Russia - Ukraine “peace negotiations”

[05C40]

Ram, could you explain what you're saying here? You and I disagree about most things, but I have a hunch we agree much more about Russia-Ukraine than about most other things. But as for "WWIII," I don't see any way a nuclear war is less likely in a world in which the US is strongly and unequivocally on the side of Ukrainian survival and success, as opposed to a world in which the US is either pro-Russia or neutral. I could buy that Russia needs to know Ukraine is capable of inflicting significant damage before a reasonable resolution is possible. I'm having a harder time buying that the US essentially dropping out of this conflict and leaving Ukraine to defend itself makes a "WWIII" less likely.

In re WW3: The notion that Vlad "the Ras" Putin only wants a part of Ukraine is absurd. Vlad the Ras only wants the Eastern part of Ukraine in the same way that Hitler only wanted the Sudetenland. Does anyone doubt that any resolution of the Ukranian situation that met with Vlad the Ras' approval would be hailed by St. Donald of Mar-a-Lago as "Peace for our time"? IMO, the key difference between the Sudetenland and the part of Ukraine that Vlad the Ras claims is all he wants, is that the potential ultimate adversaries in this situation are armed with nuclear weapons. Fortunately for the US, Ukraine seems to have prioritized the reduction of Russian's nuclear strike force.

EVERY single action taken by St. Donald of Mar-a-Lago in this situation just screams that Vlad the Ras must have some truly awful Kompromat on St. Donald.

 

[Ramrouser]

Ram, could you explain what you're saying here? You and I disagree about most things, but I have a hunch we agree much more about Russia-Ukraine than about most other things. But as for "WWIII," I don't see any way a nuclear war is less likely in a world in which the US is strongly and unequivocally on the side of Ukrainian survival and success, as opposed to a world in which the US is either pro-Russia or neutral. I could buy that Russia needs to know Ukraine is capable of inflicting significant damage before a reasonable resolution is possible. I'm having a harder time buying that the US essentially dropping out of this conflict and leaving Ukraine to defend itself makes a "WWIII" less likely.

No, I just meant that it wouldn't be a good look for the US/EU to be heavily involved in a military action that destroyed significant aircraft and equipment, etc. 3,000 miles in the interior of Russia. That moves the needle on the old doomsday clock. Russia's internal investigation will reveal that Ukraine was not assisted by the Western Allies and did not even give them a heads up on the mission.

Otherwise, I'm thrilled with what the Ukrainians accomplished. It's a game changer, further weakening Russia and significantly strengthening Ukraine's hand. Once the dust settles, and Putin gets his "revenge" by bombing Kiev and other parts of Ukraine, this action just might get us closer to a peace agreement. Z showed the world and the US (Trump) that Ukraine does have a card or two to play.

 

[lawtig02]

I'm shocked, SHOCKED, that today's talks did not result in much progress.

Loading…

www.cnn.com

Russian and Ukrainian delegates met in Istanbul on Monday for their second set of direct peace talks, a day after Kyiv launched a shock drone attack on Russia’s nuclear-capable bombers, in an operation that President Volodymyr Zelensky said was a year and a half in the making.

The talks began late and lasted barely over an hour. Although both sides agreed to work on a new prisoner exchange, statements from the two sets of delegations suggested that little had been achieved to bridge the gulf between their positions, particularly on the matter of a ceasefire.

After the initial round of discussions in the Turkish city last month – the first between the warring countries since soon after Russia’s full-scale invasion in early 2022 – both sides agreed to share their conditions for a full ceasefire and a potentially lasting peace.

Russian state media agencies reported that Russia laid out two ceasefire “options” in its peace memorandum.

In the first option, Moscow will ask for the complete withdrawal of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) from Ukraine’s mainland Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia regions, RIA Novosti reported. Russia annexed those regions during its invasion in 2022, but has been unable to fully capture them in the years since.

In the second option, called a “package deal,” the UAF would have to demobilize, and all foreign military aid to Kyiv, including intelligence, would be halted, a summary of the memorandum published by RIA Novosti said.

Ukraine would also be prohibited from deploying and mobilizing its armed forces, and martial law in Ukraine would need to be lifted, with elections to be held no later than 100 days after it is lifted, the memorandum outlined.

It is not clear whether Ukraine can choose just one of the options, or whether it must agree to both.

The maximalist demands expand on the terms set by Russia during the 2022 trilateral talks held in Turkey.

In the past, Ukraine has refused Russian proposals for territorial concessions in exchange for peace.

Zelensky criticized Russia for not sharing its memorandum ahead of time. “Despite this,” he said before the talks began, “we will attempt to achieve at least some progress on the path toward peace.”

 

[superrific]

Ukraine needed to do this alone in order to create their own leverage against Putin. Russia would never consider any peace plan if US or EU were heavily involved in the planning or logistics of the operation. Plus, there’s the whole WWIII to worry about.

1. Whether they had to do it alone, they didn't have to say they were alone. That message was aimed at its "allies" in Washington, who seem to have completely given up on Ukraine.

2. Usually, when countries have allies, it makes them stronger. For Ukraine to have acted with EU support would put the Russians staring down the barrel of a larger gun. After all, if the EU was involved, then its assistance would not be theoretical. Russia would be given a sign that the EU means business.

It is hard for me to imagine how lying about having support from allies would benefit Ukraine in any way.

3. The reason Ukraine did it on its own is that it couldn't find a partner it could rely on. The Ukrainians aren't stupid: they know Trump was receiving national security briefings starting last summer. And of course Congress was receiving them as well. If the Ukrainians were to enlist US help, the Russians would have been ready and the plan would have failed. It needed to be a surprise job, which would be impossible if Trump knew anything about it.

 

[whatntarnation]

Ukraine has struck the Crimean Bridge. Detonated a large amount of explosive on a underwater support.

 

[WaynetheDrain]

I'm shocked, SHOCKED, that today's talks did not result in much progress.

Loading…

www.cnn.com

Russian and Ukrainian delegates met in Istanbul on Monday for their second set of direct peace talks, a day after Kyiv launched a shock drone attack on Russia’s nuclear-capable bombers, in an operation that President Volodymyr Zelensky said was a year and a half in the making.

The talks began late and lasted barely over an hour. Although both sides agreed to work on a new prisoner exchange, statements from the two sets of delegations suggested that little had been achieved to bridge the gulf between their positions, particularly on the matter of a ceasefire.

After the initial round of discussions in the Turkish city last month – the first between the warring countries since soon after Russia’s full-scale invasion in early 2022 – both sides agreed to share their conditions for a full ceasefire and a potentially lasting peace.

Russian state media agencies reported that Russia laid out two ceasefire “options” in its peace memorandum.

In the first option, Moscow will ask for the complete withdrawal of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) from Ukraine’s mainland Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia regions, RIA Novosti reported. Russia annexed those regions during its invasion in 2022, but has been unable to fully capture them in the years since.

In the second option, called a “package deal,” the UAF would have to demobilize, and all foreign military aid to Kyiv, including intelligence, would be halted, a summary of the memorandum published by RIA Novosti said.

Ukraine would also be prohibited from deploying and mobilizing its armed forces, and martial law in Ukraine would need to be lifted, with elections to be held no later than 100 days after it is lifted, the memorandum outlined.

It is not clear whether Ukraine can choose just one of the options, or whether it must agree to both.

The maximalist demands expand on the terms set by Russia during the 2022 trilateral talks held in Turkey.

In the past, Ukraine has refused Russian proposals for territorial concessions in exchange for peace.

Zelensky criticized Russia for not sharing its memorandum ahead of time. “Despite this,” he said before the talks began, “we will attempt to achieve at least some progress on the path toward peace.”

So when is "Day One?" Is it tomorrow?

 

[lawtig02]

So when is "Day One?" Is it tomorrow?

Come on now. You didn't realize he was just being sarcastic?

How Trump backed away from promising to end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours

During his campaign, Donald Trump said repeatedly that he would be able to end the war between Russia and Ukraine “in 24 hours” upon taking office.

apnews.com

MARCH 14: Trump says he was “being a little bit sarcastic” when he repeatedly claimed as a candidate that he would have the Russia-Ukraine war solved within 24 hours.

“Well, I was being a little bit sarcastic when I said that,” Trump says in a clip released from an interview for the “Full Measure” television program. “What I really mean is I’d like to get it settled and, I’ll, I think, I think I’ll be successful.”

 

[BlooVooDoo]

So when is "Day One?" Is it tomorrow?

He’s going to make a Day One national holiday, just as soon as he delivers on something noteworthy.

 

[dukeman92]

Ukraine has struck the Crimean Bridge. Detonated a large amount of explosive on a underwater support.

I was hopeful that yesterday's attack was just the tip of the iceberg. I think Ukraine has more up their sleeve.

 

[dukeman92]

No, I just meant that it wouldn't be a good look for the US/EU to be heavily involved in a military action that destroyed significant aircraft and equipment, etc. 3,000 miles in the interior of Russia. That moves the needle on the old doomsday clock. Russia's internal investigation will reveal that Ukraine was not assisted by the Western Allies and did not even give them a heads up on the mission.

Otherwise, I'm thrilled with what the Ukrainians accomplished. It's a game changer, further weakening Russia and significantly strengthening Ukraine's hand. Once the dust settles, and Putin gets his "revenge" by bombing Kiev and other parts of Ukraine, this action just might get us closer to a peace agreement. Z showed the world and the US (Trump) that Ukraine does have a card or two to play.

I get what you're trying to say... and somewhat agree... but if the US & EU hadn't been funneling them weapons for so long, they probably aren't in a position to pull this off.

 

[BlueSmoke]

Russia's internal investigation will reveal that Ukraine was not assisted by the Western Allies and did not even give them a heads up on the mission.

Uh........knowing the Russian propaganda machine, what their investigation shows and what Russia says it shows (publicly) are two different things. I would think its 100% that Russia will claim Ukraine had help. Can't have their population thinking the Nazi Ukrainian regime could pull this off by themselves.

 

[BlueSmoke]

Ukraine has struck the Crimean Bridge. Detonated a large amount of explosive on a underwater support.

Seem like I posted in the last month that it was puzzling why Ukraine was not doing much to attack Russia's rail system which is mostly powered by electricity. Well, in the last few days there are reports of other rail bridges being blown up.. Two or three I believe. And now this, which appears to have been a hit on the rail side of the Crimean Bridge.

Wouldn't want to ever play chess with any of these Ukrainians. The timing of their moves is impeccable.

 

[1moretimeagain]

Trump’s been mighty quiet

 

[dukeman92]

Trump’s been mighty quiet

Zelenskyy humiliated Trump and Putin yesterday.

 

[superrific]

Seem like I posted in the last month that it was puzzling why Ukraine was not doing much to attack Russia's rail system which is mostly powered by electricity. Well, in the last few days there are reports of other rail bridges being blown up.. Two or three I believe. And now this, which appears to have been a hit on the rail side of the Crimean Bridge.

Wouldn't want to ever play chess with any of these Ukrainians. The timing of their moves is impeccable.

Well, Ukrainians and Russians alike tend to be great chess players . . .

I suspect the calculus goes like this:

A. Ukraine can destroy as much infrastructure as it wants, but it cannot win a long war of attrition. Peace is therefore of great importance.
B. You can't get to a peace deal with that level of aggression.
C. So Z needed to give peace a chance, so to speak. At the very least, he needed to present Ukraine as striving for peace, for the benefit of its European allies one supposes. And he did that. But Russia doesn't want peace.
D. Meanwhile, Ukraine was setting up multiple surprise attacks. Unleashing them all at once is perhaps particularly frightening for Russia -- how much else can they do? In other words, Z is hoping for a Tet Offensive type of effect, where Ukraine demonstrates to Russia that it cannot win the war without massive losses and maybe Russia will lose the stomach for a long fight.

 

[superrific]

BTW, Russians and Russian supporting Americans comparing this Ukrainian attack to Pearl Harbor are outrageous.

They seem, for the most part, fairly accurate if you focus on the message conveyed by the analogy, which I take to be this:

A. At Pearl Harbor, the Americans had a whole lot of military equipment that wasn't very well guarded. The surprise attack completely crippled the US fleet. Had the US not had a lucky victory at Midway, it is possible the war in the Pacific couldn't really have been fought.

B. In Russia, the Russians had a whole lot of equipment that wasn't very well guarded. A surprise attack crippled the Russian air force. It is possible that without the air force, Russia cannot win the war, at least not in the short term.

In other words, in one day, the military capability of the US in 1941 and Russia in 2025 have been decimated.

I don't take the comparison to be a judgment about the morality of the attack. Remember: the betrayal Americans feel is quite specific to America. To the rest of the world, Pearl Harbor was just a surprise attack. They probably feel the same way about Pearl Harbor as we do about the Germans punching through the forest and storming through France in a week or two (or however long it took).

 

[dukeman92]

Equating what happened yesterday to Pearl Harbor is quite possibly the biggest airball of all time. Yikes.

 

[superrific]

Equating what happened yesterday to Pearl Harbor is quite possibly the biggest airball of all time. Yikes.

1. How did I "equate" them?
2. Could you explain what makes it an airball?

 

[nycfan]

They seem, for the most part, fairly accurate if you focus on the message conveyed by the analogy, which I take to be this:

A. At Pearl Harbor, the Americans had a whole lot of military equipment that wasn't very well guarded. The surprise attack completely crippled the US fleet. Had the US not had a lucky victory at Midway, it is possible the war in the Pacific couldn't really have been fought.

B. In Russia, the Russians had a whole lot of equipment that wasn't very well guarded. A surprise attack crippled the Russian air force. It is possible that without the air force, Russia cannot win the war, at least not in the short term.

In other words, in one day, the military capability of the US in 1941 and Russia in 2025 have been decimated.

I don't take the comparison to be a judgment about the morality of the attack. Remember: the betrayal Americans feel is quite specific to America. To the rest of the world, Pearl Harbor was just a surprise attack. They probably feel the same way about Pearl Harbor as we do about the Germans punching through the forest and storming through France in a week or two (or however long it took).

Based on the propaganda and posting histories of many of the folks embracing the Pearl Harbor analogy, I have to disagree with your assessment of the intended judgment about the morality of the attack. It is very much intended for pro-Putin American audiences to deepen the myth of Ukraine as the representative of decadent wokeism (and somehow also Naziism) bad guy against which Russia is defending Western Society.

 

[superrific]

Based on the propaganda and posting histories of many of the folks embracing the Pearl Harbor analogy, I have to disagree with your assessment of the intended judgment about the morality of the attack.

All right. I can't speak to that. I used the passive voice to focus less on the specific motivations of speakers (which I don't know) and more on the inherent logic. I'll take you at your word that it has been used nefariously -- but at the same time, my mind went to Pearl Harbor and I'm not pro-Putin at all. I don't think it's an inapt analogy; it's just that even apt analogies can be misused. In every analogy, there are some things the same and some things different. If, on the basis of the sameness, you conclude that everything about the comparison is the same -- that's just bad reasoning. It doesn't make the analogy terrible all around.