Putin Promises 'Immediate' Peace if Ukraine Drops NATO Bid and Cedes Occupied Territories

[Jingthing]

18 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

yeah, just keep the war going and people dying..from the safety of your laptop. 

It's Putin's choice to keep his genocidal war going.

[frank83628]

On 6/15/2024 at 1:15 PM, Jingthing said:

Putin doesn't want peace. But he wants the world to think he wants peace.

The useful idiots for Putin will buy anything he dishes out. 

As always, he wants to completely erase Ukraine, either swallowing it completely or making it a slave state of Russia (like Belarus). 

He's weaker than ever, that's why he made this BS offer.

 

 

if he wanted to erase Ukraine he would have done it from the start. 

 

Putin has always said Ukraine joining NATO was a no, The US has pushed this further, the head of nato openly said this some months ago. 

[frank83628]

15 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It's Putin's choice to keep his genocidal war going.

no, there were talks on the table in April 22, the uk and us put a stop to them. negotiations could have ended the war back then. so all the dead since are on the shoulders of the BOJO and Biden.  

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

if he wanted to erase Ukraine he would have done it from the start. 

 

Putin has always said Ukraine joining NATO was a no, The US has pushed this further, the head of nato openly said this some months ago. 

Yes he could have with nukes.

But he doesn't want to use nukes because of MAD. 

[Jingthing]

Just now, frank83628 said:

no, there were talks on the table in April 22, the uk and us put a stop to them. negotiations could have ended the war back then. so all the dead since are on the shoulders of the BOJO and Biden.  

So the Kremlin propaganda narrative goes. 

[NanLaew]

On 6/14/2024 at 2:03 PM, Jingthing said:

Putin's obviously desperate.

He sees the writing on the wall. 

Ukraine can't possibly agree to this.

Putin's game is to fuel maga fascist types who actually take such proposals seriously. 

 

He's what now?

 

What writing?

 

Ukraine is a America's puppet and doesn't matter if they agree or not.

 

He can see the US, NATO and their allies' waning interest. He can do this "special military operation" until the proverbial cows come home which is something the US, NATO and their allies can't.

Edited June 16 by NanLaew

[Jingthing]

Just now, NanLaew said:

 

He's what now?

 

What writing?

 

Ukraine is a America's puppet and doesn't matter is they agree or not.

 

He can see the US, NATO and their allies' waning interest. He can do this "special military operation" until the proverbial cows come home which is something the US, NATO and their allies can't.

You're out of touch.

The west's interest is the opposite of waning.

That's why fascist dictator Putin is freaking out now.

The west is even trying to Trump proof the support for Ukraine now. 

[NanLaew]

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

You're out of touch.

The west's interest is the opposite of waning.

That's why fascist dictator Putin is freaking out now.

The west is even trying to Trump proof the support for Ukraine now. 

 

You're (still) fixated.

 

"maga facist types... Trump proof..."

 

 

[Jingthing]

Just now, NanLaew said:

 

You're (still) fixated.

 

"maga facist types... Trump proof..."

 

 

You're not paying attention.

The maga movement is fascist.

They relate to fascist Putin.

The west is very worried that Ukraine's situation will fall apart if Trump takes power again and now they are actually taking action that could mitigate that disaster,

 

[LosLobo]

1 hour ago, Gweiloman said:

Your article is over 2 years and at the time that Ukraine was about to sign the peace deal with Russia.

 

Try to keep up.

Well done, I am amazed at your chrono-numeracy skills.

My post was entirely relevant to the post I replied to, yours' isn't.

The OP also contained references to the past e.g. WWII, the old Soviet Union and 1962 Russian missiles in Cuba.
 

[expat_4_life]

23 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

no, there were talks on the table in April 22, the uk and us put a stop to them. negotiations could have ended the war back then. so all the dead since are on the shoulders of the BOJO and Biden.  

 

21 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

So the Kremlin propaganda narrative goes. 

 

Sorry to break it to you @Jingthingbut @frank83628is correct.  Confirmed by one of the Ukrainian negotiators.

https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news/official-johnson-forced-kyiv-to-refuse-russian-peace-deal/

Edited June 16 by expat_4_life

[scubascuba3]

26 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

if he wanted to erase Ukraine he would have done it from the start. 

 

Putin has always said Ukraine joining NATO was a no, The US has pushed this further, the head of nato openly said this some months ago. 

They are quasi NATO already, another fight he's lost

[LosLobo]

2 hours ago, jas007 said:

2 hours ago, jas007 said:

Los Lobo,

 

That article is two years old, so not too relevant today.  In ant event, given the continued U.S. meddling in Ukraine since at least 2014, I’m sure Russia wasn’t taking promises by Zelensky at face value.  And remember, US Secretary of State James Baker once promised Russia that NATO would not expand one inch eastward. That was way back in 1991, I believe. And yet, look at what has happened since. Country after country in Eastern Europe has joined NATO or is in the process of doing so.
 

Now, more than ever, the issue is important to Russia. They don’t want NATO on their doorstep in Ukraine.  That’s understandable. At this point, it’s obvious the U.S. wants nothing more than to harm Russia in as many ways as possible.  The rationale that NATO is only a defensive alliance won’t fly.

 

Imagine hostile forces were established in Tijuana, or Juarez, or Cuba.  Hostile forces armed with all the latest military equipment, including missiles. The U.S. establishment would go nuts.  They don’t want that kind of threat right on the border. Again, that’s understandable. Why should it be any different for Russia?

.

Jas007,
 

Yet it was relevant to your post.

And was your previous reference to WWII, the Soviet Union and Cuban missiles and now 2014 and James Baker in 1990 relevant now in 2024?

 

 

Edited June 16 by LosLobo

[Tropicalevo]

On 6/15/2024 at 1:34 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. Hitler lost. If he had nuclear weapons would he have lost?

 

Different times, different scenario.

Same megalomaniacal dictator traits though.

Time does not change that.

[frank83628]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

So the Kremlin propaganda narrative goes. 

you really should broaden your information channels. Boris Johnston flew to Kyiv  and put a stop thew the negotiations.

 

put it in a google search search and choose from one of the many links provided, there are numerous!

 

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/05/06/boris-johnson-pressured-zelenskyy-ditch-peace-talks-russia-ukrainian-paper

 

 

 

 

[Walker88]

23 hours ago, johng said:

This ill thought out action will  only speed up other countries desire to join the BRICS  and demise of the petrodollar.

 

Ah, the old BRICS and petrodollar argument.

 

Brazilian growth rate and its standard of living is the envy of which country?

 

Russia is doing rather poorly and losing both money and young men at a rapid rate.

 

India is trying to become a Hindu Republic, but the BJP and Modi didn't fare so well recently. Expect some social disruption over the next few years. Modi couldn't even carry Uttar Pradesh, a province that population-wise is the world's 5th largest country.

 

China has growth problems, debt problems and RE problems. Oh, and gender issues, such as 30+ million extra marrying age males.

 

Generally, countries prefer not to join a group of losers. They pretend for possible trade, but that's it.

 

As for the petrodollar....a quick search has the coming demise of the dollar going back to around 1967. Maybe someday, as in the old saying "Brazil is the country of tomorrow, and always will be".

 

The dollar's strength stems from a combination of factors, the primary one being rule of law/access to capital markets. Anybody can place, or withdraw, billions of dollars into and out of US capital markets in an instant. There is liquidity and freedom. The same cannot be said of any other market, and certainly not China or India. On top of that the US economy is as robust as any nation right now, remains Ground Zero of innovation and invention, and its military remains the strongest in the world.

 

The election could screw that up if the felon wins, but absent that, the next decade or more belongs to the US. If AI truly changes the world, the main thing it will change is the price and availability of energy. Oil is one technological breakthrough away from being obviated (e.g, thorium reactors, better battery storage), which means Russia even loses its 'gas station with nukes' status, and the entire Middle East can go back to camel schtupping and Shi'a vs Sunni conflict.

 

Putin might be smart enough to see the writing on the wall, and this 'peace plan' is just desperation.

Edited June 16 by Walker88

[transam]

2 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

you really should broaden your information channels. Boris Johnston flew to Kyiv  and put a stop thew the negotiations.

 

put it in a google search search and choose from one of the many links provided, there are numerous!

 

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/05/06/boris-johnson-pressured-zelenskyy-ditch-peace-talks-russia-ukrainian-paper

 

 

 

 

Is that a dodgy link.........?  

 

You seem to think Ukraine should have said to Putin, "Yes Sir", well that is the cowards way out, When Hitler and Japan went on their rampage, we all could have  said, "Yes Sir".

But we didn't, because we knew we were in the right, they were just scum aggressors.

So I put you and a few others down as Red's, or cowards.....

 

[frank83628]

10 minutes ago, transam said:

Is that a dodgy link.........?  

 

You seem to think Ukraine should have said to Putin, "Yes Sir", well that is the cowards way out, When Hitler and Japan went on their rampage, we all could have  said, "Yes Sir".

But we didn't, because we knew we were in the right, they were just scum aggressors.

So I put you and a few others down as Red's, or cowards.....

 

there are plenty of links to choose from, the one i posted was quoting from a Ukrainian paper, i thought that might satisfy some of you, rather than it be a 'right wing putin puppet outlet'. google it yourself, there are namy to choose from 

[frank83628]

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

They are quasi NATO already, another fight he's lost

yeah, he is fighting the US and nato, just not officially, had it been Ukraine alone it would have ended long ago. 

 

did you see lindsey grayham talking of the 12 trillion in minerals...funny that aye, if it's not oil the yanks want its, deffo peace and democracy !! 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/senator-graham-ukraine-s-12-trillion-mineral-wealth-and-its-future/ar-BB1o1qqL

[Cardano]

On 6/15/2024 at 1:42 PM, Bkk Brian said:

Yes, he would have lost, the same if Putin used nuclear weapons, he would lose within seconds

And so would everyone else!!

[Captain Flack]

Some bickering and personal attacks, against community rules removed. Stop it now and stay discussing the topic, not each other.

 

Rule 9. You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages. You will respect other members and post in a civil manner. Personal attacks, insults or hate speech posted on the forum or sent by private message are not allowed.

 

[transam]

36 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

there are plenty of links to choose from, the one i posted was quoting from a Ukrainian paper, i thought that might satisfy some of you, rather than it be a 'right wing putin puppet outlet'. google it yourself, there are namy to choose from 

Is it the Ukrainian version of The Guardian, Daily Worker or Morning Star............. 😜

[Bkk Brian]

32 minutes ago, Cardano said:

And so would everyone else!!

I honestly didn't think it was necessary to state the obvious. You proved me wrong.

[jvs]

4 hours ago, jas007 said:

Los Lobo,

 

That article is two years old, so not too relevant today.  In ant event, given the continued U.S. meddling in Ukraine since at least 2014, I’m sure Russia wasn’t taking promises by Zelensky at face value.  And remember, US Secretary of State James Baker once promised Russia that NATO would not expand one inch eastward. That was way back in 1991, I believe. And yet, look at what has happened since. Country after country in Eastern Europe has joined NATO or is in the process of doing so.
 

Now, more than ever, the issue is important to Russia. They don’t want NATO on their doorstep in Ukraine.  That’s understandable. At this point, it’s obvious the U.S. wants nothing more than to harm Russia in as many ways as possible.  The rationale that NATO is only a defensive alliance won’t fly.

 

Imagine hostile forces were established in Tijuana, or Juarez, or Cuba.  Hostile forces armed with all the latest military equipment, including missiles. The U.S. establishment would go nuts.  They don’t want that kind of threat right on the border. Again, that’s understandable. Why should it be any different for Russia?

Have you seen how long the Finnish border with russia is?

Well done putin,great strategy!

[rabas]

2 hours ago, expat_4_life said:

 

Sorry to break it to you @Jingthingbut @frank83628is correct.  Confirmed by one of the Ukrainian negotiators.

https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news/official-johnson-forced-kyiv-to-refuse-russian-peace-deal/

 

The European Conservative is a small EU English language politically oriented publication covering  philosophy, politics, culture, and the arts. I would not consider it a reliable source on complex political issues.

 

There were many rounds of negations that eventually failed for several factors not mentioned in your link, which is reporting soundbites. What the head negotiator really said was [WIKI]

 

"Ukrainian lead negotiator Davyd Arakhamia stated in an interview on 24 November 2023 that in March 2022 the Russian delegation had promised Ukraine peace for refusing to join NATO, but that Russia had not given any security guarantees and the Ukrainian delegation did not trust Russia to uphold such an agreement.^[77][79][80] "

 

The lack of security guarantees would be sufficient reason for the US, UK, and most peoples' grandmothers to say don't sign. 

[beautifulthailand99]

12 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

I hear Russia is recruiting. Why don't you join their genocidal war against Ukraine. Or at the very least donate you pension to it?

If you are already doing this then please ignore. But if you're not and you are blowharding for more war then could I suggest putting your money where your mouths and keyboards are.

 

https://www.usubc.org/site/recent-news/war-bonds--invest-to-support-ukraine

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

10 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

If you are already doing this then please ignore. But if you're not and you are blowharding for more war then could I suggest putting your money where your mouths and keyboards are.

 

https://www.usubc.org/site/recent-news/war-bonds--invest-to-support-ukraine

 

 

Blowing hard for more war eh? 

 

Would you like to prove that or just feel that a worthless meme and link is more your style? Who started this genocidal war against Ukraine? Who could stop today?

[AreYouGerman]

On 6/15/2024 at 8:15 AM, Jingthing said:

Putin doesn't want peace. But he wants the world to think he wants peace.

 

So. There's a war right now, right? And peace would mean a ceasefire, right?

 

So, if both party agree on peace and one side doesn't follow it. What would it mean?

 

Let me help you, bro, as you seem to have difficulties with that part.

 

It would mean there would be still war and no ceasefire.

[AreYouGerman]

I have a great idea!

 

Make a peace conference and don't invite the other war participant.

 

Then, tell the winning side that it should agree to unconditional surrender.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, AreYouGerman said:

 

So. There's a war right now, right? And peace would mean a ceasefire, right?

 

So, if both party agree on peace and one side doesn't follow it. What would it mean?

 

Let me help you, bro, as you seem to have difficulties with that part.

 

It would mean there would be still war and no ceasefire.

If I wanted pablum I would cook some oatmeal.