Russia's War Against Ukraine

[Pete Dero]

Giving back the Kursk oblast, on that plan, would be necessary,

From what I'm hearing/reading there isn't much left of an Ukrainian presence in the Kursk regio :

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-verge-losing-kursk-pocket-its-foothold-inside-russia-2025-03-12/
https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-squeezes-ukraine-out-of-kursk-stronghold/
https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-struggles-to-stay-in-kursk-oblast-until-negotiations-during-russias-new-push/

[bobarossa]

I don't think anyone has mentioned the discovery that it was a Russian captain on that cargo ship that rammed a tanker carrying aviation gas to american troops in europe.  Sounds pretty close to a blatant attack on US forces.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/captain-arrested-uk-ship-crash-is-russian-national-owner-says-2025-03-12/

[Jarhead0331]

I don't think anyone has mentioned the discovery that it was a Russian captain on that cargo ship that rammed a tanker carrying aviation gas to american troops in europe.  Sounds pretty close to a blatant attack on US forces.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/captain-arrested-uk-ship-crash-is-russian-national-owner-says-2025-03-12/

Assuming intentional, how would they have obtained the intel on the cargo?

[JasonPratt]

^ Just heard that myself a minute ago, yep. Unclear if Russian government was behind it; people do act on their own volition.

Well, the Uks held the Kursk oblast as long as they feasibly could, it was a good try. They'd have to give it up anyway, but would have been better to hold it for negotiations.

On the other hand, Ukraine just launched a major offensive elsewhere, in alphabetical order: Kupyansk, Pokrovsk, Svatove, and Toretsk. And might be gearing up for a marine assault on some Dnepr Delta islands.

[JasonPratt]

For the most recent Kursky action as Ukraine withdraws, effectively finishing half their strategy (the other lapsed part being to hold for negotiations):

[Pete Dero]

Doesn't bode well :

https://newsukraine.rbc.ua/news/european-intelligence-receives-document-with-1741828773.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/03/12/trump-russia-ukraine-negotiations-fsb-document/

European intelligence received a document outlining Russia's maximalist demands and hard-line negotiating stance regarding a potential end to the war against Ukraine. The document was prepared for the Kremlin by a Moscow-based analytical center closely linked to the FSB in February, according to The Washington Post.

The document was prepared by the analytical center a week before the negotiations between delegations from Washington and Moscow in Riyadh (Saudi Arabia) on February 18.

According to the document, Russia should work to weaken the U.S. negotiating position on Ukraine by stoking tensions between the Trump administration and other countries while pushing ahead with Moscow's efforts to dismantle the Ukrainian state

The document prepared for the Kremlin also rejects Trump's previous plans for a peace deal within 100 days as "impossible to realize" and says that "a peaceful resolution of the Ukraine crisis cannot happen before 2026."

The document also rejects any plans to send Western peacekeepers to Ukraine, as proposed by some European leaders.

Moreover, among the maximalist demands of the Kremlin, it insists on "recognition of Russia's sovereignty over the Ukrainian territories."

The document also calls for further division of Ukraine's territory by creating a "buffer zone" in Ukraine's northeast on the border with Russian regions such as Bryansk and Belgorod, as well as a demilitarized zone in southern Ukraine near Crimea, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014. The latter would affect the Odessa region.

Furthermore, the document stresses the need for the "complete dismantling" of the current Ukrainian government.

The document outlines ways in which Russia could strengthen its position in the negotiations by exacerbating tensions between the US, China, and the European Union, and by offering the US access to valuable resources, including those in the occupied territories of Ukraine, where it is claimed there are rare earth metal deposits.
The document says Russia's efforts should first be focused on normalizing relations between Washington and Moscow, through the restoration of full diplomatic staffing levels at both countries' embassies and the appointment of Alexander Darchiev as Russia's ambassador to the United States.

The document also proposed that Russia agree not to deploy its medium-range Iskander missiles in Belarus, in exchange for the US agreeing not to deploy new missile systems on the European continent.

Additionally, it suggested that Russia should stop supplying weapons to countries considered "unfriendly" to the United States, while the US would stop providing arms to Ukraine. However, the document adds that halting Russian weapon supplies to Moscow's allies would be "difficult to realize."

The document rejects any potential political concessions from the official Kyiv, such as Ukraine renouncing NATO membership, and holding elections in which pro-Russian parties would be allowed to participate.

Moreover, the document also rejects attempts to pressure Russia into a peace agreement through the partial lifting of sanctions, arguing that the "the importance of the factor of sanctions against our country has been exaggerated."

[Crossroads]

It would seem that, despite the fact all this has been played in public, Russia was caught off-guard with the demand that there would be a ceasefire as a prerequisite to negotiations.

After all, the SOP for Putin has been that a ceasefire would be a result of any negotiations. Meet our demands, and there is a ceasefire. Then, they'd violate the very ceasefire they just agreed to, and come up with new demands. A Russian ceasefire is where you cease and we fire, as Darth Putin reminds us.

National Review with a handy summary of The Ukraine War in a Nutshell

I just pick this paragraph from there, emphasis mine:

What is Ukraine fighting for? Its survival as a sovereign state. Sure, there is a laundry list of other things important to the Ukrainians. They'd very much like all their land back. They'd like to join the EU, an economic window to the West. They'd like to join NATO, which would greatly increase their defensive security.

But none of those things is essential, and as the record of the early peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia in spring 2022 appears to illustrate, all of them were negotiable to Ukraine at the outset of the war.

One thing was a deal-breaker, and should be a deal-breaker: any settlement must preserve not just Ukraine's survival at the end of this war but also its capacity to deter or repel future Russian invasions aimed at extinguishing it.

So yes, let us see how Kremlin plays the role of the wronged ones now, and how the Trump administration will react to that.

Here's Channel4 News from UK with interview of NATO Deputy SACEUR of 2011-2014. He is very much in line with Darth Putin.

We have Pres Z with his speech throwing the ball at Russian side of court, then the Foreign Minister of Russia Lavrov accusing Europe and the UK as war mongers with plans of aggression towards the poor old Russia. Then the rather blunt words as what happens next by Shirreff.

https://youtu.be/4uy0M1QBpsQ?si=IqeXS-uQ1yOjMWMe&t=57

If you'd rather read his interview, it can be found here.

[JudgeDredd]

100% Russia will attack again.

Whatever deal is reached, it will be short lived unless there's NATO and/or European peace forces are in Ukraine.

And the next time Putin attacks, he'll be in Kyiv.

[Jarhead0331]

[Crossroads]

The temporary truce was "correct" and "we support it," the Russian leader said, but, alas, there were many sticking points. Ukrainian units had nearly been encircled in a salient in Russia's Kursk region and could be forced to "surrender or die," he explained. Why should they just be let go? "If we stop hostilities for 30 days, what does that mean? That everyone who is there will go out without a fight?"

During the pause in hostilities, will Ukraine be able to mobilize fresh troops and receive weapons from the West? "How will supervision be organized? These are all serious questions." He then added: "I think we need to talk to our American colleagues ... Maybe have a phone call with President Trump and discuss this with him."

Just the day before, Lavrov had given an hour-and-half -long master class in Putin-style diplomacy, which should have been a warning to the White House.

His interlocutors — a trio of fellow travelers led by onetime Fox News presenter Judge Andrew Napolitano — were pushovers, nodding and chortling as he complained about (horrors of horrors) being forced to use a unisex bathroom in Scandinavia. They purred their approval when he mournfully griped about all the injustices the West had doled out to his peace-loving country: The false accusations of poisoning opposition leader Alexei Navalny, trying to kill Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, or downing Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.

It all came down to Europe and NATO's broken promises and malign behavior, he said.

From:

https://www.politico.eu/article/vladimir-putin-is-playing-donald-trump-again-russia-ukraine-war/

It continues:

But as Lavrov piled deflection and digression upon deflection and digression, his plaintive lecture demonstrated that — just as Putin reinforced yesterday — Russia plans to play Trump, much like it did former U.S. President Barack Obama when it came to Syria, using delaying tactics to prevent America from hitting their client for unleashing chemical weapons.

It goes on for a good while after these snippets too.  Let us see how the Trump administration will react to these tactics. It should be nothing new.

And despite the public and, in my opinion, shameful (but let's not go there) bullying of Ukraine, and the continuous BFF messaging towards Russia, equally shameful (but let's not go there) it's not what the mouth says but what the hand does that truly counts.

And now, with not many reports out on it yet, it seems the Trump administration has just let the exemptions lapse for the few Russian banks Russia still uses for oil payments. That's encouraging to see. They seem to talk (very) softly, but the big stick is being put to use as well. 


edit well that was a lot of typos. no alcohol involved, even. just me.
 

[Jarhead0331]

[JudgeDredd]

Ukraine could win the war with full support of the democratic nations around.

A ceasefire should be on Ukrainian terms...not Russias or the US. And the west should give every single tool they can to Ukraine to give Ukraine the best possible position to enter a ceasefire. .

Regardless of whether the war continues or not...that should be up to Ukraine and Ukraine alone. It's their blood being spilled. It's their land being stolen. It's their existence being threatened.

It's NOT for the US or the UK or any other country to decide when Ukraine takes a ceasefire and under what circumstances...it's only for the US and the UK and any other country interested in democracy to provide Ukraine with the means to get to whatever negotiating settlement they require to end the war

[Jarhead0331]

Ukraine could win the war with full support of the democratic nations around.

A ceasefire should be on Ukrainian terms...not Russias or the US. And the west should give every single tool they can to Ukraine to give Ukraine the best possible position to enter a ceasefire. .

Regardless of whether the war continues or not...that should be up to Ukraine and Ukraine alone. It's their blood being spilled. It's their land being stolen. It's their existence being threatened.

It's NOT for the US or the UK or any other country to decide when Ukraine takes a ceasefire and under what circumstances...it's only for the US and the UK and any other country interested in democracy to provide Ukraine with the means to get to whatever negotiating settlement they require to end the war

I agree that a cease fire should not be on Russian terms, but I disagree that it should be on Ukraine's and Ukraine's alone. If Ukraine doesn't want to take into consideration the terms or interests of other nations, then it can fight the war on its own without the material and financial support of those nations. More is at risk than Ukrainian sovereignty, much more, and a such, Ukraine is not in a position to have its cake and eat it too. America is not going to write a blank check, nor should it be expected to and I don't think it is reasonable to criticize her for not doing so.

Russia must face consequences if it rejects the cease fire proposal outright, but those consequences should not include unconditional material support that will prolong the war until Ukraine can "win". I support Ukraine, but not unconditionally so, and I think that is how the majority of Americans see it.

[Crossroads]

To be honest, I don't quite understand the frugality discussion related to aiding Ukraine. Like in that video Jar posted a few pages back, if anything, the US probably runs a hefty profit on this, especially given the new oil and LNG deals made as European nations quickly adapted to buying their energy elsewhere.

Then there's the moral side of the story. The only crime Ukraine truly committed, as far as the Kremlin is concerned, was turning its economy towards the EU. Having a prosperous and democratic Ukraine at their border was a threat Putin would not tolerate. And while morality does not exist in geopolitics, nations do have interests. Forcing a warmonger out of war and setting an example for China and other autocrats would be worth some investment on its own.

Aid to Ukraine is pennies compared to what was spent on the Forever Wars. And, as Ukraine has made clear, they need weapons, not foreign boots on the ground.

Alas, it is what it is. I continue to be at a loss as to what the great game is behind the rush to force a ceasefire. I would indeed prefer Ukrainians to have a say in this too. They are the ones who were brutally invaded through no fault of their own.

I know there are theories about the endgame, but the Trump administration has not laid it out as far as I know. Comparing it to how Reagan played the carrot and the stick, there was never any doubt about what his endgame was.

Regarding the video above, all good but the lecturing part was quite strange. I for one do not "hate" Russians, what a strange argument to make. We used to have an active living border not long ago, I've got a ton of Russian friends and acquintances, many living here now as for instace many ICT professionals preferred to move out for a bit. The fact that I distrust Kremlin is another thing completely.   

[JudgeDredd]

but I disagree that it should be on Ukraine's and Ukraine's alone

Sorry JH - I 100% disagree that it should not be on Ukraine's terms alone.

They are the victim here. It's their people dying on the battlefield. It's their sovereingty at risk here. It's their country under assault. It absolutely, 100% should be on their terms. If the US and other nations decide not to support Ukraine's desire to be a sovereign nation and protect it's borders, like other nations, then that's on them and it should be noted in the history books.

If Ukraine doesn't want to take into consideration the terms or interests of other nations, then it can fight the war on its own without the material and financial support of those nations.

Of course other nations should be allowed to bail in support of Ukraine if Ukraine doesn't agree to "cease on any terms" - but - that should be down to Ukraine.

Currently they are being bullied by Trump (in his vanity - not for the love of freedom, sovereignty, or to prevent Ukrainian blood being spilled on the battlefield) to accept any deal. And, unashamedly, they are being pushed to do so by the EU who insist on US participation in any peace arrangement.

Ukraine is trying to "have it's cake and eat it". It's simply trying to survive as a sovereign nation.

I don't know how to make this "more personal" to the you guys. Maybe (an extreme example I'm sure) if Mexico annexed Texas (which was part of Mexico way back when)? Would the US be thinking that Texas was trying to have it's cake and eat it?

I know it's not the same - but I am struggling to find a comparison that would make it more personal and specific to Americans.

I totally understand why the US is split in it's defence of Ukraineand whether US dollars should be spent there. Which is why I've been shouting for the EU to get it's shit together! Afterall there's an ocean between you and Europe (that's a ridiculous argument - but valid to some I guess)  .

But - and this is important - siding with an authoritarian dictatorship like Russia over a sovereign democratic state that is simply trying to exist is just way the fuck out there.

I do understand the call for a cessation in hostilities - ofcourse I do - who wants people to die...but that MUST be at the request of the people who are dying on the battlefield - not us. Absolutely not us and most certainly not at the request of someone who is more concerned about how he looks right now and how he is written in the history books rather than actaully doing the right thing.

If the US wants to pull funding and let that country slowly, literally bleed to death, then so be it. BUT...it MUST be up to the Ukrainian people whether they want to donate 20% of their land to Russia...knowing full well, regardless of Trump's desire for the Nobel Peace Prize, that Russia will attack again, stronger and more knowledgeable than it did in 2022.

The fact that Russia is worried about Ukraine rebuilding it's military whilst spending 25% of GDP on military equipment is just fucked up.

They are playing the US. They are playing Trump. TBF toTrump -as soon as he works that out, I think Russia wants to watch the fuck out-he may just turn nasty.

Again - if Europe and Russia isn't the US's problem or "immediate" problem...fine and I wish you all the best.

But the European Union needs to understand that Russia is absolutley it's problem.

Is Russia a problem for the UK. Nope. Is it a problem for France? Nope. Is it a problem for Germany? Unlikely. But is it a problem "generally" for those countries...absolutely!

We could just sit back and let Russia do what the fuck it likes. But that is not the right thing to do.

Fuck Russia. Fuck Putin. Fuck his "whiny" threats of nuclear armageddon. He may have 6000+ nuclear warheads to Europes 600? But the number doesn't really matter and he knows it. 60. 600. 6000. Whatever the number - wasteland will follow and he knows it and won't risk it.

I do not want war. I do not want a third World War. I do not want a Nuclear War.

But - as Gus's signature states - I don't believe living under threat of nuclear armageddon and some dickhead who throws that threat about like it's an ad for some arthritis cure - is any kind of life. If Ukraine is not a line...where is that line? Again - there's an ocean between you and Europe. You have distance. Cool I understand your stance. I'm arguing for the EU here...hoping, as in WWI and WWII, that the US sees some value in assisting the EU here.

But as a UK citizen and very much an EU supporterI see Ukraine as that last bastion of saying "No - not here and no further".