• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Putin & Russia

monkeybarry said:
It's probably a year or 18 months away (that's a feeling, not evidence based) when a big day of reckoning comes and Europe pulls out of using US equipment.
It'll be a big shock, because it'll be a huge reduction in capability.
Quite what it'll do to the US - who knows.
Does feel like it'll be a massive human event
Click to expand...
The sooner the better. Spend the money with EU and UK defence manufacturers and give the boost to Europe's economy and not US. I'm sure the US firms will also be delighted with Trump if that happens.
 
DubSpur said:
The sooner the better. Spend the money with EU and UK defence manufacturers and give the boost to Europe's economy and not US. I'm sure the US firms will also be delighted with Trump if that happens.
Click to expand...
I dont know about Europe, but most of the UK's spending is through BAE Systems, which was an arm of the MoD until Thatcher sold it off, but is still principally a UK company. A lot of defence R&D funding already goes into UK universities too
 
Gutter Boy said:
I dont know about Europe, but most of the UK's spending is through BAE Systems, which was an arm of the MoD until Thatcher sold it off, but is still principally a UK company. A lot of defence R&D funding already goes into UK universities too
Click to expand...
BAE Systems usually accounts for 10-15% of spending, there are loads of other contractors. Close to a billion is normally spent with US contractors. If the majority of European countries are similar it means there's a big wedge being spent with US contractors.
 
DubSpur said:
The sooner the better. Spend the money with EU and UK defence manufacturers and give the boost to Europe's economy and not US. I'm sure the US firms will also be delighted with Trump if that happens.
Click to expand...
18 months feels like the soonest it can be - I actually think that's the game Starmer is playing; drag it out on a knife edge but as cordially as possible until the mid terms, then see what things look like. Whether we can get that far before it becomes an untenable support.....who the F knows. It's only been 6/7 weeks so far! Will it just be a dingdong swinging blitzkrieg? Or will it sustain? That probably depends on if there is a major shock on US soil that Trump has to deal with.

I suspect moves are already in motion to move away from Starlink after the Twitter spat - they are clearly too unpredictable to be relied upon.

If the rumours the US moving troops out of Germany and to Hungary are true, it'll be interesting to see what Germany, Poland and Austria do. The US and Hungary are not technically the enemy - but it's hard to consider them friends too. And Mertz has made that very clear.
 
I have said in the past I would be the first to acknowledge if Trump or Musk do anything I feel helps the world in anyway

Credit is where credit is due for reinstating intelligence supply to Ukraine - it is a good thing… as is arranging a cease fire

It’s still early reporting and there’s a lot of ifs and buts about whether this will uphold or not - and still about the long term trajectory of the conflict after the truce.

I fully expect if Russia wants a truce it’s because they need to organise their supply lines more. I worry trump will take away the intelligence sharing straight after

But if it does uphold then he has brought one positive
 
A 30 day ceasefire is a start (or a handy break for Russia to consolidate)but is a minor step towards lasting peace, and in fact a step that's quite easily undone when they start (if they ever do) talking about how they might agree to end the war.
That's when Ukraine gets told again 'you haven't got the cards'.

I thought all 3 parties were meeting up in Saudi. America the only party privvy to what's being said on all sides. Nice.

Trump wants a 'peace deal' for his ego.
Trump wants a 'piece deal' for negotiating it.
Trump cares little for the outcome for Ukraine. The bullying of Zelensky' will soon start again.
Politically Trump wants to keep Russia close, just to keep them away from China (USA's real hate)
Trump could get silly angry when he realizes conflict resolutions aren't as easy as real estate deals...yes, they both involve pieces of land BUT not ones that belong to another country.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
A 30 day ceasefire is a start (or a handy break for Russia to consolidate)but is a minor step towards lasting peace, and in fact a step that's quite easily undone when they start (if they ever do) talking about how they might agree to end the war.
That's when Ukraine gets told again 'you haven't got the cards'.

I thought all 3 parties were meeting up in Saudi. America the only party privvy to what's being said on all sides. Nice.

Trump wants a 'peace deal' for his ego.
Trump wants a 'piece deal' for negotiating it.
Trump cares little for the outcome for Ukraine. The bullying of Zelensky' will soon start again.
Politically Trump wants to keep Russia close, just to keep them away from China (USA's real hate)
Trump could get silly angry when he realizes conflict resolutions aren't as easy as real estate deals...yes, they both involve pieces of land BUT not ones that belong to another country.
Click to expand...
Russia will only agree to this if it benefits its main purpose, which is to conquer Ukraine. Russia will aim to extract onerous concessions from Ukraine in return for no concessions on its side. And then, it will break the agreement when it suits its purpose, as that is its MO.
 
Rorschach said:
Russia will only agree to this if it benefits its main purpose, which is to conquer Ukraine. Russia will aim to extract onerous concessions from Ukraine in return for no concessions on its side. And then, it will break the agreement when it suits its purpose, as that is its MO.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Hence the difficulty in calling this 'peace talks'.

The correct solution (and Zelensky's position) is for basically for everything to return as it was.

Obviously, thats not an outcome available via these 'talks'
1. Because Putin is a dictator and needs to be seen as one ie needs to claim some sort of victory
2. Trumps obvious hatred of Zelensky' and yearning for a nobel peace prize
3. Anything to do with money...Trumps ok with it flowing in but detests it flowing out. So minerals yes... security guarantees no.
4. We don't know how deep Trump is in with Russia

If Zelensky' wants to fight on...it's not going to be with American support.

So it will be up to the EU...with boots on the ground and arms/financial aid or just arms/financial aid...plus tech/intelligence help etc.

It's all risky as letting things run might actually open the opportunity of Russia building up momentum and before you know it they are at the Polish border. (Although conversely things aren't too clear on the capacity of Russia's war resources).

The only realistic middle ground is for Zelensky' to concede the eastern states Donbass etc and probably commit staying out of NATO. As you say pretty much giving Russia all their concessions. And that in itself could be a slippery slope.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Agreed. Hence the difficulty in calling this 'peace talks'.

The correct solution (and Zelensky's position) is for basically for everything to return as it was.

Obviously, thats not an outcome available via these 'talks'
1. Because Putin is a dictator and needs to be seen as one ie needs to claim some sort of victory
2. Trumps obvious hatred of Zelensky' and yearning for a nobel peace prize
3. Anything to do with money...Trumps ok with it flowing in but detests it flowing out. So minerals yes... security guarantees no.
4. We don't know how deep Trump is in with Russia

If Zelensky' wants to fight on...it's not going to be with American support.

So it will be up to the EU...with boots on the ground and arms/financial aid or just arms/financial aid...plus tech/intelligence help etc.

It's all risky as letting things run might actually open the opportunity of Russia building up momentum and before you know it they are at the Polish border. (Although conversely things aren't too clear on the capacity of Russia's war resources).

The only realistic middle ground is for Zelensky' to concede the eastern states Donbass etc and probably commit staying out of NATO. As you say pretty much giving Russia all their concessions. And that in itself could be a slippery slope.
Click to expand...
Russians don't want a ceasefire it would seem.
 
Rorschach said:
Russians don't want a ceasefire it would seem.
Click to expand...
For the sake of 30 days I can't see why Russia wouldn't take that pause to see what position Ukraine takes in talks.
Because if it isn't close to bending over for Russia...Trump and his cronies will be back to bullying and belittling Zelensky' and Ukraine.

At the moment I think Russia are just finishing the job of pushing Ukraine out of Kursk to remove that negotiation card from Ukraine s hand.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
For the sake of 30 days I can't see why Russia wouldn't take that pause to see what position Ukraine takes in talks.
Because if it isn't close to bending over for Russia...Trump and his cronies will be back to bullying and belittling Zelensky' and Ukraine.

At the moment I think Russia are just finishing the job of pushing Ukraine out of Kursk to remove that negotiation card from Ukraine s hand.
Click to expand...
Yes I think you are right about removing the Kursk 'card' from the negotiations, but the cost of regaining it has come at a huge price for Putin in terms of soldiers and equipment from what I have read. The numbers are staggering and it has weakened other areas of the front where Ukraine has made advances, where troops were redeployed to Kursk. So this was likely a political move rather than strategic. I would think the calculation being done in the Kremlin now, is that with the US being openly hostile to Ukraine that they don't need a pause to achieve their goals. Or a pause may introduce EU troops into the equation or some other less obvious factor.
 
Rorschach said:
Yes I think you are right about removing the Kursk 'card' from the negotiations, but the cost of regaining it has come at a huge price for Putin in terms of soldiers and equipment from what I have read. The numbers are staggering and it has weakened other areas of the front where Ukraine has made advances, where troops were redeployed to Kursk. So this was likely a political move rather than strategic. I would think the calculation being done in the Kremlin now, is that with the US being openly hostile to Ukraine that they don't need a pause to achieve their goals. Or a pause may introduce EU troops into the equation or some other less obvious factor.
Click to expand...
The EU just isn't in the conversation, we only are when Zelensky' needs help (an option) and we all agree to f ck America off out of it. They're obviously not neutral in this discussion
 
Rorschach said:
Russians don't want a ceasefire it would seem.
Click to expand...
Or maybe they do providing it weakens Ukraine...hard to keep up.
At a press conference in Moscow, President Putin says Russia is in favour of a 30 day ceasefire. But he says Russia has several outstanding issues, including (in his view) that Ukraine could use the time to rearm.He says any ceasefire must “eliminate the root causes of the crisis”.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back