The Russian proposals – at least something is on the table – politicalbetting.com
The Russian proposals – at least something is on the table – politicalbetting.com
Above is a screen grab of the latest move today in the Ukraine crisis – the Russians setting out what they would agree to for a peaceful outcome.
Comments
-
First1
-
Second like Bad Vlad0
-
Mike, it is all lies. No one should believe a word that Putin says unless it is a statement that he likes riding bareback on horse.
4 -
That last one is a big fat NOPE0
-
Aren't they the supposed reasons for the invasion in the first place? Designed to be turned down, unsurprisingly.1
-
regardless of whether he means it or not, it is a step back from wanting all or most of Ukraine by Putin. you only make an offer when you think you are losing...rottenborough said:Mike, it is all lies. No one should believe a word that Putin says unless it is a statement that he likes riding bareback on horse.
3 -
Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all0 -
So Hitler thought he was losing the war, when he made his "offer" to Britain in July 1940?spudgfsh said:
regardless of whether he means it or not, it is a step back from wanting all or most of Ukraine by Putin. you only make an offer when you think you are losing...rottenborough said:Mike, it is all lies. No one should believe a word that Putin says unless it is a statement that he likes riding bareback on horse.
0 -
Why would anyone trust a word Russia says? How can Ukraine possibly reach a treaty with such an untrustworthy violent neighbour?18
-
I'm more inclined to the thinking that despite his weird ranting he didn't want all of Ukraine, he just wants to stamp it down and restrict its freedom to act.spudgfsh said:
regardless of whether he means it or not, it is a step back from wanting all or most of Ukraine by Putin. you only make an offer when you think you are losing...rottenborough said:Mike, it is all lies. No one should believe a word that Putin says unless it is a statement that he likes riding bareback on horse.
0 -
Speaking with @EmmanuelMacron, @OlafScholz and @POTUS this afternoon, we agreed to continue applying the pressure on Russia to isolate Putin diplomatically and economically – ensuring his barbaric venture is a total and complete failure.
https://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/15009498570743070721 -
Well, this is an interesting development. It's obviously a maximalist position. I agree with Mike, Russia might compromise on EU but not NATO. And why would Ukraine agree, when no NATO means it could happen again? Russia also might compromise on full independence for the breakaway republics possibly?1
-
That's such a dramatic change in demands (from the genocide of the Ukrainian identity to just cementing the de-facto reality pre-war) that it indicates Moscow know the war isn't going well, nor is their situation likely to improve.2
-
We've frozen their foreign reserves. Given the sinkage of the Rouble they would seriously be worth something to Russia. $500 is 3 times Ukraine's annual GDP. What might the damage of the war be? $50bn? $100bn? A fraction of those reserves should cover it.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all3 -
Oh the logic of demanding Ukraine allow separatist regions to go their own way, whilst simultaneously demanding Ukraine not ever be allowed to enter into its own alliances with other nations.
I could see the NATO demand being conceded (NATO won't want it perhaps, and they get some measure of support outside it if not enough), but how could Ukraine's leadership abandon EU membership as at least a goal?
There is no neutrality as far as being a buffer state goes. If you must comply with one side's wishes by force you're in effect in their political bloc anyway.
Here's hoping the Ukrainians do well enough in this war, likely to be lengthy, that they do not need to give up on their hopes, even if some are unlikely to be attained.0 -
Absolutely do not agree to any of this
Putin has to be taken out otherwise he will just make Crimea and the Russian controlled areas into military bases readying for another invasion in years to come
At the very least Ukraine should join the EU and even NATO
Imagine after all that has happened we let him away with outrageous war crimes8 -
Says a lot about a society that they are concerned enough about losses in officers to properly count the losses but not for men!Chameleon said:Someone who has previously been reliable pre-invasion reports:
"Trusted contacts in Russia are telling that 🇷🇺 Western Military District has lost 1200 officers in 🇺🇦 since the beginning of war.
dead + injured + prisoners = 1200 officers"
https://twitter.com/VDV_Textbooks/status/1500758281983254528
Russia doesn't have as many NCOs are the west, but you're still looking at maybe a multiplier of 10 to get all ranks losses, add in losses from other military districts and you're up in the 20-30k range.
this could be wildly off, but also is accurate its very bad for the Russians.0 -
I think the EU mostly pays. But they're not going to want to pay to rebuild a country only to see Putin smash it up again, which implies a Ukraine as a member of NATO as a guarantor against renewed Russian aggression - which I think means supporting the Ukrainian military until they've reclaimed Crimea and the Donbas.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
However, at this point the West seems to be only providing military equipment that helps Ukraine to defend, and to fight a guerrilla war. They're probably going to need some heavier equipment if they're going to push the Russians out completely.0 -
A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.6 -
I agree in principle, however we are not having the bejesus bombed out of us, so it's easy for us to say.Big_G_NorthWales said:Absolutely do not agree to any of this
Putin has to be taken out otherwise he will just make Crimea and the Russian controlled areas into military bases readying for another invasion in years to come
At the very least Ukraine should join the EU and even NATO
Imagine after all that has happened we let him away with outrageous war crimes4 -
I'd guess that the damage of the war would be way more than one year's worth of Ukrainian GDP. Rebuilding Kharkiv alone would be immensely expensive.FrankBooth said:
We've frozen their foreign reserves. Given the sinkage of the Rouble they would seriously be worth something to Russia. $500 is 3 times Ukraine's annual GDP. What might the damage of the war be? $50bn? $100bn? A fraction of those reserves should cover it.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all1 -
It seems obvious Ukraine cannot accept this. Despite speculation about a mostly return to status quo, it's hard to see what deal Ukraine's leaders could even sell to its people at this point, yet might feel obliged to attempt.
It's simply impossible to trust the word of an invader, especially one who claims they are not invading even as they are in the act of killing you.
I don't envy being Zelensky when a somewhat more rational condition is presented and he is pressured to accept by allies who would like a quick end to things.0 -
I have no idea what the scale of Russian assets is in frozen accounts around the world. It seems to me that an international convention could be convened to agree on the legal seizure of these assets and their use in reparations to help rebuild Ukraine.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
Now as I say I have no idea how much wealth is in banks outside of Russia so it maybe that this would only be a tiny fraction of what was needed. But it would be interesting to know exactly how many of those many billions are in non-Russian banks.1 -
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.0 -
I expect it to be Ukraine positionMexicanpete said:
I agree in principle, however we are not having the bejesus bombed out of us, so it's easy for us to say.Big_G_NorthWales said:Absolutely do not agree to any of this
Putin has to be taken out otherwise he will just make Crimea and the Russian controlled areas into military bases readying for another invasion in years to come
At the very least Ukraine should join the EU and even NATO
Imagine after all that has happened we let him away with outrageous war crimes1 -
I think we should leave it entirely to Zelenskyy whilst promising that none of our sanctions will be removed.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect it to be Ukraine positionMexicanpete said:
I agree in principle, however we are not having the bejesus bombed out of us, so it's easy for us to say.Big_G_NorthWales said:Absolutely do not agree to any of this
Putin has to be taken out otherwise he will just make Crimea and the Russian controlled areas into military bases readying for another invasion in years to come
At the very least Ukraine should join the EU and even NATO
Imagine after all that has happened we let him away with outrageous war crimes7 -
But Hitler feared Britain - at least as far as their control of the seas went. He knew they could do him some serious damage even if he thought they could never beat him. He just wanted Britain out of the war so he could concentrate on the East. I do wonder if Putin is starting to worry that he cannot beat Ukraine without doing irreversible damage to Russian interests.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
So Hitler thought he was losing the war, when he made his "offer" to Britain in July 1940?spudgfsh said:
regardless of whether he means it or not, it is a step back from wanting all or most of Ukraine by Putin. you only make an offer when you think you are losing...rottenborough said:Mike, it is all lies. No one should believe a word that Putin says unless it is a statement that he likes riding bareback on horse.
1 -
Incidentally, I was playing Suzerain again the other day, the text game about fictional eastern european type nations caught in a power struggle between super powers and unstable neighbours. Eerily topical despite the fictional nature with the Russiantype neighbour staging false flag attacks, and demanding wholesale transfer of territory or else face invasion. It doesn't end well if you don't have concrete backing of major powers.2
-
I agree 100%FrankBooth said:
I think we should leave it entirely to Zelenskyy whilst promising that none of our sanctions will be removed.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect it to be Ukraine positionMexicanpete said:
I agree in principle, however we are not having the bejesus bombed out of us, so it's easy for us to say.Big_G_NorthWales said:Absolutely do not agree to any of this
Putin has to be taken out otherwise he will just make Crimea and the Russian controlled areas into military bases readying for another invasion in years to come
At the very least Ukraine should join the EU and even NATO
Imagine after all that has happened we let him away with outrageous war crimes0 -
Good health warning: https://twitter.com/ErrantStrategry/status/1500904280034885635
I sat through an intel update this afternoon. While I can’t get specific, what I will say is that the view of the war that we are getting from expertly curated UKR IO is giving a lot of folks an impression of not only RUS incompetence but also UKR dominance. The excellent work of accounts like @RALee85 and @OSINTtechnical further reinforce this. They are not pushing disinfo, but they are providing reinforcement of an impression that the RF are wholly indisciplined and wildly incompetent. The RF absolutely feature these things. But what we are not seeing is the mil successes they are having. Recall they are advancing and they are taking ground. Just really slow. The fact is that RUS is having some success, and while they’ve lost a sizable amount of personnel and equipment, it’s only a small percentage of the total they brought. While each UKR loss, especially of their regular soldiers and pilots, is irreplaceable.2 -
I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".0
-
Supposedly about half the sovereign wealth Putin built (deliberately, for this moment) is held "outside" Russia. So about $300 billion, I believe. RoughlyRichard_Tyndall said:
I have no idea what the scale of Russian assets is in frozen accounts around the world. It seems to me that an international convention could be convened to agree on the legal seizure of these assets and their use in reparations to help rebuild Ukraine.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
Now as I say I have no idea how much wealth is in banks outside of Russia so it maybe that this would only be a tiny fraction of what was needed. But it would be interesting to know exactly how many of those many billions are in non-Russian banks.
Its frozen status is one of the things which has totally nonplussed Moscow. They did not expect this
$300bn would surely be enough to rebuild Ukraine, and make it liveable again, and then some. No way Russia agrees to it1 -
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.
Even tonight Boris has been in a conference with Biden - Macron and Scholz0 -
As it stands at moment the longer this goes on the more that Putin is revealing that is superpower war machine is in fact a losing mess of drunks, incompetent conscripts crying for mum, useless officers and corrupt quartermasters. They can't even turn up to Kwick Fit once a year for a proper tyre change.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
The maps he has on his massive desk are all lies. All the generals have been lying to him for years.1 -
There's no way Russia allows Ukraine to have an EU army in it.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
1 -
The Russians have lost a second general.
Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who took part in the second #Chechen war, the war in #Syria and the annexation of #Crimea, was killed in battles near Kharkiv.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/15009521349378949122 -
I wonder how a 'not in NATO but with a NATO equipped and trained army' would go, since if they make it through this I imagine Ukraine would rightly be keen to maintain some of the excellent military links they are building up.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
Of course, the Russians want Ukraine to demilitarise, which is another of those laughably one sided demands.
We don't like that you might have some weapons (or so we claim)
Therefore we will burn your country to the ground
This proves you don't need weapons, but that we do.0 -
I doubt it, and I most certainly hope not. An independent army is an essential feature of a free country.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.0 -
My guess: this war now ends with Putin's defeat, or a nuclear war. That's it0
-
NO. BBC. The map with red zones does NOT show where the RU are said to be in control. It shows where they have a presence. See Lawrence Freedman.0
-
https://twitter.com/shaunwalker7/status/1500951390251888641
New Zelensky video, starts with him on an iphone showing the scene outside to walking into his office and starting his address. The phone/camera switch is pretty smooth. Whoever his social media team are, they're doing a great job.3 -
Indeed. Yet this whole business started over Ukraine wanting to look West more, and that's increasingly the case (for some reason a violent basketcase next door and his mini me to the north stress them out), so they cannot resile from it.TheWhiteRabbit said:
There's no way Russia allows Ukraine to have an EU army in it.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
Hence it seeming a grim stalemate will prevail, if the invasion is blunted.
And that is why sanctions must not be reduced if/when fighting does stall or stop - it doesn't make Ukraine any safer to stop them, and unless it concedes massively to Ukraine there is no reason to do so.0 -
Is it usual for generals to be killed in battle? I imagine them being 30 miles behind the front line, General Melchett style.williamglenn said:The Russians have lost a second general.
Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who took part in the second #Chechen war, the war in #Syria and the annexation of #Crimea, was killed in battles near Kharkiv.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/15009521349378949120 -
If the invasion is reversed, the sanctions must absolutely be lifted. Otherwise how would sanctions ever be effective against anyone ever again?kle4 said:
Indeed. Yet this whole business started over Ukraine wanting to look West more, and that's increasingly the case (for some reason a violent basketcase next door and his mini me to the north stress them out), so they cannot resile from it.TheWhiteRabbit said:
There's no way Russia allows Ukraine to have an EU army in it.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
Hence it seeming a grim stalemate will prevail, if the invasion is blunted.
And that is why sanctions must not be reduced if/when fighting does stall or stop - it doesn't make Ukraine any safer to stop them, and unless it concedes massively to Ukraine there is no reason to do so.0 -
It is how NATO is constitutedLuckyguy1983 said:
I doubt it, and I most certainly hope not. An independent army is an essential feature of a free country.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.0 -
I agree. Sadly.Leon said:My guess: this war now ends with Putin's defeat, or a nuclear war. That's it
Unless, unless, the Chinese intervene. That is my hope now. This is bad for business.0 -
9 German generals were killed in the Soviets' 1944 Operation Bagration, with 22 captured.kyf_100 said:
Is it usual for generals to be killed in battle? I imagine them being 30 miles behind the front line, General Melchett style.williamglenn said:The Russians have lost a second general.
Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who took part in the second #Chechen war, the war in #Syria and the annexation of #Crimea, was killed in battles near Kharkiv.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/15009521349378949121 -
As Mexicanpete says, it's not up to us, and we need to be careful not to tell them what to do from the comfort of our living rooms. As a negotiating position, it looks unachievable, but not out of sight.Luckyguy1983 said:Well, this is an interesting development. It's obviously a maximalist position. I agree with Mike, Russia might compromise on EU but not NATO. And why would Ukraine agree, when no NATO means it could happen again? Russia also might compromise on full independence for the breakaway republics possibly?
I do think that if Ukraine gives up joining NATO, they need some serious military guarantees from the west which will take effect in any future invasion - yes, including a no-fly zone. Those would actually be better than hoping to join NATO, since we don't allow new members who have territorial disputes.0 -
These are very poor generals, don't they know they should be 200 miles behind the front line?williamglenn said:The Russians have lost a second general.
Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who took part in the second #Chechen war, the war in #Syria and the annexation of #Crimea, was killed in battles near Kharkiv.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/15009521349378949120 -
Does being in the EU provide the protection that Ukraine needs? Putin knows that once a country is in Nato he cannot threaten them. This is a man who operates through fear and a President in his 'closest' neighbour who won't dance to his tunes is his worst nightmare.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
0 -
Yes, I agree, Russia is clearly losing, and all the hi-tech missiles that quietly became yachts are partly to blamerottenborough said:
As it stands at moment the longer this goes on the more that Putin is revealing that is superpower war machine is in fact a losing mess of drunks, incompetent conscripts crying for mum, useless officers and corrupt quartermasters. They can't even turn up to Kwick Fit once a year for a proper tyre change.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
The maps he has on his massive desk are all lies. All the generals have been lying to him for years.
No way Russia does anything but lose, from here. Question is, does it lose alone, and if so, how badly? Or will the mad-hound Putin successfully launch a few nukes to save his "legacy"?
0 -
Russia accepts that Ukraine can have EU membership - but not NATO.
Then the EU enters into the equivalent of NATO's Article 5. Invasion of Ukraine would mean the military might of the combined EU, each defensively supporting other member states. An EU NATO by the back door, No other EU permanently troops stationed there. But US funded (supplied?) state of the art missile defence based across the country. And lots of regular joint exercises.
But not NATO. No sirree......
The UK says it will stand with the EU. Not as part of the EU army, but as solid as we have been these past 2 weeks.
2 -
I doubt the Ukranaians will agree but Putin's terms could have been worse, at least he is not claiming all of Ukraine, only the ones with the biggest Russian population.
Ends the illusion that Putin sees any distinction between NATO and the EU however0 -
Reminiscent of the Winter War 1939-40? Except this time, no Mannerheim Line.Leon said:
Supposedly about half the sovereign wealth Putin built (deliberately, for this moment) is held "outside" Russia. So about $300 billion, I believe. RoughlyRichard_Tyndall said:
I have no idea what the scale of Russian assets is in frozen accounts around the world. It seems to me that an international convention could be convened to agree on the legal seizure of these assets and their use in reparations to help rebuild Ukraine.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
Now as I say I have no idea how much wealth is in banks outside of Russia so it maybe that this would only be a tiny fraction of what was needed. But it would be interesting to know exactly how many of those many billions are in non-Russian banks.
Its frozen status is one of the things which has totally nonplussed Moscow. They did not expect this
$300bn would surely be enough to rebuild Ukraine, and make it liveable again, and then some. No way Russia agrees to it
Question is, can Ukraine hold out long enough to convince Stalin's heir to make peace on terms that may truncate UKR territory, but leave the bulk (reasonably) independent?
0 -
NATO commitments we cannot avoid. Getting entangled in the EU army we certainly can, and must.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is how NATO is constitutedLuckyguy1983 said:
I doubt it, and I most certainly hope not. An independent army is an essential feature of a free country.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.0 -
Russian troops summarily execute a Ukrainian mayor as he was distributing bread to townspeople.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/russian-forces-kill-mayor-of-town-near-kyiv-officials-say/0 -
Leon said:
My guess: this war now ends with Putin's defeat, or a nuclear war. That's it
Mr Johnson says "We will protect you"
I don't subscribe to this point of view
Believe me when I say to you
I hope the Russians love their children too0 -
300 billion would work out at around $6800 per Ukrainian, or about five grand. Not as much as you think. And I'd say not adequate to the suffering they've been put through.Leon said:
Supposedly about half the sovereign wealth Putin built (deliberately, for this moment) is held "outside" Russia. So about $300 billion, I believe. RoughlyRichard_Tyndall said:
I have no idea what the scale of Russian assets is in frozen accounts around the world. It seems to me that an international convention could be convened to agree on the legal seizure of these assets and their use in reparations to help rebuild Ukraine.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
Now as I say I have no idea how much wealth is in banks outside of Russia so it maybe that this would only be a tiny fraction of what was needed. But it would be interesting to know exactly how many of those many billions are in non-Russian banks.
Its frozen status is one of the things which has totally nonplussed Moscow. They did not expect this
$300bn would surely be enough to rebuild Ukraine, and make it liveable again, and then some. No way Russia agrees to it
It is, however, a good start.1 -
So Scotland isn't a free country?Luckyguy1983 said:
I doubt it, and I most certainly hope not. An independent army is an essential feature of a free country.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.1 -
I notice Zelensky has just posted a video from his office. That's the first in a long time. I assumed he was well out of the way now of Kiev.0
-
Russia is still gaining ground. While a Russian victory is no longer inevitable, it is still very possible that Russia throws enough men and machines in to gum up the machinery. I'd like to see some armed Ukrainian resistance in Russian occupied cities before throwing a 'Russia can't win' party.Leon said:
Yes, I agree, Russia is clearly losing, and all the hi-tech missiles that quietly became yachts are partly to blamerottenborough said:
As it stands at moment the longer this goes on the more that Putin is revealing that is superpower war machine is in fact a losing mess of drunks, incompetent conscripts crying for mum, useless officers and corrupt quartermasters. They can't even turn up to Kwick Fit once a year for a proper tyre change.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
The maps he has on his massive desk are all lies. All the generals have been lying to him for years.
No way Russia does anything but lose, from here. Question is, does it lose alone, and if so, how badly? Or will the mad-hound Putin successfully launch a few nukes to save his "legacy"?0 -
It is within the UKOnlyLivingBoy said:
So Scotland isn't a free country?Luckyguy1983 said:
I doubt it, and I most certainly hope not. An independent army is an essential feature of a free country.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.1 -
It is total lies.HYUFD said:I doubt the Ukranaians will agree but Putin's terms could have been worse, at least he is not claiming all of Ukraine, only the ones with the biggest Russian population.
Ends the illusion that Putin sees any distinction between NATO and the EU however
I assume that no one in diplomatic circles will spend more than ten mins on this crock of shit.
1 -
Unfair on the Melchetts I’m afraid. 78 were killed on active duty in the First World War (UK and dominions).kyf_100 said:
Is it usual for generals to be killed in battle? I imagine them being 30 miles behind the front line, General Melchett style.williamglenn said:The Russians have lost a second general.
Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who took part in the second #Chechen war, the war in #Syria and the annexation of #Crimea, was killed in battles near Kharkiv.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/15009521349378949124 -
The problem that Russia has now is that nobody is going to believe that they will abide by anything they sign up to. The past is littered with their broken promises. You can't negotiate with someone who habitually fails to keep their word.
Johnson has a similar problem, all be it on a vastly different scale. Whatever the Prime Minister says large sections of the country, including many in his own party, now don't believe him or don't expect him to do what he says.2 -
And not a free country?HYUFD said:
It is within the UKOnlyLivingBoy said:
So Scotland isn't a free country?Luckyguy1983 said:
I doubt it, and I most certainly hope not. An independent army is an essential feature of a free country.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.0 -
Isn't that what you are also doing just as the rest of us, by commmenting on the viability or acceptability of negotiating positions?NickPalmer said:
As Mexicanpete says, it's not up to us, and we need to be careful not to tell them what to do from the comfort of our living rooms. As a negotiating position, it looks unachievable, but not out of sight.Luckyguy1983 said:Well, this is an interesting development. It's obviously a maximalist position. I agree with Mike, Russia might compromise on EU but not NATO. And why would Ukraine agree, when no NATO means it could happen again? Russia also might compromise on full independence for the breakaway republics possibly?
I don't understand your distinction of giving up NATO membership in exchange for military guarantees from NATO including a no fly zone - that would provide Ukraine with the security of NATO backing in the event of further invasion, which is precisely what Russia does not want
That doesn't make any sense to me. It's not about NATO troops or bases not being stationed in Ukraine, since they can already be station near Russia in existing NATO countries, it seems to therefore be about Ukraine, specifically, not being allowed to have NATO defence. Giving them that defence without membership therefore doesn't seem acceptable to Russia even as a face saving option
Great news President Putin, Ukaine will not join NATO
That's great, we have successfully ensured military neutrality then?
Well...NATO have promised that they would come th Ukraine's aid if we ever attacked again
Sure sure, but like now, right?
Well, no, they'd also impose a no fly zone
...You're fired.0 -
No, of course it isn't. Neither is England.OnlyLivingBoy said:
So Scotland isn't a free country?Luckyguy1983 said:
I doubt it, and I most certainly hope not. An independent army is an essential feature of a free country.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.2 -
Of course it won't. One of the reasons we left the EU was our opposition to an EU army.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.
Even tonight Boris has been in a conference with Biden - Macron and Scholz
We don't pay the golf club subs any more, so we can't expect to be the Club Captain.1 -
Interesting 'town hall' in the Kuzbass (Kemerovo Oblast) which purportedly shows the Governor Sergey Tsivilyov being given a hard time over the fate of Russian soldiers.
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1500769632768118788?s=20&t=8xWoQkb8ZZqDdVTJfX41IA0 -
Yes, if the invasion is reversed. But if the fighting eventually stops with current Russian territorial gains, then could you lift sanctions then, with Russia holding Kherson, Melitopol, a large proportion of Ukraine's nuclear power, etc?Luckyguy1983 said:
If the invasion is reversed, the sanctions must absolutely be lifted. Otherwise how would sanctions ever be effective against anyone ever again?kle4 said:
Indeed. Yet this whole business started over Ukraine wanting to look West more, and that's increasingly the case (for some reason a violent basketcase next door and his mini me to the north stress them out), so they cannot resile from it.TheWhiteRabbit said:
There's no way Russia allows Ukraine to have an EU army in it.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
Hence it seeming a grim stalemate will prevail, if the invasion is blunted.
And that is why sanctions must not be reduced if/when fighting does stall or stop - it doesn't make Ukraine any safer to stop them, and unless it concedes massively to Ukraine there is no reason to do so.0 -
My Hart bleads....... No it doesn't LOL LOL, this does add credibility that Russian losses are bigger than expected,williamglenn said:The Russians have lost a second general.
Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who took part in the second #Chechen war, the war in #Syria and the annexation of #Crimea, was killed in battles near Kharkiv.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/15009521349378949120 -
Yep.Leon said:
Yes, I agree, Russia is clearly losing, and all the hi-tech missiles that quietly became yachts are partly to blamerottenborough said:
As it stands at moment the longer this goes on the more that Putin is revealing that is superpower war machine is in fact a losing mess of drunks, incompetent conscripts crying for mum, useless officers and corrupt quartermasters. They can't even turn up to Kwick Fit once a year for a proper tyre change.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
The maps he has on his massive desk are all lies. All the generals have been lying to him for years.
No way Russia does anything but lose, from here. Question is, does it lose alone, and if so, how badly? Or will the mad-hound Putin successfully launch a few nukes to save his "legacy"?
If Ukr can hang on maybe another week then the supply issues for RU look like a military disaster to be read to junior officers in training for the next hundred years.
I guess the Whitehouse is wargaming a set of 'Putin goes fully bonkers in his rage at losing' scenarios.
0 -
Don't think so. Andrei Sukhovetsky, killed last week, also in charge of the 41st. The picture looks like Valery Gerasimov, Russian Defence minister, albeit a bit younger.williamglenn said:The Russians have lost a second general.
Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who took part in the second #Chechen war, the war in #Syria and the annexation of #Crimea, was killed in battles near Kharkiv.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/15009521349378949120 -
Only within the limits of what the UK government agrees and has granted HolyroodOnlyLivingBoy said:
And not a free country?HYUFD said:
It is within the UKOnlyLivingBoy said:
So Scotland isn't a free country?Luckyguy1983 said:
I doubt it, and I most certainly hope not. An independent army is an essential feature of a free country.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.0 -
I think he took a few days off in Ibiza, catch some winter sun. Dude needed a break.FrankBooth said:I notice Zelensky has just posted a video from his office. That's the first in a long time. I assumed he was well out of the way now of Kiev.
2 -
Why is the BBC not focusing on the fact that RU is losing in military terms?0
-
Apparently the first general was taken out by a British trained sniper. Would be nice to go 2 for 2 on this one.BigRich said:
My Hart bleads....... No it doesn't LOL LOL, this does add credibility that Russian losses are bigger than expected,williamglenn said:The Russians have lost a second general.
Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who took part in the second #Chechen war, the war in #Syria and the annexation of #Crimea, was killed in battles near Kharkiv.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/15009521349378949120 -
That may be a bit optimistic at this stage. We do need to remember that Ukraine has 'won' the media war so our own perceptions could be a little skewed.Leon said:
Yes, I agree, Russia is clearly losing, and all the hi-tech missiles that quietly became yachts are partly to blamerottenborough said:
As it stands at moment the longer this goes on the more that Putin is revealing that is superpower war machine is in fact a losing mess of drunks, incompetent conscripts crying for mum, useless officers and corrupt quartermasters. They can't even turn up to Kwick Fit once a year for a proper tyre change.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
The maps he has on his massive desk are all lies. All the generals have been lying to him for years.
No way Russia does anything but lose, from here. Question is, does it lose alone, and if so, how badly? Or will the mad-hound Putin successfully launch a few nukes to save his "legacy"?1 -
No, definitely not. It would depend on a settlement with Ukraine.LostPassword said:
Yes, if the invasion is reversed. But if the fighting eventually stops with current Russian territorial gains, then could you lift sanctions then, with Russia holding Kherson, Melitopol, a large proportion of Ukraine's nuclear power, etc?Luckyguy1983 said:
If the invasion is reversed, the sanctions must absolutely be lifted. Otherwise how would sanctions ever be effective against anyone ever again?kle4 said:
Indeed. Yet this whole business started over Ukraine wanting to look West more, and that's increasingly the case (for some reason a violent basketcase next door and his mini me to the north stress them out), so they cannot resile from it.TheWhiteRabbit said:
There's no way Russia allows Ukraine to have an EU army in it.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
Hence it seeming a grim stalemate will prevail, if the invasion is blunted.
And that is why sanctions must not be reduced if/when fighting does stall or stop - it doesn't make Ukraine any safer to stop them, and unless it concedes massively to Ukraine there is no reason to do so.0 -
Until it returns the territories it has taken in Donbas and Crimea the invasion is still ongoing. The West looked the other way on that before and it did no good, so it absolutely should not reduce sanctions until Russia withdraws itself from the entire territory.Luckyguy1983 said:
If the invasion is reversed, the sanctions must absolutely be lifted. Otherwise how would sanctions ever be effective against anyone ever again?kle4 said:
Indeed. Yet this whole business started over Ukraine wanting to look West more, and that's increasingly the case (for some reason a violent basketcase next door and his mini me to the north stress them out), so they cannot resile from it.TheWhiteRabbit said:
There's no way Russia allows Ukraine to have an EU army in it.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
Hence it seeming a grim stalemate will prevail, if the invasion is blunted.
And that is why sanctions must not be reduced if/when fighting does stall or stop - it doesn't make Ukraine any safer to stop them, and unless it concedes massively to Ukraine there is no reason to do so.
Since it won't, there's no reason to remove them. They are effective the longer they go on.
The sanctions are because Russia has invaded. It doesn't follow, therefore, that all is well once they withdraw troops. What if they decided to do it all again a year from now?0 -
One thing to bear in mind is that while the EU may be making strong noises now about Ukraine joining if push comes to shove it might be such a done deal:MarqueeMark said:Russia accepts that Ukraine can have EU membership - but not NATO.
Then the EU enters into the equivalent of NATO's Article 5. Invasion of Ukraine would mean the military might of the combined EU, each defensively supporting other member states. An EU NATO by the back door, No other EU permanently troops stationed there. But US funded (supplied?) state of the art missile defence based across the country. And lots of regular joint exercises.
But not NATO. No sirree......
The UK says it will stand with the EU. Not as part of the EU army, but as solid as we have been these past 2 weeks.
1) Ukraine has a (pre-war) population of 40 million, which would massively alter the power balance of the various EU blocs if they joined the Visegrad group
2) Ukraine is one of the poorest European countries with a GDP per capita of about a third of the poorest EU member (Bulgaria), which would have a massive impact on the EU development budget0 -
Oh, for sure, Russia could still claim a "victory", but it will be the same kind of victory as Napoleon seizing a burned out, deserted Moscow - which was followed by a terrible, tragic retreatChameleon said:
Russia is still gaining ground. While a Russian victory is no longer inevitable, it is still very possible that Russia throws enough men and machines in to gum up the machinery. I'd like to see some armed Ukrainian resistance in Russian occupied cities before throwing a 'Russia can't win' party.Leon said:
Yes, I agree, Russia is clearly losing, and all the hi-tech missiles that quietly became yachts are partly to blamerottenborough said:
As it stands at moment the longer this goes on the more that Putin is revealing that is superpower war machine is in fact a losing mess of drunks, incompetent conscripts crying for mum, useless officers and corrupt quartermasters. They can't even turn up to Kwick Fit once a year for a proper tyre change.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
The maps he has on his massive desk are all lies. All the generals have been lying to him for years.
No way Russia does anything but lose, from here. Question is, does it lose alone, and if so, how badly? Or will the mad-hound Putin successfully launch a few nukes to save his "legacy"?0 -
Except they are not really. We have had several days where their advances seem to be minimal apart from around Mariupol suburbs and the capture of an army base. Ukrainian numbers are undoubtedly exaggerated but it’s clear there are heavy losses. It’s also clear that Belarus’ army won’t join the attack which means Russia’s convoy to the NW of Kiev has to keep an eye on its rear. If the foreign legions even have a few ex-soldiers, particularly US and U.K., then that helps replenish some of the losses.Chameleon said:
Russia is still gaining ground. While a Russian victory is no longer inevitable, it is still very possible that Russia throws enough men and machines in to gum up the machinery. I'd like to see some armed Ukrainian resistance in Russian occupied cities before throwing a 'Russia can't win' party.Leon said:
Yes, I agree, Russia is clearly losing, and all the hi-tech missiles that quietly became yachts are partly to blamerottenborough said:
As it stands at moment the longer this goes on the more that Putin is revealing that is superpower war machine is in fact a losing mess of drunks, incompetent conscripts crying for mum, useless officers and corrupt quartermasters. They can't even turn up to Kwick Fit once a year for a proper tyre change.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
The maps he has on his massive desk are all lies. All the generals have been lying to him for years.
No way Russia does anything but lose, from here. Question is, does it lose alone, and if so, how badly? Or will the mad-hound Putin successfully launch a few nukes to save his "legacy"?
I don’t know whether Putin’s ‘offer’ is genuine but, given he’s not asking for demilitarisation, it’s likely he is coming at this from a position of needing to exit quickly. Russia just cannot go on like this.0 -
https://twitter.com/jamesjohnson252/status/1500958302565507077
I expect the lasting impact and deeper brand damage for Johnson from partygate (which hasn’t finished yet, btw) will be greater than what we are seeing in (some) polls on the impact of Ukraine.2 -
In 1940, Russians were losing the Winter War with Finland, very publicly.
Until they weren't, and Finns were forced to sue for peace.
Note that Finland had significant natural defenses versus Russia - vast forests, many lakes, tundra, narrow Karelian Isthmus, extremely limited transportation options - that Ukraine lacks. Plus Helsinki was NOT on the front line of battle.
So tad early in 2022 to say that Russians are whipped, this time around?0 -
The flip side is that there are going to be lots of reconstruction projects for German companies to get their hands into….and at least some of the cost will come from the States.GarethoftheVale2 said:
One thing to bear in mind is that while the EU may be making strong noises now about Ukraine joining if push comes to shove it might be such a done deal:MarqueeMark said:Russia accepts that Ukraine can have EU membership - but not NATO.
Then the EU enters into the equivalent of NATO's Article 5. Invasion of Ukraine would mean the military might of the combined EU, each defensively supporting other member states. An EU NATO by the back door, No other EU permanently troops stationed there. But US funded (supplied?) state of the art missile defence based across the country. And lots of regular joint exercises.
But not NATO. No sirree......
The UK says it will stand with the EU. Not as part of the EU army, but as solid as we have been these past 2 weeks.
1) Ukraine has a (pre-war) population of 40 million, which would massively alter the power balance of the various EU blocs if they joined the Visegrad group
2) Ukraine is one of the poorest European countries with a GDP per capita of about a third of the poorest EU member (Bulgaria), which would have a massive impact on the EU development budget1 -
Don't think so. Sober and serious military analysis is that RU are in shit here. Certainly in the North. Doing better in South but still nowhere near where Putin thought they would be by day ten or eleven.FrankBooth said:
That may be a bit optimistic at this stage. We do need to remember that Ukraine has 'won' the media war so our own perceptions could be a little skewed.Leon said:
Yes, I agree, Russia is clearly losing, and all the hi-tech missiles that quietly became yachts are partly to blamerottenborough said:
As it stands at moment the longer this goes on the more that Putin is revealing that is superpower war machine is in fact a losing mess of drunks, incompetent conscripts crying for mum, useless officers and corrupt quartermasters. They can't even turn up to Kwick Fit once a year for a proper tyre change.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
The maps he has on his massive desk are all lies. All the generals have been lying to him for years.
No way Russia does anything but lose, from here. Question is, does it lose alone, and if so, how badly? Or will the mad-hound Putin successfully launch a few nukes to save his "legacy"?
This was supposed to be over in three days.
0 -
Utter bollocks. Of course it follows. Sanctions are meant to alter behaviour. If they remain in place, then there really is no reason not to invade again.kle4 said:
Until it returns the territories it has taken in Donbas and Crimea the invasion is still ongoing. The West looked the other way on that before and it did no good, so it absolutely should not reduce sanctions until Russia withdraws itself from the entire territory.Luckyguy1983 said:
If the invasion is reversed, the sanctions must absolutely be lifted. Otherwise how would sanctions ever be effective against anyone ever again?kle4 said:
Indeed. Yet this whole business started over Ukraine wanting to look West more, and that's increasingly the case (for some reason a violent basketcase next door and his mini me to the north stress them out), so they cannot resile from it.TheWhiteRabbit said:
There's no way Russia allows Ukraine to have an EU army in it.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
Hence it seeming a grim stalemate will prevail, if the invasion is blunted.
And that is why sanctions must not be reduced if/when fighting does stall or stop - it doesn't make Ukraine any safer to stop them, and unless it concedes massively to Ukraine there is no reason to do so.
Since it won't, there's no reason to remove them. They are effective the longer they go on.
The sanctions are because Russia has invaded. It doesn't follow, therefore, that all is well once they withdraw troops. What if they decided to do it all again a year from now?1 -
Much as I hope it is so, I don't think we can be certain that Russia is 'losing' yet.rottenborough said:Why is the BBC not focusing on the fact that RU is losing in military terms?
0 -
Kyiv will likely still fall within a month but the problem will then come with any guerrilla war after if terms are not agreed.Leon said:
Oh, for sure, Russia could still claim a "victory", but it will be the same kind of victory as Napoleon seizing a burned out, deserted Moscow - which was followed by a terrible, tragic retreatChameleon said:
Russia is still gaining ground. While a Russian victory is no longer inevitable, it is still very possible that Russia throws enough men and machines in to gum up the machinery. I'd like to see some armed Ukrainian resistance in Russian occupied cities before throwing a 'Russia can't win' party.Leon said:
Yes, I agree, Russia is clearly losing, and all the hi-tech missiles that quietly became yachts are partly to blamerottenborough said:
As it stands at moment the longer this goes on the more that Putin is revealing that is superpower war machine is in fact a losing mess of drunks, incompetent conscripts crying for mum, useless officers and corrupt quartermasters. They can't even turn up to Kwick Fit once a year for a proper tyre change.Leon said:Again, who pays?
If Russia was agreeing to rebuild Kharkiv (and a thousand other towns) then maybe. They are not. Everyone will be skint after this
And, Ukrainians sense they are winning. It maybe somewhat delusional, born of social media, but there is a definite sense they are not only stalling the Evil Russians, they are pushing them back. Heroically
Do you sue for peace in that situation? I can't see it. Yes it is arguably logical - if you want to save your remaining towns - but Putin has pushed Ukraine far beyond cold logic. For them, this is surely existential, now. Russians are Nazis, who must lose. Both sides therefore need a "win" and that is a bad place for us all
The maps he has on his massive desk are all lies. All the generals have been lying to him for years.
No way Russia does anything but lose, from here. Question is, does it lose alone, and if so, how badly? Or will the mad-hound Putin successfully launch a few nukes to save his "legacy"?
Putin, unlikely Hitler or Napoleon though sensibly invaded as the Russia winter was ending with Spring and Summer on the way not in Summer with autumn and winter on the way0 -
The huge difference from that war was that Russia was not being squeezed economically while it fought. Replacing equipment was also a lot easier, especially in tanks and planes.SeaShantyIrish2 said:In 1940, Russians were losing the Winter War with Finland, very publicly.
Until they weren't, and Finns were forced to sue for peace.
Note that Finland had significant natural defenses versus Russia - vast forests, many lakes, tundra, narrow Karelian Isthmus, extremely limited transportation options - that Ukraine lacks. Plus Helsinki was NOT on the front line of battle.
So tad early in 2022 to say that Russians are whipped, this time around?0 -
If Russia has a veto over what their sovereign neighbours can and can't do then they may be better off continuing the fight.TheWhiteRabbit said:
There's no way Russia allows Ukraine to have an EU army in it.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
0 -
Nephew of Valery G?TheWhiteRabbit said:
Don't think so. Andrei Sukhovetsky, killed last week, also in charge of the 41st. The picture looks like Valery Gerasimov, Russian Defence minister, albeit a bit younger.williamglenn said:The Russians have lost a second general.
Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who took part in the second #Chechen war, the war in #Syria and the annexation of #Crimea, was killed in battles near Kharkiv.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/15009521349378949120 -
How is it bollocks? So long as Donbas and Crimea are in Russian hands the invasion has not stopped.Luckyguy1983 said:
Utter bollocks. Of course it follows. Sanctions are meant to alter behaviour. If they remain in place, then there really is no reason not to invade again.kle4 said:
Until it returns the territories it has taken in Donbas and Crimea the invasion is still ongoing. The West looked the other way on that before and it did no good, so it absolutely should not reduce sanctions until Russia withdraws itself from the entire territory.Luckyguy1983 said:
If the invasion is reversed, the sanctions must absolutely be lifted. Otherwise how would sanctions ever be effective against anyone ever again?kle4 said:
Indeed. Yet this whole business started over Ukraine wanting to look West more, and that's increasingly the case (for some reason a violent basketcase next door and his mini me to the north stress them out), so they cannot resile from it.TheWhiteRabbit said:
There's no way Russia allows Ukraine to have an EU army in it.NickPalmer said:I think the second one is the hard one. Maybe they could live with giving up Crimea, but giving up the east provinces would be hard. The third could probably be sorted as "EU but not NATO".
Hence it seeming a grim stalemate will prevail, if the invasion is blunted.
And that is why sanctions must not be reduced if/when fighting does stall or stop - it doesn't make Ukraine any safer to stop them, and unless it concedes massively to Ukraine there is no reason to do so.
Since it won't, there's no reason to remove them. They are effective the longer they go on.
The sanctions are because Russia has invaded. It doesn't follow, therefore, that all is well once they withdraw troops. What if they decided to do it all again a year from now?
So by your own logic the sanctions should continue whilst those areas are occupied since their behaviour has not been altered sufficiently.
(Crimea is more awkward since virtually no one seems to conclude it would want to rejoin Ukraine).
So I am happy to concede your point - once Russia has altered its behaviour the sanctions should stop. The behaviour being the annexation and occupation of bits of Ukraine, not just bits beyond those taken in 2014.0 -
Why would we be part of the EU’s defence planning? We left. Would we expect the EU to be part of the UK’s defence planning? Rocking up to discuss budgets etc in Whitehall? The ERG would do their nut. We’re not in the EU, they’re not in the U.K. Farcical thinking.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.
Even tonight Boris has been in a conference with Biden - Macron and Scholz
And I wish people (well, you and HYUFD mostly) would stop making Johnson the only person in politics who gets called by a familiar name other than his surname. It’s “Johnson, Biden, Macron and Scholz” or “Boris, Joe, Emmanuel and Olaf”. You can’t have it both ways.
2 -
oh.Benpointer said:Interesting 'town hall' in the Kuzbass (Kemerovo Oblast) which purportedly shows the Governor Sergey Tsivilyov being given a hard time over the fate of Russian soldiers.
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1500769632768118788?s=20&t=8xWoQkb8ZZqDdVTJfX41IA0 -
We are not going to be part of the EU army but we will be part of the defence of Europe in alliance with the EUMexicanpete said:
Of course it won't. One of the reasons we left the EU was our opposition to an EU army.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I expect the UK will be very much part of the EU defence planning and indeed a closer relationship all roundLuckyguy1983 said:
8n the future, the EU will have its own defence force, that could defend RUkraine. Of course, I don't see how that's any better for Russia. But I suppose it won't be lead by the US or include the UK. So perhaps its more palatable.kle4 said:A repeat message, to the people of Europe:
If you even think about joining NATO we will invade you.
If you are in NATO we probably won't.
Therefore, please stop wanting to join NATO.
Even tonight Boris has been in a conference with Biden - Macron and Scholz
We don't pay the golf club subs any more, so we can't expect to be the Club Captain.0 -
Russia is absolutely not whipped, it is sunk. Like the USA in Vietnam. The parallel is eerie, and you should appreciate itSeaShantyIrish2 said:In 1940, Russians were losing the Winter War with Finland, very publicly.
Until they weren't, and Finns were forced to sue for peace.
Note that Finland had significant natural defenses versus Russia - vast forests, many lakes, tundra, narrow Karelian Isthmus, extremely limited transportation options - that Ukraine lacks. Plus Helsinki was NOT on the front line of battle.
So tad early in 2022 to say that Russians are whipped, this time around?
America poured billions into winning that Vietnam war, against a 3rd world opponent, yet it could not win because the people on the ground bitterly resisted any occupation - and that means by anyone, France, America, or China. Vietnam is a proudly independent country, as any visitor can attest. They REALLY hate China, by the way. Much more than the USA, despite the horrors of the war
Ukraine is now, surely, similarly disposed to Russia. For Ukrainians, Russia has gone from giant friendly neighbour (at best, for some) to evil bullying abuser (to all), in a week. It is now the hated enemy, and that must be a truth for decades to come
Russia has no hope of occupying and repressing a vast nation of 44m people who despise it, so Russia will only lose. The question is whether Russia loses fast, or slow, or with an outburst of H bombs5
