397 Comments
User's avatar
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Aug 18
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Fledr Maus's avatar

Security guarantees were agreed on in the Istanbul agreement already, with China and Rus being guarantors and Rus having veto powers what could be done in Ukieland regarding the army. Moreover, there were guarantees in the Budapest Memorandum, that ukies adore so much, with USA being one of the guarantors. How did that work out?

Secondly, just because some anglophoni spin doctor drops something like this, doesnt mean its true.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Aug 18
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
grr's avatar

That story went down the same memory hole as the captured Brit officers at Avostal two years ago.....

Expand full comment
Gerald's avatar

Fake news. The pictures were wrong to start with and articles with authors that riffed off reputable people like Scott Ritter had references which, when I looked them up, were non existent.

Expand full comment
Glasshopper's avatar

Borzzikman is still running it as fact. Sounds doubtful though.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

I hope the meeting goes well between Trump and Ze.

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

Short and sweet, huh, Victor. I wonder why? So why do you hope this meeting goes well? Just curious. lol

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

Don't you hope it goes well? No?

"Well", in my personal view, means I hope Ze refuses and Russia is left free to obliterate Ze's forces, to destroy the nazis, to take all traditional Russian lands back into the Russian Federation and to force what remains of Ukraine back into the Russian orbit.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

Also, why do you always end your comments with 'lol'? Just curious.

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

Fair question? It's a sign that I find something amusing.

Expand full comment
grr's avatar
Aug 18Edited

Damn. Here was thinking you were saying Lots of Love. LOL

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

Hahahaha, lol.

Expand full comment
aj hollis's avatar

That reminds me of reading how an older relative of a bereaved family sent a letter of condolence, ending it with what she thought was the abbreviation of "Lots Of Love".

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

LOL

Expand full comment
X75's avatar

Young people do this all the time. Rarely see a message from a 20 something year old poster without "lol" or "lmao", although "rotflmao" does seem to have disappeared.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

"rotflmao" requires too long an attention span for our younger generation to write out.

Expand full comment
Soujourner's avatar

Sad but true.

Expand full comment
Dhdh's avatar

GTKRWN is still the best...

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

Victor, you are making me a promise you can't keep. If Russia is to take all Russian-speaking territories, it would have to take Odessa and other locations not in the plans. But we'll see what comes of the peace terms.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

Russia will continue until its objectives are met, which means of course a minimum of the 5 regions but more regions if necessary. You keep shooting until there remains no further movement.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

See, there is a tiny flaw in the plan -- it is bollocks.

And it is so because you fail to account for oligarch interests. Which still rule the Kremlin's decisions, thus the presence of that cockroach Dimitriev in Alaska, and of Abramovich in Istanbul in 2022.

Expand full comment
Peter Joy's avatar

Is Dimitriev a 4X2? His name doesn’t indicate it, his Wiki entry doesn't say so; but he fled to the USSA at the first opportunity, worked for the Vampire Squid and has much the same hairline and doofus nebbish face as the BBC’s Anthony Zurcher (a very typical name for a BBC ‘foreign correspondent’ these days).

Expand full comment
PFC Billy's avatar

Technically, one keeps shooting until target noticably changes shape or catches fire.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

Kiev is Russian speaking too.

People seem to have forgotten that.

In fact, if you go back to the last time any semi-realistic such map was made (i.e. without huge political interference), most of Ukraine was.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

Hell, when I was there, everyone in Lvov could speak Russian just fine.

Expand full comment
Peter Joy's avatar

Well, I hope the Tsar takes everything up to and including Kiev, Odessa and the land in-between, and Hungary, Romania and Poland their own historic lands and minorities, leaving the Banderites with about 3,000 sq km (i.e. a county-sized rump state) around Lviv. Following the collapse of the EUSSR, Vienna should look to revive an economic version of the old Austro-Hungarian Empire, ranging from Karlovy Vary to Podgorica and Innsbruck to Kosice.

Expand full comment
Mik Alp's avatar

When I was in Kiev in the 90's, about 20 times, I never heard anyone speaking ukrainian, except on tv.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar
Aug 19Edited

There was a video of Arestovych, I think it was late 2023, early 2024, and was telling the interviewer that he had a friend working in some clothing store (or something like that) in Kiev, and Arestovych asked him to do a an unofficial survey, by recording over the span of a week what language each of the customers coming in spoke.

The result was 85% Russian. This in late 2023.

You could see the same thing in the videos of explosions when Kiev was being hammered regularly during the time that Surovikin ran the SMO -- everyone was screaming and cursing in Russian in those.

In fact the only reason anyone spoke Ukrainian in Kiev at all before the SMO was that it was the capital. Otherwise it would be as purely Russian a city as Kharkov and Odessa.

Expand full comment
EngNobobody's avatar

well for whom? our (american) interests and Ze puppet interests are not aligned, they are actually on the opposite sides. we need to be out of this money laundering operation through nazi run corrupt shithole, ze needs to keep the juice going as long as he can (as this is his only way to stay alive for a little bit longer). we also need to minimize stupid classes with nuclear superpowers and very much want move towards disbarment, arms control, solving complex issues together (from rise of BRICS to Middle East to many other places in the world).

Also, I do not understand why his euro-reich babysitters have to travel with him every time, aren't we pretending that this is 'democratically elected president of Ukraine' or something? Is that expired puppet that out of it that he is no longer able to speak on his own?

Expand full comment
Mishko_'s avatar

They (EU members & Z) represent their official "accepted and understood" version of events, the Rules Based Order guided consensus.

They are the incrowd, the select few. The hugging and the touching and the meaningful looks and mutual affirmations and countless visits forms the emo bonding they share.

Plus ofcourse their shared complicity in yuuge corruption.

I suspect that is a major factor in why they seem to appreciate and value eachother

with such peculiar affection.

Expand full comment
Luis Gómez de Aranda's avatar

Very well said!

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

>Russia’s primary confirmed victory in the talks—as opposed to the various speculative parameters now floating about—was aligning the US with Putin’s demand of “agreement before ceasefire”, rather than Zelensky and Europe’s rival demand of “ceasefire before agreement”.

This is still a massive Russian defeat though, because a real Russian victory can only be accomplished if Ukraine ceases to exist, thus by definition there can be no agreement. Therefore any agreement is strategic Russian defeat.

Expand full comment
Simplicius's avatar

Anything short of Russia nuking all of NATO and establishing a galactic empire is a "defeat" for turbomaximalists, it seems.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar
Aug 18Edited

Not turbomaximalists, realistits. Didn't you yourself also write that:

>That would mean offensive NATO troops directly on Russia’s border, which flies in the face of one of Russia’s main reasons for even fighting this existential conflict

What you are defending is Minsk-3. Arguably an even worse version, because this time there is the experience of Minsk-1/2. And Astana too.

>- Russia will freeze the front lines in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions.

This is treason, and not just in spirit. It is treason by the Russian constitution, and there are no plausible arguments it is not.

>- Return control of areas in the Sumy and Kharkiv regions to Ukraine.

Russia barely holds anything there, so not very significant.

>- Formal recognition of Russia's sovereignty over Crimea.

Zero gains here. First, the facts on the ground matter, second, why just Crimea?

>- Cancellation of at least part of the sanctions against Russia.

But sanctions are good for Russia while not being sanctioned has been catastrophic for it, for 30 years. Economic interaction with the West is how it got looted and deindustrialized, sanctions forced a reversal of that. Against the wishes of Russian elites. Thus demanding lifting of sanctions is effectively treason too.

Also, it places Russia in a subservient to the West role. If the West can impose sanctions then lift them and Russia is then thankful for that, well, this then is an abusive relationship in which Russia is willingly the submissive side, isn't it?

>- Ukraine will be prohibited from joining NATO.

Doesn't matter at all. NATO is in Ukraine de facto. That is what matters.

Also, the current situation is more convenient for NATO -- if Ukraine was officially in NATO and drones and missiles were flying into Russia, then that may have finally forced the Kremlin's hand to smoke all the NATO proxies in Europe (though given what we have seen in the last three years, even that is kind of doubtful these days; there is no limit to the humiliation these cowards and traitors are willing to inflict on their country in exchange for the megayacht class keeping its ill gotten wealth). Ukraine being a non-NATO proxy is what makes the current format of the war possible in the first place.

>- Putin seems to have been open to Ukraine receiving certain security guarantees.

More treason.

>- Official status of the Russian language in some parts of Ukraine or throughout Ukraine, as well as the rights of the Russian Orthodox Church to operate freely.

Empty promises. Who's going to enforce that?

>Zelensky is considered by Russia to be legally illegitimate to even so much as sign anything, which would presume from Russia’s side any finalization of agreements would need to wait for a legally acceptable successor, anyway.

There can be no "legally acceptable successor" because there can be no real elections in Ukraine right now. All the non-Banderite parties have been banned. You can only get someone even worse than Zelensky.

BTW, this is exactly the rake the Kremlin stepped on after the Maidan -- they should never have recognized Poroshenko and Zelensky. And yet they did. What did that get them?

>With Putin being a highly ‘legalistic’ leader, it’s hard to imagine him abrogating two standing legal realities simultaneously, in the Zelensky legitimacy and the constitutionality of Kherson and Zaporozhye administrative regions

Notice that Putin has never mentioned Kherson and Zaporozhye for now almost three years after the annexation. He didn't have the integrity to even address the nation on November 10 2022 -- he sent Surovikin and Shoigu to take the PR hit instead while he himself was in hiding for weeks, as the pathetic coward that he is. He could have addressed the nation and said "circumstances force us to abandon a regional capital of the Russian federation, but this is only temporary, I promise that it will be soon returned". He never did that, not at the time it was done, nor at any moment since. June 14 2024 was the only time Kherson and Zaporozhye have ever featured in any statements of his, and even then it was not as specific and forceful as it should have been.

So yeah, a lot of lines of evidence point to Putin abandoning those cities, regardless of how "legalistic" he is and what the constitution says.

>The only logical explanation is the above: that Russia knows no agreement can ever be reached anyway, and is thus playing for time by pretending at concessions to affect the peacemaker and transfer responsibility on Ukraine and Europe.

What "relevance" does "responsibility" have here?

What matters is facts on the ground, and Putin has stubbornly refused to establish the kind of facts on the ground that will solve Russia's existential problems.

Expand full comment
Fledr Maus's avatar

'Notice that Putin has never mentioned Kherson and Zaporozhye for now almost three years after the annexation.'

June 2024

'Putin: Russia’s sovereignty over the Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk, and Lugansk regions is permanent and non-negotiable.'

https://t.me/RussiaDirect/387

Lie by omission again. Wont go into other position.

Dude, you are discrediting yourself with your lies by omission. So good point you make are a priori discredited coz you do these things.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

*Regions*, not cities.

Expand full comment
Fledr Maus's avatar

huh?

Expand full comment
Fledr Maus's avatar

Yes, whole regions on both sides of the Dnepr, which includes city of Kherson as well.

Kherson is essential for land brigde, water for Crimea and agricultural land. Saw some Azovstali whining about Khersons land, being essential for them.

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

You raise good points here, GM.

Expand full comment
Royotoyo's avatar

GM is just another psycho doomer nut job like that Feral Finster freak. Better to simply ignore him. Everyone's worried that Putin might cuck, but let's wait and see how it all plays out.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

He and his supporters are simply the 6th column ("concern" trolls) equivalent of the American neocons - exact same ideology, only on the other side of the conflict.

Expand full comment
Eclavdra's avatar

Or an actual American Neocon.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

There is that possibility. 😉

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

If by 'supporter' you mean people who find GM's points worth reading, I'll confess to be one. Do I agree with everything he says? No. Is his point of view disturbing and worrisome. Well....yes. Is he well informed, consistent and insightful? Definitely. Personally, I don't come here to read shit I agree with and clap in an echo chamber - I come here to get different points of view.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

I will confess to enjoying an island of people who generally agree with my views. I do enjoy different viewpoints, but in a friendly atmosphere - unlike MSM and liberal sites.

Expand full comment
Luis Gómez de Aranda's avatar

One can accept that an observer -with a personal loyalty to one side or not- comes to the conclusion that the conduit of the war by W. Putin is not conducive to the best results for Russia or even plain wrong.

What is really false, and very boring on top of that, is that use and abuse of silly accusations like "the coward", "the traitor" and all the megayachts stuff.

I don't see W. Putin or Mr. Lavrov very often sunbathing in Montecarlo or Marbella.

A coward because the Russian President never forgets that his most important task is preventing a general war that could become a nuclear one? Thank God for such cowardice.

With a "courageous" leader

like Boris Johnson in Russia, we might not be writing and reading about this conflict, or about anything else, by this end of August 2025. At least not in Europe.

A traitor because the Russian President probably prefers that Ukraine does not cease to exist? Well, it is obvious that the overwhelming part of the population of that country West of the Dnieper does not want to become part of Russia.

How would Russia annexe all Ukraine? What about the population? Subjects non-citizens like the Palestinians in Israel?

Incorporate 20 million angry russophobes in the Russian electoral body?

This is a complex situation. Time will tell which side was successful and its degree of success.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar
Aug 19Edited

>A traitor because the Russian President probably prefers that Ukraine does not cease to exist?

That position is indeed treason.

If you knew and understood the history here, you would get it too.

>Subjects non-citizens like the Palestinians in Israel?

Three choices -- revert back to being Russian, which all of them other than Galicians are, die, or leave.

>Incorporate 20 million angry russophobes in the Russian electoral body?

Have a nuclear armed russophobic country in your most strategically vital former territories?

That is better?

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

Try addressing the substance of what I write.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

Sorry. That comment was not directed at you or anything you wrote.

Expand full comment
UpgradeToFounding's avatar

I notice the same left wing bloc mentality of slander the opposition, provide no response to questions that should be addressed, just slander the opposition. The seals then clap in excitement.

I can appreciate a thought out post, I can also see who jumps on bandwagons. "This view is wrong because I say it is wrong" is only a logical answer to complete idiots and those under heavy influence that not only have no insight or knowledge of a situation, they are dangerously unwilling to admit it.

I believe this sounds like you.

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

You're projecting your own worries that Putin might cuck, then you say let's see how it all plays out. You're not even sure. You masked your insecurity by needing the word, everyone, meaning you, and then you resorted to ad hominem attacks on your self-declared bad guys to cover up your ineptitude to make a relevant case for yourself. Careful when you use the words psycho and freaks cause it might just bounce back to you. lol

Expand full comment
Royotoyo's avatar

Thanks for the psych analysis, everything you say is absolutely true, including me being an insecure psycho and freak. The only aspect you missed is that I actually have skin in the game, this isn't just a spectator sport for some of us. So I don't appreciate internet randos being cavalier with my fate to sate their sadistic desires.

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

How do you have skin in the game, Royo?

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

Which points are GM wrong on there? He makes a lot more acute points than you do - let's hear your actual take instead of the childish drive by. Entertain us with your insight lol

Expand full comment
Hussein Hopper's avatar

A dirigible of pomposity and rabid doom and gloom ranter. Should get job on MSNBC or CNN. Pretends to be Russian , but his ranting sounds suspiciously similar to Zelensky’s . Maybe he has the same pharmacist.

Expand full comment
Elena's avatar

Why don't you argue the facts instead of calling names? I do find GM's positions consistently extreme, but it's hard to consider anything overly paranoid when the US has been in the process of attempting to destroy Russia for the past twenty years or more, especially after seeing what happened to Syria. I find it difficult to think that any peace settlement at all would be safe. But perhaps that makes me a psycho doomer nut job?

A cautious one, anyway.

Expand full comment
Royotoyo's avatar

What is "femdom erotica"? Sounds pretty hot.

Expand full comment
Elena's avatar

I think it is. If you glance at some of my other posts you’ll find examples, so you’ll be able to see if you like it.

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

It's called echo chamber paralysis, where the person only wants to hear what they want to hear. Heaven forbid if someone has a different opinion. So they act out like a 5-year-old.

Expand full comment
Octavia Moya's avatar

How can one "argue the facts" with someone whose reflexive solution to everything is an all out nuclear war? Noticing that somebody is completely off their rocker while, at the same time, insisting that reasoned discussions must continue with the crazy person, is a strange position to take to say the least.

Expand full comment
Haywood Jablome's avatar

I must have missed it but I don't recall GM calling for all out nuclear war. What I have seen him advocate for is Russia to tactically nuke Euro dog nations and parts of Ukraine as a deterrent.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar
Aug 18Edited

Correct, and at this point this is how you avoid all-out nuclear war.

It could have been avoided without nuking anyone had the Kremlin done conventional deterrent strikes very early, but by now that is probably not an option, precisely because the Kremlin allowed provocations to escalate.

Let's review the basic points once again as concisely as possible:

1) This is war of the Western oligarchy against Russia using Ukrainian cannon fodder, and the Ukrainian oligarchy as middle men.

2) It is a war for Russia's land and resources, in effect a repeat of WWII

3) There is a clear trend towards it expanding, with Europeans being fed into it too.

4) There is also a clear trend towards a potential American first strike, using its forward deployment advantage.

How do you get out of this situation if you are the Kremlin?

One option that avoids committing mass murder is to start hitting the Western oligarchy directly, to force them to back off. This means pinpoint conventional strikes at their residences, private planes, yachts, etc. You may even use some small nukes to take out mansions with large physical footprints (there won't be much collateral damage as those are typically outside populated places). But the point is that they have to be afraid for their own physical safety and not dare attack Russia in any way as a result.

The other clear path towards eliminating the threat without destroying whole cities is to eliminate the middle men. In the case of Ukraine, that would be the Ukrainian oligarchy. Again, same thing -- pinpoint strikes taking them out one by one, wherever they are, until they make the calculation that the money they get from associating with the West is not worth being turned into bloody puree splattered on the charred remains of whatever building they were in when the Russian missile came.

The Kremlin did none of that and sat on their hands while NATO was escalating. And forward deploying. The results of that are:

1) NATO has forward deployed and dispersed all over Europe, so physically eliminating the potential military threat may not be possible without annihilating whole cities and countries

2) Deterrence has been lost to such an extent, that it is not clear if even pinpoint strikes against prominent oligarchy figures with do the trick of restoring it now.

Thus nuking some NATO country to zero might be the only option left.

If that option is not used, Russia faces a future in which drones and missiles fly into it 24/7 in perpetuity, draining its resources and destroying its industry. Because why not launch them if there will be no consequences and there is zero cost to it?

And if deterrence is not re-established, then somebody may get the idea that it is time for a nuclear first strike. At which point whether Russian can respond or not is largely a moot point from a Russian perspective, because the damage will have been done regardless. Likely Russia will be able to respond, and that's the end of everything.

Expand full comment
Octavia Moya's avatar

@Haywood Jablome:

Anybody that believes Russia can carry out strategic nuclear strikes on the major NATO states without triggering a massive world war is insane. This is an insane suggestion, plain and simple. GM is corralling a mass of idiots, at best.

Expand full comment
NiggleS's avatar

Your usage of the word tactically is incorrect.

To nuke anything other than immediate battlefield formations is a *strategic* decision, thus you (parroting GM) are advocating starting an all out nuclear war, strategically.

Nuke usage is not dictated by the size of the warhead, the break point between "tactically* and *strategically* is based on purpose, not kilotonnes.

Something that General Moron is too stupid to understand, you should try better yourself.

Expand full comment
Octavia Moya's avatar

The notion that Putin will suddenly reverse course and abandon all of his very publicly professed policy positions is, in my opinion, nonsensical. The idea that Putin is a "weak cuck" just waiting for the perfect opportunity to throw all of Russia under the bus is a long standing meme at the heart of the CIA/NATO propaganda machine.

The meme is intended to foment internal unrest among allegedly "hardcore" Russians who are believed to form a sizeable share of Putin's inner circle, as well as to offer glimmers of hope to the perceived basement dwelling contingent of radicals within Russia that the West prays somehow aggregate into a domestic revolution.

Putin is not a "cuck," but a master statesman, and a ruthless leader. The meme exists only because the GAE and its proxies cannot deal with Putin as they would with any other spineless leader. It is precisely because Putin is *not* spineless that he is vehemently painted as a "cuck."

Expand full comment
GM's avatar
Aug 18Edited

>The idea that Putin is a "weak cuck" just waiting for the perfect opportunity to throw all of Russia under the bus is a long standing meme at the heart of the CIA/NATO propaganda machine.

It's not a meme though, it is what the man has consistently done.

Minsk-1/2 is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Then it was exacerbated by him vetoing whatever was in the General Staff's plans for the initial invasion that would have made it work.

He doubled down on weakness/treason with Istanbul in 2022. Remember that he put Crimea on the table there. Yes, Crimea.

Then he spent the next three years stalling for who knows what instead of winning the war, while allowing every single NATO provocation, including a string of absolutely unthinkable previously transgressions, to go unanswered.

In between all that was the Syria fiasco, where the Russians, the Syrian army, the Iranians and Hezbollah had the US/Israel/Turkey-sponsored Islamists almost completely defeated and ready for the final clean up operation in Idlib. And then Putin betrayed everything in Astana. We know what happened eventually.

You also may have noticed how the demands about "denazification" and "demilitarization" are not heard much these days. Which is yet another in the long line of betrayals.

>Putin is not a "cuck," but a master statesman, and a ruthless leader

"Master statesmen" and "ruthless leaders" do not let their cities be bombed 24/7 when they have the power to stop it immediately and permanently with the snap of their fingers.

Expand full comment
VHMan's avatar

The responsibility for navigating a path forward for Russia through the current seething geopolitical-landscape would have long since crushed a lesser man. When does he sleep?

Expand full comment
EngNobobody's avatar

that is just GM for you. They have been here for years trolling for the same narrative.

Expand full comment
Luis Gómez de Aranda's avatar

If Ukraine does not cease to exist, then the result of the conflict is a massive Russian defeat? Why exactly?

Ah, yes, because Stalin would have done this and that.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar
Aug 18Edited

1) Because any part of Ukraine left outside Moscow control will be used as a vector of attack against Russia.

Didn't you learn that lesson from Syria? How big/small was Idlib?

2) Because Kiev and Odessa are Russian cities, and extremely important ones too, and should not be ceded to an anti-Russian project without a fight.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

To be fair, any portion of Ukraine or Russia or anywhere else will be used as a vector of attack. Whether or not controlled by Moscow won't matter.

Expand full comment
Mark Chapman's avatar

It is a Russian defeat in that the west made two Slavic nations fight one another and kill over a million of their people. However, that was a foretold defeat for Russia because its options were to fight or to submit, and it tried every way it could think of to avoid war.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

Correct.

And what most here don't understand is the reasons Russia tried to avoid war, which have to do with its internal post-Soviet socio-economic structure. The USSR would have fought because its elites were not compromised in the same way.

Expand full comment
JG's avatar

Morning has broken🌅; soon, eyes wide open💙🇷🇺❤️

Expand full comment
marcjf's avatar

Seems to me that the main objective here for Team Trump (probably assisted by Russia) is to snooker the neo-cons by saying one thing and then doing another. And along with the neo-cons the EUUK crowd. Mr T looks like abandoning Ukraine, just needs a plausible cover story. There seems little chance to me of actual peace breaking out, so the war must be fought without US aid and probably without a US Article 5 security guarantee for its NATO allies - who are now on a non-NATO frolic of their own. I am so glad I live in Western Europe and am thus blessed with wise and far-sighted leaders in such abundance.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

You are, IMO, spot on. This current effort on the part of Trump and Putin is designed to offer Trump a way out of the conflict and Putin an excuse to continue to obliterate the Ukrainian forces and to establish a NATO/Nazi-free environment in Ukraine.

I am for peace, but only under Russia's reasonable terms. A premature peace would be a catastrophe for all concerned.

Expand full comment
Angelina's avatar

Seems like Trump is into an industrial grade "maskirovka" of his intentions. Probably, it's the right thing to do given his neo-cons surrounding.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

There is no maskirovka. Trump surrounds himself with neocons because he chose them.

Expand full comment
Angelina's avatar

Not so sure Trump is a fully free agent in selection of his cohorts. It could be some give-take situation and Ms. Lindsey delivering SC in mid-term/similar.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

You assume facts not in evidence.

Expand full comment
Angelina's avatar

I have eyes just like you do - but I don't assume I know all facts/allegiances from the crap around, he got some half-crap, some 100%

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

I also don't make shit up to reassure myself, especially when there are much simpler explanations available, ones that do not require jumping to conclusions.

Expand full comment
Luís Nunes's avatar

Not true of any position that needs senate confirmation. Neocons own the place.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

The Senate only confirms. They don't nominate.

If you think that a Team R Senate was going to defy Trump, especially during the post-inauguration honeymoon...

Expand full comment
Luís Nunes's avatar

They did... As much as they dares. Whats his face wasn't the first choices for CIA. Hegseth almost certainly wasn't first choices for Pentagon, either. Danny Davies was blackballed. There may be more...

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

If the Senate was willing to confirm Gabbard, they would confirm about anyone.

Stop making excuses.

Expand full comment
Concerned Celtiberian's avatar

First: IMO “neocon” is nowadays a term so unspecific as to be worthless (sort of like the words “communist” or “fascist”). I would rather refer to this faction as “Russia-first US imperialists”, as opposed to the “China-first” crowd to which apparently Trump now belongs.

Second: considering that most Euro leaders since at least 30 years have been bred, groomed,indoctrinated, kompromat’ed, pressured and generally puppeteered by the US, it is indeed remarkable that some of them now dare to oppose the Master of Puppets. Is this real or is it merely a theater?? A good cop - bad cop kabuki for the public?

Expand full comment
Gnuneo's avatar

A "neocon" is someone of the Zionazi-US Empire ilk, that believes in unipolar World domination.

A "fascist" is someone who believes in private Oligarchic control, and using state totalitarian control to smother protest about say impoverishment or ongoing genocides.

A "communist" is indeed pretty vague, but appears to be anyone a: someone who disagrees that impoverishing the population is a good thing, or b: anyone the New Right doesn't like for anything.

European 'leaders' and political systems have indeed been groomed, but not by some singular entity called "The US", but by a specific grouping within that - the Zionazi-US Empire-Intel lobby. The ones that have several 'Epstein' honey-traps ongoing. And control the the entire Western corporate media.

Expand full comment
Jeff R's avatar

"A "neocon" is someone of the Zionazi-US Empire ilk, that believes in unipolar World domination."

Actually that is a Ziocon.

Expand full comment
Gnuneo's avatar

I believe the "Ziocon" term is a more recent adaptation, reflecting growing awareness of who is pulling the strings.

Expand full comment
Dhdh's avatar

Neocon = Jew and their shabos goy like Zion don.

Expand full comment
Concerned Celtiberian's avatar

Bingo!

Expand full comment
Mikey Johnson's avatar

Yes friend!

Trump is playing the US Deep State (remember Kellog is frozen out) and he is managing the European Deep State ( bringing them out in the light).

Pragmatics like Trump and Putin goes well along.

Expand full comment
Luís Nunes's avatar

I find all this talk of US - Russia agreements very premature and likely a psyop. They can't even restore basic consular services but at the same time have the mutual confidence to agree to what amounts to a major draft treaty? It might seem that I'm insisting in hollow formalities, but you have to crawl before you Run.

Expand full comment
HBI's avatar

"Everything Trump says (or does) is about domestic political considerations"

I get proven right time and time again. The idiocies of the current situation can be explained via that.

Expand full comment
Luís Nunes's avatar

In this case, he need cover to TACO 🌮 on sanctions against China and doing the bare minimum on India and Brazil. Putin did him a solid.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

Trump's goal is self-aggrandizement. There is no master strategy, no eleven dimensional chess.

The europeans and Zelenskii will flatter, promise a statute or something, dangle out prospects of plunder (much as how Trump was induced to keep US Troops in Syria), whatever, in order to get Trump to change his mind.

Again.

Expand full comment
Peter Joy's avatar

Now THAT’S sarcasm.

Evidently the seven Eurodwarves accompanying their patsy cocaine dwarf to DC believe that defeat in Ukraine will be their long-suffering peoples’ cue to rise up and hang/ shoot/ guillotine them. How else to explain their Ukraine obsession?

Expand full comment
Jams O'Donnell's avatar

I must say that that sounds like a great idea. Keep passing it around and maybe it'll catch on.

Expand full comment
Hans Kloss's avatar

a low level i.e. manageable war possibly a proxy version is best for keeping the nation under control. The only problem is that at some point some people may believe the propaganda.

Expand full comment
Peter Joy's avatar

Well, that might be their theory (der Primat den Aussenpolitik, as Bismarck called it). But this is from a ruling clique that makes a very public point of despising nationalism, patriotism and indeed their own native peoples so that in reality, in a Europe that is in obvious and rapid social and economic decline, the Ukraine proxy war - or more to the point, the 12 figure annual costs to fund it - just another source of resentment and anger. In broke, potholed and collapsing Yookay, it’s just yet another obscene misuse of borrowed money that’s increasingly making taxpayers’ blood boil and erasing the last shreds of legitimacy of our rotten, incompetent State and the insanely deluded lower midwits who run it.

Expand full comment
PFC Billy's avatar

@Peter Joy

Shouldn't that be Zelensky as The Cocaine Snow White + The 7 Eurodwarves?

Expand full comment
Peter Joy's avatar

You’re quite right. I failed to imagine bearded little Zelensky with his piano-playing todger as Snow White; but from the Eurodwarf viewpoint, that’s more or less what represents.

Expand full comment
Richard Roskell's avatar

EU countries that promise to send troops to Ukraine as soon as a ceasefire is reached are simply adding to Russia's reasons to keep going.

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

Same as promising Ukraine NATO Article 5 protection: a guarantee Russia will not stop.

Expand full comment
Dane's avatar

Do you think that is why they make the promise?

They don't actually want the war to stop at this point. They think that the longer the fighting goes on, the weaker Russia will be; that Russia/Ukraine can be turned into an USSR/Afghanistan or USA/Vietnam type situation.

This is what I've come to believe - European powers intend to sacrifice Ukraine to improve their own position viz Russia.

I'm not commenting on how sane this plan is, only that it is their plan.

Expand full comment
Richard Roskell's avatar

That's a reasonable conjecture, imo. It's an objective fact that the EU wants Ukraine to continue fighting and not to surrender to Russia. It costs them nothing to promise to send troops, even though they might not in the end.

Expand full comment
Rory Bellows's avatar

Right and they’ll just say the Ukrainians were too cowardly and quit…or that this was all going swimmingly until Trump came in and then blame him. The vast majority of citizens in NATO nations will eat that slop up.

Expand full comment
Sal's avatar
Aug 18Edited

Military realities are the main driver now. IMHO the SMO is doing very well, just as planned, slow attrition, boiling the West frog so as no to create panic. Hard to see how a peace agreement can be reached. A year from now, more attrition on all Western fronts. I vote for Mearshimer's analysis on this one.

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

Pretending to negotiate buys mucho time for Russia and inhibits effective NATO / EU support for Ukraine.

Expand full comment
Morgthorak the Undead's avatar

The ten minutes that Putin and Trump spent utterly alone, in the back of the Beast, after Trump invited Putin to ride with him, were used well by both men. I suspect the entire summit turned on those ten minutes, and the rest was more or less window dressing and theater.

No one rode with them, and no one could hear or see what they were saying to each other. That meant that things could be said during that ride that could never have been said otherwise.

It was HIGHLY unusual for Trump to invite Putin to ride in the Beast, and just as unusual for Putin to do it. There was much more going on there than met the eye, and those ten minutes will likely be very politically profitable for both men.

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

They had about 7 minutes on the tarmac alone, too. The Beast is probably bugged, though.

Expand full comment
SmallStepForMan's avatar

Any human communication starts of with “hows the family” and such. It is impossible for 2 presidents to immediately discuss issues with no prior “familiarisation” and exposing views. Nothing significant happened in the car.

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

This is a very myopic analysis of top-level diplomatic mechanations. LOTS can happen in 60 seconds alone, let alone 10 minutes. These guys understand how valuable and rare 'time alone' is - they aren't likely to waste it.

Expand full comment
Jeff's avatar

Ten minutes of how’s the family? 😂 I don’t spend that much time on small talk in my own insignificant life

Expand full comment
Angelina's avatar

Not so unusual - didn't Putin give a ride to Kim Jong-un in the gifted to Kim Aurus?

I was a bit shocked, I must admit seeing Putin going in, but after all it was all about trust.

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

One Putins plane entered US airspace, he was in Trumps hands - the limo ride was the easy part. It's pretty obvious Trump loves to show off the hardware and trappings of being the most powerful politician on earth. One can hardly imagine the true volume and dimensions of Orangemand ego. Jabba the Hut comes to mind lol

Expand full comment
Angelina's avatar

It's always interesting to see an acute case of megalomania:-) Reminds me of an old soviet song's refrain, "without me, without me, here would be absolutely nothing, and even sun would not be shining, if it were not for me." I can only imagine how some professional butt-kissers elevated their skill to art, provided such a fertile ground. Nobody normal would withstand such intense "adoration."

Expand full comment
grr's avatar

He is not the most powerful politician on earth.

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

Yeah, I wondered if that statement was accurate, too, even as I made it. Who do you think is the most powerful politician if not the US President?

Expand full comment
grr's avatar

I'd say VVP.

Expand full comment
Yoni Reinón's avatar

The time for a quick blowjob. Who was sucking? Thats the point.

Expand full comment
VHMan's avatar

Unnecessarily vulgar—by which you get your comments dismissed without being read.

Expand full comment
Yoni Reinón's avatar

For Trump there are only two kinds of men, the winners and the losers. The long long red carpet meant respect. So I think Trump’s the sucker.

Expand full comment
Yoni Reinón's avatar

sorry about that bro..These are the cons of free speach.

Expand full comment
Dhdh's avatar

Yes bc yoni is a Jew.

Expand full comment
Yoni Reinón's avatar

The usual idiot

Expand full comment
Dhdh's avatar

thanks for outing yourself jew…

Expand full comment
Yoni Reinón's avatar

I am not a jew you nazi idiot. I am a catholic.

Expand full comment
grr's avatar

Only dismissed by virtue signalling snowflakes.

Expand full comment
John Galtsky's avatar

"No one rode with them, and no one could hear or see what they were saying to each other. That meant that things could be said during that ride that could never have been said otherwise."

Very true, but, alas, English is one of Putin's weaker languages. Any ultra-private messages would have had to have been very short and very simple. It's not Putin's style to talk in ways that can result in translation errors or communicating nuances he does not intend.

... and I bet Trump was disappointed Putin didn't bring with him the attractive lady who was translating in Osaka. :-)

Expand full comment
Angelina's avatar

I'm pretty sure Putin brushed up on his English and given that his German is excellent , it won't be difficult. All Trump had to say, "Vlad get me out of this shit." :-)

Expand full comment
pyrrhus's avatar

Russians are going to be suspicious of any agreement that leaves Ukraine independent, and therefore possibly receptive to NATO's blandishments....Certainly Putin cannot give back provinces that have voted to join Russia...so both sides are playing games....

Expand full comment
Royotoyo's avatar

If I was Zelensky, I'd offer to sign whatever agreement, and then declare that I'm not going back to Ukraine, but to my mansion in Miami to chill. Because in Ukraine I won't survive for ten minutes. You want to impose the agreement? Good luck!

Expand full comment
Fledr Maus's avatar

Konovaltes and Bandera had similar ideas;)

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

But it was not Putin in the Kremlin at the time.

Expand full comment
Fledr Maus's avatar

Hahaha

But it was Putin who was in the Kremlin when Krasikov boinked Chechen.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar
Aug 18Edited

And it is Putin in the Kremlin when nobody has boinked the green gnome, Budanov or Malyuk.

Expand full comment
Fledr Maus's avatar

I am sure you know that they said many times they preferred Ze, due to his irrational and temper tantrum throwing nature, to some other rational puppet. So another lie by omission.

Boinking Budanov and Malyuk, ‘’decision makers' as well, would not make any difference at this point, because they are easily replaceable executioners of the orders others give them.

Having said this, somebody did assassinate SBU dude that was in charge of the attacks in Rus, but only after proper bodies approved the assassination, supposedly. Putin the all controlling octopus that never sleeps (gotta be up non stop to control all them time zones) could not decide on his own about the assassination policies. And even all this is not publicly confirmed, it is hearsay. But you like hearsay.

So, to return to Bandera, ‘pussy arse’’ USSR tried to achieve extradition, but failed, and only assassinated him in 1959. Why 1959? He was waiting for a USA visa application process to end and to flee to USA.

Expand full comment
Fledr Maus's avatar

And other Chechens around the Globe

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

This quite possibly what Trump's proposal will be. But of course Ze will then have to hope that he lives a long life afterwards.

Expand full comment
Cheryl Shepherd's avatar

Z might be offered "the opportunity to become a director in Hollywood or a politician". Excellent, Roman Polanski, Harvey Weinstein, Dennis Hastert, and Barney Frank all approve of this message, birds of a feather. The cocaine must flow!

Expand full comment
Angelina's avatar

I'll bet my money on Zelensky be eventually trotsky'd by Ukrainians wherever he ends up in the world, when they'd fully grasp how screwed and disposed they're by the West.

Expand full comment
Elena's avatar

If they don't get him quickly my money would be on Russia.

Expand full comment
Angelina's avatar

Russia would want Zelensky @ Nuremberg2.0 re.: Ukraine, not to just blow his brains out on some pavement/cut in pieces, as Ukrainians might..

Expand full comment
Elena's avatar

Hmm. Maybe, but I’d consider Nuremberg rigged. Look how the west protects Satanyahu, for example.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

I dunno, Ghani is still alive and well.

Expand full comment
Jim Uren's avatar

This fellow comes to similar conclusions

https://youtu.be/3VbeFZT7MGA

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

It appears that Russia is going to settle for a whole lot less than what it could have gained, considering its dominance over AFU forces as I predicted long ago. I hope I'm wrong about this..

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

I believe your hope will come true.

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

But right now it doesn't look like it, Victor.

It looks like Russia is going to settle for minimal gain when it could have optimized for so much more. Putin may come up short. Anyway, we'll know soon enough.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

Don't rely on what is said, Denis - only what is done. The game must be played. It's Ze's move now. Have patience.

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

So, I have your personal guarantee, Victor?

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

There are no guarantees in life - except death and taxes, of course.

Expand full comment
Mikey Johnson's avatar

What is done is too little and too late every f*****g time.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

So impatient! Well, for your info I tried my best to convince Putin over tea the other day to try harder and if necessary, nuke the whole of Europe, but he just wasn't having any of it - kept bringing up his General Staff and their pig-headedness to draw this operation out as long as possible.

Expand full comment
Mikey Johnson's avatar

Dear Victor.

This SMO/non-War is shrouded in so much wishful thinking that most people dont see what is before their eyes.

1. We have almost 100% transparancy where every formation is every minute with thousands of clips and maps giving us all information of what happens on the ground.

2. It is almost as transparant in the air…every attack is traced and we can see the results (although sometimes assuming a lot or not knowing at all)

3. What is not transparant is the losses and the resources left.

4. We have ”objectives” from the Russian side and the ”Russia must not win” from EU/NATO. Neither of them showing any clear strategy other than perpetual war.

3,5 years of operations should give us clues of what is being done and not regarding the ”objectives”. Instead people are telling themselves fairytales avoiding all important questions.

It is not wrong to have faith. But the disappointment when you wake up….

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

Impatient, you are (in Yoda voice). If this signals Putin turning the NATO tide, he's achieved plenty!

Expand full comment
Denis's avatar

But Vinny, the NATO tide remains intact along with its proxy Ukraine AFU forces and government. Patient, years several, I have been.

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

These things take decades to evolve I am horrified to report. Stock up on popcorn, but put half in the fallout shelter.

Expand full comment
Sam Ursu's avatar

I'm glad Putin and Trump had a chance to talk f2f behind closed doors. As for the rest, I don't know what the fiddily fuck is going on. I literally can never tell what any of these people are going to do except that Z is going to beg for money and weapons.

That being said, it's one thing for the leader to decide something and another for the people to accept it. And there are a whole lot of angry folks in Ukraine and Russia who aren't going to be happy if unacceptable concessions are made.

Expand full comment
Victor's avatar

In today's world the people's voice doesn't carry much weight anyway.

Expand full comment
Peter Williamson's avatar

It is ridiculous to see Starmer as credible. His country faces civil war. His country already accepted so-called GoodFriday Agreement giving Irish Republic a say in Northern Ireland and a rigged voting system different from U.K. which favours Republicans over Loyalists. Why he cannot conceive of that US-imposed solution for N Ireland applying in Ukraine is peculiar

Russia wants Security Guarantees covering Europe especially itself. Russia has been repeatedly invaded by Germany snd Poland and France and less frequently by Britain and Japan snd USA snd Romania and Italy snd Hungary and of course by Sweden

So Security Guarantees for Ukraine are indivisible from those for Russia on its borders North and South snd East snd West

Trump will simply tell Zelensky no one is going to go any further down this path snd tell Euros there is no US backstop. Israel has exposed US backstop as threadbare

Merz is more interested in Kiev than in 27.5% duty on German car parts - he has limited traction with Trump. Sept is when US announces troop withdrawals from Europe. To control EU US needs to withdraw troops to make it more dependent snd pliant

Expand full comment
grr's avatar
Aug 18Edited

LOL you call the Northern Ireland filth loyalists, Irish call them traitors. And they are.

Expand full comment
Peter Williamson's avatar

You sound just like Azov types talking about people in Donetsk. That is the nature of bigotry it fails to see the objective situation. That is why Russia cannot trust its Loyalists to the whims of the Galician Nationalists

Expand full comment
grr's avatar

Azov? LOL. The Loyalists are English loving filth that killed and betrayed their own countrymen for English silver and gongs.

Expand full comment
bemused's avatar

I don't live in Northern Ireland, but I do live in Donegal and travel to the North frequently. The vast majority of the people who live in the north are normal friendly people who are loyal to their country and to the union they are part of. Just like most people of the world are loyal to theirs. I would say your attitudes are at least 30 years out of date if not far longer. The Troubles are over, and except for a few rabble rousers (such as yourself?) people on both sides are happy with that. Perhaps things will change, politically, as time goes on, but casting the opposing side in the way you do does nobody any favors.

Expand full comment
grr's avatar

If they are loyal to the occupiers they are traitors. Not enough lipstick can be put on that pig to make it attractive.

Expand full comment
Haywood Jablome's avatar

It would appear that the "s' and "a" keys on your keyboard have been swapped when typing the word "and."

Expand full comment
Peter Williamson's avatar

Yes that can be a problem when using a phone on the move

I do hope you are not too unsettled

I realise it can cause psychological imbalance

Expand full comment
Dhdh's avatar

why care about Irish Republic instead of the unlimited influx of non-whites by the jew?

Expand full comment
Jullianne's avatar

The game here is to outmanoeuvre Z, get the US out of this war and so fold the putative european front. Then Ukraine collapses as pensions et al cease to be paid, hyper inflation takes hold.....

Russia does not need to take all Ukraine in some super strike. Ukraine will vote to save itself by choosing to join the RF.

Russia, moreover, does not need to reassert any of its terms until they are on the table, just let this noise rattle around the west. It is playing to its own allies at the moment to keep them on board viz the threatened secondary sanctions. And it is useful right now for the Russian hardliners in western media circles to be obliged to push out the GM line, even though they fear they are playing to Putin here, namely that Putin is a traitor to go anywhere near any of these alleged concessions and just watch will happen if he does! His overthrow! 'WHY ISN'T HIS TEAM DENYING OUR STUFF BY NOW?????'

This gloved fist is functioning as a threat to the west that is now all tangled up in its own black propaganda.

As in ' Hang on, this was us saying Russians would do this if Putin caved, not Russians themselves, not beyond the usual suspects and our own plants.And that was to secure Russian internal collapse, not big up the war! Is it true that a weak Putin would be dethroned and we would have a real war declared over Ukraine with the application of all out Russian force to end it? Would Putin deliberately manoeuvre Russia to this denouement by kindly conceding to our deal? Maybe he wants to retire. Or is that just our own spiel????..... 'We urgently need space to think here, to back off a bit and allow the current manageable fight to continue. No bone crushing sanctions... definitely not that.' Maybe now is the time to remove Z.....

Russia wins however it goes, and so does not need to intervene right now as the enemy makes all its own predictable mistakes.

Expand full comment
Vinny Vanchesco's avatar

It's easy to tell who plays chess and who.plays checkers around here. Great comment

Expand full comment
Christopher's avatar

It will be interesting to see how things play out if/when Zelensky signs any peace agreement. My guess is that it kicks off a nasty period for Ukraine where the search for the innocent to blame for the loss of territory, including the Donbas, begins, and the guilty maneuver to escape the blame cannons.

The guilty being NATO and European "leaders" who dangled the carrot of NATO membership in front of Ukraine, only to rip it away in the end.

Will the rest of Ukraine settle for EU membership down the road? Or will the pitchforks come out? As you say Russia might not have to do anything other than sit back and watch Kiev collapse in riots and death squads.

Expand full comment
Haywood Jablome's avatar

I find it hard to imagine Russia wanting Zelenskyy to leave. He's the largest fuckup clown the world has seen in a long time. The USA on the other hand, I can see them wanting him gone. I believe it was Napoleon Bonaparte who said "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." Although Sun Tzu said similar.

Expand full comment
Jullianne's avatar

I did not say it was Russia pondering that.... just being relaxed about a general breakout of infighting all over the western alliance including in Ukraine.

Expand full comment