Ukraine war: Rishi Sunak visits President Zelensky in Kyiv as he pledges £50m in aid

[Bkk Brian]

22 minutes ago, internationalism said:

yes, the March visit from 3 european prime ministers was officially announced:

"The European Union said the politicians were not carrying any particular mandate, but that leaders in Brussels were aware of the trip, as it was mentioned during an informal EU summit in Versailles, France, last week.

Poland's Deputy Foreign Minister Marcin Przydacz admitted the trip was risky, but said it was "worth taking for the sake of values". He said they had told the Russians the visit was taking place. "

 

also 3 leaders from france, germany and italy in June

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/germanys-scholz-travel-kyiv-with-macron-draghi-before-g7-bild-am-sonntag-2022-06-11/

 

so that sudden Sunak's visit, just 4 days after polish "accident" might have something to do with it.  But Sunak's statement is very laconic, even if they must have discussed it

 

 

 

Not so sudden:

 

New British Prime Minister's Visit to Ukraine Already Being Prepared – Ambassador

Vadym Prystaiko, Ukraine's ambassador to the UK, has said that Kyiv is currently preparing to host a visit by Rishi Sunak, the new British Prime Minister.

https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/eng/news/2022/10/28/7149604/

 

Certainly not as sudden as Boris

Boris Johnson make surprise visit to Ukraine

https://www.bbc.com/pidgin/articles/crg0gxpp4l1o

[billd766]

12 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Leaving aside the question of legality, I do not recall that the Ukraine was "peaceful" for a number of years, before the invasion.

It was before Russia, under Putin once again, illegally annexed the Crimea.

 

Now by systematically destroying the infrastructure of the Ukraine, he is once again committing war crimes and crimes against humanity.

 

Anyway I thought that you had given up answering my posts.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, billd766 said:

It was before Russia, under Putin once again, illegally annexed the Crimea.

 

Now by systematically destroying the infrastructure of the Ukraine, he is once again committing war crimes and crimes against humanity.

 

Anyway I thought that you had given up answering my posts.

That was just on that particular subject, otherwise I'd have put you on my ignore list.

 

You are deflecting, as I was referring specifically to Ukrain being "peaceful", when IMO it wasn't.

[Summerinsiam]

Ukraine was not peaceful prior to the illegal Russian invasion. It was also and still is deeply corrupt. Since 2014 there had been an ongoing conflict in the east with the Russians having de facto control over much of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Instead of embracing realpolitick and trying to reach a viable solution, Zelensky refused and expressed the desire to join NATO and the EU. He refused to implement correctly the Minsk agreements that had been tirelessly negotiated. As a consequence, he was a source of irritation for many in the western corridors of power. Of course, this is now conveniently forgotten. Although most of the blame lies with Putin he is not blameless. Nor is he the saint that is portrayed in much of the sycophantic western media. The targeting of civilian infrastruture is horrific, but in the climate of war, sadly it is a tried and tested tactic. Remember the 'shock and awe' campaign that the Americans launched at the onset of their illegal invasion of Iraq. Not to mention the inumerable number of citizens who died, and the regional instability that occurred as a direct consequence. Remember the firestorms in Dresden?

 

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

7 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

Ukraine was not peaceful prior to the illegal Russian invasion. It was also and still is deeply corrupt. Since 2014 there had been an ongoing conflict in the east with the Russians having de facto control over much of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Instead of embracing realpolitick and trying to reach a viable solution, Zelensky refused and expressed the desire to join NATO and the EU. He refused to implement correctly the Minsk agreements that had been tirelessly negotiated. As a consequence, he was a source of irritation for many in the western corridors of power. Of course, this is now conveniently forgotten. Although most of the blame lies with Putin he is not blameless. Nor is he the saint that is portrayed in much of the sycophantic western media. The targeting of civilian infrastruture is horrific, but in the climate of war, sadly it is a tried and tested tactic. Remember the 'shock and awe' campaign that the Americans launched at the onset of their illegal invasion of Iraq. Not to mention the inumerable number of citizens who died, and the regional instability that occurred as a direct consequence. Remember the firestorms in Dresden?

 

 

 

B.S. & off topic

[billd766]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

That was just on that particular subject, otherwise I'd have put you on my ignore list.

 

You are deflecting, as I was referring specifically to Ukrain being "peaceful", when IMO it wasn't.

quote from your post.  'You are deflecting, as I was referring specifically to Ukrain being "peaceful", when IMO it wasn't'.

 

What is deflecting about the Crimea. It WAS a part of the Ukraine until Russia, under Putin illegally annexed it in 2014.

 

It is only your opinion which is worth the same as mine or any other posters on AN.

 

Unless of course you can back it up with links and facts.

[billd766]

This makes some good reading for some posters.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements

 

 

[Summerinsiam]

I stand by what I said: Zelensky could and should have done a lot more on the diplomatic front, to seek to avoid the catastrophe unfolding in his country today. Instead, he chose to poke the Russian bear. Explicitly stating that Ukraine woudn't join NATO and exploring third party security guarantees would have been a start. Serious backdoor diplomacy ended the Cuban Missile Crisis, and that is the only realistic way to end this dangerous conflict. Meanwhile, Zelensky is like a broken record with his incessant demands and constant refusal to contemplate any negotiations. He only has one speech, endlessly delivered to anyone who will listen. Any further serious escalation is flirting with disaster and in nobody's interests. Least of all his backers, whose populations' resolve wil be futher tested this winter. Expect the rapid onset of Ukraine fatigue. Hard decisions and compromises will eventually have to be made for the greater good. Until Zelensky and Putin get real this cannot happen. I am not sure he is the man to do this.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

I stand by what I said: Zelensky could and should have done a lot more on the diplomatic front, to seek to avoid the catastrophe unfolding in his country today. Instead, he chose to poke the Russian bear. Explicitly stating that Ukraine woudn't join NATO and exploring third party security guarantees would have been a start. Serious backdoor diplomacy ended the Cuban Missile Crisis, and that is the only realistic way to end this dangerous conflict. Meanwhile, Zelensky is like a broken record with his incessant demands and constant refusal to contemplate any negotiations. He only has one speech, endlessly delivered to anyone who will listen. Any further serious escalation is flirting with disaster and in nobody's interests. Least of all his backers, whose populations' resolve wil be futher tested this winter. Expect the rapid onset of Ukraine fatigue. Hard decisions and compromises will eventually have to be made for the greater good. Until Zelensky and Putin get real this cannot happen. I am not sure he is the man to do this.

What would a serious negotiation have looked like to you and when should they have done it? Should Ukraine have submitted to Russian annexation similar to what we saw in Crimea? Is Moldova next?

[Bkk Brian]

4 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

I stand by what I said: Zelensky could and should have done a lot more on the diplomatic front, to seek to avoid the catastrophe unfolding in his country today. Instead, he chose to poke the Russian bear. Explicitly stating that Ukraine woudn't join NATO and exploring third party security guarantees would have been a start. Serious backdoor diplomacy ended the Cuban Missile Crisis, and that is the only realistic way to end this dangerous conflict. Meanwhile, Zelensky is like a broken record with his incessant demands and constant refusal to contemplate any negotiations. He only has one speech, endlessly delivered to anyone who will listen. Any further serious escalation is flirting with disaster and in nobody's interests. Least of all his backers, whose populations' resolve wil be futher tested this winter. Expect the rapid onset of Ukraine fatigue. Hard decisions and compromises will eventually have to be made for the greater good. Until Zelensky and Putin get real this cannot happen. I am not sure he is the man to do this.

But what you said was wrong, you still stand by it? 

 

Zelensky refused and expressed the desire to join NATO and the EU. He refused to implement correctly the Minsk agreements that had been tirelessly negotiated. As a consequence, he was a source of irritation for many in the western corridors of power.

 

Why has the 2015 agreement failed to end fighting in eastern Ukraine?

The Minsk II deal set out military and political steps that remain unimplemented.

A major blockage has been Russia’s insistence that it is not a party to the conflict and therefore is not bound by its terms.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/9/what-is-the-minsk-agreement-and-why-is-it-relevant-now

 

 

 

[Summerinsiam]

It wasn't wrong. He failed to try to make it work. Russia, of course shares the blame for its failure. As to negotiations: it is acknowledged by analysts that there was the potential for a deal about a month after the invasion. Putin would probably accepted the Donbas and Luhansk, which he had de facto control of anyway. Crime was a fait accompli.As I said before, nerly all conflicts end through negotiation. If you eschew all efforts at diplomacy and compromise what is the endgame?

 

[Bkk Brian]

3 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

It wasn't wrong. He failed to try to make it work. Russia, of course shares the blame for its failure. As to negotiations: it is acknowledged by analysts that there was the potential for a deal about a month after the invasion. Putin would probably accepted the Donbas and Luhansk, which he had de facto control of anyway. Crime was a fait accompli.As I said before, nerly all conflicts end through negotiation. If you eschew all efforts at diplomacy and compromise what is the endgame?

 

Avoiding a war is also carried out through negotiations.

 

Exclusive: As war began, Putin rejected a Ukraine peace deal recommended by aide

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/exclusive-war-began-putin-rejected-ukraine-peace-deal-recommended-by-his-aide-2022-09-14/

[Summerinsiam]

Both sides have subsequently denied that this ever happened. I ask again: If you reject any Ukrainian compromise or loss of territory, what is the endgame? It is easy to be critical while offering nothing constructive yourself. If you think Putin will accept a crushing military defeat with all its consequences for him, when he has a massive nuclear capability, then you are very naive.

[Bkk Brian]

25 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

Both sides have subsequently denied that this ever happened. I ask again: If you reject any Ukrainian compromise or loss of territory, what is the endgame? It is easy to be critical while offering nothing constructive yourself. If you think Putin will accept a crushing military defeat with all its consequences for him, when he has a massive nuclear capability, then you are very naive.

Link to that claim?

 

Hint, Putin denying does not count

 

"But, despite earlier backing the negotiations, Putin made it clear when presented with Kozak's deal that the concessions negotiated by his aide did not go far enough and that he had expanded his objectives to include annexing swathes of Ukrainian territory, the sources said. The upshot: the deal was dropped."

Edited November 23, 2022 by Bkk Brian

[Summerinsiam]

I am not engaging in semantics. Why have you once again failed to address my question: if you discount any compromise and negotiation as you appear to do, what is the endgame in this war?

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Summerinsiam said:

I am not engaging in semantics. Why have you once again failed to address my question: if you discount any compromise and negotiation as you appear to do, what is the endgame in this war?

Substantiating a claim you made is not semantics and until you do there's not point in further discussion, either that or admit you are wrong.

 

One month into the invasion

Zelensky: We won’t join NATO if that brings peace

https://nypost.com/2022/03/22/zelensky-we-wont-join-nato-if-that-brings-peace/

[Summerinsiam]

I meant that he should have said that before the invasion, not when it was too late. There are many sources that say the opposite, but I am not going to start referencing them. This is an informal forum and not an academic dissertation. The Ukrainians denied it too, especially after Biden and Johnson cynically jumped on the Ukrainian bandwagon. The first prority of any government is to safeguard their citizens, and with their current approach they are in danger of failing in this. I guess that you won't answer my question because you don't have an answer. You think, like Zelensky, that western support should be unconditional and that we should allow the world to be pushed to the brink of oblivion.

[Bkk Brian]

41 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

I meant that he should have said that before the invasion, not when it was too late. There are many sources that say the opposite, but I am not going to start referencing them. This is an informal forum and not an academic dissertation. The Ukrainians denied it too, especially after Biden and Johnson cynically jumped on the Ukrainian bandwagon. The first prority of any government is to safeguard their citizens, and with their current approach they are in danger of failing in this. I guess that you won't answer my question because you don't have an answer. You think, like Zelensky, that western support should be unconditional and that we should allow the world to be pushed to the brink of oblivion.

So no link to that claim "Both sides have subsequently denied that this ever happened." Totally ignored by you so I can only assume you were delibertly lying.

 

So far you've made many claims in this thread, not one has been substantiated with a link, lets go through just a few:

 

1) "Even the top US general said recently that Ukraine cannot win" - Not true, provide a link for this, he did say there was no "near term victory" it will take a long time and they are prepared for the long haul with Ukraine

 

2) Before the invasion he was an unpopular comedian who to the west's consternation was failing to implement the Minsk agreement. Had he done so we might not be where we are today. Not true. You fail to accept the link I provided that Russia refuses to recognize the Minsk 2 despite signing it so of course its impossible to implement

 

3) Ukraine was not peaceful prior to the illegal Russian invasion. It was also and still is deeply corrupt. Yes it was corrupt but not as corrupt as Russia

 

4)  Instead of embracing realpolitick and trying to reach a viable solution, Zelensky refused and expressed the desire to join NATO and the EU. Not true, he offered to not join NATO

 

5) I stand by what I said: Zelensky could and should have done a lot more on the diplomatic front, to seek to avoid the catastrophe unfolding in his country today. Instead, he chose to poke the Russian bear. Not true, he defended Ukraine and its population from an illegal invasion. Putin invaded without warning on the premise it was a military exercise.

 

6) Putin would probably accepted the Donbas and Luhansk. LOL yea I bet he would, they don't belong to him they belong to Ukraine

 

Ok so you've got a fair bit to substantiate there if you want a credible discussion as its pointless debating with someone who does not substantiate their claims.

 

 

Edited November 23, 2022 by Bkk Brian

[Summerinsiam]

I thought I had addressed the issue of substantiation. You are obviously blinded by your allegiance to Ukraine. Are you Ukrainian or are you like Boris Johnson; cynically making the mistake of being more Ukrainian than Ukrainians are themselves? I agree that its pointless to debate with somebody who has such tunnel vision. Yes, end of discussion. Tellingly, you focus on finding fault with somebody's position, but are unable to offer anything constructive. You are clearly at a loss to provide an answer to my central question, which to me speaks volumes.

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

I thought I had addressed the issue of substantiation. You are obviously blinded by your allegiance to Ukraine. Are you Ukrainian or are you like Boris Johnson; cynically making the mistake of being more Ukrainian than Ukrainians are themselves? I agree that its pointless to debate with somebody who has such tunnel vision. Yes, end of discussion. Tellingly, you focus on finding fault with somebody's position, but are unable to offer anything constructive. You are clearly at a loss to provide an answer to my central question, which to me speaks volumes.

Listen to volumes all you like, if you don;t substantiate your argument around here you're going to get short thrift. Pretty soon members here will just ignore you and your trolling.

[Bkk Brian]

17 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

I thought I had addressed the issue of substantiation. You are obviously blinded by your allegiance to Ukraine. Are you Ukrainian or are you like Boris Johnson; cynically making the mistake of being more Ukrainian than Ukrainians are themselves? I agree that its pointless to debate with somebody who has such tunnel vision. Yes, end of discussion. Tellingly, you focus on finding fault with somebody's position, but are unable to offer anything constructive. You are clearly at a loss to provide an answer to my central question, which to me speaks volumes.

Try reading forum rules. Do some research Vlad

[Scott]

Baiting posts and replies removed.  If you make a claim then it needs to be backed up with a link from a credible source.    Otherwise, it can be considered as false or misleading. 

 

When continually posting unsubstantiated claims, it is trolling and will earn a suspension.