Sure, invading Russian troops were welcome in Kherson, with Ukrainian flags.
Posted on 05/11/2022 4:26:47 AM PDT by Kaslin
A negotiated end to the war in Ukraine is imperative, and the sooner the better. However, it will require Ukraine to make certain concessions to the warmongers who invaded their country. Doing so will be a bitter pill for Ukraine to swallow. These concessions are mostly symbolic. It will be distasteful, and morally unsatisfying. But prolonging the war in the hope of a decisive victory over Russia is a strategy fraught with peril and has few if any benefits.
There is no guarantee Ukraine can defeat Russia, and losing on the battlefield will undermine Ukraine’s position. Plus, victory promises scant tangible rewards. Crimea and Donbass will not be recovered. And while the odds of a NATO-Russia war are slim, the potential consequences are terrifying. This war has to stop, with a negotiated settlement, before it spirals out of control, and before more people die needlessly.
It is impossible not to greatly admire Ukraine’s heroic resistance to unprovoked Russian aggression. But the United States has no vital national security interest truly at stake in Ukraine. Ukraine is not a treaty ally of the United States. We have no responsibility to defend Ukraine, and there is no loss of credibility if we do not.
I am skeptical Ukraine can win. They’ve put up a heroic fight so far, absolutely inspiring. But favor is usually on the side of the big battalions. Putin has staked his prestige and political survival on some sort of victory. Starting this war was a huge strategic mistake for Putin. Having begun a war, however, he can’t face the disgrace of defeat.
And there is a real risk of a nuclear World War III. Maybe Russian rhetoric about nuclear war is just empty saber rattling. However, I have had Duma members tell me they would be willing to die in a nuclear war, if it also meant the destruction of the United States.
So, what does Putin want? His core demands are that Ukraine adopt a constitutional amendment to remain neutral in perpetuity, that Ukraine recognize Russia’s (illegal) annexation of Crimea, and also recognize the so-called people’s republics of Donetsk and Luhansk as independent.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy should accede to these demands. Ukraine was unlikely to join the alliance anytime in the foreseeable future. Likewise, there is no prospect of Ukraine recovering Crimea or the Donbass. Agreeing to these demands, Zelenskyy surrenders nothing that is not already lost.
It would be difficult for the Ukrainians to agree to these terms. But it might be better to accept Putin’s minimalist program while such an agreement can be reached than risk military setbacks and Putin’s imposition of his maximalist objectives. These aims may include annexation of Ukraine’s entire Black Sea coast, including the major cities of Odessa, Mykolaiv, and Kherson, as well as the demilitarization of Ukraine.
And what’s the alternative? Maybe with continuing arms supplies, Ukraine can stay in the fight indefinitely. But to what purpose? I see few possibilities for a decisive Ukrainian military victory, only to maybe halt further Russian military advances. There will be no reconquest of Crimea and Donbass.
And let’s dispense with pieties about “a global struggle between democracy and autocracy.” Let's also set aside daydreams of a coup in Moscow. This is a moment to confront hard choices and draw rational conclusions.
It’s a lousy situation, and just like you, I’d love to see Vladimir Putin go down. But as much as that might be emotionally satisfying, it doesn’t resolve the very real dilemma Ukraine faces. Every day this war drags on, people will keep dying. Continuing the war and staying the course offers a) very scant possibilities of genuine gains, and b) runs very real risks of much worse outcomes, even global disaster. What I propose here is perhaps hard to stomach. Nobody much enjoys giving in to bullies or gangsters. But are we really, really willing to die for Kramatorsk?
And what does America really stand to gain from more war on Ukrainian soil? For Washington, the bloodier the war, the more Russia suffers militarily. That is not an unreasonable desire. But it is the Ukrainians who will die to achieve it. A negotiated peace now stops the war. It puts an end to the bombings and shelling of Ukrainian cities and the deaths of Ukrainian civilians and soldiers. Bad peace, in this case, really is preferable to a good war.
“There will be no reconquest of Crimea and Donbass.”
This sentence betrays his Russian allegiance. “reconquest”? When did Ukraine do the first “conquest”
“The problem is that Ukraine seems to be a vital financial interest of the globalist corruptocrats”
And to Putin, He wants the natural resources of eastern Ukraine. No blood for oil Pootie..
Do you see any insurgency so far? The only insurgency I see is pro-Russian.
Will they do whatever it takes to compromise?
“In Ukraine, a Bad Peace Is Better Than a Good War”
Oh PLEASE, if we don’t get a nuclear war out of this, what’s the point of even having nuclear weapons?
"Today we slaughtered them in the airport. They are out of Saddam International Airport. The force that was in the airport, this force was destroyed."
“You bring up a great point, Why haven’t the Russians attacked Infrastructure? That should have been the first to go. Then wait 10-14 days BEFORE invading. Something is odd.”
It’s not a typical war, and Russia never referred to it as a war. The idea WAS to put pressure on Ukraine to quickly agree to a settlement and then live in peace. That was vetoed by the Neocons and the Leftists in Europe, so it’s going to get uglier for Ukraine, far uglier.
We decided we wanted to put all our resources into becoming an Asian land power exactly when and for what purpose? Given our geostrategic position in the world why would THAT be in our national interest?
Yep, your propaganda is exactly in that class.
Sure, invading Russian troops were welcome in Kherson, with Ukrainian flags.
Another mindless retort from a Poot pet.
Thanks for your “input.”
Disregard my last... that was directed at RusViking.
Compare this small astroturf demonstration to the 9th May celebrations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-ECj7tAU_k
A peace that leaves Ukraine independent with free speech but neutral in foreign policy (no Biden/EU control) would be a good peace. Neither party would get it all.
“We decided we wanted to put all our resources into becoming an Asian land power exactly when and for what purpose?”
Thats news to me!
Really? You haven’t been paying attention for about the last 20 years.
So what asian lands do we now own in the last 20yrs?
“I have a different perspective. As I see it, the end result is likely to be that Russia becomes more Asian than European.”
Yep, we had a choice, either bring Russia into our orbit, on their terms, which meant that they could continue to do what’s best for the Russian people, rather than on the terms of Neocons, Globalists, and Greens. Europe couldn’t agree to those terms, as they feel it their right to run the world, and if Putin wouldn’t answer to them, they’d make him pay.
As it was, if Europe was to get anywhere close to reducing their carbon-energy usage by anything close to their 90% goal over the next 10 to 20 years, than Russian gas exports to Europe will nearly dry up. So Russia has to turn to Asia and other countries, regardless.
What this insane reaction by the West has done is greatly accelerate this move, and will now make it encompass much more than just energy. But the neocons don’t care, since they’ve gotten the war they needed to replace Afghanistan.
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.