Putin declares four areas of Ukraine as part of Russia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I doubt you would be so happy about the outcome if a chunk of your country was being handed over.

---

Maybe up to one million lives lost so far, and how many injured? who knows!!!, coupled with the destruction in mostly Ukraine but also in Russia I'd like peace before anything at this point, WW2 has given insight that land rearrangement can take place in the future years, for me the killing stops first and foremost, seeing those who will never lose a son or daughter to this or any war being bullish about fighting on makes me sick, i wouldn't mind hedging that Mothers and Fathers of Ukrainian children yet to be sent to the meat grinder are welcoming potential peace in preference to acting as a proxy army for America and their allies conducting the proceedings from far away. But if you want your point answered, no I wouldn't be happy about Putin invading and everything that's followed and inc. land being handed over, I'm all ears to how this can end realistically, Putin isn't just going to put the tools away and retreat is he?.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

I'd gladly forfeit Monmouthshire if it meant a bit of peace and quiet....

---

They could have Glamorgan too. We have a local brewery, so all is good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heathblue

Maybe up to one million lives lost so far, and how many injured? who knows!!!, coupled with the destruction in mostly Ukraine but also in Russia I'd like peace before anything at this point, WW2 has given insight that land rearrangement can take place in the future years, for me the killing stops first and foremost, seeing those who will never lose a son or daughter to this or any war being bullish about fighting on makes me sick, i wouldn't mind hedging that Mothers and Fathers of Ukrainian children yet to be sent to the meat grinder are welcoming potential peace in preference to acting as a proxy army for America and their allies conducting the proceedings from far away. But if you want your point answered, no I wouldn't be happy about Putin invading and everything that's followed and inc. land being handed over, I'm all ears to how this can end realistically, Putin isn't just going to put the tools away and retreat is he?.

---

I agree with most of that. No good outcome to this war - but some are less bad than others. Stop the killing and hopefully don't let this be a Trump-Putin stitch up. Other parties need to force their way to the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

I'd gladly forfeit Monmouthshire if it meant a bit of peace and quiet....

---

Oof! What has Monmouthshire ever done to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heathblue

Maybe up to one million lives lost so far, and how many injured? who knows!!!, coupled with the destruction in mostly Ukraine but also in Russia I'd like peace before anything at this point, WW2 has given insight that land rearrangement can take place in the future years, for me the killing stops first and foremost, seeing those who will never lose a son or daughter to this or any war being bullish about fighting on makes me sick, i wouldn't mind hedging that Mothers and Fathers of Ukrainian children yet to be sent to the meat grinder are welcoming potential peace in preference to acting as a proxy army for America and their allies conducting the proceedings from far away. But if you want your point answered, no I wouldn't be happy about Putin invading and everything that's followed and inc. land being handed over, I'm all ears to how this can end realistically, Putin isn't just going to put the tools away and retreat is he?.

---

And if he gets given a bit of Ukraine are you confident that ends it for good? If Russia walks away with Ukrainian territory and sanctions drop off, where is the deterrent for future action by them or others? I am trump will give it some big bravado 'dont you dare do it again..' but the actions suggest otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

I agree with most of that. No good outcome to this war - but some are less bad than others. Stop the killing and hopefully don't let this be a Trump-Putin stitch up. Other parties need to force their way to the table.

---

I don't think Russia stops unless it's a stitch up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

And if he gets given a bit of Ukraine are you confident that ends it for good? If Russia walks away with Ukrainian territory and sanctions drop off, where is the deterrent for future action by them or others? I am trump will give it some big bravado 'dont you dare do it again..' but the actions suggest otherwise.

---

Do we carry on as is then, or ramp things up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

Oof! What has Monmouthshire ever done to you?

---

It's full of middle aged white men 🤣🤣

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Do we carry on as is then, or ramp things up?

---

I don't think it's negative to suggest that any deal will not last anyway and I don't really think about it tbh, it's not my problem. I don't really like the idea of Trump marching around the world carving pieces of countries up and claiming victory.

Ukraine could have sat down with Russia and sorted out a shit deal where they give away territory themselves, the only thing trump adds is pressure on them to accept it.

It's like a guy seeing a kid getting bullied. He goes over, puts his hand in the kids pocket and hands 10% of the kids money over to the bully. He then tells the kid how much he just helped him. Noble peace prize for that great hero, and what have you incentivised the bully to do tomorrow?

To answer your question... Russia have played chicken with the west, knowing the USA would buckle in support of Ukraine eventually. I'd carry on as is, we aren't fighting the war for Ukraine, they aren't an unwilling participant as far as my limited knowledge goes. That's the game of chicken for you, someone jumps first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I don't think it's negative to suggest that any deal will not last anyway and I don't really think about it tbh, it's not my problem. I don't really like the idea of Trump marching around the world carving pieces of countries up and claiming victory.

Ukraine could have sat down with Russia and sorted out a shit deal where they give away territory themselves, the only thing trump adds is pressure on them to accept it.

It's like a guy seeing a kid getting bullied. He goes over, puts his hand in the kids pocket and hands 10% of the kids money over to the bully. He then tells the kid how much he just helped him. Noble peace prize for that great hero, and what have you incentivised the bully to do tomorrow?

To answer your question... Russia have played chicken with the west, knowing the USA would buckle in support of Ukraine eventually. I'd carry on as is, we aren't fighting the war for Ukraine, they aren't an unwilling participant as far as my limited knowledge goes. That's the game of chicken for you, someone jumps first.

---

Yeah I certainly see your point. I just don't think we have the desire to support Ukraine properly (in effect risk a nuclear war) and I don't think it's sustainable to carry on. The US voters suggested that. The German election will likely demonstrate it too. Not as direct results of supporting Ukraine perhaps, but because of secondary impacts like the cost of aid and energy. So I don't think it can carry on as is.

It's far from ideal, esp for Ukraine who will no doubt view it as an historical mistake, but I suppose thats not an uncommon result of peace settlements which are neatly always compromises, or fights to the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Yeah I certainly see your point. I just don't think we have the desire to support Ukraine properly (in effect risk a nuclear war) and I don't think it's sustainable to carry on. The US voters suggested that. The German election will likely demonstrate it too. Not as direct results of supporting Ukraine perhaps, but because of secondary impacts like the cost of aid and energy. So I don't think it can carry on as is.

It's far from ideal, esp for Ukraine who will no doubt view it as an historical mistake, but I suppose thats not an uncommon result of peace settlements which are neatly always compromises, or fights to the end.

---

any peace settlement agreed without Ukraine being part of the discussions will not last

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

any peace settlement agreed without Ukraine being part of the discussions will not last

---

Agreed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Yeah I certainly see your point. I just don't think we have the desire to support Ukraine properly (in effect risk a nuclear war) and I don't think it's sustainable to carry on. The US voters suggested that. The German election will likely demonstrate it too. Not as direct results of supporting Ukraine perhaps, but because of secondary impacts like the cost of aid and energy. So I don't think it can carry on as is.

It's far from ideal, esp for Ukraine who will no doubt view it as an historical mistake, but I suppose thats not an uncommon result of peace settlements which are neatly always compromises, or fights to the end.

---

The US voters wanted someone who'd reduce the cost of living first and foremost according to the poll I saw this week (79 per cent, the biggest single reason why people voted Republican). Incoming Governments always claim they have been given a mandate for everything that was in their manifesto, but your average person only votes on the basics or maybe on a pet, pretty minor, policy of theirs that the new Government supports, they don't go through the manifestos with a fine toothcomb and then not vote for any party that has something in them that they don't agree with.

I'm pretty sure there weren't many Americans who voted for Trump to do a Neville Chamberlain impersonation by appeasing Putin, bnt it didn't stop him winning - albeit by only about 1.5 per cent, yet that's big enough for him to start acting like some kind of monarch apparently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

any peace settlement agreed without Ukraine being part of the discussions will not last

---

It depends on which territory has been “ lost” by Ukraine , if it’s the majority Russian speaking area then it will work. If it’s more than that then it’s back to square one.

Less not forget many Russian speaking Ukrainian people have been persecuted by Ultranationalist groups in recent times, but that doesn’t appear to be in the news at all.

[QUOTE=the other bob wilson;5572295]The US voters wanted someone who'd reduce the cost of living first and foremost according to the poll I saw this week (79 per cent, the biggest single reason why people voted Republican). Incoming Governments always claim they have been given a mandate for everything that was in their manifesto, but your average person only votes on the basics or maybe on a pet, pretty minor, policy of theirs that the new Government supports, they don't go through the manifestos with a fine toothcomb and then not vote for any party that has something in them that they don't agree with.

I'm pretty sure there weren't many Americans who voted for Trump to do a Neville Chamberlain impersonation by appeasing Putin, bnt it didn't stop him winning - albeit by only about 1.5 per cent, yet that's big enough for him to start acting like some kind of monarch apparently.[/QUOTES q]

Yeah of course. US voters weren't voting on Ukraine as a number one issue, although the money to fund it was an issue in itself. Moreover the war did raise global prices so there is the indirect link. That is felt more keenly in Europe with Germany the biggest if not the most impacted example. And we see it there, where one way or another maintaining the war in Europe is having a big impact across the continent and it's hard to sustain.

I think that's the issue. We won't beat Russia without being embroiled in a very serious global conflict, which I don't think we want. We also almost certainly won't see Putin voluntarily back down. So the option is a continued war that destabilises Europe, is increasing unsustainable and costs hundreds of thousands of lives. Or. We seek some kind of peace, that will never be on perfect terms but peace never is.

I also think you know the Neville Chamberlain comparison is not accurate. If nothing else it should refer to when Putin took Crimea when everyone shrugged their shoulders.

Headline below is "Zelensky to meet Vance as Trump pushes for Ukraine peace talks..". Is that really such a dreadful thing?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c24728zpp70t

[QUOTE=JamesWales;5572304]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

The US voters wanted someone who'd reduce the cost of living first and foremost according to the poll I saw this week (79 per cent, the biggest single reason why people voted Republican). Incoming Governments always claim they have been given a mandate for everything that was in their manifesto, but your average person only votes on the basics or maybe on a pet, pretty minor, policy of theirs that the new Government supports, they don't go through the manifestos with a fine toothcomb and then not vote for any party that has something in them that they don't agree with.

I'm pretty sure there weren't many Americans who voted for Trump to do a Neville Chamberlain impersonation by appeasing Putin, bnt it didn't stop him winning - albeit by only about 1.5 per cent, yet that's big enough for him to start acting like some kind of monarch apparently.[/QUOTES q]

Yeah of course. US voters weren't voting on Ukraine as a number one issue, although the money to fund it was an issue in itself. Moreover the war did raise global prices so there is the indirect link. That is felt more keenly in Europe with Germany the biggest if not the most impacted example. And we see it there, where one way or another maintaining the war in Europe is having a big impact across the continent and it's hard to sustain.

I think that's the issue. We won't beat Russia without being embroiled in a very serious global conflict, which I don't think we want. We also almost certainly won't see Putin voluntarily back down. So the option is a continued war that destabilises Europe, is increasing unsustainable and costs hundreds of thousands of lives. Or. We seek some kind of peace, that will never be on perfect terms but peace never is.

I also think you know the Neville Chamberlain comparison is not accurate. If nothing else it should refer to when Putin took Crimea when everyone shrugged their shoulders.

Headline below is "Zelensky to meet Vance as Trump pushes for Ukraine peace talks..". Is that really such a dreadful thing?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c24728zpp70t

---

Of course it's appeasement and the notion that, having got chunks of Ukraine back, Putin will stop at that is laughable. i agree there should have been a response to what happened in 2014, but all you're doing in bringing that up is arguing that two wrongs make a right.

[QUOTE=the other bob wilson;5572305]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Of course it's appeasement and the notion that, having got chunks of Ukraine back, Putin will stop at that is laughable. i agree there should have been a response to what happened in 2014, but all you're doing in bringing that up is arguing that two wrongs make a right.

---

No one doubts there is an element of appeasement. But these things are a balance aren't they? Bit of appeasement in the mix that hopefully brings peace? When has a war ever ended without a degree of that? Unless one side destroys the other, every peace settlement ends in an element of appeasement, no?

Again, I just don't see what the alternative is? Do we continue as is, or do you think we should ramp up support. Push Russia back. Does that end the long term threat too? History there would also say it shouldn't.

I just think we should welcome talks on peace. The idea it will encourage Russia to start a war again, when it is already at war anyway seems a tad nonsensical.

This will all be down to what Ukraine things. If they aren't happy the war will continue, but I think peace talks between the US, Russia and Ukraine is something we should be cautiously optimistic about. There is no optimism elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

It depends on which territory has been “ lost” by Ukraine , if it’s the majority Russian speaking area then it will work. If it’s more than that then it’s back to square one.

Less not forget many Russian speaking Ukrainian people have been persecuted by Ultranationalist groups in recent times, but that doesn’t appear to be in the news at all.

---

it's a bit more complicated than saying that "Russian speaking Ukrainian people have been persecuted by Ultranationalist groups in recent times".
yes there has been, but this was in response to Russian financed and armed groups causing trouble in the region. They have done it before elsewhere and will almost certainly do it again in the future

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

any peace settlement agreed without Ukraine being part of the discussions will not last

---

They will play the tinniest of parts, be involved, and have to accept Trump's decision. He's calling all the shots. They are tired and want it over. They defended well and, in the end, would lose a small proportion of land when Putin wanted the whole Country. Both Leaders need to be able to tell their people they had a victory and that part of the World can settle back down to some normality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

They could have Glamorgan too. We have a local brewery, so all is good.

---

Let them flatten Swansea and improve it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North Cardiff Blue

They will play the tinniest of parts, be involved, and have to accept Trump's decision. He's calling all the shots. They are tired and want it over. They defended well and, in the end, would lose a small proportion of land when Putin wanted the whole Country. Both Leaders need to be able to tell their people they had a victory and that part of the World can settle back down to some normality.

---

Russia is currently occupying about 20% of Ukraine, with more than 3 million Ukrainians living there under occupation.
If it was in the uk that would be equivalent to giving up an area double the size of wales with 10% of the UK population living it -it would never be considered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Russia is currently occupying about 20% of Ukraine, with more than 3 million Ukrainians living there under occupation.
If it was in the uk that would be equivalent to giving up an area double the size of wales with 10% of the UK population living it -it would never be considered.

---

I know, but if the US withdraws support what would the eventual outcome be?

Putin is in a stronger position, there is going to have to be a lot of compromise, the wording from the US and Trump gives clear indications about what's going to need to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Russia is currently occupying about 20% of Ukraine, with more than 3 million Ukrainians living there under occupation.
If it was in the uk that would be equivalent to giving up an area double the size of wales with 10% of the UK population living it -it would never be considered.

---

Your last line doesn't really mean anything in the context of Eastern Europe, the history of the Soviet Union, the fact that red lines on maps don't delineate peoples in that region perfectly, mixed cultural heritage, the history of Ukraine, the military might of Russia and repeated incursions into Ukrainian territory etc etc etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North Cardiff Blue

They will play the tinniest of parts, be involved, and have to accept Trump's decision. He's calling all the shots. They are tired and want it over. They defended well and, in the end, would lose a small proportion of land when Putin wanted the whole Country. Both Leaders need to be able to tell their people they had a victory and that part of the World can settle back down to some normality.

---

I see Trump has side-lined the people who started this mess in 2014, and now the EU have jumped in to direct Zelensky.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/president...ign-relations/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

I see Trump has side-lined the people who started this mess in 2014, and now the EU have jumped in to direct Zelensky.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/president...ign-relations/

---

the person who started this in 2014 is Vladimir Putin, and trump has done the opposite of sideline him

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

the person who started this in 2014 is Vladimir Putin, and trump has done the opposite of sideline him

---

:thumbup:

Sidelining him was the right thing to do but it hasn't worked. Its screwed Europe's economy leading to political destabilisation. It didn't stop him invading Ukraine and it's led to 200,000 odd deaths. It's not working. We can carry on. Or we can seek peace or we can massively ramp it up and risk a far more serious conflict.

US, Ukraine and Russia will very likely enter peace talks in the coming days.

Seriously now, what do people want to hear on the ten o clock news tonight?

"Peace talks fail as Russia launches missiles into Ukraine killing dozens"

or

"Peace talks to take place next week" ??

There is no optimal solution, but there never is. The option of peace is at least worth exploring though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

the person who started this in 2014 is Vladimir Putin, and trump has done the opposite of sideline him

---

That’s totally incorrect, it’s been pointed out ( and dismissed) numerous times in the past.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

That’s totally incorrect, it’s been pointed out ( and dismissed) numerous times in the past.

---

There is a 'western narrative' about 2014 which I completely reject, but that said the instigator of the current war is Putin and Trump (as Rjk says) has maintained a close and admiring relationship with him since at least his first term (before that I think) and has ensured he is not sidelined or isolated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

There is a 'western narrative' about 2014 which I completely reject, but that said the instigator of the current war is Putin and Trump (as Rjk says) has maintained a close and admiring relationship with him since at least his first term (before that I think) and has ensured he is not sidelined or isolated.

---

The U.S intervened because a pro Russian president won during a fair election process. 11 years and billions of dollars later it looks as if things are back where they started both in territory and political balance.

I’m happy to stand corrected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

The U.S intervened because a pro Russian president won during a fair election process. 11 years and billions of dollars later it looks as if things are back where they started both in territory and political balance.

I’m happy to stand corrected.

---

It was the US State Department/USAID/CIA, who incidentally have just been side-lined by the Trump administration (see link in my previous post). As a consequence of this, Zelensky has now reached out to the EU and the non-US element of NATO for further direction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

The U.S intervened because a pro Russian president won during a fair election process. 11 years and billions of dollars later it looks as if things are back where they started both in territory and political balance.

I’m happy to stand corrected.

---

Unbelievably naive - Putin's eventual aim is to get things back to something like they were like in 1988, not 2014.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Sidelining him was the right thing to do but it hasn't worked. Its screwed Europe's economy leading to political destabilisation. It didn't stop him invading Ukraine and it's led to 200,000 odd deaths. It's not working. We can carry on. Or we can seek peace or we can massively ramp it up and risk a far more serious conflict.

US, Ukraine and Russia will very likely enter peace talks in the coming days.

Seriously now, what do people want to hear on the ten o clock news tonight?

"Peace talks fail as Russia launches missiles into Ukraine killing dozens"

or

"Peace talks to take place next week" ??

There is no optimal solution, but there never is. The option of peace is at least worth exploring though.

---

Agree. Macron, Biden and Johnson encouraged Zelenski to keep the war going from the start, giving £100's billions of support. I'm not sure what all those wailing voices from this side of the Atlantic are wanting - perhaps keep the war going for another 6 months by which Ukraine will be totally beaten.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Quiet Monkfish

Agree. Macron, Biden and Johnson encouraged Zelenski to keep the war going from the start, giving £100's billions of support. I'm not sure what all those wailing voices from this side of the Atlantic are wanting - perhaps keep the war going for another 6 months by which Ukraine will be totally beaten.

---

Roosevelt encouraged Churchill to keep the war going with lend-lease. Just think of all the lives that decision cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Roosevelt encouraged Churchill to keep the war going with lend-lease. Just think of all the lives that decision cost.

---

Agree, though western Europe was threatened, and after 1941 the eventual outcome of the war was in no doubt. In the case of Ukraine/Russia there was never going to be a good outcome for Ukraine, despite the western media building up Ukraine's chances..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Quiet Monkfish

Agree, though western Europe was threatened, and after 1941 the eventual outcome of the war was in no doubt. In the case of Ukraine/Russia there was never going to be a good outcome for Ukraine, despite the western media building up Ukraine's chances..

---

You agree? Meaning that you think USA shouldn't have supported the Allies before they joined the war?

At that point, western Europe was mostly under Nazi occupation, never mind "threatened"!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Unbelievably naive - Putin's eventual aim is to get things back to something like they were like in 1988, not 2014.

---

Irony Alert , I almost feel sorry for you ( almost )

You still got your Ukraine flags on your front window and clapping the NHS ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Irony Alert , I almost feel sorry for you ( almost )

You still got your Ukraine flags on your front window and clapping the NHS ?

---

:shrug:

You've got this habit of bringing up clapping the NHS no matter what the subject being discussed is, what's that got to do with this thread? I know Covid and Ukraine are high on the automatic tick list for independent thinkers like you, but I struggle to see the connection here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

:shrug:

You've got this habit of bringing up clapping the NHS no matter what the subject being discussed is, what's that got to do with this thread? I know Covid and Ukraine are high on the automatic tick list for independent thinkers like you, but I struggle to see the connection here.

---

Ukraine isn’t in my hot list neither is Covid , but a balanced debate without being called Smugeratti or a conspiracy theorist is why the subject is being discussed.

Out of curiosity, can you name any examples on conspiracy theories ( it must be at least 50 )on either of the subjects you have mentioned which have turned out to be false?

One or two things I reckon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Ukraine isn’t in my hot list neither is Covid , but a balanced debate without being called Smugeratti or a conspiracy theorist is why the subject is being discussed.

Out of curiosity, can you name any examples on conspiracy theories ( it must be at least 50 )on either of the subjects you have mentioned which have turned out to be false?

One or two things I reckon.

---

At least two.... but I expect the true number is in the high dozens for Covid alone.

I will go with the BBC on these:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52847648

I don't think Ukraine has inspired as many conspiracy theories - even around casualty levels - more different political views and analysis.