And Putin got rid one of his most effective commanders in the war.
Posted on 05/08/2024 3:41:23 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
As the West struggles to define its strategy in Ukraine, politicians on both sides of the Atlantic have long insisted that the only path to a “just and lasting peace” is to support Ukraine until Russia unconditionally admits defeat. They dismiss calls for a negotiated settlement as naive, dangerous and futile, claiming that Russian President Vladimir Putin will not relent unless stopped by force of arms — Ukrainian or otherwise.
More than two years into the conflict, Western leaders remain unfazed in their commitment to Russian military defeat, even as the fighting tilts decidedly in Moscow’s favor. The West’s continued lack of interest in feeling out the Kremlin’s terms for ending the war was jarring even in 2022, considering Russia’s massive advantage in all relevant indicators of military power. It is all the more boggling today in light of Ukraine’s substantially worse and rapidly deteriorating position.
This persistent belief that there was never a diplomatic path to peace in Ukraine is inconsistent with the facts and functions as a self-imposed constraint forcing Western governments to double down on unsustainable and counterproductive war aims.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Complete lie, there was NO "peace deal".
The ONLY agreement was that Ukraine agreed to neutrality IF a major western power gave security guarantees, which was never going to happen.
🧵THE DEAL THAT NEVER WAS
How Russia sought to subjugate Ukraine, the West rightly refused to play the ball, and Putin became personally responsible for the failure of the Ukrainian-Russian talks
Recent days have seen a renewed debate over the Ukrainian-Russian peace talks of spring of 2022. The popular wisdom says that both sides were close to an agreement, but this is simply false. Let's finally unpack it, dyspel the myths and put a stop to the manipulation that abound
FIRST, there was never any single deal that could have ended the war. What is simplistically presented as a deal was meant to combine at least three components - multilateral treaty on the status of Ukraine, bilateral Ukraine-Russia agreement, underpinned by Western guarantees
The Ukrainian-Russian talks were barely one piece of a larger puzzle, and only the whole package agreed upon could have brought this war to an end. Since the talks already stalled over the first piece of the puzzle, a diplomatic end to the war was never really within reach
SECOND, there was not even consensus between Ukraine and Russia as to what was really discussed. Ukraine insisted that the talks concerned the future status of Ukraine only, Russia - that a comprehensive agreement is negotiated, including the settlement of bilateral issues
This is an extremely important detail, which is usually overlooked. All along, Ukraine underlined that bilateral issues are to be excluded from the multilateral treaty on the status of Ukraine, and are supposed to be the subject of separate talks between Zelensky and Putin
And since there was no agreement between Ukraine and Russia on what was really to be discussed between the respective delegations, there was no further agreement on what would be potentially discussed between Zelensky and Putin either
Zelensky expected his potential meeting with Putin to be serious negotiations on key bilateral points (Russian troops withdrawal, territorial issues). While Putin kept insisting that he would agree for any meeting only for Zelensky to sign "a peace agreement"
For this reason, there was absolutely no agreement between Ukraine and Russia on either the mechanism for the withdrawal of the Russian troops, the territorial questions, the sequence of implementation of the arrangements, or even in what format these arrangements should be made Ukraine consistently maintained that territorial issues were to be agreed upon before a multilateral treaty on Ukraine's status would enter into force. Russia maintained that the Russian troops would remain on the Ukrainian territory until Ukraine fully implemented the treaty
THIRD, even in terms of Ukraine's future status the two sides did not reach understanding on most aspects. Not even details of Ukraine's neutrality were completely agreed upon, let alone the status and the size of the Ukrainian army
It is not also true that Russia agreed to Ukraine's accession to the EU. It expressed its consent in principle, but subject to conditions that Ukraine rejected, pointing out that other neutral countries that are members of the EU did not have to meet them to be considered neutral
In fact, the only issue on which Ukraine indeed reached a provisional agreement with Russia was that Ukraine would agree to its neutral status, but in exchange for international security guarantees from the Western countries. Which now brings me to the puzzle no.3
For a multilateral treaty on the status of Ukraine to enter into force whatsoever, Ukraine had to obtain security guarantees from its biggest Western partners. Yet this was impossible from the outset for at least three reasons
1/ Ukraine negotiated bilaterally with Russia and the Western partners were neither included, nor even in the loop. The big puzzle required therefore a separate talks between Ukraine and these partners that were expected to become security guarantors
2/ On the Russian initiative, the draft treaty was to impose numerous obligations on the Western guarantors - not entering any military agreements with Ukraine, informing about military exercises and provisions of their military doctrines, cancelling sanctions on Russia
3/ Russia demanded a far-reaching disarmament of Ukraine and de facto veto right on whether the Western guarantors would even come to Ukraine's rescue in the case of an attack ("on the basis of the decisions agreed by all Guarantor States", one of which was to be Russia itself)
The treaty itself would provide for an immediate suspension of any Western military and military-technical asisstance to Ukraine, although the Russian troops would still remain on the Ukrainian territory, and Russia would have the right to control the Ukrainian inventories
From the Russian perspective, the treaty was simply intended to incapacitate Ukraine, to which the Western states would never agree. They would become obliged to defend a defenceless and disarmed Ukrainian state, and would even need a Russian consent to do so!
Moreover, the Treaty assumed that any reservations to its content were not possible. The Western countries were therefore expected to unconditionally accept the Russian terms. Simply speaking, the Russian side put forward a proposal that they knew the West would have to reject
Suggesting now that Boris Johnson somehow torpedoed the talks is a brazen manipulation to cover up the fact that it was actually Putin who broke off the talks (which were going nowhere anyway). How come?
As I have already mentioned, Ukraine did not agree with Russia on any of the three pieces of the puzzle, but was still willing to make concessions. The Russian delegation understood fortune was slowly turning in Ukraine's favor, but Putin apparently did not share this view
So here comes an interesting part! Putin himself was presented a (still inconclusive) draft treaty on 15 April 2022. Quoting the Russian sources, Reuters argues, however, that Putin rejected the agreement and pressed ahead with military campaign
It became clear that the Russian delegation had no real mandate for talks with the Ukrainians, and that Putin himself was not willing to make any significant concessions, precisely what the Polish side kept saying since the talks started in Feb 2022. Russia was bluffing all along What we are seeing today is a coordinated effort to blame Ukraine for the failure of the 2022 talks. This is ignorance at best, at worst - a deliberate action to influence the Western public opinion to undermine support for further assistance to Ukraine [END]
https://twitter.com/dszeligowski/status/1785771531458462188
Calm down Kazan and put aside your rose colored glasses. Russia is making incremental gains, gains that are coming at great cost. You act as if the Ukrainians are the only suffering casualties. Russia is not going to be able to dictate a peace. It is in their best interest, too, to cut a deal. This war has cost both sides too much.
And Putin got rid one of his most effective commanders in the war.
That Baghdad Bob-level propaganda.
The Russians are gaining ground DAILY and not even on a major offensive.
The reason for the slow grind to minimize causalities, which Russia has, all while Ukraine has seen 600,000 troops killed.
Here's the reality for you. 600,000 dead Ukrainians but only 85,000 Russian causalities.
https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng
Russian casualties in Ukraine.
Mediazona count, updated SEMI-ANNUALLY MONTHLY Data: Mediazona and the BBC Russian Service;estimates by Meduza
RECORDED NAMES COUNT
51,679
11 Apr — 25 Apr
PROBATE REGISTRY ESTIMATE
~ 85k
23 Feb — 14 Mar
If you really believe that I feel sorry for you. Even the Russians are estimating that the Ukrainians have lost only a combined 444,000 killed and wounded. (US estimates are 70,000 killed and 100,000 - 120,000 wounded.) Estimates for Russian casualties, killed and wounded, range between 350,000 to 410,000.
Fight with what? Ukie 15 year olds?
YouCraynee running out of warm male bodies.
I doubt it but it could be possible depending on the demands of each side
The average age of the Ukrainian soldier is now 43.
“I have always thought that Ukrainian neutrality in exchange for Russia withdrawal should be the basis for peace.”
It’s either that or being sliced and diced to bordering countries, including Poland, Hungary, and of course Russia. I wonder if that’s the real objective of the Zeepers, as their demands for continuing a losing war will certainly bring that about if they don’t quickly reverse course.
VIDEOS - Russia Oil
1. Why Ukraine should continue to destroy oil refineries in Russia: Foreign Affairs explains reasons
Kanal13
1.62M subscribers
5-9-2024 12:19 a.m. EDT
5:10 Minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrKrItOFZ6k
“Ukraine must continue attacks on Russian refineries, because this harms the aggressor and cannot negatively affect the global oil market.
Foreign Affairs writes about this .
In total, since October, Ukraine has carried out at least 20 strikes on Russian refineries. By the end of March, Ukraine had destroyed about 14 percent of Russia’s oil refining capacity and forced the Russian government to impose a six-month ban on gasoline exports. One of the world’s largest oil producers now imports gasoline.
But the Biden administration criticized the attacks. In February, Vice President Kamala Harris called on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to refrain from attacks on Russian oil refineries over concerns that the strikes would lead to higher global oil prices.
Echoing this sentiment, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin warned the Senate Armed Services Committee in mid-April that “the attacks could have a spillover effect on the global energy situation.” Instead of targeting oil infrastructure, Austin said, Ukraine should focus on pursuing tactical and operational objectives that could directly impact the ongoing fight.
“Criticism from Washington is misplaced: attacks on refineries will not have the impact on global energy markets that US officials fear. These attacks reduce Russia’s ability to turn its oil into usable products; they do not affect the amount of oil it can produce or export. In fact, with less domestic refining capacity, Russia will be forced to export more of its crude oil, not less, pushing world prices down rather than up, ” Foreign Affairs writes.
The publication notes that while Ukrainian attacks are limited to Russian oil refineries, they are unlikely to lead to an increase in world oil prices. At the same time, these blows could cause pain inside Russia, where prices for petroleum products such as gasoline and diesel fuel have begun to rise sharply.
“These strikes achieve the same goals that Ukraine’s Western partners set for themselves through sanctions and caps on the price of Russian oil, but which have largely not been achieved: to degrade Russia’s financial and logistical ability to wage war while limiting broader damage to the global economy, Kyiv must win where it can, and the campaign to destroy Russian oil refining capacity benefits Ukraine with limited risk,” the publication says.
The publication notes that Ukraine has focused its attacks specifically on oil refineries, and not on oil fields or crude oil export infrastructure. “The difference is important,” Foreign Affairs emphasizes.”
2. RUSSIA - 45% of Oil Capacity Hit by Drone Attacks as Refineries Close & Ukraine Targets Russian Oil
Joe Blogs
369K
27:02 Minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15Hxhy2p_ic
“Between 21st January and 17th March Ukraine launched HUNDREDS of DRONE ATTACKS against Russian Oil Refineries located IN RUSSIA. These attacks show that Ukraine is now looking to target longer range attacks on infrastructure in Russia to reduce the amount of revenue that Russia is earning from Oil Exports. In this video I provide more details on the extent of the attacks, look at the impact on OIL PRICES in Russia, discuss Russia’s defense plans and the potential impact on both Russia’s Oil & Gas Industry and the Russian Economy.”
Chapters:
0:00 Intro
3:50 REFINERY ATTACKS
8:23 REFINERY CAPACITY
14:28 OIL PRICES
19:07 SUMMARY & CONCLUSION
3. Two Russian oil refineries in Ryazan and Voronezh are hit by Ukrainian drones
Daily Mail
3.58M subscribers
May 3, 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcuP6A5DFiw
1:26 Minutes
“Two more Russian oil refineries have been hit by long-range Ukrainian drones causing further pain for Putin. Video showed a refinery in the Ryazan region on fire overnight after being struck by explosive aircraft. More footage captured the sound of the incoming drones and the explosions after they struck the facility. While that attack was ongoing, a second took place in the nearby Voronezh region.
It is part of a months-long campaign by the Ukrainians to cripple Russia’s lucrative oil industries.
Data shows the attacks are paying off, with prices soaring as supplies begin to dwindle. Petrol costs have risen almost 20% since the start of the year and diesel has rocketed 10% in a week.
The aim is to make life as hard for ordinary Russians as possible to turn them against the war, whilst also robbing the Kremlin of funds to keep the war going and fuel for their tanks.”
4. Explosions rip through Putin oil refinery as Ukraine kamikaze drones tear into Russian troops
The Sun
5.18M subscribers
5-2-2024
8:38 Minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33F0gzsf0uQ
“UKRAINE has blitzed another major Russian oil refinery in a kamikaze drone strike, the explosions sparking a huge inferno near Moscow.
Dramatic video from the scene showed flames raging from the Rosneft energy giant facility in the city of Ryazan on Wednesday.
- Contents of video -
00:00 - 00:20 - Drone strike on oil refinery with text explainer
00:20 - 01:05 - Tank blown up on frontlines
01:05 - 03:06 - Ukraine repels Russian ‘meat grinder’ convoy
03:06 - 03:49 - Drone strike at night
03:49 - 04:25 - Huge explosion as drone strikes abandoned tank
04:25 - 06:19 - Ukrainian forces attack Russian trench and force troops to surrender
06:19 - 07:21 - Russia’s Sergei Shogiu statement
07:21 - 08:30 - Strike came after Odesa attack by Russia
ENDS”
ARTICLE: VLAD’S INFERNO Ukraine hits Putin’s oil refinery in kamikaze drone strike sparking fireball blast near Moscow
Dramatic footage shows flames raging at a Russian oil refinery
Jessica Baker Will Stewart
7:57, 1 May 2024
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/27648580/ukraine-strikes-russian-oil-refinery-moscow/
“Ukraine must continue attacks on Russian refineries, because this harms the aggressor and cannot negatively affect the global oil market.”
Of course the price of oil is affected by less supply.
Which explains why we are all paying higher prices for Gas.
Looking forward to WW3, REVEREND?
Aren't "Christian clerics" supposed to seek peace?
Rev in a false church…
These Ukrainians on FR are selfish. They only care about prolonging the hostilities for as long as they can so that they can continue to collect their filthy lucre.
They don’t care about their fellow countrymen dying or having their lives upended and their livelihoods destroyed. They don’t care about the economic impact this has outside Eastern Europe.
They care about collecting their paychecks. They care about *themselves.*
Allegra: “These Ukrainians on FR are selfish. They only care about prolonging the hostilities for as long as they can so that they can continue to collect their filthy lucre.”
Exactly right. They’re all in favor of Biden’s foreign policy regarding Ukraine...a policy that will keep The Big Guy, the MIC and the globalists rolling in cash AND a policy that will kickoff WW3.
Either they don’t care, or they’re downright stupid, or they’re getting paid to post Zelensky’s money-making propaganda.
It’s UKRAINE FIRST for zeepers and never mind the consequences for America.
Tell me jackass, where do I pick up this fantasy “lucre” you idiots are talking about.
Just possibly, everyone doesn’t agree with you, despite your incredible foreign policy genius.
Wow that’s brilliant.
Thank you! I thought so too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.