I said it

would be a farce and it was a farce.

So now what happens re Trump's threat to apply sanctions?

And what happens re Trump's promise to release the Epstein flies?

Was bad enough, but there was some relief that Trump didn't come out in support of Putin's plan but I see the reports are now Trump is favourable to Putin's plan of wanting Ukrainian territory handed over in exchange for peace.

I see a raft of European leaders are heading to Washington with Zelensky as backup to ensure there is no repeat of the Oval Office ambush.

.

.

Mark Hertling

@markhertling

Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling (Ret.) (@MarkHertling) was commander of U.S. Army Europe from 2011 to 2012. He also commanded 1st Armored Division in Germany and Multinational Division-North during the surge in Iraq from 2007 to 2009.

Mark Hertling

9–11 minutes

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov (at right) and Putin foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov (second to right) attend a meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on February 18, 2025 with Secretary of State Marco Rubio (second to left), Trump Nation Security Advisor Mike Waltz (third to left), and Trump Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff. (Photo by Russian Foreign Ministry / Handout/Anadolu via Getty Images)

WE FIND OURSELVES IN WHAT President Zelensky of Ukraine has recently called a “disinformation bubble” regarding the war in Ukraine, so perhaps it’s time for some cold, hard facts—what the military might call a “BFO,” a blinding flash of the obvious. Vladimir Putin started this war in Ukraine by launching an unprovoked invasion. Throughout the three years of this conflict, Russian forces have purposely committed documented war crimes. Yet the Kremlin—now aided by some in the United States—continues to spread propaganda to mask the truth. From the deliberate bombing of civilian infrastructure to mass executions in places like Bucha to the kidnapping of Ukrainian children, the evidence of war crimes is overwhelming. And we are negotiating with them.

While waging an unprovoked and brutal campaign of destruction, Russians have actively recruited some to support their story of this conflict through large-scale messaging campaigns, while attempting to silence anyone who dares to expose their atrocities through intimidation.

Some of Russia’s attempts to push its message and silence its enemies—especially within Russia—were more sophisticated than others. For example, I had traveled to Russia multiple times, and was even once invited to speak at their military’s famed Voroshilov Academy. Then, in May 2022, Russia published a list of 963 Americans (and a few Canadians) permanently banned from entering that country. I was on that list. While I wasn’t surprised—in fact, I considered it an honor—it was hard to understand why some of the others were included: Morgan Freeman, Mark Zuckerberg, Lloyd Austin, Canadian First Lady Sophie Trudeau, and even a few dead people. Maybe the Russian foreign ministry was worried that John McCain would tell the truth about the “special military operation” to the Russian people from beyond the grave.

Perhaps I was on the list due to my media commentary. In multiple cable-news appearances, I described videos I saw of Russian forces on the frontlines, and it was easy to observe war crimes. While not a lawyer, I was a soldier, and like all American soldiers, I had been trained on what not to do in combat. Through basic training, officer accession, and a career of any length, U.S. military personnel receive a rigorous education on the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions. All troops learn about following rules of engagement, treatment of prisoners of war, the prohibition of torture, and the distinction between combatants and civilians. Special emphasis is placed on Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions forbidding torture and cruel treatment, Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibiting forced deportations, and Article 53 of the Fourth Geneva Convention banning the destruction of civilian property without military necessity. Officers and sergeants receive additional training on command and leadership responsibility, and judge advocate general officers provide continuous legal oversight to commanders, ensuring compliance with the United States Uniform Code of Military Justice and international humanitarian law.

When U.S. soldiers violate any of these boundaries, they are held responsible. But in viewing films of Russian tactics, I saw unlawful actions executed by soldiers who appeared to have little or no training with no accountability from any level of leadership.

Share

“War crimes” is a legal term, but it’s also used colloquially. To illustrate the kinds of abuses our new interlocutors committed, here are five examples, linked to specific articles of law, of the scope and scale of the offenses committed since February 2022:

1. Estimates suggest that nearly 20,000 Ukrainian children have been forcibly taken to Russia since the start of the invasion in 2022. These actions are a war crime under Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the forcible transfer of protected persons from occupied territories. The deportation of children with the intent to permanently remove them from their country violates international humanitarian law.
2. Russian forces have deliberately targeted civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, and energy facilities. One of the more recent prominent instances occurred on Christmas Day 2024, when Russia launched a severe bombardment on multiple Ukrainian cities and energy infrastructure, resulting in significant power outages across the country. Such attacks violate Article 53 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits destruction of property not justified by military necessity. These actions against essential services are a mark of all phases of Russia’s three-year campaign, designed to terrorize the civilian population, and they are a grave breach of international law.
3. Russian rocket and tube artillery have also indiscriminately shelled densely populated civilian areas, leading to significant loss of life and property. For example, in August 2024, a Russian bomb attack on Kharkiv resulted in at least eight deaths and dozens injured, including children. This violates Article 51 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions. The lack of distinction between military and civilian targets ignores the principles of proportionality and distinction in armed conflict.
4. Russian soldiers have been repeatedly accused of mistreating and executing Ukrainian prisoners of war, with various films showing their specific actions. Such actions violate the Third Geneva Convention, specifically Articles 13 and 14, which mandate the humane treatment of POWs with the requirement to protect them from acts of violence and intimidation. There have also been hundreds of allegations of Russian forces engaging in torture and inhumane treatment of detainees, including beatings, electric shocks, and mock executions. Such actions violate Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. The reported abuse of prisoners and civilians in occupied territories reflects a blatant disregard for human dignity and international legal standards.
5. There is documented widespread sexual violence committed by Russian forces against Ukrainian civilians and detainees. The United Nations has verified more than ninety cases of sexual violence in Russian-occupied areas, affecting victims ranging from 4 to over 80 years old. There are likely thousands of such cases for which evidence was less available. These acts include rape, forced nudity, and other forms of sexual abuse, often used systematically as a weapon of war to instill fear and exert control over the population. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has reported that detainees in Russian-controlled areas are subjected to brutal treatment, including sexual violence, as a form of torture. These violations have been recognized as war crimes and crimes against humanity, prompting calls for international accountability and support for survivors.
6. In occupied regions, Russian forces have compelled Ukrainian civilians to join pro-Russian militias. Forcing individuals to take up arms against their own country under duress undermines their rights and breaches international law—Article 51 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
7. Russian forces have also employed starvation as a method of warfare by destroying food supplies and blocking humanitarian aid. These actions violate Article 54 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, which specifically condemns depriving civilians of essential sustenance.

These are just examples of the indiscriminate attacks on civilian infrastructure, unlawful detentions, and widespread reports of human rights abuses. The people who represent the nation that has committed these war crimes are sitting across the table from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, discussing diplomacy with the hope of relief from devastating sanctions and an end to a conflict they started, all the while continuing to inflict suffering on Ukraine. American officials, following the initial talks in Saudi Arabia, focused on three primary objectives: restoring diplomatic relations between our two countries, establishing negotiation teams, and planning for post-war cooperation.

Those who have suffered the atrocities—the civilians tortured in occupied territories, the children abducted, the prisoners of war executed—are not in the room. While diplomacy is necessary in ending any conflict, it should not come at the cost of overlooking the brutal reality of Russian aggression and the continuous commission of war crimes. While these negotiations might produce a temporary ceasefire, there can be no lasting peace between the perpetrators of these detestable crimes and the victims who have shown the world their willingness to fight back.

Please take a moment to send this important article to a friend or post it to social media:

Share

Thanks Draad, what a very clear, simple and straight forward interview from Rubio explaning exactly what happened at the meeting, after the meeting, and what is being set up for the next meeting with Zelensky tomorrow.

I see a raft of European leaders are heading to Washington with Zelensky as backup to ensure there is no repeat of the Oval Office ambush.

LMFAO .... this statement is hilarious

Rubio, on two separate occasions in the interview above, very clearly stated that Donald Trump personally invited the European leaders to join Zelensky in the next meeting, because the EU leaders have previously brought up some great ideas before regarding what to do with this war.

Rubio also stated that the very first phone call that Trump made after this meeting was to the secretary general of NATO who will also be attending the meeting tomorrow with Zelensky, and then Rubio also stated that Trump personally called the European leaders on Air Force One, on the way back from this meeting in Alaska, at 2am US time, to set up this next meeting with Zelensky.

But no......Stav will try and have you believe that the European leaders are going with Zelensky as backup so that there is no repeat of the Oval Office ambush....

Stav's bullshit just never stops...... LMAO

Maybe.... just maybe..... try and give Trump some credit for a change Stav

LMFAO .... this statement is hilarious

It was Zelensky that asked the Europeans to attend not Trump. Von der Leyen confirmed she was going on Zelensky's personal request and after that the other European leaders decided they would go as well. From my understanding Zelensky proposed European leaders attending the meeting on the call with Trump who wasn't against it. But it wasn't Trump who invited them.

Rubio, on two separate occasions in the interview above, very clearly stated that Donald Trump personally invited the European leaders to join Zelensky in the next meeting, because the EU leaders have previously brought up some great ideas before regarding what to do with this war

Rubio is lying.

Rubio also stated that the very first phone call that Trump made after this meeting was to the secretary general of NATO who will also be attending the meeting tomorrow with Zelensky, and then Rubio also stated that Trump personally called the European leaders on Air Force One, on the way back from this meeting in Alaska, at 2am US time, to set up this next meeting with Zelensky.

Incorrect, Trump called Zelensky first to discuss the summit and to discuss a potential 3 way meeting between US-Russia-Ukraine, Zelensky supported the idea but insisted on European involvement, it's at the point that the head of NATO and the European leaders were looped into the call.

But no......Stav will try and have you believe that the European leaders are going with Zelensky as backup so that there is no repeat of the Oval Office ambush....

That's exactly what everyone in Europe and Ukraine see's as the reason for all the European leaders going. I've no idea how anyone can see it as anything else.

Stav's bullshit just never stops...... LMAO

You're not the sharpest tool in the shed are you?

Maybe.... just maybe..... try and give Trump some credit for a change Stav

Maybe just maybe try living in reality.

The B S about Epstein is not easy to resolve - there were girls used by Epstein to be dealt with since they do not want to get invovled and subjected to scandals that could harm then in future and these young wman must give pemission for their cases to be revealed and they have the right not to be left a ruined life by releasing their names and details and the issue is being dealt with differently with due regard to their wishes, But as per normal that issue was not borne in mind to release all files on the issue. But that was a sideshow and while the Justice Departmet interviewed Maxwell and find out what really happened and who was involved in criminality. But this has zero to do with the peace negotiations iro Ukraine. If Trump was in any way involved the most investigated president by the FBI and CIA in the history of the USA would have been charged with an offence. The opposition is true - Melania Trump did not introduce Trump to Epsteinm and she is going to mae some media outlets bankrupt and other s in jai for crimnal libel.

There is one thing where Trump changed is mind and that is the provision of securty guarantees and the USA wll provide the guarantees needed to protect Ukraine and other countries by US troops when encessary to protect the countries.

So why must Ukraine gets territories back the present regime installed unconmsttutionally in 2014 that led to the Civil War in Eastern Ukraine be rewarded for destroying the Constitution of Ukraine and democracy in Ukraine. The way the Biden Administration handled the situation through bribery and corruption of which details have already been provided by the Banks to the FBI about the Biden crime family money-laundering to the tune of $40 million dollars gained from Ukraine and China - while elements of corruption was also involving Russia of which there was full proof concerning Clinton and her 2016 campaign manager Podesta have already been revealed and again Comey and Wray refused to investigate it - making the Democrat leadership totally despicable.

Instead of trying to prevent the 2022 invasion of Ukraine by negotiations the Biden regime sabotaged efforts to prevent the invasion through negotations and in fact promote the Civil War in Eastern Ukraine. The Ukraine stuation open the way not only for corruption to be covered up - it opened futher capacity for corruption which was already exposed in Senate and House hearings. It is for the FBI and subsequently the Courts to deal with the issue of corruption in Ukraine.

Beause of the illegal change of Government on 2014 and the Bandera associated elements involved in that change the Russian people living in Eastern Ukraine - bearing in mind ow Badera supporter in Ukraine sided with the Nazi's in WW and the learnings of Bandera endangered the lives of Russian speaking people in Eastern Ukraine. And ther fears were realized when the Kiev regime banned the speaking of Russian in public, the banning of using Russians in schools, the arrest of all Russian speaking members of the Ukraine Parliament and the banning of the functoning of the Ukraine Orthodox Church - to which 80% of the Ukraine popuation belongs. What is weird is that elements in the new regime forming the Ukraine Government were n angels in this case and an open policy was advocated by elements in the Zelenskyy government that people must abandon heir languages, cuture and civil rights and if ttey do not conform that they must be eliminated through ethnic cleansing. That is the dirty part of a dictatorial approach by the Zelenssky Governemnt never mentioned by Stav and when he was reminded in postings that watappened he claimed about the language issue in schools he claimed the EU countries warned against it - but what did they actually do to stop the BS. They did nothing at all. What happened to the mmbers of Parlaiment arrestes by the Zelenskyy regime in February 2022 and since then 3 members has been released but what ahppened to the rest? They were never charged with any offences and Stav claimed at one stage that the were exchanged as part of a POW exchange - utter BS invention. Whether these MP' are still alive is another question,

Why was one fo the US Government projects of the Biden Administration the operation of Bio-Labs in Ukraine and went so far to construct a modern bio-lab in Odessa in Ukraine. When this matter was raised in the Security Council the US frst reaction was there are no bio-labs in Ukraine. The next lie was there were indeed bio-labs from the Communist era that ended in 1991 - and that the USA Government were helping Ukraine to close the bio-labs down. That was BS supreme after 30 years no biolabs were closed down and the US Defense grants to Ukrane include funding to build a new and modern bio-lab.. When the Biden Administration lies were finally exposed in a Senate Hearing - the result was a zero sense of accountability. In he bio-las in the Dombas region there were instructions directly from Washington that the labs were under thread by Russian troops the pathogens must be destroyed. In one case it it was reported to the Security Council that the pathogens were not destroyed and ws sent to Moscow for evalation and found to be more dangeros than the Covid patogens developed in the Wuhan lab - also funded by the US Government. But since exposure the Biden Rgime went ahead with the dangerous conduct involved.

There is another issue also exposed in a Senate Investigation and that was about the fact that after 6 months after the Russian Invasion in 2022 of Ukraine only 30% of the armaments delivered to Ukraine reched te fighting army in Eastern Ukraine. This was admitted by USDF in a Senate hearing when it was also revealed in Senate in September 2022 that a Colonel of the US Army was to be sent to Ukraine to ensre the weapons rovided actualy reached the fighting army. The question remained as to what appened to the $35 billion arms delivered never reaching the Ukraine army and what happened to the armaments itself, What is clear Ukraine corruption played a major role in that regard - but the question remains who from the USA was invovled in the scam.

Under the Autopen Administration he WH used methods to censor news they want to keep secret and senor FBI, CIA and WH officials met with the media and internet platforms and infomed them that real information expsoed in Senate was based on Russian Disinformaion and should not be published, Musk exposed he rot when he prchased Twier and found that mosr of he senior staff were ex-members of the CIA and FBI. In the end Zckeran admintted that he was ashamed of being invovled in teh emdia scam practiced by the Autopen Presidency.

So althouh the Senate Hearings and lies by the Autopen Presidency never was published by the media sources the site members used because it was too embarassing to the corruption involving both politicians and bureaucats in the USA. This is really simple - the site members never knew about coruption involving both US politicians and corruption in Ukraine. That is the sick part of the crazy claims of site members on the issue of Ukraine as well.

What is indeed needed is to stop the rot in both the USA and to gie the Uraine people a chance to deal with the situation in Ukraine. As long is the War goes on the people will not have the opportunity to deal with the issues inside Ukraine - a opportunity they do not have of free elections at present.

The fact is that the criminals in the USA is being dealt with at present and the of corru[tion in the USA are dealt wih on vrtually a daly basis and is progressing the lie-spreading in the media get worse all te tieme.

Finally i was clear that Trump is going to provide security garantees to the Ukrainians as to conduct of Russia - but that apply to Ukraine Government conduct as well. The chanmces are corrupt rogues in Ukraine will siffer as well and if the get out of control and organize terrorist attacks on theatres in Moscow the planners and participants willa also be punished. The Bio-labs in Ukraine will be clsoed down and US involvement in those labs will stop and the Azov Batallion will be banmne and solies invovled will be sent back to their countries of origin wtha warning to the Govenments that indivduals nvovled was part of a terrorist and mercenary operation listed as such by the UN Seciruty Council would be set back to thei countries of origin and the Governments would be warned of heir crimnality in Ukraine as well/ .

What is worse for US Policians is that the US will demand that an international inmvestgtion be appointed to deal with involvement of people of al nations involved in rampant corruption n Ukraine. - so a lot of politicians in the USA are going to jail and sentenced to go directly to jail and not pass GO. That is why US Politicians and senior discharged officials are sceaming blue murder about what is happening.in respect of Ukraine and in that regard the Autopen signed pardons will not help the criminals involved,

.

.

You're not the sharpest tool in the shed are you?

LOL, coming from the only tool in the shed......

Stav

How the hell did you know the following:-

Incorrect, Trump called Zelensky first to discuss the summit and to discuss a potential 3 way meeting between US-Russia-Ukraine, Zelensky supported the idea but insisted on European involvement, it's at the point that the head of NATO and the European leaders were looped into the call.

Macron and Starmer made satements on the issue on the visit of Zelenskyy and the NATO Scretary was annunced, of please explain your claim to the contrary, Your claim is meaningless garbage dreamed up by you or based on media reports trying to undermine efforts to stop peace negotiations in Ukraine.

It was in fact tryng to distort the fact that Trump discussed its potential approach in his upcoming meeting with Putin was cleared with the NATO leaders in Europe.before the meeting on Friday. Since the start of the negotiating rogress there were regular bi-lateral discussions on the issue on a regular basis. So the NATO leaders in Europe was aware all teh time what was deveoped.

In January there was a meeting of NATO leaders in London and afterwards a resolution was issued to thee ffect that the NATO leaders supported the peacemaking efforts of Trump Starmer himself said he had three telehonic discussions to ensure the clear requirements of the NATO leaders and Trump was dealt with in the final announcement.

Despite all the narratives you pushed tat there was a difference between theTrump and the NATO leadership was BS supreme - there were reugular dsicsusions on the issue between Trump and the leadership in urope on the issue to frame a United Front when it came to the peace engotiations in Ukraine.

That's exactly what everyone in Europe and Ukraine see's as the reason for all the European leaders going. I've no idea how anyone can see it as anything else.

Zelenskyy tried to prescribe to Trump in front of the media to follow his instructions on the Ukrane issue and taht was total BS and he was kicked out of the WH because of his unacceptable conduct. Zelenskyy's nexr step was to go to LOndon to get sympathy from the anuary meeting of NATO leaders in London and the end result was tat the NATO leaxdership support the peace efforts of Trump in Ukraine.

Zelenskyy himself admitted he was wrong in what he did and the aid agreement he was supposed to sign was in fact signed subsequently by the buffoon as well.

. .

Been reading the press from elsewhere than the liberal world for years now... Propaganda is the name of the game. Yet different types of propaganda exist. About this peace conference, the press outside of the liberal world has been hyperbolic, it has magnified, praised excessively Putin, hiding small but inconvenient facts and stuff like that... All in all, they have given a distorted picture by amplification. The free press, though, is now turning to the Chemical Ali type of propaganda, it is blatantly incorrect, a forced consensual version that goes against common perception. Liberals often quote the Pravda as an example but still, the Pravda informed people in indirect ways. The free press, nothing, it is all about coercion and submission, telling a blatantly incorrect version of this and measuring submission thereafter.

Watching thirty seconds in the video was enough to see the liberal uses this rope; starts by a blatantly incorrect statement and therefore expect viewers to submit. From that point, what he says no longer matters as the follow up must be accepted.

Apparently, he has even claimed that the first call given by Trump was to NATO director when the first call was supposed to be to the Ukrainian leader. There is no will to deceive, only to submit. Liberals keep stating versions that they know are incorrect and known as incorrect and then after, that is bend the knee, bend the knee, bend the knee... Liberals only know that, submission. Submission. Submission. Submission. Submission.

"Rubio is lying."

LOL...bold statement...and one you can't back up at all, but yeah I wasn't expecting anything else.

Zelensky can't invite anyone to the Whitehouse, only Trump can do that. He might have asked the Whitehouse to invite some other leaders to also be present, it might even have been a condition for his own participation but that's still not a justification to accuse Rubio of lying.

The Tump administration lies all the time, I see Rubio being no different.

Zelensky can't invite anyone to the Whitehouse, only Trump can do that. He might have asked the Whitehouse to invite some other leaders to also be present, it might even have been a condition for his own participation but that's still not a justification to accuse Rubio of lying.

Zelensky asked Trump for permission for the European leaders to come along which Trump gave. That's not the same as Trump extending the invite, it wasn't his idea. The European leaders are their to back up Zelensky in case Trump tries to bully him into accepting a bad deal. Everything else is just spin.

Get off your high horse...you're the one constantly swallowing the media spin...we don't know the details, stop pretending you do...it depends on what you choose to believe and what not to. You've got no proof that Rubio told a deliberate lie, yet you stated it as fact...you are guilty of exactly the same thing you accuse others of.

I sallow media spin?, this coming the man who said their their probably is some truth to the statement that migrants are eating the dogs and cats.

We do know the details, they came from both Zelensky and von der Leyen who was on the call and I'd consider them far more trust worthy than anyone who's in the Trump administration.

Rubio is spinning when he says European leaders aren't coming to prevent Zelensky being bullied, that's exactly why they're going.

You said he was lying...put up the proof.

I wonder what people will say if the European leaders agree to Russia taking control of the Donbas, if it was accompanied by the US and EU future security protections, with the guaranteeing of Ukraine's future security, which could be very similar to NATO's article 5 where an attack against any NATO member is an attack against all members of the alliance.

According to special Trump envoy Steve Witkoff, Putin already agreed to this

Would the same people then blame the EU and the US of selling out Ukraine.....or are they willing to have their say on it now.....

You said he was lying...put up the proof.

He can't .... he never can...... but he will always state things like this as fact and expect people to swallow the bullshit.

I wonder what people will say if the European leaders agree to Russia taking control of the Donbas, if it was accompanied by the US and EU future security protections, with the guaranteeing of Ukraine's future security, which could be very similar to NATO's article 5 where an attack against any NATO member is an attack against all members of the alliance.

It's not up to European leaders to agree to that, its up to Ukraine. Now it's possible they could support such a deal, but I suspect Ukraine would want absolute cast iron guarantees from both Europe and the US of direct military intervention in Ukraine if Russia breaks the agreement, with no room for wriggle room. Even article 5 of NATO doesn't guarantee a military response if a NATO member is attacked, what Ukraine should want is more like the treaty Japan has with America, were America is obligated to defend Japan if its attacked. If he got something like that then he could go back to the Ukrainian people and parliament and see if they would accept it.

According to special Trump envoy Steve Witkoff, Putin already agreed to this

So this has apparently come up that Putin has supposedly made a concession in allowing Ukraine to have a security guarantee from the west as long as its not NATO but this hasn't been confirmed and Witkoff misunderstood what Putin was offering the last time he meet, so this needs to be clarified first.

I'm hearing some speculation is what the European's might do is get Zelensky to agree to handing over the Donbass on condition of strong security guarantees from the US and Europe and also that Russia hands over some of Ukraine's occupied territory at the same time as time as Ukraine withdraws from the Donbass. The idea here it's that a triple bluff, because Europe doesn't expect Putin to accept such an offer and then they can turn back to Trump and say, see Ukraine/Zelenksy is not the problem, they were ready to make a deal, its Putin that's the problem and get Trump back on side.

Would the same people then blame the EU and the US of selling out Ukraine.....or are they willing to have their say on it now.....

That's a different situation from handing over the Donbass in exchange for nothing but a promise from Russia to start ceasefire negotiations. There wasn't talk of security guarantees until yesterday and it still remains unclear if their is a real offer or if Witkoff is talking rubbish. I still think it would be an incredibly dubious deal to take.

Just yesterday the British MOD issued a report saying at the present rate of advance, it would take Russia 4.4 years to capture the rest of the Donbass (the fortress belt) and they would sustain almost 2 million more additional casualties. That would be such an enormous concession for Ukraine to make, and frankly I don't trust the Russians to uphold a ceasefire or Trump's America to honour any guarantees it gives. I don't believe Russia has the ability to maintain a war at this tempo for 4.4 years. I'd be surprised if they could manage half that. I do also believe Ukraine can hold out if the west has the political well to provide them with the required support.

"Rubio is lying."

LOL...bold statement...and one you can't back up at all, but yeah I wasn't expecting anything else.

Ah, lies come in all types and indeed, liberals use every angle to dodge accusation of lies. It is very funny.

Trump stated the first call would go to the Ukrainian leader then this duded stated that Trump gave his first call to NATO (according to comments in this thread which may not be even correct)

Two versions that can not be correct at the same and the two of them may constitute a lie. Now this is when liberal mindedness kicks in. Since the statements come from two different people, it can not be said which of them lies. And that is the card played here. It would be better to state that the Trump administration lies. But even with that, liberals have ways to escape the accusation of lies.

For simple minded people, the problem is elsewhere: it should be simple to state the proper version of the first call. But it does not suit liberals. Liberalism is all about division, not unity. By providing two different versions that do not align, they divide people in two groups, one supports one version, the other supports the other and it is on for the contest of power, for the battle for dominance. Division, polarization, which are essential to a liberal project of submission.

It's not up to European leaders to agree to that, its up to Ukraine. Now it's possible they could support such a deal, but I suspect Ukraine would want absolute cast iron guarantees from both Europe and the US of direct military intervention in Ukraine if Russia breaks the agreement, with no room for wriggle room. Even article 5 of NATO doesn't guarantee a military response if a NATO member is attacked, what Ukraine should want is more like the treaty Japan has with America, were America is obligated to defend Japan if its attacked. If he got something like that then he could go back to the Ukrainian people and parliament and see if they would accept it.

This is precisely my point, the EU and US agreeing to a deal like this....even if Ukraine don't agree.

However, I would expect that people like you and Blob would accuse the EU and US of abandoning Ukraine, especially if Ukraine want to continue fighting till the last man........so at what point would you expect Ukraine to start accepting a joint EU and US offer to end this war ....

I'm hearing some speculation is what the European's might do is get Zelensky to agree to handing over the Donbass on condition of strong security guarantees from the US and Europe

Same, hence why I brought it up

There wasn't talk of security guarantees until yesterday and it still remains unclear if their is a real offer or if Witkoff is talking rubbish. I still think it would be an incredibly dubious deal to take.

So if this offer was made now, to end this war, would you be against it, or would you rather the war continue for a few more years

This is precisely my point, the EU and US agreeing to a deal like this....even if Ukraine don't agree.

However, I would expect that people like you and Blob would accuse the EU and US of abandoning Ukraine

Europe won't abandon Ukraine, them saying they could support a deal involving territory swapping in exchange for Ukraine getting robust security guarantees is not the same thing as Europe cutting off military aid and support to Ukraine, because regardless of whether Ukraine takes the deal or not, Europe will support them.

especially if Ukraine want to continue fighting till the last man.

Fuck off with the disingenuous Russia talking point.

.......so at what point would you expect Ukraine to start accepting a joint EU and US offer to end this war .

When the offer guarantees their survival. Right now the talk of security guarantees is little more than talk. Russia yesterday came out and rejected any peacekeeping troops from NATO countries being sent to Ukraine to enforce a peace deal, be it inside a NATO mission or an independent deployment to Ukraine.

Same, hence why I brought it up

But you didn't bring up in the context of the European's supporting it as a manipulation of Trump, not with an expectation of Ukraine having to follow through on it.

So if this offer was made now, to end this war, would you be against it, or would you rather the war continue for a few more years

So if you mean by offer that in exchange for Ukraine withdrawing completely from the Donbass they get some other territory back (but much less than they are handing over) and in return there is a ceasefire and Ukraine get security guarantees from the US and Europe and Russia agrees to those security guarantees, I still wouldn't support it because it would involve Ukraine handing over it's strongest defensive position on the frontline that they have spent 11 years building up and obligating them to move into territory much less well suited for defence, it would also hurt them economically and it would be morally wrong to award the aggressor with more territory. I don't trust Russia to not attack again and don't trust Trump's America to honour any security commitments they would make.

If Ukraine where to get those same security guarantees but any ceasefire occurred along the present frontline that is something I could support but their would also have to be no restrictions on military aid being sent to Ukraine or talk of Ukraine reducing its army size.

"Fuck off with the disingenuous Russia talking point."

Damn...I see I touched a nerve here ..... I didn't realise what a delicate little flower you were.

"When the offer guarantees their survival"

Ahhhh....but you have often spoke about Ukraine possibly wanting to keep fighting on, to maybe not surrender anything at all, and as you rightly put it... make their own choice in this war.....to ensure their survival and way of life .....so I will ask you again, what would you say if Ukraine rejected any offer outright, from the EU and US, because they refuse point blank to cede any ground to Russia, and they do not want to swap anything with Russia....and all Ukraine want is for the EU and US to continue to supply financial aid and arms to continue the war with Russia.

But you didn't bring up in the context of the European's supporting it as a manipulation of Trump, not with an expectation of Ukraine having to follow through on it

Huh......

No manipulation from Trump, just security guarantees from EU and US for Ukraine

I don't trust Russia to not attack again and don't trust Trump's America to honour any security commitments they would make.

Ok, so you basically wouldn't support any proposal at all, to end the war then, because I don't see any way that this war ends soon, without these options being put on the table.

Damn...I see I touched a nerve here ..... I didn't realise what a delicate little flower you were.

LOL that's rich coming from you. No when I hear the line fighting to the last Ukrainian I take it that person doesn't actually care a jot about Ukraine, its faux concern whether it be it coming from either a far left wing tankie who blames every problem in the world on the US/West, or a MAGAloid who wants to be able to gloat about Trump getting a win, even if it comes at Ukraine's expense.

Ahhhh....but you have often spoke about Ukraine possibly wanting to keep fighting on, to maybe not surrender anything at all, and as you rightly put it... make their own choice in this war.....to ensure their survival and way of life .....so I will ask you again, what would you say if Ukraine rejected any offer outright, from the EU and US, because they refuse point blank to cede any ground to Russia, and they do not want to swap anything with Russia....and all Ukraine want is for the EU and US to continue to supply financial aid and arms to continue the war with Russia.

If Ukraine rejected trading additional territory that is their choice and I would support it. By the way the US is no longer really supplying either financial aid or arms to Ukraine, there is a small amount of the Biden approved aid still being delivered but the bulk of that has already been delivered. The US selling weapons to Europe now and in the future should not be considered US aid but European aid. The main thing of value the US is now providing is intelligence.

Huh......

No manipulation from Trump, just security guarantees from EU and US for Ukraine

That's exactly what it was, because they European's know that Putin wouldn't accept security guarantees for Ukraine. They just needed to be the last person in Trump's ear to make him forgot about Putin's flattery in Alaska.

Ok, so you basically wouldn't support any proposal at all, to end the war then, because I don't see any way that this war ends soon, without these options being put on the table.

No I stated a proposal I would think is acceptable. If Russia was to break a ceasefire or if Trump bailed on his commitments then at least Ukraine would still have its fortress belt as a bulwark to hold Russia back.

My option isn't on the table but neither is yours. Putin wont' accept security guarantees for Ukraine. The only options Russia will accept are defacto Ukrainian surrender, it's Russia and Putin that are the impediment to peace not Ukraine. So yes the war will likely go on.

LOL that's rich coming from you. No when I hear the line fighting to the last Ukrainian I take it that person doesn't actually care a jot about Ukraine, its faux concern whether it be it coming from either a far left wing tankie who blames every problem in the world on the US/West, or a MAGAloid who wants to be able to gloat about Trump getting a win, even if it comes at Ukraine's expense.

MAGAloid.... that's a big world for so early in the week.... come on Stav.... tone it down till at least Thursday

If Ukraine rejected trading additional territory that is their choice and I would support it. By the way the US is no longer really supplying either financial aid or arms to Ukraine, there is a small amount of the Biden approved aid still being delivered but the bulk of that has already been delivered. The US selling weapons to Europe now and in the future should not be considered US aid but European aid. The main thing of value the US is now providing is intelligence.

So let's try and be very clear here......regarding your position on this ongoing war......are you saying that you would fully support Ukraine pressuring the EU and US to continuing supporting this war for many years to come, whether it be through financial aid, weapons or intelligence, and until a point is reached where Ukraine can then turn around and say that they are satisfied with the outcome, whatever it may be in a few years time.... even though, the EU and US proposal right now could possibly be to come to a compromise with Russia as soon as possible, in some way, to save lives on both sides...which Ukraine point blank refuse to do......even if they were provided with guaranteed future securities...

If Russia was to break a ceasefire or if Trump bailed on his commitments then at least Ukraine would still have its fortress belt as a bulwark to hold Russia back.

I fully agree with this, but ultimately it doesn't help your argument because even if Russia didn't break a ceasefire, you wouldn't accept it at any point to begin with anyway because you wouldn't at any point trust that Trump would abide to his commitments of future securities.

"because they European's know that Putin wouldn't accept security guarantees for Ukraine"

You cannot know this for sure, so you are making more assumptions

My option isn't on the table but neither is yours. Putin wont' accept security guarantees for Ukraine

You could be right, but I doubt it..... time will tell

Stav persist with unbelievable shit of immense proportions. The first people Trump spoke to was the NATO leaders not Zelenskyy - the announcement of meeting outcome was discussed with them and after that the Zeenskyy meeting was arranged for Monday arranged and announced - but Stav always knows the inside story, he nornally gets his shit from The Guardian and definitely does not have the inside sources he claims to have.

His main campaign on site is that Trump is causing s hit and ignore he wshes o he NaATO cou ntries in betraying Z Zelenskyy and the Ukraine people.

There was a minor disagreement about the process forward - Trump does not trust Putin when it omes to vague ceasefires and the fact is the German Chancellor insisting on a ceasefire first came from an idiot whose party was he majority party with Germant\y sinking economically going down every day. Merz's experience on peace creation efforts equal that of Stav.

Ceasefires actually in the past in other words meant that the sides invovled in wars used it to replenish ther armaments and Trump does not want that to happen. Trump wants the war ended this month - not 6 months from now and that is possible but hard to achieve.

.In any even there is no indication that the EU countries does not support the Trump pace offers and all the make-believe BS of tav has been disproved in a meeting in Washington yesterday. So now all Stav has is to make unfounded allegations about why the European Leaders was at the meeting and how the meeting was used to n undermine Trump's peacemaking efforts.

So now Stav - please tell us where he emeting between Trump is to take place and who asked e European leaders to be present coupled o spreading sht hat Trmp is betrying kraine and Europe on he issue. ome now and give us he inside info n the enxt meeing on he issue,

Beause I do not use the Guardian BS as a basis for info - I look at what happened in the past and try t work out hat would happen. My guess is that Trump will arrnage the meeing to be held in Istanbul and wih he el of he Turish President put pressure to comply with the peace program. Both Russia and Ulraine or heir trade prposed have uses "le Bosphore" for shipping purpsoes and The Turks can close at if they so wish. Trump is better as a leader s the clowns in NATO countries have.

So let me tell you - he meeing will be in Istanbul and Blnken is not available to tell Zelenskyy to leave he meeing and not udertake any agreement with Russia - like happened in April 2022 uder the Autopen Presidency. .

.

. .

.

Stav persist with unbelievable shit of immense proportions. The first people Trump spoke to was the NATO leaders and not Zelenskyy - the announcement of meeting outcome was discussed with them and after that the Zeenskyy meeting was arranged for Monday and announced - but Stav always knows the inside story, he nornally gets his shit from The Guardian and definitely does not have the inside sources he claims to have.

His main campaign on site is that Trump is causing shit and ignore the wishes of the NATO countries in betraying Zelenskyy and the Ukraine people.

There was a minor disagreement about the process forward - Trump does not trust Putin when it omes to vague ceasefires and the fact is the German Chancellor insisting on a ceasefire first came from an idiot whose party was he majority party with Germant\y sinking economically going down every day. Merz's experience on peace creation efforts equal that of Stav.

Ceasefires actually in the past in other wars meant that the sides invovled in wars used it to replenish ther armaments and Trump does not want that to happen. Trump wants the war ended this month - not 6 months from now and that is possible but hard to achieve.

In any even there is no indication that the EU countries does not support the Trump peace efforts and all the make-believe BS of Stav has been disproved in a meeting in Washington yesterday. So now all Stav has is to make unfounded allegations about why the European Leaders was at the meeting and how the meeting was used to n undermine Trump's peacemaking efforts.

So now Stav - please tell us where he emeting between Trump is to take place and who asked e European leaders to be present coupled o spreading sht hat Trmp is betrying kraine and Europe on he issue. ome now and give us he inside info n the enxt meeing on he issue,

Beause I do not use the Guardian BS as a basis for info - I look at what happened in the past and try to work out what would happen next. My guess is that Trump will arrnage the meeing to be held in Istanbul and has the means to put pressure to comply with the peace program. Both Russia and Ulraine for their trade prurposes can use "le Bosphore" for shipping purposes and The Turks can close at if they so wish. Trump is better as a leader the clowns in NATO countries have.

So let me tell you - he meeing will be in Istanbul and Blnken is not available to tell Zelenskyy to leave the meeing and not udertake any agreement with Russia - like happened in April 2022 uder the Autopen Presidency.

.

.

. .

.

So let's try and be very clear here......regarding your position on this ongoing war......are you saying that you would fully support Ukraine pressuring the EU and US to continuing supporting this war for many years to come,

Talking about bizarre phrasing... Ukraine pressuring the EU or the US...what??? What has Ukraine got to pressure the US or EU with?

whether it be through financial aid, weapons or intelligence, and until a point is reached where Ukraine can then turn around and say that they are satisfied with the outcome,

Ukraine will never be satisfised with an outcome that is anything but getting all of Ukrainian territory back, but they know that's not realistic and would be willing to accept a deal that doesn't compromise their security. Trading in their best defensive position that's also deeply integrated into their military industrial base is suicidal if you ask me.

whatever it may be in a few years time.... even though, the EU and US proposal right now could possibly be to come to a compromise with Russia as soon as possible, in some way, to save lives on both sides...which Ukraine point blank refuse to do......even if they were provided with guaranteed future securities...

Again with the phrasing, Ukraine point blank refuse to do???, and again I will tell you to fuck off with such disingenuous tripe. Ukraine have time and again expressed a willingness to negotiate and accept significant compromises in leaving 20% of Ukrainian territory in Russian hands. At no time has Russia expressed the same willingness, its demands have remained maximalist and it's never negotiated in good faith, Ukraine is not the problem, the problem is Putin and Russia.

So I fully support Ukraine's right to choose what it wants to do. If such a deal occurred (trade Donbass for security) and Ukraine took it I I believe they would be making a mistake but obviously its up to them.

I fully agree with this, but ultimately it doesn't help your argument because even if Russia didn't break a ceasefire, you wouldn't accept it at any point to begin with anyway because you wouldn't at any point trust that Trump would abide to his commitments of future securities.

Well that's my point, trading the fortress belt is too high price even with security guarantees. I don't think Russia is actually capable of seizing the fortress belt.

You cannot know this for sure, so you are making more assumptions

Russia has come out and said they wont' accept Ukraine joining NATO and they won't accept a deployment of troops from NATO countries in Ukraine as peacekeepers even acting indecently not as a NATO mission. Russia has never changed from its demands that western countries stop supplying Ukraine and for the Ukraine army to be reduced in size and for restrictions placed on the type of weapons it can have. What on earth makes you think Russia will accept security guarantees, because Trump/Witkoff said so?

You could be right, but I doubt it..... time will tell

Most likely outcome is this war will just roll on into next year.

Talking about bizarre phrasing... Ukraine pressuring the EU or the US...what??? What has Ukraine got to pressure the US or EU with?

Simple, the pressure with not abandoning them in front of the whole world, if they refuse to accept a certain deal with Russia

Public pressure, political pressure....or any other pressure that would constitute them still getting international support for the war

Again with the phrasing, Ukraine point blank refuse to do???, and again I will tell you to fuck off with such disingenuous tripe

You are one extremely sensitive little guy...... which is why I tried a little bit of humour to start off my last post, but you are just too far down the rabbit hole now.... no worries this side though, lol.

"and would be willing to accept a deal that doesn't compromise their security"

Yeah.... but as you have already told us all so many times, you would never agree or support this because you don't trust Putin or Trump, so I guess in your mind this should never be an option put on the table, because it's untrustworthy..... hence why I am trying to get you to actually put a clear proposal on the table that you could actually agree with.

So I fully support Ukraine's right to choose what it wants to do. If such a deal occurred (trade Donbass for security) and Ukraine took it I I believe they would be making a mistake but obviously its up to them.

Again...... what should Ukraine ask for that you would deem a fair proposal.

Well that's my point, trading the fortress belt is too high price even with security guarantees

And still more waffle...... no clear proposal again.....

I don't think Russia is actually capable of seizing the fortress belt.

Very possible, yes

Russia has come out and said they wont' accept Ukraine joining NATO and they won't accept a deployment of troops from NATO countries in Ukraine as peacekeepers even acting indecently not as a NATO mission. Russia has never changed from its demands that western countries stop supplying Ukraine and for the Ukraine army to be reduced in size and for restrictions placed on the type of weapons it can have. What on earth makes you think Russia will accept security guarantees, because Trump/Witkoff said so?

Oh please, this has nothing to do with what Trump or Witkoff have done or said...... wow ..... you are just so far down this rabbit hole with bad man Trump and his administration, that your "critical thinking" on certain issues is so often impaired....

I actually really do believe that at some point in the near future, Putin himself will have to make a decision on coming to the table with ending this war, and if that means he may have to waive or concede on some previous points that he has been staunchly in support of, then I believe he could do just that......but I could be wrong....

However, your ongoing blatant hatred of anything Trump related just absolutely supersedes everything else in the war..... it is clear as mud how much you dislike anything that Trump tries to do or does do regarding this war...... yet you want us all to keep belieivng you and your "critical thinking".... it's honestly becoming a joke now.

Russia and the Ukraine have both said a lot of things that the other party ostensibly won’t accept. But that’s not unusual in negotiations, which are the only course for a timely resolution.

Any other course, for example thinking Russia can be forced to stop via sanctions will just drive Russia further into the Chinese orbit and potentially shift all its vast natural resources into that alliance. It won’t stop Russia,

Trump inherently knows this and has tried to convince Putin Russia still has a possible future with the West….to howls of opprobrium from the Western press. He may very well not succeed, but if he doesn’t the Ukranians are condemned to years of war and the decimation of a generation of young men.

It’s not always pretty and when the Donald switches into self praise mode, I change channels. But the effort he is making to settle this conflict and re engage with Russia is right for the Ukraine and the world.

I

You are one extremely sensitive little guy...... which is why I tried a little bit of humour to start off my last post, but you are just too far down the rabbit hole now.... no worries this side though, lol.

LOL I'm sensitive, yeah sure. No I just see through the obvious shifting of the blame, like the good little Trump apologist you are.

Yeah.... but as you have already told us all so many times, you would never agree or support this because you don't trust Putin or Trump, so I guess in your mind this should never be an option put on the table, because it's untrustworthy..... hence why I am trying to get you to actually put a clear proposal on the table that you could actually agree with.

Again...... what should Ukraine ask for that you would deem a fair proposal.

And still more waffle...... no clear proposal again.....

What Ukraine are already asking, a freezing of the conflicting along present frontline, security guarantees from the west to Ukraine, no recognition of any Ukrainian territory as Russian and no handing over additional Ukrainian territory, no restrictions on military aid being sent to Ukraine and no forced reduction of the size of the Ukrainian armed forces.

Very possible, yes

I'll take military experts and analysts like the British MOD or Institute for the Study of War over your opinion.

Oh please, this has nothing to do with what Trump or Witkoff have done or said...... wow ..... you are just so far down this rabbit hole with bad man Trump and his administration, that your "critical thinking" on certain issues is so often impaired....

Your going lecture me on critical thinking, when you vehemently argued Nancy Pelosi controlled the national guard in DC on January 6th, when 10 seconds searching online could debunk it.

I actually really do believe that at some point in the near future, Putin himself will have to make a decision on coming to the table with ending this war, and if that means he may have to waive or concede on some previous points that he has been staunchly in support of, then I believe he could do just that......but I could be wrong....

At no point has he moved an inch and why would he with Trump in the White House.

However, your ongoing blatant hatred of anything Trump related just absolutely supersedes everything else in the war..... it is clear as mud how much you dislike anything that Trump tries to do or does do regarding this war...... yet you want us all to keep belieivng you and your "critical thinking".... it's honestly becoming a joke now.

It's not about hating Trump which I do. It's about Ukraine not getting the shaft. If Trump was doing actually wanted I wanted him to do, such as applying secondary sanctions, going after the shadow fleet and supplying Ukraine with longer range missiles I'd credit him for it and I have no doubt you would be supporting that approach as well, saying look how firm Trump is in standing up to Putin and mocking the people who said before the election Trump could sell out Ukraine. There be none of this Ukraine has no cards or that Ukraine is on the path to inevitable defeat. You don't have critical thinking you just go along with whatever Trump does (like Doge and foreign aid) and accept whatever narrative they trout out, now matter how embarrassingly farcical it is.

LOL I'm sensitive, yeah sure. No I just see through the obvious shifting of the blame, like the good little Trump apologist you are.

Hehe, you go little guy..... go on..... lol

"security guarantees from the west to Ukraine"

You see.... this is why you just don't make any sense at all.... and this is precisely why I was trying to get some clear proposal on Ukraine that you would actually agree to go along with...... but here you are yet again, asking for something that you have already stipulated on this forum, that you think would be a dubious proposal or deal, because you don't trust Putin enough not to invade again, and you also don't trust Trump and his administration enough to back up his promise of future securities .... but yet here you are, clearly asking for it... LOL..... ai ai ai ...

I'll take military experts and analysts like the British MOD or Institute for the Study of War over your opinion.

I'll take the opinion of most people just on this forum, over yours, lol

Your going lecture me on critical thinking, when you vehemently argued Nancy Pelosi controlled the national guard in DC on January 6th, when 10 seconds searching online could debunk it

You got it

At no point has he moved an inch and why would he with Trump in the White House.

Of course, it's all Trump's fault again...... there is that rabbit hole that I keep referring to.

I also suppose that Putin conceding that this war would never have happened under Trump is just another Putin attempt at sucking up to Trump..... of course it is.... it never can be that Trump did or would have done something right.... he has the wrong surname for that to happen, I get it.

It's not about hating Trump which I do.

LMAO, you certainly don't need to convince anyone here of that

It's about Ukraine not getting the shaft. If Trump was doing actually wanted I wanted him to do, such as applying secondary sanctions, going after the shadow fleet and supplying Ukraine with longer range missiles I'd credit him for it and I have no doubt you would be supporting that approach as well, saying look how firm Trump is in standing up to Putin and mocking the people who said before the election Trump could sell out Ukraine. There be none of this Ukraine has no cards or that Ukraine is on the path to inevitable defeat. You don't have critical thinking you just go along with whatever Trump does (like Doge and foreign aid) and accept whatever narrative they trout out, now matter how embarrassingly farcical it is.

You keep convincing yourself of that, because I guarantee you right now that what we see of you on here, is very different to what you perceive it to be.

As Rubio said, it is so easy to just throw in the secondary sanctions, but there is a lot more involved than that..... a lot more than your "critical thinking" can comprehend it seems

Very nice article from Boris, which I agree a lot with

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-15013797/BORIS-JOHNSON-Trumps-breakthrough-peace-closer-Putin.html

You see.... this is why you just don't make any sense at all.... and this is precisely why I was trying to get some clear proposal on Ukraine that you would actually agree to go along with...... but here you are yet again, asking for something that you have already stipulated on this forum, that you think would be a dubious proposal or deal, because you don't trust Putin enough not to invade again, and you also don't trust Trump and his administration enough to back up his promise of future securities .... but yet here you are, clearly asking for it... LOL..... ai ai ai ...

Emm why did you omit the part were I said "a freezing of the conflict along present frontline",

Right now the present deal seems to be that in exchange for Ukraine handing over the Donbass (and thus the Fortress Belt) they get security guarantees from Europe and the US. I do not believe that's a good deal, losing the fortress belt leaves Ukraine too exposed to further Russian aggression even with the security guarantees (which at this present moment in time are quite vague).

Now if the same security guarantees were offered to Ukraine by the US and Europe but there was no need for Ukraine to hand over the Donbass that's a different story because in the event of future Russian aggression of America bailing out then Ukraine is no worse a position than it is now. That's a deal that might well be worth taking a punt on.

I'll take the opinion of most people just on this forum, over yours, lol

Fine, I'm sure they are all as well versed in military affairs as the British MOD and the Institute for the Study of War.

Of course, it's all Trump's fault again...... there is that rabbit hole that I keep referring to.

No it's all Trump's fault though you can argue he's policies are contributing to Putin not feeling the need to make an concessions. The real issue is Trump trying to shift the blame onto Ukraine.

I also suppose that Putin conceding that this war would never have happened under Trump is just another Putin attempt at sucking up to Trump

It was 1000% Putin manipulating Trump. How can you be so gullible not to see it. Same thing again with the European's fawning over him yesterday. Do you not understand pretty much every world leader think's Trump a joke and a moron, they just pile on the flattery to manipulate him. He's a dangerous clown, a toddler with a loaded gun that has to be constantly mollycoddled to prevent him from doing something stupid.

it never can be that Trump did or would have done something right.... he has the wrong surname for that to happen, I get it.

Did I not credit Trump for Operation warp speed, did I not credit him for the Abraham Accords, did I not credit him when he got Biden's peace deal in Israel over the line before he became President in January.

You keep convincing yourself of that, because I guarantee you right now that what we see of you on here, is very different to what you perceive it to be.

Oh no DA doesn't think much of me, I'm going lose sleep over this.

As Rubio said, it is so easy to just throw in the secondary sanctions, but there is a lot more involved than that..... a lot more than your "critical thinking" can comprehend it seems

I know secondary sanctions can be difficult to enforce and would be costly but how about the US try something, anything to pressure Russia instead of just Trump throwing out the odd verbal threat at Russia that it's clear by now he's no intention of following through with.

Fine, I'm sure they are all as well versed in military affairs as the British MOD and the Institute for the Study of War

Oh....I meant on any topic.......lol

Now if the same security guarantees were offered to Ukraine by the US and Europe but there was no need for Ukraine to hand over the Donbass that's a different story because in the event of future Russian aggression of America bailing out then Ukraine is no worse a position than it is now. That's a deal that might well be worth taking a punt on.

Ok, so to confirm, if Ukraine are offered future security guarantees without having to hand over the Donbass, you would be in favour of them accepting that deal

I know secondary sanctions can be difficult to enforce and would be costly but how about the US try something, anything to pressure Russia instead of just Trump throwing out the odd verbal threat at Russia that it's clear by now he's no intention of following through with.

More of your fabulous assumptions...... you are incredibly well connected with all this constant inside information about what has happened and what is still going to happen... LMAO

This is getting sicker and sicker by the day. Stav is raving about thngs he thought up hmself and try to get support for his thoughless BS.

So he always say things that eveybody bar t he real liars are lying. After 9 years of Russia C ollusion lies was full exposed he beieves the lairs and eveybody else are liars - even Rubio - while he beleives the lies of the corrupt BSters in the USA.

By the way find out why Clinton is now suddenly wanted to make peace with Trump - reason she does not want to go to jail for lyng and araid of bankruptsy based on lbel claims. So try again Stav and determine who really are the liars invovled, . Everybody disagreeing wth him are not liars they are careful not to use lies in their arguments and stay with the truth. Clinton is n shit because of lies and so is Obama and a string of people likely to end up in jail. Obama may be pardoneed by Trump to prevent a precedent repeat in future - the rest are going to spet their lives in prison for many years to come. Watch them ratting amongst themselves by turning to state evidence to save hem from prison for many years to come. .

.

Ok, so to confirm, if Ukraine are offered future security guarantees without having to hand over the Donbass, you would be in favour of them accepting that deal

If the security guarantees are robust enough that Ukraine can accept then I wouldn't be against them accepting that deal. Problem is I don't think Russia will accept Ukraine being given such guarantees.

More of your fabulous assumptions...... you are incredibly well connected with all this constant inside information about what has happened and what is still going to happen... LMAO

How can you just deny reality, what happened to Trump's 50 day deadline, that he later dropped to 10-12 days, that passed without any action, what happened to last months threat of very significant sanctions, what about his threat of server consequences before the Alaska summit?

I'll make a prediction, their will be no bi-lateral meeting between Putin-Zelensky (and Trump won't punish him for it) because Putin doesn't believe Zelensky is the legitimate leader of Ukraine and such a meeting would been seen as him legitimizing Zelensky. The current diplomatic track of the Alaskan Summit followed by Mondays meetings in the White House is going no where. No substantial progress was made towards peace, because Ukraine is never going to be willing to hand over the Donbass and whatever security guarantees the west offer Ukraine, Russia will reject them.

If the security guarantees are robust enough that Ukraine can accept then I wouldn't be against them accepting that deal. Problem is I don't think Russia will accept Ukraine being given such guarantees.

Ok, so if Ukraine are given those security guarantees, then you will agree to Ukraine accepting the deal....got it

How can you just deny reality

Simple, the actual reality of the situation is that Trump might still implement the secondary sanctions, who knows... you certainly don't.... and neither do I...... however you are phrasing it like Trump always just puts out verbal threats and won't follow through with actually doing it, because he hasn't yet done so.....when in fact he could still do it, which would go against exactly what you are saying he won't do.

I'll make a prediction, their will be no bi-lateral meeting between Putin-Zelensky (and Trump won't punish him for it) because Putin doesn't believe Zelensky is the legitimate leader of Ukraine and such a meeting would been seen as him legitimizing Zelensky. The current diplomatic track of the Alaskan Summit followed by Mondays meetings in the White House is going no where. No substantial progress was made towards peace, because Ukraine is never going to be willing to hand over the Donbass and whatever security guarantees the west offer Ukraine, Russia will reject them

Lets see how this prediction plays out

If Trump does not punish Putin for not attending the meeting with Zelensky, then Trump is offering nothing directly towards making Russia come to the table and negotiate, and I will categorically blame Trump for keeping this war going.

Ok, so if Ukraine are given those security guarantees, then you will agree to Ukraine accepting the deal....got it

Yes. If they believe the guarantees are sufficient and are willing to accept them, I don't have an issue.

Simple, the actual reality of the situation is that Trump might still implement the secondary sanctions, who knows... you certainly don't.... and neither do I...... however you are phrasing it like Trump always just puts out verbal threats and won't follow through with actually doing it, because he hasn't yet done so.....when in fact he could still do it, which would go against exactly what you are saying he won't do.

How many times has he issued some sort of verbal threat and not followed through on it. Even away from the Russia-Ukraine war how many times in his trade negotiations has Trump delayed implementing tariffs or backed out when faced with push back.

Yes he still could do so, but I'd very surprised if he did.

DA thanks again for the paywall blocker .....truly luvly jubbly

How many times has he issued some sort of verbal threat and not followed through on it. Even away from the Russia-Ukraine war how many times in his trade negotiations has Trump delayed implementing tariffs or backed out when faced with push back.

TACO