Alexei Navalny dead

There's two problems with that

(1) It condemns Ukranians to live in perpetuity under Russian rule, and they've been merrily committing various war crimes
(2) Nobody believes the Russians will stand by their committments, and will simply invade again once they can.
Negotiation doesn't need necessarily mean direct Kremlin rule, not with NATO around the table.

If the Russians aren't to be trusted then how is Ukraine any worse off if hostilities cease now and they have time to re-arm?

What is the best realistic outcome for Ukraine on its current course?
 
Not necessarily. It is my firmly-held belief that this war was preventable on both sides. Putin has blood on his hands and should never have invaded. But the underlying tensions go back a long time. Please, I urge you to read Professor Richard Sakwa's 'Frontline Ukraine'. Also Benjamin Abelow's 'How the West Brought War to Ukraine: Understanding How U.S. and NATO Policies Led to Crisis, War, and the Risk of Nuclear Catastrophe.' Whilst Sakwa's book was written in 2015, it accurately predicts the events that have taken place. Abelow's book is interesting because it doesn't absolve Putin of blame but looks at how different decisions could have brought about a different outcome.

Its bollocks, mate. Even Putin has dropped all pretence over NATO expansion - probably just as well as he’s done more for NATO expansion than anyone. Poor old Tucker kept trying to get Putin to go there and all he got was a lecture on the 15th century and historical destiny.

Putin even blamed the Poles for ‘forcing‘ Hitler to invade Poland. Instead of reading speculation from 2015 try listening to what the mad **** actually says in 2024 and educate yourself.
 
Its bollocks, mate. Even Putin has dropped all pretence over NATO expansion - probably just as well as he’s done more for NATO expansion than anyone. Poor old Tucker kept trying to get Putin to go there and all he got was a lecture on the 15th century and historical destiny.

Putin even blamed the Poles for ‘forcing‘ Hitler to invade Poland. Instead of reading speculation from 2015 try listening to what the mad **** actually says in 2024 and educate yourself.
Sakwa's book is well-sourced. It isn't solely a prediction but a detailed study on the Maidan Revolution and events thereafter. He is the Emeritus Professor on Russian and European Studies at the University of Kent. You can't call it speculation without reading it. Education goes both ways.
 
Sakwa's book is well-sourced. It isn't solely a prediction but a detailed study on the Maidan Revolution and events thereafter. He is the Emeritus Professor on Russian and European Studies at the University of Kent. You can't call it speculation without reading it. Education goes both ways.

I‘m sticking with Putin’s own words and thinking on this matter. You know, straight from the horses mouth and all that.
 
Not necessarily. It is my firmly-held belief that this war was preventable on both sides. Putin has blood on his hands and should never have invaded. But the underlying tensions go back a long time. Please, I urge you to read Professor Richard Sakwa's 'Frontline Ukraine'. Also Benjamin Abelow's 'How the West Brought War to Ukraine: Understanding How U.S. and NATO Policies Led to Crisis, War, and the Risk of Nuclear Catastrophe.' Whilst Sakwa's book was written in 2015, it accurately predicts the events that have taken place. Abelow's book is interesting because it doesn't absolve Putin of blame but looks at how different decisions could have brought about a different outcome.
I simply don’t accept that NATO has done anything materially wrong and shouldn’t be held responsible for Russia’s crippling national paranoia.

NATO hasn’t repeatedly marched into other countries with a view to subjugating them. NATO hasn’t gone back on agreements it’s signed (and I call bullshit for this idle gossip that Russia was given assurances about NATO expansion in the early ‘90s - I’m yet to see any verifiable proof of this, and in any event it wouldn’t warrant Russia’s subsequent disposition). NATO aren’t in the habit of tramping over all in its path. You think counties like Sweden and Finland would have elected to join if that was the case?

The Ukrainian people do not want to be part of Russia, or under their jackboot. Personally, I can’t blame them one iota for that.
 
I‘m sticking with Putin’s own words and thinking on this matter. You know, straight from the horses mouth and all that.
As is your prerogative. Difficult to lend much weight to what he says though, as he is not to be trusted.
 
I simply don’t accept that NATO has done anything materially wrong and shouldn’t be held responsible for Russia’s crippling national paranoia.

NATO hasn’t repeatedly marched into other countries with a view to subjugating them. NATO hasn’t gone back on agreements it’s signed (and I call bullshit for this idle gossip that Russia was given assurances about NATO expansion in the early ‘90s - I’m yet to see any verifiable proof of this, and in any event it wouldn’t warrant Russia’s subsequent disposition). NATO aren’t in the habit of tramping over all in its path. You think counties like Sweden and Finland would have elected to join if that was the case?

The Ukrainian people do not want to be part of Russia, or under their jackboot. Personally, I can’t blame them one iota for that.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.