Afghanistan was +20 years and ended worse off. That is why is unlikely that Putin can't win in the long run. You can't hold a country that opposes your regime. Negotiations will always be in his favour because will be de facto accepted. But Ukraine will be destroyed in the process so Ukraine is the one that needs to decide
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Every single Western leader with an IQ greater than room temperature now says that this war will end at the negotiation table. Last week the CIA director William Burns visited Kiev for his 10th meeting with Zelenskiy. Yesterday, back in Washington, he gave over 2 hours of testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Here is what he said regarding the push to get the $61 billion to Ukraine (my own emphasis and underlining to illustrate the point):
"With additional funding, Ukraine should be able to regain the offensive initiative by the end of this year or early 2025. Such a shift would put Ukraine in a stronger position to negotiate with President Putin of Russia"
You see the shift in language? It's not just the amorphous "negotiation table" anymore (at which Zelenskiy has signed a law making it illegal to sit down with Putin), it specifies "President Putin of Russia". This is not accidental, this was from his scripted opening statement to the Committee. These guys are very careful with the language they use. For all you folk saying "Ukraine will never negotiate with Putin!", the CIA director is saying they will have to, and he's saying it days after meeting with Zelenskiy (a meeting incidentally that has now led to reports in Ukrainian media that Kuleba is about to be fired as foreign minister). Putin's going nowhere. 2 years ago the pipe dream was to collapse the Russian economy, reclaim all of Ukraine's territory, and cause the downfall of Putin's regime. In other words, the military defeat of Russia. Now the new shambolic masterplan is to just about keep Ukraine in the game until next year, when yet another 'counter-offensive' will attempt to "strengthen Ukraine's position at the negotiation table" (nobody during the hearing yesterday pressed Burns on whether that wasn't meant to be the point of the last 'counter-offensive' that resulted in tens of thousands more dead Ukrainians).
So you can dismiss the "peace talks camp" all you like, but you'd be dismissing everyone from Biden to Blinken to (as of yesterday) Stoltenberg (his new definition of 'Ukrainian victory' is some vague horseshit about "retaining their sovereignty").
I just watched General Pat Ryder's Pentagon press briefing from today. He was pressed on his use of the term "Ukraine must win this fight" (the question put to him was: "Do you mean win this war?"). He of course evaded the question, as they all now do. But the shift in language from "win the war" to "win this fight" is in anticipation of Ukraine eventually giving up the regions Putin has annexed. I guess Kiev and Lviv will retain some form of "sovereignty" - if "sovereignty" means "saddled with unpayable debt for generations" - and that's what the West will call a "victory" for Ukraine. Only the delusional lunatics among Zelenskiy's sprawling network of "advisers", plus irrelevant foreign ministers like the Lithuanian and Polish guys, still talk about "Ukrainian victory". Anyone of any importance knows how this is all going to end. At this stage in the war the only people who are still fooled about Ukraine's situation are those who want to be fooled (or else they're shameless senators like Richard Blumenthal and Lindsey Graham, whose primary interest now is getting their donors at Raytheon and Lockheed Martin one last big 61 billion dollar taxpayer-funded payday). I only wonder if the White House regrets hauling Mark Milley in for some political re-education back in December of 2022 when he said that then would be the best time for Ukraine to negotiate.
It's yet another example of strategic incoherence from the West. "Negotiations are futile because Putin can't be trusted...BUT, this war will inevitably end at the negotiating table with Putin representing the Russian side". If it's accepted that this war will end in negotiations with Putin then my question for Western leaders is: what exactly are you waiting for? For another 40,000 Ukrainian conscripts to die 'weakening' the Russian army for you a bit more, only to then have them agree to a peace arrangement they could have got now? For the military industrial complex to get a couple hundred more billion from the taxpayers? As I keep on asking: what on earth is the goal here? What is the strategy? Answer (per multiple Western diplomats) - there literally isn't one. They're making it up as they go along, 'led' by a total imbecile in Jake Sullivan. So when William Burns says repeatedly yesterday: "Our allies around the world are watching what we do in Ukraine", I think to myself "Yeah, I hope they are. I hope they see what a total lack of a coherent game plan you have for Ukraine, because you're up next, Taiwan".
This is certainly true about the multipolar world, but their support goes deeper than that. To take India as an example, back in 2022 the Indian foreign minister Jaishankar was on a stage fielding accusatory questions from Western media about why India continued to do business with Russia. On stage with him was Anthony Blinken who said he was there "to tell India that Russia is not a reliable partner" (the subsequent 2 years have lanced most of the condescension from Blinken). With his customary beautifully-controlled sarcasm, Jaishankar suggested that India itself would decide who has been a reliable partner for his country thoughout history, given that it was America that - for all its talk of cherishing "democracies" like India - has chosen instead to arm to the teeth a military diсtatorship on their doorstep.
This is why it was obvious to anyone with a rudimentary grasp of history that the sanctions would not work as Yellen, Biden, Blinken and that cretin Sonnenfeld said they would. The majority of the world thinks the West losing this war in Ukraine will be a good thing, and history points to why.
Last edited:
Well no one cares less about the people he's supposed to rule than Putin. In terms of comparable wars, I really think you do have to go back to WW2 and Germanies expansions into Czech republic / Poland, except it didn't go as planned so he's just hanging in there or something.
Media coverage, remarkedly, is also pretty similar to those times as far as internal Russia goes.
Last edited:
US foreign policy is full of terrible mistakes alienated many countries around the world.
The US always claimed to export freedom and democracy as well as to help these countries to develop but in the end they foremost were following their own interests.
Still I firmly believe out of 3 the geopolitical powerhouses, the US are by far the lesser evil.
Maybe the Indian foreign minister should have some talks with German politicians. Until March 2022 they were saying exactly the same about Russia. I'm sure today they would tell him a complete different story though.
Don't spook him, or he'll make 25th last post in this thread.
A month or two before the Ukrainian counter-attack that reclaimed lots of land in 2022, he was sitting on here and with precisely the same tone and sense of superiority mocked people for thinking that the counter-attack would ever happen or could ever work.
Oh, I know. He claimed a lot of things in his first posts that he doesn't really like to come back to.
He's much more into making predictions than verifying them and much more into decrying the state of the discourse in The West™ than he is into engaging anyone's actual arguments or adhering to his own alleged standards. When Glaston was banned I naively expected that he was going to mellow out, but no, it just meant that he needed to start finding Glaston everywhere he looks.
Phone call between Macron and Putin on 20th of February 2022. Nothing groundbreaking, but interesting to hear a conversation between 2 world leaders talking nontheless.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
It also underscores how incredibly deceptive and manipulative Putin is, coming across as an honest broker to western leaders, all the while being fully committed to invading irrespective of any negotiations.
You see one post you've seen all of them.
He just wanted to play hockey and exercise.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Putin was already sounding deluded in that video. The French government people listening to the conversation had the same "WTF?" reaction that any of us had when we first heard any of Putin's talking points 2 years ago and ever since.
A genius, huh, Donald?
News in Denmark now he is sending troops to Finland border since its now Nato territory
Remember everyone, this is all because NATO exists. Imperialism? What is that? 
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I'm surprised they released this clip. Yes, the content of the phone call isn't particularly groundbreaking but still.
Oh, absolutely, because Western leaders are the epitome of 'honest brokers,' aren't they? They spun a web of lies to drag us into the Iraq war. Add to that a 20-year military holiday in Afghanistan, some sneaky business in Syria, and a bit of meddling in Libya. The results? A whole lot of death, chaos, and enough displaced people to spark a worldwide refugee crisis. If anyone's been through all that and still takes the foreign policy bigwigs at their word, they've definitely missed a memo or two!
What the war in Ukraine has really laid bare is how much we've let our production capabilities and defense industrial base erode. It's like we've been caught with our pants down. At the war's start, we were churning out 15,000 artillery shells a month. Two years down the line? We've only managed to nudge that number up to 29,000. Meanwhile, the Russians are outproducing us by 10 times. It's a bit of a joke, honestly. Making a shell costs us a whopping $5,000 to $6,000 each, but the Russians can do it for less than $400.
Remember when all the big news outlets were yelling about how Russia was just a bunch of corrupt officials running a shell of a military? Turns out, we're the ones burning money 10 times faster than they are. Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
And then there's all this talk about sending more aid to Ukraine to 'weaken Russia.' But from where I'm standing, it looks like every move we've made has only beefed up the Red Army. They're cranking out military gear like nobody's business, becoming tougher against sanctions, and looking more ready to throw down than they were two years ago. Biden's big talk at the start? It's all boomeranged. He was all about diminishing Russian strength and preventing their war-waging capabilities. On the contrary, Russia now boasts a larger, more weaponized, and battle-hardened military, especially adept at countering Western armaments.
Economically, too, Biden's promise to crush Russia with sanctions has turned into a bit of a punchline. Their economy's outpacing the G7, while our friends in Europe are taking the hit. Talk about a plan backfiring.
And don't get me started on the humanitarian side. Biden said we'd ease the Ukrainians' suffering. Instead, we've dug them into a deeper hole with this proxy war and our 'fight to the last Ukrainian' stance (to quote Lindsay and Mitch). It's led to a disaster: over 10 million people, mostly women and kids, have fled the country. Half a million casualties. And with a chunk of the population being non-working pensioners, we're staring at the demographic collapse of Ukraine.
So, when you take a step back and look at it all, it's been a disaster. Yet, you can bet the media will keep on weaving stories about how more aid, some shiny new weapons, or a fresh counteroffensive is going to turn things around. Always another glittering story to keep us hooked.
This ain't new content - this was released a few years ago, perhaps a few months after the Russian invasion.
Alright, I don't remember that. I only remember a phone call with Zelensky on day 1 of the invasion.
Love your post, this is the best part. So its the West fault for all this not Russia. If West has just let Russia do their thing it would be over in weeks and there would be peace? Or better yet with sending arms the West is prolonging the war, the same war Russians actually want to end I guess.
Its not Russia's fault millions of people are fleeing and there are half a million casulties its the west who dragged blameless Russia into war who just wanted peace and normal life. Poor, old Russia.
I guess if Trump becomes president it all comes true, I hope he'll end all this suffering with a peace deal in which Ukraine will let go of its territory. But ups Putin doesnt really want to talk peace now his army has the initiative. He supposedly wanted that only when things werent so rosy, but most probably it was just a propaganda to portray the West as the real agressor.
It seems to me it makes you excited while you write about the mighty Red Army.
Last edited:
Not really surprising. Russia turned their economy into a war economy.
Same reason again. A war economy is more or less self-sufficient. The demand for new weapons, ammunition and equipments is unlimited. Russia prints ruble and parts of their industry are flourishing. Necessary foreign currencies they get through the exports of gas, oil and other resources, which the Western sanctions couldn't hurt much as India and China stent following.
I firmly believe Putin's real trouble will start, when he had to reverse the switch from war economy to a normal economy which is much harder to do.
At this point he's just wumming.
This is what all the pro-Russia comments always come down to, in the end. From @DT12 to @Suedesi, from Trump to Orbán, it's the same: they're telling everyone to give up on Ukraine and let Russia win. That's all there is to it. Every argument about how wonderful Russia's economy is, all the handwringing about the West and the feigned concern about Ukrainian casualties, each condescending remark amounts to the same thing: Russia should be allowed to win and do as they see fit with Ukraine.
Once Putin turns to the Baltic states, these people will be back with the exact same message.
They also love responding to people saying "you know, I don't think Vladimir Putin can be trusted" with a five paragraph essay that begins "OH SO YOU'RE SAYING THE IRAQ INVASION WAS A GREAT IDEA AND YOU LOVE THE CIA????"
Oh oh but the West can be trusted right, they've proven to be honest brokers, right!?
Oh of course, NATO pushed Russia into attacking Baltic states by accepthing them into the fold. Their posts sound they're from one person who has 2 accounts.
I remember talking to a friend last year, he's pro Russian as you get, he was saying something like Trump didnt start any wars in the sense it was Biden who actually started the war in Ukraine.
We're all Dick Cheney on this blessed day.
Suedesi would have definitely given poland to hitler in the 30s.
"Faced with the alternative of Ukrainian defeat and running these literally existential risks, it is essential — as we have argued in a recent paper for the Quincy Institute — that pressure for continued aid to Ukraine, and statements like those of Macron, be accompanied by a serious and credible push for a compromise peace with Russia now, while we still have leverage to bring to talks.
Complete victory for Ukraine is now an obvious impossibility. Any end to the fighting will therefore end in some form of compromise, and the longer we wait, the worse the terms of that compromise will be for Ukraine"
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/macron-nato-ukraine/
The authors of that article are the former CIA director of Russia analysis and the director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute and professor of War Studies at King's College London (not quite Neville Chamberlain scholar MarvelFan2012's Twitter feed but still no geopolitical slouches). The gist of their argument is that for more than 2 years now Western leaders have polished their macho images at home by visiting and goading Zelenskiy to seek "total victory" with their 'help' (Macron in particular is looking to swoop in as a late-game tough guy in order to boost his piss-poor polling numbers ahead of June's European elections; this despite having done the least of any major leader for the last 26 months), with the result that Ukraine has now become a Nato mercenary for Western generals wanting to boost their budgets. They believe peace talks are needed now while Ukraine still has a modicum of leverage to bring to them.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Whataboutism at its finest.
Funny thing is, 20 years ago the only political leader that was already in power (and therefore personally accountable) was Putin.
Suedesi and DT12 really sound like those 50-Cent Army (Wumao) trolls who have pushed Chinese propaganda over the last decade. Go figure if they are actually paid 50 cents per hour to write their pro-Kremlin bullshit.
Did you see those RC planes attacking Russian refineries? Perhaps worth taking a look at for anybody taking Russian claims concerning production and capabilities seriously.
Also, I believe that is literally a Kremlin talking point that is rapidly deployed whenever someone criticizes Putin.
Russia jammed GPS of Defence Secretary’s aircraft on trip to Poland
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/14/grant-shapps-gps-jammed-aircraft-trip-poland-troops/
Coming back to this, this is the clip of Macron/Zelensky having a phone call.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
- As far as I can tell, on the issue of artillery shells, it should be noted that Western militaries aren't as focused on artillery as Ukraine and Russia. So this was always gonna be a headache problem in terms of artillery shell production. From my reading, European nations aren't committing yet to mass production. It's slowly scaling up (Rheinmetall for example) but defense companies are still saying they need assurances on long-term contracts.
- Russia is toughening itself against sanctions indeed and this has been noted by many folks. But there's a flipside to the coin: the West hasn't reached its limits yet. It's not completely all in on sanctions for whatever reasons (domestic agenda etc).
- This "fight to the last Ukrainian" stuff is really cringe whoever says it. Ukrainians were going to fight anyway, they're the ones under attack and they've chosen to resist. And they aren't unique in this, human history is full of people fighting back against aggression. Without mass Western military aid, they likely would have still fought although resorting more to guerrilla warfare. You're framing it as if we are forcing Ukraine to fight.
- A disaster would have been leaving Ukraine to its demise. Instead, they have used Western intelligence + weapons to defend themselves and push the Russians back.
- Don't give the Russians too much credit. They had to do deals with Iran and North Korea for drones, missiles, artillery shells and so on.
That doesn't mean all is positive of course.
- Western politicians are still often spouting empty rhetoric or posturing for domestic elections.
- Aid had been drying up since the 2023 summer counter-offensive.
- Ukraine itself has to make tough decisions on mobilization and how to continue the fight.
- Western governments seemingly don't feel the urgency to crack down harder on sanctions evasion or impose harsher sanctions.
Something has certainly happened, of course we never really know what's really going on in the world of intelligence.
Le Pen on board too though... What?
Finally we have a proper coalition in Europe (France/UK/Poland/Czech/ Romania/Nordics/Baltics).