In 2019 Russia controlled 7% of Ukraine. In early 2022 Russia invaded Ukraine and in months controlled 30% of Ukraine. Russia right now controls 20% of Ukraine after nearly 4 years of war. Russia has taken 1% of Ukraine over the last year. Something could break at any point in time - but the last 3+ years of the war has shown Russia lose half the land they gained early in the battle. At this point it is a complete stalemate with Russia and Ukraine. The idea that Russia will just trample Ukraine has been proven to be false. It will be 4 years of war in February and Russia doesn’t have a lot to show for it. This isn’t even a Vietnam scenario because the fatality figures Vietnam were like 3:1 VC for US fatality. Every war is different but this hasn’t been a good invasion for Russia so far, and as more time goes on - the less time that Trump will be in office and the more time the EU has to build up.
I am sure Trump has thought of this, while he is not asleep at the wheel. Europe Might Leave America Hanging By Dumping $2.34 Trillion In U.S. Debt If Trump Sells Out Ukraine
Maybe yes. Maybe no. When the bond market freaked the f*ck out about his crazy *ss tariffs, trump backed the tariffs off a bit.
As of this week, Trump is still attacking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, alleging that he hadn't even read the peace plan proposal. On Tuesday, the pressure campaign continued as the U.S. tried to convince Zelenskyy to approve the proposal, Axios reported. There is ZERO chance that Trump has read the peace proposal. ZERO.
I am pretty certain that if you asked him to read any multipage doc & repeat back what he read - he would not be able to Hence all the cognitive tests
tramp was never serious about stopping russia, he kissed ass and putin told him to FU.......................tramp is a p***y who doesn't realize what russia will do in the future, nor does he care, he just wants to appease the dictator who probably has something on him
In part due to our acting in Russia's best interests, intentions on dismembering NATO, and also because of designs on Greenland, Denmark identifies the United States of America as a potential security concern in their latest intelligence assessment. That seems a bit restrained, what with including the word "potential." https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/10/euro...5390029&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook Anyway, that's where we are right now and the Danes are not wrong.
So you expect that the "break at any time" in your claimed stalemate will be Ukraine driving the Russias out of all of Ukraine? I think the break will likely be soon and Ukraine will likely lose all of the for Oblasts Russia is claiming and probably also the old Russian City of Odessa leaving Ukraine landlocked. All because the US i.e NATO wanted to expand. I suggest you supplement the mainstream narrative with say an article about the book "Provoked" by Scott Horton. The book which I have not read is very long and detailed about the lead up to the Ukraine War. Also try https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-articles/wgtgma5kj69pbpndjr4wf6aayhrszm. a relative short piece.
By posting this crap you have lost the ability to ever point the finger at someone else for spreading one-sided propaganda. Again, you continually remove any agency that Russia and Putin have. They are just like a wild polar bear or something that doesn’t have the ability to control this own actions. Sweden and Finland didn’t even think about joining NATO until Putin invaded Ukraine. NATO expansion is a self fulfilled prophecy in most cases. Post Reagan, much of the expansion had very little to even do with Russia. The biggest expansion of all was the Prague summit in 2002 which led to Lithuania, Latvia, etc. joining mostly due to the Western alliance forming post 9-11 and the US really harping on the need to respond globally to share intelligence and prevent terrorist attacks in Europe. Yes you can blame George W for taking advantage of the situation and maybe he had intentions of provoking Putin, but keep in mind that publicly not far after that I believe, W said the “I looked into his eyes” statement during that press conference speech. Yes if China or Russia started militarily alliances with Costa Rica, the Nicaragua, then Gautamala, we would rightfully be concerned about their influence to eventually be at our border in Mexico… However we would hopefully also talk about what the US has done as well to attribute to that, and objectively talk about why China or Russia started an alliance with China instead of seeing the US as a viable ally. Again, if Russia didn’t suck so bad at everything, then maybe Latvia, Lithuania, etc. would be like yeah… let’s work with those guys. Russia has more natural resources, and in the past had some of the brightest most talented scientists and people in the world. Yet under Putin’s watch has been a laughing stock in terms of growing a viable economy and creating opportunity for his country. The only way he can grow is by invading a small neighboring country???… that’s weakness and that’s on him and his piss pour leadership. If you want to talk objectively about this great, but don’t post this crap the point the finger at anyone else ever for posting what you then call out as propaganda.
Zelenski as well as the very unpopular leaders of Germany, France and Britain might want to do this . However, Europe can't afford to piss off the US this after the Russian gas pipeline was blown up and replaced it with more expensive LNG from America, not to speak of plans to spend much more on their hoped for Forever War for Ukraine. Also they have no world class competitive companies in AI, electric cars etc As a democratic socialist I have long admired WesternEurope, but they need to wise up. Massive military spending won't help them except temporarily with their economic decline vs Asia and even the US.
Hey, you seem sincere, but mistaken imho. You remove agency from I guess the US except for the Republicans or I guess Dubya. Your naked assertion that NATO expansion had little to do with Russia in a way supports my position that NATO should have disbanded in around 1991 when the Soviet Union ceased. Sadly Sweden, and Sweden have been captured like the US by conservative billionaires so they belie their old reputation. BTW the World Bank iirc says in 2024 Russia's GDP grew faster than the US and certainly Western Europe. Jeffrey Sachs is a world class international economist who was very accepted by liberals and the NYT etc before straying from the permitted path. Now he is not allowed on them. Google Sachs and do some research.
glynch -- you are 100% correct, amigo. I have been making this point for a LONG TIME around here. There's no question Obama and then Biden provoked this war. So many have died (and continue to die) needlessly as a result. From your article: There were in fact two main U.S. provocations. The first was the U.S. intention to expand NATO to Ukraine and Georgia in order to surround Russia in the Black Sea region by NATO countries (Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, and Georgia, in counterclockwise order). The second was the U.S. role in installing a Russophobic regime in Ukraine by the violent overthrow of Ukraine’s pro-Russian President, Viktor Yanukovych, in February 2014. The shooting war in Ukraine began with Yanukovych’s overthrow nine years ago, not in February 2022 as the U.S. government, NATO, and the G7 leaders would have us believe.
I don't see the part where I removed agency from the US. Quite the opposite. I spoke from the perspective of Russians or Russian sympathizers when I talked about a situation where let's say China became a military ally of Costa Rica, then Nicaragua, etc. and Mexico being seen as a threat if they followed suit, and put China at our border. However the part you are missing here is that I said that in that case we'd also need to understand what the US did to screw up so badly to where it drew Central American countries to view us as unreliable, and not important enough.. AND that would be the fault of the US. The US has agency of course and its not just Republicans. Democratic presidents, and members of Congress have made mistakes as well. Not just W, Reagan, and Trump. Biden as a Senator gave unchecked wartime powers to W. In the case though of many of the NATO "expansion" countries like Lithuania, and Latvia, it's not just a simple NATO expansion aggression case... we are talking post 9/11 where these countries PURSUED THE US in order to gain access to homeland security, and intelligence capabilities that they believed they could benefit from. MAYBE W had ill intentions to provoke Putin, but at least publicly that was NOT the case. However as it relates to the "Expansion of NATO" what Sachs and others from that pro-Russia/Noam Chomsky circle cherry pick and leave out the full story here in a narrative that is meant to cast the US as the villain, and Russia as a mindless animal that has no agency, and just acts in its nature. That's nonsense. NATO expansion happened yes, but it wasn't ALWAYS designed to provoke Russia, and victimize the country & it's people. W, Obama, and Trump (to his credit here) have all given Putin all the runway he needs to turn his country around, and be part of the civilized world. All of those presidents have given Putin the chance to stop being a victim, and instead join the rest of the civilized world, and instead Putin alone has decided to continue to act like the victim, and the aggressor to go on this revenge tour to restore the Soviet Union to its past glory, and become a shell of a human being that only operates as a corrupt mob boss. Sachs has also come under fire publicly by many who have shown that his portrayal of Russian sympathy in NATO expansion is largely misrepresentative of the facts. I'm not alone here in thinking that Sach's view here is BS, and again like you always do... removes agency from Putin and Russia to portray them as a force of nature... not led by people that have failed to deliver for their country for decades.
