Why not negotiate a lasting deal now to prevent further deaths in Ukraine and further escalation that has the potential for a nuclear exchange

[oneworld2]

Ah so this is all the US’s fault. At least some things never change.

I'm just giving you the facts on the European aversity to Ukrainian/Georgian membership of NATO and how the US forced it into the statement summerizing the 2008 NATO meetings in Budapest

As the global hegemon it's not that hard to believe but if you want to delude yourself that what I said is somehow untrue that's your choice

 

[btthegreat]

Not at all. The great powers are seldom bothered by such things be they Russia, China, The USA that's the real world, I don't like it but that's the way it is

Did you support the illegal US attack on the sovereign nation of Iraq?

The US attack on the Cuban sovereign decision to site Russian missiles on its soil?

The countless US led coups to overthrow elected governments?

It is obvious that the Ukraine has been and continues to be used by the West, in the same way others have been used by them in the past. That's the Great Game and it 's operators don't give a shit about national sovereignty until it becomes a useful ruse in a particular situation, like it has with Ukraine

No I did not support the American attack on Iraq, or Panama or Grenada. What is obvious to me, is that the parties who should determine Ukraine's membership in NATO, are Ukraine and NATO, not Putin or Biden. Glad you mentioned Cuba If we can put up with a communist Cuba living under the protective umbrella of the USSR, for 30 years, Russia can put up with Ukraine, or Finland, or Moldavia, deciding to join NATO under our protective umbrella. The NATO alliance calls for mutual DEFENSE, and it obliges no nation to participate in aggression. Ukraine has already handed over it nuclear arsenal under clear assurances that it would gain guarantees of security and its present borders which is exactly what we insisted happen in Cuba with the removal of those rockets aimed directly at us. Now you want everyone to abandon those commitments and let Putin dictate borders, and determine Ukraine's foreign policy.

Why in hell would any nation ever negotiate in good faith and give up its nuclear weaponry or nuclear ambitions again?

 

[Antiwar]

Nevertheless I lament the situation of Ukraine, but it has the right to self-determination even if that means going down in a blaze of glory.

Any theoretical Western summons to roll onto its back now will not be met with any enthusiasm anyway. If there was dislike for Russia (both for the Kremlin in particular and, in many cases for the country in general) that has by all accounts by now developed into actual hatred.

Putin may succeed in taking it militarily but he'll never be able to govern it.

What are your takes on what we're going to do if this escalates further, which drastically risks two very possible existential threats: the collapse of Earth's ecosystems and nuclear war?

 

[craig]

What are your takes on what we're going to do if this escalates further, which drastically risks two very possible existential threats: the collapse of Earth's ecosystems and nuclear war?

You do what you have to. Wake up!

 

[Chagos]

Well Russia is Broke. They can't pay their debt. The Ruble is worth less than a Penny. Putin can't afford this war. Within a week Russia will be on her knees. Then will be the time to negotiate with putin.

She ain't THAT broke, what with the Kremlin having accumulated an abundant amount of funds in its coffers to fall back on.

But that's a one-timer which will eventually run out while meanwhile no new or only little income is generated..

 

[Chagos]

What are your takes on what we're going to do if this escalates further, which drastically risks two very possible existential threats: the collapse of Earth's ecosystems and nuclear war?

If the wannabe csar goes for the Baltics there'll be an unavoidable automatism, if he goes for Moldavia I suspect we won't be doing much more than we're doing now.

Let's face it, nobody in the West, government or people, is going to go into direct military confrontation with Russia over Ukraine. Nor over any other of its past satellites if they're not in NATO.

As to the ecology, that is the least of our worries right now. Always has been the minute more pressing issues arose,

Of course one can argue what is more pressing than that but you know history, I assume.

 

[Antiwar]

If the wannabe csar goes for the Baltics there'll be an unavoidable automatism, if he goes for Moldavia I suspect we won't be doing much more than we're doing now.

Let's face it, nobody in the West, government or people, is going to go into direct military confrontation with Russia over Ukraine. Nor over any other of its past satellites if they're not in NATO.

As to the ecology, that is the least of our worries right now. Always has been the minute more pressing issues arose,

Of course one can argue what is more pressing than that but you know history, I assume.

Wow, that's a doozy of a statement. Do you think nuclear war will help with the global warming part of climate change?

 

[Juin]

Whatever happens wars always end with dialogue, If there is a nuclear war well we can scratch that anyway but the point remains if that isn't the case.

I see so many people, so whipped up by the western MSM, that they can't allow for two sides of a story to be heard. They are pushing for extending the war in what is truly a wreckless approach given the dangers I have just outlined.

Ukraine can be neutral, it's an option that is not that unreasonable. It doesn't have to be a NATO member and the likelihood it was never really on the cards anyhow. It likewise, would prevent any Ukrainian membership of the Russian defence grouping

The conflict in the Donbas can be deescalated and elections held, free from influence of Kiev and Moscow and the wishes of the people there gauged to see what they want , inline with international law. The same with Crimea.

There is still time to end this in a much better way than risk a full scale war between Russia and NATO so why isn't it being discussed here?

Actually I dont believe we would be in this present quandary if Nato did not, post implosion of Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, adopt expansionism as a policy. In the hind sight, I believe the old Nato of pre 1991 was a much more solid stable organisation. It was well defined, and both sides- Nato and Warsaw Pact- understood very well that they were not to encroach on each other's domains, even on invitation.

The Nato of Jens Stoltenberg is a is dangerous because it is ill defined. It does not have any limits. Yesterday its frontiers was with the former W Germany. Then it was at Poland. Then in the Baltics. Tomorrow it wants to be in Ukraine. And Georgia. How is such a military alliance that not supposed to be perceived as a threat by those in the path of its expansion?

 

[Lutherf]

I agree but the underlying reasons that caused it also need to be resolved




I agree but that's not how it works in the real world



You don't know that for sure. There could be a commitment from both sides to demilitarize and have UN peacekeepers and neutral officials oversee any elections



Most of this has already been agreed in the Minsk2 agreement mentioned above. It wasn't " absurd " or " Naive" when the UNSC voted for it, or the OSCE, so is it just those things when someone else you disagree with mentions it?

It was damned sure made "naive" when Russia decided to go into Ukraine unprovoked.

 

[Chagos]

Wow, that's a doozy of a statement. Do you think nuclear war will help with the global warming part of climate change?

Yeah, it'll make things a lot hotter.

Do I have to add a sarcasm icon or am I clear without that?

 

[rickc]

She ain't THAT broke, what with the Kremlin having accumulated an abundant amount of funds in its coffers to fall back on.

But that's a one-timer which will eventually run out while meanwhile no new or only little income is generated..

Russia’s central bank had a plan in place to prop up the ruble in case of emergency — a rainy day fund worth more than $600 billion, comprising assets parked in banks and institutions all over the world.

On Monday, the U.S. Treasury announced it’s freezing central bank assets held in the U.S. Other major U.S. allies have done the same. It will be difficult, even impossible, for the Russian central bank to use those reserves to rescue the currency.

 

[Schrott]

Nevertheless I lament the situation of Ukraine, but it has the right to self-determination even if that means going down in a blaze of glory.

Any theoretical Western summons to roll onto its back now will not be met with any enthusiasm anyway. If there was dislike for Russia (both for the Kremlin in particular and, in many cases for the country in general) that has by all accounts by now developed into actual hatred.

Putin may succeed in taking it militarily but he'll never be able to govern it.

Yes the situation for the people in the Ukraine is as horrible as it can get. Its a unimageable disaster. It is just horrible. But if they give in, they will live for a long time in misery, with a prolonged dirty, bloody resistant war.
They know that.
We in the West have to give them all the tools they can use, without NATO involvement, to bleed and kill the Russian Army till it says no more and so that they will not come back.
That will need a lot of killing, sadly and I mean a lot.
This real war, not a police action, with a few thousand casualties. Real old fashioned land war.
Its sad but it needs to be done.
We should remember in a way they die for us to, for Moldovia and Georgia, too.

 

[Mach]

Russia has dubbed its invasion of Ukraine a "special military operation" and has criminalized sharing information about the war domestically. Those who spread information about the war have been threatened with arrest and imprisonment.

Sounds like the wrong side doesn't it.

No you missed out a large percentage of the worlds population that don't appear to be against Russia and see their concerns as legitimate

You're wrong again (still), it's Putin's choice to invade Ukraine, not "a large portion of the worlds population".
141 votes in the UN to condemned it.
Only 5 against the condemnation. Belarus corrupted by Russia, Syria corrupted by Russia, Eritrea, Russia, and ****ing North Korea.

You're pushing for the minority side of evil in this case. Sorry, it is that black and white.

This started with a US inspired coup that overthrew the elected government of Ukraine in 2014.

They threw out the pro-Russian, corrupt Victor Y., chased his ass back to Russia. The wanted to embrace Europe and not Russia...sorry.
Remember it was Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort that helped get Victory Y elected....the U.S. through Paul Manafort, helped elect Victory Y....and they played dirty.

In March last year Zelensky made clear he intended to attack and take back Crimea and the Donbas. That is a defacto declaration of war with Russia.

Russia invaded and took those regions, they started the war. Stop lying. And now Russia has chosen a full-scale invasion and tells its people bullshit reasons.

 

[Juin]

No I did not support the American attack on Iraq, or Panama or Grenada. What is obvious to me, is that the parties who should determine Ukraine's membership in NATO, are Ukraine and NATO, not Putin or Biden.

No. I believe you are incorrect in that regard. A military alliance is a concern to whoever is within striking distance of that alliance. It has been that way throughout history. If A ,a neighbouring country to B, enters a military alliance with another C, then it is B's business. How can it not be B's business? A inviting C, an enemy of B, into a military alliance brings C's military within striking distance of B

Glad you mentioned Cuba If we can put up with a communist Cuba living under the protective umbrella of the USSR, for 30 years, Russia can put up with Ukraine, or Finland, or Moldavia, deciding to join NATO under our protective umbrella.

What if that argument is not persuasive to Russia?

The NATO alliance calls for mutual DEFENSE, and it obliges no nation to participate in aggression.

I can name at least two Nato members notorious for aggression.

Ukraine has already handed over it nuclear arsenal under clear assurances that it would gain guarantees of security and its present borders which is exactly what we insisted happen in Cuba with the removal of those rockets aimed directly at us.

It was the nuclear arsenal of the Soviet Union. The nukes were never the property of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Belarus also had to give up Soviet nukes. Kazakhstan as well. They all were returned to Russia the successor state of the Soviet Union.

 

[Chagos]

Russia’s central bank had a plan in place to prop up the ruble in case of emergency — a rainy day fund worth more than $600 billion, comprising assets parked in banks and institutions all over the world.

On Monday, the U.S. Treasury announced it’s freezing central bank assets held in the U.S. Other major U.S. allies have done the same. It will be difficult, even impossible, for the Russian central bank to use those reserves to rescue the currency.

The bolded (by me) points to the fact that not everything is/was held outside of Russia.

We'll have to see how long Russia can live off the reserves it still holds access to, but it won't be collapsing tomorrow.

 

[Schrott]

Wow, that's a doozy of a statement. Do you think nuclear war will help with the global warming part of climate change?

It will help, Nuclear Winter, instant climate change reversal.

 

[Schrott]

The bolded (by me) points to the fact that not everything is/was held outside of Russia.

We'll have to see how long Russia can live off the reserves it still holds access to, but it won't be collapsing tomorrow.

2/3 of its reserves are invested abroad and got seized.

 

[Chagos]

2/3 of its reserves are invested abroad and got seized.

Yeah, we'll have to see how long the remaining third will last.

 

[Schrott]

Yeah, we'll have to see how long the remaining third will last.

2500 tons of Gold. Which they only can sell to China.
Good luck with that.

 

[rickc]

Yeah, we'll have to see how long the remaining third will last.

Russia's stock market remains shut down. The ruble is worth less than a penny. And Western businesses are fleeing. JPMorgan warns a Russian default could be next.

"Sanctions imposed on Russia have significantly increased the likelihood of a Russia government hard currency bond default," JPMorgan emerging markets strategists wrote in a note to clients on Wednesday.

 

[Chagos]

What is conveniently and prevaricatingly suppressed in all these claims in here of "the West" constituting a threat to Russia, is the lack of address of who actually has been going to war these last decades in the region.

It wasn't any NATO country that invaded Russia, it was Russia invading third parties long before it invaded Ukraine.

 

[Antiwar]

Yeah, it'll make things a lot hotter.

Do I have to add a sarcasm icon or am I clear without that?

You've already discredited yourself enough.

 

[Antiwar]

It will help, Nuclear Winter, instant climate change reversal.

You see the silver lining in mushroom clouds.

Those pesky Russians would be gone, also.

 

[Chagos]

You've already discredited yourself enough.

I know but I'm working on becoming much worse.

 

[WillyPete]

Ukraine can be neutral, it's an option that is not that unreasonable. It doesn't have to be a NATO member and the likelihood it was never really on the cards anyhow. It likewise, would prevent any Ukrainian membership of the Russian defence grouping

If Ukraine wanted to be neutral, they could go that direction without being invaded.

We are to reward this behavior by giving Putin everything he wants?

The conflict in the Donbas can be deescalated and elections held, free from influence of Kiev and Moscow and the wishes of the people there gauged to see what they want , inline with international law. The same with Crimea.

There is still time to end this in a much better way than risk a full scale war between Russia and NATO so why isn't it being discussed here?

Putin can deescalate and gain a LOT of credibility by pulling his troops out immediately.

If he were to do so, I would support further negotiation.