Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)

[gehringer_2]

36 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Why would he trade women and children for disgraced Russian soldiers (his line of thinking I believe)? Which will be a destabilizing issue in Ukraine (that is what Putin's thinking will also be IMO so...) not better odds than 50/50.

Not to mention that repatriated solders could be a destabilizing force in Russia. Putin's hero - Stalin, knew that all too well, which is why he threw so many returning solders like Solzhenitsyn who had seen too much in Europe into the Gulag.

Edited September 10, 2022 by gehringer_2

[romad1]

 

[mtutiger]

John Mearsheimer's takes early on continue to age like a glass of milk in the hot Texas sun

[romad1]

20 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

John Mearsheimer's takes early on continue to age like a glass of milk in the hot Texas sun

oh man...Vladimir Putin defender of Western Christendom and the muscular manly values has an army of bed shitters led by sycophantic tree stump collectors.

[romad1]

 

[romad1]

 

[gehringer_2]

23 hours ago, romad1 said:

the worst is yet to come from Putin

yes. People need to be clear eyed. No one can let down their guard or relax. You can be sure Putin has at least one more throw to make. 

[romad1]

i endorse much of this thread 

[romad1]

not real but fun

 

[1984Echoes]

A lot of that was obvious but where I would disagree is that:

China will in no way suffer from Russia's defeat. They will simply shift focus.

They will shift current strategy to an all out build out of pipelines & other to facilitate Russian oil and gas flowing into China. But it will be under China's contractual terms. And Russian oil and gas has been slow to develop in China, previously, because the Chinese drive hard bargains. Very hard. Hard for Russia to stomach. And therefore, limited buildout to-date.

But now that Putin/ Russia are between a rock and a hard place, with the EU repudiating their energy supplies... Xi will have them over a barrel. I believe they are currently getting 30-40% discounts on the Russian oil & gas they are purchasing, because of the existing sanctions. China will push for long-term contracts with Russian supplies at a severe discount. Effectively, a price cap.

China has already been copying their advanced military technologies onto their own platforms, so they no longer need Russia as a supplier.

Having Russia as a military partner would have been advantageous... but they will have to live with a severely diminished Russia as an economic/ military entity. I won't state the same for political ideology as I think there may be changes in the Russian polity coming soon. But since they have lost their ranking as a military superpower (aside from a nuclear arsenal..); it doesn't really matter anyways.

China will force Russia into a commodities supplier relationship, which I think was destiny anyways for Russia under the current regime. This is just happening a whole lot swifter than anyone could have imagined. Because of Putin's Folly.

Lastly, on Taiwan... It's probably short-term painful for China... but they have a long game... so I think they will start to tread more carefully and again, will just look to adapt/ shift their techniques to deal with the new reality. They've been throwing a lot of temper tantrums recently... but they'll figure out what changes they need to implement to continue on their attempted path towards becoming the dominant #1 superpower. Which I don't think was ever realistically achievable (more like parity), even if their economy will soon be larger than the US Economy.

Overall, probably some disappointment on Xi's side but... he'll adapt quickly IMO.

[ewsieg]

Some great news from the last few days which seems to be confirmed now.   I haven't been around much lately.  Has anyone pointed out that it looks like Russia and Ukraine were close to an agreement that would have stopped the war in April but Boris Johnson helped nix it (i'm sure with our support).  

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/russian-federation/world-putin-wants-fiona-hill-angela-stent?check_logged_in=1&utm_medium=promo_email&utm_source=lo_flows&utm_campaign=registered_user_welcome&utm_term=email_1&utm_content=20220910

Take a look at the current map below and note that the deal would have given Ukraine everything it controlled prior to Feb 24.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-kyiv-world-news-kharkiv-e06b2aa723e826ed4105b5f32827f577

If it comes out Zelensky was leaning towards taking the deal and didn't because of us, heads should roll.

[gehringer_2]

20 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

If it comes out Zelensky was leaning towards taking the deal and didn't because of us, heads should roll.

Sure. Just like the 'settlement' on the Sudetenland brought peace to Europe.

False retcon assumptions. No matter what Putin negotiated he'd have gone to war for more - he just would have started in a stronger position. Unfortunately, the only way Putin's territorial ambitions in Ukraine were going to be ended was going to be on a battlefield. He's been committed to that route since at least 2014. 

In fact no-one today can look at the criminal outrages perpetrated as policy by Putin's armies and have even a shred of belief that Putin's Russia could have been a reliable negotiating partner.

Edited September 10, 2022 by gehringer_2

[1984Echoes]

13 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

... 

If it comes out ...

heads should roll.

The only heads rolling will be Russian.

[romad1]

37 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Some great news from the last few days which seems to be confirmed now.   I haven't been around much lately.  Has anyone pointed out that it looks like Russia and Ukraine were close to an agreement that would have stopped the war in April but Boris Johnson helped nix it (i'm sure with our support).  

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/russian-federation/world-putin-wants-fiona-hill-angela-stent?check_logged_in=1&utm_medium=promo_email&utm_source=lo_flows&utm_campaign=registered_user_welcome&utm_term=email_1&utm_content=20220910

Take a look at the current map below and note that the deal would have given Ukraine everything it controlled prior to Feb 24.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-kyiv-world-news-kharkiv-e06b2aa723e826ed4105b5f32827f577

If it comes out Zelensky was leaning towards taking the deal and didn't because of us, heads should roll.

Really?

[romad1]

1 hour ago, 1984Echoes said:

A lot of that was obvious but where I would disagree is that:

China will in no way suffer from Russia's defeat. They will simply shift focus.

They will shift current strategy to an all out build out of pipelines & other to facilitate Russian oil and gas flowing into China. But it will be under China's contractual terms. And Russian oil and gas has been slow to develop in China, previously, because the Chinese drive hard bargains. Very hard. Hard for Russia to stomach. And therefore, limited buildout to-date.

But now that Putin/ Russia are between a rock and a hard place, with the EU repudiating their energy supplies... Xi will have them over a barrel. I believe they are currently getting 30-40% discounts on the Russian oil & gas they are purchasing, because of the existing sanctions. China will push for long-term contracts with Russian supplies at a severe discount. Effectively, a price cap.

China has already been copying their advanced military technologies onto their own platforms, so they no longer need Russia as a supplier.

Having Russia as a military partner would have been advantageous... but they will have to live with a severely diminished Russia as an economic/ military entity. I won't state the same for political ideology as I think there may be changes in the Russian polity coming soon. But since they have lost their ranking as a military superpower (aside from a nuclear arsenal..); it doesn't really matter anyways.

China will force Russia into a commodities supplier relationship, which I think was destiny anyways for Russia under the current regime. This is just happening a whole lot swifter than anyone could have imagined. Because of Putin's Folly.

Lastly, on Taiwan... It's probably short-term painful for China... but they have a long game... so I think they will start to tread more carefully and again, will just look to adapt/ shift their techniques to deal with the new reality. They've been throwing a lot of temper tantrums recently... but they'll figure out what changes they need to implement to continue on their attempted path towards becoming the dominant #1 superpower. Which I don't think was ever realistically achievable (more like parity), even if their economy will soon be larger than the US Economy.

Overall, probably some disappointment on Xi's side but... he'll adapt quickly IMO.

China lost a lot with the expansion of NATO.  A lot LOT of moving pieces there. 

[mtutiger]

3 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

Sure. Just like the 'settlement' on the Sudetenland brought peace to Europe.

False retcon assumptions. No matter what Putin negotiated he'd have gone to war for more - he just would have started in a stronger position. Unfortunately, the only way Putin's territorial ambitions in Ukraine were going to be ended was going to be on a battlefield. He's been committed to that route since at least 2014. 

In fact no-one today can look at the criminal outrages perpetrated as policy by Putin's armies and have even a shred of belief that Putin's Russia could have been a reliable negotiating partner.

Also not clear why accepting pre-Feb 24 borders would be seen as a win among the Ukrainian people, particularly after Putin invaded.

A more serious "proposal" would be pre-2014 borders, with reparations.

[ewsieg]

4 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

Sure. Just like the 'settlement' on the Sudetenland brought peace to Europe.

False retcon assumptions. No matter what Putin negotiated he'd have gone to war for more - he just would have started in a stronger position. Unfortunately, the only way Putin's territorial ambitions in Ukraine were going to be ended was going to be on a battlefield. He's been committed to that route since at least 2014. 

In fact no-one today can look at the criminal outrages perpetrated as policy by Putin's armies and have even a shred of belief that Putin's Russia could have been a reliable negotiating partner.

As I said, if Zelensky wanted to agree to it, and we stronghanded him, that's bullshit.  The biggest argument on this site is we should support Ukraine/Zelensky if they want war, conversely we should support him if he wants peace too.

In terms of 'owning' the Russians, this war has been a fabulous success that we can all cheer on from the comfort of our homes on the other side of the world.  If this war stopped in April, how many tens of thousands would have been saved from the Ukrainian military and citizens?  I've heard some estimates of up to 1 million Ukrainians that were forced into Russia, what are the chances they are ever coming back?  Imagine how much less this global inflation crisis may have been if this stopped that long ago.  We still haven't seen the real crunch on just how bad this war will be globally until we see how Europe gets through this Winter.  

Points on Putin and just how safe could Ukraine feel even if Russia did pull out are valid.  As mentioned, this might be better for us in terms of China as well.  From a US standpoint, this has been great.  Just surprised it's one of the few guys still on this site that supported us going into Iraq that is the one pointing out war is still a pretty horrible thing and comes with some great losses, even if you 'win'.

[romad1]

Forcing Ukraine to make peace with Russia would be the first thing that the Maga party would do if they were back in power. 

But, the Western alliance would not allow that to happen.

Edited September 11, 2022 by romad1

[1984Echoes]

Show the evidence that the US strong-armed Ukraine into not taking a deal.

Otherwise you are again full of crap.

This was in the news every day, loudly and clearly and with NO US Influence whatsoever, that:

1) Ukraine kept pushing for negotiations and an end to the war.

2) Russia kept jerking them around because they didn't WANT serious negotiations. Russia had no interest in real negotiations, they wanted to take as much of Ukraine as they thought they could get away with taking and they were confident they could do so. This came out from multiple sources and in multiple instances. There were NO serious negotiations because Russia has not been serious from the start, or at any point. Putin wants as much of Ukraine as he can take, and the rest of Ukraine weakened to a pauper state and disallowed from entering the EU, ever, or NATO. Never allowed to enter the EU? That is NOT a serious offer. or one that Ukraine would ever accept.

3) UKRAINE ended the negotiations after Russian atrocities came to light. This takes no influence from the US whatsoever.

 

Every single country and politician, from the U.K, to Poland, to Germany, to the U.S., EVERYONE has stated loudly and clearly that it is UKRAINE's DECISION on negotiations, and what they are willing to accept. If you have evidence to the contrary, then post it, and don't hide behind a paywall either. Show the evidence.

Otherwise, you are full of crap. Again.

[mtutiger]

9 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

Show the evidence that the US strong-armed Ukraine into not taking a deal.

Otherwise you are again full of crap.

This was in the news every day, loudly and clearly and with NO US Influence whatsoever, that:

1) Ukraine kept pushing for negotiations and an end to the war.

2) Russia kept jerking them around because they didn't WANT serious negotiations. Russia had no interest in real negotiations, they wanted to take as much of Ukraine as they thought they could get away with taking and they were confident they could do so. This came out from multiple sources and in multiple instances. There were NO serious negotiations because Russia has not been serious from the start, or at any point. Putin wants as much of Ukraine as he can take, and the rest of Ukraine weakened to a pauper state and disallowed from entering the EU, ever, or NATO. Never allowed to enter the EU? That is NOT a serious offer. or one that Ukraine would ever accept.

3) UKRAINE ended the negotiations after Russian atrocities came to light. This takes no influence from the US whatsoever.

 

Every single country and politician, from the U.K, to Poland, to Germany, to the U.S., EVERYONE has stated loudly and clearly that it is UKRAINE's DECISION on negotiations, and what they are willing to accept. If you have evidence to the contrary, then post it, and don't hide behind a paywall either. Show the evidence.

Otherwise, you are full of crap. Again.

Yep, that was what was known at the time and is consistent with what we know about how Russia "negotiates" more generally. They are not a good faith actor and shouldn't be treated like one. And Zelensky understands that I'm sure.

Edited September 11, 2022 by mtutiger

[mtutiger]

10 hours ago, ewsieg said:

In terms of 'owning' the Russians, this war has been a fabulous success that we can all cheer on from the comfort of our homes on the other side of the world.  If this war stopped in April, how many tens of thousands would have been saved from the Ukrainian military and citizens?  I've heard some estimates of up to 1 million Ukrainians that were forced into Russia, what are the chances they are ever coming back?  

Do you think the average Ukrainian feels the same way that you, sitting from the comfort of your home in a country not being invaded, feels about this war?

Or are they pissed off that their imperialist, wannabe Czar next door invaded them and won't let them live in peace?

I think we all know the answer, even for the more Russian-speaking populations it's Door 2.

[gehringer_2]

so before this started, I asked the question about whether the Ukrainians were going to be 'serious' about defending themselves or whether we would find, like say in Vietnam or Afghanistan, that we could pour in effort from this side to no ultimate good, because if that had been the case, then none of the death and destruction war would be justified. Cut a deal with Putin and be done with it. And since history proves that the US is quite capable of misunderstanding the true nature of the clients we have picked in the past, I absolutely had doubts about this enterprise.

But the truth has been that the Ukrainians answered the bell from day one. This is their war, not ours, and they have every right, and every moral justification, to fight to create a way of life different from what they could expect under Putin.  And anyone in the "West" who fails the see the need for them to win doesn't understand the value his own freedom, because it's the "West" the Ukrainians are fighting for.

Edited September 11, 2022 by gehringer_2

[romad1]

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

so before this started, I asked the question about whether the Ukrainians were going to be 'serious' about defending themselves or whether we would find, like say in Vietnam or Afghanistan, that we could pour in effort from this side to no ultimate good, because if that had been the case, then none of the death and destruction war would be justified. Cut a deal with Putin and be done with it. And since history proves that the US is quite capable of misunderstanding the true nature of the clients we have picked in the past, I absolutely had doubts about this enterprise.

But the truth has been that the Ukrainians answered the bell from day one. This is their war, now ours, and they have ever right, and every moral justification, to fight to create a way of life different from what they could expect under Putin.  And anyone in the "West" who fails the see the need for them to win is doesn't understand the price his own freedom, because it's the "West" they are fighting for.

as well and to augment your point.  The Baltic and other NATO allies are also answering the bell with the distinct exception of Germany which was completely tainted by Putin's operatives being in control of the governing party.   

[mtutiger]

11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

so before this started, I asked the question about whether the Ukrainians were going to be 'serious' about defending themselves or whether we would find, like say in Vietnam or Afghanistan, that we could pour in effort from this side to no ultimate good, because if that had been the case, then none of the death and destruction war would be justified. Cut a deal with Putin and be done with it. And since history proves that the US is quite capable of misunderstanding the true nature of the clients we have picked in the past, I absolutely had doubts about this enterprise.

But the truth has been that the Ukrainians answered the bell from day one. This is their war, not ours, and they have every right, and every moral justification, to fight to create a way of life different from what they could expect under Putin.  And anyone in the "West" who fails the see the need for them to win doesn't understand the value his own freedom, because it's the "West" the Ukrainians are fighting for.

Well stated. Obviously the usual caveats about information we receive about the war, but most of the wavering we've seen from this war isn't coming from Ukraine; it's coming from us and our western allies.

[romad1]

Technology has really empowered the open source researcher.  NASA FIRMS is really interesting.  You see where strikes have occurred that haven't been reported otherwise.   Some things going on that look very good for Ukraine.