter last year.
Personally I’ve turned from cautious optimist to borderline pessimist, but remain convinced this is an existential fight that must be fought until Putin is no more. Sadly it seems across the channel and Atlantic we have rather a lot of people eager to wave a piece of paper. If they do that then they are selling Ukraine down the river into oblivion, in the short or long term.
When I began pointing out the faltering nature of the Ukrainian counter offensive I can only recall @Dura_Ace and @DavidL agreeing with me, and saying Yeah it’s not great
But anyway it doesn’t matter
The point is Ukraine cannot win this war - not in terms of regaining all lost territory. Russia has found a method - laying billions of mines - which makes it impossible. Ukraine has lost too many men and is now sending women into battle - literally the wombs of the Ukrainian nation. The future
Perhaps it is time for us to say to Ukraine Ok this isn’t working any more. Sorry
And before I am accused of being Putin’s catamite the economist and the Wall Street journal have both pointed out that senior Ukrainian politicians and generals believe exactly this: Sadly, the war cannot be won, it is maybe time to cut losses and save lives
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
And our job is to say that we will support Ukraine as long as they wish to fight.
Yes, but being realistic if the US doesn't do the heavy lifting is anyone else going to outside the Baltics, who can only do so much?
I just hope there's a crack team within UK government planning how UK will help with the heavy lifting of resisting Russia in general across Europe ready for the Trump 2.0 arrival.
All of europe needs to plan now.
If we wanted to do that, we'd be doing it now - like Poland. Instead, we'll bumble along.
The state of our armed forces, if a second term Trump were to abandon NATO, is parlous. The idea that there is a "crack team" planning anything within this government is ridiculous. And if there were, it would be working on the next election before it considered anything else.
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
Yes. The surprising failure of really quite stringent sanctions was pivotal
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
Not great for them - but serious and well targeted sanctions (completely restricting the supply of machine tool parts, for example) would have collapsed their manufacturing. That still hasn't been done.
Too many German companies making too much money from selling them.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
They could have got lucky and it could have worked. But the problem with PB is that there was a vast amount of virtue signalling and groupthink on this topic. There was no analysis going on, the commentary was very poor, like reading some comments on facebook where everyone agrees with each other. It was always apparent to me that the problem for Ukraine is that it cannot ever win, and even now, any 'peace' based on a frozen line is going to be destablising for Ukraine in a way that it is not for Russia.
If an armistice happens on the front lines roughly as they are now then we have to arm Ukraine to the teeth so that Putin never tries it again. Ditto Poland and the Baltics and the entire NATO frontier
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
Yes. The surprising failure of really quite stringent sanctions was pivotal
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
Not great for them - but serious and well targeted sanctions (completely restricting the supply of machine tool parts, for example) would have collapsed their manufacturing. That still hasn't been done.
It appears no one sat down with some analysts and said "how do we fuck Russia? At least cost to our economy, and without committing acts of war?"
Machine tools wouldn't even be that costly (and the UK is more or less irrelevant to that), as the value of the trade is tiny compared with its importance to the Russian economy. It would have cost a few billion at most to buy all the stock that otherwise found its way to Russia.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
Everyone didn’t say that.
Throughout this war people have all sat in their own positions on two spectrums: optimistic vs pessimistic, and pro- or anti-Russia. There is a difference between the will to victory and belief in victory, although human nature being what it is there is some correlation.
There have been some unrealistic optimists and some constant pessimists. Both have been wrong at times. The former this Autumn, the latter last year.
Personally I’ve turned from cautious optimist to borderline pessimist, but remain convinced this is an existential fight that must be fought until Putin is no more. Sadly it seems across the channel and Atlantic we have rather a lot of people eager to wave a piece of paper. If they do that then they are selling Ukraine down the river into oblivion, in the short or long term.
When I began pointing out the faltering nature of the Ukrainian counter offensive I can only recall @Dura_Ace and @DavidL agreeing with me, and saying Yeah it’s not great
But anyway it doesn’t matter
The point is Ukraine cannot win this war - not in terms of regaining all lost territory. Russia has found a method - laying billions of mines - which makes it impossible. Ukraine has lost too many men and is now sending women into battle - literally the wombs of the Ukrainian nation. The future
Perhaps it is time for us to say to Ukraine Ok this isn’t working any more. Sorry
And before I am accused of being Putin’s catamite the economist and the Wall Street journal have both pointed out that senior Ukrainian politicians and generals believe exactly this: Sadly, the war cannot be won, it is maybe time to cut losses and save lives
You see this is the problem, and where I think different people see things very differently. A peace with Russian territorial gains would not save lives or cut losses long term. It would be a platform for the next invasion, after a few years to rebuild the Russian military and learn lessons. And after that Moldova perhaps. Of the Baltics. By that point Putin would know that NATO is always the first to blink. This is proper Sudetenland stuff.
The West could have helped Ukraine win this war but instead dithered, leaving Russia time to dig trenches and recruit new fighters, buy more ammunition and do their thing on their US useful idiots.
Russia will keep going until it’s either regained its lost colonies or is beaten.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
They could have got lucky and it could have worked. But the problem with PB is that there was a vast amount of virtue signalling and groupthink on this topic. There was no analysis going on, the commentary was very poor, like reading some comments on facebook where everyone agrees with each other. It was always apparent to me that the problem for Ukraine is that it cannot ever win, and even now, any 'peace' based on a frozen line is going to be destablising for Ukraine in a way that it is not for Russia.
If an armistice happens on the front lines roughly as they are now then we have to arm Ukraine to the teeth so that Putin never tries it again. Ditto Poland and the Baltics and the entire NATO frontier
And rUkraine must join NATO
Also maybe Georgia
Georgia’s now fully succumbed to state capture by the Russian influence machine. Short of another rose revolution they’re not joining NATO anytime soon.
It is entirely plausible to me that the Biden administration wants the Ukraine situation settled by the time of the election.
Yes. It deprives Trump and the GOP of an increasingly potent attack line
“Americans are suffering at home as you send trillions to Zelensky”
If Biden can turn around and say The Russian bear has been mauled and won’t try this again, even if Ukraine has lost territory, and now the war is over - a lot of American voters would say Yes, that’s fine, now focus on domestic stuff please
And Trump’s America First shtick is less effective
And as part of any settlement what would the West want? A fast track for Ukraine into the EU and NATO. Which now appears more relevant and critical than ever.
And that creates an attack line against the person who is a NATO sceptic.
It wouldn't happen, though, as Putin wouldn't accept it - and the Putin friendly NATO members would veto it. EU membership remains a possibility, as there's a bit more leverage against the recalcitrants.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
Everyone didn’t say that.
Throughout this war people have all sat in their own positions on two spectrums: optimistic vs pessimistic, and pro- or anti-Russia. There is a difference between the will to victory and belief in victory, although human nature being what it is there is some correlation.
There have been some unrealistic optimists and some constant pessimists. Both have been wrong at times. The former this Autumn, the latter last year.
Personally I’ve turned from cautious optimist to borderline pessimist, but remain convinced this is an existential fight that must be fought until Putin is no more. Sadly it seems across the channel and Atlantic we have rather a lot of people eager to wave a piece of paper. If they do that then they are selling Ukraine down the river into oblivion, in the short or long term.
When I began pointing out the faltering nature of the Ukrainian counter offensive I can only recall @Dura_Ace and @DavidL agreeing with me, and saying Yeah it’s not great
But anyway it doesn’t matter
The point is Ukraine cannot win this war - not in terms of regaining all lost territory. Russia has found a method - laying billions of mines - which makes it impossible. Ukraine has lost too many men and is now sending women into battle - literally the wombs of the Ukrainian nation. The future
Perhaps it is time for us to say to Ukraine Ok this isn’t working any more. Sorry
And before I am accused of being Putin’s catamite the economist and the Wall Street journal have both pointed out that senior Ukrainian politicians and generals believe exactly this: Sadly, the war cannot be won, it is maybe time to cut losses and save lives
You see this is the problem, and where I think different people see things very differently. A peace with Russian territorial gains would not save lives or cut losses long term. It would be a platform for the next invasion, after a few years to rebuild the Russian military and learn lessons. And after that Moldova perhaps. Of the Baltics. By that point Putin would know that NATO is always the first to blink. This is proper Sudetenland stuff.
The West could have helped Ukraine win this war but instead dithered, leaving Russia time to dig trenches and recruit new fighters, buy more ammunition and do their thing on their US useful idiots.
Russia will keep going until it’s either regained its lost colonies or is beaten.
They could still help Ukraine win - subject to Congressional approval for the funding. And it's maybe only 20 or 30 House members blocking that.
It is entirely plausible to me that the Biden administration wants the Ukraine situation settled by the time of the election.
Yes. It deprives Trump and the GOP of an increasingly potent attack line
“Americans are suffering at home as you send trillions to Zelensky”
If Biden can turn around and say The Russian bear has been mauled and won’t try this again, even if Ukraine has lost territory, and now the war is over - a lot of American voters would say Yes, that’s fine, now focus on domestic stuff please
And Trump’s America First shtick is less effective
And as part of any settlement what would the West want? A fast track for Ukraine into the EU and NATO. Which now appears more relevant and critical than ever.
And that creates an attack line against the person who is a NATO sceptic.
It wouldn't happen, though, as Putin wouldn't accept it - and the Putin friendly NATO members would veto it. EU membership remains a possibility, as there's a bit more leverage against the recalcitrants.
Hungary would just ask for more from the US for a yes vote. Turkey would also just ask for some more concessions. See the votes on Finland and Sweden.
It is entirely plausible to me that the Biden administration wants the Ukraine situation settled by the time of the election.
Yes. It deprives Trump and the GOP of an increasingly potent attack line
“Americans are suffering at home as you send trillions to Zelensky”
If Biden can turn around and say The Russian bear has been mauled and won’t try this again, even if Ukraine has lost territory, and now the war is over - a lot of American voters would say Yes, that’s fine, now focus on domestic stuff please
And Trump’s America First shtick is less effective
And as part of any settlement what would the West want? A fast track for Ukraine into the EU and NATO. Which now appears more relevant and critical than ever.
And that creates an attack line against the person who is a NATO sceptic.
It wouldn't happen, though, as Putin wouldn't accept it - and the Putin friendly NATO members would veto it. EU membership remains a possibility, as there's a bit more leverage against the recalcitrants.
But this is the thing. If Putin wants to continue to endanger his premiership with a costly and bloody stalemate then he can do. But if he does genuinely want to come to the table and freeze the conflict - then there’ll be consequences to that too. Nobody is walking away from the situation with everything they wanted. That’s the nature of a deal. Ideally we’d all love to see Russia completely out of Ukraine, but that is looking to be unfortunately incredibly difficult to achieve.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
Everyone didn’t say that.
Throughout this war people have all sat in their own positions on two spectrums: optimistic vs pessimistic, and pro- or anti-Russia. There is a difference between the will to victory and belief in victory, although human nature being what it is there is some correlation.
There have been some unrealistic optimists and some constant pessimists. Both have been wrong at times. The former this Autumn, the latter last year.
Personally I’ve turned from cautious optimist to borderline pessimist, but remain convinced this is an existential fight that must be fought until Putin is no more. Sadly it seems across the channel and Atlantic we have rather a lot of people eager to wave a piece of paper. If they do that then they are selling Ukraine down the river into oblivion, in the short or long term.
When I began pointing out the faltering nature of the Ukrainian counter offensive I can only recall @Dura_Ace and @DavidL agreeing with me, and saying Yeah it’s not great
But anyway it doesn’t matter
The point is Ukraine cannot win this war - not in terms of regaining all lost territory. Russia has found a method - laying billions of mines - which makes it impossible. Ukraine has lost too many men and is now sending women into battle - literally the wombs of the Ukrainian nation. The future
Perhaps it is time for us to say to Ukraine Ok this isn’t working any more. Sorry
And before I am accused of being Putin’s catamite the economist and the Wall Street journal have both pointed out that senior Ukrainian politicians and generals believe exactly this: Sadly, the war cannot be won, it is maybe time to cut losses and save lives
Someone genuinely perceptive said this back in January:
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
Yes. The surprising failure of really quite stringent sanctions was pivotal
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
Not great for them - but serious and well targeted sanctions (completely restricting the supply of machine tool parts, for example) would have collapsed their manufacturing. That still hasn't been done.
Third party trade is pretty hard to stop. Lots going via India.
And its hard to sanction a petro-state. Looking at Iran or Venezuela, oil is easy to move, pretty anonymous when refined and everyone needs it.
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
(Snip)
Afghanistan has proved you wrong twice. Vietnam once (not twice, as IIRC France got nukes after it left).
No, I mean you can’t win a war of OFFENCE against a nuclear power on their home territory
Because in the end they will use a nuke
The only way Ukraine can win this war - now that Russia has laid seven trillion mines making conventional attacks impossibly costly - is by attacking Russia itself, on Russian territory, with long range weapons provided by the US etc
But that risks toppling Putin and WW3 and the Bomb. So America won’t give those weapons to Kyiv
So the result is what we see. Stasis. Neither side can attack successfully
The only obvious answer to your point then is to make sure that all the countries along the Russian border (including Ukraine) are armed with nuclear weapons. That is the only way they will ever feel even slightly secure against a Putin led Russia.
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
(Snip)
Afghanistan has proved you wrong twice. Vietnam once (not twice, as IIRC France got nukes after it left).
No, I mean you can’t win a war of OFFENCE against a nuclear power on their home territory
Because in the end they will use a nuke
The only way Ukraine can win this war - now that Russia has laid seven trillion mines making conventional attacks impossibly costly - is by attacking Russia itself, on Russian territory, with long range weapons provided by the US etc
But that risks toppling Putin and WW3 and the Bomb. So America won’t give those weapons to Kyiv
So the result is what we see. Stasis. Neither side can attack successfully
The only obvious answer to your point then is to make sure that all the countries along the Russian border (including Ukraine) are armed with nuclear weapons. That is the only way they will ever feel even slightly secure against a Putin led Russia.
That is the logical conclusion of your comment.
I look forward to the day when every state has nuclear weapons.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
They could have got lucky and it could have worked. But the problem with PB is that there was a vast amount of virtue signalling and groupthink on this topic. There was no analysis going on, the commentary was very poor, like reading some comments on facebook where everyone agrees with each other. It was always apparent to me that the problem for Ukraine is that it cannot ever win, and even now, any 'peace' based on a frozen line is going to be destablising for Ukraine in a way that it is not for Russia.
If an armistice happens on the front lines roughly as they are now then we have to arm Ukraine to the teeth so that Putin never tries it again. Ditto Poland and the Baltics and the entire NATO frontier
And rUkraine must join NATO
Also maybe Georgia
Georgia’s now fully succumbed to state capture by the Russian influence machine. Short of another rose revolution they’re not joining NATO anytime soon.
Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia occupied by Putin for 15 years already.
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
we're not vulcans
Some are definitely Victors. Others quite simply Valiants. With a smattering of Sperins.
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
Everyone has morale. We're not vulcans. Being a non-combatant doesn't mean having no emotional investment in a conflict (just ask those marching on both sides over Israel- Hamas over recent weeks). We were a non-combatant country when Churchill was writing The Gathering Storm.
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
(Snip)
Afghanistan has proved you wrong twice. Vietnam once (not twice, as IIRC France got nukes after it left).
No, I mean you can’t win a war of OFFENCE against a nuclear power on their home territory
Because in the end they will use a nuke
The only way Ukraine can win this war - now that Russia has laid seven trillion mines making conventional attacks impossibly costly - is by attacking Russia itself, on Russian territory, with long range weapons provided by the US etc
But that risks toppling Putin and WW3 and the Bomb. So America won’t give those weapons to Kyiv
So the result is what we see. Stasis. Neither side can attack successfully
It just takes one dude with a molotov to get 'lucky' and take Putin out of the picture. Not pretty in any way - but another Cabrinovic isn't unthinkable. The outcome might well be horrific - but to say you "can't win a war" when all you want to do is "defeat the oppressor" is a rather different calculation.
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
we're not vulcans
Some are definitely Victors. Others quite simply Valiants. With a smattering of Sperins.
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
Everyone didn’t say that.
Throughout this war people have all sat in their own positions on two spectrums: optimistic vs pessimistic, and pro- or anti-Russia. There is a difference between the will to victory and belief in victory, although human nature being what it is there is some correlation.
There have been some unrealistic optimists and some constant pessimists. Both have been wrong at times. The former this Autumn, the latter last year.
Personally I’ve turned from cautious optimist to borderline pessimist, but remain convinced this is an existential fight that must be fought until Putin is no more. Sadly it seems across the channel and Atlantic we have rather a lot of people eager to wave a piece of paper. If they do that then they are selling Ukraine down the river into oblivion, in the short or long term.
When I began pointing out the faltering nature of the Ukrainian counter offensive I can only recall @Dura_Ace and @DavidL agreeing with me, and saying Yeah it’s not great
But anyway it doesn’t matter
The point is Ukraine cannot win this war - not in terms of regaining all lost territory. Russia has found a method - laying billions of mines - which makes it impossible. Ukraine has lost too many men and is now sending women into battle - literally the wombs of the Ukrainian nation. The future
Perhaps it is time for us to say to Ukraine Ok this isn’t working any more. Sorry
And before I am accused of being Putin’s catamite the economist and the Wall Street journal have both pointed out that senior Ukrainian politicians and generals believe exactly this: Sadly, the war cannot be won, it is maybe time to cut losses and save lives
Someone genuinely perceptive said this back in January:
Indeed you have been realistic for some time. I only started being so around the summer. It’s hard to be realistic when you hope for the “right” result but all wars end in a way where nobody is really happy with the outcome.
Exc @David_Cameron gives 1st full interview as Foreign Sec: Israel will never be secure unless there's "long-term safety, security and stability" for Palestinians; civilian casualties in Gaza too high; settler violence in WB "completely unacceptable".
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
we're not vulcans
Some are definitely Victors. Others quite simply Valiants. With a smattering of Sperins.
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
Yes. The surprising failure of really quite stringent sanctions was pivotal
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
Not great for them - but serious and well targeted sanctions (completely restricting the supply of machine tool parts, for example) would have collapsed their manufacturing. That still hasn't been done.
Too many German companies making too much money from selling them.
I wonder if a sustained campaign of propaganda would have been effective "Making money out of killing Ukrainians, just like their parent companies did in 1943"
It’s over. The war is done. Ukraine has run out of men and Russia has run out of mojo. A muddy armistice beckons
Is disclose.tv a legit source ?
The tweet cites Bild which is (a) paywalled, and (b) in German.
But you can read the first paragraphs
Looks legit to me
A foreign policy guy analyses:
“German newspaper BILD reports that there is a "secret German-American Ukraine Plan" whereby Zelensky would not be forced directly to negotiate, but moved into that realisation by continuing to deliberately give him just enough arms, in type and quantity, for him to hold the current de facto line of contact, but deliberately never enough for him to be able to recapture the occupied territories. BILD notes a particularly cynical aspect of this alleged plan: that the U.S. and Germany could largely decide this course of action by themselves and impose it, given that they are the two largest suppliers of materiel to Ukraine in terms of volume. BILD goes on to say that the aim would be to guide the war, through the policy tool of Western arms supplies, into a de facto Minsk 3 situation, but without ever saying it, as it would be Ukraine itself that would choose that outcome, because it would not be in a position to achieve anything better. BILD states that it has a source inside the German government, and that this way of thinking comes from inside the Chancellor's Office, not from the Defence Ministry, and that Defence Minister Pistorius would like to assist Ukraine more, if he had the authority to do so. BILD also suggests that Berlin and Washington have the same view and the same goal regarding the trajectory to give to the war.
My comment: sadly, it is plausible that there is a lot of truth to those revelations and that they will be half-denied very quickly. But in the end, we all see the chosen behaviours of the relevant states, in particular the reluctance to supply longer-range weapons, which is consistent with the alleged plan. Of course any such plan would be dishonour and stupidity of absolutely historic proportions. Completely unacceptable and wrong-headed. Immoral, too.”
if it is 'secret' it isn't in Bild. if it is in Bild it isn't secret.
Bild is a tabloid. They want clicks
But they generally don’t lie, especially about big stuff like this
How on earth does this 'plan' fit with Trump taking office?
Dunno. Maybe Biden wants the war ‘over’ before the election so Trump can’t use it as leverage?
That would be even more daft. The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
You can’t win a war against a nuclear power
(Snip)
Afghanistan has proved you wrong twice. Vietnam once (not twice, as IIRC France got nukes after it left).
No, I mean you can’t win a war of OFFENCE against a nuclear power on their home territory
Because in the end they will use a nuke
The only way Ukraine can win this war - now that Russia has laid seven trillion mines making conventional attacks impossibly costly - is by attacking Russia itself, on Russian territory, with long range weapons provided by the US etc
But that risks toppling Putin and WW3 and the Bomb. So America won’t give those weapons to Kyiv
So the result is what we see. Stasis. Neither side can attack successfully
The only obvious answer to your point then is to make sure that all the countries along the Russian border (including Ukraine) are armed with nuclear weapons. That is the only way they will ever feel even slightly secure against a Putin led Russia.
That is the logical conclusion of your comment.
I look forward to the day when every state has nuclear weapons.
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
All Putin needs to succeed is the triumph of Right wing populist like Trump, Wilders, Orban etc setting people against people.
Economic stagnation and right wing populism did well in the 1930s when liberal democracies were under the cosh.
We just need to decide which side we are on. I have my doubts about too many here.
Sometimes you need populists to fight populists.
The one single regret I have about Truss no longer being PM is her reliably bloodcurdling Russophobia. We could do with a bit of that in the face of cross-Atlantic appeasement.
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
we're not vulcans
Some are definitely Victors. Others quite simply Valiants. With a smattering of Sperins.
We have at least one B2, I think ?
I was trying to work in the B1 "Bone", but couldn't make it work.
If Ukraine does turn into a sort-of victory for Russia, the key moment was probably much earlier than many people think. It was when Putin defied the financial pressure put on Russia and just carried on regardless.
Yes. The surprising failure of really quite stringent sanctions was pivotal
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
They do, unfortunately, have one gain. Tens of thousands of kidnapped Ukrainian children. There is a part of me that thinks that was their reason for the war...
Britain does have an opportunity to be on the right side of history here.
With Ukraine we can reprise the very well alone, lonely voice for freedom thing in the face of what will look initially like Western betrayal and later like Western naïveté, for little political cost, and retain the moral high ground. There might be the opportunity for a told you so moment a few minutes before the nukes detonate a few months into the third Ukraine war in 2029.
With Israel-Gaza if Cameron (and Starmer/Lammy, and Moran) can be the critical friend of Israel and then support some kind of longer term plan, then we might actually be a useful catalyst alongside the bigger powers like the US.
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
Everyone has morale. We're not vulcans. Being a non-combatant doesn't mean having no emotional investment in a conflict (just ask those marching on both sides over Israel- Hamas over recent weeks). We were a non-combatant country when Churchill was writing The Gathering Storm.
Morale has a very specific meaning. The maintenance of morale in the sense of public consent for continued participation in a conflict often involves the censorship of 'bad news' and the broadcasting of 'good news'. Discussing the desirability of maintaining good morale on PB is inappropriate bordering on faintly sinister.
All Putin needs to succeed is the triumph of Right wing populist like Trump, Wilders, Orban etc setting people against people.
Economic stagnation and right wing populism did well in the 1930s when liberal democracies were under the cosh.
We just need to decide which side we are on. I have my doubts about too many here.
Strangely enough, apart from the Russians and the Ukrainians, everyone else seems remarkably relaxed about the current state of affairs. Stalemate suits especially if the conflict declines to a few shells and the occasional rocket. Not quite a "cold" war - more a tepid one.
Democratic parties have two options when confronted by populists - ignore them and hope they'll go away or bring them in to the political process (the latter is more of an option in a multi-party system, much less so in a Presidential scenario). If Wilders leads the next Dutch Government he will have to deal with the day-to-day of Dutch life and the one things which weakens populists is becoming unpopular.
Their response is usually to look for a group to scapegoat or to try to game the system to enable them to remain in power in perpetuity. Once that fails they run out of road very quickly.
All Putin needs to succeed is the triumph of Right wing populist like Trump, Wilders, Orban etc setting people against people.
Economic stagnation and right wing populism did well in the 1930s when liberal democracies were under the cosh.
We just need to decide which side we are on. I have my doubts about too many here.
Sometimes you need populists to fight populists.
The one single regret I have about Truss no longer being PM is her reliably bloodcurdling Russophobia. We could do with a bit of that in the face of cross-Atlantic appeasement.
I liked the way that Truss actually answered questions at PMQs.
Britain does have an opportunity to be on the right side of history here.
With Ukraine we can reprise the very well alone, lonely voice for freedom thing in the face of what will look initially like Western betrayal and later like Western naïveté, for little political cost, and retain the moral high ground. There might be the opportunity for a told you so moment a few minutes before the nukes detonate a few months into the third Ukraine war in 2029.
With Israel-Gaza if Cameron (and Starmer/Lammy, and Moran) can be the critical friend of Israel and then support some kind of longer term plan, then we might actually be a useful catalyst alongside the bigger powers like the US.
What can we actually *do* for the Ukrainians? We can i) give them money, ii) give them weapons, iii) persuade other countries to do likewise. Which of these three do you think we can sustain until March/May next year, when the Russian Presidential Election 2024 is over and Putin can conscript more people?
About three months ago I began quietly pointing out that Ukraine’s counter offensive was actually going nowhere. Everyone on here shouted at me and told me I was a “fucking appeaser” and a “Putinist shill” and that any moment now Ukraine would sweep the Russians aside and cut the Bear in two on the shores of Azov
How did that work out?
Everyone didn’t say that.
Throughout this war people have all sat in their own positions on two spectrums: optimistic vs pessimistic, and pro- or anti-Russia. There is a difference between the will to victory and belief in victory, although human nature being what it is there is some correlation.
There have been some unrealistic optimists and some constant pessimists. Both have been wrong at times. The former this Autumn, the latter last year.
Personally I’ve turned from cautious optimist to borderline pessimist, but remain convinced this is an existential fight that must be fought until Putin is no more. Sadly it seems across the channel and Atlantic we have rather a lot of people eager to wave a piece of paper. If they do that then they are selling Ukraine down the river into oblivion, in the short or long term.
When I began pointing out the faltering nature of the Ukrainian counter offensive I can only recall @Dura_Ace and @DavidL agreeing with me, and saying Yeah it’s not great
But anyway it doesn’t matter
The point is Ukraine cannot win this war - not in terms of regaining all lost territory. Russia has found a method - laying billions of mines - which makes it impossible. Ukraine has lost too many men and is now sending women into battle - literally the wombs of the Ukrainian nation. The future
Perhaps it is time for us to say to Ukraine Ok this isn’t working any more. Sorry
And before I am accused of being Putin’s catamite the economist and the Wall Street journal have both pointed out that senior Ukrainian politicians and generals believe exactly this: Sadly, the war cannot be won, it is maybe time to cut losses and save lives
Someone genuinely perceptive said this back in January:
Indeed you have been realistic for some time. I only started being so around the summer. It’s hard to be realistic when you hope for the “right” result but all wars end in a way where nobody is really happy with the outcome.
There is a narrow line between 'being realistic' and 'defeatism'.
Putin (and perhaps Xi) would quite like us all to think: "Ukraine cannot win, let's get a peace"; as that 'peace' will be very much on Putin's terms - as he is the only single person who can stop this war. And Putin's terms in the medium and long term will be very bad for Europe and the world.
I'd argue that, the argument can be put the other way: we (the west) made some mistakes last year, in not giving Ukraine what it needed fast enough. We need to learn this lesson, and give Ukraine everything it needs to win.
Because if Putin wins in Ukraine, how will we protect the Baltic states and other Eastern European countries in five years' time?
It’s fair to say that one Bild article has had more effect on morale than 10 weeks of Saturday morning PB trolls.
We are a forum of adults on a comment thread owned and run in a non-combatant country. We shouldn't have 'morale'; we should have an open and dispassionate discussion.
Everyone has morale. We're not vulcans. Being a non-combatant doesn't mean having no emotional investment in a conflict (just ask those marching on both sides over Israel- Hamas over recent weeks). We were a non-combatant country when Churchill was writing The Gathering Storm.
Morale has a very specific meaning. The maintenance of morale in the sense of public consent for continued participation in a conflict often involves the censorship of 'bad news' and the broadcasting of 'good news'. Discussing the desirability of maintaining good morale on PB is inappropriate bordering on faintly sinister.
Oh how ridiculous. Morale means morale. Or to quote the Cambridge dictionary
“the amount of confidence felt by a person or group of people, especially when in a dangerous or difficult situation”
Look, I just faintly praised your idol Liz Truss so take the win.
Comments
Kompromat?
Sometimes elections and election results are easy to analyse but more often then not a superficial analysis fails to notice what has actually happened and what it might portend for the future.
Take the Dutch General Election from Wednesday - the quick analysis said it was a "win" for the "far right". Perhaps - perhaps not. It depends if you think Wilders and the PVV, for all their anti-immigration rhetoric, are really "of the Right" or, like UKIP here, a left-wing wolf disguised as a right-wing sheep.
One of the ways to defang the populist wolf is to bring them in to the fold - it doesn't always work (it didn't in Germany in January 1933 when the other right-wingers thought they could "control" Hitler). Wilders actually sounded disappointed the VVD refused to be in Cabinet with him but neither did the defeated centre-right VVD promise not to support a PVV minority - it could be shrewd politics.
The other big winners in Wednesday's elections were Omtzigt's New Social Contract and I suspect they would find it easier to co-exist with the PVV than the VVD so a minority administration of PVV and NSC looks an option with VVD offering the equivalwnt of supply and confidence.
Omtzigt's old party, the CDA, lost badly as did the centrist D66 (both being members of the former Government) and that's the key - the election was, as we're seeing in other places, a decisive rejection of the incumbent administration and the parties within. The previous VVD/D66/CDA/CU coalition went from 78 seats in the previous House of Represntatives to just 41. The big winners were the PVV (up 20) and NSC (new party, 20) but both the Green-Labour bloc (+8) and the Farmer Citizens Movement (+6) also moved ahead.
The winners were therefore those who hadn't been part of the Government whether they were "new" parties (NSC and the Farmer/Citizens) or opposition parties (Green-Labour and PVV).
Perhaps "Warsaw sore of war"?
The idea that you could reliably engineer such an outcome is risible.
The reality is that if Biden could get the funding bill though Congress, he would now be arming Ukraine to win the war, not lose it. And it's ammunition rather than men that Ukraine is rapidly running out of, thanks to GOP Representatives blocking a House vote
Sounds more like kite flying by the pro-Russia factions in Germany.
(The other reality, if course, is that the UK's ability to influence the outcome is seriously limited. We've largely shot our bolt.)
He tells us all his travel adventures on here?
And long may it continue.
Edit: Ah, beaten to it.
‘If Not Me, Who?’: As Ukraine Seeks Troops, Women Prepare for the Call
With so much in the war against Russia hinging on refilling the ranks of soldiers, efforts are underway to draw more Ukrainian women into the army.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/08/world/europe/ukraine-war-army-women.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
That's what they think.
Novelty trumps everything.
That said, I agree this Bild article might be some complex psyops - perhaps to embarrass Biden and Scholz into greater effort?
Nonetheless my instinct is that this war is winding down into a sad ceasefire in the frozen mud
He'd pay an awful lot of money to keep that nugget from us.
More to the point you can’t win a war against a nuclear power if you don’t care enough about winning.
“Americans are suffering at home as you send trillions to Zelensky”
If Biden can turn around and say The Russian bear has been mauled and won’t try this again, even if Ukraine has lost territory, and now the war is over - a lot of American voters would say Yes, that’s fine, now focus on domestic stuff please
And Trump’s America First shtick is less effective
The one that will be triggered by a fat drunk football fan pissing on a minor war memorial?
Or am I getting my apocalypses mixed up again?
https://youtu.be/Wp_K8prLfso?si=bSrnZapj5-qywtdD
How did that work out?
The various currents and undercurrents of Newham politics flow through this result. The winning candidate, Sophia Naqvi, while nominally Independent, is a supporter of Mehmood Mirza, the winner of the Boleyn contest in July. Along with a defecting member from East Ham North, they now form the official opposition to the Labour administration.
MIrza was once a Labour supporter and an ally of Roksana Fiaz, the current Mayor and Mirza was part of the group which orchestrated her selection success and the ousting of Sir Robin Wales. This was all good while Corbyn ran the party but in the Starmer era, Fiaz has become a loyalist and Mirza and his followers have been expelled.
This vote was therefore much less about Gaza than straightforward factional left-wing politics and personalities. Fiaz even encouraged another ally to run as a spoiler candidate but he only got 10% and made no difference with the Conservative, Green and LD candidates all well behind (it was a dreadful result for the Greens in particular).
Newham is a Borough with a high population of those claiming to adhere to the Islamic faith but the largest Muslim groupings are from Bangladesh, Pakistan and sub-Saharan Africa. Gaza was a peripheral issue and in any case for all Plaistow North is 45% Muslim that means it's 55% non-Muslim so it seems certain Naqvi drew support well beyond the established religious groupings.
There's been a rapid rise in dissatisfaction with the Council in recent times - indeed, almost ever since Fiaz took over from Sir Robin Wales. In the latter's time, and channelling my inner James Cleverly, Newham might have been a sh*thole but it was a well-managed and well-run sh*thole. Now, as with many other Councils, the cracks are starting to show and while it's probably unfair to blame Fiaz in isolation, it's happened on her watch.
What now? I'm sure MIrza will put up candidates in East Ham, West Ham & Beckton and the Stratford & Bow seats next year. I suspect he doesn't have the resources yet to fight all 22 Wards at a full election in 2026 and the history of Respect back in the mid-2000s suggests it's a hard task. It is clear the formerly rock solid Labour vote can't be assumed anywhere in Newham and whether via the Newham Independents or the Greens, 2026 may be a much tougher election for Labour and for Fiaz who will seek re-election as Mayor (I would imagine).
A lot of smart people say that the likely conclusion of this war is that it just gets frozen on pretty much the same lines as present.
Because in the end they will use a nuke
The only way Ukraine can win this war - now that Russia has laid seven trillion mines making conventional attacks impossibly costly - is by attacking Russia itself, on Russian territory, with long range weapons provided by the US etc
But that risks toppling Putin and WW3 and the Bomb. So America won’t give those weapons to Kyiv
So the result is what we see. Stasis. Neither side can attack successfully
And that creates an attack line against the person who is a NATO sceptic.
Edit; in the case of Ukraine that might well be a lot sooner.
Throughout this war people have all sat in their own positions on two spectrums: optimistic vs pessimistic, and pro- or anti-Russia. There is a difference between the will to victory and belief in victory, although human nature being what it is there is some correlation.
There have been some unrealistic optimists and some constant pessimists. Both have been wrong at times. The former this Autumn, the latter last year.
Personally I’ve turned from cautious optimist to borderline pessimist, but remain convinced this is an existential fight that must be fought until Putin is no more. Sadly it seems across the channel and Atlantic we have rather a lot of people eager to wave a piece of paper. If they do that then they are selling Ukraine down the river into oblivion, in the short or long term.
You're also wrong: that 'home' territory is Ukraine, not Russia.
If Ukraine joins either, that would be an existential moment for Putin.
It showed how much the world economy has escaped western hegemony. We can’t control it any more. China is economically as powerful as America and in some ways (trade) MORE powerful
With China backing Putin we couldn’t crush Russia economically, and from there Putin had a route to survival
It’s still important to note Russia has taken a heck of a savaging. Lost 100,000s men. Spent billions. Nordstream severed. Best young people emigrated. It is still - surely - a long term disaster for Russia even if they can point to some acquired territory, for now
The Conservatives are now at their lowest for this series, whilst Labour is also polling low (but has another 1% to fall to reach their nadir). LibDems are on their equal highest and Reform and Green are still polling strongly. So a move away from the two main parties.
Let's see whether the Autumn Statement impacts the polling next week.
https://x.com/mij_europe/status/1728023820278071411
Seems no one is going to escape the coming European Council breakdown over Europe's Ukraine policy unscathed, regardless of supportive language that will be adopted to paper over the cracks “the EU remains committed to Ukraine etc etc”. The blame game is already in full effect. (Thread...)
But the problem with PB is that there was a vast amount of virtue signalling and groupthink on this topic. There was no analysis going on, the commentary was very poor, like reading some comments on facebook where everyone agrees with each other.
It was always apparent to me that the problem for Ukraine is that it cannot ever win, and even now, any 'peace' based on a frozen line is going to be destablising for Ukraine in a way that it is not for Russia.
*though if Trump gets in…. Well….
But anyway it doesn’t matter
The point is Ukraine cannot win this war - not in terms of regaining all lost territory. Russia has found a method - laying billions of mines - which makes it impossible. Ukraine has lost too many men and is now sending women into battle - literally the wombs of the Ukrainian nation. The future
Perhaps it is time for us to say to Ukraine Ok this isn’t working any more. Sorry
And before I am accused of being Putin’s catamite the economist and the Wall Street journal have both pointed out that senior Ukrainian politicians and generals believe exactly this: Sadly, the war cannot be won, it is maybe time to cut losses and save lives
Instead, we'll bumble along.
The state of our armed forces, if a second term Trump were to abandon NATO, is parlous.
The idea that there is a "crack team" planning anything within this government is ridiculous. And if there were, it would be working on the next election before it considered anything else.
And rUkraine must join NATO
Also maybe Georgia
It would have cost a few billion at most to buy all the stock that otherwise found its way to Russia.
The West could have helped Ukraine win this war but instead dithered, leaving Russia time to dig trenches and recruit new fighters, buy more ammunition and do their thing on their US useful idiots.
Russia will keep going until it’s either regained its lost colonies or is beaten.
EU membership remains a possibility, as there's a bit more leverage against the recalcitrants.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4284837/#Comment_4284837
Well done for catching up.
That is the logical conclusion of your comment.
Boris says raise min to £40k...so simple, why didn't he just do it.
A kite, rather.
Later.
https://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/1728105949146288378
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-84H_Thunderscreech
Economic stagnation and right wing populism did well in the 1930s when liberal democracies were under the cosh.
We just need to decide which side we are on. I have my doubts about too many here.
The one single regret I have about Truss no longer being PM is her reliably bloodcurdling Russophobia. We could do with a bit of that in the face of cross-Atlantic appeasement.
Eric Salama says he thought charity's approach was 'profoundly wrong' after it signed petition that criticised Israeli bombing
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/24/eric-salama-comic-relief-crisis-chairman-quits-gaza-israel/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/24/st-andrews-university-rector-israel-genocide-palestine/
With Ukraine we can reprise the very well alone, lonely voice for freedom thing in the face of what will look initially like Western betrayal and later like Western naïveté, for little political cost, and retain the moral high ground. There might be the opportunity for a told you so moment a few minutes before the nukes detonate a few months into the third Ukraine war in 2029.
With Israel-Gaza if Cameron (and Starmer/Lammy, and Moran) can be the critical friend of Israel and then support some kind of longer term plan, then we might actually be a useful catalyst alongside the bigger powers like the US.
Democratic parties have two options when confronted by populists - ignore them and hope they'll go away or bring them in to the political process (the latter is more of an option in a multi-party system, much less so in a Presidential scenario). If Wilders leads the next Dutch Government he will have to deal with the day-to-day of Dutch life and the one things which weakens populists is becoming unpopular.
Their response is usually to look for a group to scapegoat or to try to game the system to enable them to remain in power in perpetuity. Once that fails they run out of road very quickly.
Bonkers but not entirely wrong.
It’s in our interests. Russia is no real threat to America. It is a threat to Europe and the UK
Putin (and perhaps Xi) would quite like us all to think: "Ukraine cannot win, let's get a peace"; as that 'peace' will be very much on Putin's terms - as he is the only single person who can stop this war. And Putin's terms in the medium and long term will be very bad for Europe and the world.
I'd argue that, the argument can be put the other way: we (the west) made some mistakes last year, in not giving Ukraine what it needed fast enough. We need to learn this lesson, and give Ukraine everything it needs to win.
Because if Putin wins in Ukraine, how will we protect the Baltic states and other Eastern European countries in five years' time?
“the amount of confidence felt by a person or group of people, especially when in a dangerous or difficult situation”
Look, I just faintly praised your idol Liz Truss so take the win.
https://genius.com/Happy-mondays-step-on-lyrics