Not a credible scenario. Why would restoring aid to Ukraine be any worse than what they have already rolled over? The Russian requirements are simple and only need to be satisfied. It would mean Ukraine has to face the fact that it has lost, and the only difference in the outcome is whether they lose more men in combat. The Russians have so far spared the core electrical services, so there is always something worse they can impose on Ukraine. They have already been abjured by the West, so public relations mean nothing to them. Good PR is good if it aligns with their objectives ("What's the harm?"), but if not, it is useless and discarded. They really don't give a shit for anyone's opinion. Only for their reputation as a force to reckon with.
Leverage? Or an inducement? If Ukraine is willing to surrender, withdraw out of Russian and Novorossiyan territories and forswear any NATO membership, I think Putin would be happy to agree. He would have what he has always declared was necessary. The question is whether Trump can get Zelensky to do the right thing---but I am now coming to the belief that such a thing is impossible. Zelensky is at the mercy of powers that absolutely do not want the pacification of Ukraine. It could be his death warrant if he did agree.
If Ukraine wants to piss and moan about "security guarantees" and drag its feet at the last instant (which seems to be its style), the "deal" is no deal. Everyone forgets how the Eastern Front of World War II turned out. The residual Ukraine could end up as the only member of a "Kiev Pact" with Putin watching over their shoulders.
I will say that I admire the Russians. They behave like men, not like prancing dancers.
I agree that the prancing dancer is just a puppet.
As I've shared my belief elsewhere in this thread, the real proxy war is Russia vs NATO.
And NATO is being most strongly guided in this endeavor by UK and France, based on the prancing dancer scrambling to hug and huddle with Kier Starmer and Macron before and after his beatdown at the Whitehouse by POTUS and VPOTUS.
The Euro-Faction all want the US to fully commit to "boots on the ground" security in Ukraine. They do not want the war to end. None of them want peace. They all want US money, US equipment, and US soldiers if they can get them.
Not going to happen while Trump is POTUS.
Everyone calls Putin a liar, but the US and NATO lied about not expanding NATO eastward towards Russia. Time and again, those promises were broken, and with NATO on Russia's doorstep by making Ukraine the next to join NATO, Putin had enough and hit them hard. We would do the same thing if China or Russia was on our border. Look at the Cuban Missile Crisis as an example (which by the way, the US started by placing Jupiter Missiles in Turkey).
Shutting off the money and equipment was just as much, if not more, of a way to say to NATO "F-You." and not as much about saying anything to the prancing dancer. Z already showed that he is a puppet, and that's it. He holds no cards.
I do not think it is in Russia's long-term interest to be in perpetual war. I don't think Putin wants it to just keep going.
I'm not sure about all of the Novorossiyan area, but If Russia is offered the Donbas and is assured that Ukraine will never be in NATO, I would bet that he takes that deal and the war ends.
Quite so, with a few caveats. The Kievan genocide against the Donbass Russians was too much to tolerate, so that tipped the scales in addition to the other concerns. And the 4 oblasts (now Novorossiya) and Crimea ARE Russian territory insofar as Moscow is concerned, so there will be no negotiation over that.
I have no idea how Putin could ever be assured that Ukraine would not be infested by NATO. That's what happened, despite all kinds of assurances. Perhaps if the U.S. left NATO and left it a weak shell, that might be a balance. Otherwise, I think the idea of a "Kiev Pact," in parallel with the Warsaw Pact, might be the only solution that would provide assurance.
The west has lost any "leverage" it might have had with Russia. Sanctions? Hilarious. Russia is selling petroleum to any buyer...including the EU. "Agree to this ceasefire, or we will say bad things about you." (Putin has a paroxysm from laughing too loud.) I admit to channeling the Russian outlook on this, and it is surprising how easily it comes to me.
Not a credible scenario. Why would restoring aid to Ukraine be any worse than what they have already rolled over? The Russian requirements are simple and only need to be satisfied. It would mean Ukraine has to face the fact that it has lost, and the only difference in the outcome is whether they lose more men in combat. The Russians have so far spared the core electrical services, so there is always something worse they can impose on Ukraine. They have already been abjured by the West, so public relations mean nothing to them. Good PR is good if it aligns with their objectives ("What's the harm?"), but if not, it is useless and discarded. They really don't give a shit for anyone's opinion. Only for their reputation as a force to reckon with.
How much leverage would POTUS have in negotiating a ceasefire with Putin if Ukraine has no defense at all?
Leverage? Or an inducement? If Ukraine is willing to surrender, withdraw out of Russian and Novorossiyan territories and forswear any NATO membership, I think Putin would be happy to agree. He would have what he has always declared was necessary. The question is whether Trump can get Zelensky to do the right thing---but I am now coming to the belief that such a thing is impossible. Zelensky is at the mercy of powers that absolutely do not want the pacification of Ukraine. It could be his death warrant if he did agree.
If Ukraine wants to piss and moan about "security guarantees" and drag its feet at the last instant (which seems to be its style), the "deal" is no deal. Everyone forgets how the Eastern Front of World War II turned out. The residual Ukraine could end up as the only member of a "Kiev Pact" with Putin watching over their shoulders.
I will say that I admire the Russians. They behave like men, not like prancing dancers.
I agree that the prancing dancer is just a puppet.
As I've shared my belief elsewhere in this thread, the real proxy war is Russia vs NATO.
And NATO is being most strongly guided in this endeavor by UK and France, based on the prancing dancer scrambling to hug and huddle with Kier Starmer and Macron before and after his beatdown at the Whitehouse by POTUS and VPOTUS.
The Euro-Faction all want the US to fully commit to "boots on the ground" security in Ukraine. They do not want the war to end. None of them want peace. They all want US money, US equipment, and US soldiers if they can get them.
Not going to happen while Trump is POTUS.
Everyone calls Putin a liar, but the US and NATO lied about not expanding NATO eastward towards Russia. Time and again, those promises were broken, and with NATO on Russia's doorstep by making Ukraine the next to join NATO, Putin had enough and hit them hard. We would do the same thing if China or Russia was on our border. Look at the Cuban Missile Crisis as an example (which by the way, the US started by placing Jupiter Missiles in Turkey).
Shutting off the money and equipment was just as much, if not more, of a way to say to NATO "F-You." and not as much about saying anything to the prancing dancer. Z already showed that he is a puppet, and that's it. He holds no cards.
I do not think it is in Russia's long-term interest to be in perpetual war. I don't think Putin wants it to just keep going.
I'm not sure about all of the Novorossiyan area, but If Russia is offered the Donbas and is assured that Ukraine will never be in NATO, I would bet that he takes that deal and the war ends.
Quite so, with a few caveats. The Kievan genocide against the Donbass Russians was too much to tolerate, so that tipped the scales in addition to the other concerns. And the 4 oblasts (now Novorossiya) and Crimea ARE Russian territory insofar as Moscow is concerned, so there will be no negotiation over that.
I have no idea how Putin could ever be assured that Ukraine would not be infested by NATO. That's what happened, despite all kinds of assurances. Perhaps if the U.S. left NATO and left it a weak shell, that might be a balance. Otherwise, I think the idea of a "Kiev Pact," in parallel with the Warsaw Pact, might be the only solution that would provide assurance.
The west has lost any "leverage" it might have had with Russia. Sanctions? Hilarious. Russia is selling petroleum to any buyer...including the EU. "Agree to this ceasefire, or we will say bad things about you." (Putin has a paroxysm from laughing too loud.) I admit to channeling the Russian outlook on this, and it is surprising how easily it comes to me.