This interview with Putin should've taken place not long after the conflict started, however the media doesn't trust you at all to figure out that Putin is an evil madman. You should probably watch it just to fully guage the man so you can make sure someone you know doesn't sympathise with any points he makes, if you aren't calm and measured in your criticisms of him and only ever abusive towards him for others less informed you may seem like the lunatic.
Another one.I'm no supporter of Putin but after seeing that, it's probably a good thing Biden doesn't meet or talk with him.
He would run circles around Biden if they ever had a conversation, especially in public. He was able to switch between many topics easily and converse about them and could recite 1200 years of European history off the top of his head in detail.
Biden didn't even get one minute into his press conference yesterday without the president of Mexico and Egypt confused.
It’s insane and is never substantively or satisfactorily addressed when it’s raised.
So says the man who hates the west.Unsurprisingly you know better than the man who was in the room. If trusting the Russians was the overriding issue why bother sitting down in the first place?
That's not to say trust wasn't an issue. As the man said there was no way they could proceed without security guarantees.That would have involved 'the West' playing a constructive role in the idea of a neutral Ukrainian state .... rather than saying fuck that let's fight.....with our weapons and your blood.
Within the post you called 'bollocks' was a link to what the Ukrainian delegation was demanding.
The Russians may well have said 'nyet' further down the line but we will never now because we said it first.
Oooo and another west hater joins the party.If you can't maintain your war you have to sue for peace. Ideally you want to be able to trust the other side to hold to their commitments but just because trust is absent doesn't mean you keep on fighting a war you can't win.
Ukraine will not back down.....it really is that simple.If you can't maintain your war you have to sue for peace. Ideally you want to be able to trust the other side to hold to their commitments but just because trust is absent doesn't mean you keep on fighting a war you can't win.
That’s ultimately a question for the Ukrainians, but it seems likely that If they felt there was sufficient level of trust in the Russians then a deal may already have been done. So both factors (trust/ likelihood of military success) interchange and I guess compete with each other. As things stand, Ukraine clearly doesn’t feel sufficiently subjugated to do a deal with a hostile nation it doesn’t trust.If you can't maintain your war you have to sue for peace. Ideally you want to be able to trust the other side to hold to their commitments but just because trust is absent doesn't mean you keep on fighting a war you can't win.
Russia are fighting a war they can't win.If you can't maintain your war you have to sue for peace. Ideally you want to be able to trust the other side to hold to their commitments but just because trust is absent doesn't mean you keep on fighting a war you can't win.
Oooo and another west hater joins the party.