Russia

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

I think that Trump will have to navigate domestic public opinion. Americans are not stupid and have a sense of fair play they will not want Putin to be rewarded for his aggression. Shitting on Ukraine will not be well received at home.

[egg]

9 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

You’d have to be rather more naive to believe that:

a) Ukraine would negotiate a deal which literally gives them nothing. It’s basically a piece of paper that says, "we’re okay with everything Russia has done."

b) Russia will stop fighting when they’ve been officially rewarded for what they’ve done so far but haven’t got everything they want yet.

This either ends on the battle field or around the negotiation table. It'll be the latter. Do you say it'll be the former? 

[egg]

4 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

I think that Trump will have to navigate domestic public opinion. Americans are not stupid and have a sense of fair play they will not want Putin to be rewarded for his aggression. Shitting on Ukraine will not be well received at home.

I get that, but would he care if he can't run again? He's about getting deals done that save or make America money, and in his eyes,  make him look good. Neither Ukraine nor Gaza should be stitched up, but both will be sadly. 

[badgerx16]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

I get that, but would he care if he can't run again?

Give him a chance, the 22nd Amendment is on page 2 of his to do list, and there is already a proposal to put before Congress a Bill that is intended to rephrase the Amendment so that it refers to being unable to serve more than 2 consecutive terms.

[egg]

2 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Give him a chance, the 22nd Amendment is on page 2 of his to do list, and there is already a proposal to put before Congress a Bill that is intended to rephrase the Amendment so that it refers to being unable to serve more than 2 consecutive terms.

Christ. Congress may be daft enough to pass that. 

[badgerx16]

20 minutes ago, egg said:

Christ. Congress may be daft enough to pass that. 

Also, consider that at the end of this term he will be older than Biden was when his term in office ended.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

45 minutes ago, egg said:

I get that, but would he care if he can't run again? He's about getting deals done that save or make America money, and in his eyes,  make him look good. Neither Ukraine nor Gaza should be stitched up, but both will be sadly. 

He is quite vain and legacy will be on his mind. He wants to be seen as the good guy.  Ukraine v Russia is with a marginal grey tinge is a question of right and wrong.

[Gloucester Saint]

Sounds like Hegseth announced Trump’s thinking for that moment on Ukraine without filtering it properly. Scott Bessant the Treasury Sec now rowing back at pace saying US air cover may well be on offer and Vance backing that up on the way to the summit stating all options are on the table and Russia may face further sanctions. 

[woksaintly]

Trump and Peace
The reality and unambiguous policy of Trump is now all too apparent. He has dismissed democracy as a political inconvenience and that the only thing that is important is "the deal". That deal should benefit him and the USA.

On the grander scale of things his real fear and enemy is China. I am certain he wants an ally in Putin to offset the cosy relationship between Russia and China that currently exists. It is also very evident he does not care about Europe or for that matter NATO. He thinks that he can bully Ukraine into a deal by immediately withdrawing arms support and let Europe pick up the pieces. This is indeed the challenge that the collective European states now face as the USA abandons its position of defenders of democracy. Will Europe take up the challenge in defending Ukraine with muscle rather than rhetoric?

History tells us that bullies continue to bully unless they are stopped. WE thought that was only Putin but now I fear that is Trump too

[egg]

44 minutes ago, woksaintly said:

Trump and Peace
The reality and unambiguous policy of Trump is now all too apparent. He has dismissed democracy as a political inconvenience and that the only thing that is important is "the deal". That deal should benefit him and the USA.

On the grander scale of things his real fear and enemy is China. I am certain he wants an ally in Putin to offset the cosy relationship between Russia and China that currently exists. It is also very evident he does not care about Europe or for that matter NATO. He thinks that he can bully Ukraine into a deal by immediately withdrawing arms support and let Europe pick up the pieces. This is indeed the challenge that the collective European states now face as the USA abandons its position of defenders of democracy. Will Europe take up the challenge in defending Ukraine with muscle rather than rhetoric?

History tells us that bullies continue to bully unless they are stopped. WE thought that was only Putin but now I fear that is Trump too

Good post, and I'm with you on all of that. I also think there's also a wish to divide and conquer the wider Brics+ nations, politically and financially speaking. China he can only really hurt with tariffs, but Russia he can help by easing tariffs, he's softened up India, and had a pop at South Africa in his first week. Europe are a drain to him, and in reality do the US need NATO? It's shaping up to be a very interesting year. 

[badgerx16]

According to the Wall Street Journal a Ukrainian F-16 was shot down by friendly fire from a Ukrainian operated Patriot missile system because when the Patriots were supplied they had the Link-16 IFF system, which identifies the F-16 as a friendly asset, disabled, and when Ukraine started receiving F-16s nobody thought to turn it on.

[whelk]

Turns out Jonnyboy is actually called Dean

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZNd1Qj2sp/

[sadoldgit]

On 13/02/2025 at 19:34, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

I think that Trump will have to navigate domestic public opinion. Americans are not stupid and have a sense of fair play they will not want Putin to be rewarded for his aggression. Shitting on Ukraine will not be well received at home.

You say that Americans are not stupid and whilst I agree that not all Americans are stupid, there were enough stupid ones to vote this cretin in for a second term. Millions of them.

[egg]

I hadn't seen this... insane.

"Revealed: Trump’s confidential plan to put Ukraine in a stranglehold. Panic in Kyiv as US president demands higher share of GDP than Germany’s First World War reparations. Donald Trump’s demand for a $500bn (£400bn) “payback” from Ukraine goes far beyond US control over the country’s critical minerals. It covers everything from ports and infrastructure to oil and gas, and the larger resource base of the country.

The terms of the contract that landed at Volodymyr Zelensky’s office a week ago amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity. It implies a burden of reparations that cannot possibly be achieved. The document has caused consternation and panic in Kyiv.

The Telegraph has obtained a draft of the pre-decisional contract, marked “Privileged & Confidential’ and dated Feb 7 2025. It states that the US and Ukraine should form a joint investment fund to ensure that “hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine”. 

The agreement covers the “economic value associated with resources of Ukraine”, including “mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure (as agreed)”, leaving it unclear what else might be encompassed. “This agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles,” it states.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of “all new licences issued to third parties” for the future monetisation of resources. There will be “a lien on such revenues” in favour of the US. “That clause means ‘pay us first, and then feed your children’,” said one source close to the negotiations.

It states that “for all future licences, the US will have a right of first refusal for the purchase of exportable minerals”. Washington will have sovereign immunity and acquire near total control over most of Ukraine’s commodity and resource economy. The fund “shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions” of all future licences and projects. And so forth, in this vein. It seems to have been written by private lawyers, not the US departments of state or commerce.

President Zelensky himself proposed the idea of giving the US a direct stake in Ukraine’s rare earth elements and critical minerals on a visit to Trump Tower in September, hoping to smooth the way for continued arms deliveries.

He probably did not expect to be confronted with terms normally imposed on aggressor states defeated in war. They are worse than the financial penalties imposed on Germany and Japan after their defeat in 1945. Both countries were ultimately net recipients of funds from the victorious allies.

A new Versailles

If this draft were accepted, Trump’s demands would amount to a higher share of Ukrainian GDP than reparations imposed on Germany at the Versailles Treaty, later whittled down at the London Conference in 1921, and by the Dawes Plan in 1924. At the same time, he seems willing to let Russia off the hook entirely.

Donald Trump told Fox News that Ukraine had “essentially agreed” to hand over $500bn. “They have tremendously valuable land in terms of rare earths, in terms of oil and gas, in terms of other things,” he said.

He warned that Ukraine would be handed to Putin on a plate if it rejected the terms. “They may make a deal. They may not make a deal. They may be Russian someday, or they may not be Russian someday. But I want this money back,” he said.

Trump said the US had spent $300bn on the war so far, adding that it would be “stupid” to hand over any more. In fact the five packages agreed by Congress total $175bn, of which $70bn was spent in the US on weapons production. Some of it is in the form of humanitarian grants, but much of it is lend-lease money that must be repaid."

https://archive.is/0El3f

 

[badgerx16]

Trump punishes Ukraine for being invaded. Make "the deal" so bad that whatever Putin offers looks the better option.

Edited Tuesday at 12:36 by badgerx16

[egg]

21 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Trump punishes Ukraine for being invaded. Make "the deal" so bad that whatever Putin offers looks the better option.

Alas, yes. 

[benjii]

35 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Trump punishes Ukraine for being invaded. Make "the deal" so bad that whatever Putin offers looks the better option.

Present something to Ukraine that can never be agreed. Make concessions to Putin anyway. Walk off in a strop blaming Ukraine.

 

Trump is, after all, on the Russian payroll. 

[tdmickey3]

1 hour ago, egg said:

I hadn't seen this... insane.

"Revealed: Trump’s confidential plan to put Ukraine in a stranglehold. Panic in Kyiv as US president demands higher share of GDP than Germany’s First World War reparations. Donald Trump’s demand for a $500bn (£400bn) “payback” from Ukraine goes far beyond US control over the country’s critical minerals. It covers everything from ports and infrastructure to oil and gas, and the larger resource base of the country.

The terms of the contract that landed at Volodymyr Zelensky’s office a week ago amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity. It implies a burden of reparations that cannot possibly be achieved. The document has caused consternation and panic in Kyiv.

The Telegraph has obtained a draft of the pre-decisional contract, marked “Privileged & Confidential’ and dated Feb 7 2025. It states that the US and Ukraine should form a joint investment fund to ensure that “hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine”. 

The agreement covers the “economic value associated with resources of Ukraine”, including “mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure (as agreed)”, leaving it unclear what else might be encompassed. “This agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles,” it states.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of “all new licences issued to third parties” for the future monetisation of resources. There will be “a lien on such revenues” in favour of the US. “That clause means ‘pay us first, and then feed your children’,” said one source close to the negotiations.

It states that “for all future licences, the US will have a right of first refusal for the purchase of exportable minerals”. Washington will have sovereign immunity and acquire near total control over most of Ukraine’s commodity and resource economy. The fund “shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions” of all future licences and projects. And so forth, in this vein. It seems to have been written by private lawyers, not the US departments of state or commerce.

President Zelensky himself proposed the idea of giving the US a direct stake in Ukraine’s rare earth elements and critical minerals on a visit to Trump Tower in September, hoping to smooth the way for continued arms deliveries.

He probably did not expect to be confronted with terms normally imposed on aggressor states defeated in war. They are worse than the financial penalties imposed on Germany and Japan after their defeat in 1945. Both countries were ultimately net recipients of funds from the victorious allies.

A new Versailles

If this draft were accepted, Trump’s demands would amount to a higher share of Ukrainian GDP than reparations imposed on Germany at the Versailles Treaty, later whittled down at the London Conference in 1921, and by the Dawes Plan in 1924. At the same time, he seems willing to let Russia off the hook entirely.

Donald Trump told Fox News that Ukraine had “essentially agreed” to hand over $500bn. “They have tremendously valuable land in terms of rare earths, in terms of oil and gas, in terms of other things,” he said.

He warned that Ukraine would be handed to Putin on a plate if it rejected the terms. “They may make a deal. They may not make a deal. They may be Russian someday, or they may not be Russian someday. But I want this money back,” he said.

Trump said the US had spent $300bn on the war so far, adding that it would be “stupid” to hand over any more. In fact the five packages agreed by Congress total $175bn, of which $70bn was spent in the US on weapons production. Some of it is in the form of humanitarian grants, but much of it is lend-lease money that must be repaid."

https://archive.is/0El3f

 

Wow, he is more of a cunt than even his worst critic could claim..

[badgerx16]

1 minute ago, tdmickey3 said:

Wow, he is more of a cunt than even his worst critic could claim..

And GM wants us to negotiate a trade deal with him.

[leesaint88]

24 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

And GM wants us to negotiate a trade deal with him.

That could have a huge move forward too, as the previous stumbling blocks have been on food stuffs for which the regulations are too far and wide to ever meet. RFK seems to want the US to at least mirror the same standards we have in europe regarding additives etc. If he gets that through then it would bring a trade deal a whole lot closer. 

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, benjii said:

Present something to Ukraine that can never be agreed. Make concessions to Putin anyway. Walk off in a strop blaming Ukraine.

 

Trump is, after all, on the Russian payroll. 

I don’t know if it is true or not but there is a rumour doing the rounds that, during Trump’s phone call to Putin he said something like…”You run a cool country, I run a cool country. Let’s carve up the rest of the world”. No surprise that he is sending a Real Estate expert to Ukraine and Gaza under the guise of a senior diplomat.

[AlexLaw76]

34 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I don’t know if it is true or not but there is a rumour doing the rounds that, during Trump’s phone call to Putin he said something like…”You run a cool country, I run a cool country. Let’s carve up the rest of the world”. No surprise that he is sending a Real Estate expert to Ukraine and Gaza under the guise of a senior diplomat.

And yet Russia and Ukraine are nearer peace now than any time in the few years

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

And yet Russia and Ukraine are nearer peace now than any time in the few years

Are they ? Replacing Russian military aggression with US economic colonialism is hardly going to help Ukraine, and using extreme intimidation to force them to accept is morally corrupt.  What little has been suggested so far is more like a pause in proceedings before round 2 begins, Putin's new BFF tells him there are no adverse consequences to his aggression, and he can keep most of the territory he has overrun as he rebuilds his military and sets his sights on his next target.

Edit; from Lavrov's comments, Russia is opposed to any external security guarantees for Ukraine, so there would be nothing to get in the way of SMO 2.0. ( Not that security promises to Ukraine have ever counted for much ).

Edited Tuesday at 16:35 by badgerx16

[Whitey Grandad]

33 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Are they ? Replacing Russian military aggression with US economic colonialism is hardly going to help Ukraine, and using extreme intimidation to force them to accept is morally corrupt.  What little has been suggested so far is more like a pause in proceedings before round 2 begins, Putin's new BFF tells him there are no adverse consequences to his aggression, and he can keep most of the territory he has overrun as he rebuilds his military and sets his sights on his next target.

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium, atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.

• To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire, and where they make a desert, they call it peace.
   
• Tacitus

[Jimmy_D]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

And yet Russia and Ukraine are nearer peace now than any time in the few years

Right now the US ‘negotiating’ hasn’t changed Russia’s demands one bit.

There’s absolutely zero chance Ukraine agrees to that, they’re as far from peace as they’ve ever been.

[Lighthouse]

It’s so weird that Lavrov won’t accept any NATO peacekeeping troops in Ukraine as part of a ceasefire deal. If Russia gets to keep the parts of Ukraine they occupy, why on Earth would that matter?! Russia definitely isn’t going to attack the rest of Ukraine again in the future. Definitely not.

[egg]

17 minutes ago, Jimmy_D said:

Right now the US ‘negotiating’ hasn’t changed Russia’s demands one bit.

There’s absolutely zero chance Ukraine agrees to that, they’re as far from peace as they’ve ever been.

How do you know their demands before today, and now? 

That said, i think today was probably little more than a surface scratching exercise anyway. 

[egg]

3 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

It’s so weird that Lavrov won’t accept any NATO peacekeeping troops in Ukraine as part of a ceasefire deal. If Russia gets to keep the parts of Ukraine they occupy, why on Earth would that matter?! Russia definitely isn’t going to attack the rest of Ukraine again in the future. Definitely not.

Unusually we agree. The fact is that NaTo have not been a threat to Russia. Nor have Ukraine. The two combined wouldn't be, unless Russia attacked and NATO Ukraine came to it's rescue. 

[Lighthouse]

1 minute ago, egg said:

How do you know their demands before today, and now? 

That said, i think today was probably little more than a surface scratching exercise anyway. 

Their demands/aims are the same as they’ve always been, the total subjugation of Ukraine under the control of Moscow. It’s quite clear from what the Russians have said so far they haven’t deviated from this at all. In short the want to keep everything they occupy right now and keep Ukraine isolated and defenceless ready for their next assault when they’ve amassed sufficient forces along the new border. It’s quite clear from Lavrov’s stance on the free part of Ukraine that he has absolutely no intention of allowing any kind of security guarantees.

Other than a load of hot air from Trump and his cronies, absolutely nothing has changed. The only card they can really play of any consequence is some sort of crippling economic blackmail which would force Kyiv into total surrender and would be one of the most disgusting manoeuvres of any US government in history.

[rallyboy]

Any discussion with only one side isn't a peace summit, it's a PR exercise for Trump and Putin.

 

[egg]

Just now, Lighthouse said:

Their demands/aims are the same as they’ve always been, the total subjugation of Ukraine under the control of Moscow. It’s quite clear from what the Russians have said so far they haven’t deviated from this at all. In short the want to keep everything they occupy right now and keep Ukraine isolated and defenceless ready for their next assault when they’ve amassed sufficient forces along the new border. It’s quite clear from Lavrov’s stance on the free part of Ukraine that he has absolutely no intention of allowing any kind of security guarantees.

Other than a load of hot air from Trump and his cronies, absolutely nothing has changed. The only card they can really play of any consequence is some sort of crippling economic blackmail which would force Kyiv into total surrender and would be one of the most disgusting manoeuvres of any US government in history.

That's all assumption. Unless and until we're told what principles were discussed today, we won't know current positions and whether any concessions were given or indicated as a possibility.

That said, I'm convinced that Ukraine will get absolutely shafted in this, and will retain 'sovereignty' but at enormous financial expense. The latter will come with security guarantees of sorts assuming it gives US financial guarantees.

Russia get land, US get to to rape and pillage Ukraine, and Ukraine remains but will be about as free as a caged canary. 

[Jimmy_D]

9 minutes ago, egg said:

How do you know their demands before today, and now? 

That said, i think today was probably little more than a surface scratching exercise anyway. 

You only have to read Russia’s demands from today to realise that they’re certainly not stepping back or willing to concede anything, but they match almost word for word their demands all along.

Fortunately Russia has been weakened enough by Ukraine that Europe can probably support Ukraine as long as they’re willing to fight, albeit at a greater cost than anyone would like.

Whether political pressure from Europe can keep US support flowing remains to be seen, but the US has burned an awful lot of political capital, goodwill and and soft power in Europe just for a surface scratching exercise.

[egg]

5 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

Any discussion with only one side isn't a peace summit, it's a PR exercise for Trump and Putin.

 

To an extent, yes, but Trump wants a bit of Ukraine and to get that he needs Russia out of the way, thus it seems to be a chat to see what Russia will take to get out and stay out.

I think it's more a mutual nest feathering exercise than PR. 

[egg]

1 minute ago, Jimmy_D said:

You only have to read Russia’s demands from today to realise that they’re certainly not stepping back or willing to concede anything, but they match almost word for word their demands all along.

Fortunately Russia has been weakened enough by Ukraine that Europe can probably support Ukraine as long as they’re willing to fight, albeit at a greater cost than anyone would like.

Whether political pressure from Europe can keep US support flowing remains to be seen, but the US has burned an awful lot of political capital, goodwill and and soft power in Europe just for a surface scratching exercise.

You've said similar throughout. I'm not sure that even our military leaders share your confidence. 

[badgerx16]

16 minutes ago, egg said:

You've said similar throughout. I'm not sure that even our military leaders share your confidence. 

Russia is undoubtedly weaker, her best troop formations have been decimated, and the tank reserves have been burned through. Whether the Russian forces have been sufficiently weakened to the point where they do not pose a significant threat to Western Europe is open to question : they had a significant superiority before the SMO, still have vast reserves of manpower and the capacity to rebuild, and the UK's ground military headcount is probably smaller than at any time since the Spanish Armada.

Edited Tuesday at 17:32 by badgerx16

[egg]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

Russia is undoubtedly weaker, her best troop formations have been decimated, and the tank reserves have been burned through. Whether the Russian forces have been sufficiently weakened to the point where they do not pose a significant threat to Western Europe is open to question : they had a significant superiority before the SMO, still have vast reserves of manpower and the capacity to rebuild, and the UK's ground military headcount is probably smaller than at any time since the Spanish Armada.

There is no doubt they're weaker, but I'm not persuaded they're weaker (at least personnel wise) than Europe. There's also no doubt that Europe are significantly weaker hardware wise, and that Russia have been able to replenish moreso than Europe. We can't get away from the fact that we've been told that we need to boost European military big time to out muscle Russia. The US hold the aces here, and sadly they have a leader willing to shaft everyone else to get what he wants. 

[Lighthouse]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

There is no doubt they're weaker, but I'm not persuaded they're weaker (at least personnel wise) than Europe. There's also no doubt that Europe are significantly weaker hardware wise, and that Russia have been able to replenish moreso than Europe. We can't get away from the fact that we've been told that we need to boost European military big time to out muscle Russia. The US hold the aces here, and sadly they have a leader willing to shaft everyone else to get what he wants. 

I’d say most military analysts would disagree with that, Russia has nothing that can compete in air to air combat with any NATO Typhoon or F35 for example. Even many of the older F16s and FA18s have more advanced avionics than their Russian counterparts, many of which are far from airworthy condition. It’s a similar story when you start comparing the WW2 era tanks Russia has been dragging out of storage to modern Leopards and Challengers.

We’ve been complacent for too long in terms of troop numbers and defence spending but collectively Europe has the stronger military. It’s just a question of will power.

[Jimmy_D]

7 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

I’d say most military analysts would disagree with that, Russia has nothing that can compete in air to air combat with any NATO Typhoon or F35 for example. Even many of the older F16s and FA18s have more advanced avionics than their Russian counterparts, many of which are far from airworthy condition. It’s a similar story when you start comparing the WW2 era tanks Russia has been dragging out of storage to modern Leopards and Challengers.

We’ve been complacent for too long in terms of troop numbers and defence spending but collectively Europe has the stronger military. It’s just a question of will power.

Not to mention that, regardless of Russian claims of the military power they have, some of the best options they have (and so are actually using) on the front in Ukraine are donkeys, domestic vehicles, motorcycles, military vehicles from 70 years ago, and troops on crutches.

Meanwhile Ukraine lead the world in drone warfare, and are increasing that domestic capability at an incredible rate.

[Baird of the land]

2 hours ago, rallyboy said:

Any discussion with only one side isn't a peace summit, it's a PR exercise for Trump and Putin.

 

Last June wasn’t there a so called peace summit excluding Russia.

[aintforever]

3 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

I’d say most military analysts would disagree with that, Russia has nothing that can compete in air to air combat with any NATO Typhoon or F35 for example. Even many of the older F16s and FA18s have more advanced avionics than their Russian counterparts, many of which are far from airworthy condition. It’s a similar story when you start comparing the WW2 era tanks Russia has been dragging out of storage to modern Leopards and Challengers.

We’ve been complacent for too long in terms of troop numbers and defence spending but collectively Europe has the stronger military. It’s just a question of will power.

Isn’t the issue the fact that Russia’s economy is now geared up for war? Right now they are probably weak but in 5 or so years time they could be a serious threat unless we increase our forces.

[badgerx16]

19 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Isn’t the issue the fact that Russia’s economy is now geared up for war? Right now they are probably weak but in 5 or so years time they could be a serious threat unless we increase our forces.

Maintaing a 'war economy', especially on top of international sanctions, is severely detrimental to the domestic one.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-economy-putin-ukraine-war-b2699716.html

"The result in Russia has been rampant inflation, currently running at over 9 per cent, crippling interest rates of 21 per cent and runaway price hikes on staple goods that far outpace the headline inflation rate and have hit ordinary Russians hard.

Last summer the price of eggs jumped by 42 per cent, bananas by 48 per cent, tomatoes by 39.5 per cent and potatoes by 25 per cent. The Russian ruble has lost over half of its value since Putin first invaded Crimea in 2014, and over $600bn of the Kremlin’s foreign currency reserves have been frozen in Western banks.

More than 1,000 Western businesses – including Ikea and McDonald’s – pulled out, as did Western car manufacturers. Imports of Western goods – especially technology – are now expensively routed through sanctions-busting neighbours like Kazakhstan and Georgia. And last month Russian utility companies hiked prices for electricity by up to 250 per cent.

“Everyone drives Chinese cars these days, but there are no spare parts,” says Alexandra, 39, a former journalist who lives in Moscow and whose ex-husband is fighting in Ukraine. “The only foreign cars you buy are right-hand-drive [from Japan]. Anyone with a mortgage is paying crazy interest. People complain how expensive everything has become.”

"The current crazy levels of expenditure are unsustainable, so Putin has a strong economic incentive to bring his war to an end"

[Lighthouse]

40 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Isn’t the issue the fact that Russia’s economy is now geared up for war? Right now they are probably weak but in 5 or so years time they could be a serious threat unless we increase our forces.

If it was that simple that you could just ‘gear your economy’ for war indefinitely and not suffer any consequences, then everyone would do it all the time. I’m not an economist, so I couldn’t begin to tell you the ins and outs of all these sanctions, their long terms effects and the sustainability of Russian countermeasures but a war of this scale is not something that either they or Ukraine can keep up forever.

[whelk]

33 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Maintaing a 'war economy', especially on top of international sanctions, is severely detrimental to the domestic one.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-economy-putin-ukraine-war-b2699716.html

"The result in Russia has been rampant inflation, currently running at over 9 per cent, crippling interest rates of 21 per cent and runaway price hikes on staple goods that far outpace the headline inflation rate and have hit ordinary Russians hard.

Last summer the price of eggs jumped by 42 per cent, bananas by 48 per cent, tomatoes by 39.5 per cent and potatoes by 25 per cent. The Russian ruble has lost over half of its value since Putin first invaded Crimea in 2014, and over $600bn of the Kremlin’s foreign currency reserves have been frozen in Western banks.

More than 1,000 Western businesses – including Ikea and McDonald’s – pulled out, as did Western car manufacturers. Imports of Western goods – especially technology – are now expensively routed through sanctions-busting neighbours like Kazakhstan and Georgia. And last month Russian utility companies hiked prices for electricity by up to 250 per cent.

“Everyone drives Chinese cars these days, but there are no spare parts,” says Alexandra, 39, a former journalist who lives in Moscow and whose ex-husband is fighting in Ukraine. “The only foreign cars you buy are right-hand-drive [from Japan]. Anyone with a mortgage is paying crazy interest. People complain how expensive everything has become.”

"The current crazy levels of expenditure are unsustainable, so Putin has a strong economic incentive to bring his war to an end"

Problem is these cunts are happy to live off potatoes and vodka 

[badgerx16]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

Problem is these cunts are happy to live off potatoes and vodka 

Would you go to war in a tank built by pissed Russians ?

[Weston Super Saint]

9 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Maintaing a 'war economy', especially on top of international sanctions, is severely detrimental to the domestic one.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-economy-putin-ukraine-war-b2699716.html

"The result in Russia has been rampant inflation, currently running at over 9 per cent, crippling interest rates of 21 per cent and runaway price hikes on staple goods that far outpace the headline inflation rate and have hit ordinary Russians hard.

Last summer the price of eggs jumped by 42 per cent, bananas by 48 per cent, tomatoes by 39.5 per cent and potatoes by 25 per cent. The Russian ruble has lost over half of its value since Putin first invaded Crimea in 2014, and over $600bn of the Kremlin’s foreign currency reserves have been frozen in Western banks.

More than 1,000 Western businesses – including Ikea and McDonald’s – pulled out, as did Western car manufacturers. Imports of Western goods – especially technology – are now expensively routed through sanctions-busting neighbours like Kazakhstan and Georgia. And last month Russian utility companies hiked prices for electricity by up to 250 per cent.

“Everyone drives Chinese cars these days, but there are no spare parts,” says Alexandra, 39, a former journalist who lives in Moscow and whose ex-husband is fighting in Ukraine. “The only foreign cars you buy are right-hand-drive [from Japan]. Anyone with a mortgage is paying crazy interest. People complain how expensive everything has become.”

"The current crazy levels of expenditure are unsustainable, so Putin has a strong economic incentive to bring his war to an end"

Throw in a new US President who wants to massively increase the country's exports - let's face it no goods other than oil and gas are likely to be heading in the other direction - and you might be able to figure out why he is so keen to get a 'deal' done regarding Ukraine.

[badgerx16]

Trump's team return from talks with the Russians

[badgerx16]

Sergei Lavrov tells the Americans that Russia does not target any civilian energy infrastructure. A blatant lie, left unchallenged. This is the level of "negotiation" that has been taking place.

Trump tells Ukraine " You could have made a deal 3 years ago" - true, they could just have surrendered.

 

This will not end with a negotiated settlement, or at least it will only have been "negotiated" between the US and Russia. It will end with a settlement imposed on Ukraine that grants Putin most of what he wants.

Edited Wednesday at 08:47 by badgerx16

[badgerx16]

"You should have never started it, you could have made a deal. I could have made a deal for Ukraine that would have given them almost all of the land, everything, almost all of the land, and no people would have been killed, no city would have been demolished, .........but they chose not to do it that way".

What he missed out was "...and my good friend Vladimir Putin, very smart guy, one of the smartest guys around, would have kept to our agreement, my agreement, the deal I made, an excellent deal, very excellent, and would have been happy, very happy in fact, and would keep to his side of the bargain, our very good deal for Ukraine, my good deal for them, and never threaten to take more territory, at least not much more, just those little bits to tidy up the borders, not much at all really, not really useful land, land Ukraine can afford to give up because it isn't worth much really, not at all, and Putin, smart guy, very smart guy, would stick to our deal, the deal, my very good deal really, and he would not threaten anybody, well not much and the war would never have happened, probably not, not at all,possibly, and nobody would have died, well maybe not, perhaps not died".

Edited Wednesday at 09:37 by badgerx16

[leesaint88]

What Russia wanted from Ukraine has been known for years, certainly working within the defence industry it came as no surprise that they launched a large scale invasion back in 2022. Probably the only surprise was how poorly the Russian military performed especially when it came to logistics and how quickly morale dropped in certain 'elite' units. Below is what I've always understood Russia wanted:

- Land bridge to the North of Crimea

- Access to fresh water supplies for Crimea

- To have the Donbass & Luhansk absorbed into the Russian federation or as separate republics like South Ossetia etc.

Personally I don't think the Russians are too bothered about Ukraine being in NATO, they didn't grumble much back in 2008 when the Ukrainians first floated the idea on the back of the Georgian war. But now Trump has decided it won't happen it'll be something they can push in the negotiations. 

[badgerx16]

8 minutes ago, leesaint88 said:

What Russia wanted from Ukraine has been known for years, certainly working within the defence industry it came as no surprise that they launched a large scale invasion back in 2022. Probably the only surprise was how poorly the Russian military performed especially when it came to logistics and how quickly morale dropped in certain 'elite' units. Below is what I've always understood Russia wanted:

- Land bridge to the North of Crimea

- Access to fresh water supplies for Crimea

- To have the Donbass & Luhansk absorbed into the Russian federation or as separate republics like South Ossetia etc.

Personally I don't think the Russians are too bothered about Ukraine being in NATO, they didn't grumble much back in 2008 when the Ukrainians first floated the idea on the back of the Georgian war. But now Trump has decided it won't happen it'll be something they can push in the negotiations. 

Disagree about NATO, Russia sees NATO expansion as western aggression, and would like the Baltics to have not joined either - though he has now shot himself in the foot through his belligerence, with Finland and Sweden abandoning their neutrality.

Why should Ukraine have to give up any territory? The bottom line is Putin does not accept Ukraine as being a legitimate country, and it's annexation would be the first step in restoring Russia to it's Imperial glory - Georgia next ?

Edited Wednesday at 10:19 by badgerx16