Can I propose that, each time Leon is banned, it's for twice as long as the previous ban?
Why?
Because he would find it educational?
What's it got to do with you, though? Can't we let the site operators deal with how they run it, rather than us demand bans on other posters?
@TwistedFireStopper . I think you are missing the point. @IanB2 was cracking a rather good joke. You need to see the previous thread. It made me laugh out loud.
Ahhh, I'm just an occasional lurker, so miss lots. In that case, I withdraw my pompous rebuttal to Ian!
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
This feels like people in Europe trying to predict the US election; we do not have insight into the views of the majority of the Russian population, nor into those people at the heart of the Kremlin.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
That's not true.
I've been suggesting the eventual collapse of Russia for years and I always said it was a long-term project that might take years.
I said from the start that if the war was over rapidly it would be in Russia's favour but it was a longer-term conflict that would be favouring Ukraine.
We're still in the "gradual at first" stage and I've never said imminent, however the signs are starting to mount that culmination is coming and I don't think they could last now another year or two.
Getting honest data out of Russia is hard but from what it seems the fundamentals now are all starting to show the strains.
What about the stories that Republican members of Congress, with very few exceptions, are unwilling to criticise or vote against Trump because of fears for their/their families' personal safety?
"According to one source with direct knowledge of the events, North Carolina senator Thom Tillis told people that the FBI warned him about “credible death threats” when he was considering voting against Pete Hegseth’s nomination for defense secretary. Tillis ultimately provided the crucial 50th vote to confirm the former Fox & Friends host to lead the Pentagon. According to the source, Tillis has said that if people want to understand Trump, they should read the 2006 book Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work. (When asked for comment for this story, a spokesperson for Tillis said it was false that the senator had recommended the book in that capacity. The FBI said it had no comment.)"
I don't understand the European Ukraine play. It seems that Russia will only end the war if they can claim a victory (the Donbas at a minimum, presumably) and that Ukraine will only end the war if they are defeated (or, a negotiated peace with cast iron Western-backed security guarantees - boots on the ground presumably via NATO or another structure).
Therefore what are we playing at? It seems like the options are simple:
Let Russia defeat Ukraine.
Help Ukraine push Russia out of their borders.
Tell Russia that if they don't accept a negotiated settlement (probably less than the whole Donbas with western bases in Ukraine) then Europe/UK will use all their military might to achieve the above.
What else is there, realistically?
Rope a dope.
Help Ukraine absorb Russia's attacks until Russia is tired and exhausted and collapses. Which looks like coming soon, which is why Russia's shills are getting increasingly shrill about the need for "peace".
Yes but that relies upon American support and American sanctions.
If Europe wants to do this alone, then I can't see any alternative to the above.
I don't see why.
Russia has an economy smaller than Italy's.
The UK with Poland, Germany, other European allies, Canada and others absolutely can help Ukraine defeat Russia - even without America if need be. Rather with, but if need be without.
(I'm interested to know why he wasn't tasered, which seems appropriate. This is Police Scotland, and I do not know their practice.)
They may have tried tasers.
From memory, Ben Ando's excellent book on police bravery has two stories where tasers failed: one was when they tackled a man high on drugs in a tower block corridor; either due to lack of space or the drugs the man had taken, the taser had no effect. In another, the man was wearing such thick clothing the tasers did not work.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
I don't understand the European Ukraine play. It seems that Russia will only end the war if they can claim a victory (the Donbas at a minimum, presumably) and that Ukraine will only end the war if they are defeated (or, a negotiated peace with cast iron Western-backed security guarantees - boots on the ground presumably via NATO or another structure).
Therefore what are we playing at? It seems like the options are simple:
Let Russia defeat Ukraine.
Help Ukraine push Russia out of their borders.
Tell Russia that if they don't accept a negotiated settlement (probably less than the whole Donbas with western bases in Ukraine) then Europe/UK will use all their military might to achieve the above.
What else is there, realistically?
Rope a dope.
Help Ukraine absorb Russia's attacks until Russia is tired and exhausted and collapses. Which looks like coming soon, which is why Russia's shills are getting increasingly shrill about the need for "peace".
Yes but that relies upon American support and American sanctions.
If Europe wants to do this alone, then I can't see any alternative to the above.
I don't see why.
Russia has an economy smaller than Italy's.
The UK with Poland, Germany, other European allies, Canada and others absolutely can help Ukraine defeat Russia - even without America if need be. Rather with, but if need be without.
There was a chat on R5L last week, where one of the phone callers said something like: "We cannot fight Russia, as they have such a massive economy and are such a world power". This is utterly bogus, and the interviewer did not pick him up on it.
The "Russia stronk!" myth has been dead for decades, but people still revere its stinking corpse.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
To my mind, Russia's biggest problems, in the war, are:
(a) They have to keep attacking. Their opponents are defending, and constantly bleeding them.
(b) They have a choice whether or not to fight. Ukraine does not.
You're a military historian. How do you see the endgame.
I don't see Russia being able to sustain the losses of men and material that it was suffering in the last four months of last year (40-50,000 casualties per month). The attacks have certainly slackened since the start of the year.
Russia's economy is clearly deteriorating, but Putin has a vast apparatus of repression, to prevent revolt.
We've also seen that Ukraine does not have the means to recapture the lost territories. So, I think at some stage, the war will peter out into a cold war/cold peace. Technically, the war will continue, but in reality, it will grind to a halt. To my mind, the European side of NATO has to ensure that Ukraine is in as strong a position as possible at that point, in order to hold onto the remaining 80% of the country, and assist in rebuilding the Ukrainian economy.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
That's not true.
I've been suggesting the eventual collapse of Russia for years and I always said it was a long-term project that might take years.
I said from the start that if the war was over rapidly it would be in Russia's favour but it was a longer-term conflict that would be favouring Ukraine.
We're still in the "gradual at first" stage and I've never said imminent, however the signs are starting to mount that culmination is coming and I don't think they could last now another year or two.
Getting honest data out of Russia is hard but from what it seems the fundamentals now are all starting to show the strains.
The Tories now need to put themselves firmly on the side of British interests and national and European defence. To Badenoch’s credit, she seems to have signposted that in her messaging since Friday.
There will be debates along the way on how to achieve that goal and the policies for doing so. That is where the Tories should take the fight to Labour, not in the direction of travel. It also distinguishes them from Reform and they should go after Farage on this.
To my mind, Russia's biggest problems, in the war, are:
(a) They have to keep attacking. Their opponents are defending, and constantly bleeding them.
(b) They have a choice whether or not to fight. Ukraine does not.
You're a military historian. How do you see the endgame.
I don't see Russia being able to sustain the losses of men and material that it was suffering in the last four months of last year (40-50,000 casualties per month). The attacks have certainly slackened since the start of the year.
Russia's economy is clearly deteriorating, but Putin has a vast apparatus of repression, to prevent revolt.
We've also seen that Ukraine does not have the means to recapture the lost territories. So, I think at some stage, the war will peter out into a cold war/cold peace. To my mind, the European side of NATO has to ensure that Ukraine is in as strong a position as possible at that point, and assist in rebuilding the Ukrainian economy.
Might the problem for Putin be not military defeat but conspiracy?
He's old. Nobody lives forever. He saw off the Wagner revolt but it was a close run thing.
The question then becomes if New Supreme Leader would be able, or willing, to end the war without territorial gains. What of Crimea?
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
I’m tending towards this more pessimistic view over time. But then I’m often wrong.
Russia’s strategy for centuries has been to use its conquered territories to fight wars for it. They’re not alone there, after all we made much use of empire soldiers in the world wars. But they go further and as others have commented seem able to avoid any impact on Muscovites.
This is the danger with a bigger land grab in Ukraine and an eventual annexation of Belarus. They’ll use Ukrainians and Belarusians to prosecute the next war, against Lithuania, say, for land access to Kaliningrad. Then they’ll have some Lithuanians they can throw into the fight with Latvia and Estonia as they prepare the ground for Poland, and so on.
To my mind, Russia's biggest problems, in the war, are:
(a) They have to keep attacking. Their opponents are defending, and constantly bleeding them.
(b) They have a choice whether or not to fight. Ukraine does not.
You're a military historian. How do you see the endgame.
I don't see Russia being able to sustain the losses of men and material that it was suffering in the last four months of last year (40-50,000 casualties per month). The attacks have certainly slackened since the start of the year.
Russia's economy is clearly deteriorating, but Putin has a vast apparatus of repression, to prevent revolt.
We've also seen that Ukraine does not have the means to recapture the lost territories. So, I think at some stage, the war will peter out into a cold war/cold peace. Technically, the war will continue, but in reality, it will grind to a halt. To my mind, the European side of NATO has to ensure that Ukraine is in as strong a position as possible at that point, in order to hold onto the remaining 80% of the country, and assist in rebuilding the Ukrainian economy.
Thanks. What does "grind to a halt" look like in terms of day by day, the nitty gritty to bring about the halt.
To my mind, Russia's biggest problems, in the war, are:
(a) They have to keep attacking. Their opponents are defending, and constantly bleeding them.
(b) They have a choice whether or not to fight. Ukraine does not.
What is the minimum that could be sold to Putin as a win for Russia?
Because without some sort of victory, Vlad seems likely to be taking a long walk through a high window pretty soon.
My point exactly. This war will end when there’s an agreement. It isn’t going to end without that and however unpopular it is, Ukraine is not going back to how it was before 2014. It just isn’t.
I agree that I don’t want Trump negotiating it nor do I support anything he says. But I do also accept reality. I await the usual “you support Putin” replies.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
Russia is like Wile E Coyote having run off the cliff but still hanging in the air, the realisation that there's no ground underneath hasn't come yet until he looks down and then the inevitable happens.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
I don't understand the European Ukraine play. It seems that Russia will only end the war if they can claim a victory (the Donbas at a minimum, presumably) and that Ukraine will only end the war if they are defeated (or, a negotiated peace with cast iron Western-backed security guarantees - boots on the ground presumably via NATO or another structure).
Therefore what are we playing at? It seems like the options are simple:
Let Russia defeat Ukraine.
Help Ukraine push Russia out of their borders.
Tell Russia that if they don't accept a negotiated settlement (probably less than the whole Donbas with western bases in Ukraine) then Europe/UK will use all their military might to achieve the above.
What else is there, realistically?
Rope a dope.
Help Ukraine absorb Russia's attacks until Russia is tired and exhausted and collapses. Which looks like coming soon, which is why Russia's shills are getting increasingly shrill about the need for "peace".
Yes but that relies upon American support and American sanctions.
If Europe wants to do this alone, then I can't see any alternative to the above.
I don't see why.
Russia has an economy smaller than Italy's.
The UK with Poland, Germany, other European allies, Canada and others absolutely can help Ukraine defeat Russia - even without America if need be. Rather with, but if need be without.
Giving them kit, and training, is the easier bit. Ukraine is being trained up on the German RCH-155s and will be getting them within weeks, before even the German army, where they're made. The problem is the US command and control, the software, the spy satellites, all the US infrastructure we rely upon to make our stuff work and to use it effectively. I have no idea how long and how much it would cost to set up a parallel European capability.
(I'm interested to know why he wasn't tasered, which seems appropriate. This is Police Scotland, and I do not know their practice.)
They may have tried tasers.
From memory, Ben Ando's excellent book on police bravery has two stories where tasers failed: one was when they tackled a man high on drugs in a tower block corridor; either due to lack of space or the drugs the man had taken, the taser had no effect. In another, the man was wearing such thick clothing the tasers did not work.
Much easier to hit someone with a car than a taser.
(I'm curious if this incident will pop up in the STATS19 data as a driver: pedestrian pavement collision...)
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
Russia is like Wile E Coyote having run off the cliff but still hanging in the air, the realisation that there's no ground underneath hasn't come yet until he looks down and then the inevitable happens.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
Isn't it more likely that internal forces remove Putin before they get to the point of economic collapse?
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
Russia is like Wile E Coyote having run off the cliff but still hanging in the air, the realisation that there's no ground underneath hasn't come yet until he looks down and then the inevitable happens.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
The US could lift their sanctions any day and the Kremlin coffers start to refill. At that point, it falls on Europe to decide what it wants to do.
I don't understand the European Ukraine play. It seems that Russia will only end the war if they can claim a victory (the Donbas at a minimum, presumably) and that Ukraine will only end the war if they are defeated (or, a negotiated peace with cast iron Western-backed security guarantees - boots on the ground presumably via NATO or another structure).
Therefore what are we playing at? It seems like the options are simple:
Let Russia defeat Ukraine.
Help Ukraine push Russia out of their borders.
Tell Russia that if they don't accept a negotiated settlement (probably less than the whole Donbas with western bases in Ukraine) then Europe/UK will use all their military might to achieve the above.
What else is there, realistically?
Rope a dope.
Help Ukraine absorb Russia's attacks until Russia is tired and exhausted and collapses. Which looks like coming soon, which is why Russia's shills are getting increasingly shrill about the need for "peace".
Yes but that relies upon American support and American sanctions.
If Europe wants to do this alone, then I can't see any alternative to the above.
I don't see why.
Russia has an economy smaller than Italy's.
The UK with Poland, Germany, other European allies, Canada and others absolutely can help Ukraine defeat Russia - even without America if need be. Rather with, but if need be without.
Russia is very good at projecting strength from a position of weakness. It has learned that trick from history. The Soviet Union’s power and strength became a mirage during the Brezhnev decline, but they were able to keep the house of cards standing for another decade.
It will all look fine in Russia, until one day it isn’t.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
Russia is like Wile E Coyote having run off the cliff but still hanging in the air, the realisation that there's no ground underneath hasn't come yet until he looks down and then the inevitable happens.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
Isn't it more likely that internal forces remove Putin before they get to the point of economic collapse?
Indeed, that's what I expect to happen, when they get close to but not quite at the point of collapse.
The regime is so dictatorial they need to be close to that point though before people will be brave enough to wield the knife. Or, this being Russia, open the window.
I don't understand the European Ukraine play. It seems that Russia will only end the war if they can claim a victory (the Donbas at a minimum, presumably) and that Ukraine will only end the war if they are defeated (or, a negotiated peace with cast iron Western-backed security guarantees - boots on the ground presumably via NATO or another structure).
Therefore what are we playing at? It seems like the options are simple:
Let Russia defeat Ukraine.
Help Ukraine push Russia out of their borders.
Tell Russia that if they don't accept a negotiated settlement (probably less than the whole Donbas with western bases in Ukraine) then Europe/UK will use all their military might to achieve the above.
What else is there, realistically?
Rope a dope.
Help Ukraine absorb Russia's attacks until Russia is tired and exhausted and collapses. Which looks like coming soon, which is why Russia's shills are getting increasingly shrill about the need for "peace".
Yes but that relies upon American support and American sanctions.
If Europe wants to do this alone, then I can't see any alternative to the above.
I don't see why.
Russia has an economy smaller than Italy's.
The UK with Poland, Germany, other European allies, Canada and others absolutely can help Ukraine defeat Russia - even without America if need be. Rather with, but if need be without.
Russia is very good at projecting strength from a position of weakness. It has learned that trick from history. The Soviet Union’s power and strength became a mirage during the Brezhnev decline, but they were able to keep the house of cards standing for another decade.
It will all look fine in Russia, until one day it isn’t.
Indeed. Going back to my original comment - gradually at first, then suddenly.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
Russia is like Wile E Coyote having run off the cliff but still hanging in the air, the realisation that there's no ground underneath hasn't come yet until he looks down and then the inevitable happens.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
Isn't it more likely that internal forces remove Putin before they get to the point of economic collapse?
Indeed, that's what I expect to happen, when they get close to but not quite at the point of collapse.
The regime is so dictatorial they need to be close to that point though before people will be brave enough to wield the knife. Or, this being Russia, open the window.
I wonder how many assassination attempts or plots there have been against Putin since he came to power. There’s not been so much as a hint of anything getting close to success. There are presumably at least 1 or 2 Ukrainian moles in inner circle.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
Russia is like Wile E Coyote having run off the cliff but still hanging in the air, the realisation that there's no ground underneath hasn't come yet until he looks down and then the inevitable happens.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
The US could lift their sanctions any day and the Kremlin coffers start to refill. At that point, it falls on Europe to decide what it wants to do.
US lifting sanctions would be an interesting thing to model. It would allow the fleet to sail again and free up banking and supply chain financing. It wouldn’t bring back European gas demand (or of it did, that would collapse demand for US LNG). And it would probably also lead to a fall in hydrocarbons prices.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
Evolution teaches us if you back far enough you share a common ancestor with your dog. Fido’s great, great,…, great grandmother is your great, great,…, great grandmother.
Another thing: I absolutely believe Putin is a threat to eastern Europe and maybe central Europe too. I back an increase in defence spending to help fend him off/deter him. But here's what infuriates me: we've been getting actually invaded by Islamists every day for the past six years. 150k+ unverified, bad-faith Channel gatecrashers so far, mainly fighting-age males. And no government has bothered to stop it despite it being a bigger threat to our security in Britain.
The Reform fans find it so hard to actually criticise the dictator Putin. This is turning into a big problem for them.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
Russia is like Wile E Coyote having run off the cliff but still hanging in the air, the realisation that there's no ground underneath hasn't come yet until he looks down and then the inevitable happens.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
The US could lift their sanctions any day and the Kremlin coffers start to refill. At that point, it falls on Europe to decide what it wants to do.
US lifting sanctions would be an interesting thing to model. It would allow the fleet to sail again and free up banking and supply chain financing. It wouldn’t bring back European gas demand (or of it did, that would collapse demand for US LNG). And it would probably also lead to a fall in hydrocarbons prices.
Quite a complex impact I think
Whilst the fleet might sale, I'm not sure where it is sailing to. I am on a project that puts me on the inside loop on Chinese reactions to sanctions. If the US lifts sanctions but Europe doesn't, I am far from convinced the Chinese will resume purchases of Russian oil. India - harder to read.
What about the stories that Republican members of Congress, with very few exceptions, are unwilling to criticise or vote against Trump because of fears for their/their families' personal safety?
"According to one source with direct knowledge of the events, North Carolina senator Thom Tillis told people that the FBI warned him about “credible death threats” when he was considering voting against Pete Hegseth’s nomination for defense secretary. Tillis ultimately provided the crucial 50th vote to confirm the former Fox & Friends host to lead the Pentagon. According to the source, Tillis has said that if people want to understand Trump, they should read the 2006 book Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work. (When asked for comment for this story, a spokesperson for Tillis said it was false that the senator had recommended the book in that capacity. The FBI said it had no comment.)"
Buck passing. Far too much to expect GOP senators to show some responsibility for their actions, 'a big boy told me to do it or he'll take my lunch money.'
Evolution teaches us if you back far enough you share a common ancestor with your dog. Fido’s great, great,…, great grandmother is your great, great,…, great grandmother.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
Evolution teaches us if you back far enough you share a common ancestor with your dog. Fido’s great, great,…, great grandmother is your great, great,…, great grandmother.
Food for thought.
We all have the same pedigree, chum.
That's right, pal.
Be a good chappie and stop with the dog food jokes.
Evolution teaches us if you back far enough you share a common ancestor with your dog. Fido’s great, great,…, great grandmother is your great, great,…, great grandmother.
Food for thought.
We all have the same pedigree, chum.
That's right, pal.
Our poster from legendary Camelot keeps claiming genealogy winalot.
Evolution teaches us if you back far enough you share a common ancestor with your dog. Fido’s great, great,…, great grandmother is your great, great,…, great grandmother.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
Evolution teaches us if you back far enough you share a common ancestor with your dog. Fido’s great, great,…, great grandmother is your great, great,…, great grandmother.
Food for thought.
We all have the same pedigree, chum.
That's right, pal.
Be a good chappie and stop with the dog food jokes.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
What actually seems to be happening is a two track process.
Starmer is attempting to pursue continuation of the peace negotiations, but on a more realistic level by starting from the pov of Ukraine’s future security, rather than a carve up fait accompli agreed with Putin.
The security guarantee from the Americans is the subject of “intense” discussion, Starmer said.
He explained:
For me, the components of a lasting peace are a strong Ukraine to fight on, if necessary, to be in a position of strength; to negotiate a European element to security guarantees, and that’s why I’ve been forward-leaning on this about what we would do; and a US backstop. That’s the package, all three parts need to be in place, and that’s what I’m working hard to bring together. As the Guardian’s defence and security editor, Dan Sabbagh, notes, Starmer acknowledges that Trump has not committed to a US backstop security guarantee for a European force in Ukraine but says the US and UK are having continuing talks over it...
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
The last sentence is absolutely key. The US has not funded NATO for the last 80 years out of the goodness of its heart, it's because it has allowed the US to set the rules. That has delivered huge material benefits to the US, far outweighing the costs. On its own, the US is a huge and incredibly wealthy market, but alone it cannot support the ambitions and needs of its commercial and financial sectors. Pax Americana was a boon to them. Pax Europa, if it happens, will inevitably cost them dear.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
Trump is actually more sympathetic to dictators than to democracies.
Here's an interview with Thomas Zimmer a German who is a 20th century American history professor at Georgetown University
"tagesschau24: Some analysts say that Zelenskyj behaved tactically clumsily during the conversation because he started a fundamental debate about US security guarantees and military aid in front of the cameras. What do you think about that?
Zimmer: I think that's completely wrong because it's based on a very fundamental misunderstanding: the idea that Trump's position on this issue can be controlled by tactical skill and diplomatic finesse. That's wishful thinking that continues to cling to the idea that Trump doesn't have a consistent position at all. He's perhaps just a businessman who wants to negotiate a good deal and also someone to whom you can somehow sell anything through flattery.But that completely ignores the fact that Trump has had a very clear stance on this conflict for many years now and a very clear inclination towards Russia and autocratic rulers like Putin. It also completely ignores the fact that the Trumpist forces that are now in power in the USA are pursuing a clear, ideologically defined project. They are really serious about turning away from the liberal world order, from Europe's liberal democracies. They have something completely different in mind. We have to let go of the idea that with a little skill, with a little tact, all of this can somehow be averted."
" I don't think it makes sense to continue to hold out hope that Trump, the Trumpist government or the Republican Party will be able to pursue any policies other than what we have now experienced."
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
Russia is like Wile E Coyote having run off the cliff but still hanging in the air, the realisation that there's no ground underneath hasn't come yet until he looks down and then the inevitable happens.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
The US could lift their sanctions any day and the Kremlin coffers start to refill. At that point, it falls on Europe to decide what it wants to do.
US lifting sanctions would be an interesting thing to model. It would allow the fleet to sail again and free up banking and supply chain financing. It wouldn’t bring back European gas demand (or of it did, that would collapse demand for US LNG). And it would probably also lead to a fall in hydrocarbons prices.
Quite a complex impact I think
Whilst the fleet might sale, I'm not sure where it is sailing to. I am on a project that puts me on the inside loop on Chinese reactions to sanctions. If the US lifts sanctions but Europe doesn't, I am far from convinced the Chinese will resume purchases of Russian oil. India - harder to read.
Siberia has an awful lot of natural resources - and China is the only country in a position to be able to extract them. But they also have no need to do so today so the longer Russia is weakened the better China's final end result.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
Trump says a lot of shit. Rarely does it correspond with what’s true.
Meanwhile his VP shouts down the Ukrainian president, and accuses him of peddling propaganda when he talks of Russia atrocities.
Minsk II didn’t “stop the killing”. This will be no different without a credible defence strategy for Ukraine, which Trump has already declared he wants no part of.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
I pray we will never have to fight a war against Russia. And I don’t think we will have to, if we play our cards right:
The way to stop that from happening is through unity and strength on the European continent. Equivocation suits Putin. It gives him the chance to gamble.
We are putting ourselves in the strongest position if we use the next few years to rearm, and to put in place a strong European deterrent. If we spend the next few years equivocating, then a miscalculation leading to a wider conflagration becomes sadly more likely. But I am hopeful. And I don’t see that in our future.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
The demographic deficit of fighting age men will take some time to recover, as well.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
But isn't that what Chamberlain thought he was doing at Munich? Hitler's assurance was not worth the paper it was written on.
Evolution teaches us if you back far enough you share a common ancestor with your dog. Fido’s great, great,…, great grandmother is your great, great,…, great grandmother.
Food for thought.
We all have the same pedigree, chum.
That's right, pal.
Be a good chappie and stop with the dog food jokes.
So there's a dog food puns thread? I'll have a Butchers....
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
But isn't that what Chamberlain thought he was doing at Munich? Hitler's assurance was not worth the paper it was written on.
Chamberlain sought peace, but simultaneously prepared for war.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Like people who endlessly call a stock market crash he may be right one day.
Without wishing to re-open the maths, there's some interesting stuff in that paper linked by kjh earlier, and another I was reading about Australian aboriginal genetics. In particular, it is striking how few incomers are needed to maintain the "we all share the same ancestors from three thousand years back" conclusion. In both North America and Australia, even a rate less than one incomer every century (over the Baring Straight to America, or down through Papua NG into Australia) is sufficient to maintain the admixing, such that if you go back 3,000 years, we all share the same ancestors as all native Americans.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Like people who endlessly call a stock market crash he may be right one day.
I've never put a timescale on Russia's culmination.
Indeed I've said all along we should prepare for this to take many years. Wars can take many, many years.
Which makes mockery of "you've been saying that for years" rather absurd - yes, I've been consistent for years and so far the facts have borne out what I'm saying. It is pure dishonesty to suggest anyone has been saying Russia is going to collapse imminently, that was never said.
There's a world of difference between imminently and eventually. Don't be so impatient. We need to be in this for the long haul.
And if that is "one day" right, then it was always right. Since it was always saying this would eventually happen, so long as we stay the course.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
Trump says a lot of shit. Rarely does it correspond with what’s true.
Meanwhile his VP shouts down the Ukrainian president, and accuses him of peddling propaganda when he talks of Russia atrocities.
Minsk II didn’t “stop the killing”. This will be no different without a credible defence strategy for Ukraine, which Trump has already declared he wants no part of.
So Trump has said he wants the war to end. You, presumably, don't. Talk me through the next 12-18 months with your plan.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I don’t.
According to Russian relatives, there is zero sign of war weariness expressed as even vaguely anti-war sentiment. Even anti-Putinists still think the war must carry on until Russia “wins”.
There’s no sign of the morale collapse that would be required for defeat.
If Putin can keep supplying the troops from outside the Greater Russian population, and give them some kind of equipment, it will continue.
Morale collapses much faster when the money stops flowing. When people can't afford bread or eggs, then morale can change rapidly.
It isn't based on morale that I'm making my judgment. Russia is running out of men, materials and money. Those three determine the outcome of a long-term war far more than morale ever does.
Ironically more Russians can now afford bread and eggs because of soldiers' wages and bonuses being sent back home to the poorer parts of the country.
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
Russia is like Wile E Coyote having run off the cliff but still hanging in the air, the realisation that there's no ground underneath hasn't come yet until he looks down and then the inevitable happens.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
The US could lift their sanctions any day and the Kremlin coffers start to refill. At that point, it falls on Europe to decide what it wants to do.
US lifting sanctions would be an interesting thing to model. It would allow the fleet to sail again and free up banking and supply chain financing. It wouldn’t bring back European gas demand (or of it did, that would collapse demand for US LNG). And it would probably also lead to a fall in hydrocarbons prices.
Quite a complex impact I think
Whilst the fleet might sale, I'm not sure where it is sailing to. I am on a project that puts me on the inside loop on Chinese reactions to sanctions. If the US lifts sanctions but Europe doesn't, I am far from convinced the Chinese will resume purchases of Russian oil. India - harder to read.
Siberia has an awful lot of natural resources - and China is the only country in a position to be able to extract them. But they also have no need to do so today so the longer Russia is weakened the better China's final end result.
Agree with that.
China plays the long game. When the Russian economy goes down the pan, they can bail them out - by buying Russian Manchuria off them.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
But isn't that what Chamberlain thought he was doing at Munich? Hitler's assurance was not worth the paper it was written on.
Chamberlain sought peace, but simultaneously prepared for war.
Trump isn't fit to lick Chamberlain's boots.
I suspect Trump is also planning for war. An Abrams tanks and Lightening IIs for Russian oil contra deal would be so "beautiful".
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
Trump says a lot of shit. Rarely does it correspond with what’s true.
Meanwhile his VP shouts down the Ukrainian president, and accuses him of peddling propaganda when he talks of Russia atrocities.
Minsk II didn’t “stop the killing”. This will be no different without a credible defence strategy for Ukraine, which Trump has already declared he wants no part of.
So Trump has said he wants the war to end. You, presumably, don't. Talk me through the next 12-18 months with your plan.
Have you not read my post upthread ? I've already answered that - and rather more importantly, it's what our government, and possibly the majority of Europe, are now pursuing.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
He said that the expense was a long way behind stopping the killing. Great farmland though Ukraine no doubt has, it is bodies, said Trump, that are stopping the bullets.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
He has no interest in stopping the killing. It doesn't even enter into his mind that it matters if lots of Ukranians, Russians and anyone else dies. He wouldn't even care if lots of Americans died as long as it didn't affect his own prospects, wealth and ego.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
How could a thought enter something that doesn't exist?
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
Yes, he's a dictator.
If the rumour from the states on three terms is correct, Trump is the same.
I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.
Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.
We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)
Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US. The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order. No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia? I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.
Eventually, yes.
And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.
Because sacrificing millions to live under an authoritarian dictatorship to stop thousands of willing people who want to fight that dictatorship (or are fighting on behalf of it) from dying is not an acceptable price worth paying.
I don't understand the European Ukraine play. It seems that Russia will only end the war if they can claim a victory (the Donbas at a minimum, presumably) and that Ukraine will only end the war if they are defeated (or, a negotiated peace with cast iron Western-backed security guarantees - boots on the ground presumably via NATO or another structure).
Therefore what are we playing at? It seems like the options are simple:
Let Russia defeat Ukraine.
Help Ukraine push Russia out of their borders.
Tell Russia that if they don't accept a negotiated settlement (probably less than the whole Donbas with western bases in Ukraine) then Europe/UK will use all their military might to achieve the above.
What else is there, realistically?
Rope a dope.
Help Ukraine absorb Russia's attacks until Russia is tired and exhausted and collapses. Which looks like coming soon, which is why Russia's shills are getting increasingly shrill about the need for "peace".
Yes but that relies upon American support and American sanctions.
If Europe wants to do this alone, then I can't see any alternative to the above.
I don't see why.
Russia has an economy smaller than Italy's.
The UK with Poland, Germany, other European allies, Canada and others absolutely can help Ukraine defeat Russia - even without America if need be. Rather with, but if need be without.
Giving them kit, and training, is the easier bit. Ukraine is being trained up on the German RCH-155s and will be getting them within weeks, before even the German army, where they're made. The problem is the US command and control, the software, the spy satellites, all the US infrastructure we rely upon to make our stuff work and to use it effectively. I have no idea how long and how much it would cost to set up a parallel European capability.
This guy who claims to be a somewhat independent Ukrainian military analyst has this to say on the effects of America removing its technical assistance
The nature of warfare is changing very fast. Last year Ukraine produced more than 1.3m drones for its military to use, comfortably more than anyone else in the world. This year there will be considerably more. How much longer will the Russian manpower advantage even be relevant?
The Russians, in contrast, have largely been dependent upon running down huge stocks of artillery and tanks together with imports paid for by capital reserves which are now exhausted.
This war is not developing to Russia’s advantage, not at all. The balance is swinging in Ukraine’s favour but they still need financial help to keep their government running, the economy moving and the Russians at bay until the swing becomes more decisive. Hopefully they will get it today.
It’s weird how much Trump has misjudged this. It’s almost as if they were getting their information from Russia.
Well said.
There is a reason Putin's shills are desperate for "peace" soon and it is because Russia is getting close to culmination.
Europe needs to stand firm and back Ukraine.
Trump was completely wrong to say Ukraine doesn't "hold any cards", it is Russia that is failing more than Ukraine. Russia's already raided its prisons and sent North Koreans in meatwaves to the front, they're running out of money and meat to send to the grinder.
If Europe backs Ukraine fully, then even if Trump cuts America's support, Ukraine still should win this war. If Europe stands firm, I doubt Putin will make it to the end of Trump's term, which would be quite an irony and what a legacy for Trump to be the US POTUS who upended America's relationships and backed the wrong horse.
There won’t be any sudden collapse. I expect the broken back nature of the Russian war effort to become even more pronounced.
I expect Russia to collapse in two ways. Gradually at first, then suddenly.
I misread that as you expect Russia to collapse in two days. Which I wouldn't not have expected from you.
Still wishing the world did what you wanted it to do while ignoring facts on the ground.
It isn't about wishes, the facts on the ground are the Russia is going bankrupt in men, materials and money.
Hence the Hemingway reference that seems to have gone over your head.
I am aware of the reference.
You have been calling for the imminent collapse of Russia for three years and, then as now, I just don't see it.
Russia is not collapsing in my view, any time soon. This war will go on and on.
It might not go on and on if the US follows through with the Trump rhetoric.
I take that point.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
See it through the "on and on" stage until Russia runs out of men, money and materials to send into the meat grinder.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
I don’t think that is any time soon. I don’t think the war ends without a settlement.
The war doesn’t end with a settlement either. It just goes into a pause before phase 3, like it did last time in 2014.
The war will only end with the deposing or death of Putin, assuming the Russian soldiers can't be thrown out before.
That's your call on this, is it. Death of Putin or it continues.
Yes, he's a dictator.
If the rumour from the states on three terms is correct, Trump is the same.
Comments
(a) They have to keep attacking. Their opponents are defending, and constantly bleeding them.
(b) They have a choice whether or not to fight. Ukraine does not.
I've been suggesting the eventual collapse of Russia for years and I always said it was a long-term project that might take years.
I said from the start that if the war was over rapidly it would be in Russia's favour but it was a longer-term conflict that would be favouring Ukraine.
We're still in the "gradual at first" stage and I've never said imminent, however the signs are starting to mount that culmination is coming and I don't think they could last now another year or two.
Getting honest data out of Russia is hard but from what it seems the fundamentals now are all starting to show the strains.
"According to one source with direct knowledge of the events, North Carolina senator Thom Tillis told people that the FBI warned him about “credible death threats” when he was considering voting against Pete Hegseth’s nomination for defense secretary. Tillis ultimately provided the crucial 50th vote to confirm the former Fox & Friends host to lead the Pentagon. According to the source, Tillis has said that if people want to understand Trump, they should read the 2006 book Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work. (When asked for comment for this story, a spokesperson for Tillis said it was false that the senator had recommended the book in that capacity. The FBI said it had no comment.)"
Russia has an economy smaller than Italy's.
The UK with Poland, Germany, other European allies, Canada and others absolutely can help Ukraine defeat Russia - even without America if need be. Rather with, but if need be without.
From memory, Ben Ando's excellent book on police bravery has two stories where tasers failed: one was when they tackled a man high on drugs in a tower block corridor; either due to lack of space or the drugs the man had taken, the taser had no effect. In another, the man was wearing such thick clothing the tasers did not work.
What I was alluding to was if the current situation was maintained, I think the war would go on and on.
I don’t really know what Harris planned to do beyond that?
And in Moscow the city as opposed to the government, the only differences sanctions made is that some foreign shops closed. Muscovites are not called to the front line.
As an aside, this is what led to so many intellectuals falling in love with Communism during the 1930s. Capitalism had failed at home; Europe was falling to fascism; but in Moscow, life was good thanks to communism and the fact that Western visitors were not allowed to visit the rest of Russia where people were starving.
The Russian economy is not about to implode. Thanks to sanctions, there is not much need for foreign exchange, and once there is a ceasefire and sanctions are lifted, oil and gas sales will quickly refill the Kremlin's coffers.
America will eventually broker a peace deal that leaves Russia with what it wants, and that will be sold as Putin's victory. Tragic but true.
When that happens, the war ends rapidly.
The "Russia stronk!" myth has been dead for decades, but people still revere its stinking corpse.
Russia's economy is clearly deteriorating, but Putin has a vast apparatus of repression, to prevent revolt.
We've also seen that Ukraine does not have the means to recapture the lost territories. So, I think at some stage, the war will peter out into a cold war/cold peace. Technically, the war will continue, but in reality, it will grind to a halt. To my mind, the European side of NATO has to ensure that Ukraine is in as strong a position as possible at that point, in order to hold onto the remaining 80% of the country, and assist in rebuilding the Ukrainian economy.
There will be debates along the way on how to achieve that goal and the policies for doing so. That is where the Tories should take the fight to Labour, not in the direction of travel. It also distinguishes them from Reform and they should go after Farage on this.
Because without some sort of victory, Vlad seems likely to be taking a long walk through a high window pretty soon.
He's old. Nobody lives forever. He saw off the Wagner revolt but it was a close run thing.
The question then becomes if New Supreme Leader would be able, or willing, to end the war without territorial gains. What of Crimea?
Russia’s strategy for centuries has been to use its conquered territories to fight wars for it. They’re not alone there, after all we made much use of empire soldiers in the world wars. But they go further and as others have commented seem able to avoid any impact on Muscovites.
This is the danger with a bigger land grab in Ukraine and an eventual annexation of Belarus. They’ll use Ukrainians and Belarusians to prosecute the next war, against Lithuania, say, for land access to Kaliningrad. Then they’ll have some Lithuanians they can throw into the fight with Latvia and Estonia as they prepare the ground for Poland, and so on.
I agree that I don’t want Trump negotiating it nor do I support anything he says. But I do also accept reality. I await the usual “you support Putin” replies.
Yes soldiers are getting wages, and morale stays high as long as they can, however Russia has used up most of its liquid reserves that it has access to, in order to pay for those wages and is running a very hefty deficit. Even with that hefty deficit and liquid reserves that are running out, its still not being able to replace the materials it is losing, hence its desperate to raid reserves and get stuff from the North Koreans etc
Eventually money and materials are going to run out - and what then?
Giving in to a peace deal before that happens just lets them off the hook.
(I'm curious if this incident will pop up in the STATS19 data as a driver: pedestrian pavement collision...)
What on Earth has happened to this man.
It will all look fine in Russia, until one day it isn’t.
The regime is so dictatorial they need to be close to that point though before people will be brave enough to wield the knife. Or, this being Russia, open the window.
Quite a complex impact I think
Another thing: I absolutely believe Putin is a threat to eastern Europe and maybe central Europe too. I back an increase in defence spending to help fend him off/deter him.
But here's what infuriates me: we've been getting actually invaded by Islamists every day for the past six years. 150k+ unverified, bad-faith Channel gatecrashers so far, mainly fighting-age males.
And no government has bothered to stop it despite it being a bigger threat to our security in Britain.
The Reform fans find it so hard to actually criticise the dictator Putin. This is turning into a big problem for them.
The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.
Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order.
No skin in the game, no say.
All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.
The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.
Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.
He says he wants to stop the killing as a primary aim. I have no doubt he also wants to go down in history as the Peacemaker President who touched the world with his hands and, lo, the world reacted. But he said he wanted to stop the killing.
Snyder identifies five specific failures - hospitality, decency, democracy, strategy and independence
https://snyder.substack.com/p/five-failures-in-the-oval-office?publication_id=310897&post_id=158132584&isFreemail=true&r=8fn4q&triedRedirect=true
This is all about Trump and the anti-democratic right. There is nothing for America in its current course.
Starmer is attempting to pursue continuation of the peace negotiations, but on a more realistic level by starting from the pov of Ukraine’s future security, rather than a carve up fait accompli agreed with Putin.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2025/mar/02/ukraine-war-volodymyr-zelenskyy-keir-starmer-donald-trump-us-europe-eu-russia-defence-latest-live-news
… Starmer says he thinks Trump wants to see a lasting peace in Ukraine despite his rhetoric and attitude towards Zelenskyy. “Everybody agrees with that apart from Putin,” he told the BBC. By “lasting peace”, Starmer means a “US backstop”, along with “security guarantees” provided by European countries and a “strong Ukraine” armed with defensive capabilities to resist the Russian invasion.
The security guarantee from the Americans is the subject of “intense” discussion, Starmer said.
He explained:
For me, the components of a lasting peace are a strong Ukraine to fight on, if necessary, to be in a position of strength; to negotiate a European element to security guarantees, and that’s why I’ve been forward-leaning on this about what we would do; and a US backstop.
That’s the package, all three parts need to be in place, and that’s what I’m working hard to bring together.
As the Guardian’s defence and security editor, Dan Sabbagh, notes, Starmer acknowledges that Trump has not committed to a US backstop security guarantee for a European force in Ukraine but says the US and UK are having continuing talks over it...
Here's an interview with Thomas Zimmer a German who is a 20th century American history professor at Georgetown University
"tagesschau24: Some analysts say that Zelenskyj behaved tactically clumsily during the conversation because he started a fundamental debate about US security guarantees and military aid in front of the cameras. What do you think about that?
Zimmer: I think that's completely wrong because it's based on a very fundamental misunderstanding: the idea that Trump's position on this issue can be controlled by tactical skill and diplomatic finesse. That's wishful thinking that continues to cling to the idea that Trump doesn't have a consistent position at all. He's perhaps just a businessman who wants to negotiate a good deal and also someone to whom you can somehow sell anything through flattery.But that completely ignores the fact that Trump has had a very clear stance on this conflict for many years now and a very clear inclination towards Russia and autocratic rulers like Putin. It also completely ignores the fact that the Trumpist forces that are now in power in the USA are pursuing a clear, ideologically defined project. They are really serious about turning away from the liberal world order, from Europe's liberal democracies. They have something completely different in mind. We have to let go of the idea that with a little skill, with a little tact, all of this can somehow be averted."
https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/amerika/interview-zimmer-usa-trump-100.html
" I don't think it makes sense to continue to hold out hope that Trump, the Trumpist government or the Republican Party will be able to pursue any policies other than what we have now experienced."
Due on Ferrari tomorrow morning, will he call in sick?
Rarely does it correspond with what’s true.
Meanwhile his VP shouts down the Ukrainian president, and accuses him of peddling propaganda when he talks of Russia atrocities.
Minsk II didn’t “stop the killing”. This will be no different without a credible defence strategy for Ukraine, which Trump has already declared he wants no part of.
I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.
Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.
Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.
The way to stop that from happening is through unity and strength on the European continent. Equivocation suits Putin. It gives him the chance to gamble.
We are putting ourselves in the strongest position if we use the next few years to rearm, and to put in place a strong European deterrent. If we spend the next few years equivocating, then a miscalculation leading to a wider conflagration becomes sadly more likely. But I am hopeful. And I don’t see that in our future.
Trump isn't fit to lick Chamberlain's boots.
Indeed I've said all along we should prepare for this to take many years. Wars can take many, many years.
Which makes mockery of "you've been saying that for years" rather absurd - yes, I've been consistent for years and so far the facts have borne out what I'm saying. It is pure dishonesty to suggest anyone has been saying Russia is going to collapse imminently, that was never said.
There's a world of difference between imminently and eventually. Don't be so impatient. We need to be in this for the long haul.
And if that is "one day" right, then it was always right. Since it was always saying this would eventually happen, so long as we stay the course.
China plays the long game. When the Russian economy goes down the pan, they can bail them out - by buying Russian Manchuria off them.
This is the lesson that some on here have not yet learnt. Maybe because they don't want to face it. Trump has no interest in helping or protecting Ukraine or Europe. His interests are purely transactional and we don't matter. All these questions about how or whether we will be able to defend against Russia or help Uraine are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a choice, that Trump will be persuaded to change his mind and help in our defence. He won't.
Once you accept that you realise that it is not a quastion of whether we want to rearm and challenge Putin. It is simple fact that we have to. And the best way to ensure my son and daughter don't end up having to fight in Europe is to make sure Putin loses - or at least fails to succeed - in Ukraine.
I've already answered that - and rather more importantly, it's what our government, and possibly the majority of Europe, are now pursuing.
Since, TBF, nobody should have done that for four years and two months (less four days) that *should* have been quite some time ago.
https://bsky.app/profile/tatarigami.bsky.social/post/3limxuvthlc2h