Russia

[badgerx16]

10 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

So people against this proposal….what is the alternative you suggest? Keep on fighting with waning us political backing

As stated previously, Trump grows a pair. His problem is that he idolises 'strong' leaders; Putin, Xi, even Kim Jong Un, and likes to view himself as being their peer. The problem is that they are lifelong political animals, and have experience and manipulative skills he will never have.

Edited Friday at 23:28 by badgerx16

[Colinjb]

2 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Very loose and too general to be a policy. Specifically what does this mean and how realistic is this? 

This is a global issue. Russia are bullying a sovereign nation and it's being allowed to happen.

The alternative is Europe and the USA growing a pair.  

I fear your use of the word realistic is appropriate. This doesn't stop here.

[badgerx16]

13 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

 

What do you ultimately think the Ukraine will be able to achieve? There seems to be some pie in the sky thinking that Putin will give up Ukrainian terroritory altogether or just keep crimea. That will never happen so what is the real and realistic solution? It’s easy to criticise but a well balanced alternative wins the day

Ukraine alone cannot acheive much, Ukraine with the right level of international political will can blunt Putin's expansionist amibitions. A well balanced alternative would take back some, if not most, of what Russia has occupied since 2014, and ensure that Russian aggression cannot be aimed at anybody else. Putin must have his claws trimmed, but left with a get out that doesn't embarass him completely.

[Sir Ralph]

5 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Ukraine alone cannot acheive much, Ukraine with the right level of international political will can blunt Putin's expansionist amibitions. A well balanced alternative would take back some, if not most, of what Russia has occupied since 2014, and ensure that Russian aggression cannot be aimed at anybody else. Putin must have his claws trimmed, but left with a get out that doesn't embarass him completely.

Fair response and I agree with most of what you say. I think the question is how robust is the agreement. Personally I think any concession on territory should only be agreed is Ukraine (remaining) becomes part of nato, otherwise no deal

[aintforever]

38 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

So people against this proposal….what is the alternative you suggest? Keep on fighting with waning us political backing

Forcing a deal that doesn’t involve Ukraine handing over more territory and cutting Ukraine’s forces in half would be a start.

Caving in to Russia is only going to cause more problems in the future.

[Sir Ralph]

9 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Forcing a deal that doesn’t involve Ukraine handing over more territory and cutting Ukraine’s forces in half would be a start.

Caving in to Russia is only going to cause more problems in the future.

I agree - I’ve read some more of the heads of terms than the original reports I had seen and actually (hands up) it has elements that are too pro Russian. It’s too weak a deal. Cutting your defence and not being part of nato (if you concede land) are not acceptable. Europe needs to back Zelensky if this is the best offer Trump can get (yes I’ve changed my tone after reading the full HoTs)

Edited Saturday at 00:07 by Sir Ralph

[sadoldgit]

Ukrainians are talking about fighting on with shovels. Kind of puts into perspective the a-hole who is trying to sell them down the river who bottled out of fighting against Communism due to “bone spurs.” 

[Turkish]

15 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Ukrainians are talking about fighting on with shovels. Kind of puts into perspective the a-hole who is trying to sell them down the river who bottled out of fighting against Communism due to “bone spurs.” 

Russians did that nearly 3 years ago

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64855760

kind of puts into perspective how utterly clueless you are about something you’re regularly spouting off about 

[badgerx16]

6 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Ukrainians are talking about fighting on with shovels. Kind of puts into perspective the a-hole who is trying to sell them down the river who bottled out of fighting against Communism due to “bone spurs.” 

 

6 hours ago, Turkish said:

Russians did that nearly 3 years ago

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64855760

kind of puts into perspective how utterly clueless you are about something you’re regularly spouting off about 

Russian soldiers have carried double edged shovels for close quarters combat since WW1. It is standard practice, and the weapon is known as the MPL-50.

Edited Saturday at 06:54 by badgerx16

[egg]

7 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

I agree - I’ve read some more of the heads of terms than the original reports I had seen and actually (hands up) it has elements that are too pro Russian. It’s too weak a deal. Cutting your defence and not being part of nato (if you concede land) are not acceptable. Europe needs to back Zelensky if this is the best offer Trump can get (yes I’ve changed my tone after reading the full HoTs)

Good man. The deal is a shocker, and it's hard to decide what part is worse. The financial aspects are disgraceful though. 

- $100bn of frozen Russian assets invested "in US-led efforts to rebuild and invest in Ukraine", with the US receiving 50% of the profits and Europe adding $100bn in investment for reconstruction, so an American price for involvement, and the EU expected to sink cash in

- there's €200bn in Russia frozen assets. Why not give all to Ukraine....the deal instead says that the rest of those frozen assets would go to a "US-Russian investment vehicle", so Russia would see some of its money come back, but with a financial benefit for the US.

There needs to be a resolution to this, but not that deal. 

[badgerx16]

"A senior member of Russia’s State Duma has dismissed the 28-point peace plan recently proposed by the United States to end the war in Ukraine, describing it as a “provocation” and contrary to Russian interests.

According to The Moscow Times, First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee Alexei Zhuravlyov said that only a full military victory and Ukrainian capitulation could bring a definitive end to the war.

Zhuravlyov argued that Washington’s objective was to preserve Ukraine as a permanent strategic threat to Russia. "

 

https://united24media.com/latest-news/russia-rejects-trumps-peace-plan-says-only-full-military-victory-over-ukraine-is-acceptable-13688

Edited Saturday at 19:33 by badgerx16

[badgerx16]

[Jimmy_D]

On 21/11/2025 at 21:57, egg said:

That's not the reality though. Trump won't allow his deadline to pass, then throw more money and hardware Ukraine's way. 

The horrible reality doesn't go away by saying what Trump should do. 

The west were collectively a disgrace post Crimea, and Trump has taken it to new levels. 

Looks like Russia will let Trump's deadline pass.

Ukraine's options are to let Russia commit genocide, or to do everything to try to stop Russia committing genocide.

It's happened before that Putin has embarrassed Trump, and support for Ukraine has continued, albeit limited as it's been under Trump.

[sadoldgit]

It isn’t just Trump who needs to grow a pair, it is The West. If we all took a much tougher line with Putin from the start we wouldn’t be where we are today. Enough is enough. Call his bluff. He can’t take on the whole of Europe/NATO without the risk of launching WW3 and even he isn’t that crazy.

[egg]

8 hours ago, Jimmy_D said:

Looks like Russia will let Trump's deadline pass.

Ukraine's options are to let Russia commit genocide, or to do everything to try to stop Russia committing genocide.

It's happened before that Putin has embarrassed Trump, and support for Ukraine has continued, albeit limited as it's been under Trump.

Completely different points. Rubio has made it clear that this batshit plan is a US plan. Trump has given Ukraine a deadline to accept that plan. It is unlikely that the US will continue to support Ukraine if it refuses its plan. 

Progress from here is almost impossible imo. If the US succumb to Western common sense, it'd have to counter its own proposal. Russia plainly have high expectations, and Trump has met those expectations with this plan. 

Trump has driven a coach and horses through any realistic prospect of a sensible resolution, and will likely leave any ongoing support to Europe and the rest of the world.

This plan is clearly designed to be on off ramp for the US one way or the other - either Ukraine fold (they won't) or the US walk citing what they'll claim to be Ukrainian unreasonableness. 

[CB Fry]

Interesting/worrying/not surprising 

 

 

[Jimmy_D]

1 hour ago, egg said:

Completely different points. Rubio has made it clear that this batshit plan is a US plan. Trump has given Ukraine a deadline to accept that plan. It is unlikely that the US will continue to support Ukraine if it refuses its plan. 

Progress from here is almost impossible imo. If the US succumb to Western common sense, it'd have to counter its own proposal. Russia plainly have high expectations, and Trump has met those expectations with this plan. 

Trump has driven a coach and horses through any realistic prospect of a sensible resolution, and will likely leave any ongoing support to Europe and the rest of the world.

This plan is clearly designed to be on off ramp for the US one way or the other - either Ukraine fold (they won't) or the US walk citing what they'll claim to be Ukrainian unreasonableness. 

He hasn't though, there's in effect nothing for Ukraine to accept, Russia have already rejected it.

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, egg said:

Completely different points. Rubio has made it clear that this batshit plan is a US plan. 

"A group of US senators say they were told by Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the 28-point peace plan for Ukraine is not an American proposal - that it represents the Russian position and was leaked by a representative for Moscow.

The three senators say they spoke to Rubio on the phone on his way to Geneva, having asked him to clarify how the 28-point peace plan emerged.

One of them, Republican Mike Rounds, who sits on the Senate intelligence committee, said they were concerned the leaked document looked Russian in nature - even including the way it had been written.

The senators say Rubio told them it was not in fact an American proposal, but a Russian plan, leaked by the Russian side, and the Ukrainians would be able to respond to it and negotiate."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c33mv4y2187t

 

[AlexLaw76]

7 minutes ago, Jimmy_D said:

He hasn't though, there's in effect nothing for Ukraine to accept, Russia have already rejected it.

Where is that?

[badgerx16]

1 minute ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Where is that?

He may be referring to this.......

14 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

"A senior member of Russia’s State Duma has dismissed the 28-point peace plan recently proposed by the United States to end the war in Ukraine, describing it as a “provocation” and contrary to Russian interests.

According to The Moscow Times, First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee Alexei Zhuravlyov said that only a full military victory and Ukrainian capitulation could bring a definitive end to the war.

Zhuravlyov argued that Washington’s objective was to preserve Ukraine as a permanent strategic threat to Russia. "

 

https://united24media.com/latest-news/russia-rejects-trumps-peace-plan-says-only-full-military-victory-over-ukraine-is-acceptable-13688

 

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, badgerx16 said:

He may be referring to this.......

 

Does that equate to 'Russia' rejecting the proposal?

[badgerx16]

7 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Does that equate to 'Russia' rejecting the proposal?

If you put all the conspiracy theories together you would be forced to ask why the Russians would reject their own plan.

Maybe Nic could explain, he is the forum conspiracy expert.

[Jimmy_D]

24 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

If you put all the conspiracy theories together you would be forced to ask why the Russians would reject their own plan.

Maybe Nic could explain, he is the forum conspiracy expert.

My guess, Trump is desperate for this war to end by any means possible so he can say he ended it, because he thinks it'll mean he gets a Nobel Peace Prize like Obama got.

I'd guess The US have taken Russia's position, adjusted it with the bare minimum they think they can surrender to on Ukraine's behalf, so they have to negotiate with Russia as little as possible, still ended up with something that's not acceptable to Russia, and of course something that could never be accepted by Ukraine either.

[egg]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

"A group of US senators say they were told by Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the 28-point peace plan for Ukraine is not an American proposal - that it represents the Russian position and was leaked by a representative for Moscow.

The three senators say they spoke to Rubio on the phone on his way to Geneva, having asked him to clarify how the 28-point peace plan emerged.

One of them, Republican Mike Rounds, who sits on the Senate intelligence committee, said they were concerned the leaked document looked Russian in nature - even including the way it had been written.

The senators say Rubio told them it was not in fact an American proposal, but a Russian plan, leaked by the Russian side, and the Ukrainians would be able to respond to it and negotiate."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c33mv4y2187t

 

I've seen that claim. The US position is that the plan is theirs and was drawn by them.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c33mv4y2187t?post=asset%3A1597c28d-6c60-4bd1-b015-6e596e4ee5f7#post

 

[badgerx16]

The Russians are saying that the updated plan will be "less favourable to Russia".

[sadoldgit]

So we are bouncing from a Russian wish list back to an Ukraine wish list again. There was no way that Ukraine were going to agree to the latest plan out before them, not that Trump had any interest in the details. He just wants this off his desk and to use to get his converted peace prize.

This will only work if Trump puts serious pressure on Putin, as the aggressor. He seems unwilling to do so and it looks highly likely that we are in for even more rinse and repeat peace plans until he either grows a pair or croaks.

[AlexLaw76]

3 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

So we are bouncing from a Russian wish list back to an Ukraine wish list again. There was no way that Ukraine were going to agree to the latest plan out before them, not that Trump had any interest in the details. He just wants this off his desk and to use to get his converted peace prize.

This will only work if Trump puts serious pressure on Putin, as the aggressor. He seems unwilling to do so and it looks highly likely that we are in for even more rinse and repeat peace plans until he either grows a pair or croaks.

Why is it all on the USA to sort out Europes mess?

for a long time now they have grown increasingly tired of our part of the world

Edited 2 hours ago by AlexLaw76

[whelk]

18 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Why is it all on the USA to sort out Europes mess?

for a long time now they have grown increasingly tired of our part of the world

You keep banging on about this. How about looking into some history and educating yourself rather than keep pedalling this fatuous line. Lots of documentaries if you don’t like books

[AlexLaw76]

7 minutes ago, whelk said:

You keep banging on about this. How about looking into some history and educating yourself rather than keep pedalling this fatuous line. Lots of documentaries if you don’t like books

I am read up on it, thanks.

 

[sadoldgit]

29 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Why is it all on the USA to sort out Europes mess?

for a long time now they have grown increasingly tired of our part of the world

Why did the USA get involved in North Korea and Vietnam? Why did the USA (once upon a time, not now of course) take such a strong stand about the spread of Communism?

Why are they still supporting Israel so staunchly if they are getting fed up with our part of the world?

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I am read up on it, thanks.

 

Surprised such simple questions seem to baffle you then

[sadoldgit]

3 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I am read up on it, thanks.

 

From Putin’s own library?

[AlexLaw76]

1 minute ago, whelk said:

Surprised such simple questions seem to baffle you then

Nice reply, 

bit rich give I have been more accurate about the entire situation since the start, compared to nearly all on this.

but hey, anyone who does not follow your view, train of thought or understanding is thick cunt.

which is to be expected as the Forum Sgt Major.

Edited 1 hour ago by AlexLaw76

[whelk]

3 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Nice reply, 

bit rich give I have been more accurate about the entire situation since the start, compared to nearly all on this.

but hey, anyone who does not follow your view, train of thought or understanding is thick cunt.

which is to be expected as the Forum Sgt Major.

The world order is what it is and the US have always been interested in involving themselves spending billions to influence and destabilise in the name of democracy.  That has been the norm and the UK and other western nations have largely supported them. 
Agree that that our over reliance needs to change but until recent US Administrations there was no reason to think differently. 
UK didn't shrug and say ‘why should we?’ when US wanted our support in Afghanistan or Iraq. 

[whelk]

10 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

which is to be expected as the Forum Sgt Major

😀 ChatGPT said I was funny

[AlexLaw76]

10 minutes ago, whelk said:

😀 ChatGPT said I was funny

To be fair, much of the time you are 

🙈😂👍

[badgerx16]

What is surprising is that the US got involved pretty much from day 1. They usually wait at least 2 years.