"Thank goodness we don't want peace in Europe!" Topic

Thank goodness we are going to continue the most costly, bloody, deadly and disruptive land war in Europe since WW2! Putin made a peace overture, and the West summarily rejected it. That's the third peace overture so far that has been rejected -- I for one can hardly wait to see mushrooms clouds gracing the horizon!

link

Don't forget the Rule of Thumb! If it's Bigger than your Thumb, it's time to Run!

Some peace overture: give us everything we want and we we promise a temporary ceasefire and not to break this agreement, like we broke all the previous ones…

Putin's 'Peace deals' amount to Ukrainian surrender.
Once Putin has been appeased, I think, like Adolf Hitler, he will see the world as weak and continue to expand his empire.

I, and lots of others I am sure, suspect Big Bad Vlad asks for peace when his military is doing badly, with the intention of getting a breathing space to rebuild his battered army, navy and air force.
Its a no brainer for him, if his 'Peace deals' fail, he can always say the West is the warmonger in this conflict, and if it succeeds, he gains the territories his army failed to conquer.

Its an old saying, but worth repeating ' The only thing necessary for evil to triumph in the world is that good men do nothing'

Much as Hitler to Chamberlin at Munich, it was a piece offering. Hitler wanted a piece of Czechoslovakia and that was enough until he wanted a piece of Poland and then a piece of Belgium and the Netherlands and Denmark and Norway etc.

In return for pieces of the Ukraine including several his robbers don't occupy at the moment, Putin will offer peace. Until he wants the next piece. Appeasement is the word most associated with Chamberlin because history is a bit too nice to use the word craven.

The longer the losing side holds out before negotiating an agreement, the less favorable the final settlement.

Putin's 'Peace deals' amount to Ukrainian surrender.

Do you think Russia is going to collapse and surrender, or do you think some kind of negotiated settlement will have to be done?

If you think the outcome will be a peace settlement of some kind, then why are you prolonging the War? Get a ceasefire in place, stop the dying, shore up your defenses and see if the talks lead to something both sides hate but can accept. And if you can't reach a peace deal you've at least bought time to implement stronger layered defenses which favor Ukraine over Russia.

Some peace overture: give us everything we want and we we promise a temporary ceasefire and not to break this agreement, like we broke all the previous ones…

There has been no ceasefire in Ukraine since the start of the war, just faster or slower war as far as I remember.

Oh -- and I'm reminded that the people in charge of Team Biden's policies and war plans are already responsible for:

1. The Libya War

2. The take-down of pro-US Egyptian leader Mubarak, resulting in the rise to power of the Muslim Brotherhood and countercoup by now dictator al-Sisi

3. The Expansion of the Syrian Civil War

4. The Color Revolution in Lebanon and rise to dominance of Hezbollah

5. The premature exit from Iraq and the rise of the ISIS Caliphate which conquered an area larger than Ireland and dominated some 12 MILLION people, subjecting them to harsh Sharia law, slavery, oppression and genocide.

6. The rise of Iran to a regional power and US quiescence in the face of the 2009 popular revolt against the Mullahs in which the US tacitly supported the theocracy of Iran

7. US quiescence in the face of Iran's support of the Houthi which led to civil war in Yemen and the intervention of the Arab League, followed missile strikes on Saudi Arabia and UAE by the Houthis with Iranian-supplied weapons…and when the Houthi took Yemen's capitol the then-Obama Admin ordered the USMC Embassy detail to surrender.

8. US quiescence in the face of the 2008-2009 Russian invasion of Georgia

9. US quiescence in the face of the 2012 Russian annexation of Crimea

10. US quiescence in the face of the 2014 Russian annexation of Eastern Ukraine

11. The collapse of Afghanistan and chaotically hasty US retreat that cost scores of US casualties and thousands of local allies, and which also saw the loss of over $80 USD BILLION in infrastructure and military equipment and weapons to the Taliban.

So I'm not disposed to think current leadership and planners know what they are doing and have the competence to control the outcome of the Ukraine War.

"Gimme more land & I'll stop killing your people…" Putin's peace offering.

Damon.

If you surrender your country is a peace deal, then perhaps it isn't much of a deal. I would much prefer to see one where the following conditions are agreed to.
1). Russian withdraws from ALL Ukrainian territory.
2). Russia pays for every damn dime of damage that it has inflicted upon Ukraine.
3). All Ukrainian citizens are returned to their home country.
4). Putin is arrested for War Crimes.
5). Russia disarms.

Now that would be a peace deal.

SB I agree with your list but would put the rise of Hezbollah and Iran as a regional power on Reagan based on the Beirut disaster and his subsequent dealings with Iraq. But certainly the subsequent leaders failed to resolve these issues as well.

Trusting Putin in a deal for peace….Whatever the politics of the first deal, it was rejected at least in part because the Russians had begun zip-tying and executing Ukrainian civilians and the first war crimes investigators were arriving and releasing the evidence.

+1 Fitzovich.

Russia has agreed many times to not invade it's neighbors and yet Russia occupied land from four of them including Chechnya whom they conquered completely; after a peace agreement.

Any peace agreement simply gives Russia time to rearm and strike somewhere else.

What is the penalty for Russia attacking Ukraine in the future if they give Russia what they want now? Putin has said they can't join NATO. So who will rescue them when he moves to take away the rest of the country.

Bunkermeister

1). Russian withdraws from ALL Ukrainian territory.
2). Russia pays for every damn dime of damage that it has inflicted upon Ukraine.
3). All Ukrainian citizens are returned to their home country.
4). Putin is arrested for War Crimes.
5). Russia disarms.

Russia has NUKES! So please remember the Rule of Thumb regarding Mushroom Clouds: "If it's Bigger than your Thumb, it's time to Run!"

SB I agree with your list but would put the rise of Hezbollah and Iran as a regional power on Reagan based on the Beirut disaster and his subsequent dealings with Iraq.

Nah, that was happening anyways, the 8 years of Obama where he took no action against their rising power and scores of attacks, while relaxing sanctions AND enabling their nuke program with useless unverifiable negotiations had more to do with it.

Any peace agreement simply gives Russia time to rearm and strike somewhere else.

Well, aren't we supposed to be paying attention now? I mean, we laughed off Russia's invasions for 8 years under Obama when many of the same team working for Biden "cut their teeth." So why not stop this war and make sure any subsequent conflicts will be even harder for Russia to prosecute? Make Ukraine into a Hedgehog and put in place a containment policy with more defenses in bordering NATO counties, you know the kind of thing NATO should already have done, yes?

Anyways, the more often Putin signals he wants to talk peace and gets blown off again, the closer we get to him saying, "Fruck it -- ok, they want war, let's ramp it up and see how they like it." Boomety Boom, oops, was that a NATO airfield -- my bad! Oops, was that the German Rheinmetal repair depot and a couple score German techs? Ooopsie. That's how you get Mushroom clouds…

But it seems like y'all wanna play Fallout 4 for reals…

A former member of the previous POTUS's cabinet, said we can't let Putin think he won. It may only make him want to take more of the former Imperial Russian Empire.

However, don't know if he has too many choices that are not NATO …

What Forces would he use ? With the very high losses his military has suffered.

What Forces would he use ? With the very high losses his military has suffered.

Dunno -- Putin hasn't gone to full mobilization or put the Russian economy on a war footing. He also hasn't targeted NATO territory or bases enabling the war in Ukraine, even though NATO supplied weapons are being used to strike targets in Russia.

A former member of the previous POTUS's cabinet, said we can't let Putin think he won. It may only make him want to take more of the former Imperial Russian Empire.

Oh gimme a break! Putin is like a nuclear-armed Mussolini whose impression of himself and his military is so unrealistic he cannot defeat a poor neighbor many times smaller than Russia. -- just like Mussolini broke the Italian Army on the mountains of Greece and could not conquer it. He certainly cannot take Europe or create a new Russian Empire anymore than Mussolini could create Nova Roma.

Some kind of peace deal is valuable, and doesn't mean that the any territories lost are lost forever and not subject to future negotiations. And you know why you also want some kind of ceasefire and deal in the works -- because the Democrats have so frucked up support for Ukraine by using it as a litmus test for political loyalty that if the Presidency changes parties this year there's a damn good chance that the rug gets pulled from under Ukraine -- and that's also a factor of waning American public support for funding an endless war with no clear end in sight or metric for whatever success looks like, which leadership still can't realistically define.

My fear is that as we keep promoting more war and rejecting peace we're telling Putin he needs to get more serious just as the American public is starting to turn against the war in general. And then what? You could see Ukraine collapse like a house of cards, and it would be YOUR fault for supporting those who have been driving it so unrealistically far. You are creating the conditions for the very disastrous Russian conquest of Ukraine you fear.

SBminisguy.

You seem to be overlooking that Putin's proposal isn't a ceasefire in place then negotiate. It is for Ukraine to permanently cede a lot of territory, including their second city and most of the country's mineral resources and remaining power generation plus rule out the one thing that they think would protect them from Russia coming back in a few years and taking the rest.

And Russia most certainly is on a war footing. Even so, they are burning through reserves of AFVs to refurbish and hand to mouth on missiles and ammunition, whether domestically produced or bought from North Korea and Iran.

No doubt they could mobilise more people (though the fact that they are using so many criminals and developing world mercenaries suggests that isn's as easy as we might think) but training, equipping them and giving them ammunition is another matter.

So SB Minis guy would be quite happy for someone to turn up at his house give him and his family a good kicking and steal all of his wargames figures,

Could he please give us his address,

Tally Ho!

I always remember a story from Normandy, where a group of Germans surrendered to some British troops, but as a couple of Tommies moved forward to accept the surrender, one of the Germans opened fire, killing one of the approaching party, after which he dropped his weapon and raised his hands again.
Needless to say, the other Brit, with a Bren, emptied the magazine into the German.
Likewise, Putin cannot be trusted, ever!

SBminiguy,
Yeah, they have nukes and cannot be trusted with them, it is time for them to be disarmed completely.

Fitz, nice dream. Who's going to accomplish it?

🤔Well the US is admitting to UFO's… maybe they…? But could we trust the aliens?

There are good arguments on both sides. SB makes good points and some counter arguments are reasonable.

You have to ask multiple questions.

1) do you believe the Ukraine can drive Russia out of their territory, if the Russians are willing to play the long game?
2) no matter how many weapons the Ukraine gets from NATO, can their population sustain the casualties necessary to continue this? As pointed out, the Russians are using troops from multiple peoples.
3) will the Russian population put up with a long term war footing, taxes and eventual loss of people they actually care about? Remember they have historically been willing to sustain immense loses.
4) will Putin die? If so, will it make a difference? Will he be overthrown? (Doubtful).
5) will the US and allies be willing to shell out trillions for a long term stalemate in the Ukraine?
6) will one side or the other, make the ultimate mistake that will lead to the ultimate war? It's happened multiple times in Europe before. Track record is not good.

Just some thoughts, there are many more.

From Military.com

NATO is hitting their defense spending target…

Yes NATO are paying "their fair share" …

Putin and his intel cronies screwed up massively, again.

1) Ukraine was a much tougher nut to crack.

2) 2 new members to NATO, Sweden and Finland, in response to his invasion of Ukraine.

3) NATO is spending more $ on defense since Putin invade Ukraine.

4) Russia's losses are very high for few real gains.

Take away – So for a former KGB officer … seems Putin don't know %#@&*!💩 about history or the art & science of war.

link

35thOVI+1

As for the rest, when did I ever say you can trust Putin? Trust but Verify, eh? But also you guys, please stop listening to people like Peter Zeihan who keep predicting the pending collapse of Russia and all that. And I'm with ya -- I don't want to see Ukraine conquered, but by pretending Ukraine can "win" by totally ejecting Russia from all territory? Be real, not gonna happen. Neither is Russia disarming its nukes, neither is a NATO army gonna march to Moscow. So then what?

Oh -- and why do the same people that want to force Israel to stop dismantling Hamas in a Just War with great cause and have peace talks, want to force the war in Ukraine to continue and reject peace talks?? The Biden team has actually cut off military aid to Israel while spending hand over fist on Ukraine. Care to explain why one war confined to a small strip of land is "destabilizing" but the largest war in Europe since WW2 is all good?

Hasn't it always been the case that every participant in a war has been happy to have peace on their terms – i.e., if the other side capitulates.

Anders Puck Nielsen on the 'peace' plans:

YouTube link

Here is Vlad Vexler on the same speech by Putin. Vexler uses a lot of words but he brings up somethings mentioned in speech not mentioned in the news media, which is that a long term peace requires NATO to retreat to their Cold War boundaries.

YouTube link

I agree with Nielsen, the recent statement by both Russia and Ukraine should be taken seriously, but they aren't really 'peace plans'. Neither side is willing to compromise, which means each wants to other to capitulate.

One thing no-one has mentioned is the Ukrainian war aim. Since day 1 they have said they want to return to the pre 20th Feb 2014 borders.
They pose no threat to Russia's existence and never have.
The only good ending is for the Russians to return to those borders, then they can have all the peace they, and we, want.

I think at the very least this war is keeping Putin occupied and preventing him, for example, invading the Baltic states (to establish a land border to Kaliningrad)

Now is the time to stay strong and focused. Things will work out like they tend to do.

Those advocating that the Ukraine continue, do you truly believe the Ukraine can win?

We would all, (most of us anyway), would love to see the Russia bear defeated with its tail between their legs. But do you really believe this will happen? Or are you just hopping that the Ukrainians will continue to drain Russian resources until the Ukrainians military personnel run out?

I am curious to hear the responses.

I don't think they can. I believe at best, the Russians would be willing to withdraw from some territory, but some will be lost forever, just as the Crimea. Or until regime changes happen in Russia in the future. Putin cannot live forever.

But maybe others really believe the Ukraine can prevail. Would be nice, but I don't have high hopes.

35thOVI+1

"…Things will work out like they tend to do."

The motto of a guy who has lost everything at a casino but believes his luck is about to change if he can only borrow a little more.

Ukraine cannot and will not win this war. Believing otherwise is pure fantasy and prolongs the human and material cost.

Our help for Israel has been huge over decades and we would never allow them to be overrun and cease to exist as a country, which is what Putin is trying in Ukraine. The two situations are very different. Hamas is not a military power on the level of Russia, and its functioning depends heavily on Iran, does it not?

I think it is possible that the interruption of critical help from the US to Ukraine last year for many months seemed to give Russia the edge and IMO, Ukraine might not recover enough to win on the battlefield. Eventually both sides will need a ceasefire, and it may end like Korea, which is to say not resolved.

Ukraine cannot and will not win this war. Believing otherwise is pure fantasy and prolongs the human and material cost.

Have you considered the precedent of the Polish–Soviet War (1919-1921)?

More importantly, Europe cannot and will not lose this war.

Ukraine might not recover enough to win on the battlefield

They have several hundred Russians surrounded on the Kharkiv front, which shows substantial recovery.

Yes, I have seen that and I hope you are right. Ammo was pretty low this spring, among other things. They are a tough bunch.

I have returned to my previous identity, after a brief interlude…

Tort, are you seeing anyone about this multiple personality disorder? 😉

Yes, I see many people but I think I might be imagining it! I do feel better as my old self.

Just so you're not seeing dead people and seeing Dr. Malcolm Crowe about it. 💀😉

I have a sixth sense about these things

I have returned to my previous identity, after a brief interlude…

Are you Batman ?!?

OT – The US and NATO must continue sending all the support they can. To ensure Ukraine keeps killing Russians. Regain their territory. And show what a 2d rate military the Russians are.

Why would anyone be stupid enough to believe any treaty or agreement with Russia is worth the paper it's written on. They have routinely violated every agreement with respect to Ukraine and its integrity for years.

Ukraine absolutely can outlast Russia and bleed them white. As long as the rest of the world is smart enough to continue supporting them.

I find the "but Russia has nukes" argument to relatively specious. The majority of saber rattling has been by powerless minions such as Medvedev with a history of simply foolish ranting and while he has a nice title, no power beyond what Putin grants. Putin may be an opportunistic thug but he is rational and using a nuclear weapon even in a "demonstration" would drive away their vital Chinese support.

Several of these more rabid saber rattlers have listed a return of Alaska as among their demands for a greater Russia. Perhaps we should give them Alaska since after all, they have nukes.

Ha! No dead people. No Batman. But my interest in modern military matters continues…. I especially follow the Pacific region. The scale of the Ukraine war has been unexpected. I hope bjporter is right…

I find the "but Russia has nukes" argument to relatively specious.

You cannot dismiss it. When sh1t hits the fan in war you have little control over the direction of the conflict, and in general history terms the longer a war drags on and the more players are involved the more it tends to escalate in ways nobody likes. The more chances that people misunderstand the situation. Hell, we weren't at war and some errant words helped spark the Korean War and the Gulf War, and some dude shooting a prince sparked WW1. Now you have nukes. If Putin needs to, do you think he'd hesitate overly much about tac nuking a Ukrainian unit and then tell NATO to "make my day." I mean, you're all making the case that Putin is a dangerous, bloody man who will kill whomever to reach his goals -- but yet he's also so rational he won't use tac nukes if he has to??

And what if it's not Putin but somebody else who screws up? Or a weapon is readied and there's an "oopsie?"

You're right, it may not be likely but it cannot be ignored either.

During the Cold War, both sides were very cautious after the Cuban Missile Crisis, taking great care to avoid provocative, escalatory actions and inflammatory language. This was probably a product of a belated realization of how many people were running with scissors during the Missile Crisis, but also a more general appreciation (rooted in the experience of the Second World War) of what conflict on that scale really meant. The two powers actively supported proxy wars, but generally tried to limit direct escalatory threats. Even if the measures they used were sometimes just fig leaves, everyone always left the other side a way to climb down, so no crisis ever got out of control.

It seems ominous to me that the leaders and prominent voices in both the US and Russia have little personal experience of the military or war, and that Putin's most important experience was the collapse of the USSR, which he sees as a catastrophe.

America, Ukraine and the Illusion of an Isolationist Choice

link

Armand

Tango, that is a well thought out and detailed analysis, thanks for posting it!

Tango, that is a well thought out and detailed analysis, thanks for posting it!

Not a good analysis -- the dude is an Establishment CIA guy, and he presents a strawman argument between total isolation and maintaining global hegemony that reads like an Undergraduate political science essay. If you're concerned and skeptical about the Ukraine War and want an offramp to peace he declares you an irresponsible Isolationist. And he offers no path forward except conflict and war with no clear goal -- and that's why a majority of Americans support *less* aid for Ukraine. Because nobody can tell us what "winning" looks like and what it might take to get there!

What's Victory look like? How will this war end? What will it cost to end it, what commitment? What will happen after it ends? What are the REAL consequences of failure, and what are the REAL risks of escalation into WW3 or a broader regional conflict?

Two years in -- hundreds of thousands of dead, millions of refugees, global instability, and hundreds of billions of $$ spent -- and none of these crucial things are explained by leadership, and if you ask you're a Putin Puppet, or in this guy's words after you clear away the fluff, a fool.

What lovely news -- NATO plays the Nuclear Escalation Game!

The head of NATO has announced that it's time the world remembered that NATO is a Nuclear Alliance by removing nuclear weapons from storage and placing them into a readiness state. Woohoo, bring on the nukes, boys!

Nato is in talks to deploy more nuclear weapons in the face of a growing threat from Russia and China, the head of the alliance has said.

Jens Stoltenberg added that the bloc must show its nuclear arsenal to the world to send a direct message to its foes in an interview with The Telegraph.

He revealed there were live consultations between members on taking missiles out of storage and placing them on standby as he called for transparency to be used as a deterrent.

link

And every turn the US Admin and NATO keep escalating with rhetoric and actions. Why? For example, the Russians sent an antiquated attack sub that uses nuclear propulsion and a light cruiser, accompanied by TUGBOATS, to show the flag in Cuba. The kind of cruise Russia has been doing for decades, and given the piddly amount of firepower poses absolutely no threat -- in fact, we're all more at risk of the sub sinking and causing a radiocative mess on the ocean floor than anything else. But instead we get treated to these kinds of headlines:

"The arrival of the Kazan nuclear-powered submarine in Havana, Cuba's capital, has heightened US anxiety, following Russian warnings days before.

The sub is joined by Russia's most powerful cruiser, the Gorshkov, in a four-ship convoy."

What anxiety? We saw them coming, we have the power to remove them from the face of the Earth if need be, and they are more likely to breakdown than cause any problems. It's actually pretty sad that this is the best Russia can do.

It's good to remember that -- globally, Russia has LOST its power projection ability, it is a regional player and we're at war on its own border. But that doesn't mean we can frick around on its border and escalation won't happen.

So what exactly is the ask on Ukraine? Give up completely and allow Russia to annex the four oblasts/provinces they've partially stolen already? In return for what? If that is the case and Ukraine is abandoned, isn't the lesson for them to build some nukes to protect what's left?

Also, what response should be planned for the next theft ( and there will be a next theft as this one worked) which will be either trans-Dniestra or more of Georgia or possibly in the Baltics?

The Russian hard liners are pushing for pieces of Poland and that might well be WW3.

So what exactly is the ask on Ukraine?

You tell me -- you're the one who wants to risk having to send our sons and daughters to fight and die in Ukraine.

What's victory look like?
Is that victory realistic?
What are the risks of trying to get said defined victory?
How much will victory cost in blood and treasure?
What does the post-Victory Peace look like?
How will you secure Peace after War is done?
How much will Peace cost?

SBminisguy: "You tell me -- you're the one who wants to risk having to send our sons and daughters to fight and die in Ukraine."

Without getting into this latest strawman, when nobody here has suggested sending NATO troops to fight in Ukraine: 'our sons and daughters'? I'm increasingly wondering how many of the posters on here advocating for whatever Putin demands this week are really based in Western countries.

Useful idiots only goes so far in explaining such positions.

Useful idiots only goes so far in explaining such positions

See, that's EXACTLY what I'm talking about! Rather than do some thinking about this and answer questions you just toss out lazy ad hominem attacks. Oh, and some politicians in the US have talked about sending US troops to Ukraine and Congress just voted for automatic draft registration at age 18.

Good points SBminisguy. Unfortunately, they fall on deaf ears. Those who don't fall in lock-step with the official narrative are denounced as useful idiots, personally attacked, and accused of being non-Western shills. Total rubbish. I think those being attacked on this and other threads should take comfort in the words of Proverbs 26:4 and 29:9-11 (Midlander65 – that's a book in the Bible).

@ Gray Bear

Don't be a hypocrite!

TMP link

At the moment I am sitting in my son the O-4's house as his wife the O-4 puts their 2 year old and 6 week old to bed. I want Russia bled and then bled some more so they do not have to go to Europe when Putin tries to steal the next bit of land from a NATO member because NATO showed Putin democracies are too weak to stand up to aggression.

I'll go with that … Putin and Russia need to get their ⚾🥎 clipped severely. So they pose no threat to anyone. Save for their own people. That won't change if ever …