Ukraine must cede territory in peace talks, says US

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Kursk salient is gone. Troops now surrounded and withdrawing. I said this may happen last week and got the usual vacuous laughing emojis. Nobody had the balls to challenge me though. The only card albeit a small one that Zelensky had has folded. Always was a strategic error and has now proven to be the case.  

 

Looks like it....unfortunately:

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/whats-happening-russias-kursk-region-why-does-it-matter-2025-03-12/

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

Do you know if this is being reported in western msm? Or will they just simply ignore it so that the sheeple still thinks that their side is winning?

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/whats-happening-russias-kursk-region-why-does-it-matter-2025-03-12/

[worgeordie]

9 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

All right then. Russia is winning and Ukraine is losing. Is that acceptable to you?

You seem happy about that , you a Russian lover ? you think it's OK for Russia to

invade Ukraine ...

 

regards Worgeordie

[jayboy]

31 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I ignore nothing but it's of no importance in the present situation. The war is being won by Russia, PERIOD.

 

 

There was another occasion when a wicked aggressor was winning a war in which it sought sought to exterminate a militarily inferior country.The leader of that country said:

 

"Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender"

 

By your debased morality that leader should have  kept his bravado to himself and sough a humiliating accommodation with the aggressor.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, TedG said:

You sure? 

 

Better not push it too much.

[worgeordie]

54 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I bet they would not have. They would have put up a good show and then done what any sane people do- surrender in the face of certain death. At that time they didn't know about the death camps and all that.

 

For proof, I give you Singapore, and the humiliating surrender.

I said if the Germans had landed in England , there is a difference Singapore not their country,

But if you think so your the Man  555

 

regards Worgeordie

[Dan O]

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

What?  Funding that allowed Ukrainians to keep fighting and dying, but didn't come close to allowing them to actually win?  That would take foreign boots on the ground and risk WW3 and Armageddon.

 

The sooner the money dries up, the sooner the killing will stop.  On both sides.  Then they can start spending that money on rebuilding.

 

How delusional are you? You take away  support and aide for defense and allow the opposition to increase bombing and missle strikes and claim you're stopping the killing? Are you serious? 

[Dan O]

32 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Russians always win these negotiations. They are the world's best chess players. Just think of the Cuban missile crises. Kennedy was celebrated for winning it. In actual fact the Russians won it. The US had to promise to remove missiles from Turkey and not to invade Cuba.

 

Minsk 1 and Minsk 2 were also wildly in favour of Russia.

 

They always win these negotiations.

Nice misleading take on revising history.