Stupid Shit in Kyiv

[John Clayton]

...2. 1994: Budapest Memorandum...

Just to refresh people's memory, prior to 1994 Ukraine held over 1700 nuclear warheads on multiple missles, bombers, etc. They had the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world. They gave up these weapons in exchange for international treaty assurances, including (and principally) Russia, that guaranteed the integrity of Ukrainian borders. Russia is clearly the treaty breaker here; however, the US and the UK do bear some responsibility for not coming to their defense in 2014.

[Xpartan]

Turkey or Israel could mediate.

However, there is little reason to believe in any good faith from the Russian side since there is not one agreement standing they have respected with Ukraine. I think only a resounding defeat of Russia will be the end of this war, otherwise Russia will simply regroup and do the same again whilst lying in the faces of the International community.

Only way to curtail it's power to wean away the reliance on Russian resources, and ensure that long term, technologies like microchips are not exported to Russia.

Yep.

Russia has recognized Ukraine's borders AT LEAST 4 times in the last 30 years.

1. 1991: Russia recognizes Ukrainian independence.

2. 1994: Budapest Memorandum.

3. 1997: Russian–Ukrainian Friendship Treaty.

4. 2010: Kharkiv Pact.

What else do they want to realize that Russia can't be trusted. Sign anything with them, and they'll use the break to regroup and start again. They don't give a shit about Donbass, they came to Ukraine FOR Ukraine.

[VinDici]

Turkey or Israel could mediate.

However, there is little reason to believe in any good faith from the Russian side since there is not one agreement standing they have respected with Ukraine. I think only a resounding defeat of Russia will be the end of this war, otherwise Russia will simply regroup and do the same again whilst lying in the faces of the International community.

Only way to curtail it's power to wean away the reliance on Russian resources, and ensure that long term, technologies like microchips are not exported to Russia.

Bad on me, I should been more clear about the disqualifications coming from both sides, as in France and Germany would be nixed by Ukraine and the UK nixed by Russia.

Does Switzerland's neutrality allow it to serve in a mediator role? Other than the Swiss, it's hard to think of another country in Europe that hasn't formally or informally chosen a side.

[Jmsuttr]

Not necessarily. UK and Boris Johnson in particular are very popular in Ukraine (unlike Germany, France and Italy).

Bad on me, I should been more clear about the disqualifications coming from both sides, as in France and Germany would be nixed by Ukraine and the UK nixed by Russia.

Does Switzerland's neutrality allow it to serve in a mediator role? Other than the Swiss, it's hard to think of another country in Europe that hasn't formally or informally chosen a side.

[Xpartan]

The French would have been prime candidates had not Macron made his recent "let's not humiliate Putin" comment. Whether one agrees with him or not, he's clearly disqualified himself in the eyes of Ukraine. In fact, I think most of the European "great powers" (UK, France, Germany, etc.) have ruled themselves out. So, the million-dollar question is, who is left?

Not necessarily. UK and Boris Johnson in particular are very popular in Ukraine (unlike Germany, France and Italy).

[Jmsuttr]

I actually enjoy your authoritative posts. As I kind of mentioned with another poster, I would be careful delving into the idea that there are some certain outcomes in the aftermath of this war.

I have avoided making definitive statements about where things will end up. You are correct that the Ukraine is fighting an existential war. However, I don't think we want to push Putin and the Russian military into thinking this is an existential war for Russia. I'm not talking about letting the Russians leverage the nuke card for gain. I am talking about driving the Russians to commit to an extended war that never seems to end.

I have no idea how things will end up. If you think the Ukraine will push the Russians out of the Eastern Ukraine / Crimea and the Russians will just pack up, go home and everything will be settled, I would hope for that but I think it is optimistic.

You're right the Ukrainians on the ground, don't care what I think about negotiations. Since this war is impacting the global economy everyone has a stake in it.

As far as a third party broker being tangential, I would disagree and say they can be helpful at times. Obviously the Ukraine and Russia have to both tire of the war and want to pursue a way out, but there are so many levers and so many implications globally I think there are countries that can help. Just the fact that some prominent European leaders were trying to tell Putin on the phone that the war was not going great for him is an act of trying to drive peace negotiations.

I agree that trying to predict specific outcomes is a fool's errand. I have been pretty consistent, however, in my assertion that there are no reality-based winnable scenarios for Russia, only varying degrees of failure.

And, as I see it, that's not so much a prediction as an observation. To me it's similar to seeing someone who painted themselves into a corner. You can't predict exactly what pattern of steps they'll follow, but you can safely observe that there's no path out of the corner that avoids getting paint on the shoes. Of course, they could simply decide to stay in the corner, but that's just another failure variant. I think the FT article I just posted does a good job of keeping things in the proper perspective, and I think those who are yielding to the temptation of making predictions are getting caught up in a mood-swing mentality.

As far as third-party brokers are concerned, maybe I'm having a brain cramp but for the life of me I'm struggling to recall a circumstance, at least in modern times, in which any have played a substantive role or made a material difference. Do you have any specific examples in mind?

When one combatant surrenders unconditionally it doesn't much matter where the agreement is signed. And if neither side is ready to negotiate, third parties are irrelevant, as witness the Ukraine-Russia meetings that took place in Istanbul. Maybe the best role for a mediator, when the time is ripe, is just to provide a meeting venue and make sure there's plenty of coffee on hand! Oh yes, and pastries would be great, as would a nice lunch. The French would have been prime candidates had not Macron made his recent "let's not humiliate Putin" comment. Whether one agrees with him or not, he's clearly disqualified himself in the eyes of Ukraine. In fact, I think most of the European "great powers" (UK, France, Germany, etc.) have ruled themselves out. So, the million-dollar question is, who is left?

[Jmsuttr]

I've posted often that the direction of the tide is more important than the action of the waves. This article sets a similar tone, warning against the mood swings that can accompany positive and negative reports (about either side).

https://www.ft.com/content/f2f360e0-...3-775eb244d1d2

Imagine if WW-II (or pick your war) battles had been subject to near-instantaneous comments and analysis on Twitter, Instagram, etc. I'm personally not a huge fan of social media (prob a generational thing) but it's easy to see how such media channels can make it difficult to keep the big picture in clear focus.

P.S. When I used the above link for the first time, I got a readable version of the article. But using it again resulted in a paywalled page. If the link doesn't work for you, try this one:

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https://www....3-775eb244d1d2

[WyattEarp]

Here's a good quote from the Reuters article. It's entirety is worth a read.

"Listing all of the steps needed to falsify a ballot, Gronke told Reuters: '1) You need a falsified ballot with a unique bar code, printed on special paper, and a special envelope. If the claim is that you've somehow obtained 400,000 original ballots without the elections officials or voters knowing, how precisely did you do this?

"2) You need to successfully forge the voter's signature.  3) You need to deposit the envelope and have it validated by a local official.

Congratulations! Besides committing a felony, you have now cast ONE fraudulent ballot. Now you need to figure out how to do that hundreds of thousands of times, in different jurisdictions, with different ballot styles and different voting materials.'"

https://www.reuters.com/article/fact...-idUSL2N2XJ0OQ

We have fake excuses for voter suppression while scammers make a buck peddling the narrative a la Carlson and the convicted embezzler d'Sousa. That's bad enough but when it undercuts our democracy a la Jan 6th then we need to take a stand.

I'm not arguing about the past election. I just don't like a reliance on mail-in voting. If one doesn't like expanding mail-in voting like myself, they certainly don't like unmanned ballot collection boxes.

This discussion tends to raise the ire of people fixated on January 6. I would have told you the same thing in 2019. I am not even remotely concerned about the results of the 2020 election.

Republicans do benefit from low turnout. However, Democrats benefit from shepherding their voters. The question is how much "shepherding" is too much. As an example when I ordered a mail-in ballot during 2020, I provided my Driver License number. Key words: "I ordered" "Drives License number". Certain requirements seem fairly reasonable and yet still get argued.

[WyattEarp]

Here's a good quote from the Reuters article. It's entirety is worth a read.

"Listing all of the steps needed to falsify a ballot, Gronke told Reuters: '1) You need a falsified ballot with a unique bar code, printed on special paper, and a special envelope. If the claim is that you've somehow obtained 400,000 original ballots without the elections officials or voters knowing, how precisely did you do this?

"2) You need to successfully forge the voter's signature.  3) You need to deposit the envelope and have it validated by a local official.

Congratulations! Besides committing a felony, you have now cast ONE fraudulent ballot. Now you need to figure out how to do that hundreds of thousands of times, in different jurisdictions, with different ballot styles and different voting materials.'"

https://www.reuters.com/article/fact...-idUSL2N2XJ0OQ

We have fake excuses for voter suppression while scammers make a buck peddling the narrative a la Carlson and the convicted embezzler d'Sousa. That's bad enough but when it undercuts our democracy a la Jan 6th then we need to take a stand.

I'm not arguing about the past election. I just don't like a reliance on mail-in voting. If one doesn't like expanding mail-in voting like myself, they certainly don't like unmanned ballot collection boxes.

This discussion tends to raise the ire of people fixated on January 6. I would have told you the same thing in 2019. I am not even remotely concerned about the results of the 2020 election.

Republicans do benefit from low turnout. However, Democrats benefit from shepherding their voters. The question is how much "shepherding" is too much. As an example when I ordered a mail-in ballot during 2020, I provided my Driver License number. Key words: "I ordered" "Drives License number." Certain requirements seem fairly reasonable and yet still get argued.

[Paulie97]

Here's a good quote from the Reuters article. It's entirety is worth a read.

"Listing all of the steps needed to falsify a ballot, Gronke told Reuters: '1) You need a falsified ballot with a unique bar code, printed on special paper, and a special envelope. If the claim is that you've somehow obtained 400,000 original ballots without the elections officials or voters knowing, how precisely did you do this?

"2) You need to successfully forge the voter's signature.  3) You need to deposit the envelope and have it validated by a local official.

Congratulations! Besides committing a felony, you have now cast ONE fraudulent ballot. Now you need to figure out how to do that hundreds of thousands of times, in different jurisdictions, with different ballot styles and different voting materials.'"

https://www.reuters.com/article/fact...-idUSL2N2XJ0OQ

We have fake excuses for voter suppression while scammers make a buck peddling the narrative a la Carlson and the convicted embezzler d'Sousa. That's bad enough but when it undercuts our democracy a la Jan 6th then we need to take a stand.

[WyattEarp]

Every nation other than Russia and Ukraine is at best tangential, and at worst irrelevant.

As I see it, Ukraine's requirements for any kind of cease-fire (or more) would be, at a minimum, Russia's withdrawal to pre-invasion boundaries. I see no indication that's even close to being acceptable to Russia.

Russia apparently believes it can hold out against sanctions and attrition of military resources long enough to seize all of Luhansk, Donetsk, and a land corridor to Crimea. And, from other sources I've recently read, some in Russia believe they can reconstitute their forces enough to make another push at Kyiv.

While Ukraine's thinking, as I understand it, is that they can bend without breaking and, with Western support, continue to grind down Russia's ability to effectively wage war. And, on that front, there are things happening to encourage Ukraine. Putin has failed to call for national mobilization, perhaps fearing backlash or widespread disobedience or avoidance, and Russia has eliminated the upper age limit for military service. Those, and similar developments, indicate that Putin is having a hard time finding soldiers. And any who are recruited today will need to be trained for at least several months before achieving even minimal fighting proficiency.

So, that's a longish way of saying that neither side is anywhere close to believing they need to negotiate. When one side, or both, is sufficiently beaten up, then who the negotiator is, while important, won't be the primary issue..

I actually enjoy your authoritative posts. As I kind of mentioned with another poster, I would be careful delving into the idea that there are some certain outcomes in the aftermath of this war.

I have avoided making definitive statements about where things will end up. You are correct that the Ukraine is fighting an existential war. However, I don't think we want to push Putin and the Russian military into thinking this is an existential war for Russia. I'm not talking about letting the Russians leverage the nuke card for gain. I am talking about driving the Russians to commit to an extended war that never seems to end.

I have no idea how things will end up. If you think the Ukraine will push the Russians out of the Eastern Ukraine / Crimea and the Russians will just pack up, go home and everything will be settled, I would hope for that but I think it is optimistic.

You're right the Ukrainians on the ground, don't care what I think about negotiations. Since this war is impacting the global economy everyone has a stake in it.

As far as a third party broker being tangential, I would disagree and say they can be helpful at times. Obviously the Ukraine and Russia have to both tire of the war and want to pursue a way out, but there are so many levers and so many implications globally I think there are countries that can help. Just the fact that some prominent European leaders were trying to tell Putin on the phone that the war was not going great for him is an act of trying to drive peace negotiations.

[Paulie97]

Based on the swing counties I know. I believe Biden won the election. However, I am also distressed by how lax the Democrats want to make voting standards going forward. I have no problem with moving voting to Sundays, but I have a lot of problems with recent trends towards mail-in voting, unmanned voting boxes and vote harvesting efforts.

You would have to be naive to think that there is a lack of election integrity in some Democratic and Republican cities and counties in the United States. The money in our government is too big for unethical behavior not to follow. The "there's no evidence" line is a cop out. Most people know that you can't detect most voter fraud. And yet, people on both sides have still been convicted over the years..

Then you are "distressed" for no reason. Americans have been voting securely by mail for 150 years. And the FBI and other election security experts aren't distressed don't know what you think you know.

"In a press briefing on election security on Aug. 26, senior FBI officials said they've found no evidence of coordinated fraud with mail-in ballots and also highlighted how unlikely the scenario would be. 'It would be extraordinarily difficult to change a federal election outcome through this type of fraud alone, given the range of processes that would need to be affected or compromised by an adversary at the local level,' the FBI said. ".

https://www.cnet.com/news/politics/m...ble-to-commit/

Read the whole article for details and illustrations.

And you erect and knock down a straw man. No one is saying "no evidence" of fraud, but that it's rare and didn't come remotely close to changing the outcome of the 2020 election. And everyone's shit is together. Even the sham recount by a partisan group in Arizona turned up nothing. Yes we get all the conspiracy theories like 2000 mules, like out of all these "mules" none have loose lips and all are keeping the secret. Then there's the 60+ frivolous lawsuits that never got off the ground. Voter fraud is rare, with Trump's top election security official Chris Krebs calling the last election the most secure in US history. And voter fraud involves a felony and is impractical on an individual basis just to get in an extra vote for a preferred candidate, especially for someone here on a green card that would be deported.

Mail in voting is common in a number of countries, and we have seen plenty of success with it in the US. Conservatives are against it while for a number of ways to make it harder to vote because they are increasingly in the minority and cannot win national elections otherwise. They depend on low turnout. It's a solution without a problem, and we get it with the racist dog whistles and all the focus on and imagery of Hispanics in Arizona and blacks in Georgia and Philadelphia processing ballots, "Birth of a Nation" revisited, nothing new under the sun. That was Trump's calling card from the start, backlash from the first black president, and it continues. It sells and is lucrative. Anyway enjoy a bit more reading, or, if you don't like those, Google is full articles that oppose the ideas you are sympathetic towards. I'm taking a break from the monger forum war and politics for a while as I'm overwhelmed with work responsibilities. Plus I already thoroughly hashed this one out with the conservatives in the American politics forum. Am not up for a rerun, at least not so soon.

https://www.demandthevote.com/truth-about-voter-id

https://news.columbia.edu/in-mail-ab...-vote-election

[Paulie97]

Yeah debunked with leftwing lies.

Yep Bill, like your cohorts you just cry "fake news" and never read the article, nice and easy and requires little brain power. Here's you're guy. See attachment. His his criminality and history of spreading false information is well documented, as is the flawed methodologies, non-sequiturs, and omissions in "2000 Mules." Better luck in 2024. Wink.

https://www.reuters.com/article/fact...-idUSL2N2XJ0OQ

[WyattEarp]

Too bad 60+ frivolous lawsuits were laughed out the door. LOL Better luck in 2024.

P.S. Best wishes on your English language studies.

Based on the swing counties I know. I believe Biden won the election. However, I am also distressed by how lax the Democrats want to make voting standards going forward. I have no problem with moving voting to Sundays, but I have a lot of problems with recent trends towards mail-in voting, unmanned voting boxes and vote harvesting efforts.

You would have to be naive to think that there is a lack of election integrity in some Democratic and Republican cities and counties in the United States. The money in our government is too big for unethical behavior not to follow. The "there's no evidence" line is a cop out. Most people know that you can't detect most voter fraud. And yet, people on both sides have still been convicted over the years.

The Courts really don't want to intervene. They want state and local jurisdictions to get their shit together and keep it that way. Just my two cents.

[Jmsuttr]

From some news source: "Of course we want peace, but we also want our territories back," said Anna Ockmanko, 57, whose house in a small village outside of Kharkiv was destroyed when Russian forces invaded. "If not, then what are we suffering for?

Sad truth is that Ukrainians are suffering as punishment for their stupidity. Stupidity is not always punished in this world, but it usually is, and the punishment is typically severe, because that's the only way to get stupid people to learn. Same as teaching a stupid animal: since stupid animals can't / won't learn by logical reasoning, they have to be beaten silly with a stick until pain finally sinks in and forces them to learn.

Not the first to use following metaphor, but worth repeating over and over. If a robber points a gun at your stomach and says "give me all the money in your wallet", then you are very stupid not to comply, because certainly your life is with more than any amount of money. Yes, complying is cowardly surrender. And? Go back and read this metaphor over and over until you understand, because the alternative is what happens in the preceding paragraph: if you can't learn by reason, including via metaphors, then you will be probably be beaten silly with a stick, so to speak, to force you to learn.

From the Ukrainian perspective, they're fighting for their very lives. It's irrelevant whether you, or anyone else, agrees with that assessment. That's how Ukrainians view the situation and that's why their response is what it is. Using your robber scenario, if you believe (or are sure) that the robber intends to kill you, then you'll resist in any way possible and with all your might. The truly stupid reaction would be to do anything else.

So, to anyone sitting in their comfy chair, observing from a safe distance and opining that Ukraine should be doing this or that, I'm guessing a clear and loud "go fuck yourself" would be the likely Ukrainian response.