Redbrickbear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

President-elect Donald Trump’s team has allegedly drafted a proposal to end the ongoing war in Ukraine war, per WSJ.

Allegedly the plan includes significant conditions: Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current…

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) November 7, 2024

---

"Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current front lines and the establishment of a demilitarized zone between Russian-held territory and Ukraine."


That does not accomplish anything long term

Kyiv has to give up forever its claims on Donbas and Crimea

Moscow has to give up the idea that the rest of Western oriented Ukraine is not going to join EU-NATO soon.

Just a demilitarized zone solves nothing long term.

---

Yeah I don't think this is intended to be a long term goal. Its a ceasefire.

Zelensky is opposed because a ceasefire was tried back in 2014 and Ukraine lost Crimea...but that's because there were no real forcible conditions. IMO Zelensky is delusional because Trump will withhold U.S. arms and funding to Ukraine unless it enters peace talks with Russia.

Trump will demand forcible conditions. If Russia doesn't abide, its war. If Ukraine doesn't abide, they stop getting funding. These would be the conditions for 20 years.

Long term, I would clean up the insane corruption in Ukraine. We cannot allow a oligarchy state to enter NATO, although some would argue their oligarchy control has diminished, which it has, it could turn into an autocracy. They simply don't have the track record for it.

Russia will never accept an agreement along these lines. At best it would prolong the war. At worst it would lead to direct US involvement.

Predict an armistice will be established between Ukraine and Russia prior to June 1st.

🚨Joe Rogan and Dave Smith absolutely RIP on Lindsey Graham. Rogan's impression is hilarious! Watch the whole thing 😂😂😂

"We got to get those minerals. Theres some expensive minerals over there in the Ukraine." LMAO pic.twitter.com/MuGHf6Y4j4

— Autism Capital 🧩 (@AutismCapital) November 7, 2024

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

If both sides were exhausted, Russia's progress wouldn't be accelerating as it has. And it has markedly accelerated since the fall of Avdiivka.

To answer your question, Russia will secure Donetsk in six to twelve months. I'm guessing much closer to six.

---

LOL "accelerating..." Sure. They were advancing by feet. per day. Now they're advancing by yards per day. It'll take longer than 12 months.....

By next summer, they'll have increasing difficulty sustaining their efforts. 2026 is when it wraps up. Unless we remove the restrictions from the Ukes. Could end it next year if we do that. And I suspect Trump will.

---

You've obviously quit keeping up with news from the front. I don't blame you...I'd be depressed too if I were you.

---

The difference is, my sources are reporting facts and yours are reporting propaganda.

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success. Russia has exactly that. Problem is, it's casualty rate relative to Uke losses is closer to 5-1. That's why we see Russia bringing in troops from NoKo. They're basically out of manpower without a full mobilization which Putin has obviously decided is not politically viable.

Demographics will not determine the outcome of this war.
Logistics will.

First, I would expect to see Trump covert aid to Ukraine over to lend-lease (something he's already mentioned he would like to do). That deteriorates Russia's strategic position, as it actually joins Ukraine and USA/Nato at the hip. To prevent that, Russia must then achieve total victory and subsumption of Ukraine, something manifestly beyond Russia's ability to achieve.

Second, I would expect to see Trump loosen if not remove all restrictions from Ukrainian use of US weapon systems against targets inside Russia. That will seriously hamper Russian logistics.

Both of those steps will drastically increase Putin to come to the negotiating table.

Biggest miscalculation policy critics have made is that Trump is going to fold up our hand and leave Ukraine to its own fate. Not. Going. To. Happen.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

President-elect Donald Trump’s team has allegedly drafted a proposal to end the ongoing war in Ukraine war, per WSJ.

Allegedly the plan includes significant conditions: Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current…

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) November 7, 2024

---

"Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current front lines and the establishment of a demilitarized zone between Russian-held territory and Ukraine."


That does not accomplish anything long term

Kyiv has to give up forever its claims on Donbas and Crimea

Moscow has to give up the idea that the rest of Western oriented Ukraine is not going to join EU-NATO soon.

Just a demilitarized zone solves nothing long term.

---

the only long-term "solution" is for Russia to lose the war & go home.

I agree with the delay of Ukrainian membership to Nato. Premature entry of Ukraine to Nato is an existential threat to Nato, perhaps an even greater one than outright Russian victory in the war.

I'm skeptical of the sourcing of this story. Sounds like leaking to drive narrative rather than actual developments.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

President-elect Donald Trump’s team has allegedly drafted a proposal to end the ongoing war in Ukraine war, per WSJ.

Allegedly the plan includes significant conditions: Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current…

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) November 7, 2024

---

"Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current front lines and the establishment of a demilitarized zone between Russian-held territory and Ukraine."


That does not accomplish anything long term

Kyiv has to give up forever its claims on Donbas and Crimea

Moscow has to give up the idea that the rest of Western oriented Ukraine is not going to join EU-NATO soon.

Just a demilitarized zone solves nothing long term.

---

I'm skeptical of the sourcing of this story. Sounds like leaking to drive narrative rather than actual developments.

---

On that point and that point alone, you are probably right. That doesn't mean Trump will take the hawkish approach that you expect; I doubt he knows yet what he'll do.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

President-elect Donald Trump’s team has allegedly drafted a proposal to end the ongoing war in Ukraine war, per WSJ.

Allegedly the plan includes significant conditions: Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current…

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) November 7, 2024

---

"Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current front lines and the establishment of a demilitarized zone between Russian-held territory and Ukraine."


That does not accomplish anything long term

Kyiv has to give up forever its claims on Donbas and Crimea

Moscow has to give up the idea that the rest of Western oriented Ukraine is not going to join EU-NATO soon.

Just a demilitarized zone solves nothing long term.

---

the only long-term "solution" is for Russia to lose the war & go home.

---

And then what....

You think letting NATO (DC really) build military bases in Crimea is gonna bring long term peace with Moscow?

And what about the millions of ethnic russians in Crimea and the Donbas?

We plan on ethnically cleansing the area like with the eastern Europe Germans after WWII? Or the way the Muslim Turks forced out and killed the Armenians and Assyrian Christians in WWI?

Fall of a Tyrant: An 'Earthquake' Brings Down the Biden/Harris Dystopia

The last four years were the darkest in U.S. history: A vicious clampdown on freedom at home; brutal wars abroad. Will Trump fight the Beltway militarists, or make a deal with them?

"Support for Trump was high across almost all demographic groups, especially those that previously supported the Democrats. He rode a tsunami of boiling popular anger over years of failed economic policies, state repression and wars/ genocide. Harris won in major urban areas plagued by lawlessness and corruption as well as in upper class suburbs. Most states that she won didn't require an ID to vote.

Biden, however, still has 2 months to set the country and world on fire. One of the first decisions he made after Trump's victory was to pledge an additional $6 billion for his friends in Kiev. The New York Times continues to call Trump "a mortal threat to the nation", which is a signal to incite protests and riots. I anticipate that in January, the Democrats will unleash their militants BLM, Antifa, etc.

Let's take a brief look at how Biden's brutal and disastrous rule began, and what events fueled the anger of the American people.

In January 2021, amid allegations of widespread voter fraud, Biden's regime got off to an ominous start. He was so widely detested that 40,000 soldiers had to be dispatched to patrol the streets of Washington DC for his installment into the Oval Office. This set the tone for his heavy-handed rule.

Consumed by fear and paranoia, Biden moved fast to clamp down on the opposition, jailing hundreds of Trump supporters on dubious charges of "insurrection". Trump was impeached a second time and criminal cases launched in order to destroy his legacy and prevent him from running again. The U.S. had never before seen such political persecution. We were in uncharted territory..."

Whiterock's Boomercon dreams aside the Pomeos, Brennans, etc of this world will not crawl back into positions where they can exert their malign influence...and if they do, the GOP will burn to the ground as surely as the Democrat party did. Let's hope that Zelensky - canceller of elections, persecutor of Christians, promoter of the rainbow jihad, campaigner for the Harriz/Walz ticket - is the next tyrant to fall.

Realitybites said:

---

Fall of a Tyrant: An 'Earthquake' Brings Down the Biden/Harris Dystopia

The last four years were the darkest in U.S. history: A vicious clampdown on freedom at home; brutal wars abroad. Will Trump fight the Beltway militarists, or make a deal with them?

"Support for Trump was high across almost all demographic groups, especially those that previously supported the Democrats. He rode a tsunami of boiling popular anger over years of failed economic policies, state repression and wars/ genocide. Harris won in major urban areas plagued by lawlessness and corruption as well as in upper class suburbs. Most states that she won didn't require an ID to vote.

Biden, however, still has 2 months to set the country and world on fire. One of the first decisions he made after Trump's victory was to pledge an additional $6 billion for his friends in Kyiv. The New York Times continues to call Trump "a mortal threat to the nation", which is a signal to incite protests and riots. I anticipate that in January, the Democrats will unleash their militants BLM, Antifa, etc.

Let's take a brief look at how Biden's brutal and disastrous rule began, and what events fueled the anger of the American people.

In January 2021, amid allegations of widespread voter fraud, Biden's regime got off to an ominous start. He was so widely detested that 40,000 soldiers had to be dispatched to patrol the streets of Washington DC for his installment into the Oval Office. This set the tone for his heavy-handed rule.

Consumed by fear and paranoia, Biden moved fast to clamp down on the opposition, jailing hundreds of Trump supporters on dubious charges of "insurrection". Trump was impeached a second time and criminal cases launched in order to destroy his legacy and prevent him from running again. The U.S. had never before seen such political persecution. We were in uncharted territory..."

Whiterock's Boomercon dreams aside the Pomeos, Brennans, etc of this world will not crawl back into positions where they can exert their malign influence...and if they do, the GOP will burn to the ground as surely as the Democrat party did. Let's hope that Zelensky - canceller of elections, persecutor of Christians, promoter of the rainbow jihad, campaigner for the Harriz/Walz ticket - is the next tyrant to fall.

---

LMAO. Ok Vlad.

Realitybites said:

---

Fall of a Tyrant: An 'Earthquake' Brings Down the Biden/Harris Dystopia

The last four years were the darkest in U.S. history: A vicious clampdown on freedom at home; brutal wars abroad. Will Trump fight the Beltway militarists, or make a deal with them?

"Support for Trump was high across almost all demographic groups, especially those that previously supported the Democrats. He rode a tsunami of boiling popular anger over years of failed economic policies, state repression and wars/ genocide. Harris won in major urban areas plagued by lawlessness and corruption as well as in upper class suburbs. Most states that she won didn't require an ID to vote.

Biden, however, still has 2 months to set the country and world on fire. One of the first decisions he made after Trump's victory was to pledge an additional $6 billion for his friends in Kiev. The New York Times continues to call Trump "a mortal threat to the nation", which is a signal to incite protests and riots. I anticipate that in January, the Democrats will unleash their militants BLM, Antifa, etc.

Let's take a brief look at how Biden's brutal and disastrous rule began, and what events fueled the anger of the American people.

In January 2021, amid allegations of widespread voter fraud, Biden's regime got off to an ominous start. He was so widely detested that 40,000 soldiers had to be dispatched to patrol the streets of Washington DC for his installment into the Oval Office. This set the tone for his heavy-handed rule.

Consumed by fear and paranoia, Biden moved fast to clamp down on the opposition, jailing hundreds of Trump supporters on dubious charges of "insurrection". Trump was impeached a second time and criminal cases launched in order to destroy his legacy and prevent him from running again. The U.S. had never before seen such political persecution. We were in uncharted territory..."

Whiterock's Boomercon dreams aside the Pomeos, Brennans, etc of this world will not crawl back into positions where they can exert their malign influence...and if they do, the GOP will burn to the ground as surely as the Democrat party did. Let's hope that Zelensky - canceller of elections, persecutor of Christians, promoter of the rainbow jihad, campaigner for the Harriz/Walz ticket - is the next tyrant to fall.

---

Another reason we need to move up the transfer of power after elections.

No reason the lame duck should be allowed to hang around for months after getting thrown out of the White House.

The transfer of power should be 30 days or less after an elections on Nov. 5th

We are not a horse and buggy society anymore.

[Why do we wait until the latter part of January to swear in a president we elect in November? Put another way: How is it that the Brits can have a newly elected prime minister meeting with the queen to form a new government within a day or two, but we need 10 or 11 weeks to install a new crew?

Well, since you asked, our transfer of power originally took much longer. It was initially set for March 4, though in 1789 a bad winter storm delayed the swearing-in of George Washington until April. Thereafter, the early March mandate was respected for nearly 150 years.

A bad winter was a major obstacle in 1789 because so much of the system literally ran on horsepower. The best overland option was a horse, or a horse and buggy, or a horse-drawn coach, over roads that were iffy at best especially in winter. Sometimes it was faster to get a boat.

After a national election, many riders had to mount many horses to assemble voting results from every local voting jurisdiction in the original 13 states. Still more would need to saddle up so that the results could cross state lines and make multiday trips, often in inclement weather.]

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

President-elect Donald Trump’s team has allegedly drafted a proposal to end the ongoing war in Ukraine war, per WSJ.

Allegedly the plan includes significant conditions: Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current…

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) November 7, 2024

---

"Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current front lines and the establishment of a demilitarized zone between Russian-held territory and Ukraine."


That does not accomplish anything long term

Kyiv has to give up forever its claims on Donbas and Crimea

Moscow has to give up the idea that the rest of Western oriented Ukraine is not going to join EU-NATO soon.

Just a demilitarized zone solves nothing long term.

---

the only long-term "solution" is for Russia to lose the war & go home.

---

And then what....

You think letting NATO (DC really) build military bases in Crimea is gonna bring long term peace with Moscow?

And what about the millions of ethnic russians in Crimea and the Donbas?

We plan on ethnically cleansing the area like with the eastern Europe Germans after WWII? Or the way the Muslim Turks forced out and killed the Armenians and Assyrian Christians in WWI?

---

It was ok for the Russians to ethnically cleanse those areas?

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success.

---

Tell me without telling me you still don't understand attrition warfare.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success.

---

Tell me without telling me you still don't understand attrition warfare.

---

Did you seriously type that?

trey3216 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

President-elect Donald Trump’s team has allegedly drafted a proposal to end the ongoing war in Ukraine war, per WSJ.

Allegedly the plan includes significant conditions: Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current…

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) November 7, 2024

---

"Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current front lines and the establishment of a demilitarized zone between Russian-held territory and Ukraine."


That does not accomplish anything long term

Kyiv has to give up forever its claims on Donbas and Crimea

Moscow has to give up the idea that the rest of Western oriented Ukraine is not going to join EU-NATO soon.

Just a demilitarized zone solves nothing long term.

---

the only long-term "solution" is for Russia to lose the war & go home.

---

And then what....

You think letting NATO (DC really) build military bases in Crimea is gonna bring long term peace with Moscow?

And what about the millions of ethnic russians in Crimea and the Donbas?

We plan on ethnically cleansing the area like with the eastern Europe Germans after WWII? Or the way the Muslim Turks forced out and killed the Armenians and Assyrian Christians in WWI?

---

It was ok for the Russians to ethnically cleanse those areas?

---

Donbas and Crimea have been filled with ethnic russians for a long time.

If you mean the Communist Soviets getting rid of the Crimean Tartars in World War II

Well that just begs the question of if D.C. wants Zelensky to copy old Joe Stalin (one of the great monsters of history)



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tatars

trey3216 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success.

---

Tell me without telling me you still don't understand attrition warfare.

---

Did you seriously type that?

---

Right? After almost three years, you'd think he would get it.

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success. Russia has exactly that. Problem is, it's casualty rate relative to Uke losses is closer to 5-1. That's why we see Russia bringing in troops from NoKo. They're basically out of manpower without a full mobilization which Putin has obviously decided is not politically viable.

Demographics will not determine the outcome of this war.
Logistics will.

First, I would expect to see Trump covert aid to Ukraine over to lend-lease (something he's already mentioned he would like to do). That deteriorates Russia's strategic position, as it actually joins Ukraine and USA/Nato at the hip. To prevent that, Russia must then achieve total victory and subsumption of Ukraine, something manifestly beyond Russia's ability to achieve.

Second, I would expect to see Trump loosen if not remove all restrictions from Ukrainian use of US weapon systems against targets inside Russia. That will seriously hamper Russian logistics.

Both of those steps will drastically increase Putin to come to the negotiating table.

Biggest miscalculation policy critics have made is that Trump is going to fold up our hand and leave Ukraine to its own fate. Not. Going. To. Happen.

---

The billion dollar aid packages are over.

Trump got elected because people are tired of America's priorities being out of order.

Trump will absolutely cut Ukraine off bcs we can't afford to keep funding them and he has to clean up the domestic messes the Globalists who stole the last election created in our country, most notably securing the border and mass deportations.

---

European nations need to step up like yesterday. They thumb their noses at how backwards the US is until it's time to pony up for the military, then it's all about NATO NATO NATO ie "United States idiots, please save us from the Asiatic hordes!" As I posted months back (and got heat for it), I think it's a high time that the American government prioritized the well-being of Americans over foreigners both domestic and abroad. I know that's a crazy thought, but there it is

If Zelinsky is unwilling to concede anything to Russia, funding needs to be dramatically decreased. The idea that Russia is going to leave Crimea and eastern Ukraine and stop by every household along the way to apologize is cute in movies like Braveheart, but it's not how the real world works. Life isn't fair. Big countries beat up on smaller countries. It sucks that Europe sat on their hands for years, so blame them, not the US

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success. Russia has exactly that. Problem is, it's casualty rate relative to Uke losses is closer to 5-1. That's why we see Russia bringing in troops from NoKo. They're basically out of manpower without a full mobilization which Putin has obviously decided is not politically viable.

Demographics will not determine the outcome of this war.
Logistics will.

First, I would expect to see Trump covert aid to Ukraine over to lend-lease (something he's already mentioned he would like to do). That deteriorates Russia's strategic position, as it actually joins Ukraine and USA/Nato at the hip. To prevent that, Russia must then achieve total victory and subsumption of Ukraine, something manifestly beyond Russia's ability to achieve.

Second, I would expect to see Trump loosen if not remove all restrictions from Ukrainian use of US weapon systems against targets inside Russia. That will seriously hamper Russian logistics.

Both of those steps will drastically increase Putin to come to the negotiating table.

Biggest miscalculation policy critics have made is that Trump is going to fold up our hand and leave Ukraine to its own fate. Not. Going. To. Happen.

---

The billion dollar aid packages are over.

Trump got elected because people are tired of America's priorities being out of order.

Trump will absolutely cut Ukraine off bcs we can't afford to keep funding them and he has to clean up the domestic messes the Globalists who stole the last election created in our country, most notably securing the border and mass deportations.

---

European nations need to step up like yesterday. They thumb their noses at how backwards the US is until it's time to pony up for the military, then it's all about NATO NATO NATO ie "United States idiots, please save us from the Asiatic hordes!" As I posted months back (and got heat for it), I think it's a high time that the American government prioritized the well-being of Americans over foreigners both domestic and abroad. I know that's a crazy thought, but there it is

---

They have built very comprehensive welfare states off the back of American tax payers and the security assurances that the USA provides.

And they are loath to spend the money that is required of them to be in NATO

[2014, NATO leaders came to an agreement that members who spend under the 2% benchmark are to work towards reaching that goal within a decade. Thus, far many of the members (65%), haven't met that goal. ]

Redbrickbear said:

---

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success. Russia has exactly that. Problem is, it's casualty rate relative to Uke losses is closer to 5-1. That's why we see Russia bringing in troops from NoKo. They're basically out of manpower without a full mobilization which Putin has obviously decided is not politically viable.

Demographics will not determine the outcome of this war.
Logistics will.

First, I would expect to see Trump covert aid to Ukraine over to lend-lease (something he's already mentioned he would like to do). That deteriorates Russia's strategic position, as it actually joins Ukraine and USA/Nato at the hip. To prevent that, Russia must then achieve total victory and subsumption of Ukraine, something manifestly beyond Russia's ability to achieve.

Second, I would expect to see Trump loosen if not remove all restrictions from Ukrainian use of US weapon systems against targets inside Russia. That will seriously hamper Russian logistics.

Both of those steps will drastically increase Putin to come to the negotiating table.

Biggest miscalculation policy critics have made is that Trump is going to fold up our hand and leave Ukraine to its own fate. Not. Going. To. Happen.

---

The billion dollar aid packages are over.

Trump got elected because people are tired of America's priorities being out of order.

Trump will absolutely cut Ukraine off bcs we can't afford to keep funding them and he has to clean up the domestic messes the Globalists who stole the last election created in our country, most notably securing the border and mass deportations.

---

European nations need to step up like yesterday. They thumb their noses at how backwards the US is until it's time to pony up for the military, then it's all about NATO NATO NATO ie "United States idiots, please save us from the Asiatic hordes!" As I posted months back (and got heat for it), I think it's a high time that the American government prioritized the well-being of Americans over foreigners both domestic and abroad. I know that's a crazy thought, but there it is

---

They have built very compressive welfare states off the back of American tax payers and the security assurances that the USA provides.

And they are loath to spend the money that is required of them to be in NATO

[2014, NATO leaders came to an agreement that members who spend under the 2% benchmark are to work towards reaching that goal within a decade. Thus, far many of the members (65%), haven't met that goal. ]

---

Yep. And I can't wait till I get called a Russia lover by some gated-community Republican or limousine liberal that doesn't care if the housing market sucks or their grocery bill is going up and would never send their own kid to get shot by random peasants on the front line. As with most wars, this is about the ultra rich deciding that the working class and middle class should go fight each other so that they can get slightly richer. So again, while I feel bad for Ukraine, there's nothing happening here that hasn't happened in any other proxy war since the beginning of recorded history

/rant

trey3216 said:

---

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success. Russia has exactly that. Problem is, it's casualty rate relative to Uke losses is closer to 5-1. That's why we see Russia bringing in troops from NoKo. They're basically out of manpower without a full mobilization which Putin has obviously decided is not politically viable.

Demographics will not determine the outcome of this war.
Logistics will.

First, I would expect to see Trump covert aid to Ukraine over to lend-lease (something he's already mentioned he would like to do). That deteriorates Russia's strategic position, as it actually joins Ukraine and USA/Nato at the hip. To prevent that, Russia must then achieve total victory and subsumption of Ukraine, something manifestly beyond Russia's ability to achieve.

Second, I would expect to see Trump loosen if not remove all restrictions from Ukrainian use of US weapon systems against targets inside Russia. That will seriously hamper Russian logistics.

Both of those steps will drastically increase Putin to come to the negotiating table.

Biggest miscalculation policy critics have made is that Trump is going to fold up our hand and leave Ukraine to its own fate. Not. Going. To. Happen.

---

The billion dollar aid packages are over.

Trump got elected because people are tired of America's priorities being out of order.

Trump will absolutely cut Ukraine off bcs we can't afford to keep funding them and he has to clean up the domestic messes the Globalists who stole the last election created in our country, most notably securing the border and mass deportations.

---

European nations need to step up like yesterday. They thumb their noses at how backwards the US is until it's time to pony up for the military, then it's all about NATO NATO NATO ie "United States idiots, please save us from the Asiatic hordes!" As I posted months back (and got heat for it), I think it's a high time that the American government prioritized the well-being of Americans over foreigners both domestic and abroad. I know that's a crazy thought, but there it is

---

European Nations have more than stepped up for the first time since the dawn of NATO in supplying Ukraine

---

And yet even the NATO Secretary General said this week that European members should do more.

Source: https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-is-right-mark-rutte-says-nato-members-spend-more-gdp-2-percent-european-political-community-summit/

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success. Russia has exactly that. Problem is, it's casualty rate relative to Uke losses is closer to 5-1. That's why we see Russia bringing in troops from NoKo. They're basically out of manpower without a full mobilization which Putin has obviously decided is not politically viable.

Demographics will not determine the outcome of this war.
Logistics will.

First, I would expect to see Trump covert aid to Ukraine over to lend-lease (something he's already mentioned he would like to do). That deteriorates Russia's strategic position, as it actually joins Ukraine and USA/Nato at the hip. To prevent that, Russia must then achieve total victory and subsumption of Ukraine, something manifestly beyond Russia's ability to achieve.

Second, I would expect to see Trump loosen if not remove all restrictions from Ukrainian use of US weapon systems against targets inside Russia. That will seriously hamper Russian logistics.

Both of those steps will drastically increase Putin to come to the negotiating table.

Biggest miscalculation policy critics have made is that Trump is going to fold up our hand and leave Ukraine to its own fate. Not. Going. To. Happen.

---

The billion dollar aid packages are over.

Trump got elected because people are tired of America's priorities being out of order.

Trump will absolutely cut Ukraine off bcs we can't afford to keep funding them and he has to clean up the domestic messes the Globalists who stole the last election created in our country, most notably securing the border and mass deportations.

---

European nations need to step up like yesterday. They thumb their noses at how backwards the US is until it's time to pony up for the military, then it's all about NATO NATO NATO ie "United States idiots, please save us from the Asiatic hordes!" As I posted months back (and got heat for it), I think it's a high time that the American government prioritized the well-being of Americans over foreigners both domestic and abroad. I know that's a crazy thought, but there it is

---

European Nations have more than stepped up for the first time since the dawn of NATO in supplying Ukraine

---

And yet even the NATO Secretary General said this week that European members should do more.

Source: https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-is-right-mark-rutte-says-nato-members-spend-more-gdp-2-percent-european-political-community-summit/

---

Many of them need to, for sure. But here is a decent summary so far...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/#:~:text=Denmark%20contributed%201.83%20percent%20of,that%20began%20in%20February%202022.

trey3216 said:

---

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success. Russia has exactly that. Problem is, it's casualty rate relative to Uke losses is closer to 5-1. That's why we see Russia bringing in troops from NoKo. They're basically out of manpower without a full mobilization which Putin has obviously decided is not politically viable.

Demographics will not determine the outcome of this war.
Logistics will.

First, I would expect to see Trump covert aid to Ukraine over to lend-lease (something he's already mentioned he would like to do). That deteriorates Russia's strategic position, as it actually joins Ukraine and USA/Nato at the hip. To prevent that, Russia must then achieve total victory and subsumption of Ukraine, something manifestly beyond Russia's ability to achieve.

Second, I would expect to see Trump loosen if not remove all restrictions from Ukrainian use of US weapon systems against targets inside Russia. That will seriously hamper Russian logistics.

Both of those steps will drastically increase Putin to come to the negotiating table.

Biggest miscalculation policy critics have made is that Trump is going to fold up our hand and leave Ukraine to its own fate. Not. Going. To. Happen.

---

The billion dollar aid packages are over.

Trump got elected because people are tired of America's priorities being out of order.

Trump will absolutely cut Ukraine off bcs we can't afford to keep funding them and he has to clean up the domestic messes the Globalists who stole the last election created in our country, most notably securing the border and mass deportations.

---

European nations need to step up like yesterday. They thumb their noses at how backwards the US is until it's time to pony up for the military, then it's all about NATO NATO NATO ie "United States idiots, please save us from the Asiatic hordes!" As I posted months back (and got heat for it), I think it's a high time that the American government prioritized the well-being of Americans over foreigners both domestic and abroad. I know that's a crazy thought, but there it is

---

European Nations have more than stepped up for the first time since the dawn of NATO in supplying Ukraine

---

And yet even the NATO Secretary General said this week that European members should do more.

Source: https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-is-right-mark-rutte-says-nato-members-spend-more-gdp-2-percent-european-political-community-summit/

---

Many of them need to, for sure. But here is a decent summary so far...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/#:~:text=Denmark%20contributed%201.83%20percent%20of,that%20began%20in%20February%202022.

---

When I read that, I come away feeling even more convinced that the European members of NATO need to step their game up. A damning fact:

"In absolute terms, the largest bilateral aid allocations to Ukraine were made by the United States, at over 75 billion euros as of June 30, 2024. European Union (EU) institutions, such as the European Commission and the European Council, allocated the second-largest amount of assistance, at almost 40 billion euros. The United Kingdom (UK) was the fourth-leading source of bilateral aid."

And to tell you the truth, this reinforces the idea that the current paradigm of NATO is failing i.e. " Well shucks, European country A and B are chipping in a reasonable amount, but European countries B, C, D, E, and F are pitching less than the minimum. Oh well, the US will make up the difference in the end! Again, I think people are sick of the United States being the world's daddy Warbucks/world Police.

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success. Russia has exactly that. Problem is, it's casualty rate relative to Uke losses is closer to 5-1. That's why we see Russia bringing in troops from NoKo. They're basically out of manpower without a full mobilization which Putin has obviously decided is not politically viable.

Demographics will not determine the outcome of this war.
Logistics will.

First, I would expect to see Trump covert aid to Ukraine over to lend-lease (something he's already mentioned he would like to do). That deteriorates Russia's strategic position, as it actually joins Ukraine and USA/Nato at the hip. To prevent that, Russia must then achieve total victory and subsumption of Ukraine, something manifestly beyond Russia's ability to achieve.

Second, I would expect to see Trump loosen if not remove all restrictions from Ukrainian use of US weapon systems against targets inside Russia. That will seriously hamper Russian logistics.

Both of those steps will drastically increase Putin to come to the negotiating table.

Biggest miscalculation policy critics have made is that Trump is going to fold up our hand and leave Ukraine to its own fate. Not. Going. To. Happen.

---

The billion dollar aid packages are over.

Trump got elected because people are tired of America's priorities being out of order.

Trump will absolutely cut Ukraine off bcs we can't afford to keep funding them and he has to clean up the domestic messes the Globalists who stole the last election created in our country, most notably securing the border and mass deportations.

---

European nations need to step up like yesterday. They thumb their noses at how backwards the US is until it's time to pony up for the military, then it's all about NATO NATO NATO ie "United States idiots, please save us from the Asiatic hordes!" As I posted months back (and got heat for it), I think it's a high time that the American government prioritized the well-being of Americans over foreigners both domestic and abroad. I know that's a crazy thought, but there it is

---

European Nations have more than stepped up for the first time since the dawn of NATO in supplying Ukraine

---

And yet even the NATO Secretary General said this week that European members should do more.

Source: https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-is-right-mark-rutte-says-nato-members-spend-more-gdp-2-percent-european-political-community-summit/

---

Many of them need to, for sure. But here is a decent summary so far...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/#:~:text=Denmark%20contributed%201.83%20percent%20of,that%20began%20in%20February%202022.

---

When I read that, I come away feeling even more convinced that the European members of NATO need to step their game up. A damning fact:

"In absolute terms, the largest bilateral aid allocations to Ukraine were made by the United States, at over 75 billion euros as of June 30, 2024. European Union (EU) institutions, such as the European Commission and the European Council, allocated the second-largest amount of assistance, at almost 40 billion euros. The United Kingdom (UK) was the fourth-leading source of bilateral aid."

And to tell you the truth, this reinforces the idea that the current paradigm of NATO is failing i.e. " Well shucks, European country A and B are chipping in a reasonable amount, but European countries B, C, D, E, and F are pitching less than the minimum. Oh well, the US will make up the difference in the end! Again, I think people are sick of the United States being the world's daddy Warbucks/world Police.

---

Germany's coalition government just collapsed over the issue of loans to Ukraine. Britain's pro-Zelensky PMs have been thrown out in rapid succession, and Macron is barely holding on in France. That's to say nothing of Hungary and Slovakia. Everyone knows this fiasco is played out, so I wouldn't expect any greatly renewed efforts from Europe.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

President-elect Donald Trump’s team has allegedly drafted a proposal to end the ongoing war in Ukraine war, per WSJ.

Allegedly the plan includes significant conditions: Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current…

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) November 7, 2024

---

"Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current front lines and the establishment of a demilitarized zone between Russian-held territory and Ukraine."


That does not accomplish anything long term

Kyiv has to give up forever its claims on Donbas and Crimea

Moscow has to give up the idea that the rest of Western oriented Ukraine is not going to join EU-NATO soon.

Just a demilitarized zone solves nothing long term.

---

I'm skeptical of the sourcing of this story. Sounds like leaking to drive narrative rather than actual developments.

---

On that point and that point alone, you are probably right. That doesn't mean Trump will take the hawkish approach that you expect; I doubt he knows yet what he'll do.

---

You should prepare to be disappointed.

🚨🚨Scoop: Elon Musk joined Trump's call with Zelensky https://t.co/jKztAwJPuE

— Jim VandeHei (@JimVandeHei) November 8, 2024

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

President-elect Donald Trump’s team has allegedly drafted a proposal to end the ongoing war in Ukraine war, per WSJ.

Allegedly the plan includes significant conditions: Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current…

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) November 7, 2024

---

"Ukraine should give up its NATO membership aspirations for at least 20 years, the freezing of the current front lines and the establishment of a demilitarized zone between Russian-held territory and Ukraine."


That does not accomplish anything long term

Kyiv has to give up forever its claims on Donbas and Crimea

Moscow has to give up the idea that the rest of Western oriented Ukraine is not going to join EU-NATO soon.

Just a demilitarized zone solves nothing long term.

---

I'm skeptical of the sourcing of this story. Sounds like leaking to drive narrative rather than actual developments.

---

On that point and that point alone, you are probably right. That doesn't mean Trump will take the hawkish approach that you expect; I doubt he knows yet what he'll do.

---

You should prepare to be disappointed.

---

You think I'm not? This is Trump we're talking about. Still, that report is very little to go on.

Sam Lowry said:

---

How the United States was transformed from guardian to spoiler of the postwar international order. An excellent summary from Harper's magazine.

Quote:

---

Why Are We in Ukraine?
On the dangers of American hubris
by Benjamin Schwarz, Christopher Layne

From the early Nineties, when Washington first raised the idea of NATO expansion, until 2008, when the U.S. delegation at the NATO summit in Bucharest advocated alliance membership for Ukraine and Georgia, U.S.-Russian exchanges were monotonous. While Russians protested Washington's NATO expansion plans, American officials shrugged off those protests--or pointed to them as evidence to justify still-further expansion. Washington's message to Moscow could not have been clearer or more disquieting: Normal diplomacy among great powers, distinguished by the recognition and accommodation of clashing interests--the approach that had defined the U.S.-Soviet rivalry during even the most intense stretches of the Cold War--was obsolete. Russia was expected to acquiesce to a new world order created and dominated by the United States.

The radical expansion of NATO's writ reflected the overweening aims that the end of the Cold War enabled Washington to pursue. Historically, great powers tend to focus pragmatically on reducing conflict among themselves. By frankly recognizing the realities of power and acknowledging each other's interests, they can usually relate to one another on a businesslike basis. This international give-and-take is bolstered by and helps engender a rough, contextual understanding of what's reasonable and legitimate--not in an abstract or absolute sense but in a way that permits fierce business rivals to moderate and accede to demands and to reach deals. By embracing what came to be called its "unipolar moment," Washington demonstrated--to Paris, Berlin, London, New Delhi, and Beijing, no less than to Moscow--that it would no longer be bound by the norms implicit in great power politics, norms that constrain the aims pursued as much as the means employed. Those who determine U.S. foreign policy hold that, as President George W. Bush declared in his second inaugural address, "the survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands." They maintain, as President Bill Clinton averred in 1993, that the security of the United States demands a "focus on relations within nations, on a nation's form of governance, on its economic structure."

Whatever one thinks of this doctrine, which prompted Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to dub America "the indispensable nation"--and which Gorbachev said defined America's "dangerous winner's mentality"--it lavishly expanded previously established conceptions of security and national interest. In its crusading universalism, it could be regarded by other states, with ample supporting evidence, as at best recklessly meddlesome and at worst messianically interventionist. Convinced that its national security depended on the domestic political and economic arrangements of ostensibly sovereign states--and therefore defining as a legitimate goal the alteration or eradication of those arrangements if they were not in accord with its professed ideals and values--the post-Cold War United States became a revolutionary force in world politics.

https://harpers.org/archive/2023/06/why-are-we-in-ukraine/

---

---

The orange p grabber you didn't vote for about to fix all that for y'all

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

MOSCOW, October 30. /TASS/. The number of cases of desertion and unauthorized abandonment of the unit in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surpasses 100,000, Verkhovna Rada deputy Anna Skorokhod admitted.

"Unauthorized abandonment of the unit, desertion - I will not name the number, but I would say - more than 100,000," she said in an interview with YouTube channel Novosti Live.

Earlier, military lawyer from the Center for Support of Veterans and Their Families Roman Likhachev said that more than 100,000 servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had voluntarily left their units.

On Tuesday, president of Ukraine's Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko announced a significant increase in desertion cases in the ranks of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, calling the situation threatening. According to Ukrainian media estimates, the total number of deserters in Ukraine has already reached 170,000.

---

Imagine how bad it must be for Russia, too.....

---

What side do you think can afford more desertions from its forced conscript army?

---

both sides can sustain it. But to your point, probably Ukraine, given that it is inflicting casualty rates which more than offset its demographic disparity of 3.5 to 1. Remember, Russia has been the attacker for all but ca 3-4 months in this war, and the attacker needs a MINIMUM of 3-1 advantage in manpower to have a reasonable chance of success.

---

Tell me without telling me you still don't understand attrition warfare.

---

We know you don't for sure

Here's a Ukrainian testicle sucking deep stater saying the quiet part out loud. Trump is not going to cut off Ukraine because he knows that doing so is bad for America. Trump wants to "win until we get tired of winning."

Seems like a lot folks have forgotten that the last aid bill to Ukraine passed by 79-18 vote in Senate.

In the House, 311 voted for the aid package, only 112 against.

& Trump did not campaign with vigor on cutting aid to Ukraine.https://t.co/t28Zfa9GP8…

— Michael McFaul (@McFaul) November 8, 2024

Fre3dombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

How the United States was transformed from guardian to spoiler of the postwar international order. An excellent summary from Harper's magazine.

Quote:

---

Why Are We in Ukraine?
On the dangers of American hubris
by Benjamin Schwarz, Christopher Layne

From the early Nineties, when Washington first raised the idea of NATO expansion, until 2008, when the U.S. delegation at the NATO summit in Bucharest advocated alliance membership for Ukraine and Georgia, U.S.-Russian exchanges were monotonous. While Russians protested Washington's NATO expansion plans, American officials shrugged off those protests--or pointed to them as evidence to justify still-further expansion. Washington's message to Moscow could not have been clearer or more disquieting: Normal diplomacy among great powers, distinguished by the recognition and accommodation of clashing interests--the approach that had defined the U.S.-Soviet rivalry during even the most intense stretches of the Cold War--was obsolete. Russia was expected to acquiesce to a new world order created and dominated by the United States.

The radical expansion of NATO's writ reflected the overweening aims that the end of the Cold War enabled Washington to pursue. Historically, great powers tend to focus pragmatically on reducing conflict among themselves. By frankly recognizing the realities of power and acknowledging each other's interests, they can usually relate to one another on a businesslike basis. This international give-and-take is bolstered by and helps engender a rough, contextual understanding of what's reasonable and legitimate--not in an abstract or absolute sense but in a way that permits fierce business rivals to moderate and accede to demands and to reach deals. By embracing what came to be called its "unipolar moment," Washington demonstrated--to Paris, Berlin, London, New Delhi, and Beijing, no less than to Moscow--that it would no longer be bound by the norms implicit in great power politics, norms that constrain the aims pursued as much as the means employed. Those who determine U.S. foreign policy hold that, as President George W. Bush declared in his second inaugural address, "the survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands." They maintain, as President Bill Clinton averred in 1993, that the security of the United States demands a "focus on relations within nations, on a nation's form of governance, on its economic structure."

Whatever one thinks of this doctrine, which prompted Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to dub America "the indispensable nation"--and which Gorbachev said defined America's "dangerous winner's mentality"--it lavishly expanded previously established conceptions of security and national interest. In its crusading universalism, it could be regarded by other states, with ample supporting evidence, as at best recklessly meddlesome and at worst messianically interventionist. Convinced that its national security depended on the domestic political and economic arrangements of ostensibly sovereign states--and therefore defining as a legitimate goal the alteration or eradication of those arrangements if they were not in accord with its professed ideals and values--the post-Cold War United States became a revolutionary force in world politics.

https://harpers.org/archive/2023/06/why-are-we-in-ukraine/

---

---

The orange p grabber you didn't vote for about to fix all that for y'all

---

That's a tall order. And a lot of it does come down to character. Reagan faced a lot of resistance to making peace with Russia, but he fought through it because he had real principles. Trump is susceptible to all manner of incitements and flatteries.

Best I can say is that I'm hopeful.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

How the United States was transformed from guardian to spoiler of the postwar international order. An excellent summary from Harper's magazine.

Quote:

---

Why Are We in Ukraine?
On the dangers of American hubris
by Benjamin Schwarz, Christopher Layne

From the early Nineties, when Washington first raised the idea of NATO expansion, until 2008, when the U.S. delegation at the NATO summit in Bucharest advocated alliance membership for Ukraine and Georgia, U.S.-Russian exchanges were monotonous. While Russians protested Washington's NATO expansion plans, American officials shrugged off those protests--or pointed to them as evidence to justify still-further expansion. Washington's message to Moscow could not have been clearer or more disquieting: Normal diplomacy among great powers, distinguished by the recognition and accommodation of clashing interests--the approach that had defined the U.S.-Soviet rivalry during even the most intense stretches of the Cold War--was obsolete. Russia was expected to acquiesce to a new world order created and dominated by the United States.

The radical expansion of NATO's writ reflected the overweening aims that the end of the Cold War enabled Washington to pursue. Historically, great powers tend to focus pragmatically on reducing conflict among themselves. By frankly recognizing the realities of power and acknowledging each other's interests, they can usually relate to one another on a businesslike basis. This international give-and-take is bolstered by and helps engender a rough, contextual understanding of what's reasonable and legitimate--not in an abstract or absolute sense but in a way that permits fierce business rivals to moderate and accede to demands and to reach deals. By embracing what came to be called its "unipolar moment," Washington demonstrated--to Paris, Berlin, London, New Delhi, and Beijing, no less than to Moscow--that it would no longer be bound by the norms implicit in great power politics, norms that constrain the aims pursued as much as the means employed. Those who determine U.S. foreign policy hold that, as President George W. Bush declared in his second inaugural address, "the survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands." They maintain, as President Bill Clinton averred in 1993, that the security of the United States demands a "focus on relations within nations, on a nation's form of governance, on its economic structure."

Whatever one thinks of this doctrine, which prompted Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to dub America "the indispensable nation"--and which Gorbachev said defined America's "dangerous winner's mentality"--it lavishly expanded previously established conceptions of security and national interest. In its crusading universalism, it could be regarded by other states, with ample supporting evidence, as at best recklessly meddlesome and at worst messianically interventionist. Convinced that its national security depended on the domestic political and economic arrangements of ostensibly sovereign states--and therefore defining as a legitimate goal the alteration or eradication of those arrangements if they were not in accord with its professed ideals and values--the post-Cold War United States became a revolutionary force in world politics.

https://harpers.org/archive/2023/06/why-are-we-in-ukraine/

---

---

The orange p grabber you didn't vote for about to fix all that for y'all

---

That's a tall order. And a lot of it does come down to character. Reagan faced a lot of resistance to making peace with Russia, but he fought through it because he had real principles. Trump is susceptible to all manner of incitements and flatteries.

Best I can say is that I'm hopeful.

---

Trump, kamala, you, Biden, OG DaeI
Obama, bush, Reagan

All humans. All susceptible. Your comment scores zero intellectual points and you're just smart enough to know that based on your points

You are correct though. Your peeps left him a tall
Order of total trash to clean up. Good thing, he knows his way around a garbage truck.

#TakeTheL