Slava Ukraini, which means 'Glory to Ukraine'.

Seems like you care more about Trump looking bad than the Ukraine war ending, Star. Or is it that you care more about Trump looking bad AND his supporters being proved wrong, than you do about ending the war?

What I care about is ending the war on terms favourable to Ukraine.

Let's just remember that the Dems failed to stop the war. And they had more than enough time.

The difference is the Dem's didn't say they could stop the war in a day. Nor did the pressure Ukraine to make concessions which may not be true of Trump.

But sure, let's ask you a hypothetical in return.

You didn't answer mine but sure.

If Trump does manage to end the war...will you call it a coincidence, or will you admit that since he was able to end the war then he may have also been able to prevent it had he been elected in 2020?

Its possible he may have prevented the war if he was President in 2020 regardless of whether he ends the war when he's President again. I just consider it very unlikely either way. 

This point ….if not recognized has the potential to end serious efforts to control the proliferation of nuclear weapons. If you are Iran, or North Korea or Israel why would you not want the security.

• Invoke the Budapest Memorandum:

  • Stress that Ukraine surrendered its nuclear weapons in exchange for security assurances from Russia, the US, and the UK. Russia’s violation undermines international disarmament agreements.

I always wa against his war - like I was against the 2nd Iraq War.   I aways quoted a French friend of mie who told me that in the history of Europe countries  may win battls - but stil lose te war,   It always happened in cases  involvin g Muslim fanaics  nd also in other wars within  Europe.  

It happened to Russia in two cases - in the Napoleontic wars and in the asion of Nazi Germany where in the end the Russians destroyed two mighty empires,  After those two wars were lost Napoeon's rule collapsed and  East Germany and all counries in cnetral Europe ebcame slave counries uled by Stalin.

Now back to more recent history.   In 2001 the USA invaded  ghanistan only o end up feeing from that country in panic in the middle of the night in 2021.   Th cond case wa in 2003hen he USA invaded Iraq and  he counry is ruled by fanatics who hate he USA  - while he S Army is stuck i camps all over Iraq.   A ter mor than 20 years here is no winner and only chaos in Iraq,  

The USA in 2014 and ler on under Biden thought Russia as so weak that trained Ukrainian troops  provided by NATO countries will destroy the Russian Army and  the lad to Government collapse in Russia,    So in 2014 the USA funded and organizd a coup in Ukraine thatled to a civil war in Eaterm Ukraine,  

When teh Presidential election was held in 2019 Zelenskyy promised in his election campaign that he would end the civil war  in Eastern Ukraine trhrough negotiations.   A fter Roud one of he eelction he got 29% of the vote - in Round 2  his promise to ed th Civil War throug negotiations turned into a landslide in his favor.

But he soon discovered that it did not tie in with the ideas in Washington to destroy Russia through a war between Ukraine and Russia - which the warmongers in Washington believes would cause victory fri Ukraine and capse of the Russian Government and dismembering of Russia into five or six smaller countries that could be managed easily by the USA>

It did not happen and nwo the push is for getting WW3 started.   No doubt the war in 2022 started n thta prmis of the USA Government.    I a recent Congress hearing it came out hat the  Deese coud nt provide anyhing s to the Ukrine War and there wre no future planning iro the Ukraine War.   The US Defense Force stated there is no plan for stopping  another endles War, while knowing full well  that  the Ukraine army canno win he war,   TNrump wants to stop the War through negotiation and eveybody on site thinks that Ukraine will be the loses in such negotiations,

Tat is not Trump's style of negotiation and Putin knows that as well.   He would bI beleieve take the easy way out,   The impleentation of the Minsk agreement already signed twice by Putin.    That would leave in  the position where Ukraine wil retain the country  existing in 2015 - when Ukraine was already part of Russia and will neer be returned to Ukraine.   From their  trump wilinsist that the full Minsk agreement be implemented  and will conceed that all the Ukraine Biolabs operated by the US Defense Force will be closed/    

or the rest Ukraine wil not be allowed to become a mmber of NAO and a ne Conmsitution in Ukraine be developed and a referendum be held o gt approval of he Constitution.  for Ukine.  The implemtation will be contrlled by a Committe of Nat Members, russia and Ukraine.   Onc that was done the Russians will ihdrawn form Ukraine .

-  .    

Rooinek and childishness reign supreme again/   

1. Control over Crimea

• Opening Position: Crimea is a sovereign part of Ukraine as recognized by international law. The annexation by Russia in 2014 is illegal and must be reversed. We demand the full return of Crimea to Ukraine.
• Compromise Position: If Russia refuses outright withdrawal:
  • Consider offering Crimea a special international administration for a transitional period (e.g., 10 years) under UN or neutral oversight, during which the status of Crimea will be determined through an internationally monitored referendum.
  • Russia are unlikely to agree to this as they have repeatedly said control of Ukraine is an absolute red line for them but even if they where to do so in order to obtain a ceasefire they may just renege on the deal 10 years down the road.
  • Russia must withdraw military forces from Crimea during this period.
  • Russia will never agree to that.
  • The rights of ethnic Ukrainians, Crimean Tatars, and other minorities must be safeguarded.
  • Russia could agree to this or take the position that they are all ready safeguarding those rights. But as long as Russia maintain controls Crimea there is no way to ensure they do. (they clearly aren't)

2. Status of Donetsk and Luhansk Regions

• Opening Position: Full reintegration of Donetsk and Luhansk into Ukraine under its sovereignty and legal framework, with no exceptions.
• Compromise Position: If reintegration meets resistance:
• Offer autonomy within Ukraine, provided:
  • All armed groups in these regions are disbanded and disarmed.
  • Ukraine retains control of external borders.
  • Ukrainian law and taxation systems are reestablished.
  • Local elections are conducted under OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) monitoring.
• No veto powers over national policies will be granted to these regions.
• While Russia does not seem to consider Donetsk and Luhansk as a critical an issue as control of Crimea they are very unlikely to agree to any of these compromises, which are tantamount to handing control of those regions back to Ukraine. They have already annexed these territories into Russia proper.
3. Borders and Demilitarized Zones
• • Opening Position: Ukraine demands the restoration of its internationally recognized borders, with Russian forces withdrawing entirely.
  • Compromise Position: To ensure peace and security:
  • A demilitarized buffer zone could be established along the border with international peacekeeping forces (UN or OSCE) overseeing the region.
  • The zone could extend into Russian territory as well, ensuring mutual security.
  • While a demilitarized zone might be acceptable to both Russia and Ukraine it raises several questions. I'll point out during the Troubles in Northern Ireland the UK had 20,000 soldiers stationed at the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland for nearly 30 years during which time they where unable to prevent regular infiltration of the border by paramilitary groups. The frontline in Ukraine is over twice the size of the Northern Ireland border.  So how many peacekeepers would be needed, who will provide them, for how long and at what cost? What would happen if say Russian forces attacked them, would they be authorised to fire back? 

  4. Control Over Other Occupied Territories

  • Opening Position: Immediate and unconditional return of all territories occupied by Russia during the 2022 invasion.
  • Compromise Position:
  • Any Russian withdrawal must be accompanied by a commitment to fund reconstruction efforts in these areas.
  • Local governance in these regions could be subject to transitional arrangements, with OSCE or UN oversight to ensure stability.
  • A timeline for withdrawal can be negotiated (e.g., phased withdrawal within 6-12 months).
  • The Russian's are not going give up any territory other than maybe the two small sections they have in the the north of Kharkiv Oblast. They are not going to care if Ukraine promises to reconstruct these other occupied territories. Aside from which Ukraine would do that anyway if it ever regained controlled of these territories for its own long term benefit.

  5. Territorial Integrity Guarantees

  • Opening Position: Ukraine demands legally binding commitments from Russia to respect its sovereignty and territorial integrity, backed by guarantees from major powers (e.g., the US, EU, and China).
  • Compromise Position:
  • Russia signs a non-aggression treaty with Ukraine, ensuring no future attempts to seize territory.
  • Guarantees must include severe penalties for violations, such as automatic reinstatement of sanctions or military support to Ukraine from guarantors.
  • Russia had already signed treaties in the past acknowledging Ukraine's territorial integrity, which Russia violated. Ukraine also had guarantees of security from western countries that they have mostly failed to live up too. So any non-aggression treaty would be worthless without absolute cast iron guarantees of direct military intervention (not just support) from its western partners.  That leaves the question of would its western partners commit to that.

  
  

  • Ukraine could offer conditional neutrality (non-NATO membership) in exchange for
  • Ukraine won't go for conditional neutrality, it would leave them exposed to Russian aggression in the future. Redline issue for Ukraine.
  • Total withdrawal of Russian forces from occupied territories.
  • Recognition of Ukrainian sovereignty over its entire territory.
  • Russia will never agree to either of those terms.
  • Trade-offs could include the joint development of disputed areas, such as Crimea’s Black Sea resources, under international oversight.
  • Bit of a non issue.
  
  

  Red Lines for Ukraine

  1. No permanent loss of territory without internationally verified and legally binding guarantees.

  Ukraine will never agree to any permanent loss of territory. From what they have recently said though they would be willing to accept temporary loss where Russia maintains control of the occupied territories in the short to medium term while they pursue diplomatic means of re-obtaining the territories in the long run, but at no point would they ever recognize the occupied territories as Russian.

  2. No compromise on the right to self-determination for Ukrainians in occupied areas.

  Without controlling those territories Ukraine they have no way of ensuring self-determination for the Ukrainians.

  3. No veto or undue influence for Russia over Ukrainian domestic or foreign policies.

  Yes this is a redline and part of the reason the Minsk agreements broke down. This is doable but kinda dependent on the support Ukraine gets from other countries.

  
  
  If you have been following events recently Ukraine have made statements to the effect that they consider security more important than territorial integrity. They are willing to compromise on leaving the occupied territories in Russian hands for the time being but without ever acknowledging them as Russian in exchange for cast iron security guarantees, most preferably NATO membership and the full protection offered by article 5 of NATO.The problem is NATO membership is likely a redline for the Russians. Now maybe some sort of compromise can be reached in which Ukraine remains out of NATO but some western countries commit to defending Ukraine if attacked, but then you have question of which countries would commit to doing so. Would Russia agree to that, is it not the same as NATO membership in all but name? Could it led to a bizarre situation where some NATO countries end up being involved in a war with Russia while others sit it out, then at that point what purpose does NATO serve.
As for your section on how Ukraine will counter Russia's arguments in negotiations. I will sum up how Russia will counter Ukraine's arguments.
They'll lie.

So I hear

The abe isues b  Syav is the biggest cncoction of BS anybody could put on this site/  

None so blind .............................

Maybe one day you'll explain your Putin fanboy fantasy ................ this monster that has your unquestionable support & consistently remains devoid of any criticism whatsoever ....... truly sh ameful, an RTnews echo chamber.       

Maybe one day you would learn why the war in Ukraine started and why it should be stopped through negotiation - sabotaged by the US  Giovernment from the world go.   Maybe you would discover that the wars invlving the USA is driven by bribery and corruption.  Maybe you would learn that the War in Ukraine started as a result of the US A of Ukraine in 2014 causing a civil wn Ukraine and peace negotiations was three times sabotaged by the USA Government,

Maybe should also learn that elements in the USA are using the Ukraine for forbidden gain-of-function biolabs in Ukraine used and funded by the US ovrnment - who moved that research from Wuhan to Odessa.

Maybe you would realize that the answer is real megotiations to end the BS and the USA using  the  Ukrainians  as proxies like Iran used Hamas and Hezbollah against Israel will stop as a result.

   .    .        

Stav

I read the points and the first sentece of the Crimea is BS supreme.  S o I did not read any further,   Crimea was before 1953 a part of Rusia and tha wetn on until 1991 when the Comunist regime  fell,

The Ukraine Constitutio dealt in detail with the Crimea issue  took a special place,   It was included that domestically te Crimea would ahve their own elected Parliament that govern al domestic Govnance of the Crimea - Rusia was to lease their naval bases from the Ukraine Government for an indefinite period and the only functions the Ukraine Government itself related to central Government tax collection and Foreign Affairs,

By 2014 there wer NO Ukraine soldiers in the crimea but 11 000 Russian solders were there servig in the abses of the Russian navy in Sebastopol,    There were only 5% of te population were Ukrainians - t he oher 95% were Russians (85%) and Tartars (10%),   Ibn reality and ties between the  Crmea was very little  as the Crimea was self-governing the area in erms of the Crimea clauses in he Ukraine 1991 Constitution.

When the coup in Kiev took place and the Urkaine Constitution was nullified by the incoming regime controlled by the USA  took over in Kiev te situation in Ukraine was messy and let to a civil war in Eastern Ukraine.   The Crimea Parliament was the only governance body ef in the Criea and ithout any cnstitution the Crimea Parliament deccided to hold a referendum on the issue of the future of the Crimea and called a referendum as t th future of Ukraine,   95% of he population voted to be joining Russia.   In two opinion polls conducted by  a Grman andUS polsters indicated tha the dsupport to jin Russia gre to 96.5%.   

Nobody in the Crimea wantrd t b part of the contitutionaless Ukraine - but them the USA would never cunenance he iddea that they wanted t take over the Russian Black Sea bases and nobody care about democracy and thishes of the people living in the Crimea,

So wat came out above is BS -  with discasing of the Ukraine constitution the Crimea was left withou any Government and the people deied n heir own furute in a referendum.   Since the Ukraine Constitution was discarded the legal tes y Ukraine and the Crimea was ended and that was the end of the links between Ukraine and the Crimea,   

Tger si n way tht Russia will hand back the Crimea to Ukraine or any other body controled by the USA.   Ukraine is not negotiable and that was realized by the time  the Minsk agreement was negotiated.     

There could be a solution in what a new Cnstitution of Ukraine bsed on a federal state can be negotiated and approved by the peopele of Ukraine in an international monitored referendum - but the fact is the Ukraine voters would vote again for being part of Russia so they may vote to remain being part of Russia.     

Ukraine have a btter chance to retain the whole of the rest of Ukraine - but a ne DEMOCRATIC constitution approve by all the voters in Ukraine will be possible,,  Nobody in Eastern Ukraine will agree to remain part of Ukraine governed by a  banana republic dictatorship like the case is at present.    

     .            .                  

Absolute shitori- fictional  bollocks. ......... what a shame.

STAV 

ukraine had no Nukes in 1992 ad sig ned a treaty prohibiting development of Nuclear Arms and in the Constiution prhinbit such nuclear arms development

If they  have such nuclear arms at present it could only come from ONE Source and that would be the USA.    Instwad of tying to ensure world stablity and peace the Biden Regime is trying to start WW3.   I woud not be surprised if the present USA  Governmnt did  supply a nuclear bomb to Ukraine and hmelves doing such an attack t ensure the start of WW3,  ensure the start of WW3 asap.

I have a question for you and BB though - Do you suppot Democracys as te ideal form of Government - plain  "YES  I do or NO I don't,".?

Yes,  100 %,  I do .

Be good if you would answer questions instead of referring everything back to the effing Minsk blah-blah .

Easy dimness

I asnwered the questions clearly and precisely.

The Misk agreement did not contain the situation prevling in the Crimea and admitted that hat happened in the Crimea was accepted by all partnes and signed by the Pesidents of Ukraine and Russia - as wella s Macron and Mertel and was referred to the UN Security Counicl for acceptance - which happened unanimusly.   The treaty was never submitted to Congress as required by US Law.

So what do I support i.r.o peace negotiations in Ukraine and acceped by he U S Seciruty Council:

*     That he 2015 borers of Uraine be respectd by all participansts involved,   - I stick with that one.

*      That to ensure proper and demcratic Gernance in Ukraine as wella s human rights protection is thatanew and democatic Constitution with a Fedeal concept based on the US Constitution.   Since the 2014 coup  Ukraine has had no Constitution and the ide was to get Ukaine abck to being a democatic country - protecting the human rights of all Ukaie sitizns 

*      That the condiions adhered to in the 1955 agrement in  the case of Austria and contained in the 1991 agreement on expansion of NATO be adhered to and that Ukraine not be allowed to join NATO.   That is nothing new  Austria has strictly kept to he 1955 agremeent and is still fully independent and democratic while not a member of NATO.       Based on hisoric fact ad agreements going back to 1990 on he issue should remain in force.   I support this concept as well.  

Russia did  nothing when the three Baltic Republics joied NATO other than protest about it as a breach of the 1990 agreement and did nothinwhen other countries in central Europe joined NATO -but they all rtained heir constitutions and even in countries wih russian speaking people the counries reatained their constitutions guaranteeing protection of human rights.

The USA Biden Administration realized that a  new Constitution in Ukraine would weaken their control  oe the Ukraine overnment,   When Zelenskyy was campaigning for election as  President he would sart negotiations tos top the Civil War in Eastern Ukraine.   He was clarly told by Senator enendez that if he takes that route he USA will end all financial assistance to Ukraine and as forced to obey USA instructions.   

Since Tump wa fighing for his political ife absed on the Russian oax and he wanted to find out about the corruption involving Biden, Pelosi  and Schiff involvong aid to Ukraine being icked bck to especially the hree people managed - Pelosi and Schiff deided o tryand impeach him through fake charges,    The onmgoig protction aracket of crupt USA poltcians in Uraie is shocking and needs to be dealt ith,     Simply put US politicians wants to keep the Ukraine War going so  as prtec people invovled in corruption in Ukraine.

BB

You claim you support Democracy 100%.   Fie I agree with you there. 

Then how come you support the abolishment of Democracy and banana republic dicatorship in Ukraine who has no Consitution guranteeing human rights and freedoms.        

How come you support Putin, the biggest villain since Hitler ?

Name onm case where I suppor Putin iro he Uraine War.   I sid the February 2022 inmvasion was wrong - but unlike te si idios I could understand why it happened and from the word go insisted on negotiations to prevent andend it.

The USA refused to even negotiate anythinmg - they wanted the war and  supported it all out.  Why did that happen?    There are limitless opportunities for corruption and fraud attached to wars and for US Politicians and bureaucrats that is an opporunity never to be missed.

 The Afganistan War lasted 20 years and the Iraq qwar is in its 21 years an  is ongoing - so fter Afghnistan a new war was essentail for he crooks and that played  a major role in decsionmaking in the USA isofa as Ukraine is concerned,

   .             ,  

Seems to have gone somewhat unreported, but the Ruble is really starting to tank hard. Been dropping in value against the dollar for the last month and a half.

https://www.exchange-rates.org/converter/usd-rub

"How come you support Putin, the biggest villain since Hitler ?"

Yeah, Putin is for sure worse than Stalin and also Pol Pot.

He didn't actually say worse.

Stav

I ask you a simple question.   Dio myou support Democracy as the drving force of freedom or don't you.   Please give us an anwer 

Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Slobodan Milosevic, Muammar Gadaffi, Donald Trump, Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler . . . they all have something in common.

They were all deeply flawed human beings unfit to lead anyone or anything who were supported into power by very stupid and gullible people.

Lol...Malles, wag maar...

Rooinek is a idiotic doos

Etav just fo your inomtion Tump has appoited General Kellog as his point man in Ukraine so negotations on negotiations on the Ukraine War wukk satart before e end of Jnnuary 2025   

Th e ollowing wa cotained in the announcmwnt on heneral Kellog:-

.""I am very pleased to nominate General Keith Kellogg to serve as Assistant to the President and Special Envoy for Ukraine and Russia," Trump posted on his Truth Social platform. "Keith has led a distinguished Military and Business career, including serving in highly sensitive National Security roles in my first Administration. He was with me right from the beginning! Together, we will secure PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH, and Make America, and the World, SAFE AGAIN!"

BB

Have you ever writtem  anytthing based on fact n site.   By the way dimness  the Russians removed all nuclear bombs from Ukraine to Russia in 1992 and Ukraine signed the Nuclear proloferation Treaty and adhered to it atleast until 2014,   Ukraina adhered strictly with that treaty and did not develop a nuclear bomb until that date,    

If they did subsequetly develop a nucear bomb one wnders where the enriched uranium needed to produce such bombs does not exist in Ukraine and if hey suddenly have nuclear bombs then it must have been done with the assisance of the USA or he USA may secretly provided such bombs to Ukraine - thus breaking nternational  treatie on that issue. 

I would not be surprized if Biden acted criminally on the latte issue-  - on a riminal always a criminal applies 100% to Biden.  

And tha supe-iiot poto you use eminds me of Mayorkas - te Xretary of homelad Scrity who impeented the nightmare exiting i the USA with he Open Boder polciy he impemted,    Mayorka may end up in jail because he betrayed the contry,   

With Musk, Zuckerberg seen how Harris misspent the $1,5 billion donated to get her  elected totally. The DNC is now tryng to raise $20 milion needed to pay outstanding acounts. Now Morgan said Harris has no talent and to run in fuure in any election. So it is down to Gates - an alleged Epstein crimiinal - and Soros are left as the only major sponsors,    .