sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

FSB chief Beseda. Then Putin replaced the entire FSB lead with the GRU. There were reports that some of the FSB were arrested for dereliction of duty based on the failed Kyiv takeover.

---

That sounds like an intelligence failure rather than a military one. If Beseda underestimated Ukrainian resistance to the extent he was accused of doing, it would be consistent with what I've seen. Putin was criticized for making one last attempt to force negotiations instead of fully committing his army at the outset. He was trying to avoid a protracted war if at all possible, even if the chances were slim. If the FSB had been right, perhaps Zelensky wouldn't have been emboldened to take Boris Johnson's advice and abandon talks. It's no wonder Putin was angry.

---

Massive intel failure for sure.

On the regime change issue, Putin has called Zelensky illegitimate numerous times, and has refused to meet with him from day 1. Also, I rarely use as source material what Ukraine or Russia say, but Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have stated that Russia repeatedly told them early on that Zelensky had to go and be replaced by a guy whose name escapes me.

---

Putin met with Zelensky in 2019 as part of his ongoing effort to implement the Minsk Agreement. They were working toward another meeting in 2022 when the Ukrainians abruptly walked out of negotiations. Zelensky issued a decree later that year prohibiting talks with Russia. Putin only started calling Zelensky illegitimate after his term expired and no elections were held. These facts present a real obstacle, as they would make it easy for Ukraine to repudiate later any agreement that Zelensky signed today. Prior to and during the early part of the war, it would absolutely have been possible for them to meet.

---

No, numerous outlets, including Russian, reported Putin refused to meet with Zelensky in early 2022.

---

No, he did not. It may have been reported that Putin was waiting to meet until more details were worked out and a first draft of the agreement was completed, but there was never a refusal in principle. On the contrary, the Istanbul Communique (drafted by the Ukrainians) clearly shows that a meeting was planned:

Quote:

---

The parties consider it possible to hold a meeting on ... ... 2022 between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia with the aim to sign an agreement and/or make political decisions regarding the remaining unresolved issues.

---

---

Kyiv Post, Foreign Affairs, NPR, CNN, and others - reporting based on actual documents and emails:

In Feb and March 2022, Putin refused to meet directly with Zelensky despite multiple public and private Zelensky requests.

Yes, Ukraine drafted that, because Ukraine always wanted the direct meetings.

---

A search for that statement brings up the following results.

Foreign Affairs:

Quote:

---

In remarks he made on March 29, immediately after the conclusion of the talks, Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation, sounded decidedly upbeat, explaining that the discussions of the treaty on Ukraine's neutrality were entering the practical phase and that--allowing for all the complexities presented by the treaty's having many potential guarantors--it was possible that Putin and Zelensky would sign it at a summit in the foreseeable future.

---

NPR:

Quote:

---

As fears grow of a Russian invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is proposing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I don't know what the president of the Russian Federation wants, that's why I proposed to meet," Zelenskyy said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

"We are ready to sit down and speak. Pick the platform that you like," Zelenskyy said. "What is the point of us shooting and proposing diplomacy at the same time?"

The Kremlin does not yet appear to have responded to Zelenskyy's proposal as of Saturday evening ET.

---

CNN:

Quote:

---

In a press conference held in a Kyiv subway, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says he is willing to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring an end to the war.

---

Kyiv Post didn't turn up anything, but since you mentioned Russian sources I will include TASS for good measure:

Quote:

---

Russian President Vladimir Putin has never refused in principle to hold a meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, but a document must be drafted before such meeting can be arranged, Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday.

---

Note that Medinsky concurred with the plan stated in the Communique. So it wasn't just wishful thinking on the Ukrainians' part.

As for the leaked email, we're on a bit of a tangent here for the reasons I mentioned earlier. The fact that Putin invaded Ukraine after years of trying to resolve the issue diplomatically hardly proves that he wanted regime change or that he was unwilling to negotiate.

But I did look up the original article in The Sun. I won't get into the question of how reliable Osechkin is or whether the leaks are genuine, given his long history of exaggerated claims and absurd propaganda (this is the same guy who once reported that Prigozhin served Putin a dinner of human brains).

More to the point, I see no reason to believe Putin swallowed these predictions hook, line, and sinker based on some emails from one or a handful of FSB officers. The article reflects the Western euphoria of the war's first year, premised on the assumption of Russian incompetence and ineptitude, with all the predictions of Ukrainian victory in the coming counter-offensive. We now know these premises and predictions were wildly erroneous. That should be kept in mind when revisiting old claims about how unprepared Putin and the Russians were. Moreover, the whole depiction of Putin as naive and ideologically driven is at odds with his statements, actions, and personality. In hindsight, it looks more than anything else like some projection on the part of British journalists.

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

FSB chief Beseda. Then Putin replaced the entire FSB lead with the GRU. There were reports that some of the FSB were arrested for dereliction of duty based on the failed Kyiv takeover.

---

That sounds like an intelligence failure rather than a military one. If Beseda underestimated Ukrainian resistance to the extent he was accused of doing, it would be consistent with what I've seen. Putin was criticized for making one last attempt to force negotiations instead of fully committing his army at the outset. He was trying to avoid a protracted war if at all possible, even if the chances were slim. If the FSB had been right, perhaps Zelensky wouldn't have been emboldened to take Boris Johnson's advice and abandon talks. It's no wonder Putin was angry.

---

Massive intel failure for sure.

On the regime change issue, Putin has called Zelensky illegitimate numerous times, and has refused to meet with him from day 1. Also, I rarely use as source material what Ukraine or Russia say, but Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have stated that Russia repeatedly told them early on that Zelensky had to go and be replaced by a guy whose name escapes me.

---

Putin met with Zelensky in 2019 as part of his ongoing effort to implement the Minsk Agreement. They were working toward another meeting in 2022 when the Ukrainians abruptly walked out of negotiations. Zelensky issued a decree later that year prohibiting talks with Russia. Putin only started calling Zelensky illegitimate after his term expired and no elections were held. These facts present a real obstacle, as they would make it easy for Ukraine to repudiate later any agreement that Zelensky signed today. Prior to and during the early part of the war, it would absolutely have been possible for them to meet.

---

No, numerous outlets, including Russian, reported Putin refused to meet with Zelensky in early 2022.

---

No, he did not. It may have been reported that Putin was waiting to meet until more details were worked out and a first draft of the agreement was completed, but there was never a refusal in principle. On the contrary, the Istanbul Communique (drafted by the Ukrainians) clearly shows that a meeting was planned:

Quote:

---

The parties consider it possible to hold a meeting on ... ... 2022 between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia with the aim to sign an agreement and/or make political decisions regarding the remaining unresolved issues.

---

---

Kyiv Post, Foreign Affairs, NPR, CNN, and others - reporting based on actual documents and emails:

In Feb and March 2022, Putin refused to meet directly with Zelensky despite multiple public and private Zelensky requests.

Yes, Ukraine drafted that, because Ukraine always wanted the direct meetings.

---

A search for that statement brings up the following results.

Foreign Affairs:

Quote:

---

In remarks he made on March 29, immediately after the conclusion of the talks, Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation, sounded decidedly upbeat, explaining that the discussions of the treaty on Ukraine's neutrality were entering the practical phase and that--allowing for all the complexities presented by the treaty's having many potential guarantors--it was possible that Putin and Zelensky would sign it at a summit in the foreseeable future.

---

NPR:

Quote:

---

As fears grow of a Russian invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is proposing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I don't know what the president of the Russian Federation wants, that's why I proposed to meet," Zelenskyy said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

"We are ready to sit down and speak. Pick the platform that you like," Zelenskyy said. "What is the point of us shooting and proposing diplomacy at the same time?"

The Kremlin does not yet appear to have responded to Zelenskyy's proposal as of Saturday evening ET.

---

CNN:

Quote:

---

In a press conference held in a Kyiv subway, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says he is willing to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring an end to the war.

---

Kyiv Post didn't turn up anything, but since you mentioned Russian sources I will include TASS for good measure:

Quote:

---

Russian President Vladimir Putin has never refused in principle to hold a meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, but a document must be drafted before such meeting can be arranged, Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday.

---

Note that Medinsky concurred with the plan stated in the Communique. So it wasn't just wishful thinking on the Ukrainians' part.

As for the leaked email, we're on a bit of a tangent here for the reasons I mentioned earlier. The fact that Putin invaded Ukraine after years of trying to resolve the issue diplomatically hardly proves that he wanted regime change or that he was unwilling to negotiate.

But I did look up the original article in The Sun. I won't get into the question of how reliable Osechkin is or whether the leaks are genuine, given his long history of exaggerated claims and absurd propaganda (this is the same guy who once reported that Prigozhin served Putin a dinner of human brains).

More to the point, I see no reason to believe Putin swallowed these predictions hook, line, and sinker based on some emails from one or a handful of FSB officers. The article reflects the Western euphoria of the war's first year, premised on the assumption of Russian incompetence and ineptitude, with all the predictions of Ukrainian victory in the coming counter-offensive. We now know these premises and predictions were wildly erroneous. That should be kept in mind when revisiting old claims about how unprepared Putin and the Russians were. Moreover, the whole depiction of Putin as naive and ideologically driven is at odds with his statements, actions, and personality. In hindsight, it looks more than anything else like some projection on the part of British journalists.

---

I really don't understand your argument. These just confirm that Zelensky wanted to meet with Putin.

And the last one just says "in principal."

The fact remains Zelensky requested multiple meetings, and Putin refused.

As for "Kyiv in 3 days," we might never know what exactly what is in Putin's head. That's not my point. My point is all these articles show they wanted to take Kyiv and Zelensky out. Whether Putin thought it would take 2 days, 3 days, 3 weeks or 2 months is immaterial. He sent his best generals and special forces on that mission, and half of them were killed. It was an epic intel failure.

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

FSB chief Beseda. Then Putin replaced the entire FSB lead with the GRU. There were reports that some of the FSB were arrested for dereliction of duty based on the failed Kyiv takeover.

---

That sounds like an intelligence failure rather than a military one. If Beseda underestimated Ukrainian resistance to the extent he was accused of doing, it would be consistent with what I've seen. Putin was criticized for making one last attempt to force negotiations instead of fully committing his army at the outset. He was trying to avoid a protracted war if at all possible, even if the chances were slim. If the FSB had been right, perhaps Zelensky wouldn't have been emboldened to take Boris Johnson's advice and abandon talks. It's no wonder Putin was angry.

---

Massive intel failure for sure.

On the regime change issue, Putin has called Zelensky illegitimate numerous times, and has refused to meet with him from day 1. Also, I rarely use as source material what Ukraine or Russia say, but Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have stated that Russia repeatedly told them early on that Zelensky had to go and be replaced by a guy whose name escapes me.

---

Putin met with Zelensky in 2019 as part of his ongoing effort to implement the Minsk Agreement. They were working toward another meeting in 2022 when the Ukrainians abruptly walked out of negotiations. Zelensky issued a decree later that year prohibiting talks with Russia. Putin only started calling Zelensky illegitimate after his term expired and no elections were held. These facts present a real obstacle, as they would make it easy for Ukraine to repudiate later any agreement that Zelensky signed today. Prior to and during the early part of the war, it would absolutely have been possible for them to meet.

---

No, numerous outlets, including Russian, reported Putin refused to meet with Zelensky in early 2022.

---

No, he did not. It may have been reported that Putin was waiting to meet until more details were worked out and a first draft of the agreement was completed, but there was never a refusal in principle. On the contrary, the Istanbul Communique (drafted by the Ukrainians) clearly shows that a meeting was planned:

Quote:

---

The parties consider it possible to hold a meeting on ... ... 2022 between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia with the aim to sign an agreement and/or make political decisions regarding the remaining unresolved issues.

---

---

Kyiv Post, Foreign Affairs, NPR, CNN, and others - reporting based on actual documents and emails:

In Feb and March 2022, Putin refused to meet directly with Zelensky despite multiple public and private Zelensky requests.

Yes, Ukraine drafted that, because Ukraine always wanted the direct meetings.

---

A search for that statement brings up the following results.

Foreign Affairs:

Quote:

---

In remarks he made on March 29, immediately after the conclusion of the talks, Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation, sounded decidedly upbeat, explaining that the discussions of the treaty on Ukraine's neutrality were entering the practical phase and that--allowing for all the complexities presented by the treaty's having many potential guarantors--it was possible that Putin and Zelensky would sign it at a summit in the foreseeable future.

---

NPR:

Quote:

---

As fears grow of a Russian invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is proposing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I don't know what the president of the Russian Federation wants, that's why I proposed to meet," Zelenskyy said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

"We are ready to sit down and speak. Pick the platform that you like," Zelenskyy said. "What is the point of us shooting and proposing diplomacy at the same time?"

The Kremlin does not yet appear to have responded to Zelenskyy's proposal as of Saturday evening ET.

---

CNN:

Quote:

---

In a press conference held in a Kyiv subway, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says he is willing to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring an end to the war.

---

Kyiv Post didn't turn up anything, but since you mentioned Russian sources I will include TASS for good measure:

Quote:

---

Russian President Vladimir Putin has never refused in principle to hold a meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, but a document must be drafted before such meeting can be arranged, Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday.

---

Note that Medinsky concurred with the plan stated in the Communique. So it wasn't just wishful thinking on the Ukrainians' part.

As for the leaked email, we're on a bit of a tangent here for the reasons I mentioned earlier. The fact that Putin invaded Ukraine after years of trying to resolve the issue diplomatically hardly proves that he wanted regime change or that he was unwilling to negotiate.

But I did look up the original article in The Sun. I won't get into the question of how reliable Osechkin is or whether the leaks are genuine, given his long history of exaggerated claims and absurd propaganda (this is the same guy who once reported that Prigozhin served Putin a dinner of human brains).

More to the point, I see no reason to believe Putin swallowed these predictions hook, line, and sinker based on some emails from one or a handful of FSB officers. The article reflects the Western euphoria of the war's first year, premised on the assumption of Russian incompetence and ineptitude, with all the predictions of Ukrainian victory in the coming counter-offensive. We now know these premises and predictions were wildly erroneous. That should be kept in mind when revisiting old claims about how unprepared Putin and the Russians were. Moreover, the whole depiction of Putin as naive and ideologically driven is at odds with his statements, actions, and personality. In hindsight, it looks more than anything else like some projection on the part of British journalists.

---

I really don't understand your argument. These just confirm that Zelensky wanted to meet with Putin.

And the last one just says "in principal."

The fact remains Zelensky requested multiple meetings, and Putin refused.

As for "Kyiv in 3 days," we might never know what exactly what is in Putin's head. That's not my point. My point is all these articles show they wanted to take Kyiv and Zelensky out. Whether Putin thought it would take 2 days, 3 days, 3 weeks or 2 months is immaterial. He sent his best generals and special forces on that mission, and half of them were killed. It was an epic intel failure.

---

Get ready for more twisting of the truth and RU propaganda. See above.

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

FSB chief Beseda. Then Putin replaced the entire FSB lead with the GRU. There were reports that some of the FSB were arrested for dereliction of duty based on the failed Kyiv takeover.

---

That sounds like an intelligence failure rather than a military one. If Beseda underestimated Ukrainian resistance to the extent he was accused of doing, it would be consistent with what I've seen. Putin was criticized for making one last attempt to force negotiations instead of fully committing his army at the outset. He was trying to avoid a protracted war if at all possible, even if the chances were slim. If the FSB had been right, perhaps Zelensky wouldn't have been emboldened to take Boris Johnson's advice and abandon talks. It's no wonder Putin was angry.

---

Massive intel failure for sure.

On the regime change issue, Putin has called Zelensky illegitimate numerous times, and has refused to meet with him from day 1. Also, I rarely use as source material what Ukraine or Russia say, but Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have stated that Russia repeatedly told them early on that Zelensky had to go and be replaced by a guy whose name escapes me.

---

Putin met with Zelensky in 2019 as part of his ongoing effort to implement the Minsk Agreement. They were working toward another meeting in 2022 when the Ukrainians abruptly walked out of negotiations. Zelensky issued a decree later that year prohibiting talks with Russia. Putin only started calling Zelensky illegitimate after his term expired and no elections were held. These facts present a real obstacle, as they would make it easy for Ukraine to repudiate later any agreement that Zelensky signed today. Prior to and during the early part of the war, it would absolutely have been possible for them to meet.

---

No, numerous outlets, including Russian, reported Putin refused to meet with Zelensky in early 2022.

---

No, he did not. It may have been reported that Putin was waiting to meet until more details were worked out and a first draft of the agreement was completed, but there was never a refusal in principle. On the contrary, the Istanbul Communique (drafted by the Ukrainians) clearly shows that a meeting was planned:

Quote:

---

The parties consider it possible to hold a meeting on ... ... 2022 between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia with the aim to sign an agreement and/or make political decisions regarding the remaining unresolved issues.

---

---

Kyiv Post, Foreign Affairs, NPR, CNN, and others - reporting based on actual documents and emails:

In Feb and March 2022, Putin refused to meet directly with Zelensky despite multiple public and private Zelensky requests.

Yes, Ukraine drafted that, because Ukraine always wanted the direct meetings.

---

A search for that statement brings up the following results.

Foreign Affairs:

Quote:

---

In remarks he made on March 29, immediately after the conclusion of the talks, Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation, sounded decidedly upbeat, explaining that the discussions of the treaty on Ukraine's neutrality were entering the practical phase and that--allowing for all the complexities presented by the treaty's having many potential guarantors--it was possible that Putin and Zelensky would sign it at a summit in the foreseeable future.

---

NPR:

Quote:

---

As fears grow of a Russian invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is proposing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I don't know what the president of the Russian Federation wants, that's why I proposed to meet," Zelenskyy said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

"We are ready to sit down and speak. Pick the platform that you like," Zelenskyy said. "What is the point of us shooting and proposing diplomacy at the same time?"

The Kremlin does not yet appear to have responded to Zelenskyy's proposal as of Saturday evening ET.

---

CNN:

Quote:

---

In a press conference held in a Kyiv subway, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says he is willing to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring an end to the war.

---

Kyiv Post didn't turn up anything, but since you mentioned Russian sources I will include TASS for good measure:

Quote:

---

Russian President Vladimir Putin has never refused in principle to hold a meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, but a document must be drafted before such meeting can be arranged, Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday.

---

Note that Medinsky concurred with the plan stated in the Communique. So it wasn't just wishful thinking on the Ukrainians' part.

As for the leaked email, we're on a bit of a tangent here for the reasons I mentioned earlier. The fact that Putin invaded Ukraine after years of trying to resolve the issue diplomatically hardly proves that he wanted regime change or that he was unwilling to negotiate.

But I did look up the original article in The Sun. I won't get into the question of how reliable Osechkin is or whether the leaks are genuine, given his long history of exaggerated claims and absurd propaganda (this is the same guy who once reported that Prigozhin served Putin a dinner of human brains).

More to the point, I see no reason to believe Putin swallowed these predictions hook, line, and sinker based on some emails from one or a handful of FSB officers. The article reflects the Western euphoria of the war's first year, premised on the assumption of Russian incompetence and ineptitude, with all the predictions of Ukrainian victory in the coming counter-offensive. We now know these premises and predictions were wildly erroneous. That should be kept in mind when revisiting old claims about how unprepared Putin and the Russians were. Moreover, the whole depiction of Putin as naive and ideologically driven is at odds with his statements, actions, and personality. In hindsight, it looks more than anything else like some projection on the part of British journalists.

---

I really don't understand your argument. These just confirm that Zelensky wanted to meet with Putin.

And the last one just says "in principal."

The fact remains Zelensky requested multiple meetings, and Putin refused.

As for "Kyiv in 3 days," we might never know what exactly what is in Putin's head. That's not my point. My point is all these articles show they wanted to take Kyiv and Zelensky out. Whether Putin thought it would take 2 days, 3 days, 3 weeks or 2 months is immaterial. He sent his best generals and special forces on that mission, and half of them were killed. It was an epic intel failure.

---

And Putin wanted to meet Zelensky, as both the Russians and the Ukrainians confirmed. I've yet to see any article stating otherwise, or stating that Putin wanted to take Zelensky out.

There's probably no point in debating casualty numbers except to say that Western outlets tend to repeat Ukrainian estimates uncritically and that those estimates are manifestly suspect, to put it in the kindest way possible. The Russians performed successful fighting retreats at the various points of contact and inflicted high casualties on the Ukrainians, as usual, so by no means was it the rout that was trumpeted in Western media.

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

FSB chief Beseda. Then Putin replaced the entire FSB lead with the GRU. There were reports that some of the FSB were arrested for dereliction of duty based on the failed Kyiv takeover.

---

That sounds like an intelligence failure rather than a military one. If Beseda underestimated Ukrainian resistance to the extent he was accused of doing, it would be consistent with what I've seen. Putin was criticized for making one last attempt to force negotiations instead of fully committing his army at the outset. He was trying to avoid a protracted war if at all possible, even if the chances were slim. If the FSB had been right, perhaps Zelensky wouldn't have been emboldened to take Boris Johnson's advice and abandon talks. It's no wonder Putin was angry.

---

Massive intel failure for sure.

On the regime change issue, Putin has called Zelensky illegitimate numerous times, and has refused to meet with him from day 1. Also, I rarely use as source material what Ukraine or Russia say, but Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have stated that Russia repeatedly told them early on that Zelensky had to go and be replaced by a guy whose name escapes me.

---

Putin met with Zelensky in 2019 as part of his ongoing effort to implement the Minsk Agreement. They were working toward another meeting in 2022 when the Ukrainians abruptly walked out of negotiations. Zelensky issued a decree later that year prohibiting talks with Russia. Putin only started calling Zelensky illegitimate after his term expired and no elections were held. These facts present a real obstacle, as they would make it easy for Ukraine to repudiate later any agreement that Zelensky signed today. Prior to and during the early part of the war, it would absolutely have been possible for them to meet.

---

No, numerous outlets, including Russian, reported Putin refused to meet with Zelensky in early 2022.

---

No, he did not. It may have been reported that Putin was waiting to meet until more details were worked out and a first draft of the agreement was completed, but there was never a refusal in principle. On the contrary, the Istanbul Communique (drafted by the Ukrainians) clearly shows that a meeting was planned:

Quote:

---

The parties consider it possible to hold a meeting on ... ... 2022 between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia with the aim to sign an agreement and/or make political decisions regarding the remaining unresolved issues.

---

---

Kyiv Post, Foreign Affairs, NPR, CNN, and others - reporting based on actual documents and emails:

In Feb and March 2022, Putin refused to meet directly with Zelensky despite multiple public and private Zelensky requests.

Yes, Ukraine drafted that, because Ukraine always wanted the direct meetings.

---

A search for that statement brings up the following results.

Foreign Affairs:

Quote:

---

In remarks he made on March 29, immediately after the conclusion of the talks, Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation, sounded decidedly upbeat, explaining that the discussions of the treaty on Ukraine's neutrality were entering the practical phase and that--allowing for all the complexities presented by the treaty's having many potential guarantors--it was possible that Putin and Zelensky would sign it at a summit in the foreseeable future.

---

NPR:

Quote:

---

As fears grow of a Russian invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is proposing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I don't know what the president of the Russian Federation wants, that's why I proposed to meet," Zelenskyy said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

"We are ready to sit down and speak. Pick the platform that you like," Zelenskyy said. "What is the point of us shooting and proposing diplomacy at the same time?"

The Kremlin does not yet appear to have responded to Zelenskyy's proposal as of Saturday evening ET.

---

CNN:

Quote:

---

In a press conference held in a Kyiv subway, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says he is willing to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring an end to the war.

---

Kyiv Post didn't turn up anything, but since you mentioned Russian sources I will include TASS for good measure:

Quote:

---

Russian President Vladimir Putin has never refused in principle to hold a meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, but a document must be drafted before such meeting can be arranged, Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday.

---

Note that Medinsky concurred with the plan stated in the Communique. So it wasn't just wishful thinking on the Ukrainians' part.

As for the leaked email, we're on a bit of a tangent here for the reasons I mentioned earlier. The fact that Putin invaded Ukraine after years of trying to resolve the issue diplomatically hardly proves that he wanted regime change or that he was unwilling to negotiate.

But I did look up the original article in The Sun. I won't get into the question of how reliable Osechkin is or whether the leaks are genuine, given his long history of exaggerated claims and absurd propaganda (this is the same guy who once reported that Prigozhin served Putin a dinner of human brains).

More to the point, I see no reason to believe Putin swallowed these predictions hook, line, and sinker based on some emails from one or a handful of FSB officers. The article reflects the Western euphoria of the war's first year, premised on the assumption of Russian incompetence and ineptitude, with all the predictions of Ukrainian victory in the coming counter-offensive. We now know these premises and predictions were wildly erroneous. That should be kept in mind when revisiting old claims about how unprepared Putin and the Russians were. Moreover, the whole depiction of Putin as naive and ideologically driven is at odds with his statements, actions, and personality. In hindsight, it looks more than anything else like some projection on the part of British journalists.

---

I really don't understand your argument. These just confirm that Zelensky wanted to meet with Putin.

And the last one just says "in principal."

The fact remains Zelensky requested multiple meetings, and Putin refused.

As for "Kyiv in 3 days," we might never know what exactly what is in Putin's head. That's not my point. My point is all these articles show they wanted to take Kyiv and Zelensky out. Whether Putin thought it would take 2 days, 3 days, 3 weeks or 2 months is immaterial. He sent his best generals and special forces on that mission, and half of them were killed. It was an epic intel failure.

---

And Putin wanted to meet Zelensky, as both the Russians and the Ukrainians confirmed. I've yet to see any article stating otherwise, or stating that Putin wanted to take Zelensky out.

There's probably no point in debating casualty numbers except to say that Western outlets tend to repeat Ukrainian estimates uncritically and that those estimates are manifestly suspect, to put it in the kindest way possible. The Russians performed successful fighting retreats at the various points of contact and inflicted high casualties on the Ukrainians, as usual, so by no means was it the rout that was trumpeted in Western media.

---

Like I said.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/talks-could-have-ended-war-ukraine

"The Financial Times said a 15-point draft deal had been prepared wherein Kyiv would give up its NATO ambitions in return for security guarantees outside NATO. Ukraine detected a softening of Russia's demands which Ukrainian presidential advisor Mykhailo Podolyak attributed to a reflection of how badly Putin's "blitzkrieg" invasion was going which left him with "no chances whatsoever to move further into Ukraine territory."

By the time of the sixth round of negotiations on March 21, the air of optimism was beginning to wane. Zelensky requested a face-to-face meeting with Putin which was rejected as it "should happen once the two sides are closer to agreeing on key issues."

Zelensky insists 'meeting' with Putin needed to end war
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky speaks from Kyiv, Ukraine, early Monday, March 21, 2022. (Image from video, Ukrainian Presidential Press Office via AP)
President Volodymyr Zelensky insists that a meeting with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin "in any format" is needed to end the war in Ukraine.
"I believe that without this meeting it is impossible to fully understand what they are ready for in order to stop the war," Zelensky says in an interview with the Ukraine regional media outlet Suspilne.
Zelensky has previously said that "without negotiations, we cannot end the war" and called for a summit with Putin, but his comments on Monday were particularly insistent.

CNN
Russian foreign minister: Putin-Zelensky meeting not necessary until key issues clarified

CNN
WashingtonCNN
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Sunday that he's "ready for negotiations" with Russian President Vladimir Putin but warned that if they fail "that would mean that this is a third World War."
"I'm ready for negotiations with him. I was ready for the last two years. And I think that without negotiations we cannot end this war," he told CNN's Fareed Zakaria.
"I think that we have to use any format, any chance in order to have a possibility of negotiating, possibility of talking to Putin.

Putin Reportedly Agreed to Meeting in Spring of 2022 With Scholz, Macron - But Refused Zelensky

19:13 GMT 28.08.2023

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

FSB chief Beseda. Then Putin replaced the entire FSB lead with the GRU. There were reports that some of the FSB were arrested for dereliction of duty based on the failed Kyiv takeover.

---

That sounds like an intelligence failure rather than a military one. If Beseda underestimated Ukrainian resistance to the extent he was accused of doing, it would be consistent with what I've seen. Putin was criticized for making one last attempt to force negotiations instead of fully committing his army at the outset. He was trying to avoid a protracted war if at all possible, even if the chances were slim. If the FSB had been right, perhaps Zelensky wouldn't have been emboldened to take Boris Johnson's advice and abandon talks. It's no wonder Putin was angry.

---

Massive intel failure for sure.

On the regime change issue, Putin has called Zelensky illegitimate numerous times, and has refused to meet with him from day 1. Also, I rarely use as source material what Ukraine or Russia say, but Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have stated that Russia repeatedly told them early on that Zelensky had to go and be replaced by a guy whose name escapes me.

---

Putin met with Zelensky in 2019 as part of his ongoing effort to implement the Minsk Agreement. They were working toward another meeting in 2022 when the Ukrainians abruptly walked out of negotiations. Zelensky issued a decree later that year prohibiting talks with Russia. Putin only started calling Zelensky illegitimate after his term expired and no elections were held. These facts present a real obstacle, as they would make it easy for Ukraine to repudiate later any agreement that Zelensky signed today. Prior to and during the early part of the war, it would absolutely have been possible for them to meet.

---

No, numerous outlets, including Russian, reported Putin refused to meet with Zelensky in early 2022.

---

No, he did not. It may have been reported that Putin was waiting to meet until more details were worked out and a first draft of the agreement was completed, but there was never a refusal in principle. On the contrary, the Istanbul Communique (drafted by the Ukrainians) clearly shows that a meeting was planned:

Quote:

---

The parties consider it possible to hold a meeting on ... ... 2022 between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia with the aim to sign an agreement and/or make political decisions regarding the remaining unresolved issues.

---

---

Kyiv Post, Foreign Affairs, NPR, CNN, and others - reporting based on actual documents and emails:

In Feb and March 2022, Putin refused to meet directly with Zelensky despite multiple public and private Zelensky requests.

Yes, Ukraine drafted that, because Ukraine always wanted the direct meetings.

---

A search for that statement brings up the following results.

Foreign Affairs:

Quote:

---

In remarks he made on March 29, immediately after the conclusion of the talks, Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation, sounded decidedly upbeat, explaining that the discussions of the treaty on Ukraine's neutrality were entering the practical phase and that--allowing for all the complexities presented by the treaty's having many potential guarantors--it was possible that Putin and Zelensky would sign it at a summit in the foreseeable future.

---

NPR:

Quote:

---

As fears grow of a Russian invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is proposing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I don't know what the president of the Russian Federation wants, that's why I proposed to meet," Zelenskyy said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

"We are ready to sit down and speak. Pick the platform that you like," Zelenskyy said. "What is the point of us shooting and proposing diplomacy at the same time?"

The Kremlin does not yet appear to have responded to Zelenskyy's proposal as of Saturday evening ET.

---

CNN:

Quote:

---

In a press conference held in a Kyiv subway, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says he is willing to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring an end to the war.

---

Kyiv Post didn't turn up anything, but since you mentioned Russian sources I will include TASS for good measure:

Quote:

---

Russian President Vladimir Putin has never refused in principle to hold a meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, but a document must be drafted before such meeting can be arranged, Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday.

---

Note that Medinsky concurred with the plan stated in the Communique. So it wasn't just wishful thinking on the Ukrainians' part.

As for the leaked email, we're on a bit of a tangent here for the reasons I mentioned earlier. The fact that Putin invaded Ukraine after years of trying to resolve the issue diplomatically hardly proves that he wanted regime change or that he was unwilling to negotiate.

But I did look up the original article in The Sun. I won't get into the question of how reliable Osechkin is or whether the leaks are genuine, given his long history of exaggerated claims and absurd propaganda (this is the same guy who once reported that Prigozhin served Putin a dinner of human brains).

More to the point, I see no reason to believe Putin swallowed these predictions hook, line, and sinker based on some emails from one or a handful of FSB officers. The article reflects the Western euphoria of the war's first year, premised on the assumption of Russian incompetence and ineptitude, with all the predictions of Ukrainian victory in the coming counter-offensive. We now know these premises and predictions were wildly erroneous. That should be kept in mind when revisiting old claims about how unprepared Putin and the Russians were. Moreover, the whole depiction of Putin as naive and ideologically driven is at odds with his statements, actions, and personality. In hindsight, it looks more than anything else like some projection on the part of British journalists.

---

I really don't understand your argument. These just confirm that Zelensky wanted to meet with Putin.

And the last one just says "in principal."

The fact remains Zelensky requested multiple meetings, and Putin refused.

As for "Kyiv in 3 days," we might never know what exactly what is in Putin's head. That's not my point. My point is all these articles show they wanted to take Kyiv and Zelensky out. Whether Putin thought it would take 2 days, 3 days, 3 weeks or 2 months is immaterial. He sent his best generals and special forces on that mission, and half of them were killed. It was an epic intel failure.

---

And Putin wanted to meet Zelensky, as both the Russians and the Ukrainians confirmed. I've yet to see any article stating otherwise, or stating that Putin wanted to take Zelensky out.

There's probably no point in debating casualty numbers except to say that Western outlets tend to repeat Ukrainian estimates uncritically and that those estimates are manifestly suspect, to put it in the kindest way possible. The Russians performed successful fighting retreats at the various points of contact and inflicted high casualties on the Ukrainians, as usual, so by no means was it the rout that was trumpeted in Western media.

---

Like I said. And obituaries and actual facts say you are lying, just like you always do.

---

The most detailed analysis of obituaries comes from Mediazona, a BBC-affiliated outlet based in Russia. As of now they count 88K deaths, about one-tenth of the ridiculous 800K+ numbers you hear coming from Ukraine.

It goes without saying that you do literally nothing here but post propaganda, with no independent thought or regard for accuracy whatsoever, so obviously you're in no position to accuse anyone of lying.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

FSB chief Beseda. Then Putin replaced the entire FSB lead with the GRU. There were reports that some of the FSB were arrested for dereliction of duty based on the failed Kyiv takeover.

---

That sounds like an intelligence failure rather than a military one. If Beseda underestimated Ukrainian resistance to the extent he was accused of doing, it would be consistent with what I've seen. Putin was criticized for making one last attempt to force negotiations instead of fully committing his army at the outset. He was trying to avoid a protracted war if at all possible, even if the chances were slim. If the FSB had been right, perhaps Zelensky wouldn't have been emboldened to take Boris Johnson's advice and abandon talks. It's no wonder Putin was angry.

---

Massive intel failure for sure.

On the regime change issue, Putin has called Zelensky illegitimate numerous times, and has refused to meet with him from day 1. Also, I rarely use as source material what Ukraine or Russia say, but Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have stated that Russia repeatedly told them early on that Zelensky had to go and be replaced by a guy whose name escapes me.

---

Putin met with Zelensky in 2019 as part of his ongoing effort to implement the Minsk Agreement. They were working toward another meeting in 2022 when the Ukrainians abruptly walked out of negotiations. Zelensky issued a decree later that year prohibiting talks with Russia. Putin only started calling Zelensky illegitimate after his term expired and no elections were held. These facts present a real obstacle, as they would make it easy for Ukraine to repudiate later any agreement that Zelensky signed today. Prior to and during the early part of the war, it would absolutely have been possible for them to meet.

---

No, numerous outlets, including Russian, reported Putin refused to meet with Zelensky in early 2022.

---

No, he did not. It may have been reported that Putin was waiting to meet until more details were worked out and a first draft of the agreement was completed, but there was never a refusal in principle. On the contrary, the Istanbul Communique (drafted by the Ukrainians) clearly shows that a meeting was planned:

Quote:

---

The parties consider it possible to hold a meeting on ... ... 2022 between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia with the aim to sign an agreement and/or make political decisions regarding the remaining unresolved issues.

---

---

Kyiv Post, Foreign Affairs, NPR, CNN, and others - reporting based on actual documents and emails:

In Feb and March 2022, Putin refused to meet directly with Zelensky despite multiple public and private Zelensky requests.

Yes, Ukraine drafted that, because Ukraine always wanted the direct meetings.

---

A search for that statement brings up the following results.

Foreign Affairs:

Quote:

---

In remarks he made on March 29, immediately after the conclusion of the talks, Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation, sounded decidedly upbeat, explaining that the discussions of the treaty on Ukraine's neutrality were entering the practical phase and that--allowing for all the complexities presented by the treaty's having many potential guarantors--it was possible that Putin and Zelensky would sign it at a summit in the foreseeable future.

---

NPR:

Quote:

---

As fears grow of a Russian invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is proposing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I don't know what the president of the Russian Federation wants, that's why I proposed to meet," Zelenskyy said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

"We are ready to sit down and speak. Pick the platform that you like," Zelenskyy said. "What is the point of us shooting and proposing diplomacy at the same time?"

The Kremlin does not yet appear to have responded to Zelenskyy's proposal as of Saturday evening ET.

---

CNN:

Quote:

---

In a press conference held in a Kyiv subway, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says he is willing to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring an end to the war.

---

Kyiv Post didn't turn up anything, but since you mentioned Russian sources I will include TASS for good measure:

Quote:

---

Russian President Vladimir Putin has never refused in principle to hold a meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, but a document must be drafted before such meeting can be arranged, Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday.

---

Note that Medinsky concurred with the plan stated in the Communique. So it wasn't just wishful thinking on the Ukrainians' part.

As for the leaked email, we're on a bit of a tangent here for the reasons I mentioned earlier. The fact that Putin invaded Ukraine after years of trying to resolve the issue diplomatically hardly proves that he wanted regime change or that he was unwilling to negotiate.

But I did look up the original article in The Sun. I won't get into the question of how reliable Osechkin is or whether the leaks are genuine, given his long history of exaggerated claims and absurd propaganda (this is the same guy who once reported that Prigozhin served Putin a dinner of human brains).

More to the point, I see no reason to believe Putin swallowed these predictions hook, line, and sinker based on some emails from one or a handful of FSB officers. The article reflects the Western euphoria of the war's first year, premised on the assumption of Russian incompetence and ineptitude, with all the predictions of Ukrainian victory in the coming counter-offensive. We now know these premises and predictions were wildly erroneous. That should be kept in mind when revisiting old claims about how unprepared Putin and the Russians were. Moreover, the whole depiction of Putin as naive and ideologically driven is at odds with his statements, actions, and personality. In hindsight, it looks more than anything else like some projection on the part of British journalists.

---

I really don't understand your argument. These just confirm that Zelensky wanted to meet with Putin.

And the last one just says "in principal."

The fact remains Zelensky requested multiple meetings, and Putin refused.

As for "Kyiv in 3 days," we might never know what exactly what is in Putin's head. That's not my point. My point is all these articles show they wanted to take Kyiv and Zelensky out. Whether Putin thought it would take 2 days, 3 days, 3 weeks or 2 months is immaterial. He sent his best generals and special forces on that mission, and half of them were killed. It was an epic intel failure.

---

And Putin wanted to meet Zelensky, as both the Russians and the Ukrainians confirmed. I've yet to see any article stating otherwise, or stating that Putin wanted to take Zelensky out.

There's probably no point in debating casualty numbers except to say that Western outlets tend to repeat Ukrainian estimates uncritically and that those estimates are manifestly suspect, to put it in the kindest way possible. The Russians performed successful fighting retreats at the various points of contact and inflicted high casualties on the Ukrainians, as usual, so by no means was it the rout that was trumpeted in Western media.

---

Like I said. And obituaries and actual facts say you are lying, just like you always do.

---

The most detailed analysis of obituaries comes from Mediazona, a BBC-affiliated outlet based in Russia. As of now they count 88K deaths, about one-tenth of the ridiculous 800K+ numbers you hear coming from Ukraine.

It goes without saying that you do literally nothing here but post propaganda, with no independent thought or regard for accuracy whatsoever, so obviously you're in no position to accuse anyone of lying.

---

Oh please, you've been caught multiple times lying. Even now. And really comical you would have the audacity to call out "propaganda" when that's all you do. A Russian liar and anti-American is all you are who constantly gets clowned here and in other threads.

Ukraine President Zelenskyy proposes to meet with Putin as tensions with Russia grow

By Deepa Shivaram
Published February 19, 2022 at 8:50 AM CST
Michael Probst
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy speaks during the Munich Security Conference in Germany on Saturday. He proposed a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin amid heightened tensions between their two countries.

Updated February 19, 2022 at 8:02 PM ET
As fears grow of a Russian invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is proposing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
"I don't know what the president of the Russian Federation wants, that's why I proposed to meet," Zelenskyy said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.
"We are ready to sit down and speak. Pick the platform that you like," Zelensky said "What is the point of us shooting and proposing diplomacy at the same time?"
The Kremlin does not yet appear to have responded to Zelenskyy's proposal as of Saturday evening ET.
"All we care about is peace," Zelenskyy said.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

FSB chief Beseda. Then Putin replaced the entire FSB lead with the GRU. There were reports that some of the FSB were arrested for dereliction of duty based on the failed Kyiv takeover.

---

That sounds like an intelligence failure rather than a military one. If Beseda underestimated Ukrainian resistance to the extent he was accused of doing, it would be consistent with what I've seen. Putin was criticized for making one last attempt to force negotiations instead of fully committing his army at the outset. He was trying to avoid a protracted war if at all possible, even if the chances were slim. If the FSB had been right, perhaps Zelensky wouldn't have been emboldened to take Boris Johnson's advice and abandon talks. It's no wonder Putin was angry.

---

Massive intel failure for sure.

On the regime change issue, Putin has called Zelensky illegitimate numerous times, and has refused to meet with him from day 1. Also, I rarely use as source material what Ukraine or Russia say, but Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have stated that Russia repeatedly told them early on that Zelensky had to go and be replaced by a guy whose name escapes me.

---

Putin met with Zelensky in 2019 as part of his ongoing effort to implement the Minsk Agreement. They were working toward another meeting in 2022 when the Ukrainians abruptly walked out of negotiations. Zelensky issued a decree later that year prohibiting talks with Russia. Putin only started calling Zelensky illegitimate after his term expired and no elections were held. These facts present a real obstacle, as they would make it easy for Ukraine to repudiate later any agreement that Zelensky signed today. Prior to and during the early part of the war, it would absolutely have been possible for them to meet.

---

No, numerous outlets, including Russian, reported Putin refused to meet with Zelensky in early 2022.

---

No, he did not. It may have been reported that Putin was waiting to meet until more details were worked out and a first draft of the agreement was completed, but there was never a refusal in principle. On the contrary, the Istanbul Communique (drafted by the Ukrainians) clearly shows that a meeting was planned:

Quote:

---

The parties consider it possible to hold a meeting on ... ... 2022 between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia with the aim to sign an agreement and/or make political decisions regarding the remaining unresolved issues.

---

---

Kyiv Post, Foreign Affairs, NPR, CNN, and others - reporting based on actual documents and emails:

In Feb and March 2022, Putin refused to meet directly with Zelensky despite multiple public and private Zelensky requests.

Yes, Ukraine drafted that, because Ukraine always wanted the direct meetings.

---

A search for that statement brings up the following results.

Foreign Affairs:

Quote:

---

In remarks he made on March 29, immediately after the conclusion of the talks, Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation, sounded decidedly upbeat, explaining that the discussions of the treaty on Ukraine's neutrality were entering the practical phase and that--allowing for all the complexities presented by the treaty's having many potential guarantors--it was possible that Putin and Zelensky would sign it at a summit in the foreseeable future.

---

NPR:

Quote:

---

As fears grow of a Russian invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is proposing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I don't know what the president of the Russian Federation wants, that's why I proposed to meet," Zelenskyy said at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

"We are ready to sit down and speak. Pick the platform that you like," Zelenskyy said. "What is the point of us shooting and proposing diplomacy at the same time?"

The Kremlin does not yet appear to have responded to Zelenskyy's proposal as of Saturday evening ET.

---

CNN:

Quote:

---

In a press conference held in a Kyiv subway, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says he is willing to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring an end to the war.

---

Kyiv Post didn't turn up anything, but since you mentioned Russian sources I will include TASS for good measure:

Quote:

---

Russian President Vladimir Putin has never refused in principle to hold a meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, but a document must be drafted before such meeting can be arranged, Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday.

---

Note that Medinsky concurred with the plan stated in the Communique. So it wasn't just wishful thinking on the Ukrainians' part.

As for the leaked email, we're on a bit of a tangent here for the reasons I mentioned earlier. The fact that Putin invaded Ukraine after years of trying to resolve the issue diplomatically hardly proves that he wanted regime change or that he was unwilling to negotiate.

But I did look up the original article in The Sun. I won't get into the question of how reliable Osechkin is or whether the leaks are genuine, given his long history of exaggerated claims and absurd propaganda (this is the same guy who once reported that Prigozhin served Putin a dinner of human brains).

More to the point, I see no reason to believe Putin swallowed these predictions hook, line, and sinker based on some emails from one or a handful of FSB officers. The article reflects the Western euphoria of the war's first year, premised on the assumption of Russian incompetence and ineptitude, with all the predictions of Ukrainian victory in the coming counter-offensive. We now know these premises and predictions were wildly erroneous. That should be kept in mind when revisiting old claims about how unprepared Putin and the Russians were. Moreover, the whole depiction of Putin as naive and ideologically driven is at odds with his statements, actions, and personality. In hindsight, it looks more than anything else like some projection on the part of British journalists.

---

I really don't understand your argument. These just confirm that Zelensky wanted to meet with Putin.

And the last one just says "in principal."

The fact remains Zelensky requested multiple meetings, and Putin refused.

As for "Kyiv in 3 days," we might never know what exactly what is in Putin's head. That's not my point. My point is all these articles show they wanted to take Kyiv and Zelensky out. Whether Putin thought it would take 2 days, 3 days, 3 weeks or 2 months is immaterial. He sent his best generals and special forces on that mission, and half of them were killed. It was an epic intel failure.

---

And Putin wanted to meet Zelensky, as both the Russians and the Ukrainians confirmed. I've yet to see any article stating otherwise, or stating that Putin wanted to take Zelensky out.

There's probably no point in debating casualty numbers except to say that Western outlets tend to repeat Ukrainian estimates uncritically and that those estimates are manifestly suspect, to put it in the kindest way possible. The Russians performed successful fighting retreats at the various points of contact and inflicted high casualties on the Ukrainians, as usual, so by no means was it the rout that was trumpeted in Western media.

---

Like I said. And obituaries and actual facts say you are lying, just like you always do.

---

It goes without saying that you do literally nothing here but post propaganda, with no independent thought or regard for accuracy whatsoever, so obviously you're in no position to accuse anyone of lying.

---

Might want to look in that mirror again.

sombear said:

---

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/talks-could-have-ended-war-ukraine

---

I've explained this several times. If you're saying Putin wanted the broad outlines of an agreement before he and Zelensky met to finalize the details, there's no question about that. If you're saying he simply "has refused to meet with Zelensky from day one," that is false according to the above article (which I quoted earlier) and everything else we've seen here. Negotiating teams typically work together well in advance of a summit meeting in order to draft agreements and resolve as many differences as possible beforehand.

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/talks-could-have-ended-war-ukraine

---

I've explained this several times. If you're saying Putin wanted the broad outlines of an agreement before he and Zelensky met to finalize the details, there's no question about that. If you're saying he simply "has refused to meet with Zelensky from day one," that is false according to the above article (which I quoted earlier) and everything else we've seen here. Negotiating teams typically work together well in advance of a summit meeting in order to draft agreements and resolve as many differences as possible beforehand.

---

Putin meeting with Zelensky would be akin to the "I'll quit one day" guy going to AA meetings 3 days/week with no intentions of ever quitting. His mind was made up. He may well have sat in a meeting with Zelensky and sent the invasion force during the meeting. Dude's mind was well made at that point.

trey3216 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/talks-could-have-ended-war-ukraine

---

I've explained this several times. If you're saying Putin wanted the broad outlines of an agreement before he and Zelensky met to finalize the details, there's no question about that. If you're saying he simply "has refused to meet with Zelensky from day one," that is false according to the above article (which I quoted earlier) and everything else we've seen here. Negotiating teams typically work together well in advance of a summit meeting in order to draft agreements and resolve as many differences as possible beforehand.

---

Putin meeting with Zelensky would be akin to the "I'll quit one day" guy going to AA meetings 3 days/week with no intentions of ever quitting. His mind was made up. He may well have sat in a meeting with Zelensky and sent the invasion force during the meeting. Dude's mind was well made at that point.

---

Sure, if you ignore everything Putin actually says and does, you can believe anything you want to believe. Then you can tell us all how we need to "just listen to Putin." Funny how that works.

Sam Lowry said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/talks-could-have-ended-war-ukraine

---

I've explained this several times. If you're saying Putin wanted the broad outlines of an agreement before he and Zelensky met to finalize the details, there's no question about that. If you're saying he simply "has refused to meet with Zelensky from day one," that is false according to the above article (which I quoted earlier) and everything else we've seen here. Negotiating teams typically work together well in advance of a summit meeting in order to draft agreements and resolve as many differences as possible beforehand.

---

Putin meeting with Zelensky would be akin to the "I'll quit one day" guy going to AA meetings 3 days/week with no intentions of ever quitting. His mind was made up. He may well have sat in a meeting with Zelensky and sent the invasion force during the meeting. Dude's mind was well made at that point.

---

Sure, if you ignore everything Putin actually says and does, you can believe anything you want to believe. Then you can tell us all how we need to "just listen to Putin." Funny how that works.

---

You ignore everything he says and was. You ignore what the Russian TV networks say even though they are directly fed what to say by Vlad via Margarita Simonyan. So, you can either say "he didn't exactly say that" like you always do or you can look at what his mouthpieces have been and continue to say and know that he didn't have to open his mouth to say it loud and clear.


Or you can be an ostrich...

Realitybites said:

---

The dangers of ignoring Ukraine's neo-Nazis

Democrats and neocons are making the argument that we really shouldn't be that concerned about Ukraine's Nazi problem so that they can continue to have a corrupt black box to launder money, conduct biowarfare experiments, make money for the MIC, and advance the borders of LGBTQstan.

Does that even sound rational?

Ukraine is ruled by a dictator who has cancelled one election and stands poised to cancel a second one. That's why he is every bit as illegitimate a ruler as if Biden were still infesting the White House on January 21st.

He's created an environment where fascism rules. So basically Hitler.

Cut them off. This war was as bad as our wag the dog war on Serbia.

---

Rarely is anything you post rational. Digging deep with a dated op-ed from a first year Tufts student I guess.

Is it appropriate for me to ask about the coincidence between billions in aid to the Ukraine and Hunter Biden's position with the Ukraine's largest state owned oil company.?

I'm not saying it's part of political influence, but it is. The Ukraine had a price and we paid out part of the deal.

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Okay, for those with a purposefully very short attention span, here's the "deal" that Russia had for Ukraine before the February 24 invasion:

- Ukraine ceases to exist as a sovereign independent nation (because it's "not a real country")
- Ukraine's popularly elected leadership…

— Illia Ponomarenko 🇺🇦 (@IAPonomarenko) January 24, 2025

---

This is a shockingly distorted history even by Ukrainian PR standards. Not a single one of those pre-war demands is accurate.

It is true that Zelensky was elected with a mandate to settle with the Russians, but his failure had nothing to do with Putin refusing to negotiate. It had to do with Zelensky's corrupt benefactors and the neo-Nazis who threatened to hang him from the highest tree in Kiev if he ever made a deal.

---

What specifically is inaccurate?

Sure, the guy spices it up a bit, but everything in there can be found in actual proposals.

---

Literally all of it. Ukraine ceasing to exist, exiling its government, replacing its president, completely dismantling its military, giving up its language and culture, breaking ties with the West, full Russian control of resources, concentration camps, mass graves, etc.

It's bizarre. Some of these things likely will happen now because of the war, but all Russia was demanding at the time was implementation of the Minsk Agreement and a pledge not to seek NATO membership.

---

I guess we can quibble over characterizations, but all of these were in the actual proposals before talks broke down:

Regime change
Russia stays in the east
Major reduction in military
Major reduction in weapons
Laundry list of prohibited weapons
No western military training
"De-Nazification"
Ban "fascism"
Ban "aggressive nationalism."
Revise history taught in schools, making it more pro-Russia
Russian national language
Russia right to review/approve even non-military relationships/agreements with other countries.
Mandatory energy/mining agreements

---

No, they were not. The Minsk proposals called for withdrawal of all forces from the east and limited autonomy for Donetsk and Luhansk. Only later did the demand change to independence for the two oblasts, with the presence of Russian forces to be negotiated. Never was there any talk of annexation or of regime change in Kiev.

Russian would have been an official language, not the official language. Ukraine would have ended discrimination and quotas against the Russian language in media. There were needed prohibitions on activities contrary to Ukraine's neutrality, including Western military training. There were also prohibitions on Nazi organizations and propaganda. Call it an affront to free speech, but Germany does the same thing (and their Nazi problem is nowhere near as bad as Ukraine's). Ukraine would have pledged to "refrain from using its own territory or the territories of other states to harm the sovereignty, independence, and integrity of other states," the major concern on the part of the Russians which I referred to earlier.

---

Wait, you're saying regime change was never pursued? How do you explain the hit squads and attempted taking of Kyiv? I mean, were they all just going there to negotiate with Zelensky?

---

Russia sent something like eight or nine battalion tactical groups to Kiev. In no way was it an attempt to take the city. The goal was to force negotiations, and it succeeded. They did in fact negotiate with the Zelensky government and came close to an agreement.

---

Then why did the highest levels of the Russian gov and military predict a quick taking of Kyiv? And why did Putin fire the architect of the Kyiv strategy? And what about the killed and captured hit squads all over Kyiv? And how about the taking of airfields and power plants and suburbs?

And I think you're understating the Russian force by about 90%.

Hundreds of destroyed tanks and other vehicles were left on the road to Kyiv.

---

Journalists may have predicted a quick taking of the city. Some legislators and other officials made general statements that Russia would be victorious or that things were going to plan. I don't recall officials at the highest levels commenting in detail. There were a number of Russian saboteurs killed or captured. I don't know about hit squads.

The operation seemed roughly analogous to Desert Storm in 1991. The Americans pushed deep into Iraq and took some steps that could potentially have toppled the regime, but that was never necessarily the goal. Most of the vehicles sent in the Kiev direction were military police and other unarmored vehicles, which tells you something about what the Russians expected. They were preparing to secure Kiev if and when the government collapsed. They tried to surround and blockade the city while cutting off power and TV broadcasts. But they had no intention of storming or holding it against significant resistance. The real meat of Russian operations was elsewhere--securing a land bridge to Crimea and capturing key points in the east.

All of this makes sense as a way to put pressure on Zelensky, and if it forces him out of power then maybe that's all the better. But it was never a demand of the Russians either before the invasion or during the negotiations that followed.

---

I mean, there are pictures of destroyed convoys many miles long, including hundreds of tanks.

REUTERS

19 Photos August 25, 20223:46 PM CDT

Ukraine puts destroyed Russian tanks on display in Kyiv

---

I mean, who said there were no pictures of tanks? No doubt Russian armored units were fanning out all across the country. I don't see a reason to conclude they had ten times as many troops as reported in Kiev.

---

you both are partly correct.

There was a small airborne force that jumped/helo'ed in to seize the airport in Kyiv, to establish an air bridge, thru which more & heavier forces could be brought in via air cargo into expand & hold the bridgehead. Then the main force from Belarus would punch thru and arrive the next day to consolidate. Very conventional strategy, but in this particular case it was "a bridge too far." the Russian plan clearly presumed Ukraine would fold under such an assault, and crumpled when it met such sustained resistance. The paratroopers were able to capture the airport, but were unable to secure it for incoming cargo flights. And the resistance met by the main column left the paratroopers exposed unsupported for too long, and they lost the air bridge. Once that happened, there was no point in the main column continuing on, and it collapsed into a disorderly flight back to Belarus.

That was an intelligence failure as much as anything else. Severe miscalculation by Russian leadership about the will and ability of their opponent.