Stupid Shit in Kyiv

[QUOTE=Questner;2986654][URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SkW1JnYnas[/URL]

[b]Given the trajectory[/b] at the front, the POTUS should act fast to prevent a possible outcome of the collapse of the AFU, that is the direct conflict in Europe. He should learn from the marxist axiom, 'Yesterday it was too soon, tomorrow it will be late'.[/QUOTE]How are things in Toretsk that your glorious Second Army in Ukraine "captured" on Feb 7?

Pokrovsk -- you promised to "liberate" it by the NYE 2024, no?

Kyiv in three days? Kursk in three days? Sudja in three days?

How's it all going? LOL.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2986655]Gee, Tiny, be careful, you only have one heart. Stop worrying about Europeans, at least. They aren't using more coal than before. The US exported LNG has replaced Russian gas, and solar panels have replaced coal. Sure they still have issues, but one issue they don't seem to have anymore is their total dependence on Russian Failed Fascist Mafia State.

[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/03/business/ukraine-russia-energy-europe.html[/URL]

Sleep well tonight.[/QUOTE]You're right Xpartan! From Eurostat, consumption of coal in Europe was up in 2022, but it probably dropped in 2023! (Only estimates are available for 2023 right now.).

Edit: But from your NYT article the LNG is going to cost out the gazoo! Children in Europe are going to go to bed hungry because of the high cost of LNG! I'm NOT going to sleep well tonight. So thanks for nothing!

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2986651]Aside from your clearly misleading narrative (the fact that Vance INTENTIONALLY and repeatedly provoked Zelensky is clear as day if you really watched the video), what you're basically saying is that Zelensky should've thrown the fight to Putin. There is no other way to read your Pulp Fiction allusion.

What a humanitarian you are.[/QUOTE]You're reading that wrong, probably intentionally. The analogy clearly applied to the press conference, and it applied to both Zelensky and Vance.

Zelensky should have done his darnedest to avoid disagreeing with Trump, even when he knew what was coming out of Trump's mouth was fiction. And he should have done it with a smile, in the Ukrainian language. And because he didn't, he's increased the probability more people will die and get butt fucked.

He didn't have to agree to anything. He just needed to kiss Trump's ass, and let his diplomatic corps do its job. That is, get the best deal they could for Ukraine. Or alternately maybe he can stand on principle and continue the war without U.S. help. [b] To the last Ukrainian. [/b]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2986670]You're reading that wrong, probably intentionally. The analogy clearly applied to the press conference, and it applied to both Zelensky and Vance.

Zelensky should have done his darnedest to avoid disagreeing with Trump, even when he knew what was coming out of Trump's mouth was fiction. And he should have done it with a smile, in the Ukrainian language. And because he didn't, he's increased the probability more people will die and get butt fucked.

He didn't have to agree to anything. He just needed to kiss Trump's ass, and let his diplomatic corps do its job. That is, get the best deal they could for Ukraine. Or alternately maybe he can stand on principle and continue the war without U.S. help. [b] To the last Ukrainian. [/b][/QUOTE]"To the last Ukrainian" is a mantra of your BFF and paid Russian propacondom BlahRed. Good job, you learn fast!

Now let's move on.

1. Zelensky refused to kiss Putin's ass when everyone told him to; he refused to leave Kyiv when everyone was giving him 3 days; he sure as fuck won't kiss Trump's ass now. What you stubbornly fail to understand, Zelensky is a head of a state, not a minion of those two MF-ers. If he kisses Trump's ass, it's the same as Ukraine kisses Trump's ass. That's not going to happen.

2. What you INTENTIONALLY refuse to see is that Trump had already made his choice. He's with Russia, Russia, Russia now. Whether Zelensky kissed his wrinkly, traitorous ass or not, it wouldn't have any bearings on whatever Trump does next. If Zelensky DID kiss his ass, as, I'm sure, many other ass-kissers suggested, he would be remembered as a man who kissed the mafia Don's ass and still got fucked later.

3. Your allusion clearly stipulates that it was Zelensky's fault, and his fault alone. How does it apply to Vance? Maybe re-read what you wrote if you didn't mean it that way.

However, if you really, truly believe that Vance and Trump went into this meeting without a firm intention to make a scene -- boy, do I have so many bridges to sell you!

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2986670]You're reading that wrong, probably intentionally. The analogy clearly applied to the press conference, and it applied to both Zelensky and Vance.

Zelensky should have done his darnedest to avoid disagreeing with Trump, even when he knew what was coming out of Trump's mouth was fiction. And he should have done it with a smile, in the Ukrainian language. And because he didn't, he's increased the probability more people will die and get butt fucked.

He didn't have to agree to anything. He just needed to kiss Trump's ass, and let his diplomatic corps do its job. That is, get the best deal they could for Ukraine. Or alternately maybe he can stand on principle and continue the war without U.S. help. [b] To the last Ukrainian. [/b][/QUOTE]I watched the whole thing a few times (and I don't mean the 10 juicy mins, but the whole presser which lasted more than an hour). Zelensky started it when he was rude to Vance by calling him JD and was condescending towards him. He can disagree with Vance but not in a disrespectful manner. Then he tried to use his usual nonsense fear mongering by implying that Russia will come after them next which is absolute nonsense. Russia is only interested in the Russian speaking parts of Eastern Ukraine, not even western Ukraine, much less western Europe.

Then Zelensky mocked Trump with the 'Putin said he will take Ukraine in 3 days' (a lie, Putin never said that, it was General Mark Milley the former USA CJCS) and was very disrespectful. That was the last straw. Trump had enough, and the rest is history. Zelensky showed that he has a very low EQ. I was actually shocked by his arrogance and belligerence. I also think Trump was extremely arrogant and humiliated Zelensky. And as a result, all of Ukraine. Almost like 'listen, you are my servant, you better shut the fuck up or get the fuck out'. And that's exactly what he did, he kicked Zelensky out! Well deserved too. The sooner Ukraine is rid of this scumbag, the better off it will be, I truly believe that.

[QUOTE=Questner;2986654][URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SkW1JnYnas[/URL]

Given the trajectory at the front, the POTUS should act fast to prevent a possible outcome of the collapse of the AFU, that is the direct conflict in Europe. He should learn from the marxist axiom, 'Yesterday it was too soon, tomorrow it will be late'.[/QUOTE]It is pretty clear to me Zelensky and the European leaders do not want peace, and Russia and the USA do. So the USA is going to go back on its aid and Russia is going to grab more territory. That is a done deal.

The MAGA and Democrat douche responses were pro and anti Trump and predictable. What has changed is Zelensky has lost support among Republican Congressmen. Lindsay Graham was supportive of Zelnsky but is not now. Graham said, "What I saw in the Oval office was disrespectful and I don't know if we can ever do business with Zelenskyy again. " And Republicans in the House and Senate are dead set against giving anything to Ukraine. SEN. ROGER MARSHALL of Kansas said: "Not another penny. " And with Republcians in control of the House, Senate, and Presidency, Zelensky is getting nothing now.

He is going to have grovel like never before, and Trump is going to make him wait and feel the consequences of how stupid he was. Whatever deal Zelensky was asked to sign before, the conditions now are going to be way worse for Ukraine. You can count on that.

[QUOTE=Questner;2986654]It's still unclear to me in the context of the latest visit, why Mr. Putin is said to renege on the ceasefire agreements? On the contrary, he keeps his word. The position of the RF in the period before the SMO always was that Russia is not part of the conflict between Ukrainian government in Kiev and Donbass. This position was repeated in 2021 during the meeting with P. Biden: the only connection was the signature under Minsk agreements. Recall, in autumn of 2021 the Ukrainian government was parading its position not to implement those agreements and choose Plan be, that is the forceful solution to the conflict. It was that time when the US and EU flooded the country with weaponry and financial support.
[/QUOTE]Yeah, I wanted a balance story on the Minsk accords. Most were the typical it is all Russia's fault, but I found this one that I felt was balanced. It is a Marxist site but I found they described the history of what went out pretty accurate.

[URL]https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/12/22/ffci-d22.html[/URL]

So the article starts with an accurate description of Putin: The Putin regime represents the interests of the Russian oligarchs who looted the Soviet Union's socialised property and are at war with the Russian working class.

So yeah, the whole Russia is bad, they always break agreements, and Ukraine is great is just more bullshit.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2986835]It is pretty clear to me Zelensky and the European leaders do not want peace, and Russia and the USA do.[/QUOTE]Come on man. They do want peace! It's just that they don't want peace at any price! That means it needs to be a peace that preserves and protects Ukraine's sovereignty as a nation. Why is that so hard for you people to understand? I don't disagree with Trump that the United States ought to get something back for helping Ukraine. Zelensky was ready to sign the rare earths mineral deal, but he needs to know that Ukraine is going to be both supported and defended if the Russians renege on peace and attack Ukraine again. Saying that Ukraine started this war and now doesn't want peace is just plain ignorant! I mean if it was you and your country what would you do? Just sign anything that leaves the door open for Russia to attack again? Put a deal on the table that preserves and protects Ukraine's sovereignty into the future, and the Ukrainians will sign it. None of the signatures on the documents will be worth the paper they're written on though if the West isn't prepared to stand up to Russia if they don't keep their word, which with Putin we know the probability of that happening is high. Putin has to know that if he attacks again, the next time he will have to pay an even greater price for his transgressions.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2986717]2. What you INTENTIONALLY refuse to see is that Trump had already made his choice. He's with Russia, Russia, Russia now. Whether Zelensky kissed his wrinkly, traitorous ass or not, it wouldn't have any bearings on whatever Trump does next. If Zelensky DID kiss his ass, as, I'm sure, many other ass-kissers suggested, he would be remembered as a man who kissed the mafia Don's ass and still got fucked later.

3. Your allusion clearly stipulates that it was Zelensky's fault, and his fault alone. How does it apply to Vance? Maybe re-read what you wrote if you didn't mean it that way.

However, if you really, truly believe that Vance and Trump went into this meeting without a firm intention to make a scene -- boy, do I have so many bridges to sell you![/QUOTE]Read the first sentence in your post #3924, where you quoted me, "[B]Like Vance,[/B] he didn't know when to keep his mouth shut, when to put his pride aside. " You should listen to the whole press conference, all 50 minutes of it, like Elvis, Blood Red and I have. You see Trump swallowing his pride during the first 40 minutes or so, and not challenging Zelensky. That didn't happen until after Vance chimed in, after Trump was trying to wind up the press conference.

Winston S. Churchill, probably referring to conversations with the president before the USA entered the war, said "No lover ever studied every whim of his mistress as I did those of President Roosevelt. " That's what Zelensky would have done if he were wise, instead of arguing and sitting cross armed.

Trump said the group will take one more question. Then Zelensky piped up out of nowhere and told Vance he had a question for him. That would indicate that Vance and Trump went into the meeting without the intention of making a scene. If Zelensky would have kept quiet, instead of trying to debate Vance and Trump in his third language, this probably never would have happened.

But continue on with your idealism if it makes you feel happy or morally superior. Hopefully the people in charge won't continue this war [B]to the last Ukrainian.[/B].

[QUOTE=BloodRed;2986765]I watched the whole thing a few times (and I don't mean the 10 juicy mins, but the whole presser which lasted more than an hour). Zelensky started it when he was rude to Vance by calling him JD and was condescending towards him. He can disagree with Vance but not in a disrespectful manner. Then he tried to use his usual nonsense fear mongering by implying that Russia will come after them next which is absolute nonsense. Russia is only interested in the Russian speaking parts of Eastern Ukraine, not even western Ukraine, much less western Europe.

Then Zelensky mocked Trump with the 'Putin said he will take Ukraine in 3 days' (a lie, Putin never said that, it was General Mark Milley the former USA CJCS) and was very disrespectful. That was the last straw. Trump had enough, and the rest is history. Zelensky showed that he has a very low EQ. I was actually shocked by his arrogance and belligerence. I also think Trump was extremely arrogant and humiliated Zelensky. And as a result, all of Ukraine. Almost like 'listen, you are my servant, you better shut the fuck up or get the fuck out'. And that's exactly what he did, he kicked Zelensky out! Well deserved too. The sooner Ukraine is rid of this scumbag, the better off it will be, I truly believe that.[/QUOTE]After viewing the whole exchange, admittedly only once, I believe a big part of the problem was that Trump and Vance, for for that matter probably Rubio, Waltz and others, didn't believe Zelensky was willing to accept conditions that would be necessary for a ceasefire. My thought that this was a travesty has mellowed. Perhaps this was the kick in the pants Zelensky and other Ukrainian power brokers needed to get serious about ending this.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2986665]What about them? You have any facts you'd like to discuss? Any specifics? Anything? Shoot.

And what's stopping you from listening to the Russian side? Seriously, you've got your Tucker, you've got your Questner, you've got your RedBlood, you've got your RT and Sputnik if everything else fails for some reasons. Finally, you've had all Russian sources on the web you can translate with one mouse click.

I mean all those mouthpieces will feed you enough Russian lies to last a lifetime. What are you whining about?[/QUOTE]Okay, let us start with an easy one. Was I making it up when Victoria Nuland was picking who was going to run Ukraine in 2014? Did I make it up when Nuland was told the EU wanted a different leader than the one she chose and said "Fuck the EU"?

[URL]https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/us-envoy-says-f-k-the-eu-in-leaked-recording/[/URL]

Nuland said she did not think that Klitschko should be in government. She said that "Yatse", meaning Yatsenyuk, "is the guy" to be prime minister, while Klitschko, from the outside, should keep the unity of the opposition. Klitscko working under Yatsenyuk is not going to work, she said.

I find it curious how Democratic officials are so interested in propping up Ukrainian leaders. Biden gets a prosecutor fired who is investigating his son, and there is this. Are you willing to fess up now and admit you were wrong about Nuland?

As for Zelensky's claim that Putin is always breaking cease fires, there was an article I linked that I felt was balanced. I have not fact checked all that it said, but I found it very credible with the history of this conflict. [URL]https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/12/22/ffci-d22.html[/URL].

Merkel has made few public statements since she was replaced as chancellor by Olaf Scholz in Germany a year ago, after sixteen years in office. The extensive interview published by Die Zeit on December 7 is a rare exception.

All the more remarkable is her admission that the Minsk agreement served to buy time for Ukraine's rearmament. "It was clear to all of us that this was a frozen conflict, that the problem had not been solved, but that is precisely what gave Ukraine valuable time," Merkel told Die Zeit.

Previously, the Minsk agreement, which Merkel signed together with then-French President Franois Hollande, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and Russian President Vladimir Putin in September 2014, had been portrayed as an effort towards peace that the Russian president had allegedly later thwarted.

Now, Merkel confirms that NATO wanted war from the start but needed time to prepare militarily.

Just two months after Merkel's third government took office, the US and Germany organized a coup in Ukraine in February 2014 that used fascist militias to help a pro-NATO regime come to power. Washington and Berlin had a problem, however. The dominant role played in the new regime by right-wing nationalists, admirers of Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, and fascist militias divided the country. Especially in the majority Russian-speaking east, where the prospect of being ruled by Ukrainian ultranationalists was met with horror.

Russia, fearing for its Black Sea fleet base in Sevastopol, annexed Crimea with the help of a referendum. Russian-backed separatists proclaimed independent republics in Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine.

The new rulers in Kiev were unable to prevent this. The Ukrainian army had fallen apart. Soldiers unwilling to sacrifice themselves for the new regime had deserted en masse.

Under these circumstances, Merkel and Hollande organized the Minsk agreementas Merkel now admitsto freeze the conflict and buy time. The agreement included a cease-fire, the withdrawal of heavy weapons, and the establishment of a security zone, monitored by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The Ukrainian government pledged to amend the constitution to allow special status for Donetsk and Luhansk and grant them greater autonomy.

Hardly any of this was ever implemented. In particular, the Ukrainian side boycotted all agreements. It did not want a negotiated settlement. Lacking soldiers ready to fight, the newly installed President Petro Poroshenko mobilized the Azov battalion and other fascist militias, which the billionaire oligarch partly financed from his own assets. They were integrated into the armed forces and sent into the breakaway regions to terrorize the local population and keep the conflict going.

The regime in Kievwhether under Poroshenko or his successor Zelenskyand its backers in Berlin and Washington, were never interested in a peaceful solution. They were interested in buying time to escalate the wareven if this had disastrous consequences for the population of the affected areas.

The German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), which is close to the German government and has no sympathy for Russia, published a paper "The Donbas Conflict" in February 2019 three years before the current war broke out. It paints a devastating picture, which makes clear that the regime in Kiev has always been concerned with geopolitical goals in the Donbas conflictlinking up with NATO, isolating Russiaand that it was willing to ruthlessly sacrifice the fate of the Ukrainian population to these goals.

End of link. I am not sure I buy all that was written but go ahead and tear it up. I am not saying all in the article is right, but I thought it was more accurate than the Ukraine good, Russia bad nonsense the MSM and Zelensky are pushing.

Tiny, it was a fucking disaster, although quite a show, no matter which way you slice it. I saw it live and I could not believe what I was seeing. Of course Ukraine's security concerns are real. Nobody trusts Putin, a cold blooded murderer, but these concerns should have been voiced in private, not in front of the world in the White House. I score it Ukraine -5, the USA -1. 5, and Putin +2. Zelensky obviously fucked up, maybe he was jet lagged, but I assume the rift will only be temporary unless the Z man is interested in committing national suicide and losing another million or so of his people over the next few years.

Check out Victor Davis Hanson's observations:

"Friday's extraordinary Oval Office meeting between President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy went off the rails, leaving hopes for a USA -brokered peace deal between Russia and Ukraine in question. Here are some reasons why things went wrong, and where it leaves efforts to end the war.

1. Zelenskyy does not grasp or deliberately ignores the bitter truth: Those with whom he feels most affinity (Western globalists, the American Left, the Europeans) have little power in 2025 to help him. And those whom he obviously does not like or seeks to embarrass (as with his Scranton, Penn. Campaign-like visit in September 2024) alone have the power to save him. For his own sake, I hope he is not being "briefed" by the Obama-Clinton-Biden gang to confront Trump, given their interests are not really Ukraine's as they feign.

2. Zelenskyy acts as if his agenda and ours are identical. So, he keeps insisting that he is fighting for us despite our two-ocean-distance that he mocks. We do have many shared interests with Ukraine, but not all by any means: Trump wants to "reset" with Russia and triangulate it against China. He seeks to avoid a 1962 DEFCON 2-like crisis over a proxy showdown in proximity to a nuclear rival. And he sincerely wants to end the deadlocked Stalingrad slaughterhouse for everyone's sake.

3. The Europeans (and Canada) are now talking loudly of a new muscular antithesis, independent of the USA Promises, promisesgiven that would require Europeans to prune back their social welfare state, frack, use nuclear, stop the green obsession, and spend 3-5% of their GDP on defense. The USA Does not just pay 16% of NATO's budget, but also puts up with asymmetrical tariffs that result in a European Union trade surplus of $160 billion, plays the world cop, patrolling sea-lanes and deterring terrorists and rogue states that otherwise might interrupt Europe's commercial networks abroad, as well as de facto including Europe under a nuclear umbrella of 6,500 nukes.

4. Zelenskyy must know that all of the once-deal-breaking impediments to peace have been settled. Ukraine is now better armed than most NATO nations, but will not be in NATO, and no president has or will ever supply Ukraine with the armed wherewithal to take back the Donbass and Crimea. So, the only two issues are a) how far will Putin be willing to withdraw to his 2022 borders and b) how will he be deterred? The first is answered by a commercial sector / tripwire, joint Ukrainian-US-Europe resource development corridor in Eastern Ukraine, coupled with a Korea-like DMZ; the second by the fact that Putin, unlike his 2008 and 2014 invasions, has now incurred a million dead and wounded to a Ukraine that will remain thusly armed.

5. What are Zelenskyy's alternatives without much USA Helpwait for a return of the Democrats to the White House in four years? Hope for a rearmed Europe? Pray for a Democratic House and a third Vindman-like engineered Trump impeachment? Or swallow his pride, return to the White House, sign the rare-earth minerals deal, invite in the Euros (are they seriously willing to patrol a DMZ? And hope Trump can warn Putin, as he did successfully between 2017-21, not to dare try it again?

6. If there is a cease-fire, a commercial deal, a Euro ground presence, and influx of Western companies into Ukraine, would there be elections? And if so, would Zelenskyy and his party win? And if not, would there be a successor transparent government that would reveal exactly where all the Western financial aid money went?

7. Zelenskyy might see a model in Netanyahu. The Biden Administration was far harder on him than Trump is on Ukraine, suspending arms shipments, demanding cease-fires, prodding for a wartime, bipartisan cabinet, hammering Israel on collateral damagenone of which Westerners have demanded of Zelenskyy. Yet Netanyahu managed a hostile President Biden, kept Israel close to its patron, and, when visiting, was gracious to his host. Netanyahu certainly would never before the global media have interrupted and berated a host and patron president in the White House.

8. If Ukraine has alienated the USA, what then is its strategic victory plan? Wait around for more Euros? Hold off an increasingly invigorated Russian military? Cede more territory? What, then, exactly are Zelenskyy's cards he seems to think form a winning hand?

9. If one views carefully all the 50-minute tape, most of it was going quite welluntil Zelenskyy started correcting Vance firstly, and Trump secondly. By Ukraine-splaining to his hosts, and by his gestures, tone, and interruptions, he made it clear that he assumed that Trump was just more of the same compliant, clueless moneybags Biden waxen effigy. And that was nave for such a supposedly worldly leader.

10. March 2025 is not March 2022, after the heroic saving of Kyivbut three years and 1. 5 million dead and wounded later. Zelenskyy is no longer the international heartthrob with the glamorous entourage. He has postponed elections, outlawed opposition media and parties, suspended habeas corpus and walked out of negotiations when he had an even hand in spring 2022 and apparently even now when he does not in spring 2025.

Quo vadis, Volodymyr?

Do you believe developments over the last 72 hours could actually be positive? It looks like Europe and Ukraine are coming up with a proposal for terms for a ceasefire. And Russia and the USA will probably do the same. Perhaps that makes sense. If you have Putin and Zelensky or their subordinates in the same room, they'd likely be at each others throats.

After the breakdown in Washington maybe Zelensky will become more realistic about terms for a ceasefire. And presumably Zelensky and the Europeans will put together a proposal for security guarantees, backed up by European troops on the ground, that would make the Ukrainians feel secure.

Russia's got to want to see relations with the world return to normal, and must be getting a whiff of what that would be like in discussions with the Trump administration about renewing direct air service and the like.

What do you think?

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2986866]Read the first sentence in your post #3924, where you quoted me, "[B]Like Vance,[/B] he didn't know when to keep his mouth shut, when to put his pride aside. " You should listen to the whole press conference, all 50 minutes of it, like Elvis, Blood Red and I have. You see Trump swallowing his pride during the first 40 minutes or so, and not challenging Zelensky. That didn't happen until after Vance chimed in, after Trump was trying to wind up the press conference.[/QUOTE]Pride? What pride? Trump's? The only thing Trump swallowed was cum leftovers on the back of his throat from blowing Putin over and over again.

Vance? The living and breathing lump of dung? The one who called him American Hitler before crawling back to his new owner for docile servitude? That Vance?

Tell me if you will: How did Zelensky offend Trump? By calling Putin a murderer and terrorist? By stating that he must pay for his crimes? By suggesting that he pays reparation for the extreme damage and loss of lives he instilled on his country? That offended Trump? Wow!

That said, I came here bearing a gift.

I did re-watch this astonishing disgrace again, and I'll give you two concessions.

1. Zelensky shouldn't have addressed Vance directly. That was definitely a mistake. He just should've expressed his opinions by talking to the media.

2. he should've spoken via the interpreter the whole time. His English is much better now than it was in 2022, but talking in his native tongue would've helped him under the sustained attack from two vicious assholes. Then again, he didn't expect an ambush.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2986866]Winston S. Churchill, probably referring to conversations with the president before the USA entered the war, said "No lover ever studied every whim of his mistress as I did those of President Roosevelt. " That's what Zelensky would have done if he were wise, instead of arguing and sitting cross armed.[/QUOTE]But that's exactly what Zelensky had done since Trump won the election. Thanking him profusely (for NOTHING by the way) on all and every occasion, smiling to the man who had wronged him for years at every turn, who'd already called him a dictator and blamed HIM, not Putin for the war.

Of course, Roosevelt never berated his allies, so we don't know if Churchill would've argued or sat "cross armed", if he had. Churchill, from what I've read, had an explosive personality, and I don't see him taking it up his ass from a scum like Trump. Actually, I think with Churchill things could've gone physical.

BTW, your bringing up Churchill is very unfortunate. Not only is it insulting to compare a titan like Roosevelt to the utter piece of shit we're having in the WH today, but please do some reading on how respectfully Churchill and Roosevelt were treating their ally De Gaulle despite hating his guts.

You're simply don't do something like this to your allies. Of course, when your ally is a dictator and war criminal, all bets are off.

[QUOTE=BloodRed;2986765]I watched the whole thing a few times (and I don't mean the 10 juicy mins, but the whole presser which lasted more than an hour).[/QUOTE]Now THAT I believe. But here's the real question: are you and your comrades Scotch people or Champaign people, or both? And did the management provide the booze or did you pool your own resources? I mean, that was your personal Victory Day, wasn't it?

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2986889]Do you believe developments over the last 72 hours could actually be positive? It looks like Europe and Ukraine are coming up with a proposal for terms for a ceasefire. And Russia and the USA will probably do the same. Perhaps that makes sense. If you have Putin and Zelensky or their subordinates in the same room, they'd likely be at each others throats.

After the breakdown in Washington maybe Zelensky will become more realistic about terms for a ceasefire. And presumably Zelensky and the Europeans will put together a proposal for security guarantees, backed up by European troops on the ground, that would make the Ukrainians feel secure.

Russia's got to want to see relations with the world return to normal, and must be getting a whiff of what that would be like in discussions with the Trump administration about renewing direct air service and the like.

What do you think?[/QUOTE]And this man calls me an idealist!

Putin couldn't be happier with Russia at war and his power unchallenged. His only concern now is a rapidly deteriorating economy, but he has Trump to fix it.

Putin will only stop when he can't fight any longer, which would happen THIS YEAR if a different president took the WH. Since that's not what happened, his errand boy will finish the destructions of the US Defense sector, put a stop to all Ukraine military assistance, degrade the Nato capabilities, remove the most important economic sanctions (and pressure Europe to do the same), and start cooperating with Russia on joint economic programs. With the economic blockade broken, there are no incentives for Putin to stop the war other than on their terms, which means Ukraine's capitulation.

It must feel like Christmas in Kremlin.

And man, how I wish to be wrong, but, unfortunately, [B]I've been 100% right about everything regarding Trump so far[/B] (go ahead and check my old posts! And I don't see that changing. The only weak hope for Ukraine now is if Dems flip the Congress in 2028, but by then, Trump and his minions will have been totally entrenched.