Gurgen If we returned to the earlier discussion we had about Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the one that led you to form this habit of heaping abuse on me, I'd back up what I said then now.

A majority of Ukrainians have wanted peace negotiations for several months. Polling has been round 50–50 far, far longer. Russian lies, perhaps you'll say. But here I am, denying heroic Ukrainian agency because in your mind the parameters of this invasion haven't changed since 2022.

Go on then ... call me pro-Putin, call me a Russian dupe, and insist I'm the one condescending to the millions of people you currently speak for so confidently, even though millions of them don't agree with you.

It's a disgrace that NATO nations promised Ukraine strong backing and encouraged Ukraine to fight in 2022, but the situation has still arrived where it is now. I find Trump and Vance humiliating Zelensky and stopping military aid disgusting and treacherous. Do you think Ukrainians disagree with that?

I predicted when we last discussed this war that it would devolve to a Putin playbook frozen conflict, after tens or hundreds of thousands more casualties, with effective concessions along the lines of Minsk 2 and no Ukraine in NATO. This still looks plausible but Ukraine's position will be even weaker with the US turning its coat.

I said it would be better if the situation reached something like that unpleasant point soon without a lot more people getting killed. I stand by that too.

Yes, a frozen conflict and a specific set of territorial and diplomatic concessions certainly won't end Putin's ambitions in Ukraine automatically.

That's why I've recently pointed out that the current situation may require the European NATO nations to step up and provide far more to guarantee any peace than they have planned.

Having to lay out to support Ukraine will be a scenario that will play in the electoral favour of RN in France and AfD in Germany. That would be a troubling situation.

I know you will have nothing worthwhile to say in response. All I get is fairy floss about me being a Stalinist and tone policing because I didn't describe the facts the right way. You know that's dumb. Grow up.

    Of course they want peace negotiations. Everyone does. The question is whether you try to negotiate from strength or make concessions to the aggressor, who by the way has refused to negotiate unless most of its demands are met before sitting down. If you want real peace negotiations you must first either defeat or weaken the aggressor sufficiently. Otherwise it's not a peace negotiation but an imposition of conditions by an invader, i.e. a reward for aggression. If the EU/US were not willing to help defeat or weaken the aggressor, they should indeed have said so sooner, instead of abandoning the fight now.

      jones Not a single minute of those "negotiations" was real or sincere from the side of Russia. These are the same "peace talks" Azerbaijan does with Armenia. Surely you must know that?

        Gurgen but if you are not willing or able to defeat or weaken the aggressor, is forever war the only option?

            Kel Varnsen I’m trying really hard to find the other side of the argument with tariffs but there’s nothing beyond the hope that it might hurt trade partners more than than the US itself

                Coombs If you are not able or willing, then what happens now is the outcome. Whether it’s the only option I don’t know, that assessment requires more knowledge than I have. Basically we’re seeing now what would happen if the people who wanted to “negotiate” with Hitler in 1941-42 got their way. And we will have more war, deeper in Europe, as our reward.

                    Mirth it's personal with him and Trudeau. he can't and won't drop this 51st state nonsense because the golden rule of trumpism is never concede lest it make you appear weak. another reason why you don't elect a thin-skinned autocrat to the highest office in the land

                      Gurgen The question is whether you try to negotiate from strength or make concessions to the aggressor, who by the way has refused to negotiate unless most of its demands are met before sitting down. If you want real peace negotiations you must first either defeat or weaken the aggressor sufficiently.

                      The Ukrainians who supported this war in 2022 didn't rally to cries of improving Ukraine's margins in some future peace negotiations. But then Ukraine has not even improved those margins since 2022.

                      Justifying the war in terms of weakening Russia's long term position would reflect the agenda of the former Biden administration more than the democratic will of Ukrainians. It doesn't match up with reality. It is empty.

                      Today Ukraine is asking to sign on to pay the United States hundreds of billions in tribute over decades.

                      200,000–500,000 or more people are dead on both sides since 2022, depending who you ask.

                      Putin's position in any peace negotiations has become stronger since 2014. Putin's grip on power in Russia is also now stronger.

                      Ukraine will not be protected by NATO Article 5 or any similar European treaty in the foreseeable future.

                      Your reasoning about the state of affairs is completely discredited but it's still everyone else who's easily deceived, spineless or secretly totalitarian.

                      Gurgen Basically we’re seeing now what would happen if the people who wanted to “negotiate” with Hitler in 1941-42 got their way. And we will have more war, deeper in Europe, as our reward.

                      Take a seat and get one single thing right about this war before you start banging on about what the next one will be.

                            awooga83 More on DOGE in a fun youtube video:

                            Basically the pattern is, a bunch of far right morons don't know what they're looking and report their 'findings', Musk spins a bullshit yarn to suit the political agenda on twitter, the lackeys Trump has appointed to head various agencies lick his boots and do whatever their told, and then Trump spins an even bigger load of bullshit while looking like a senile pensioner (to anyone not in the maga nuthouse, I guess). Then repeat. Repeatedly.

                            Meanwhile sometimes the legal system stops them from breaking the law, if it can keep up.

                                Burnwinter since you’re such a political genius and I’m so stupid, can you give me one historical example where a brutal dictator was given land “for peace” and this deterred him from future aggression?

                                    Gurgen Putin once described the dissolution of the Soviet Union as "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century." He said this about 20 years ago. He has since annexed Crimea and invaded Ukraine and put military pressure on Georgia and other states. Trust the man's words and actions. There is no evidence that he will rebuild the USSR in its entirety, but he certainly has a revanchist streak.

                                      So you agree with me that rewarding his aggression will not deter him from further aggression?

                                        Gurgen the only way to stop him is with a world war. and he is aware. so yeah

                                          Gurgen

                                          I'm not a genius and I'm not playing these weird head games. This isn't WWII and the Allied campaign to stop the Third Reich would never have happened if Hitler had 4,000 nukes.

                                          We already know what would have reduced Putin's ambitions in Ukraine at any point, and would reduce them now. Three important points:

                                          1. Concession of Crimea and the Donbas
                                          2. A guarantee Ukraine never joins NATO
                                          3. Strong security guarantees

                                          I'm sure you would call the first two of these "appeasement". Years before this war, these were the main points on the table. And after this war, they'll still be the main points on the table.

                                          The war hasn't deterred anything.

                                          If a peace should be negotiated, nothing will stop Putin funding contras and sorties into the rest of Ukraine, nor Ukrainian reprisals in Russia-occupied territory. Nothing except strong security guarantees. That's it.

                                              Burnwinter
                                              1 he wants more then that
                                              2 they were never close to joining NATO, and as you can see by what happened in Kaliningard, and with Sweden & Finland. They never really gave a shit about NATO. Then you have the puppets states that would have voted against, and Turkey who would have done the same. There was never at any point, even 1% chance of Ukraine joining NATO. Hell the last treaty signed by Ukraine itself said they abandon any desire to join NATO.
                                              3 what lol

                                                  HomeSteak so the ring of fire around Russia's borders is imaginary, people are just being paranoid when they're concerned about ballistic missile defences at every border to a nuclear superpower? Deveselu is just a place where NATO soldiers do burpees to stay fit?

                                                  You don't have to like Putin to see that this ridiculous abridgment of the narrative and complete absolving of US meddling in the region can't be a serious account of what happened. It's just Russia, they want to conquer the world, they don't care how many of their soldiers die, they will go for more - Western military, spooks and arms producers have nothing to do with any of it I swear. Give me a fucking break

                                                      jones feel like you’re skipping the part where ex-Warsaw Pact countries actively wanted to be a part of NATO and why even strategically neutral Finland decided to take the plunge recently. Any understanding of the situation starts from there.

                                                      Previously you’ve been keen to stress that the Russian Federation is not the Soviet Union as a militarised force but that judgement is still out. For most Eastern European countries, it doesn’t matter if it’s the Russian Empire, the USSR or modern day Russia, they know that their land is seen to be of “permanent strategic interest” to their much larger neighbour. The lesson learned if you’re a small to mid regional power today is that you either need to be part of a military alliance with cast iron guarantees or have your own nuclear weapon program. Otherwise your destiny is in the hands of the great powers.

                                                      Frankly, you don’t have to even discuss Russia/Ukraine - it’s a normal outcome when you have a belligerent neighbour- Canada, for example, has started making noises about allying more closely with the UK and France to house nukes and they’ve only been under pressure for about 30 days. Imagine what several centuries can do to a national psyche instead.

                                                      After that, yes, it’s pretty obvious that the US, while drunk on their unipolar superiority, overplayed their hands and promises by backing Russia into a corner without regard for their “permanent strategic interest” in the region.