War in Ukraine

[LSU-SIU]

Bearded won't be happy until we invade.

As long as he can lead from the rear behind his keyboard.

Seriously, the present leaked proposal is really a win for the U.S., so if Europe/Ukraine don't want to make realistic counter proposals - the Orange man can simply move on without them. Turn a loss into at least a neutral or winning hand, getting the money back would be a win at this point and normal relations.

The Ukraine lost, the Europeans will lose, and the U.S. has lost... the Orange bastard only has the potential ability to turn the U.S. loss into a possible win on some level. It is not realistically possible to turn Europe and the Ukraine into a win.

 

[BeardedVol]

Bearded won't be happy until we invade.

Feel free to quote me demanding a US invasion of Russia.

I'll make coffee while we wait.

 

[BeardedVol]

He is retarded. The plan isn't going to be accepted by the Russia, Europe or the Ukraine as is. Trust has nothing to do with it, the other players can negotiate an end of the war without the U.S. even being involved. I would like to see what is purposed that someone actually believes will be accepted. As soon as the Ukraine agrees, all funding will more or less come to an end.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRus...u_pov_ukraine_disagrees_on_several_points_of/

Other than disagreeing with the vast majority of the agreement, they agree.

It seems pretty easy to me, you make a deal with Russia that the Ukraine will not become a NATO member as long as the U.S. is in NATO, you lift sanctions on Russia and agree to normal relations, you agree to have Europe turn over the Russian bank assets in exchange for $100B (of the $200-350B) of it or joint use economically, and parties agree that any other damages between parties is settled (i.e. pipeline). The U.S. exits from the loser side of the equation, and joins the winning side of the equation as the winner are the good guys and writes the history. The rest will work itself out naturally.

Russia already signed an agreement where they agreed that all countries have the right to choose their own security arrangements.

So no need to make any deal about the excluding anyone from joint NATO if they want to join.

Founding Act

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization and its member States, on the one hand, and the Russian Federation, on the other hand, hereinafter referred to as NATO and Russia, based on an enduring political commitment undertaken at the highest political level, will build together a lasting and...

www.nato.int

If Russia can't be expected to honor this agreement, then why should anyone trust that they would uphold any new agreement?

 

[LSU-SIU]

Russia already signed an agreement where they agreed that all countries have the right to choose their own security arrangements.

So no need to make any deal about the excluding anyone from joint NATO if they want to join.
View attachment 792791

Founding Act

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization and its member States, on the one hand, and the Russian Federation, on the other hand, hereinafter referred to as NATO and Russia, based on an enduring political commitment undertaken at the highest political level, will build together a lasting and...

www.nato.int

If Russia can't be expected to honor this agreement, then why should anyone trust that they would uphold any new agreement?

There isn't anything to worry about as far as them complying or not complying as the U.S. would simple agree that the Ukraine would not join NATO while the U.S. is a part of NATO. Russia would have no further commitments other than cooperation as to the funds. The Ukraine could join NATO today, Russia can't stop the Ukraine from joining NATO.

Next steps exit NATO and exit the UN.

Basically, this is winner exit strategy from a loser position. Its actually kind of already in the agreement, the Orange bastard just needs to exclude the Ukraine, Europe and NATO from the agreement.

 

[BeardedVol]

There isn't anything to worry about as far as them complying or not complying as the U.S. would simple agree that the Ukraine would not join NATO while the U.S. is a part of NATO. Russia would have no further commitments other than cooperation as to the funds. The Ukraine could join NATO today, Russia can't stop the Ukraine from joining NATO.

Next steps exit NATO and exit the UN.

Basically, this is winner exit strategy from a loser position. Its actually kind of already in the agreement, the Orange bastard just needs to exclude the Ukraine, Europe and NATO from the agreement.

Again, Russia already signed an agreement whereby they agreed that all countries had the right to choose their security arrangements.

They refused to uphold that agreement, so why should anyon expect Russia to uphold any future agreement?

Ukraine itself signed numerous agreements with Russia in the past, and Russia broke all of them, so why would Ukraine expect Russia to finally adhere to an agreement?

 

[LSU-SIU]

Again, Russia already signed an agreement whereby they agreed that all countries had the right to choose their security arrangements.

They refused to uphold that agreement, so why should anyon expect Russia to uphold any future agreement?

Ukraine itself signed numerous agreements with Russia in the past, and Russia broke all of them, so why would Ukraine expect Russia to finally adhere to an agreement?

They still can, the Russians can't stop that. The U.S. is could agree that they won't allow the Ukraine to join NATO which isn't going to happen anyway.

There is nothing to uphold as there would be no obligations on Russia to do anything further other than normal relations.


U.S. gets -
> $100b or so
> normal relations with Russia
> settlement of any liabilities that have occurred i.e. pipeline and other

Russia gets
> $150-250b or so
> release of sanctions by the U.S.
> normal relations with the U.S.
> an agreement that probably isn't worth much that the Ukraine won't join NATO
> settlement of any liability if any has occurred

THE END.

Its kind of already in the agreement, just strike 90% of the agreement and strike out the ukraine, europe and nato.

 

[Sandman 423]

Feel free to quote me demanding a US invasion of Russia.

I'll make coffee while we wait.

What Feasible US lead outcome do you support?

 

[BeardedVol]

What Feasible US lead outcome do you support?

I take it you couldn't find a quote from me advocating a US invasion of Russia?

 

[BeardedVol]

They still can, the Russians can't stop that. The U.S. is could agree that they won't allow the Ukraine to join NATO which isn't going to happen anyway.

There is nothing to uphold as there would be no obligations on Russia to do anything further other than normal relations.


U.S. gets -
> $100b or so
> normal relations with Russia
> settlement of any liabilities that have occurred i.e. pipeline and other

Russia gets
> $150-250b or so
> release of sanctions by the U.S.
> normal relations with the U.S.
> an agreement that probably isn't worth much that the Ukraine won't join NATO
> settlement of any liability if any has occurred

THE END.

Its kind of already in the agreement, just strike 90% of the agreement and strike out the ukraine, europe and nato.

Again, Russia hasn't adhered to any of their previous agreements, so why should the US or Ukraine believe that Russia would adhere to a new agreement?

 

[LSU-SIU]

Again, Russia hasn't adhered to any of their previous agreements, so why should the US or Ukraine believe that Russia would adhere to a new agreement?

Because there is no requirement for Russia to do anything. The Ukraine has nothing to do with any of this and most likely won't exist.

 

[Sandman 423]

I take it you couldn't find a quote from me advocating a US invasion of Russia?

I take it you can't come up with anything feasible that doesn't involve us attacking. I'll wait while you sip your coffee.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I take it you can't come up with anything feasible that doesn't involve us attacking. I'll wait while you sip your coffee.

Trump to force Russia to unconditional surrender with no hand to play.

Right now, the only thing that can be possibility or realistically be salvaged is U.S.'s current loser position. I would give the Ukraine/Europe about 24 hours to come up with realistic terms, or just strike out the ukraine/european/nato terms from the agreement i.e. a final settlement between the U.S. and Russia.

 

[hog88]

I take it you can't come up with anything feasible that doesn't involve us attacking. I'll wait while you sip your coffee.

He’s been asked multiple times and never has answered.

 

[Sandman 423]

He’s been asked multiple times and never has answered.

I think that is because his answer doesn't line up with his political outrage.

It all comes down to $$$, Imo. We have to make it worth it for Russia to back down. I don't see people letting that happen so it will likely come down to either Ukraine capitulating, or us stepping in.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I think that is because his answer doesn't line up with his political outrage.

It all comes down to $$$, Imo. We have to make it worth it for Russia to back down. I don't see people letting that happen so it will likely come down to either Ukraine capitulating, or us stepping in.

The neocons set this one up very well which is what I mentioned in 2022... no easy exit.

The Ukraine has lost, meaning realistically there is not even a plan let alone a realistic way of carrying out the plan to win. Europe was going to collapse anyhow absent something else, that something else was a collapse of Russia. So, Europe is a loser. That leaves the U.S. which is currently a loser and the only way to change it is economically, and to bring final settlement between the U.S. and Russia.

Basically, the U.S. is in a position to still fix the glitch, but everything else will have to naturally work itself out. (That is kind of what the Trump plan has, the next step I would suggest is just remove Europe, the Ukraine and NATO from even being a part of it)

The plan is for Ukrainians to die so that they get funding, and Europe can pretend like they're not a failed union.

War in Ukraine (2024)

Just give them shovels because at the end of the day they're simply meat shields.

Boom Boom (FABs/Artillery) > Pew Pew (Shovels/Small Arms)

I'm still searching for the actual plan. Meat shields don't really work if there isn't a plan, if the meat shields are there for the delay... what is the delay going to help.

Might as well give the girl this gun because it really doesn't matter if she has a real gun or not.

 

[jvol1]

The neocons set this one up very well which is what I mentioned in 2022... no easy exit.

The Ukraine has lost, meaning realistically there is not even a plan let alone a realistic way of carrying out the plan to win. Europe was going to collapse anyhow absent something else, that something else was a collapse of Russia. So, Europe is a loser. That leaves the U.S. which is currently a loser and the only way to change it is economically, and to bring final settlement between the U.S. and Russia.

Basically, the U.S. is in a position to still fix the glitch, but everything else will have to naturally work itself out. (That is kind of what the Trump plan has, the next step I would suggest is just remove Europe, the Ukraine and NATO from even being a part of it)

The plan is for Ukrainians to die so that they get funding, and Europe can pretend like they're not a failed union.

War in Ukraine (2024)

Europe and the US should just surrender to russia. That's an awesome clown take.

Unfortunately, if we dont figure out how to rid ourselves of trump, it could be our reality.

 

[Rocky_Top_Vol13]

 

[LSU-SIU]

Europe and the US should just surrender to russia. That's an awesome clown take.

Unfortunately, if we dont figure out how to rid ourselves of trump, it could be our reality.

The clown is the person that is having a hard time comprehending, clearly you have problems in this area.

Unfortunately, if I we don't figure out how to rid myself ourselves of my serious mental condition and TDS trump, it will continue could to be my our reality.

Fixed for correctness.

 

[hog88]

I think that is because his answer doesn't line up with his political outrage.

It all comes down to $$$, Imo. We have to make it worth it for Russia to back down. I don't see people letting that happen so it will likely come down to either Ukraine capitulating, or us stepping in.

If we wanted Russia to back down, we'd start sanctioning all of our "allies" buying their oil and natural gas.

 

[LSU-SIU]

EU countries seek urgent plan B to fund Ukraine

Officials are looking at an EU bridging loan to help Kyiv stay afloat if they can’t agree on using Moscow’s frozen state assets in time.

Since Trump has been in office, the only thing that could realistically happen good for the U.S. is an agreement with the Russia to possibly get funds back in part or full. Even the Russian assets are nothing but a slight delay, you can't print weapons and you can't print meat.

Right now the Ukraine lost, Europe has lost, and the U.S. has lost -> the U.S. can possibly move over to the winning side i.e. the good guys, at least in part.

 

[Sandman 423]

If you don't mind me asking, what is the purpose of posting this?

 

[MontyPython]

Witkoff: Russian Asset.

Guessing Trump is allowing him to wet his beak too from the Russian deals Donnie is making under the table.

Traitors.


A growing number of Republican lawmakers are demanding that the Trump administration overhaul its handling of backchannel peace talks with Moscow after leaked transcripts revealed Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff discussing negotiation strategy with one of Vladimir Putin’s top aides, according to The Moscow Times on November 26.

The recordings—first reported by Bloomberg—captured Witkoff speaking with Yuri Ushakov, a senior Kremlin adviser, about shaping a US “peace plan” for Ukraine.

In the calls, Witkoff suggested arranging a direct Putin–Trump phone conversation ahead of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to Washington, floated the idea of a 20-point settlement modeled on the Gaza framework, and urged Ushakov to compliment Trump for “establishing peace in Gaza.”

He also expressed “deepest respect for President Putin” and insisted that Russia “always wanted a negotiated peace,” which he said he relayed to Trump.

The fallout has sharpened internal Republican criticism—much of it aimed directly at Witkoff and at the administration’s broader approach, which insiders say prioritizes “ending the war at any cost.”

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) blasted the unofficial diplomacy after the leaked transcripts surfaced. “This is a major problem. And one of the many reasons why these ridiculous side shows and secret meetings need to stop,” he wrote on X. He urged the administration to “allow Secretary of State Marco Rubio to do his job in a fair and objective manner.”

Rubio reportedly stepped in at the eleventh hour to revise Witkoff’s original 28-point proposal—written with Russian input—cutting it down to 19 points and removing what lawmakers described as its most controversial concessions.

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said to The Wall Street Journal that the transcripts show Witkoff “needs to be pushed aside.” Witkoff, he said, “acts like he’s on Russia’s payroll. This whole incident has been a fiasco and a blemish on our country. He needs to be fired.”

 

[LSU-SIU]

If you don't mind me asking, what is the purpose of posting this?

To pretend they're not mentality ill.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Witkoff: Russian Asset.

Guessing Trump is allowing him to wet his beak too from the Russian deals Donnie is making under the table.

Traitors.


A growing number of Republican lawmakers are demanding that the Trump administration overhaul its handling of backchannel peace talks with Moscow after leaked transcripts revealed Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff discussing negotiation strategy with one of Vladimir Putin’s top aides, according to The Moscow Times on November 26.

The recordings—first reported by Bloomberg—captured Witkoff speaking with Yuri Ushakov, a senior Kremlin adviser, about shaping a US “peace plan” for Ukraine.

In the calls, Witkoff suggested arranging a direct Putin–Trump phone conversation ahead of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to Washington, floated the idea of a 20-point settlement modeled on the Gaza framework, and urged Ushakov to compliment Trump for “establishing peace in Gaza.”

He also expressed “deepest respect for President Putin” and insisted that Russia “always wanted a negotiated peace,” which he said he relayed to Trump.

The fallout has sharpened internal Republican criticism—much of it aimed directly at Witkoff and at the administration’s broader approach, which insiders say prioritizes “ending the war at any cost.”

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) blasted the unofficial diplomacy after the leaked transcripts surfaced. “This is a major problem. And one of the many reasons why these ridiculous side shows and secret meetings need to stop,” he wrote on X. He urged the administration to “allow Secretary of State Marco Rubio to do his job in a fair and objective manner.”

Rubio reportedly stepped in at the eleventh hour to revise Witkoff’s original 28-point proposal—written with Russian input—cutting it down to 19 points and removing what lawmakers described as its most controversial concessions.

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said to The Wall Street Journal that the transcripts show Witkoff “needs to be pushed aside.” Witkoff, he said, “acts like he’s on Russia’s payroll. This whole incident has been a fiasco and a blemish on our country. He needs to be fired.”

As I said, you were complaining that the war hasn't end, then you'll be sky screaming when it ends.

PS. The only thing to salvage at this point is assets, duh.

 

[distrovol]

He’s been asked multiple times and never has answered.

I think I remember him saying we should've provided Ukraine with every conventional weapon we have and put virtually zero restraints on how the used them. Which would likely lead to a direct confrontation with Russia. If I'm wrong, please correct me. Seems pretty implausible considering they wouldn't have the technical capability to use our good stuff.