Surely you mean an orderly gesture of goodwill?
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Surely you mean an orderly gesture of goodwill?
There is a lot of data this graphic, but if you want a summary pick out the yellow line in the graph which is the 7-day KIA average. It currently stands at 734 (840 was yesterday‘s number). This increase is not just from the Bakhmut meat grinder but the broader Luhansk and Donetsk frontlines down to Vuhledar.
Numbers are from the UA MoD. Standard disclaimer that this post is a mix of official and unofficial sources, take with a grain of salt, etc. etc.
Numbers are from the UA MoD. Standard disclaimer that this post is a mix of official and unofficial sources, take with a grain of salt, etc. etc.
Damn that stuff is expensive.
Might be important to think about some kind of "effect-per-dollar" analysis. We should focus on what's cheapest while being most effective, to get the best effect.
Might be important to think about some kind of "effect-per-dollar" analysis. We should focus on what's cheapest while being most effective, to get the best effect.
That’s a pretty sobering documentary.
I'm sure they are already. I imagine part of their calculation will include the continued impact on the world economy if Russia wins and/or other countries like China decide to exert greater force on Taiwan.
More Czech T-72 tanks, as well as other items, are reportedly on the way.
I'm curious though if supplying them with more artillery ammunition would be less expensive (?) and more effective on the ground, as that's how they lost territories in the east, and now that they have superior firepower in the south, the Russians have begun to rattle.
Meant from ukrainian side.
So Luhansk then.
Hopefully this is a bs story, otherwise, this would be an insane own goal. I don’t think any Ukrainian leadership at this point can survive domestically if it chooses to negotiate on giving up more of its territories. This would again embolden Putin’s regime and bring about chaos to Ukrainian politics.
Im curious why in your opinion negotiating would be bad.
Imagine having an opportunity to stop killing 1000+ people per day and de-escalating political tension that could lead to MAD and saying no we will not do that.
Because previous negotiations with Russia have led to exactly this? Every time the price will go up. By no one I mean Ukrainian people. Curious question would you agree to give up Slovenian sovereignty to Russia for peace?
Last edited:
There's been no indication that Russia is willing to give back the territory they've annexed so negotiations are a non-starter from a Ukrainian perspective.
Edit: And a deal with Russia isn't worth anything as we've seen.
We should know by now that negotiating with Russia is a waste of time as it's been proven time and time again during the history of mankind. Right now it only suits them, that's why they are talking louder and louder about it and I bet Ukraine will be forced to negotiate again because the last treaty between Russia and Ukraine worked really well...... There is simply no possibility of "de-escalating political tension" as long as Putin rules Russia, and most likely even after that.
Because the Kremlin has shown time and time again that they are nothing but two-faced snakes. Have you seen what they did regarding the grain deal just the other day? How can anyone sane trust anything coming out of Putin or his minions whey they show zero respect for any deal? Russia ain't going to give back annexed lands unless they face into a situation similar to Germany's at the end of 1918 - a total collapse of the government.
Having read the article, it’s a bit of a clickbait headline. Also not sure how it’s news, obviously the US is trying to balance allies to ensure maximum pressure is kept up on Russia.
Well there is already speculation by all of you that x and y will happen/been demanded.
My opinion is that if there is opportunity for negotiations it should be used and if there is no possiblity for good deal for both sides then of course don't accept the offer.
For example if the reports are truthful Ukraine is doing better and better and that gives them stronger base for negotiations which definitely should be used.
I agree with you... recent history has shown, that Russia is extremely untrustworthy. Nonetheless I don't think that no negotiations should happen - but this time the world needs to make sure that Russia can't break the deal. So it has to be something like allowing Russia to orderly retreat from (whole of) Ukraine, creating a path to station NATO troops at the border (and then take Ukraine as a full member, but that's not that urgent in such a case) and open a path for Russia back into the fold of world politics and economy if they take responsibility for destruction and atrocities (meaning paying for the damage done and sending responsible people to Den Haag).
Basically every deal that's not secured by overwhelming firepower is about to be broken by Russia.
Something like this would be the only kind of deal I imagine would be acceptable for Ukraine and I can't imagine Putin agreeing to it.
Agreed that even though Russia have proven time and time again to be untrustworthy I think it's important that Ukraine and NATO keep diplomatic channels open with Russia.
Unfortunately the bit in bold can't happen if Putin remains in power because he is the number one responsible for what has happened. If Putin gets removed or killed then the prudent thing would be to give Russia a way to return to it's position before the invasion as long as they adhered to strict rules with hefty punishments if they broke them.
OSINT thread on the defensive lines Russia is building on the south east side of the Dnepr river.
Ukraine suffered a comms outage when 1,300 SpaceX satellite units went offline over funding issues.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/04/politics/spacex-ukraine-elon-musk-starlink-internet-outage/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/04/politics/spacex-ukraine-elon-musk-starlink-internet-outage/index.html
But there clearly isn't any opportunity at the moment. It is not like Russia and Ukraine are not stating their pre-consitions to negotiations and they are clearly incompatible at the moment. So it is not "speculation".
Russia is saying that the precondition is the recognition of its sovereignty over all annexed regions, significant part of which it does not even control, so Ukraine would have to cede territory which is a non-starter while they are controlling part of it and are on front foot. And the overwhelming majority of Ukraininans are strictly against.
Ukraine is saying that the pre-condition is Russia withdrawing its troops from all Ukrainian territory, non starter for Russia while Putin is in power/they haven't suffered a catastrophic military collapse. So no basis for negotiations until one of the sides weakens significantly .
Good thread, other than getting left/right bank wrong.
The left/right thing can be confusing if you are not used to it, I had never seen it used before I started following this conflict. Where I'm from compass directions are always used when describing a side of a river or lake.
There’s no such thing as negotiating with Putin, as any attempt to do so only allows him to regroup and reload for the next offensive. His regime has to be destroyed from within by way of a decisive Ukrainian victory - otherwise we will be at this every few years for the next couple of decades.
Last edited:
This. Can we now stop all rubbish on here about negotiations with the Russians?
The US seems to think that the stance taken by Ukraine and most of this thread right now, of saying that negotiations are a non-starter no matter what as long as Putin is still in power, is a tactical mistake that might be costly. Seems pretty relevant if you want Ukraine to win.
They do?
Yes. That's the report that started all this discussion. They say that Zelensky's hardline stance has generated concerns around the world, and risks eroding public support and future assistance.
How does the world ensure that Russia can't break the deal?
They can't.
So therefore negotiation is pointless.
Indeed. From Budapest to Minsk - Putin has repeatedly demonstrated treaties are pointless. Its no different than attempting to negotiate with Hitler. He has to be taken down, then actual negotiations can begin.
The Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc were not particularly bothered when they made massive investments into North Vietnam for the sake of making sure the United States' prestige would suffer greatly to the point where they would be forced to yield and then leave South Vietnam open for a downfall. This is a test where the West must show that they can be as resolute as the communists were during the Vietnam War.
Either Putin will be forced to yield (power or Ukraine or both) or he will hungry for more if the West chooses to blink first.
Yep.
But just to clarify, from what I've read, the US aren't asking Ukraine to make compromises and are not expecting anything to come out of the negotiations. They just want Ukraine to keep holding the door open to negotiations in their public messaging, to avoid a situation where a Ukrainian public hardline stance leads to an erosion of public and political support in Europe when energy prices lead to issues in winter.
True. That's what I meant by hardline stance, but it probably wasn't too clear.
Yeah, that's what I thought. I just thought I'd spell it out in a bit more detail for those who haven't read about this outside your posts.
(Am I mansplaining? Damn...
)