More on Trump, Zelensky, Putin, and the Ukraine peace talks
Today I’ve already written one post on my concerns about Trump’s recent statements on Ukraine, and his dissing of Zelensky. One of the things that has kept me wondering what’s really going on is that Rubio is Trump’s Secretary of State, and I don’t see Rubio as part of the pro-Russia camp – what I call the Tucker Carlson wing of the right. And yet he’s in the position of being heavily involved in these negotiations, which makes me a bit more hopeful.
So just now I saw this [my emphasis]:
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, White House National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff met in Riyadh with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and President Vladimir Putin’s foreign affairs advisor Yuri Ushakov to hash out ways to end the conflict. Ukraine was absent from the negotiations in Saudi Arabia.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt declined to provide specifics about the discussions, but she said the Trump administration was committed to brokering a peace deal to end the conflict between the two countries. …
Zelenskyy has stressed that Ukraine must be involved in negotiations and said Sunday that Ukraine wouldn’t accept a peace deal if his country was absent from negotiations.
But Leavitt said everyone would have a seat at the negotiating table — including other European allies — as the Trump administration seeks to advance a peace deal.
“We’re ensuring that all parties are heard,” Leavitt said in an interview with Fox News’ “America Reports” on Tuesday. “But you have to speak to both sides of the war in order to truly negotiate a deal and problem-solve. And this is a significant first step toward peace.” …
Trump and Zelenskky also spoke over the phone Wednesday about the negotiations, and Zelenskyy said he relayed that he believes Putin isn’t interested in peace with Ukraine.
“I said that [Putin] is a liar,” Zelenskyy said in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” that aired Sunday. “And he said, ‘I think my feeling is that he’s ready for these negotiations.’ And I said to him, ‘No, he’s a liar. He doesn’t want any peace.'”
While Zelenskyy voiced gratitude for U.S. support, he said there is no “leader in the world who can really make a deal with Putin without us, about us.”
This news from Leavitt indicates that Trump is at least indicating that Zelensky will have a voice, and that these first moves are efforts to soothe Putin.
Of course, if it’s just a question of presenting Zelensky with a done deal for him to sign, one that gives him none of what Ukraine wants and needs, then it’s trouble. Here’s where Trump’s unpredictable nature, and his bobbing and weaving when negotiating, get in the way of properly analyzing what the end point will be.
If you review the history of WWII, it started despite the Western Powers letting the belligerents have part of what they wanted. And it ended with the Western Powers letting even worse belligerents have part of what they wanted, but much much more than what the war was fought over in the first place.
In Churchill’s history of WWII he talks about how hard it was to figure out how to explain to the public that they went to war for Poland’s independence, and then let the Soviet Union take it all over–including the big chunk of Poland they stole and incorporated into what is now Ukraine.
These guys that we now lionize sat down with Stalin and let him take over big chunks of Europe, knowing what they were doing, knowing what kind of man Stalin was.
They didn’t do this because they were bad men or stupid men. They did it because in statecraft sometimes bad guys get to win something, because the alternative is worse.
I’m pretty sure the public didn’t know what they had agreed to until it was all agreed, and I’m pretty sure the public at the time didn’t know what was said in the meetings. They didn’t know at the time that Roosevelt joked with Stalin about murdering only 49,000 German officers instead of 50,000, for example.
So maybe, we patiently let this play out before setting our hair on fire. Right now there are many interested parties yelling as loudly as they can to try to influence us into seeing it their way, and we have very few hard facts to work from.
I will surmise that Trump is tossing out some verbal hand grenades – as he is wont to do – to keep all parties off balance and have them wondering what he is really thinking.
I just hope it does not back-fire on him nor on Ukraine.
I find it hard to believe that Trump will throw Ukraine under the bus.
Can Zelensky really influence any negotiations? In a war of attrition, Russia is undoubtedly going to come out ahead.
”I just hope it does not back-fire on him nor on Ukraine.”
It is already backfiring on all of us. Both Russia and Europe are preparing for wider war. As is China.
”In a war of attrition, Russia is undoubtedly going to come out ahead.”
Why do people keep saying this? No, it’s not.
This story begins with a WaPo report of a leaked memo, so huge grain of salt from the top! However, there are serious policy implications within, if the fundamentals prove to be true, so consider those, contextually: https://therightscoop.com/breaking-pete-hegseth-just-ordered-big-cuts-in-defense-budget/
The named Commands to be cut back: European, Central, and African.
But, what about the US funded corruption of Ukraine? I’m told that from Switzerland to countries of modest wealth, the new Ukraine oligarch’s are notorious for flaunting their grifted takings.
I hold no fast opinion on the matter, except that learning from Biden’s ways, not to be highly sceptical is very likely to be false. Who here will gainsay my claim?
Via X.com, Tucker Carlson interviews human rights lawyer Bob Amsterdam:
“Donald Trump just called Zelensky a dictator. Human rights lawyer Bob Amsterdam has worked in Ukraine for the past couple of years and confirms that if anything, that’s an understatement.
(0:00) The Situation Is Dire
(3:28) Bob Amsterdam’s Fight to Defend the Orthodox Church From Zelensky
(6:45) USAID’s Fake Church Operation
(18:49) Mike Pompeo’s Involvement
Video at link. (24:16) Why Is the US Bending the Knee to Ukraine?
(29:21) Is Zelensky Totally Coked Out?
(30:00) The Push for Sanctions
(45:00) China’s Role in Undermining the US
(48:16) The War’s Impact on the Middle East
(53:28) Corporate Media Refuses to Cover This Story
(1:00:38) The Deep State’s Attempt to Destroy Religion
(1:08:56) Why Aren’t US Politicians Fighting for Freedom of Religion?
(1:13:08) The Dangerous Corporatism of Lawyers
https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1892337325218082915
Yep Tucker Carlson, that’s a reputable journalist, after all, Ukraine is a hive of Nazis.
Just ask Vladdy.
He’s a human rights lawyer, and Colonel McGreggor is a military genius.
I heard there is a bridge for sale in NYC.
Consider that by seeming to exclude Zelenskyy, Trump got him to demand that he be a part time of the negotiations. So Z has essentially conceded the war is over and the haggling begins. Trump wins. Ht to Sundance.
Forget Ukraine for now.
Putin screwed up and attempted to take over another country and install a puppet.
Anyone here know how many puppets Putin is currently running? Anyone here know how many puppets Putin is attempting to install?
Someone finally stood up against the former mighty Russian military after Russia had invaded it – causing Putin to expose the weakness of his military to the ENTIRE WORLD (with the exception of MAGA TCS). That would be a treasonous offense in many cases.
Russia’s air force was almost useless before America gave that invaded country a dime. Attack helicopters? Shot outta the sky, so grounded to protect them.
Maneuver Warfare – another Russian weakness accidentally exposed by Putin with his foolish invasion of a weaker country, and then that weaker country standing up and fighting for their survival and freedom. Maneuver Warfare—all I remember about Putin’s military was long invading convoys getting bogged down, and picked off one by one. Maneuver Warfare—all I remember is seeing Russian tanks:
Russian tanks looked more like some kind of a Jack-In-The-Box toy with those turrets being blasted off and high into the air.
America had no clue how weak the Russian military was. The Three idiots we’ve had – Obama, Trump, Biden, and now Trump again – were Commanders in Chief and not a one had a clue how weak the Russian military was ‘n is. Bill Clinton makes those three look like chumps.
How much is information like that and other points mentioned above worth? A lot more than the imaginary number Trump keeps coming up with.
Now Trump is baaack – looking like the big mouth idiot he is for not being able to back up his 24hrs claim.
What is one of the first things he is going to do? Blame the little invaded country, and then help the invader—Russia to rebuild their weakened military. That’s a traitorous act in my opinion, to help an enemy who has been responsible for or assisted in the deaths of many American Troops, and even civilians. *TRAITOROUS*!!!!!!!
Trump should stay out of International affairs…it is that obvious.
Ukraine has no capacity to continue the war without US support. It doesn’t have the troops, it doesn’t have the money and the US is currently even paying for the government.
More to the point, Zelensky isn’t even the legitimate leader of Ukraine – his term expired some time ago and the country which people are dying over for democracy won’t even hold an election.
Zelensky is likely gone when an election is held, and both he or his successor have little choice but to accept any deal done by Trump.
I see we have the usual holding of polar opposite positions – Russia is both losing in Ukraine having its ass kicked by a tiny state with a fraction of its resources, and at the same time its going to walk in and take over all of Europe.
Both these things cannot be true. Pick one and stick to it.
Karmi:
When you write that Trump will be helping Russia rebuild its military, could you please be more specific? Because I really don’t see us selling Russia bombs or giving them military aid – not that that’s what you mean. But it’s time to explain exactly what you do mean. If you already did, I missed it. I don’t always read every word of every comment here.
If you want to understand what Trump actually said about Zelensky “starting” the war, you’d do well to watch this. It’s only 12 minutes long.
Talking to Russia first makes some sense. Anyone who has read about negotiations with Russia during WWII knows that the Russians have a negotiating plan that involves wearing the opposition down. They will argue about EVERYTING. The size and shape of the negotiating table, the placement of chairs, who can speak and for how long, yada, yada, yada. It’s a marathon, not a sprint.
IMO, the negotiations will not go anywhere for a while. Maybe Trump thinks he can charm Putin into a peace deal. Putin has just as big an ego as Trump. So, they may need to do a bit of chest bumping.
I know that the Russian economy is in a bad way. High inflation and dependent on China and India for sales of oil, gas, and minerals. India has already agreed to buy oil and gas from the U.S. That’s one wedge Trump has driven. China may also be willing to buy oil and gas from the U.S. in return for some lower tariffs on their exports to us.
Economics pressure is the answer to getting Putin to back off, IMO. Biden gave him a gift by handcuffing our oil and gas industry and being very gradualist in providing aid to Ukraine. Of course, Putin may decide he will wait four years and do everything he can to get another Democrat elected in the U.S.
Anyway, I don’t expect things to go very quickly in stopping the Ukraine war. But I’m hoping Trump can prove me wrong.
Is Zelensky Totally Coked Out?
A rhetorical exaggeration, I presume. Z is less ‘coked out’ than Kamala is blitzed out of her mind most of the time. Z, Biden/Harris, and DEI are all part of the dysfunctional mess we can’t wait to be rid of.
Why should the average American care one way or another? For most people commenting here, this is a morality play of good guys versus bad guys with no care of the billions wasted, hundreds of thousands killed and tens of thousands maimed. Go pound your chest that your guy is on the side of Angels while the life of the average Ukrainian may change under a different regime, but probably won’t one way or the other.
Or you can say let’s end this thing one way or the other as having Russia own part of Ukraine won’t matter to America, but pouring billions upon billions more into a losing war will. Russia already has 25%, four more years they’ll have all if we keep the same policy of the last two years, just with more dead people and more wasted money.
I’m going to wait and see what happens …
”When you write that Trump will be helping Russia rebuild its military, could you please be more specific? Because I really don’t see us selling Russia bombs or giving them military aid.”
I’m not Karmi, but if you’ll allow me, I think I can answer the question.
Trump has said as a part of the ceasefire he’ll lift Western sanctions against Russia. It’s these sanctions which have ground Russian war production to a halt. They are having great difficulty building new tanks, helicopters, drones, and satellites because of the sanctions. Their tanks use Western radios, optics, and targeting computers. Ditto their drones, helicopters, and satellites.
For example, while the Russians can build older (pre-1990s) C-band communication satellites, they need Western parts like Traveling Wave Tube Amplifiers (TWTAs) to build modern (1990s and beyond) Ku and Ka-band comsats. Even consumer sats like DirecTV and XM satellite radio are beyond them. Their Glonass (GPS equivalent) satellites use Western rad-hard chips. Their Glonass system (used for glide bomb guidance) is slowly degrading because they don’t have access to them. Similarly their oil pipelines and refineries are degrading because of the lack of spare parts.
Right now Russia’s military is big and dumb. It’s why Ukraine can hold it off. But if Russia can build modern comsats and glide bombs (among other things) at scale, its military becomes big and smart. At that point only America would be able to stop it, and it would cost us dearly.
”Why should the average American care one way or another?”
Because if Ukraine falls, World War III is on.
We couldn’t sit out World Wars I or II without being attacked when we were a minor power half a world away. Being the richest country in a global interconnected world isn’t going to decrease our chances of being hit.
”…four more years they’ll have all if we keep the same policy of the last two years.”
In four more years Russia will be out of tanks and artillery. At that point Ukraine will roll up their infantry and drive them out of the country. Providing Ukraine with more and better weapons will speed that up.
Trump has certainly unified the UK press. It is a real shock to see Trump badmouthing Zelensky and is not going down well. It is pushing the UK back the Europeans….
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9nw8dl7g9o
Ukraine is USAID on steroids.
mkent–just for clarity, when you write “Ukraine” in the above explanation, shouldn’t it be, the “U.S./NATO”? Because presumably without these billions and weapons, Ukraine would have fallen. Doesn’t that mean we are already at war and what you are concerned about is escalation? In the financial world, the people that make their billions in defense are in good stead. I guess that is their reward for their contribution to world justice and security. If there is a God, I wonder how it plays out for them in eternal rewards.
@ mkent – Thanks! Would add a tad more:
1) Before America or anyone else had given Ukraine a penny or a bullet, Ukraine had caused Russia’s reinvading military convoys to bog down. Blasted Russian aircraft out the air, blasted turrets off tanks, etc.
So yes, the sanctions are an incredible help, but the Ukrainians have done all the ground and air work – lasting longer with the help from UK, EU, NATO and America.
2) Time: Russia has been wanting a pause for a long time. Their military is even in more shambles than it was when they launched their foolish reinvasion. Thanks to Ukraine’s ground and air efforts, it *WAS* going to take Russia a long time to rebuild.
At the rate the *TRAITOROUS* Trump is going, it is looking like the time for Russia’s rebuilding efforts will be sped up a lot.
If Trump succeeds in helping Putin to destroy Ukraine, and then helps Putin rebuild Russia’s military (by giving him more *TIME* and dropping the sanctions)—then I will stop calling his present actions traitorous and just refer to him as The Traitor.
Zelensky sealed his fate when he decided to campaign for Kamala in PA. Big mistake on his part. He should have kept out of US elections but realized Kamala was the best option to keep the war going. I don’t think Trump forgave him for this blunder.
I agree with Victor Davis Hanson. There is no way that Ukraine can win this. Russia will take the Crimea, home of the Russian fleet, and the Russian speaking areas that form a land bridge to the fleet. That is the reality of the situation. The cessation of destruction and bloodshed, along with the commencement of rebuilding, will occur once Zelensky acknowledges this situation. I’m certainly not a Putin fan, but hoping for a different result is unrealistic.
@LordAzrael
I believe that’s blatantly false. Ukraine may not have the capacity to outright win the war (by say retaking much of the Donbas and/or Crimea) without US support, but it has the ability to continue the war well into the intermediate future on current grounds, especially with both sides running lower on equipment and manpower. I think a lot of the people speaking on this overlook just how protracted and bloody conflicts in this part of the world could be, or how it is fairly decent guerilla territory. So even if beaten badly enough for conventional peer on peer resistance to no longer be a workable part of the Ukrainian tool kit, guerilla war could and would likely continue for years on end (as we saw in WWII with the original “Banderaists” in the Ukrainian Insurgent Army). There are still guerillas operating deep in the Donbas and Crimea even now.
More iffy. It has a pretty large troop deficit (which is why it is pulling troops out of the support positions to man the trench lines) but so do the Russians and their allies, and this without the decision to call up the 25 and 18 age cohorts.
That much is definitely true, though the Euros and some others like South Korea are throwing in. Ironically the money and economy are probably even bigger immediate problems for the Ukrainian loyalists than troops or equipment. The latter two they can get by wider conscription, home production, or buying from either us or other allies (and sometimes there is overlap there, such as the likes of Poland buying Abrams and then gifting or selling them to Ukraine, which Trump has indicated he is fine with). But money is tougher and would likely involve selling more produce.
Disagree, for reasons in the Ukrainian constitution I’ll come to. Besides, who would the legitimate leader of Ukraine be in this context?
In any case, the Ukrainian Constitution has the ability to declare marital law under conditions of war and other emergency (which is clearly the case here), and also makes it either impossible or mind-bogglingly hard to hold elections or amend the constitution under martial law, complete with a 6 month pause after martial law is suspended before elections can be held (so you can’t just flip martial law “off” for an election day and counting and then flip it back “on”). Moreover in those environments the constitution makes it clear that anybody’s terms that would have naturally ended in the time frame of martial law get indefinitely extended until either martial law is lifted (at which point they help convene the prep for the next elections to elect the next Rada/Parliament) or until they are literally incapable of holding office (such as if they are dead or vegetables, in which case they get declared incapable by their peers and replaced by a delegated authority in either a by-election or an appointment).
This is the constitution and most of that was in place well before Zelenskyy came to power. I have DEEP issues with much of it (given how inflexible and IMHO legally and morally fraught it is), but it is the law and there are many reasons for it. Nor is it devoid of precedent, given how many previous governments have suspended elections during war, such as the Grand Coalition for Churchill in WWII.
I personally would prefer elections be held or the constitution to be altered to allow it, but that’s not how things stand as is and I can understand why. Moreover, the US is very pointedly RARE for so regularly holding elections during times of profound crisis like war on its own soil.
Not “won’t”, but “can’t.” Moreover, the decision that this was to be the case was made across the Rada in 2022.
There were wartime elections of a kind in 2014, but that was less due to wartime elections being a constitutional feature in Ukraine and more due to the elections already being planned to replace Yanukovych’s cabinet and the lame duck Rada with a new one when the Russian military and its separatist allies moved in, and since there was no “official” war there was still voting going on.
I do think this would argue for wartime elections being something the Ukrainian constitution SHOULD make allowances for holding, but it doesn’t.
Maybe, though less likely here.
Disagree, for various reasons. The Ukrainians do not have a gigantically strong vantage point but they do have the ability to butt heads or reject.
Firstly: My stance has always been neither polar extreme. That Russia – while still a great power – is falling behind and desiccated in many ways. It would probably LIKE to invade and conquer Europe if it thought it could get away with it, but it lacks the resources and manpower to do so and will struggle to conquer and occupy Ukraine or even sizable chunks of it plus places like Belarus and the Northern Caucasus for the foreseeable future.
Secondly: I find it ironic you are ignoring a major reason for these contradictory positions: contradictory messaging from the Kremlin and trusted mouthpieces and proxies of it.
https://balkaninsight.com/2024/02/16/russia-threatens-moldova-with-military-scenario-over-transnistria/
The Russian government makes overtures about how it is ready to settle the war, but gives very little indication it would compromise its demands regarding Ukraine and has proxies babble on about “Denazifying” Moldova or nuking Poland or the like, made with at least the passive acceptance of the Russian Government due to the state of censorship there and how you can get imprisoned or fined (or worse) for pointing out the real nature of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
I know my assessment of Russian strengths and weaknesses, and they really haven’t changed. But I can’t fault too many people for taking bullshit threats coming from Putin’s Russia at face value.
@Whatever
Let’s start with the fact that even in the midst of Trump’s diplomatic offensive, the Kremlin’s foreign minister Lavrov made a point of shilling and congratulating about the “Alliance” between Russia and the PRC. Meaning that the Kremlin is openly positioning itself as tied to the PRC, and so this stuff is very much an enemy interest to the US.
https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2025-01-20/three-years-war-ukraine-chinese-russian-alliance-passes-test
Bullshit strawman is bullshit.
For me, the fact that there were so many maimed and killed and so much wasted (including from the US Coffers) in blatant violations of both international law and the various agreements hashed out between governments beforehand is the precise identifiers of who the good guys and bad guys (or at least gooder or badder guys) are.
Meanwhile you seem to be believing in your own morality play, even if the script is different.
Translation: You haven’t fucking studied what life in the occupied territories is like and has been like for a long time. The DNR and LNR have utterly lost whatever legitimacy they once had due to rather heavy handed interference by Putin’s government (including PROBABLY a few assassinations we are pretty sure came from Moscow and not from Kyiv or anti-Kremlin guerillas), and made worse by the lawless conduct of the various paramilitaries and authorities there. Even at their best this has involved authoritarian rule and widespread looting, and it regularly gets worse than that.
And given what we have seen in places like Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Belarus we have no realistic reasons to believe “peace” would see much better.
You may not care about that, but in which case it was a damn poor move to try and grandstand using it.
Because rewarding aggressors shitting on your prior guarantees and red lines never ends badly, amirite?
I’ve said that I would throw Ukraine under the bus in its entirety if I felt it was necessary to save the US, and I stand by that statement, as much as it makes me sick. But that doesn’t mean I have to ignore the evidence of history or current events.
According to what logic?
It took ten years after WWII ended for the Kremlin’s war machine -aided by puppet troops on all its borders – to finally destroy the Ukrainian Insurgent Army cells in the field and cement occupation over Western Ukraine.
And even now the Kremlin does not have control over all the Donbas in spite of nearly 11 years of war.
If Putin keeps the same policy of the last quarter century we will end up with more dead people and wasted money, but I believe primary blame for that must lie with Putin and the Russian regime.
@TJ
That’s of more concern, but only as much. There’s going to be plenty of corruption in Ukraine and Russia regardless of how the war turns out, and the big issue is if it poses a mortal threat to American freedoms.
I wish I were surprised, but I’m not. Post-Soviet Space has generally had a reputation like that, where Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs still used to growing up under relatively austere Soviet life go out of their way.
Depends on which claims. That Ukraine was corrupt and the Bidens and co took use of it with Burisma, and that when Trump legally tried to investigate what happened (and reached out to Zelenskyy for it) he was hammered and vilified in an impeachment? Nope, not going to gainsay that one. It’s horribly true and I think goes a long way to explaining Trump’s recent actions (moreso than some kind of natural pro-Kremlin orientation).
As for others? I’ll get to them.
Oh great. Tucker and this farqer.
I haven’t watched this particular video yet, though Tucker lost most of my goodwill after he shilled for “Secular Fascist” Jew hating blood libeler Darryl Cooper (whose work I ran into separately on a social media server I found where someone was endorsing his Martyr Made podcast for its supposedly good coverage of the origins of the Israel-Palestine conflict, when in reality upon my digging it turned out to be a blood libeling piece of shit designed to whitewash almost all the problems and crimes of the Arab militants that started the conflict). And I’ve had issues with Amsterdam before, given his preaching about “religious freedom” while apparently not bringing that up to his clients in the Moscow Patriarchate of the Orthodox Church (whose current Patriarch is a known KGB Plant who is now preaching heresy).
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/whats-wrong-robert-amsterdams-analysis-ukraines-law-8371-lauren-homer-hugre
https://df.news/en/2024/02/28/why-is-bob-amsterdam-silent-about-annexed-dioceses-and-prisoners-held-in-uoc-mp-church-in-borodianka/
https://orthodoxtimes.com/false-prophecies-as-justification-for-the-war-sectarian-hoaxes-by-moscow-patriarch-kirill/
I can understand Amsterdam is a lawyer and has to represent his clients, odious as they may be, to the best of his abilities, but that does not mean others (including his legal opponents) have to let him go unanswered.
Oh noes the same uk press which has been very quiet on starmers reign of terror against british citizens which enforced the vax mandate and the lockdowns that press
Putin was able to mount this foolish exercise because of the oil revenues that we were deprived of because of bidens corruption same with Iran and Hamas, the natural gas that made Germany depended the skydragon boondoggles etc etc
Stateside they went along with ths whole January 6th sham for more time then was reasonable
Regarding the strategic situation, and particularly responding to mkent’s comment – what is the basis of the belief that Russia is going to start a war of aggression against NATO (i.e., WWIII)? Man, I just don’t see it. Without direct NATO involvement in the Ukraine, we’ve been able to grind them down to the point where they’re fielding North Korean mercenaries using Iranian and North Korean military hardware. And they’re still bogged down in an ugly war of attrition. What makes you think that they’re spoiling for a fight with NATO? Putin is a bad man, but I see no indication that he is that crazy. Russia doesn’t look like its going to be a match for NATO any time soon. It looks to me as though Putin is fighting aggressively (and dirty) in furtherance of what he perceives to be Russia’s interests.
The borders in Europe in general and eastern Europe in particular have changed regularly since the fall of Roman Empire (and arguably before then). Not every border adjustment is 1938 all over again. Sometimes, its just what Europeans do, and have done for millennia. (And what Washington warned about in his farewell address). The breakup of the USSR in the 1990’s was, basically, the unwinding of five centuries of the Russian empire. And it happened over a matter of weeks at a point when Russian power and influence were at their nadir. One way of looking at Putin’s misadventures in Georgia and Ukraine is that he is reopening the breakup of the USSR with Russia in a more advantageous position. That’s a heck of a lot different than “Putin = Hitler 2.0.”
Now China? Yes, I believe China is a menace that could well start WWIII in the near future, for example, if it tries to retake Taiwan. I also believe that Xi’s apparent beliefs about Taiwan and China’s place in the world are ideological to the extent that Xi might start a bloody world war to pursue them. And China’s demographic and economic clock is ticking. China may be staring at another four or five centuries in the wilderness if they don’t go for it in the next decade.
So what’s to be done? I don’t know. I’m happy that Trump isn’t a doctrinaire Ukraine hawk, but I don’t like his “shoot from the lip” methods. If he ends up flipping (or even sidelining) Russia and, thereby, deprives China of an ally, I’m for it. If your house is burning down, you can’t be too particular about who mans the bucket brigade. (Kind of like the Azov Brigade in the Ukrainian military.) I’d rate Trump’s chances of flipping Russia or otherwise bringing about a favorable result, however, at around 40%. He’s much more likely to just make a big mess. We’ll see. I hope I’m wrong.
(NOTE: “REPs” in the following comment does not mean all Republicans/Conservatives/Classic Liberals.)
Treason – Article III, Section 3, Clause 1:
How many here consider Russia an Ally and/or Friend? I don’t consider it to be either—Russia has been America’s enemy since at least the Korean war. Brief spell after Reagan broke the Soviet Union – up into when Russia started invading again (I don’t bother w/ the exact dates), and even then they were closer to enemy than friend.
How many here know that Russia and Iran are friends and Axis ‘Best Buds’? REPs support Russia against Ukraine, but then support Israel over Iran. Weird…IMHO.
Giving Aid to the Enemy:
Again, is Russia an Ally and/or a Friend of America?
Giving Comfort to the Enemy:
Trump has certainly given Russia a major Morale Boost – whilst crushing Ukrainians hopes and dreams of freedom from Russia’s Boot—Ukraine is certainly not America’s enemy, and yet Trump has been crushing their morale recently.
Corruption:
REPs calling Ukraine corrupt is like the pot calling the kettle black. 🙂 Corrupt was when Trump tried to force Ukraine to give his political rival’s ‘Head on a Platter’ – or else. Of course the REPs only consider the DEMs to be the corrupt ones.
Russia Starting more Wars – Are dreams of Russia’s expansion possible?:
Karmi – I think you’ve jumped the shark. The president gets to conduct foreign policy, even if you disagree with how he’s doing it. The president hasn’t committed treason because he sees tactics and strategy different than you. Respectfully, that’s nuts.
Bauxite — it is this President’s traitorous actions that have “jumped the shark.”
A President isn’t allowed to commit Treason – by aiding and giving comfort to America’s long time enemy – Russia.
@Karmi
And just when I was trying to focus on the parade of people that think this is the bee’s knees, largely alongside you, I get this unwelcome blast from the past, complete with absolutely willful abuse and misuse of legal concepts and vernacular.
Let’s address a few things.
ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT.
Firstly, by any publicly available metric, Ukraine is vastly more corrupt than the US is or has been (of course, the same applies to Russia). Now you might be able to argue said metrics are falsified or written by propagandists or what have you with the result that it distorts the record, and I’d be willing to believe you, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are what they are.
Secondly: Not only is Trump demanding investigation into Burisma and the firing of Shokin NOT Corrupt, but the fact that you seem to think such a demand would be akin to Zelenskyy giving Trump “his political rival’s “Head on a platter” is EVIDENCE IN AND OF ITSELF that it would not be corrupt.
https://nypost.com/2023/08/04/viktor-shokin-was-threat-to-burisma-says-hunter-biden-partner-devon-archer/
https://thefederalist.com/2023/08/03/media-talking-points-about-the-biden-forced-firing-of-ukraines-prosecutor-are-laughable/
The President has not only the right but the duty to investigate if US Government actions are being used to corrupt purposes at home, and the news that the Obama and Biden’s State Department viewed Shokin as a reliable partner and sufficiently not corrupt to be praised by them up until shortly before his firing, and that Biden claimed credit (publicly) for firing him on demands of withholding aid is all the more jarring.
Now, was Shokin corrupt? Probably to some degree, this is Former Soviet politics, and a bunch of the Legal Insurrection people confirmed hearing about it even before. But the important point is he was not viewed as compromised enough to be excluded from working on “anti-Corruption” with the US State Department under Obama up until shortly before the Burisma investigations. So this about face and insistence he was radioactive and had to be dropped ASAP does not speak well. Nor does the fact that Hunter Biden was involved in Burisma in a field he was grotesquely unqualified for.
And if you applied some logical consistency for literally five seconds to consider what the fuck you were saying, you would realize this not only isn’t corruption to investigate, but *couldn’t be corruption.*
The classic Morton’s Fork. If there was something amiss (especially to the point where an accurate investigation of the firing of Shokin and the Burisma connection would give Biden’s “head on a platter”), then that was something so grotesque and at affront to US interests and stated standards that Trump had to investigate. Conversely, if there WASN’T something amiss with Hunter Biden the Felon and malcontent getting a cushy borderline no show job and the firing was unrelated to scrutiny there, then there is no fault in making sure.
Having established this key principle….
Yes yes, I am well aware of the Treason definition. I am also well aware of the vocabulary involved, and the legal interpretations thereof (though to be honest I believe it was often defined too narrowly given the likes of “The Spanish Pensioner” James Wilkinson, since Spain was never a formally declared enemy of the US and rarely an actual one during the time he acted as spy).
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S3-C1-2/ALDE_00013525/
Irrelevant. The Treason language doesn’t say shit about “Ally or Friend. It also doesn’t ask for opinions (which isn’t surprising given how personal considerations are by their very nature Subjective, and it is easy to see say someone going “Yes I view Nazi Germany/The Soviet Union/Red China to be a Friend and Ally and not at all an enemy of the US”).
My own opinions of Russia and the polluted, anti-Western, anti-American, authoritarian shithole that is the Kremlin are, I hope, fairly evident from my writing. However the Constitution does not empower Turtler to be a judging authority on treason charges any more than it does Karmi. So the relevant facts are *NOT* what we CONSIDER Friends, Allies, or Enemies of the US.
And for good reason, considering how much of the early US’s history involved laborious disputes with a changing array of allies and enemies (often in quick succession), and considering how at one point the US had committed to build Algiers warships as part of a ransom payment it is easy to see how such charges could be blatantly misused for witch hunts if not carefully limited.
I have similar feelings, but the fact of the matter is that
A: The US President and Congress have authorization to conduct diplomacy with enemy sworn, official, state-of-declared-war enemies, as enumerated in the Constitution. Negotiating a peace even in a war BETWEEN the US and said enemy is obviously not treason in and of itself, let alone in an intermediary.
B: Russia is not a declared enemy of the United States under the construction of the Constitution. Maybe that’s an argument for there needing to be wider definitions of it (though buyer beware), but then that remains the case.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/07/11/sorry-donald-trump-jr-is-not-a-traitor/
https://takecareblog.com/blog/russia-and-enemies-under-the-treason-clause
Depends on the “REP”s in question. You will see anti-Israeli (and mostly anti-Jewish) scum around as well. I think people are correct in evaluating Tucker as one such case. And up to a point they have a right to that (though with Iran the argument gets stronger due to the Fatwa war, though if that’s the case there has been bipartisan negligence in actually enforcing it).
And I could go on, but I would largely be repeating myself because you really bring nothing of legal substance to the table to justify this crap. Get your head out of your ass Karmi and try researching the actual constitution and legal definitions of enemies and aid and comfort to them. We’ve had over 200 years of legal precedent on the matter (and arguably much more factoring in English Common Law and Roman Law) so there’s no excuse. I don’t have to LIKE what Trump has done on this point or his bloviating in order to rankle even more at the idea of widespread ranting about “Treason.”
(That’s also why I pointedly do not throw out the T word casually even with things I view as disgusting such as the Reset With Russia bullshit under Obama-Clinton or Clinton’s nuke fiasco with North Korea, though the latter at least has more grounds for it given the Korean War Ceasefire.)
Correct.
Once again, you have your head up your ass.
I don’t have a huge amount of good to say about the Wilson and post-Wilson malaise that dominated US politics. However not even Wilson’s most fervent enemies argued it was “treason” to negotiate for food shipments to a blockaded Germany to happen in the ugly grey area between the signing of the armistice on 10/11/1918 and its going into effect the next day, and when the US finally agreed to peace with Germany in 1921, seeing as how there was a state of war between the US and Germany but that the armistice had ended active combat and hostilities between us and both were working towards peace.
And again, this was for a declared enemy that we had formally declared war on after they openly and lethally attacked US flagged ships and engaged in a terrorist bombing campaign on the US.
Trump’s insults and attacks on Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian cause are things I find grotesque and counter to American and Western interests and those of freedom, but I can say the same thing about Obama’s cloying betrayal of Georgia in 2008 and a host of other things. That doesn’t mean they are treason.
Turtler – good to see you, and thanks for your opinion/s ‘n input.
Russia is America’s enemy – has aided in the deaths of many Americans.
Trump is not only aiding that enemy – he is also going to help it rebuild and modernize it’s military quicker. Putin ‘n his cronies were supposed to be modernizing that military for a long time, but apparently got to focused on plundering.
Corrupt is corrupt – so I won’t argue that one with you.
Between picking between Russia & Iran as friend or foe – don’t see how either one could be anything but Foe.
As for having my head up my ass – wish I were that flexible 😉
Everyone seems to think the Ukraine negotiations will be about the war. Have you considered that a peace settlement may include things not even remotely connected? The cozy relationship between Russia and Iran. Ditto the long standing relationship with India. Then there’s Cuba. And Venezuela. OPEC and its ability to disrupt Russia’s oil revenue. Add in Trump’s pressure on Europe to re-arm and NATO’s expansion with Sweden and Finland. Trump could turn Putin’s blunder to our advantage and achieve results we want, results which far outweigh a minor border change in a “country” whose borders and ethnic population have changed so many times in the past.
Trump is definitely not a man who thinks small.
@Karmi
Not legally, no.
That it has, but that’s also the issue of how and legality. And also if we defined “treason” as broadly as you want, what US President of the past half century HADN’T engaged in “treason”?
The Founders were definitely not perfect (and I think Wilkinson is one of the clear cases of how they probably defined it too narrowly) but they were well versed on ugly, complicated politics and why laws had to be narrowly tailored in order for them to not be egregiously abused (and all the more important given how the Continental Congress had expressly authorized smuggling with loyalist British colonies such as Jamaica during the American Revolution, meaning that such a construction could have indicted them all for treason to the US).
As I’ll cite with this:
“That enemy” that is not legally our enemy.
“Going to.”
That is one fucking hell of a load for those two words to do.
So what I’m seeing is Trump is guilty of treason for something he (may be) “going to” but has not actually done, and which in any case falls under the purview of the POTUS conducting foreign affairs.
This is a nonstarter, and if you were not emoting you would acknowledge this. Ditto how Marshall (for all of his major flaws – I still have a love-hate relationship with Marbury v. Madison) acknowledged this problem of proof.
And moreover, it should be a nonstarter precisely because of how easily it could be abused. If we are at the point of declaring nations, polities, or parties that are not our enemies as the constitution defined them, enemies, and arguing for treason based on Future Crime, then were is the stopping point?
Hence the famous analogy of cutting all the laws in the land down to follow the Devil, and then having no shelter if they turn on you.
Indeed they did, and indeed that has caused them problems. And in any case from a legal point of view that isn’t directly relevant to the US in terms of corruption changes (even if maybe it SHOULD be).
Hence why I mentioned. The POTUS is empowered to do a lot (including stuff that’s ethically questionable, such as holding up aid to get an attorney fired/for investigations of why that attorney was fired) in foreign affairs. The key thing with the Shokin/Burisma issue is if Biden etc. al. could show that the Shokin firing push was motivated by legitimate US government interests and policy, and not by the desire to protect Burisma. That was always a stretch and it’s become moreso with the State Department records we now have.
Ironically they probably should have fired Shokin earlier.
Then we are lucky you weren’t one of the major commission members negotiating with people like the Pitts and Cornwallis and Monsieurs XYZ and the Moroccans in the first decades of American independence. And honestly most political and military actors fall somewhere between friend and foe, at least as the Constitution defined them.
I don’t have to like a given regime and may in fact believe it is an enemy in order to recognize that as a matter of black letter law the law disagrees with me.
I mean, there’s still time.
@The Other Chuck
I have considered all of those things, and indeed I think they’d largely be par for the course given past negotiations both by Trump in general and those with Russia, including by those outside Trump. But that doesn’t mean that I am thrilled with it.
In particular, one thing I keep coming back to and that Mark Steyn pointed out in America Alone decades ago is that Putin cannot be Trusted, and that he and the “organs” he broadly represents have largely calculated that in a decaying Russia, they will benefit more by aligning with enemies of the US in particular and the West in general. Hence the fairly solid ties to the PRC, even to the point of growing dependence.
Moreover, Putin’s failure to abide by Minsk I and II and a host of other agreements international and national give me little faith on that.
Perhaps, but to which I’d respond:
A bird in hand is worth three in the skies.
Ukraine is a valuable if unofficial ally and client, and not just for the prospects of globalist grift. We also guaranteed its legal 1994 borders with Russia and the UK, and promised support to defend them. Allowing the Kremlin to betray that agreement and a host of others unilaterally is a bad blow to American credibility and prestige, which we’re already having trouble with.
And past attempts to cut some kind of grand deal with Putin have failed miserably precisely given his deep seated interests and inklings. I doubt Trump will be able to obtain such decisive results turning the Kremlin as you describe, considering he failed to in the first term (like all US POTUSes have since at least Clinton).
Agreed, though sometimes I do feel he could benefit from doing so, especially on technicalities.
In any case I signed up for this ride and support Trump, but that doesn’t mean I have to agree with everything here. And in the case of Ukraine and Russia I do not. I just hope this is some kind of X Degree Blackgammon or misdirection, but I have to call it as I see it.
@ Turtler
Seems you are trying to argue the Kings Law and the American Rule of Law whilst tossing in a dash of Lawfare here, a dash of a mixture of legal cooperation, extralegal resolution, and constructive dialogue there.
My retired criminal version works just fine by me, i.e. if you aid the enemy (Russia), then you are guilty of Treason…
I didn’t say or suggest “may be”. He has already started doing so, as in past “Going to” do.
According to Grok:
For comparison, during WW2, US government spending peaked at 43.6% of GDP in 1943 and the budget deficit peaked at 27% of spending, also in 1943.
We recovered quickly because we were the last man standing with a manufacturing base untouched during the fighting.
How many years/decades will it take for Ukraine to recover? How long is it reasonable for the US/EU to prop up Ukraine’s economy?
Ukraine will be a basket case when the war is over, and they will be back offering their natural resources in exchange for financing. The European’s of course will be more than willing to loan them money at junk bond rates.
Food for thought:
Why Western Populists Should Want Russia To Conquer Ukraine
The article lists 11 reasons. It’s a populist perspective. If you’re not a populist, you might not understand.
Since I’m a populist, I rather like the idea.
Rumor has it that Trump’s a populist too…
Turtler: Thank you for the well reasoned reply. I agree with you about Putin’s untrustworthiness in any agreement or settlement. Then I think about who Trump has at his right hand.
Elon Musk built a private aerospace company, SpaceX, which produces relatively inexpensive reusable rockets which rival any government produced product. His Starlink is THE premier satellite internet connection company which has helped Ukraine target Russian tanks. Add in the geniuses of Silicon Valley who have rallied around Trump.
And then I must smile in disgust at the little thug in Moscow riding around with his shirt off, getting the blessing of the political hack he placed as head of the Russian Orthodox Church, going hat in hand to Beijing to kiss Xi Jinping’s ring, and all the while boasting about his kleptocracy and how it is “reclaiming” Russia’s empire.
Putin vs Trump/Musk. No match.
Karmi – I think Turtler gave a good detailed explanation of why Trump hasn’t committed treason.
I’ll add another point. Even if Russia is our “enemy,” meeting the standard of the relevant treason statute, negotiating the end of a war is not giving “aid and comfort to the enemy,” even if the president makes concessions to the enemy, and even if the president says nice things about the enemy while doing it. Otherwise, the president would be unable to negotiate with enemies without risking a firing squad if a subsequent administration disagreed with his tactics/strategy.
There’s plenty of room to criticize Trump over Ukraine, but accusing him of treason is bonkers and discredits the rest of your arguments.
It appears folks that want the war in Ukraine to continue until a “just peace” is achieved are staking their hopes on a Russia’s economy worsening to the point it can no longer maintain their military.
How reliable is the information about the state of Russia’s economy and it’s ability to maintain military production and adapt to changing world economic conditions? Up until know it’s been wrong.
If you look at it from the perspective that Russia has decided it can sustain the war for 2-3 years and absorb the costs– they really don’t need a peace deal. I think that’s the calculus the administration has reached. And we have to assume that privately the Trump administration is getting more reliable data than we are, where most of the news is driven by a narrative.
I think that’s why Hegseth went to the Munich Security Conference. To tell the Russians two pre-conditions were on the table. No NATO and territory in exchange for peace. Until those two issues were signaled there would have been no peace talks.
I believe Trump is sincere in wanting to end the war as by current sensibilities, the human cost in dead/wounded is horrendous.
There is another signal that Rubio sent when he said the terms would have to be acceptable to all parties. The implication is that includes the Europeans and the Ukrainians. If that remains our negotiating position we will test how much Russia wants to end the war, because right now, the position between Russia’s demands and Ukraine/EU’s demands are irreconcilable.
Bauxite
Yes, a most excellent Rule of Law detailed explanation; however, many claimed Trump was treated unfairly under the same Rule of Law last year – ignoring the fact that Lawfare is an integral part of the Rule of Law__and/or the Kings Law.
We’ll see how the DEMs do in the midterms. If they take control of both houses (or at least the House) perhaps they can see if he has committed Treason and/or at least impeach again for something else…
Kermit is trolling Republicans with the Treason and Dread Rule if Law.
Not that it matters, his hair in fire and all that.
GC™ – poster boy for Christian hypocrisy – instigating again. Instigating because he is unable to control his own ego, and his *BELOVED* Rule of Law must never be questioned…unless that same is being used against him ‘n his.
Hair on fire, Kermit?
That dog still don’t hunt.
GC™ – poster boy for Christian hypocrisy – instigating again. Hate consumes him, leaves him unable to discuss or debate, with only insults and personal attacks left for him to use…
@Banned Lizard
Well I read it, and it was utterly underwhelming. Especially considering the magnitude of it.
But let me go through it.
Presumably the populists living in the areas of Poland and the Baltic that Putin has let mouthpieces like Medvedev threaten to nuke have not been consulted.
Ah yes, 85 Days. Because I too adore uncritical propaganda from fucking idiots like the Russian Imperial Movement, because why be either Neo-Nazis OR Neo-Tsarist when you can be Both?!?! And because someone thought it was a good idea to publicly agitate for literal fucking genocide.
https://ctc.westpoint.edu/the-russian-imperial-movement-in-the-ukraine-wars-2014-2023/
https://web.archive.org/web/20220403223221/https://ria.ru/20220403/ukraina-1781469605.html
Suffice it to say a translator is not always obliged to like the author of the material they are working on or to agree with their ideas (I have conducted some very crude unofficial translations myself), but I think it is well documented that Peter Nimitz and Alexander Zhuchkovsky are significantly more amicable and work closer together than – say – I have with freaking Vladimir Lenin or Erich Ludendorff while working on 85 Days in Slavyansk (in sharp contrast to a few of the other cited translated works from different sides).
Moreover, I do believe that ultimately 85 Days is based on a fundamental lie, that the “cross-border”/’Russian” core of the support for the Donbas was a sort of 1931 Mukden style “Freelance/Off The Leash State” operation led by Strelkov to try and agitate Putin to launch a full invasion. This is – to put it lightly – something I view as a bullshit cover story given the nature of the outbreak of fighting and the equipment. It isn’t ENTIRELY out of the realm of question for renegade middle management to drag in divisional or even army group amounts of military units into the fray without approval from command, but it’s REALLY UNLIKELY for it to happen on the strategic level with multiple Russian Military Districts and their divisional artillery support.
In addition to ya know the public acknowledgement by Putin that he sent units into Crimea just before this.
In any case, it’s ironic that at no point whatsoever does the article Banned Lizard link mentions who actually wrote the 85 Days book, what their affiliation and ideology are, or their track record. A Cntrl+F for “Russian Imperial Movement” and its abbreviations and transliterations gives fuck all.
And i think – at the risk of being conspiratorial – I know why.
Because while many view the war in Ukraine with skepticism or disillusionment, and even more are outright suspicious or hostile to Ukraine as a nexus of corruption and embezzlement, not many people are going to be onboard with literal, fucking unironic Neo-Nazi state sponsored terrorists advocating an all-Ukraine national genocide to try and erase the very concept of a separate Ukraine, complete with public executions and tortures.
All of which are things very publicly advocated by the Russian Imperial Movement and Mr. Zhuchkovsky. As is the destruction of the United States as a whole, though to what little “credit” I will give them, I’m not sure if that is sincere or just a result of them aping their “allies” in the Atomwaffen Division.
But in any case, I think it’s worth underlining just who the fuck these people are, what the fuck they are claiming, how I’m not even sure they can properly be called “populist” due to their extremely totalitarian and quasi-aristocratic and elitist ideology, and how Mr. Nimitz is not just a disinterested, unconnected translator or commenter who decided to translate their work just because he believes it is of scholarly value but does not condone their actions.
I think we’ve become very jaundiced and jaded about accusations of “Fascism”, “Nazism”, and so on due to their abuse and overuse. And with good reason. So I can understand if you are skeptical when I quite literally throw these accusations at Nimitz and comrades. But I think I can stand by it.
And it’s a shame, given how I’ve been interested by at least some of Nimitz’s work before, but it’s worth underlining.
Anyway, off of the prologue.
ZeroHedge continues…
This is just about the lowest possible bar imaginable, given how even on the MSM’s own side they had a fiction novelist turned Obama minion willing to argue that they “know nothing.” And as a scholar (albeit of a twisted kind) who regularly converses and works with people (for a certain value of that term given Gubarev and Zhuchkovsky and co) who are from the region and have been actively involved, it’s not surprising he knows more about the subjects and regions than say the despicable Joy Reid.
But then you realize
A: Joy Reid, bad as she is, probably holds the moral high ground compared to Nimitz.
B: Nimitz knows enough about the region to be able and willing to twist or lie about it for particularly insidious ends.
Ok, so let’s get into Nimitz’s storm.
So right off the bat this is a bullshit Guilt by Association mixed in with a leap of logic. While it’s broadly true that many of Ukraine’s supporters have been explicit in trying to condemn us alongside Putin, it’s worth remembering:
A: This is the same conflict that saw your average MSM leftist trying to explain away saucy fash symbols and even saw an SS Galicia Division Veteran in Trudeau’s Parliament.
and
B: There are many kinds of populism that are not necessarily united, and one can make a good argument that Euromaidan and even Zelenskyy’s rise were populist in their own right.
True, enough, though
A: The Vindman clan apparently did not give many fucks about the fact that Obama cut lethal aid to Ukraine and Trump restored it, which I think speaks to their agendas being of a more conventional American Leftist orientation than anything.
B: At most five people hardly speak for all Ukrainian supporters, including the likes of Rubio.
C: This utterly ignores the Ukrainian supporters that sided with Trump to one degree or another.
D: This ignores the very appeasement focused State Department that among other things worked to counter Trump’s opposition to Assad and Putin’s use of barrel bombs in Syria.
Going to have to take a rain check on this because frankly if they have we probably will not be in a position to know it any time soon, so Nimitz is basically arguing absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
(Any questions why I do not hold him or his intellectual honesty in high regard?)
Citation Needed.
Also Mr. Nimitz, you’re a fucking Neo-Nazi who works with among the most elitist of the Neo-Nazi movements. Why would you be angry about “anti-democratic” forces?
Which is far closer to *THE NORM* throughout the world, like it or not. Freaking Churchill negotiated with the opposition and agreed to the suspension of virtually all elections throughout Britain for the duration of WWII, and this was not unique. And that was with far fewer constitutional restrictions about wartime elections than Ukraine has.
I am not overly fond of this system to put it mildly, I believe it to be overly inflexible and unresponsive. But it’s worth reiterating that it is closer to the norm even for the US.
Myrotvorets is not “Ukraine” and seems to be primarily a disturbingly visible but private effort by Ukrainian nationalists to make an “enemies list.”
However, so far it has not had an actual effect. It is worth noting – because fucking Nimitz sure as hell isn’t going to tell you – that the “enemies’ list”
A: Does not call for the “killing” of people but “whose actions have signs of crimes against the national security of Ukraine, peace, human security, and the international law”, and of “enemies of Ukraine.” Though that is relatively weak since t’s reasonable to see how someone could take this as an incentive to kill.
B: More Importantly, the list has *fuck all official force or enforcement.* It includes elected officials in the Ukrainian government who the site author is pissed at, who have continued holding their post and exercising power without any impediment.
https://archive.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/myrotvorets-website-adds-tymoshenko-database.html
So the idea that this is an official organ of the Ukrainian government and legally enforceable “kill list” is simply bullshit.
C: On the subject of it and its ties to the Ukrainian government, the last credible claim was that it was a product of the SBU, Ukraine’s equivalent of the FBI with a dash of the National Guard. As far as I can tell this was never proved by the Daily Beast, but if it was it ironically might backfire on Nimitz’s whole “Russia has nevar-” claim.
https://san.com/cc/ukraine-uncovers-russian-rat-in-security-service/
So like Russia has and doubtless will again.
https://www.reuters.com/world/who-are-americans-imprisoned-russia-2025-02-12/
Which I view as distasteful, though unsurprising given the very NatBol, Neo-Ceaucescuist, Neo-Iron Guardist, and pro-Kremlin rhetoric of hte guy.
This is simply complete bullshit. Some of us with memories older than a day remember the Kremlin’s trusted news outlets openly agitating for that, mostly in Polish and Baltic elections though also in Brazil and Venezuela.
You know it’s ironic when the Neo-Nazi is breaking out accusations of others being Neo-Nazis as an excuse for why others (who are presumably not so in the 1488 Camp that they are comfortable admitting the ties) should support their side over others.
A: Azov’s a long and ugly story since the group was founded by Neo-Fascist Bandera Fans that had an uneasy relationship with the Ukrainian government but were so important they couldn’t just be removed, so the latter at least claims to have taken stages to try and reform Azov the unit. How much success they’ve had is iffy, with public statements they have successfully “depoliticized” the unit and a lot of criticism (and not just from Kremlin mouthpieces) that they haven’t.
(Though it is worth comparing to others we’ll see where no such effort at Denazification was even attempted).
B: It’s fundamentally comparing apples to oranges. Azov at least THEORETICALLY is supposed to be a military unit of Ukrainian National Guard, not a political organization, such as from Svoboda or Right Sector. If we wanted to make comparisons we would compare this to the likes of Wagner (and oh boy there is a reason Nimitz isn’t touching that).
C: The claim that Azov is “the largest neo-Nazi organization in the world” would be news to a lot of people. Since peak regulation strength is 2,500 (let’s be generous and pump it up to 3,000.
In contrast the Wagner Group (expressly named after Hitler’s favorite composer, and still weakened from the post-March to Moscow purges) is about 8,000ish strong, and while not expressly Neo-Nazi as a whole (then again neither is Azov) was still founded by people with Swastika tats and still contains members who are on the record doing le Nazi salute and ranting about the Jews and racial cleansing even more than Right Sector.
Meanwhile we have no firm numbers on Rusich, with the general consensus they are in the hundreds not thousands. So their higher estimates overlap with the lower ones for Azov, though with worse results since Rusich is explicitly a terrorist group that has claimed credit for border raids and bombings abroad.
And then we get into things like prison gangs where you see groups both in the West and elsewhere that routinely number in the dozens of thousands (admittedly divided between “full” members and “associates” and those in prison at a time and those not).
D: While it’s basically a technicality at this point, Azov and more specifically its originator orgs/parites like Right-Sector have iffy relations with Neo-Nazis less out of any moral principles than because they are Neo-Bandera fans who have never forgiven Hitler for betraying and imprisoning their spiritual godfather.
But I don’t feel like belaboring that point given Bandera’s awful track record.
E: I DO feel like noting that Dima Medvedev- Putin’s nominal second in command and vice president – has a history of Neo-Nazi activities throughout his youth and while he has officially disclaimed them he has apparently kept in touch.
In any case, I think this point alone is enough to show where Nimitz’s hand is and that he is willing to blatantly lie and gaslight his audience assuming they don’t know any better.
But wait, there’s more.
Conflation at work there. Also this ignores how a lot of those arrests were before even the earlier Ukrainian war.
This is simply horseshit counting on people not to know what the Russian government has been pushing.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/15/google-helped-facilitate-russia-china-censorship-requests
https://www.techdirt.com/2019/06/26/russian-government-demands-all-foreign-press-outlets-register-privilege-delivering-news-to-russia/
https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/why-government-should-not-regulate-content-moderation-social-media
Assuming you trust the Russian government’s figures. Which I sure as fuck do not. And I also note that he provides fuck all sourcing or citation for this. Which isn’t surprising.
You probably have heard the yarn that the US surpassed the USSR as the country with the highest proportion of its population in prison. This is true in the very limited sense of the most common (and trust-us-bro) evaluations of prison populations but is otherwise bullshit. What happened was rather that after Gorbachev and Glasnost other regimes learned from his mistake and simply stopped giving accurate assessments of their prison population. This is particularly acute and visibly provable with North Korea and its giant camp systems that – according to its official figures – are supposed to be empty but aren’t. Russia has proven little different in these regards, especially given its willingness to force or “encourage” prisoners into military uniform, or to use the likes of psychiatric hospitals as basically surrogate prisons.
This is true to a point and something I’ve confronted myself, with the likes of NAFO goons who once celebrated the death of an innocent, civilian woman being eaten by a shark simply because she was Russian (and as far as I can tell nobody has claimed she was involved in politics).
However, what this fucker is “conveniently” ignoring is the sadism, snuff films, and so on coming from paid Kremlin propagandists. Even a cursory look at Prigozhin’s filmed executions with the sledgehammer or Kadyrov’s conduct would prove this.
And it’s all the more notable because Kadyrov remains head of state in Chechnya and an increasingly influential member of the Russian government. And he and his units are filming themselves conducting “Struggle Snuggles” and executions on Ukrainian civilians and prisoners (in addition to peddling Diet IS policies).
This I think speaks to which side has the even darker problem at play.
There’s a lot to unpack here, but firstoff:
A: Who the fuck are you trying to fool when ranting about “democratically-unaccountable”? You’re a fucking Neo-Nazi Nimitz, I’ve read your work. You WANT Democratically Unaccountable institutions, just of the “right” kind. And the “curious omissions” such as whitewashing hardcore mass Neo-Nazi movements in Russia I think underlines that.
B: Why specifically since 1917, Nimitz?
C: At best this is guilt by association, and counting on people ignoring how the Kremlin also worked to undermine President Trump, especially in the energy independence and industrial sectors with funding of whackjob Green-Red loonies like those that helped cause the Palisades to burn.
D: This is completely irrelevant to discussing the morals and ethics of the conflict or the merits.
Nice dream, but it’s unlikely to be able to permanently happen. Especially in the Middle East. It encourages us to try and settle these conflicts or at least downplay them if we can, but let’s be realistic.
You all catch that?
Let me repeat again.
In other words, the very existence of an independent Ukrainian state is going to force “military commitments” and presumably “military conflicts.” So presumably fucker is advocating this ceases to exist.
Are you all wondering why I call this piece of shit a Neo-Nazi yet?
Moreover, it’s fundamentally a false premise. The Ukrainian state enjoyed continued peaceful existence from 1991 to early 2014, with no greater domestic conflicts than mass protests or riots and no military conflicts save voluntary participation in peacekeeping ops or as US allies in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is something that Nimitz and his ilk are trying to pretend does not exist when appealing to Western conservatives, isolationists, and moderate liberals because acknowledging it would ask why the peace in Ukraine stopped and why there is no possibility of it existing in peace.
This is what we call horse crap.
Firstly: “Russia’s territorial ambitions are limited to lands inhabited by East Slavs.”
Bullshit, as Chechnya alone should be evidence of, and the threats of the “Gotland Scenario” show. Indeed, I frankly cannot think of a SINGLE TIME IN RUSSIAN HISTORY when Russian territorial ambitions and military interests were limited to areas controlled by “Eastern Slavs.”
Which in any case would still include Poland and Slovakia.
Secondly: This would require belief of the Kremlin keeping its word. Which for obvious reasons is lacking, especially in Poland and Romania. It’s also worth remembering the last time the Russian government agreed to “seek a gradual draw down of military forces in agreement with…” another party/parties.
That was Minsk II.
Remember how THAT turned out?
I’ve been one of those that has generally opposed comparisons of Putin to Hitler, but this is one of the places where they have the greatest overlap. But even a cursory look at Putin’s favorite Georgian, Koba the Dread, would show why this is a bad idea.
For sale: Beachfront Property in Mali. Super low prices! Act now and get the Eiffel Tower!
Mark Steyn saw through this wad of shit decades ago even though he has become quite critical of Zelenskyy and loyal to Trump. That Putin and the other “Organs” have no real incentive to pal up with or even be neutral to the US (especially since demonizing it is necessary to control public outrage internally and to divert attention away from the Organs’ preferred PRC orientation). And they haven’t. Which is why decades of Western leaders on both sides have tried to turn Russia into a “true neutral” or even an ally and have been conned by the Russian government.
In contrast the Ukrainians have literally fought and in some cases died alongside us in Afghanistan and Iraq even before 2014. I think I know what I view as the sounder choice.
Somehow I am skeptical of this, and in any case do not feel it necessary given Reform and the AFD’s strong polling.
Sure, but not all “Pro-Ukrainian parties.”
It’s also worth noting that “Pro-Ukrainian Parties” includes everybody from Meloni’s Brothers of Italy to Sweden’s Pirate Party, so this is obviously not all encompassing.
Which assumes you think the economic fallout of the Kremlin trying to loot it would save more than it costs. I don’t.
It also ignores the general lack of interest in rebuilding by the Kremlin on the whole and their skill in milking the West for reconstruction dollars (often including the very same Western NGOs that the USAID investigation has made justifiably infamous).
This fucker’s use of “pro-democracy” and so on reminds me of reading old school Leninist writers doing similar, and again ignores the Kremlin doing similar.
Literally all of which have been done by the Russian government, with the added spice that the Ukrainian government does not have any territorial claims beyond that which it was agreed to lawfully posses in 1994.
The Russian Kremlin does.
Also, you note how Nimitz never addressed how deeply intertwined Russia is with the PRC, Iran, the Baathist Parties in the Middle East, and so forth? Yeah so did I.
Translation: dumbfuck is assuming nobody reading his shit has studied history prior to 1991, including Novgorodian imperialism in the medieval Baltic and especially Ivan IV’s later Livonian War. This is simply false. Russian interest in the Baltic and Scandinavia was NOT dominated by some kind of Volkish Racial/National Collectivism (though that helped) but by desire for tribute and power over the littoral. This becomes very clear if you read primary sources from the Livonian War or even decent translations of them from Ivan IV’s court, and you get shocked by how many of them could have been written today.
Oh yeah and Putin and co trying to unilaterally rescind the purchase of Alaska, a place that had a negligible ethnic Russian population even during the heyday and which has even less of a proportion now. As well as the Arctic, which has vanishingly little of any populace.
https://nypost.com/2022/03/15/putins-spin-doc-wants-reparation-from-u-s-and-alaska-back/
So in short: Don’t be reliant on remorseless, dishonest, genocide shilling Neo-Nazis like Mr. Nimitz for an accurate assessment of things.
PS: I greatly resent that this bastard is using the image of the great and relatively good Barn Wrangl, probably the best of the White Russian commanders of the Revolutionary Wars and the kind of man Russia deserved to have.
Also worth noting he was a man who was willing to make compromises with the likes of Poland, the Baltic Nationalists, Ukrainian Nationalists, and even the nutbar Naval Anarcho-Socialists in Kronstadt against the greater enemy. Which makes Nimitz’s appropriation of his image on behalf of arguing for the total destruction of the Ukrainian state (and by dint of his ties to the Russian Imperial Movement, the Ukrainian identity, culture, and peoples) all the more enraging to me.
Derp, BARON Wrangl, not “Barn.”
Not sure of Turtler’s point(s), but they may be something like mine; the result of the peace process depends on what Putin thinks he got out of the war. Not what anybody else thinks he got out of the war.
If he thinks he “won”, in his terms including Hanson’s Russia’s Way of War as an acceptable strategy, then he’ll try it again with some other excuse.
I recall in the late Sixties, it took about three months past the eighteenth birthday to make one eligible to be a soldier. Which is to say, drafted.
Don’t know Putin’s idea of the earliest age for recruiting, but it only takes a year for a guy one year younger than that to get there. And some guys are only a couple of months short.
So, Putin’s perception of the op is the only thing which matters in going forward for peace, or not, in Europe.
And the details, large or small, will add or subtract from the math. No matter what we think.
He saw biden as weak of course he would make such demands specially after the kabul capitulations there was one general makarov who wanted to nuke us during the obama years over missile defense or some such
That was around the time the entire polish cabinet was slaughtered not long after that came the half invasion and the mh 17 shootdown a little after that
Weakness invites confrontation
Funny how so many ignore Putin’s actions since 2008.
Does being a populist mean you have no functioning memory? Nor grasp the concept of cause and effect?
@Richard Aubrey:Don’t know Putin’s idea of the earliest age for recruiting, but it only takes a year for a guy one year younger than that to get there. And some guys are only a couple of months short.
You might want to look at Russia’s population “pyramid”. Which is less of a “pyramid” and more of a spiky pole or perhaps a Christmas tree with a lot of trunk showing.
There’s fewer and fewer 18-and-unders to grow to military age. He’s not replacing anyone he loses.
Russia has more 60-64 year old men then they have 15-19 year-old males, and Russia has more 40-45 year old men than 10-14 year-old males.
Most excellent ‘n handy LINK source, Niketas Choniates – Thanks!
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/02/20/zelensky-praises-productive-meeting-trump-envoy-gen-keith-kellogg/
Niketas.
You’re looking at this from a western point of view. Putin will take anybody he can get including what we might have considered 4F. I was making a case that time helps, not that his only resource was a new batch of eighteen year olds.
You may recall that the German general staff were uneasy over the relative combat power of their potential enemies in the coming WW II compared to the best the Germans could do, scraping the cupboard. But they went ahead, probably why the emphasis on the Aryan super soldier and the Wonderweapons.
The latter had some bad ideas including the immense resources in the V3, immense fixed guns shooting at London. “tausenfelser”, I think they were called for short. With that stuff they could have had more railroad engines, more bridge repairs, more tanks, more barrel replacements for their 88 and long 75.
But they needed to think they could win differently.
Didn’t work but it was a hell of a job convincing them.