X Close

Does Ukraine need to compromise? Kyiv's sovereignty has always been in American hands

A Ukrainian soldier in the Serebrianskyi forest near Kreminna. (Roman Chop/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images)

A Ukrainian soldier in the Serebrianskyi forest near Kreminna. (Roman Chop/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images)


August 22, 2023   8 mins

Over the past year and a half, calls for peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia have been widely dismissed by the Ukrainian government and its more maximalist online supporters as either Putinist propaganda or defeatism. Yet the so-far lacklustre results of Ukraine’s long-awaited counteroffensive have rendered the entire debate moot: right now, there is no incentive whatsoever for Russia to enter into negotiations.

As Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov declared last week: “The prospects for negotiations between Russia and the West are non-existent at this stage.” Indeed, Lavrov applies precisely the same argument against peace talks that both Ukraine and its Western advocates made at an earlier stage in the war: that “we regard the Westerners’ hypocritical calls for talks as a tactical ploy to buy time once again, giving the exhausted Ukrainian troops a respite and the opportunity to regroup and to send in more weapons and ammunition”. It takes two sides to negotiate, and even if Washington compelled Kyiv to the table, Moscow will not currently accept concessions distinguishable from surrender, impossible for Ukraine to accept and damaging for America to oversee.

From Moscow’s perspective, the war is settling into a comfortable rhythm: the modern armour that Ukraine had demanded for so long, whose delivery elicited such angst and drama in Western capitals, is being expended against Russia’s defensive lines to little effect, at least so far. The spring’s flurry of gruesome drone videos showing Russian deaths up close has been inverted, with Russia’s supporters now exulting in the extinction of Ukraine’s increasingly precious reserves of manpower at the hands of cheap FPV drones. The Russian economy is faring better under Western sanctions than anyone expected, while European governments ride the discontent of their voters over rising living costs. On the diplomatic front, non-Western powers view the war in Ukraine with either unruffled equanimity or quiet satisfaction, happy to trade with Russia at discount prices and to assume a role in the multipolar order now demonstrably coming into being. Far from being isolated, Russia’s role in Africa is rapidly expanding as that of the West deteriorates. The greatest threat to Ukraine’s survival, the fickle will of America’s turbulent democratic system, is slowly proceeding in the direction Putin always hoped. The war may not be the stunning success Putin initially hoped for, but its recent trends seem broadly favourable for Moscow, and its disadvantages currently manageable. The necessity for Ukraine now is to once again overturn this calculus.

In these circumstances, there is something distasteful about the flurry of anonymous briefings with which the Biden administration is now distancing itself from Ukraine’s ill-starred counteroffensive. Its results have not, after all, come as a surprise to American planners: as the Discord intelligence leaks revealed, back in February, the Pentagon was already warning that the offensive was likely to fall “well short” of its stated goals: Russia’s sophisticated trench fortifications, coupled with Ukraine’s “force generation and sustainment shortfalls” and “enduring Ukrainian deficiencies in training and munitions supplies”, would “exacerbate casualties during the offensive”, while achieving only “modest territorial gains”. While there are serious dissenting opinions, which assert that the attrition of both Russia’s artillery and manpower under Ukrainian assault will eventually bear fruit, the results so far seem to bear out the accuracy of America’s initial assessment.

Given the vast disparity between Russia and Ukraine in size, population, wealth and industrial production, a strategy of attrition in which Ukraine bears the costs of assault appears a risky gamble. It was always improbable that Ukraine’s army could entirely reshape its military doctrine along Nato lines in a matter of months to defeat, without any of the air superiority integral to the American way of war, a dug-in enemy many times its size. It was Ukraine’s more excitable online supporters, and not the American defence establishment, which had made the grandest claims for the coming offensive, while talking down Russia’s military potential, and it would seem unfair for Kyiv to now pay the price of their reckless if well-meaning exuberance.

The Biden administration’s approach to the war has always been fundamentally sound: that Ukraine should be supported to negotiate, but only from a position of relative strength. Yet it is no good to belatedly observe, as US officials are now anonymously wont to do, that perhaps America’s top general Mark Milley was right in claiming that Ukraine’s greatest period of relative strength was last winter, following the unexpected success of the Kherson and Kharkiv offensives, when an overstretched Russia was on the ropes and seemingly willing to negotiate. True, back then, Ukraine’s star was ascendent and the planned offensive, then slated for the spring, seemed fraught with terrible potential for Russia’s leadership. Yet even then, Russia insisted on Kyiv recognising Moscow’s possession of the Ukrainian territories it had just abandoned, an impossible starting condition for talks.

Even the best chance of peace, the direct talks overseen by Turkey following Russia’s abandonment of its initial regime-change blitzkrieg, were stymied by the atrocities in Bucha and Irpin which Russia’s sudden withdrawal from northern Ukraine revealed. Seemingly a product of ill-discipline rather than top-down policy, the torture and murder of Ukrainian civilians which made negotiations impossible for Kyiv may eventually be recorded as some of the costliest individual crimes in Europe’s history: half a million casualties on both sides have followed, according to US officials. There have, therefore, been precisely two opportunities for meaningful negotiations in the war’s first year and a half, and both were made politically impossible by either Moscow’s unreasonable demands or by the actions of the troops under its command.

It had been hoped that the improved negotiating position necessary for meaningful talks would blossom from Ukraine’s counteroffensive, yet without dismissing the possibility of a sudden breakthrough, it would surely now be sensible to consider the alternatives. Writing for UnHerd, the eminent American strategist Edward Luttwak proposes Ukraine rolls the dice towards total mobilisation, conscripting a three-million-man army to fend off the Russian threat. This would be a bold, perhaps desperate gamble, which would either break the back of the Russian army or destroy Ukraine. The quality of Ukraine’s armed forces has seemingly deteriorated as the eager volunteers of the war’s early months have been replaced by often unwilling conscripts, and the newly raised and Western-trained brigades designed to spearhead the offensive have not performed as well as hoped. Further waves of Ukrainian mobilisation will surely be necessary, but it would be rash at this delicate stage to gamble the country’s survival on any imminent offensive feats from its new levies.

Perhaps a more cautious approach would be for Ukraine to dial down its immediate aims at this waning stage of the summer, hunker down for winter, marshall its resources and assess the possibilities opened up by spring. Instead of pursuing wasteful, symbolic actions such as the attempted reconquest of Bakhmut — a town, we were assured, which held no strategic value — or distracting sideshows like the attempted bridgehead across the Dnieper, if Kyiv does not feel confident in committing its full available might towards the southern offensive, it should disengage and prepare now for what is sure to be a difficult winter. If, as some analysts claim, Kyiv does not possess the command and control capability to undertake anything more than piecemeal company-sized attacks, then it should reassess its strategy, prioritising its actual military capacity over the perceived need to impress the outside world. A strategy of shoring up international support by promising an endless succession of improbable feats is no long-term strategy at all.

Russia’s relative success this summer was the product of its shortening and rationalisation of its lines last autumn, a then-humiliating strategy of the since-jailed General Surovikin which has now borne effective fruit. A Ukrainian disengagement from the current offensive would not necessarily mean ceding territory in the same way Russia did last year: the past two and a half painful months of Ukraine’s offensive have all taken place in the contested “grey zone” no-man’s-land in front of Russia’s first fixed line of defence, and there is nothing to prevent Ukraine using its remaining manpower, artillery and mobile armoured reserves in a similar way. Nor does it preclude striking targets of opportunity should the occasion arise, shorn of the unrealistic expectations and long-telegraphed objectives of the delayed counteroffensive.

Instead of expending political capital on procuring costly, high-tech weaponry such as the F-16 jets which will not be in meaningful service until the end of the decade, Kyiv may better choose to focus on low-cost, easily-produced weapons such as the suicide drones with which Russia is wreaking such havoc on Ukraine’s own forces. Pin-prick crossborder stunts like UAV attacks and short-lived incursions on Russian territory may play well on social media but unsettle Ukraine’s increasingly unreliable American sponsor, and are brushed aside as annoyances by Moscow. Instead, Kyiv should focus on shifting the human and materiel costs of the war back onto Russia, by forcing Putin to return to the offensive.

While the conditions which allowed Ukraine to undertake a daring and effective offensive last autumn no longer exist, Ukraine has already demonstrated its capacity for tenacious defence against overwhelming odds, and nothing has changed in this regard. Though Russia has succeeded in taking two cities, Mariupol and Bakhmut, against a determined Ukrainian defence, it did so both times at immense cost, and by effectively freezing offensive operations elsewhere in the country. Russia’s developing mini-offensive against Kupiansk will be a test of its current offensive capacity, and there is no reason to believe that Moscow will find the going any easier. On the contrary, Prigozhin’s impromptu coup adventure has made Wagner’s deployment a less glittering weapon in Putin’s armoury, and while recent mobilisation efforts may have shored up Russia’s defensive lines, it is doubtful Moscow can sustain major offensive action without further, politically costly waves of conscription. Meanwhile, just as it was last year, Kyiv is protected from invasion from the north by narrow forest roads and impassable marshes; even the sprawling second city of Kharkiv, right on Russia’s border, would be indigestible to the invader.

A temporary emphasis on defence between this autumn and next spring would, therefore, hold little serious threat for Ukraine, but would allow it to shore up its greatest strategic weakness: its place in the American political system. For the brutal truth is that Ukraine’s overriding strategic imperative is not to recapture the Crimea, or the dubiously loyal cities of the Donbas, but to preserve the quasi-alliance with America as long as necessary to ensure the medium-term survival of the Ukrainian state. Without America’s backing, all Europe’s support will fade away with varying degrees of regret and relief; even hawkish Poland’s massive programme of rearmament is not testimony to certainty in a Ukrainian victory.

The uncomfortable reality is that Ukraine’s sovereignty is severely circumscribed by the vagaries of America’s domestic politics. Whether or not Trump evades prison to return to power, and whether or not Biden’s entanglement in a Ukraine corruption scandal entirely unrelated to the war will become politically salient, America’s opposition party is increasingly sour on the Ukraine war, and America’s fickle voters increasingly unwilling to fund Ukraine’s defence further.

Yet instead of shoring up the alliance, the disappointing results of the counteroffensive up to now have exposed  rifts between the two countries, a luxury Kyiv cannot afford, far outweighing the importance of the shattered hamlets it has captured. The increasing blame game between anonymous Biden administration officials accusing Ukraine’s army of over-promising and under-delivering on strategy, and Ukrainian officials accusing the West of the same on arms shipments, will not work in Ukraine’s favour over time (indeed, Western diplomats would do well to beware the nascent stirrings of a post-war stab-in-the-back myth now).

Instead of public expressions of eternal support followed by private disavowals, Washington should not now promise Kyiv more than it can realistically expect to deliver, factoring in the possibility of a White House transition. Equally, Ukraine now needs to cut its ambitions to America’s cloth: it should abandon fantasies of carving a humbled Russia into ethnic republics, or bundling Putin into a dock in the Hague, and focus on what can be realistically be achieved over the course of the next year. Both America and Ukraine will need to compromise: Washington by delivering more aid over a longer timeframe than Biden is politically comfortable with, and Kyiv by lowering its goals to match its objective capabilities.

Whether or not a negotiated settlement is desirable, it is not at this time achievable: Ukraine has no choice but to continue fighting, and given its commitment so far, America is morally obliged to continue its support, in a war now unlikely to conclude until the end of next year at the very earliest. Citing the eventual withdrawal from Afghanistan, Lavrov remarked last week that “the United States does not have the best historical record when it comes to supporting its allies”. It would not well-serve Nato, or least of all Ukraine, for Washington to prove him right.


Aris Roussinos is an UnHerd columnist and a former war reporter.

arisroussinos

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

240 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago

America’s “fickle” voters, as you describe us, didn’t vote to be involved in this civil war; in fact, we weren’t asked our opinion at all. We were bombarded with a David vs Goliath propaganda campaign, and those susceptible to sentimental stories spoon fed them by the media lapped it up. Those who didn’t were/are derided as “Putin apologists”.

Billions of our tax dollars and our own defense matériels have been sent to (ostensibly) aid Ukraine, whilst our own cities burn and are invaded by foreigners from all over the world. Our leadership, if one can call it that without laughing, is thoroughly corrupt, and doesn’t care that we know it. The Biden’s are confident that, although their Ukraine bribe scandal is out in the open, nothing will be done about it – all whilst the former president is being persecuted and prosecuted for “crimes” like expressing opinions and sending emails.

Ukraine is Ukraine’s problem, and its venal little Vogue cover model can get f*cked.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago

Allison, you are absolutely spot on in your comment.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

More like spot off!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

More like spot off!

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago

It’s unreal, isn’t it? America rots and burns–our beautiful cities are ringed with homeless encampments, many of them veterans from our other adventures in Empire. I can’t afford anything anymore, my middle class family is struggling, partially because of this madness and for the Biden Crime Family Syndicate’s money laundering operation in Ukraine.
If the little Vogue cover model’s speech to joint session of Congress–the political elites don’t give a f**k about regular Americans. They only care about the globalist agenda, and their stock profiles with Raytheon.
We need a revolution, but it’s not happening within either political party.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago

In 1942 , The USA became the leader of the free world, Britain was bankrupt. Britain and her Empire accepted the responsibility of opposing Napoleon, ending slavery, fighting Germany in WW1 when not threatened and fighting the Nazis on our own. The Tizard Mission provided the USA with the greatest technological gifts of all time.
President J Kennedy understood that the USA had responsibility as the leader of the Free World, hence his speeches.
“The New Frontier of which I speak is not a set of promises– it is a set of challenges. It sums up not what I intend to offer the American people, but what I intend to ask of them.
  Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
     This much we pledge–and more.
The last president to understand the USA’s responsibilities was R Reagan.
If the USA lays down the burden of being the leader of the Free World; China supported by Russia and Iran will become leader of the World and it will not be free.

Jim Bocho
Jim Bocho
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

In 1942 the ‘free world’ had enslaved most of the rest of the world. The ‘free world’ didn’t like the idea of the Germans giving it a taste of its own medicine, however.

Jim Bocho
Jim Bocho
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

In 1942 the ‘free world’ had enslaved most of the rest of the world. The ‘free world’ didn’t like the idea of the Germans giving it a taste of its own medicine, however.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

OMG! Where do you get your information? Wait, don’t tell me………..

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago

Might want to look up the definition of civil war there my friend, as one country invading another isn’t a civil war

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

Or perhaps you should look up the definition of civil war. Was the “US Civil War” a civil war or a case of the north invading the south? After all the south had seceded and therefore, for all intent and purposes, was a separate country, was it not? Now, sure the north and Lincoln didn’t regard the confederacy as a separate country, but the confederacy sure did, and the confederacy was fighting to save their way of life (irrespective of what one might think about the tragedy and horrors of slavery in the 19th century) and their homes. The situation vis a vis Ukraine and Russia is not dissimilar to the situation that pertained with the US civil war. And the aggressor in the case of the US civil war, Abraham Lincoln, is regarded as one of the greatest, if not the greatest and wisest, of all US presidents.
The bottom line is that everything depends upon one’s perspective. In the case of Ukraine, the country can basically be divided into east and west, and the east is most definitely Russian in affinity, language and culture. Western Ukraine is a mishmash and was at one time part of Poland. Further Kiev is the birthplace of Russian civilization, albeit in the middle ages.
Given that situation, would it not be better to broker a peace deal that involved partitioning of the country. After all, at the moment, the casualties on the Ukrainian side are piling up at an extraordinary rate and the so-called counteroffensive has been a complete failure.
As for the origins of the current war, the US and NATO have only themselves to blame. After the unification of Germany, the secretary of state James Baker promised Gorbachev that NATO would not advance one inch further east. Well what happened? NATO continued to advance eastward, and the US continued to interfere in countries, such as Ukraine, it had no business interfering in. They engineered the 2014 Maidan coup in Ukraine and tried to instigate a similar coup in Belarus in 2020. Under those circumstances the Russian reaction is no different from night following day. It was inevitable. And exactly the same situation would have pertained with regard to the US if the equivalent happened close to the borders of the US (e.g. the Cuban missile crisis of 1962).

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

People upvoted this nonsense?

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

People upvoted this nonsense?

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

Or perhaps you should look up the definition of civil war. Was the “US Civil War” a civil war or a case of the north invading the south? After all the south had seceded and therefore, for all intent and purposes, was a separate country, was it not? Now, sure the north and Lincoln didn’t regard the confederacy as a separate country, but the confederacy sure did, and the confederacy was fighting to save their way of life (irrespective of what one might think about the tragedy and horrors of slavery in the 19th century) and their homes. The situation vis a vis Ukraine and Russia is not dissimilar to the situation that pertained with the US civil war. And the aggressor in the case of the US civil war, Abraham Lincoln, is regarded as one of the greatest, if not the greatest and wisest, of all US presidents.
The bottom line is that everything depends upon one’s perspective. In the case of Ukraine, the country can basically be divided into east and west, and the east is most definitely Russian in affinity, language and culture. Western Ukraine is a mishmash and was at one time part of Poland. Further Kiev is the birthplace of Russian civilization, albeit in the middle ages.
Given that situation, would it not be better to broker a peace deal that involved partitioning of the country. After all, at the moment, the casualties on the Ukrainian side are piling up at an extraordinary rate and the so-called counteroffensive has been a complete failure.
As for the origins of the current war, the US and NATO have only themselves to blame. After the unification of Germany, the secretary of state James Baker promised Gorbachev that NATO would not advance one inch further east. Well what happened? NATO continued to advance eastward, and the US continued to interfere in countries, such as Ukraine, it had no business interfering in. They engineered the 2014 Maidan coup in Ukraine and tried to instigate a similar coup in Belarus in 2020. Under those circumstances the Russian reaction is no different from night following day. It was inevitable. And exactly the same situation would have pertained with regard to the US if the equivalent happened close to the borders of the US (e.g. the Cuban missile crisis of 1962).

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Oh, I thought he looked great in that F-16.
Just a matter of taste, I guess.
Thankfully, none of us will be in Russian lines when they start operating.
You should be happy about that.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

No need to be so coy – your former pres, the fat, orange draft-dodging one who sleeps in a separate room to his hooker wife, is under investigation for trying to stay in power despite having lost an election. Read the indictment: https://ayenaw.com/2023/08/02/the-big-one/ 
And why, in a representative democracy, do you think you had a right to be consulted? You’re not the government. Try to acquaint yourself with the basics of how a representative democracy actually works before making a fool of yourself in public. Failing that, move to Switzerland where the model of governance may be more to your “hoi polloi rules” tastes.  

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago

Allison, you are absolutely spot on in your comment.

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago

It’s unreal, isn’t it? America rots and burns–our beautiful cities are ringed with homeless encampments, many of them veterans from our other adventures in Empire. I can’t afford anything anymore, my middle class family is struggling, partially because of this madness and for the Biden Crime Family Syndicate’s money laundering operation in Ukraine.
If the little Vogue cover model’s speech to joint session of Congress–the political elites don’t give a f**k about regular Americans. They only care about the globalist agenda, and their stock profiles with Raytheon.
We need a revolution, but it’s not happening within either political party.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago

In 1942 , The USA became the leader of the free world, Britain was bankrupt. Britain and her Empire accepted the responsibility of opposing Napoleon, ending slavery, fighting Germany in WW1 when not threatened and fighting the Nazis on our own. The Tizard Mission provided the USA with the greatest technological gifts of all time.
President J Kennedy understood that the USA had responsibility as the leader of the Free World, hence his speeches.
“The New Frontier of which I speak is not a set of promises– it is a set of challenges. It sums up not what I intend to offer the American people, but what I intend to ask of them.
  Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
     This much we pledge–and more.
The last president to understand the USA’s responsibilities was R Reagan.
If the USA lays down the burden of being the leader of the Free World; China supported by Russia and Iran will become leader of the World and it will not be free.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

OMG! Where do you get your information? Wait, don’t tell me………..

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago

Might want to look up the definition of civil war there my friend, as one country invading another isn’t a civil war

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Oh, I thought he looked great in that F-16.
Just a matter of taste, I guess.
Thankfully, none of us will be in Russian lines when they start operating.
You should be happy about that.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

No need to be so coy – your former pres, the fat, orange draft-dodging one who sleeps in a separate room to his hooker wife, is under investigation for trying to stay in power despite having lost an election. Read the indictment: https://ayenaw.com/2023/08/02/the-big-one/ 
And why, in a representative democracy, do you think you had a right to be consulted? You’re not the government. Try to acquaint yourself with the basics of how a representative democracy actually works before making a fool of yourself in public. Failing that, move to Switzerland where the model of governance may be more to your “hoi polloi rules” tastes.  

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago

America’s “fickle” voters, as you describe us, didn’t vote to be involved in this civil war; in fact, we weren’t asked our opinion at all. We were bombarded with a David vs Goliath propaganda campaign, and those susceptible to sentimental stories spoon fed them by the media lapped it up. Those who didn’t were/are derided as “Putin apologists”.

Billions of our tax dollars and our own defense matériels have been sent to (ostensibly) aid Ukraine, whilst our own cities burn and are invaded by foreigners from all over the world. Our leadership, if one can call it that without laughing, is thoroughly corrupt, and doesn’t care that we know it. The Biden’s are confident that, although their Ukraine bribe scandal is out in the open, nothing will be done about it – all whilst the former president is being persecuted and prosecuted for “crimes” like expressing opinions and sending emails.

Ukraine is Ukraine’s problem, and its venal little Vogue cover model can get f*cked.

Jonathan N
Jonathan N
1 year ago

Right now we appear to be heading towards a Korean peninsular situation, with the difference that Russia will not become a hermit kingdom. It has too many allies outside Europe and the US for that.

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan N

It won’t be a stalemate as Ukraine has just smashed its army on the prepared Russian defensive lines without breaking through a single one. There are three. The Russian army is barely touched and vastly larger than what they started with. In addition they are manufacturing artillery shells at three times the rate prior to the start of the SMO whereas Ukraine is begging for ordinance that does not exist.
The losses taken by Ukraine are estimated to be somewhere between 100,000 and 400,000 KIA. No western government or agency will announce this tragedy.
Putin was attempting to negotiate with the US as late as Dec 2021 but was laughed at by Blinken, but the chickens are coming home to roost. Any talk of a frozen conflict is just wishful thinking trying to cover for a western disaster of catastrophic proportions.

Last edited 1 year ago by Chris Keating
Charlie Dibsdale
Charlie Dibsdale
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

I am not sure Ukraine has yet “smashed its army”. It seems to have retained a significant strategic reserve that could be deadly in a war of manoeuvre. The Russian defences are formidable but the Ukrainians are systematically crumbling them. The Ukrainians seem to have the initiative. How many casualties they have suffered and whether there is the stomach to continue this war, is not known but I sense the willingness to give up part of their homeland is not there. What has not been said is what the Ukrainians themselves want.
If The US changes its regime, and/or forces the Ukrainians into a negotiated ceasefire (I cannot see this resolving the long-term situation), we will be effectively rewarding Putin’s Russia for aggression against nation-states. This is appeasement by any other name and this does not work. This prospect is sickening and I believe would be a strategic mistake of gigantic proportions.

Fred Oldfield
Fred Oldfield
1 year ago

Watch Colonel Douglas MacGregor on the conflict (YouTube). He is by far the most reliable commentator (though not the only one).
Ukraine has been used by the neocons in Washington and its NATO allies to try to weaken Russia. In essence, they provoked this conflict by the stance they have taken on Ukraine becoming a member of NATO, which has long been a red line for the Russians. The treatment of ethnic Russians in the eastern part of Ukraine has also been a factor.
Unfortunately they entirely miscalculated Russia’s military strength and resolve. Russia has no interest in governing Ukraine. They will retain the territory they have now annexed, along with Crimea. Ukraine has already lost, is running out of men and weapons. Further attacks – to the last man – will wipe out their military altogether and leave the country a wasteland.
Make peace, you fools….

Last edited 1 year ago by Fred Oldfield
Fred Oldfield
Fred Oldfield
1 year ago

Watch Colonel Douglas MacGregor on the conflict (YouTube). He is by far the most reliable commentator (though not the only one).
Ukraine has been used by the neocons in Washington and its NATO allies to try to weaken Russia. In essence, they provoked this conflict by the stance they have taken on Ukraine becoming a member of NATO, which has long been a red line for the Russians. The treatment of ethnic Russians in the eastern part of Ukraine has also been a factor.
Unfortunately they entirely miscalculated Russia’s military strength and resolve. Russia has no interest in governing Ukraine. They will retain the territory they have now annexed, along with Crimea. Ukraine has already lost, is running out of men and weapons. Further attacks – to the last man – will wipe out their military altogether and leave the country a wasteland.
Make peace, you fools….

Last edited 1 year ago by Fred Oldfield
Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Possibly but I suspect it is too early to dismiss the idea of a stalemate as “just wishful thinking”. Surely one of the main military lessons of the last two years has been that the pendulum has swung back to favouring the defensive (as during WW1) rather than the offensive (as in WW2)? That cuts both ways.

Last edited 1 year ago by Alex Carnegie
Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Asinine nonsense.
Telling NATO to butt out of Eastern Europe (which is exactly what Putin demanded) is hardly “negotiating” is it ?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

“Russian army is barely touched” loool thats why they’re doing rounds of mobilization (even though publicly putin stated many times that no mobilized soldiers and only contractors will be on the front line) and using a “PMC” to hire cons straight out of jail ? For a supposedly 2nd best army in the world that doesn’t look like “barely touched”

Charlie Dibsdale
Charlie Dibsdale
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

I am not sure Ukraine has yet “smashed its army”. It seems to have retained a significant strategic reserve that could be deadly in a war of manoeuvre. The Russian defences are formidable but the Ukrainians are systematically crumbling them. The Ukrainians seem to have the initiative. How many casualties they have suffered and whether there is the stomach to continue this war, is not known but I sense the willingness to give up part of their homeland is not there. What has not been said is what the Ukrainians themselves want.
If The US changes its regime, and/or forces the Ukrainians into a negotiated ceasefire (I cannot see this resolving the long-term situation), we will be effectively rewarding Putin’s Russia for aggression against nation-states. This is appeasement by any other name and this does not work. This prospect is sickening and I believe would be a strategic mistake of gigantic proportions.

Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Possibly but I suspect it is too early to dismiss the idea of a stalemate as “just wishful thinking”. Surely one of the main military lessons of the last two years has been that the pendulum has swung back to favouring the defensive (as during WW1) rather than the offensive (as in WW2)? That cuts both ways.

Last edited 1 year ago by Alex Carnegie
Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Asinine nonsense.
Telling NATO to butt out of Eastern Europe (which is exactly what Putin demanded) is hardly “negotiating” is it ?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

“Russian army is barely touched” loool thats why they’re doing rounds of mobilization (even though publicly putin stated many times that no mobilized soldiers and only contractors will be on the front line) and using a “PMC” to hire cons straight out of jail ? For a supposedly 2nd best army in the world that doesn’t look like “barely touched”

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan N

May turn out that way.
But it was two years of stalemate before the ceasefire.
Looks like war til 2025–unless Russia’s economy collapses

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan N

Unbelievable.
We are now mired in a stalemate with the Russian Bear on the Eastern European Killing Fields that have almost zero to do with the interests of regular Americans–the long-game only presents more suffering for the Ukrainians, more death and dismemberment, more disenfranchisement for regular Americans as the middle and working class dies because of rampant inflation, terrible housing costs, and horrific gas prices partially caused by this ill advised war-mongering.
At the same time, the progressive left in America has acquiesced to the war-mongers and the Biden family crime syndicate’s money laundering operation in Ukraine. This whole thing doesn’t serve America, it serves a TINY SLIVER of elites in America.
Ann Coulter, whom I despise, has become the face of anti-interventionism in America? We are politically dysfunctional and feudal society, currently run by the woke-militaristic elites. What a sham.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

“stalemate” “russian bear” “killing fields” “more suffering for the Ukrainians” “disenfranchisement for regular Americans” “ll advised war-mongering” “the war-mongers and the Biden family” “money laundering operation in Ukraine” “elites in America”
Way to go comrade, you got almost all the propaganda buzzwords ! Here is your 30 rubles !

Last edited 1 year ago by Tony Testosteroni
S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago

Okey dokey, whatever you say man. I bet you don’t even live in America. Tell me how all this is going in 5 years.
You are a very stupid person.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

>You are a very stupid person.
I’m not the one regurgitating russian propaganda

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

To attack a commenter personally makes you look bad and invalidates your opinions. If you want to debate authentically it’s preferable to say you think the comments are stupid not the person.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Just reflects a lack of self control.
Don’t turn yourself into a Russian!
That’s why they’re losing.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

If he’s Russian, he may have been drunk

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Just reflects a lack of self control.
Don’t turn yourself into a Russian!
That’s why they’re losing.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

If he’s Russian, he may have been drunk

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

>You are a very stupid person.
I’m not the one regurgitating russian propaganda

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

To attack a commenter personally makes you look bad and invalidates your opinions. If you want to debate authentically it’s preferable to say you think the comments are stupid not the person.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

He’s just a loyal citizen of the Memeverse.

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago

Okey dokey, whatever you say man. I bet you don’t even live in America. Tell me how all this is going in 5 years.
You are a very stupid person.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

He’s just a loyal citizen of the Memeverse.

Perry de Havilland
Perry de Havilland
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

Hey “S Smith”, are you chaps still based at 55 Savushkina Street, St. Petersburg or has your employer moved to bigger premises to accommodate all the new hires?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Wonder if they ever got the toilet fixed.
Say…maybe that’s why they invaded?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Wonder if they ever got the toilet fixed.
Say…maybe that’s why they invaded?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

“stalemate” “russian bear” “killing fields” “more suffering for the Ukrainians” “disenfranchisement for regular Americans” “ll advised war-mongering” “the war-mongers and the Biden family” “money laundering operation in Ukraine” “elites in America”
Way to go comrade, you got almost all the propaganda buzzwords ! Here is your 30 rubles !

Last edited 1 year ago by Tony Testosteroni
Perry de Havilland
Perry de Havilland
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

Hey “S Smith”, are you chaps still based at 55 Savushkina Street, St. Petersburg or has your employer moved to bigger premises to accommodate all the new hires?

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan N

It won’t be a stalemate as Ukraine has just smashed its army on the prepared Russian defensive lines without breaking through a single one. There are three. The Russian army is barely touched and vastly larger than what they started with. In addition they are manufacturing artillery shells at three times the rate prior to the start of the SMO whereas Ukraine is begging for ordinance that does not exist.
The losses taken by Ukraine are estimated to be somewhere between 100,000 and 400,000 KIA. No western government or agency will announce this tragedy.
Putin was attempting to negotiate with the US as late as Dec 2021 but was laughed at by Blinken, but the chickens are coming home to roost. Any talk of a frozen conflict is just wishful thinking trying to cover for a western disaster of catastrophic proportions.

Last edited 1 year ago by Chris Keating
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan N

May turn out that way.
But it was two years of stalemate before the ceasefire.
Looks like war til 2025–unless Russia’s economy collapses

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathan N

Unbelievable.
We are now mired in a stalemate with the Russian Bear on the Eastern European Killing Fields that have almost zero to do with the interests of regular Americans–the long-game only presents more suffering for the Ukrainians, more death and dismemberment, more disenfranchisement for regular Americans as the middle and working class dies because of rampant inflation, terrible housing costs, and horrific gas prices partially caused by this ill advised war-mongering.
At the same time, the progressive left in America has acquiesced to the war-mongers and the Biden family crime syndicate’s money laundering operation in Ukraine. This whole thing doesn’t serve America, it serves a TINY SLIVER of elites in America.
Ann Coulter, whom I despise, has become the face of anti-interventionism in America? We are politically dysfunctional and feudal society, currently run by the woke-militaristic elites. What a sham.

Jonathan N
Jonathan N
1 year ago

Right now we appear to be heading towards a Korean peninsular situation, with the difference that Russia will not become a hermit kingdom. It has too many allies outside Europe and the US for that.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

I legitimately feel bad for Ukraine, and I even feel a bit bad for the Russian people (Putin definitely not included), because Ukrainians and Russians died in a war that America won. The war has greatly served American interests and basically nobody else. In one fell swoop, America expanded NATO, inspired other NATO members to spend money on their own defense, and broke European, dependence on Russian energy, and gave the Chinese a warning regarding attempting something similar in Taiwan. all for the small price of some weapons systems that we needed to combat test anyway. That’s all over though, and the war will increasingly be viewed simply as an expense as time passes. Putin will eventually offer the status quo plus a guarantee of Ukraine being excluded from NATO, and America will nudge them to accept because continuing the war indefinitely in an unbreakable stalemate serves no compelling American interest. It’s an ugly and unfair solution for an ugly and unfair world.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Jolly
Chris Maille
Chris Maille
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

What about feeling bad for Europeans ?
We are plagued by delusional left wing ideologues, completely unable to factor in the consequences of the war in Ukraine when calculating the costs of their great transition. Energy prices soar and that means significant and durable losses in wealth and productivity.
The US part in this war is seen as a hostile act by an increasing number of Europeans and it is very likely, that the loss of geopolitical legitimacy of the USA will be long lasting. I fail to see how severly damaging the united states’ reputation in Europe is ‘greatly serving american interests’.
I also don’t share the author’s view that the Biden clan’s involvement in Ukrainian corruption is ‘completely unrelated’ to the war. I believe there is a huge incentive to ‘protect’ very interesting information in Ukraine, that would not only damage the Bidens, but the entire globalist agenda.
Which in turn is a fundamentally good thing.

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

Except for the plague of “delusional left wing ideologues” which as a left wing person myself cannot see in your current idiotic leadership, I think you have hit the nail on the head.
Biden is up to his armpits in Ukraine corruption and it can be argued that prolonging the catastrophe is all about hiding his involvement.
It is all going pear shaped and I would be surprised if Zelensky will survive the next 12 months. He has too much dirt on the Western leadership so he will be silenced so it doesn’t get out.
I also think that it is agood thing that the globalist agenda is derailed as there is precious little in it for the ordinary citizen. Currently western politics is all about terrifying the voter, not persuading them with the promise of a better life.

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

I told a friend just yesterday that I think Zelenskyy has assassination in his near future.

Last edited 1 year ago by Allison Barrows
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago

He’s quite a small target!

Mind you so was the late King Hussein of Jordan who is reputed to survived at least 20 assassination attempts.

However the late Charles de Gaulle offered a much better chance of success but still survived!

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

Let us hope not.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

Bizarre and delusional. Like 80% of the comments on here.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Probably because they’re associated with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Exactly. Sad isn’t it. Where are the voices of reason?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Probably because they’re associated with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Exactly. Sad isn’t it. Where are the voices of reason?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago

Is that something you would like to see ? Wouldn’t you think that Putin’s assassination odds are much higher ?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

But because you think it doesn’t make it so.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

Speak on, oracle – is this something you: (i) would like to see; (ii) would not like to see; or (iii) have no opinions about?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago

He’s quite a small target!

Mind you so was the late King Hussein of Jordan who is reputed to survived at least 20 assassination attempts.

However the late Charles de Gaulle offered a much better chance of success but still survived!

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

Let us hope not.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

Bizarre and delusional. Like 80% of the comments on here.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago

Is that something you would like to see ? Wouldn’t you think that Putin’s assassination odds are much higher ?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

But because you think it doesn’t make it so.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

Speak on, oracle – is this something you: (i) would like to see; (ii) would not like to see; or (iii) have no opinions about?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

And you know all this how?

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

I told a friend just yesterday that I think Zelenskyy has assassination in his near future.

Last edited 1 year ago by Allison Barrows
Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

And you know all this how?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

Er, weren’t people saying that 60 years ago? Funny how events in 1991 sort of disproved that.
Maybe this time it’s different. But even after far worse outcomes than this, Washington never has lost “geopolitical legitimacy.”
The US is still simply too big and wealthy–while both Russia and Chian are too dysfunctional–to change that in your lifetime.

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

You raise a question I can’t answer: The US has pursued, for the last 75 years or so, a foreign policy that has brought it shameful defeat after shameful defeat. When, for heaven sakes when, will the light go off?

Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago

America’s rich have rarely, if ever, been defeated.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

‘We’ gave them ‘a damned good thrashing’ in 1812-1814, of which I shall say more on Thursday.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

And King Billy won in 1690. All’s well then

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

And King Billy won in 1690. All’s well then

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

‘We’ gave them ‘a damned good thrashing’ in 1812-1814, of which I shall say more on Thursday.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

It’s not policy, it’s political incompetence. America is an Empire of Influence and has no idea how to run a real flesh and blood post war administration. It learned too late in Afghanistan that only dealing with those who claim to be ‘Capitalists’ means you have appointed local drugs lords, con men and the mafia etc to run the country. Sarah Chayes wrote a very pertinent article about this titled “Afghanistan’s Corruption Was Made in America”. It’s worth a read.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Er, Al Qaida defeated the US? ISIS defeated the US?
Those were our enemies.
You do see, at least, why you are just lazily repeating memes made up by someone else?

Iris C
Iris C
1 year ago

America has tried to impose its liberal democracy on all the countries it has invaded since the end of WW2 without being fully aware of their complex historical, cultural and differing Islamic belief structure. It is that which has led to “defeat after shameful defeat.”

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Iris C

Haven’t seen any terrorist attacks in the US or Europe lately.
That’s really why the war was fought.

james goater
james goater
1 year ago
Reply to  Iris C

Failure, even abject failure, to achieve all stated objectives (of a military action) hardly constitutes “shameful defeat”. For “shameful defeat” see Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan, 1945, for starters!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Iris C

Haven’t seen any terrorist attacks in the US or Europe lately.
That’s really why the war was fought.

james goater
james goater
1 year ago
Reply to  Iris C

Failure, even abject failure, to achieve all stated objectives (of a military action) hardly constitutes “shameful defeat”. For “shameful defeat” see Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan, 1945, for starters!

Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago

America’s rich have rarely, if ever, been defeated.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

It’s not policy, it’s political incompetence. America is an Empire of Influence and has no idea how to run a real flesh and blood post war administration. It learned too late in Afghanistan that only dealing with those who claim to be ‘Capitalists’ means you have appointed local drugs lords, con men and the mafia etc to run the country. Sarah Chayes wrote a very pertinent article about this titled “Afghanistan’s Corruption Was Made in America”. It’s worth a read.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Er, Al Qaida defeated the US? ISIS defeated the US?
Those were our enemies.
You do see, at least, why you are just lazily repeating memes made up by someone else?

Iris C
Iris C
1 year ago

America has tried to impose its liberal democracy on all the countries it has invaded since the end of WW2 without being fully aware of their complex historical, cultural and differing Islamic belief structure. It is that which has led to “defeat after shameful defeat.”

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

You raise a question I can’t answer: The US has pursued, for the last 75 years or so, a foreign policy that has brought it shameful defeat after shameful defeat. When, for heaven sakes when, will the light go off?

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

I hate to say “I told you so” again to all the insane left-woke-warmongerers here in the states (I am still “left” but am so ashamed of it now that I don’t call myself that anymore, and call myself an RFK Jr. populist)—this was how this war was going to end and it was all a money laundering operation for the Biden Crime Family Syndicate. The “I told you so” also went for the horrific corruption of the Covid response and Biden’s insane utilization of incompetents like Fauci and Walensky as front-people. At the same time, we have Trump, whom I also despise and desperately do not want to be president again. It’s a terrible situation in the U.S. right now, and many of us have eschewed both major parties and all allegiance to any political realm and want change from this horror.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

I don’t agree with all you say but I second your feelings about the dire need for change in both parties in the US. It’s the same old thing with old white guys as leaders. There’s a desperate need for some people with vision who aren’t self-serving. But good luck with that!!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

I don’t agree with all you say but I second your feelings about the dire need for change in both parties in the US. It’s the same old thing with old white guys as leaders. There’s a desperate need for some people with vision who aren’t self-serving. But good luck with that!!

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

I don’t feel nearly so bad for Europeans because much of the damage is self-inflicted. Nobody forced Germany to close their nuclear plants and instead become dependent on Putin for gas. Nobody forced European governments to basically abandon all defense spending at the end of the Cold War and become wholly dependent on the US. America didn’t force Europeans to embrace the fantasy of NetZero. Also, are you aware most Americans don’t trust or like our politicians, bureaucrats, or corporate leaders? Our leadership, from corporate board rooms to the white house, is less popular in America than in Europe. Do they do anything about it? No, they just keep pursuing their own interests and ignore public opinion as much as possible except during election years. Why should they treat you folks any different eh?

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

“plagued” – note biblical language.
“significant and durable losses in wealth and productivity …” – note wild and uncorroborated hyperbole.
Had it been left to accountants like you, Britain would have rolled over in WW2. All that blood, sweat and tears just to wade in on the side of Johnny foreigner?
Your WW2 doppelganger would have been out on the streets, ledger book in one hand, white flag in the other. 

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

Except for the plague of “delusional left wing ideologues” which as a left wing person myself cannot see in your current idiotic leadership, I think you have hit the nail on the head.
Biden is up to his armpits in Ukraine corruption and it can be argued that prolonging the catastrophe is all about hiding his involvement.
It is all going pear shaped and I would be surprised if Zelensky will survive the next 12 months. He has too much dirt on the Western leadership so he will be silenced so it doesn’t get out.
I also think that it is agood thing that the globalist agenda is derailed as there is precious little in it for the ordinary citizen. Currently western politics is all about terrifying the voter, not persuading them with the promise of a better life.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

Er, weren’t people saying that 60 years ago? Funny how events in 1991 sort of disproved that.
Maybe this time it’s different. But even after far worse outcomes than this, Washington never has lost “geopolitical legitimacy.”
The US is still simply too big and wealthy–while both Russia and Chian are too dysfunctional–to change that in your lifetime.

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

I hate to say “I told you so” again to all the insane left-woke-warmongerers here in the states (I am still “left” but am so ashamed of it now that I don’t call myself that anymore, and call myself an RFK Jr. populist)—this was how this war was going to end and it was all a money laundering operation for the Biden Crime Family Syndicate. The “I told you so” also went for the horrific corruption of the Covid response and Biden’s insane utilization of incompetents like Fauci and Walensky as front-people. At the same time, we have Trump, whom I also despise and desperately do not want to be president again. It’s a terrible situation in the U.S. right now, and many of us have eschewed both major parties and all allegiance to any political realm and want change from this horror.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

I don’t feel nearly so bad for Europeans because much of the damage is self-inflicted. Nobody forced Germany to close their nuclear plants and instead become dependent on Putin for gas. Nobody forced European governments to basically abandon all defense spending at the end of the Cold War and become wholly dependent on the US. America didn’t force Europeans to embrace the fantasy of NetZero. Also, are you aware most Americans don’t trust or like our politicians, bureaucrats, or corporate leaders? Our leadership, from corporate board rooms to the white house, is less popular in America than in Europe. Do they do anything about it? No, they just keep pursuing their own interests and ignore public opinion as much as possible except during election years. Why should they treat you folks any different eh?

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Maille

“plagued” – note biblical language.
“significant and durable losses in wealth and productivity …” – note wild and uncorroborated hyperbole.
Had it been left to accountants like you, Britain would have rolled over in WW2. All that blood, sweat and tears just to wade in on the side of Johnny foreigner?
Your WW2 doppelganger would have been out on the streets, ledger book in one hand, white flag in the other. 

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

That’s not very accurate. NATO operates by consensus and is NOT American led however much NATO enemies and American MAGA supporters might say that it is. The fact that those enemies of peace, the governments of Russia and China, use American hubris to label the US as an aggressor really is not helped by Americans themselves posturing as the ‘Boss’ of 30 vassal states who do their bidding ! The benefits you mention are true for all peace loving Western friendly nations but rather than being the result of brilliant American long term planning, it’s the result of Putin’s misjudgement. All NATO and its allies had to do was watch Putin make Hitler type errors and think quickly how to exploit them. IMO the Russian Federation needed a reset and when Putin has gone, it can have one and become a prosperous and free society.

Last edited 1 year ago by UnHerd Reader
Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Putin won’t offer a status quo that won’t be a defeat for Ukrainians and he’s not in the position to anyways. Russian army isn’t doing so great and they’re losing ground

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Don’t confuse them with facts–on the ground or elsewhere.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

What facts on the ground are you referring to ?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

What facts on the ground are you referring to ?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Don’t confuse them with facts–on the ground or elsewhere.

Walter Schimeck
Walter Schimeck
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

The one american interest that the stalemate does serve is that it will eventually reduce Europe to a de-industrialized poor-house. The U.S. has proven yet again that it is willing to sacrifice its European allies to achieve its own geopolitical aims. It was the same mentality at work during the tactical nuclear missile standoff of the 1980s: escalate tensions to the boiling point and if the worst-case scenario should come to pass, retreat behind your 2000 mile-wide moat and wait for the conflagration to subside.

Chris Maille
Chris Maille
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

What about feeling bad for Europeans ?
We are plagued by delusional left wing ideologues, completely unable to factor in the consequences of the war in Ukraine when calculating the costs of their great transition. Energy prices soar and that means significant and durable losses in wealth and productivity.
The US part in this war is seen as a hostile act by an increasing number of Europeans and it is very likely, that the loss of geopolitical legitimacy of the USA will be long lasting. I fail to see how severly damaging the united states’ reputation in Europe is ‘greatly serving american interests’.
I also don’t share the author’s view that the Biden clan’s involvement in Ukrainian corruption is ‘completely unrelated’ to the war. I believe there is a huge incentive to ‘protect’ very interesting information in Ukraine, that would not only damage the Bidens, but the entire globalist agenda.
Which in turn is a fundamentally good thing.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

That’s not very accurate. NATO operates by consensus and is NOT American led however much NATO enemies and American MAGA supporters might say that it is. The fact that those enemies of peace, the governments of Russia and China, use American hubris to label the US as an aggressor really is not helped by Americans themselves posturing as the ‘Boss’ of 30 vassal states who do their bidding ! The benefits you mention are true for all peace loving Western friendly nations but rather than being the result of brilliant American long term planning, it’s the result of Putin’s misjudgement. All NATO and its allies had to do was watch Putin make Hitler type errors and think quickly how to exploit them. IMO the Russian Federation needed a reset and when Putin has gone, it can have one and become a prosperous and free society.

Last edited 1 year ago by UnHerd Reader
Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Putin won’t offer a status quo that won’t be a defeat for Ukrainians and he’s not in the position to anyways. Russian army isn’t doing so great and they’re losing ground

Walter Schimeck
Walter Schimeck
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

The one american interest that the stalemate does serve is that it will eventually reduce Europe to a de-industrialized poor-house. The U.S. has proven yet again that it is willing to sacrifice its European allies to achieve its own geopolitical aims. It was the same mentality at work during the tactical nuclear missile standoff of the 1980s: escalate tensions to the boiling point and if the worst-case scenario should come to pass, retreat behind your 2000 mile-wide moat and wait for the conflagration to subside.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

I legitimately feel bad for Ukraine, and I even feel a bit bad for the Russian people (Putin definitely not included), because Ukrainians and Russians died in a war that America won. The war has greatly served American interests and basically nobody else. In one fell swoop, America expanded NATO, inspired other NATO members to spend money on their own defense, and broke European, dependence on Russian energy, and gave the Chinese a warning regarding attempting something similar in Taiwan. all for the small price of some weapons systems that we needed to combat test anyway. That’s all over though, and the war will increasingly be viewed simply as an expense as time passes. Putin will eventually offer the status quo plus a guarantee of Ukraine being excluded from NATO, and America will nudge them to accept because continuing the war indefinitely in an unbreakable stalemate serves no compelling American interest. It’s an ugly and unfair solution for an ugly and unfair world.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Jolly
Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago

There is no “American” or “US” position – in the US political landscape, the country’s foreign/military policies is the dog being wagged by the tail of domestic politics and bureaucratic infighting. That’s how you get jihadis armed and trained by the CIA being bombed by the US Air Force.
It is also how you get a Ukrainian military strategy devised by the cream of neocon military strategists (Jake Sullivan, Victoria Nuland, Antony Blinken, etc) and relying on the Triumph of the Will, at odds with the sober and professional assessments by the career officers in the Pentagon.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Good God ! You can’t possibly believe that can you ? Either you are a UI or really are a Putin propagandist. Ukraine’s so called ‘Nazi problem’ is less than that of Moscow alone ! Have you ever been there ?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Exactly.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Exactly.

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Nuland and Blinken are neocons has-beens and have been partially responsible for every disastrous U.S. foreign policy decision since 2001. The fact that Biden has them up so high on the pedestal, in addition to the terrible “leadership” of Fauci and Walensky throughout Covid, only shows how utterly incompetent this administration actually is–and how they exist in this bubble that only really works for a tiny sliver of globalist elites. I’m coming from the populist-left in this critique, I despise Trump, but people like me are called “Putin lovers,” “Fascists,” and other ad-hominems for even questioning the blind leading the blind in one of the most corrupt administrations since Nixon.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Good God ! You can’t possibly believe that can you ? Either you are a UI or really are a Putin propagandist. Ukraine’s so called ‘Nazi problem’ is less than that of Moscow alone ! Have you ever been there ?

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Nuland and Blinken are neocons has-beens and have been partially responsible for every disastrous U.S. foreign policy decision since 2001. The fact that Biden has them up so high on the pedestal, in addition to the terrible “leadership” of Fauci and Walensky throughout Covid, only shows how utterly incompetent this administration actually is–and how they exist in this bubble that only really works for a tiny sliver of globalist elites. I’m coming from the populist-left in this critique, I despise Trump, but people like me are called “Putin lovers,” “Fascists,” and other ad-hominems for even questioning the blind leading the blind in one of the most corrupt administrations since Nixon.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago

There is no “American” or “US” position – in the US political landscape, the country’s foreign/military policies is the dog being wagged by the tail of domestic politics and bureaucratic infighting. That’s how you get jihadis armed and trained by the CIA being bombed by the US Air Force.
It is also how you get a Ukrainian military strategy devised by the cream of neocon military strategists (Jake Sullivan, Victoria Nuland, Antony Blinken, etc) and relying on the Triumph of the Will, at odds with the sober and professional assessments by the career officers in the Pentagon.

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago

“Ukraine has no choice but to continue fighting” … To the last Ukranian huh?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

To the last Russian…
Who hasn’t left yet.

Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Have you seen the advanced age of some conscripts over there? Be all you can be, Martin.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

Most of Russia’s mobiks are pretty old.
But enough dodge the draft so that Putin will never have enough.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

Most of Russia’s mobiks are pretty old.
But enough dodge the draft so that Putin will never have enough.

Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Have you seen the advanced age of some conscripts over there? Be all you can be, Martin.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

To the last Russian…
Who hasn’t left yet.

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago

“Ukraine has no choice but to continue fighting” … To the last Ukranian huh?

David Wildgoose
David Wildgoose
1 year ago

The torture and murder of (ethnically Russian) Ukrainian citizens after Russia withdrew were undoubtedly carried out by Ukrainian neo-Nazis, as was widely pointed out at the time.

This entire tragedy should never have happened. American neo-cons goaded Putin into military action but the victims are ordinary Ukrainian citizens of all ethnic backgrounds.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

“American neo-cons goaded Putin into military action …”
Poor decent Putin, goaded beyond endurance lol.
Interesting. Do you have any credible corroboration for that assertion?

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

The coup in 2014 engineered by Victoria Nuland isn’t enough goading for you?

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

Victoria Nuland did NOTHING except expressing verbally her delight that the Ukrainians chose to lean West and instead of being embraced by the loving arms of the bare chested Putin.
Recently I was discussing with some journalists and diplomats who could take over from Putin and whether a coup by the Russian Armed Forces might be possible. If there is a coup, it doesn’t mean I engineered it !

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Exactly.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Exactly.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago

Did Victoria Nuland sign these ? Or make Yanukovytch a russian stooge ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Exactly.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Exactly.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

I’m laughing as I type this.
“Coups” take place in a matter of hours.
Maidan took place over many months–after a police riot turned a peaceful demonstration into a long term oncfrontation.
Then Yanukovich tried to save himself by killing 100 demonstrators.
After doing that, he paniced and fled. the Rada replaced.
So, was 1789 and 1848 in France a “coup?”
Just a Russian Skazka…

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

Victoria Nuland did NOTHING except expressing verbally her delight that the Ukrainians chose to lean West and instead of being embraced by the loving arms of the bare chested Putin.
Recently I was discussing with some journalists and diplomats who could take over from Putin and whether a coup by the Russian Armed Forces might be possible. If there is a coup, it doesn’t mean I engineered it !

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago

Did Victoria Nuland sign these ? Or make Yanukovytch a russian stooge ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

I’m laughing as I type this.
“Coups” take place in a matter of hours.
Maidan took place over many months–after a police riot turned a peaceful demonstration into a long term oncfrontation.
Then Yanukovich tried to save himself by killing 100 demonstrators.
After doing that, he paniced and fled. the Rada replaced.
So, was 1789 and 1848 in France a “coup?”
Just a Russian Skazka…

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

The Minsk agreements being deliberate lies (per Merkel, Die Zeit, Dec-22) not enough for you?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

Russians must always be duped.
It’s their only real purpose.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

Russians must always be duped.
It’s their only real purpose.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

The coup in 2014 engineered by Victoria Nuland isn’t enough goading for you?

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

The Minsk agreements being deliberate lies (per Merkel, Die Zeit, Dec-22) not enough for you?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Poor Putin.
He doubtless weeps every time he is forced to rocket an apartment building.
Pray for him!

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

He heads a gangster regime – we know that. It doesn’t make us or ukraine good. Only infants and idiots believe in stories always being about goodies and baddies.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

So why are you defending Minsk agreements if they were based on lies of a gangster regime ?

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago

They were based on the lies of Ukraine, Germany and France as I recall? Is that who you mean by a gangster regime? It was agreed that the secessionist regions would have the right to self-determination (you know, actual democracy in action), but Merkel admitted it was a lie to stall whilst the west pumped weapons and training into the rather appalling Ukrainian regime that came out of the western-backed coup.

Remember? Or aren’t you familiar with the subject?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

No, I was referring to Putin’s regime and Putin’s lies. Self determination ? Was that when Russian troops took over Crimea and Putin publicly denied Russia’s involvement ? Do Russians living under Putin’s 20 year regime get the right to self-determination ?
I’m familiar with the subject and I remember how the so called “peoples republics” came into existence and I can bring up many quotes by it’s founders like Pavel Gubarev and Igor Strelkov

Last edited 1 year ago by Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

No, I was referring to Putin’s regime and Putin’s lies. Self determination ? Was that when Russian troops took over Crimea and Putin publicly denied Russia’s involvement ? Do Russians living under Putin’s 20 year regime get the right to self-determination ?
I’m familiar with the subject and I remember how the so called “peoples republics” came into existence and I can bring up many quotes by it’s founders like Pavel Gubarev and Igor Strelkov

Last edited 1 year ago by Tony Testosteroni
Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago

They were based on the lies of Ukraine, Germany and France as I recall? Is that who you mean by a gangster regime? It was agreed that the secessionist regions would have the right to self-determination (you know, actual democracy in action), but Merkel admitted it was a lie to stall whilst the west pumped weapons and training into the rather appalling Ukrainian regime that came out of the western-backed coup.

Remember? Or aren’t you familiar with the subject?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

Not sure how the USA differs. Biden & Co. just jail their opponents but so far aren’t pushing them out of windows. Then again it seems like anything is possible with this corrupt Biden administration.

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

So why are you defending Minsk agreements if they were based on lies of a gangster regime ?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

Not sure how the USA differs. Biden & Co. just jail their opponents but so far aren’t pushing them out of windows. Then again it seems like anything is possible with this corrupt Biden administration.

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Who on earth is downvoting you ! What a lot of pro Putin UI’s must post here. I thought it was a forum for independent thought but evidently not.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

The cretin in the Kremlin has many friends on these threads.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

That’s a scary thought.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

That’s a scary thought.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Unfortunately it’s fast becoming a forum for people who think they’re special because they’ve spotted mistakes of the MSM/FBI/CIA/MI5/elites etc, and watched some Scott Ritter youtubes. They’re of the right wing, but as tedious, predictable and nose-led as the woke that they hate and need.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

It is indeed. The quality of comments is abysmal. Reading back comments of two years ago they were informative and polite.

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

The price of popularity! When Unherd first started it was very niche, now it is fast becoming the biggest respectable relatively open minded news source in the Anglosphere. So it has a higher ratio of charming and not so charming, nutters and also become the target of organised comment manipulation.
It looks as though Unherd are striving to keep that element under control, and also do their best to discourage the kind of mindless online aggression that often is unleashed by anonymity. Its by no means perfect, but we can help by not responding to obvious trolls at all, whether individual or organised. And by reminding each other to keep the quality up.
Rule 1, read the post twice slowly….before hitting the POST COMMENT button.

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

The price of popularity! When Unherd first started it was very niche, now it is fast becoming the biggest respectable relatively open minded news source in the Anglosphere. So it has a higher ratio of charming and not so charming, nutters and also become the target of organised comment manipulation.
It looks as though Unherd are striving to keep that element under control, and also do their best to discourage the kind of mindless online aggression that often is unleashed by anonymity. Its by no means perfect, but we can help by not responding to obvious trolls at all, whether individual or organised. And by reminding each other to keep the quality up.
Rule 1, read the post twice slowly….before hitting the POST COMMENT button.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

It is indeed. The quality of comments is abysmal. Reading back comments of two years ago they were informative and polite.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Do you actually understand the voting system? I don’t. It’s a complete mystery to me. Are you Logan is getting down voted?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Downvotes are a Badge of Honour if they come from St P.
I LOVE them!
Been getting them since 2014!
Paying the useless drones means that many fewer shells for Ukraine.

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

The names of the voters appear to be hidden to lower the emotional temerature. The curious monkey in me is of course ver disappointed by that, so I can’t see who my friends and enemies are, but on balance I’d rather not have the comments section dominated by chimps like me!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Downvotes are a Badge of Honour if they come from St P.
I LOVE them!
Been getting them since 2014!
Paying the useless drones means that many fewer shells for Ukraine.

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

The names of the voters appear to be hidden to lower the emotional temerature. The curious monkey in me is of course ver disappointed by that, so I can’t see who my friends and enemies are, but on balance I’d rather not have the comments section dominated by chimps like me!

james goater
james goater
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Fully agree. Disheartening to see the amount of red downvotes trickling down through this discussion board.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

The cretin in the Kremlin has many friends on these threads.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Unfortunately it’s fast becoming a forum for people who think they’re special because they’ve spotted mistakes of the MSM/FBI/CIA/MI5/elites etc, and watched some Scott Ritter youtubes. They’re of the right wing, but as tedious, predictable and nose-led as the woke that they hate and need.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Do you actually understand the voting system? I don’t. It’s a complete mystery to me. Are you Logan is getting down voted?

james goater
james goater
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Fully agree. Disheartening to see the amount of red downvotes trickling down through this discussion board.

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

He heads a gangster regime – we know that. It doesn’t make us or ukraine good. Only infants and idiots believe in stories always being about goodies and baddies.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Who on earth is downvoting you ! What a lot of pro Putin UI’s must post here. I thought it was a forum for independent thought but evidently not.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago

Wow – you’ve swallowed hook line and sinker, Putin/FSB’s agit-prop in preparation for the war. Did the same thing in Georgia and in Chechnya . No better than the US’s excuses for Iraq, which I’d imagine you didn’t buy? Don’t believe either.

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/china/disinformation-about-russias-invasion-ukraine-debunking-seven-myths-spread-russia_en?s=166

Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

We simply didn’t look hard enough for Saddam’s WMD; it’s such a shame we didn’t have deboonkers to set us straight back then.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

It does say something that ‘we’ didn’t just ‘find them’.
After all that was standard operational procedure for Scotland Yard and many other such organisations for eons. I gather the technical term is to ‘plant’ evidence.

Perhaps this time ‘we’ just knew we would be found out, which would have been even more embarrassing than just waging an aggressive war/invasion.*

(* A capital charge for which not a few were hanged at Nuremberg, as you may recall.)

Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago

Well, ‘we’ were a bit more ambitious in Syria what with sponsoring amateur dramatics to prove al-Assad was using his very real chemical weapons. BTW disappointed to see you using eon and not aeon or, ideally, æon. Are you an undercover Yankee? A, dare I say it, counterfeit Brit?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

No just idle!
Yes Syria was farcical, but fortunately despite all the hype it failed.

ps. I don’t think my rather elderly I-pad can type Æ!*
How did you manage it?

(* Cut and paste!)

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago

Yes, for all the unpleasantness ‘our’ boys visited upon Syria (idle hands, what with no longer having the opportunity to engage my kinsmen in Ulster or Gibraltar) at least we never saw American marines posing on the ‘hoods’ of Pontiacs and Lincolns in Damascus or Aleppo.
Yes, one copies & pastes æ ä ê ё è ö and all the other ‘archaic’ diacritics to shame those lesser sons and daughters of Albion, Oxbridge-‘educated’, indifferent to the wealth of their mother tongue.

Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago

Yes, for all the unpleasantness ‘our’ boys visited upon Syria (idle hands, what with no longer having the opportunity to engage my kinsmen in Ulster or Gibraltar) at least we never saw American marines posing on the ‘hoods’ of Pontiacs and Lincolns in Damascus or Aleppo.
Yes, one copies & pastes æ ä ê ё è ö and all the other ‘archaic’ diacritics to shame those lesser sons and daughters of Albion, Oxbridge-‘educated’, indifferent to the wealth of their mother tongue.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

No just idle!
Yes Syria was farcical, but fortunately despite all the hype it failed.

ps. I don’t think my rather elderly I-pad can type Æ!*
How did you manage it?

(* Cut and paste!)

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago

Well, ‘we’ were a bit more ambitious in Syria what with sponsoring amateur dramatics to prove al-Assad was using his very real chemical weapons. BTW disappointed to see you using eon and not aeon or, ideally, æon. Are you an undercover Yankee? A, dare I say it, counterfeit Brit?

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

What you are ignoring is that Saddam’s scientists may have lied to him about what they had achieved. Most engineers and scientists with technical ability were working in ME in other countries. If Saddam orders a scientist to make WMDs failing to comply would result in torture and death for them and their families.
In WW2 when it came to assessing whether the Nazis were capable of making atom bombs they had scientists of the calibre of Schrodinger, Hahn and Heisenberg plus a vast industrial capability. Iraq had no such people.
I have never seen a description of Iraq’s technical capability which showed it could have produced WMD.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

It does say something that ‘we’ didn’t just ‘find them’.
After all that was standard operational procedure for Scotland Yard and many other such organisations for eons. I gather the technical term is to ‘plant’ evidence.

Perhaps this time ‘we’ just knew we would be found out, which would have been even more embarrassing than just waging an aggressive war/invasion.*

(* A capital charge for which not a few were hanged at Nuremberg, as you may recall.)

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Albert McGloan

What you are ignoring is that Saddam’s scientists may have lied to him about what they had achieved. Most engineers and scientists with technical ability were working in ME in other countries. If Saddam orders a scientist to make WMDs failing to comply would result in torture and death for them and their families.
In WW2 when it came to assessing whether the Nazis were capable of making atom bombs they had scientists of the calibre of Schrodinger, Hahn and Heisenberg plus a vast industrial capability. Iraq had no such people.
I have never seen a description of Iraq’s technical capability which showed it could have produced WMD.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Spot on.

Albert McGloan
Albert McGloan
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

We simply didn’t look hard enough for Saddam’s WMD; it’s such a shame we didn’t have deboonkers to set us straight back then.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Spot on.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

Can you be more specific ?

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Clearly he cannot. No surprise.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Clearly he cannot. No surprise.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago

Disgusting putin regime apologists still regurgitating the same Nazi nonsense as russian state tv pumps out war and genocide propaganda on a daily basis. Meanwhile Russia has wagner group, barrier troops, human trafficking, drug trafficking, 3rd world corruption, political assassinations, political prisoners etc

Last edited 1 year ago by Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago

Disgusting putin regime apologists still regurgitating the same Nazi nonsense as russian state tv pumps out war and genocide propaganda on a daily basis. Meanwhile Russia has wagner group, barrier troops, human trafficking, drug trafficking, 3rd world corruption, political assassinations, political prisoners etc

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago

“American neo-cons goaded Putin into military action …”
Poor decent Putin, goaded beyond endurance lol.
Interesting. Do you have any credible corroboration for that assertion?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Poor Putin.
He doubtless weeps every time he is forced to rocket an apartment building.
Pray for him!

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago

Wow – you’ve swallowed hook line and sinker, Putin/FSB’s agit-prop in preparation for the war. Did the same thing in Georgia and in Chechnya . No better than the US’s excuses for Iraq, which I’d imagine you didn’t buy? Don’t believe either.

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/china/disinformation-about-russias-invasion-ukraine-debunking-seven-myths-spread-russia_en?s=166

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

Can you be more specific ?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago

Disgusting putin regime apologists still regurgitating the same Nazi nonsense as russian state tv pumps out war and genocide propaganda on a daily basis. Meanwhile Russia has wagner group, barrier troops, human trafficking, drug trafficking, 3rd world corruption, political assassinations, political prisoners etc

Last edited 1 year ago by Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago

Disgusting putin regime apologists still regurgitating the same Nazi nonsense as russian state tv pumps out war and genocide propaganda on a daily basis. Meanwhile Russia has wagner group, barrier troops, human trafficking, drug trafficking, 3rd world corruption, political assassinations, political prisoners etc

David Wildgoose
David Wildgoose
1 year ago

The torture and murder of (ethnically Russian) Ukrainian citizens after Russia withdrew were undoubtedly carried out by Ukrainian neo-Nazis, as was widely pointed out at the time.

This entire tragedy should never have happened. American neo-cons goaded Putin into military action but the victims are ordinary Ukrainian citizens of all ethnic backgrounds.

Chuck Burns
Chuck Burns
1 year ago

The people of Ukraine pay the price while the USA Neo-Cons play their political game of overthrow to remake the World into their subservient vassals.
No mention in the article of the Neo-Con instigation and overthrow of the Ukraine government in 2014. No mention of the disingenuous sabotaged peace agreements of Minsk I, Minsk II, and the talks in Turkey spoiled by Western lackey Boris Johnson.
Russia embarrassingly and naively fell for the Minsk lies. Because of that, There will be no more negotiations. Russia has already told us how this ends. It will be with a Military solution. At a minimum, the Dnieper will be the dividing line between a buffer zone and the Russian Federation. The western portion of what was Ukraine will likely be divided up between Poland, Hungary, and Romania. Slovakia may get a portion as well.
If there is anything left to be called Ukraine, it will be nothing more than a City State with a huge Russian Military presence on its eastern border.

Chuck Burns
Chuck Burns
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Something continually overlooked is that the Neo-Con controlled USA is using Ukraine as a diversion while it destroys the economy of the EU and specifically Germany. The one act of sabotage, destroying the NordStream pipeline is actually an act of war directed at Germany and Europe.

Last edited 1 year ago by Chuck Burns
S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Destroys the economy of the EU AND the U.S. Hell, not one politician on the federal level even seems to care about working people anymore–the entertaining and appalling folly of Zelensky speaking before a joint session of congress proved as much to me. We are just left to rot and die with terrible health costs, inflation, housing prices out of control. This whole thing is by and for the global elites, and most especially the Biden family’s money laundering schemes. And the Left just sticks its collective head in the sand or actually supports our Undead president. It’s all just like a Looking Glass World here in America. And the Rethuglicans aren’t any better, for the most part. We are in feudal, authoritarian times.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

I like your style.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

I like your style.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

And you know all this because…………?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Biden is not exactly helping the American economy either. Enormous spending jacked up inflation. He claims he’s created jobs but in fact they were just jobs that Trump created which were abandoned during Covid. Now interest rates are at a high, stemming the purchase of housing. Biden has not served the American public well at all which is reflected in the lowest approval rating (37%) since Carter in the 80’s.

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Destroys the economy of the EU AND the U.S. Hell, not one politician on the federal level even seems to care about working people anymore–the entertaining and appalling folly of Zelensky speaking before a joint session of congress proved as much to me. We are just left to rot and die with terrible health costs, inflation, housing prices out of control. This whole thing is by and for the global elites, and most especially the Biden family’s money laundering schemes. And the Left just sticks its collective head in the sand or actually supports our Undead president. It’s all just like a Looking Glass World here in America. And the Rethuglicans aren’t any better, for the most part. We are in feudal, authoritarian times.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

And you know all this because…………?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Biden is not exactly helping the American economy either. Enormous spending jacked up inflation. He claims he’s created jobs but in fact they were just jobs that Trump created which were abandoned during Covid. Now interest rates are at a high, stemming the purchase of housing. Biden has not served the American public well at all which is reflected in the lowest approval rating (37%) since Carter in the 80’s.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Not a single word about Putin’s regime and their interference into Ukrainian politics. Yanukovytch was Putin’s candidate and was elected on the promise that he would continue with Euro integration but instead he went with Putins Eurasian Customs Union and signed the protest laws (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine).
Minsk, just like DPR and LPR were created by Russia to influence and destabilize Ukraine.
“The western portion of what was Ukraine will likely be divided up between Poland, Hungary, and Romania. Slovakia may get a portion as well” lol did you get this from Dmitry Medvedev’s telegram or Donbass Devushka ?
“If there is anything left to be called Ukraine, it will be nothing more than a City State with a huge Russian Military presence on its eastern border.” Sounding like a bitter vatnik here, Chuck. Still salty about Kiev in 3 days ?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Nice then, to see:
1) An S-400 destroyed,
2) A raid on Crimea,
3) the death of Prigozhin
4) A Russian helo defecting to Ukraine.
The End of Russia…

Chuck Burns
Chuck Burns
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Something continually overlooked is that the Neo-Con controlled USA is using Ukraine as a diversion while it destroys the economy of the EU and specifically Germany. The one act of sabotage, destroying the NordStream pipeline is actually an act of war directed at Germany and Europe.

Last edited 1 year ago by Chuck Burns
Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Not a single word about Putin’s regime and their interference into Ukrainian politics. Yanukovytch was Putin’s candidate and was elected on the promise that he would continue with Euro integration but instead he went with Putins Eurasian Customs Union and signed the protest laws (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine).
Minsk, just like DPR and LPR were created by Russia to influence and destabilize Ukraine.
“The western portion of what was Ukraine will likely be divided up between Poland, Hungary, and Romania. Slovakia may get a portion as well” lol did you get this from Dmitry Medvedev’s telegram or Donbass Devushka ?
“If there is anything left to be called Ukraine, it will be nothing more than a City State with a huge Russian Military presence on its eastern border.” Sounding like a bitter vatnik here, Chuck. Still salty about Kiev in 3 days ?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Chuck Burns

Nice then, to see:
1) An S-400 destroyed,
2) A raid on Crimea,
3) the death of Prigozhin
4) A Russian helo defecting to Ukraine.
The End of Russia…

Chuck Burns
Chuck Burns
1 year ago

The people of Ukraine pay the price while the USA Neo-Cons play their political game of overthrow to remake the World into their subservient vassals.
No mention in the article of the Neo-Con instigation and overthrow of the Ukraine government in 2014. No mention of the disingenuous sabotaged peace agreements of Minsk I, Minsk II, and the talks in Turkey spoiled by Western lackey Boris Johnson.
Russia embarrassingly and naively fell for the Minsk lies. Because of that, There will be no more negotiations. Russia has already told us how this ends. It will be with a Military solution. At a minimum, the Dnieper will be the dividing line between a buffer zone and the Russian Federation. The western portion of what was Ukraine will likely be divided up between Poland, Hungary, and Romania. Slovakia may get a portion as well.
If there is anything left to be called Ukraine, it will be nothing more than a City State with a huge Russian Military presence on its eastern border.

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago

Looking at the period 2000 – now, firstly with western money funneled into Ukrainian “NGOs” to promote the concepts of alignment with the west, then the inflection point of the 2014 Ukrainian Nationalist Coup, it looks like an attempted “Neocon” landgrab and geopolitical move towards atrophying Russia. Given Russia having been the t**d in the punchbowl in the attempted landgrab in Syria, maybe they figured it was now the time to execute as their overall plan was going skew-whiff with potential drastic rebalancing in favour (most probably) of China as the challenger hegemon. This psychopathic western cabal of the very rich has now fractured the future, with Russia aligning with China, India, Africa, South America, and the West looking pretty bad – Following on from a backdrop of decades of destabilisation and interference in Central and South America, Asia, Africa and even Europe (Serbia), they stepped up their shamelessness. Iraq was hard to forgive, as was Afghanistan, then Libya and Syria – wars built on lies and ever increasingly corrupt rewards of taxpayers money to the defence and “reconstruction” industries.

We are at an Orwellian crossroads, where our elites have turned on us just as much as these wars they pursue, desperate to destroy the threat a secure national electorate (secure as in on the higher steps of maslow’s hierarchy of needs) poses in face of their disregard for the self-interest of said masses, and in a deathgrip rush to solidifying the establishment’s visible corruption in perpetuity.

We seem to be screwed.

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy Iddon
Alan Kaufman
Alan Kaufman
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

I didn’t know that Unherd had become a venue for conspiracy theorists.

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Feel free to challenge the narrative rather than donating your vacuous dismissiveness.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Exactly. Sad isn’t it.

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Feel free to challenge the narrative rather than donating your vacuous dismissiveness.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Exactly. Sad isn’t it.

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

The elites have absolutely turned on us–even the “progressive-left” has done so, with hollow talk about helping the working class aka Bernie (whom I at one time enthusiastically backed)–now they are the water-carriers for a woke militarism and security state that dominates the U.S. This runs the gamut–the Covid lockdowns and three years of non-sensical medical authoritarianism; the Left’s new love for the FBI and their apparatchiks as well as other vast mechanisms of the security state–but I would also argue that the far-right (especially the Christian right) has their hand in levels of authoritarianism unseen in the U.S. for decades, especially regarding reproductive rights. No one wants this–we want to afford our groceries and gas and clean water and nice parks and schools and access to healthcare without coercion or criminal charges.
All of this is done by and for the corrupt elites and a deeply warped capitalistic society.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

Agree with most of what you said.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

Even Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg said that Roe V Wade was ‘bad law’ and had to be tossed so that the states could rule. This is a process which was truncated in the 70’s when an activist court ruled like a ‘a king’. It will take time. Both the far left and far right are notching victories – Maine just approved a ‘nine month’ limit- ie anything goes, whereas Florida just weeks. Ideally, we’ll end up where most Europeans are (12 to 15 weeks). The left is just upset that they don’t have the the court to legislate for them at the moment. The will of the people in this regard is functioning again. Ain’t democracy grand!?

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

Agree with most of what you said.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

Even Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg said that Roe V Wade was ‘bad law’ and had to be tossed so that the states could rule. This is a process which was truncated in the 70’s when an activist court ruled like a ‘a king’. It will take time. Both the far left and far right are notching victories – Maine just approved a ‘nine month’ limit- ie anything goes, whereas Florida just weeks. Ideally, we’ll end up where most Europeans are (12 to 15 weeks). The left is just upset that they don’t have the the court to legislate for them at the moment. The will of the people in this regard is functioning again. Ain’t democracy grand!?

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
Alan Kaufman
Alan Kaufman
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

I didn’t know that Unherd had become a venue for conspiracy theorists.

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Andy Iddon

The elites have absolutely turned on us–even the “progressive-left” has done so, with hollow talk about helping the working class aka Bernie (whom I at one time enthusiastically backed)–now they are the water-carriers for a woke militarism and security state that dominates the U.S. This runs the gamut–the Covid lockdowns and three years of non-sensical medical authoritarianism; the Left’s new love for the FBI and their apparatchiks as well as other vast mechanisms of the security state–but I would also argue that the far-right (especially the Christian right) has their hand in levels of authoritarianism unseen in the U.S. for decades, especially regarding reproductive rights. No one wants this–we want to afford our groceries and gas and clean water and nice parks and schools and access to healthcare without coercion or criminal charges.
All of this is done by and for the corrupt elites and a deeply warped capitalistic society.

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago

Looking at the period 2000 – now, firstly with western money funneled into Ukrainian “NGOs” to promote the concepts of alignment with the west, then the inflection point of the 2014 Ukrainian Nationalist Coup, it looks like an attempted “Neocon” landgrab and geopolitical move towards atrophying Russia. Given Russia having been the t**d in the punchbowl in the attempted landgrab in Syria, maybe they figured it was now the time to execute as their overall plan was going skew-whiff with potential drastic rebalancing in favour (most probably) of China as the challenger hegemon. This psychopathic western cabal of the very rich has now fractured the future, with Russia aligning with China, India, Africa, South America, and the West looking pretty bad – Following on from a backdrop of decades of destabilisation and interference in Central and South America, Asia, Africa and even Europe (Serbia), they stepped up their shamelessness. Iraq was hard to forgive, as was Afghanistan, then Libya and Syria – wars built on lies and ever increasingly corrupt rewards of taxpayers money to the defence and “reconstruction” industries.

We are at an Orwellian crossroads, where our elites have turned on us just as much as these wars they pursue, desperate to destroy the threat a secure national electorate (secure as in on the higher steps of maslow’s hierarchy of needs) poses in face of their disregard for the self-interest of said masses, and in a deathgrip rush to solidifying the establishment’s visible corruption in perpetuity.

We seem to be screwed.

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy Iddon
Stewart Trotter
Stewart Trotter
1 year ago

On 5/6 March 2022 Putin offered Zelensky peace on 3 conditions. 1. Ukrainian neutrality 2. Semi-autonomy for the Donbas Area and 3. Status Quo in Crimea. These terms seemed reasonable to me then – and even more reasonable now. Zelensky – egged on Biden and Boris Johnson – has led his country over a cliff. And his country – still under Martial Law and obliged to fight – is starting to wake up.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Why the hell should Ukraine have been bullied into any “peace”agreement? That would have been just the start of the bullying.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Why the hell should Ukraine have been bullied into any “peace”agreement? That would have been just the start of the bullying.

Stewart Trotter
Stewart Trotter
1 year ago

On 5/6 March 2022 Putin offered Zelensky peace on 3 conditions. 1. Ukrainian neutrality 2. Semi-autonomy for the Donbas Area and 3. Status Quo in Crimea. These terms seemed reasonable to me then – and even more reasonable now. Zelensky – egged on Biden and Boris Johnson – has led his country over a cliff. And his country – still under Martial Law and obliged to fight – is starting to wake up.

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago

Unbelievable.
We are now mired in a stalemate with the Russian Bear on the Eastern European Killing Fields that have almost zero to do with the interests of regular Americans–the long-game only presents more suffering for the Ukrainians, more death and dismemberment, more disenfranchisement for regular Americans as the middle and working class dies because of rampant inflation, terrible housing costs, and horrific gas prices partially caused by this ill advised war-mongering.
At the same time, the progressive left in America has acquiesced to the war-mongers and the Biden family crime syndicate’s money laundering operation in Ukraine. This whole thing doesn’t serve America, it serves a TINY SLIVER of elites in America.
Ann Coulter, whom I despise, has become the face of anti-interventionism in America? We are politically dysfunctional and feudal society, currently run by the woke-militaristic elites. What a sham.

Alan Kaufman
Alan Kaufman
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

You’re pretty mad, I see. Did it ever occur to you what would happen if Ukraine falters and Russia is emboldened? You thin k the latter is not a menace to the US?

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Jesus Christ here we go. Tell me how this 3rd rate plutocracy is a “menace” to the U.S. They are menace to the Biden Family Crime Syndicate and their money laundering operation.
You are very stupid.

Alan Kaufman
Alan Kaufman
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

“You are very stupid” is not a particularly substantive reply. 3rd rate plutocracies can do a lot of harm with nuclear weapons or the threat of same, as we will soon learn when a 5th rate theocracy gets them in return for its aid to Russia. Your geopolitical learning curve seems pretty steep ahead.

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Who is causing trouble in whose back yard? Geopolitics? Until recently geopolitics has been dominated by the race for resources, now de-dollarisation, with a multipolar sphere of influence model (US, China, Russia, Saudi etc) now emerging alongside significant destabilisation globally….. thanks mostly to blatantly corrupt US foreign policy? Ukraine is, of course, also arguably a product of the race for rssources – they do have a lot, as does Russia

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Who is causing trouble in whose back yard? Geopolitics? Until recently geopolitics has been dominated by the race for resources, now de-dollarisation, with a multipolar sphere of influence model (US, China, Russia, Saudi etc) now emerging alongside significant destabilisation globally….. thanks mostly to blatantly corrupt US foreign policy? Ukraine is, of course, also arguably a product of the race for rssources – they do have a lot, as does Russia

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy Iddon
Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

Saying someone is stupid says more about you than them. It’s a personal attack. Saying you think what they said is stupid is another matter. I think an apolgy is called for to be gracious.

Alan Kaufman
Alan Kaufman
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

“You are very stupid” is not a particularly substantive reply. 3rd rate plutocracies can do a lot of harm with nuclear weapons or the threat of same, as we will soon learn when a 5th rate theocracy gets them in return for its aid to Russia. Your geopolitical learning curve seems pretty steep ahead.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

Saying someone is stupid says more about you than them. It’s a personal attack. Saying you think what they said is stupid is another matter. I think an apolgy is called for to be gracious.

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Like a paranoid, you argue attack is the best form of defence whilst claiming Russia is the menace because you might fail to kill her? Not classy

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Exactly.

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Jesus Christ here we go. Tell me how this 3rd rate plutocracy is a “menace” to the U.S. They are menace to the Biden Family Crime Syndicate and their money laundering operation.
You are very stupid.

Andy Iddon
Andy Iddon
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Like a paranoid, you argue attack is the best form of defence whilst claiming Russia is the menace because you might fail to kill her? Not classy

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Kaufman

Exactly.

Alan Kaufman
Alan Kaufman
1 year ago
Reply to  S Smith

You’re pretty mad, I see. Did it ever occur to you what would happen if Ukraine falters and Russia is emboldened? You thin k the latter is not a menace to the US?

S Smith
S Smith
1 year ago

Unbelievable.
We are now mired in a stalemate with the Russian Bear on the Eastern European Killing Fields that have almost zero to do with the interests of regular Americans–the long-game only presents more suffering for the Ukrainians, more death and dismemberment, more disenfranchisement for regular Americans as the middle and working class dies because of rampant inflation, terrible housing costs, and horrific gas prices partially caused by this ill advised war-mongering.
At the same time, the progressive left in America has acquiesced to the war-mongers and the Biden family crime syndicate’s money laundering operation in Ukraine. This whole thing doesn’t serve America, it serves a TINY SLIVER of elites in America.
Ann Coulter, whom I despise, has become the face of anti-interventionism in America? We are politically dysfunctional and feudal society, currently run by the woke-militaristic elites. What a sham.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

It takes two sides to negotiate, and even if Washington compelled Kyiv to the table, Moscow will not currently accept concessions distinguishable from surrender, impossible for Ukraine to accept and damaging for America to oversee”.
Am I the only one struggling with this sentence? I’ve read it 5 times and still can’t wring any sense out of it. Roussinos has unfortunately gone right off the boil recently – his writing has become a bit “word salad-y”.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Yes ! But its only gibberish. Rather than simply wrong like most of Mr Roussinos’ output here. He was never “on the boil”.
I see he’s now self-identifying as a military commentator. Total waste of space.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

He did a short stint at Sandhurst apparently.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

I prefer to measure outputs and not inputs.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

I prefer to measure outputs and not inputs.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I don’t see the sentence as gibberish. Mr. Roussinos’ point is that Russia expects Ukraine to surrender, and any demands Ukraine may make will be ignored if those demands in any way constitute “wins” for the US or NATO … such as Russian agreement to rest-Ukraine joining NATO.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Then the sentence should have been written as follows:
“It takes two sides to negotiate, and even if Washington compelled Kyiv to the table, Moscow will not currently accept any concessions which do not amount to surrender by Ukraine. However, such concessions would be impossible for Ukraine to accept and damaging for America to oversee”.
That would have been a lot clearer.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

You are right of course – and for me, therein lies a separate story. Mr. Roussinos is evidently capable of writing lucid English, so why here deploy a convoluted, obfuscatory diction?

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

You are right of course – and for me, therein lies a separate story. Mr. Roussinos is evidently capable of writing lucid English, so why here deploy a convoluted, obfuscatory diction?

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Then the sentence should have been written as follows:
“It takes two sides to negotiate, and even if Washington compelled Kyiv to the table, Moscow will not currently accept any concessions which do not amount to surrender by Ukraine. However, such concessions would be impossible for Ukraine to accept and damaging for America to oversee”.
That would have been a lot clearer.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

He did a short stint at Sandhurst apparently.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I don’t see the sentence as gibberish. Mr. Roussinos’ point is that Russia expects Ukraine to surrender, and any demands Ukraine may make will be ignored if those demands in any way constitute “wins” for the US or NATO … such as Russian agreement to rest-Ukraine joining NATO.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

I got it the second time.

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

I thought it was crystal clear to be honest. Basically Russia has no intention of negotiating, the only terms they’ll accept is a Ukrainian surrender which obviously the Ukrainians or Americans aren’t going to accept

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

BB your re-phrasing is what he should have written in the first place. Thanks.

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

BB your re-phrasing is what he should have written in the first place. Thanks.

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Well, it is possible to parse that sentence, but it’s a good example of a certain kind of pretentious intellectual style, that of over-complication to impress.
If you care about your ideas, seeking the most simple and clear explanation of them is what you need to aim for.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Yes ! But its only gibberish. Rather than simply wrong like most of Mr Roussinos’ output here. He was never “on the boil”.
I see he’s now self-identifying as a military commentator. Total waste of space.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

I got it the second time.

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

I thought it was crystal clear to be honest. Basically Russia has no intention of negotiating, the only terms they’ll accept is a Ukrainian surrender which obviously the Ukrainians or Americans aren’t going to accept

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Well, it is possible to parse that sentence, but it’s a good example of a certain kind of pretentious intellectual style, that of over-complication to impress.
If you care about your ideas, seeking the most simple and clear explanation of them is what you need to aim for.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
1 year ago

It takes two sides to negotiate, and even if Washington compelled Kyiv to the table, Moscow will not currently accept concessions distinguishable from surrender, impossible for Ukraine to accept and damaging for America to oversee”.
Am I the only one struggling with this sentence? I’ve read it 5 times and still can’t wring any sense out of it. Roussinos has unfortunately gone right off the boil recently – his writing has become a bit “word salad-y”.

Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden
1 year ago

Zelensky was ready to restore the Minsk agreement in April 2022 but Boris was sent to Kiev to convince him that the American-funded war effort would be worth it.
So yes, Washington will settle this by returning to the Minsk Accord but accepting a fully independent Donesk and Luhansk republics now as part of the Russia Federation.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Reply to  Tyler Durden

As Mr. Roussinos correctly says – that settlement option is gone; Russia won’t accept it. Russia’s position now is:
All of Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporizhye, and Cherson (and Crimea of course) recognised as RussianNeutral rest-Ukraine, not in NATO, no NATO linksUkraine’s Nazis removed from government and influenceNo cession of the western Ukrainian oblasts to PolandThere may be additional conditions, such as the reinstatement of Orthodox church property and clergy, and a return to freedom of religion as well as an abolition of ethnic privileges (something Hungary and Romania also support, and which should, if not remedied, preclude Ukraine from joining the EU).
As Lavrov said – the price will only go up the longer it takes.
Unless Ukraine pulls a rabbit out of its hat. Possible, but at this point unlikely, since most of the imaginable rabbits would have to be supplied by the US or NATO, and both are flat out of rabbits.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Lavrov is talking nonsense. The price will not go up because Putin’s demands, mass murder of civilians and threats of causing famine in Africa have alienated many of his despotic supporters. He cannot win.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

More pathetic and delusional nonsense.
The price for Russia certainly goes up with very passing day as they torch the future of their country and people. It’s been a total disaster for Russia. They had a choice – graceful retreat from empire, or fnally going down in flames. They chose option two. The Chinese can’t believe their luck.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Lavrov is talking nonsense. The price will not go up because Putin’s demands, mass murder of civilians and threats of causing famine in Africa have alienated many of his despotic supporters. He cannot win.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

More pathetic and delusional nonsense.
The price for Russia certainly goes up with very passing day as they torch the future of their country and people. It’s been a total disaster for Russia. They had a choice – graceful retreat from empire, or fnally going down in flames. They chose option two. The Chinese can’t believe their luck.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Tyler Durden

Stop repeating Russian propaganda.
In 1991 Ukrainian independence referendum both Donetsk and Luhansk voted over 83% to be part of Ukraine.
Even Crimea voted 54% for the same.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

Are those regions not entitled to change their minds given that they were continually shelled from Western Ukraine from 2014 onwards.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

Are those regions not entitled to change their minds given that they were continually shelled from Western Ukraine from 2014 onwards.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Reply to  Tyler Durden

As Mr. Roussinos correctly says – that settlement option is gone; Russia won’t accept it. Russia’s position now is:
All of Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporizhye, and Cherson (and Crimea of course) recognised as RussianNeutral rest-Ukraine, not in NATO, no NATO linksUkraine’s Nazis removed from government and influenceNo cession of the western Ukrainian oblasts to PolandThere may be additional conditions, such as the reinstatement of Orthodox church property and clergy, and a return to freedom of religion as well as an abolition of ethnic privileges (something Hungary and Romania also support, and which should, if not remedied, preclude Ukraine from joining the EU).
As Lavrov said – the price will only go up the longer it takes.
Unless Ukraine pulls a rabbit out of its hat. Possible, but at this point unlikely, since most of the imaginable rabbits would have to be supplied by the US or NATO, and both are flat out of rabbits.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Tyler Durden

Stop repeating Russian propaganda.
In 1991 Ukrainian independence referendum both Donetsk and Luhansk voted over 83% to be part of Ukraine.
Even Crimea voted 54% for the same.

Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden
1 year ago

Zelensky was ready to restore the Minsk agreement in April 2022 but Boris was sent to Kiev to convince him that the American-funded war effort would be worth it.
So yes, Washington will settle this by returning to the Minsk Accord but accepting a fully independent Donesk and Luhansk republics now as part of the Russia Federation.

Reginald Duquesnoy
Reginald Duquesnoy
1 year ago

Do you understand the meaning of “check mate”, mate, or are you drowning in your own phraseology?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Is that your real name?!!

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Strange thing Claire – I confess to having googled four Unherd commenters, interest picqued by rather extraordinary comments – three of the four turned out to be self-published authors. Make of that what you will.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Strange thing Claire – I confess to having googled four Unherd commenters, interest picqued by rather extraordinary comments – three of the four turned out to be self-published authors. Make of that what you will.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

Is that your real name?!!

Reginald Duquesnoy
Reginald Duquesnoy
1 year ago

Do you understand the meaning of “check mate”, mate, or are you drowning in your own phraseology?

Yan Chernyak
Yan Chernyak
1 year ago

There is much to think about in this thoughtful article, thanks!
Little side note, as usual:

Seemingly a product of ill-discipline rather than top-down policy, the torture and murder of Ukrainian civilians which made negotiations impossible for Kyiv may eventually be recorded as some of the costliest individual crimes in Europe’s history

The whole point is that it’s not some unfortunate case of “ill-discipline”, this is exactly the russki mir (“Russian world”) which Ukrainians can never accept for themselves and which they’re fighting against. They’ve seen it in occupied Donbass before the war (which was (and still is) a gang state terrorizing its civil population), they’ve seen it (to lesser extent) in Crimea. Actually, all the world seen it during last stages of WW2 en masse – the same tolerated rapes and killing of civil population, excrements on the floors and on the walls etc. This represents a barbaric modus operandi that isn’t necessarily explicitly endorsed as a top-down policy, but rather an inherent inner popular urge that leadership has failed (and, more to the point, doesn’t want) to effectively suppress.
It’s important to grasp that Ukrainians, especially after Bucha, perceive this not merely as a war for independence; for them, it’s truly a civilizational conflict. And it should be perceived as such by us as well.

Last edited 1 year ago by yan
Anna Bramwell
Anna Bramwell
1 year ago
Reply to  Yan Chernyak

Not only were the USSR forces that raped and stole their way into Eurooe inclusive of Ukrainian soldiers, but Ukraine’s record of terrible atrocities against Poland in 1939 and again in 1945-9 was among the worst of the 20th century.

Yan Chernyak
Yan Chernyak
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

True. However, some ex-USSR nations don’t want to return to these 20th century atrocities, and some are quite OK with that, evidently.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

So what ? Classic whataboutery there.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

Yet Polish-Ukrainian relations are at their height and Poland has greatly helped Ukraine. So why are you, presumably some person from the english speaking countries who has nothing to do with either of those countries or people, emphasizing and highlighting 20th century atrocities ?

Last edited 1 year ago by Tony Testosteroni
Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

You keep repeating this nonsense and as usual you get dates wrong.
Yes, UPA committed atrocities against Polish population in Wolyn in 1942-43.
There is movie titled Wolyn about it.
There was some UPA activity in south Eastern Poland area called Bieszczady in 1945-47, but Polish Communist government together with Russian NKWD troops rounded up and resettled local population into former German territories in the Western Poland.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

But things change. It has different leadership.

Yan Chernyak
Yan Chernyak
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

True. However, some ex-USSR nations don’t want to return to these 20th century atrocities, and some are quite OK with that, evidently.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

So what ? Classic whataboutery there.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

Yet Polish-Ukrainian relations are at their height and Poland has greatly helped Ukraine. So why are you, presumably some person from the english speaking countries who has nothing to do with either of those countries or people, emphasizing and highlighting 20th century atrocities ?

Last edited 1 year ago by Tony Testosteroni
Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

You keep repeating this nonsense and as usual you get dates wrong.
Yes, UPA committed atrocities against Polish population in Wolyn in 1942-43.
There is movie titled Wolyn about it.
There was some UPA activity in south Eastern Poland area called Bieszczady in 1945-47, but Polish Communist government together with Russian NKWD troops rounded up and resettled local population into former German territories in the Western Poland.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

But things change. It has different leadership.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Yan Chernyak

Look at any prime time Russian talk show and they literally are urging the mass slaughter of Ukrainians.
Their social media posts revel in the deaths of civilians.
Communism destroyed much of the native decency in Russians. Putin has simply weaponized it. This was the same policy used during and after WW2 to suppress and exile “untrustworthy peoples.”
Agreed. Whatever Washington decides, Ukraine won’t cede any territory, especially what it already controls.

Anna Bramwell
Anna Bramwell
1 year ago
Reply to  Yan Chernyak

Not only were the USSR forces that raped and stole their way into Eurooe inclusive of Ukrainian soldiers, but Ukraine’s record of terrible atrocities against Poland in 1939 and again in 1945-9 was among the worst of the 20th century.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Yan Chernyak

Look at any prime time Russian talk show and they literally are urging the mass slaughter of Ukrainians.
Their social media posts revel in the deaths of civilians.
Communism destroyed much of the native decency in Russians. Putin has simply weaponized it. This was the same policy used during and after WW2 to suppress and exile “untrustworthy peoples.”
Agreed. Whatever Washington decides, Ukraine won’t cede any territory, especially what it already controls.

Yan Chernyak
Yan Chernyak
1 year ago

There is much to think about in this thoughtful article, thanks!
Little side note, as usual:

Seemingly a product of ill-discipline rather than top-down policy, the torture and murder of Ukrainian civilians which made negotiations impossible for Kyiv may eventually be recorded as some of the costliest individual crimes in Europe’s history

The whole point is that it’s not some unfortunate case of “ill-discipline”, this is exactly the russki mir (“Russian world”) which Ukrainians can never accept for themselves and which they’re fighting against. They’ve seen it in occupied Donbass before the war (which was (and still is) a gang state terrorizing its civil population), they’ve seen it (to lesser extent) in Crimea. Actually, all the world seen it during last stages of WW2 en masse – the same tolerated rapes and killing of civil population, excrements on the floors and on the walls etc. This represents a barbaric modus operandi that isn’t necessarily explicitly endorsed as a top-down policy, but rather an inherent inner popular urge that leadership has failed (and, more to the point, doesn’t want) to effectively suppress.
It’s important to grasp that Ukrainians, especially after Bucha, perceive this not merely as a war for independence; for them, it’s truly a civilizational conflict. And it should be perceived as such by us as well.

Last edited 1 year ago by yan
Peter Mott
Peter Mott
1 year ago

The sub-editor who wrote the title did not read the piece. At present both side are prepared to accept the surrender of the other. Short of that the war will continue. There is no compromise available.

Peter Mott
Peter Mott
1 year ago

The sub-editor who wrote the title did not read the piece. At present both side are prepared to accept the surrender of the other. Short of that the war will continue. There is no compromise available.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

The problem is: if Ukraine hadn’t attacked, with all the new weaponry supplied, Washington and others would have accused it of not being serious about the war.
Aris is correct that there is little prospect of peace soon, and that Ukraine has no choice but to keep fighting.
Ukraine never had a chance for a negotiated settlement up until now. Alexander Gabuev writes that Putin has never seriously considered a negotiated settlement. That’s simply in the dreams of those who know little or nothing about Russia or this conflict.
This may end in stalemate. Ukraine may eventually break through. But, as with Israel, Ukraine can never submit.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

The difference is that Israel is the most powerful country militarily in the Middle East. In the Ukraine-Russia conflagration, it is Russia that is the most powerful country militarily. And if you want an appropriate analogy thing of the American Civil War. The South fought valiantly for their way of life (never mind the atrocities of slavery) and won many initial victories, but in the end the sheer industrial and military might of the North inevitably won the day.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Except Russia isn’t actually that powerful, as they’ve proved in this conflict. They even seem to be having problems protecting their domestic airfields these days. And we all thought they had these super-advanced undefeatable systems like S400s and were untouchable.
But that’s what 20 plus years of Putin’s corruption and incompetence gets you.
Roll on 20 years and they won’t even be the leading naval power in the Black Sea the way they’re going – Turkey will be. Sebastopol won’t actually be that muchg use to them.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I think he means that without help Ukraine is less powerful than Russia.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

No I mean with or without help Ukraine is less powerful than Russia, just as the confederacy, despite french help, was less powerful than the Union in the US Civil War. And the best analogy for the Ukraine-Russia conflagration is the US Civil War. Look at it through that lens (irrespective of what you may think of Putin, and we all know he’s corrupt and bad, just as the Ukrainians are) and the situation and underlaying causes, as well as the ultimate and inevitable outcome become far clearer.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

I’ve got some good news for you Johann. The Ukrainians aren’t being encumbered with French “help” – certainly not enough to move the needle. Still, they’ve only got the US, UK, Poland, Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, … . Still, nothing for the Russians with their world-beating military kit (because they said so) to worry about there.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Johann,
This is just nonsense, having studied teh Civil War quite closely…
–The difference in number was far larger: 20 millin vs 4 million white southerners.
–The Confederacy was blockaded by what became a 600-ship fleet.
–the North had one of the largest industrial plant in the world. Russia’ sis pathetic.
Learn some history, before you embarrass yourself.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

I’ve got some good news for you Johann. The Ukrainians aren’t being encumbered with French “help” – certainly not enough to move the needle. Still, they’ve only got the US, UK, Poland, Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, … . Still, nothing for the Russians with their world-beating military kit (because they said so) to worry about there.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Johann,
This is just nonsense, having studied teh Civil War quite closely…
–The difference in number was far larger: 20 millin vs 4 million white southerners.
–The Confederacy was blockaded by what became a 600-ship fleet.
–the North had one of the largest industrial plant in the world. Russia’ sis pathetic.
Learn some history, before you embarrass yourself.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

No I mean with or without help Ukraine is less powerful than Russia, just as the confederacy, despite french help, was less powerful than the Union in the US Civil War. And the best analogy for the Ukraine-Russia conflagration is the US Civil War. Look at it through that lens (irrespective of what you may think of Putin, and we all know he’s corrupt and bad, just as the Ukrainians are) and the situation and underlaying causes, as well as the ultimate and inevitable outcome become far clearer.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I think he means that without help Ukraine is less powerful than Russia.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Except Russia isn’t actually that powerful, as they’ve proved in this conflict. They even seem to be having problems protecting their domestic airfields these days. And we all thought they had these super-advanced undefeatable systems like S400s and were untouchable.
But that’s what 20 plus years of Putin’s corruption and incompetence gets you.
Roll on 20 years and they won’t even be the leading naval power in the Black Sea the way they’re going – Turkey will be. Sebastopol won’t actually be that muchg use to them.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

The difference is that Israel is the most powerful country militarily in the Middle East. In the Ukraine-Russia conflagration, it is Russia that is the most powerful country militarily. And if you want an appropriate analogy thing of the American Civil War. The South fought valiantly for their way of life (never mind the atrocities of slavery) and won many initial victories, but in the end the sheer industrial and military might of the North inevitably won the day.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

The problem is: if Ukraine hadn’t attacked, with all the new weaponry supplied, Washington and others would have accused it of not being serious about the war.
Aris is correct that there is little prospect of peace soon, and that Ukraine has no choice but to keep fighting.
Ukraine never had a chance for a negotiated settlement up until now. Alexander Gabuev writes that Putin has never seriously considered a negotiated settlement. That’s simply in the dreams of those who know little or nothing about Russia or this conflict.
This may end in stalemate. Ukraine may eventually break through. But, as with Israel, Ukraine can never submit.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago

One thing that America-haters and America-worshippers obviously agree on – it’s all about America, which has almost supernatural powers of control. We are all just pawns on Uncle Sam’s board. You win, it’s because of Sam’s incompetence, you lose it’s because of Sam’s Machiavellian manoeuvres. A version of the Horseshoe Theory.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago

One thing that America-haters and America-worshippers obviously agree on – it’s all about America, which has almost supernatural powers of control. We are all just pawns on Uncle Sam’s board. You win, it’s because of Sam’s incompetence, you lose it’s because of Sam’s Machiavellian manoeuvres. A version of the Horseshoe Theory.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Ari is, as usual, touchingly naive.
Prigozhin’s assassination shows that no compromise is possible with Putin.
There will either be an outright Ukrainian victory, or a long, drawn out conflict ending with Russia as Northwest Korea.
Anything else is fantasy.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Ari is, as usual, touchingly naive.
Prigozhin’s assassination shows that no compromise is possible with Putin.
There will either be an outright Ukrainian victory, or a long, drawn out conflict ending with Russia as Northwest Korea.
Anything else is fantasy.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Prigozhin’s death illustrates why Ari’s talk of “compromise” is quite delusional.
Genuine peace would mean the end of Putin’s regime.
Whatever Putin agrees to in any compromise, he will wait and just start another war, either with Ukraine, or some Baltic nation.. It doesn’t even matter whether he thinks he can win. Being KGB, he thinks that surprise of clueless Westerners is itself a “win.”
It shows that he is “strong,” to still more clueless Russians. He can thus maintain power.
Ari fails to recognize that to Putin, any peace is in fact a loss. And permanent peace is a permanent loss. Russians would then see there is no prospect of a Russia that dominates the world. “The Russian World” was all a sham.
That in turn means the end of Putin’s regime.
Now, the only thing that holds Putin’s Russia together is war, or the prospect of war.
Anything else means the end of both the regime and Russia.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Prigozhin’s death illustrates why Ari’s talk of “compromise” is quite delusional.
Genuine peace would mean the end of Putin’s regime.
Whatever Putin agrees to in any compromise, he will wait and just start another war, either with Ukraine, or some Baltic nation.. It doesn’t even matter whether he thinks he can win. Being KGB, he thinks that surprise of clueless Westerners is itself a “win.”
It shows that he is “strong,” to still more clueless Russians. He can thus maintain power.
Ari fails to recognize that to Putin, any peace is in fact a loss. And permanent peace is a permanent loss. Russians would then see there is no prospect of a Russia that dominates the world. “The Russian World” was all a sham.
That in turn means the end of Putin’s regime.
Now, the only thing that holds Putin’s Russia together is war, or the prospect of war.
Anything else means the end of both the regime and Russia.

Alan Kaufman
Alan Kaufman
1 year ago

The author is said to be a war correspondent, whatever that means, but he sure knows little about history, both general and military. Example: “the torture and murder of Ukrainian civilians which made negotiations impossible for Kyiv may eventually be recorded as some of the costliest individual crimes in Europe’s history.” Is he kidding? Has he heard of what the Nazis did to the 3000+ Jewish villages? Has he heard of Einzatzgruppen? Or what Russia did on its way to Berlin?
Worse, he seems oblivious to the fact of multiple defeats and setbacks of the Allies and Russia in WWII, or of Israel initially in the Yom Kippur war — or many other examples. We won’t know the ending until…the ending.
He also praises Biden’s approach. What? Sending stuff always 2-3 months late, after dithering at each step?
The only useful insight of this long piece is that Ukraine is dependent on the US. That is true. And it is so close to the front lines that it cannot increase industrial production of its own.
But Ukraine is fighting NATO’s battle without NATO. If Ukraine doesn’t win — win, not stalemate — Russia will draw the correct conclusion and we’ll all be in peril.

Alan Kaufman
Alan Kaufman
1 year ago

The author is said to be a war correspondent, whatever that means, but he sure knows little about history, both general and military. Example: “the torture and murder of Ukrainian civilians which made negotiations impossible for Kyiv may eventually be recorded as some of the costliest individual crimes in Europe’s history.” Is he kidding? Has he heard of what the Nazis did to the 3000+ Jewish villages? Has he heard of Einzatzgruppen? Or what Russia did on its way to Berlin?
Worse, he seems oblivious to the fact of multiple defeats and setbacks of the Allies and Russia in WWII, or of Israel initially in the Yom Kippur war — or many other examples. We won’t know the ending until…the ending.
He also praises Biden’s approach. What? Sending stuff always 2-3 months late, after dithering at each step?
The only useful insight of this long piece is that Ukraine is dependent on the US. That is true. And it is so close to the front lines that it cannot increase industrial production of its own.
But Ukraine is fighting NATO’s battle without NATO. If Ukraine doesn’t win — win, not stalemate — Russia will draw the correct conclusion and we’ll all be in peril.

Perry de Havilland
Perry de Havilland
1 year ago

This article is wrong about so many things, but the one that had me howling with laughter was…

“The Russian economy is faring better under Western sanctions than anyone expected”

Presumably the author missed the rouble going 1:1 with the US¢… no, not the US$… the US¢ 😀

Michael Cazaly
Michael Cazaly
1 year ago

So what?

Michael Cazaly
Michael Cazaly
1 year ago

So what?

Perry de Havilland
Perry de Havilland
1 year ago

This article is wrong about so many things, but the one that had me howling with laughter was…

“The Russian economy is faring better under Western sanctions than anyone expected”

Presumably the author missed the rouble going 1:1 with the US¢… no, not the US$… the US¢ 😀

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

“The F16 jets will not be in meaningful service until the end of the decade”. Really?!!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago

“The F16 jets will not be in meaningful service until the end of the decade”. Really?!!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

“The poor Ukrainians are being duped by the evil US to kill Russians!”
“The Evil Ukrainian Nazis are duping you clueless Americans to fund them!”
IOW:
“STOP SENDING AID TO UKRAINE–IT’S KILLING OUR DRAFTEES, AND RUINING MY LIFE!”
Ever figured out which one to use?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

“The poor Ukrainians are being duped by the evil US to kill Russians!”
“The Evil Ukrainian Nazis are duping you clueless Americans to fund them!”
IOW:
“STOP SENDING AID TO UKRAINE–IT’S KILLING OUR DRAFTEES, AND RUINING MY LIFE!”
Ever figured out which one to use?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Sorry, it’s fun to say it, but Bush & Co didn’t purposely lead us into Iraq to destroy the US, as many on here claim.
They were a bunch or relatively ignorant old men, terrified that they would be directly blamed for another terror attack–and terrified even more by what Al Qaida could achieve if they had Iraqi help.
The likelihood of the latter was near zero. But delusionals like Wolfowitz claimed it would “reshape the middle east!” That was enough to get them to make teh very ambiguous claim of “WMDs,” which includes weapons from WW1.
In a choice between “supernatural guile” and “stupid” as motives, “stupid” is nearly always the correct answer.
Ask Putin.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Sorry, it’s fun to say it, but Bush & Co didn’t purposely lead us into Iraq to destroy the US, as many on here claim.
They were a bunch or relatively ignorant old men, terrified that they would be directly blamed for another terror attack–and terrified even more by what Al Qaida could achieve if they had Iraqi help.
The likelihood of the latter was near zero. But delusionals like Wolfowitz claimed it would “reshape the middle east!” That was enough to get them to make teh very ambiguous claim of “WMDs,” which includes weapons from WW1.
In a choice between “supernatural guile” and “stupid” as motives, “stupid” is nearly always the correct answer.
Ask Putin.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

I love the idea in the Memeverse that “America is declining.”
Not actually true of course. Still, I can see why people repeat the meme, just as they pass on TikTok videos.
First of all, America achieved its objectives in Kuwait, Bosnia and Kosovo.
It also invaded Afghanistan to stop terrorism in the US. When US forces withdrew, the Afghans lost. Strangely, US forces actually weren’t there.
But have you seen any terrorist attacks on the US? How’s Al Qaida doing?
Iraq was rightly a disaster, creating ISIS. But ISIS has also been defeated in Iraq and is only a minor irritant in Syria.
Iraq also isn’t under the control of either ISIS or Iran.
Now the US (and Europe) is giving aid to a Ukraine that cannot afford to lose to Russia. Russia’s regular army is gone, and every Russian offensive since then, has ended in stalemate.
Putin faces 40 million Ukrainians. they cannot afford to surrender or compromise, and it will take a long time to kill them. Meanwhile, his economy continues to contract, because people can neither eat tanks nor drive them to work.
Of course, “US econmic power is being overwhelmed by China.” But strangely, China’s economy seems to be declining. Like Japan in the 80s, demographic decline and idiotic real estate mean long-term stagnation.
Even Putin’s Great White Hope, Trump is under four indictments. Voters in the suburbs, where most state elections are decided are very unlikely to trust him again, even if he is out of jail.
So no salvation for Putin from Trump.
In the Memeverse, America is reeling, just about to fall!
But if anyone bothers to actually examine historical facts, they get a quite different picture.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

I love the idea in the Memeverse that “America is declining.”
Not actually true of course. Still, I can see why people repeat the meme, just as they pass on TikTok videos.
First of all, America achieved its objectives in Kuwait, Bosnia and Kosovo.
It also invaded Afghanistan to stop terrorism in the US. When US forces withdrew, the Afghans lost. Strangely, US forces actually weren’t there.
But have you seen any terrorist attacks on the US? How’s Al Qaida doing?
Iraq was rightly a disaster, creating ISIS. But ISIS has also been defeated in Iraq and is only a minor irritant in Syria.
Iraq also isn’t under the control of either ISIS or Iran.
Now the US (and Europe) is giving aid to a Ukraine that cannot afford to lose to Russia. Russia’s regular army is gone, and every Russian offensive since then, has ended in stalemate.
Putin faces 40 million Ukrainians. they cannot afford to surrender or compromise, and it will take a long time to kill them. Meanwhile, his economy continues to contract, because people can neither eat tanks nor drive them to work.
Of course, “US econmic power is being overwhelmed by China.” But strangely, China’s economy seems to be declining. Like Japan in the 80s, demographic decline and idiotic real estate mean long-term stagnation.
Even Putin’s Great White Hope, Trump is under four indictments. Voters in the suburbs, where most state elections are decided are very unlikely to trust him again, even if he is out of jail.
So no salvation for Putin from Trump.
In the Memeverse, America is reeling, just about to fall!
But if anyone bothers to actually examine historical facts, they get a quite different picture.

Gordon Arta
Gordon Arta
1 year ago

The PutinBots are out in force, mostly talking to each other. What’s going to happen to UnHerd when Russia can’t afford them all?

Gordon Arta
Gordon Arta
1 year ago

The PutinBots are out in force, mostly talking to each other. What’s going to happen to UnHerd when Russia can’t afford them all?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

I suspect many here can never forgive Kyiv for not giving in last year (as they so sagely advised–after they swore Putin would never invade).
Instead they took back half the territory Russia tried to occupy.
It now holds only 10% of Ukraine, not 20% BTW.
They also are upset that “tiny” Ukraine hasn’t folded yet–although it’s actually about a third of the size of Russia.
Today, the Russians are stalled at Kupyansk. Ukraine is pushing further south of Robotyne. Meanwhile, Putin still not dare call a second mobilization.
So far, almost every decision Kyiv has made has turned out to be correct. Indeed, they immediately stopped the armour attacks Washington had trained them for, and now use infiltration tactics.
Kyiv knows Russia far better than even Washington, and unforgivably, still isn’t calling for talks or peace.
Ari’s advice may be sound. Maybe not.
But in view of his uniformly bad calls in the past–the same bad calls made by many on this page–best to wait and see what Kyiv decides.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Is that why Ukrainian losses are absolutely staggering, and even the powers that be in Washington DC admit that the counteroffensive was a bust?

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Please do give numbers and sources and how reliable you believe your data is. Also the same data for the Russians. Just ofor comparison.
It sounds like you have that all readily to hand, so I expect your immediate reply.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I doubt you’ll get one

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

Indeed. Looks like he’s got nothing.
Just seem some interesting analysis on the Warographics channel on YT on this very subject.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

Still nothing.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

Indeed. Looks like he’s got nothing.
Just seem some interesting analysis on the Warographics channel on YT on this very subject.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

Still nothing.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I doubt you’ll get one

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Absolutely staggering ? Lol great numbers you got there. How about Russian numbers ? Not so absolutely staggering, I assume ? Let’s just ignore the fact that Russia is losing ground and throwing convicts and mobiks into the meat grinder. Did the powers in Washington DC think that Ukraine would be steamrolled by the worlds second army ?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Johann the Meme…

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Please do give numbers and sources and how reliable you believe your data is. Also the same data for the Russians. Just ofor comparison.
It sounds like you have that all readily to hand, so I expect your immediate reply.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Absolutely staggering ? Lol great numbers you got there. How about Russian numbers ? Not so absolutely staggering, I assume ? Let’s just ignore the fact that Russia is losing ground and throwing convicts and mobiks into the meat grinder. Did the powers in Washington DC think that Ukraine would be steamrolled by the worlds second army ?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Johann the Meme…

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

It’s not a matter of forgiving Kiev – Ukraine will bear the brunt of the consequences of trusting the West to not only have the political will to keep its promise to support Ukraine, but also in the West’s ability to do so. Recent history in Irak, Afghanistan etc. should have told Ukraine that the “political will” part was shaky. A rude shock is that the West does not even have the ability.
One of the factors that eased the path toward peace and reconciliation in Europe after WW II – with genuine peace and friendship between even France and Germany – was the realisation among Germans how blatantly the Nazis had betrayed the German people. Politicians of great integrity and stature across Europe were at hand to implement this project.
The first condition is again given. However, I despair at the format of today’s politicians in the US, Europe, and Ukraine.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Utter nonsense.
Germany and Japan unconditionally surrendered, which was the starting point of reconciliation.
Russia started ww2 as an ally of Hitler and still denies its responsibility by claiming that war only started on 22 June 1941.
So there is no grounds for reconciliation when Russia still claims ownership of Ukraine and is committed to genocide of Ukrainian nation.
So while European politicians, mostly German and French, are partially responsible for Ukrainian war, the main fault lies with genocidal Russian imperialism.
It was like this for centuries and it is naive to believe in any change.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

Utter nonsense.
Germany and Japan unconditionally surrendered, which was the starting point of reconciliation.
Russia started ww2 as an ally of Hitler and still denies its responsibility by claiming that war only started on 22 June 1941.
So there is no grounds for reconciliation when Russia still claims ownership of Ukraine and is committed to genocide of Ukrainian nation.
So while European politicians, mostly German and French, are partially responsible for Ukrainian war, the main fault lies with genocidal Russian imperialism.
It was like this for centuries and it is naive to believe in any change.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Is that why Ukrainian losses are absolutely staggering, and even the powers that be in Washington DC admit that the counteroffensive was a bust?

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

It’s not a matter of forgiving Kiev – Ukraine will bear the brunt of the consequences of trusting the West to not only have the political will to keep its promise to support Ukraine, but also in the West’s ability to do so. Recent history in Irak, Afghanistan etc. should have told Ukraine that the “political will” part was shaky. A rude shock is that the West does not even have the ability.
One of the factors that eased the path toward peace and reconciliation in Europe after WW II – with genuine peace and friendship between even France and Germany – was the realisation among Germans how blatantly the Nazis had betrayed the German people. Politicians of great integrity and stature across Europe were at hand to implement this project.
The first condition is again given. However, I despair at the format of today’s politicians in the US, Europe, and Ukraine.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

I suspect many here can never forgive Kyiv for not giving in last year (as they so sagely advised–after they swore Putin would never invade).
Instead they took back half the territory Russia tried to occupy.
It now holds only 10% of Ukraine, not 20% BTW.
They also are upset that “tiny” Ukraine hasn’t folded yet–although it’s actually about a third of the size of Russia.
Today, the Russians are stalled at Kupyansk. Ukraine is pushing further south of Robotyne. Meanwhile, Putin still not dare call a second mobilization.
So far, almost every decision Kyiv has made has turned out to be correct. Indeed, they immediately stopped the armour attacks Washington had trained them for, and now use infiltration tactics.
Kyiv knows Russia far better than even Washington, and unforgivably, still isn’t calling for talks or peace.
Ari’s advice may be sound. Maybe not.
But in view of his uniformly bad calls in the past–the same bad calls made by many on this page–best to wait and see what Kyiv decides.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
M F
M F
1 year ago

As if a brutal invasion by the Putin regime was not enough to contend with, Ukraine now appears to also have fallen victim to “Biden Derangement Syndrome.” During the Trump presidency, we had the opposite where, regardless of the merit of the Mr Trump’s actions / words, there’d be a pile-on of derision and criticism from his political opponents. The Biden administration, notwithstanding other examples of it’s ineptitude and ill-judgement, is actually doing the right thing in helping a young democracy defend itself from an unprovoked invasion, but in doing so is similarly being pilloried for it by the predictable range of right wing cranks, Putin strongman fetishists / useful idiots, and conspiracy theorists. Freedom is simply a campaign slogan for these people who, it seems, wouldn’t know what a real challenge to their actual freedom is. I would contend that the principles of Ukrainian freedom and democracy and the blood of those trying to defend it should be above this petty nonsense and cynical political point scoring, but sadly not.
All those currently urging “negotiations” (in effect a Ukrainian surrender to Russia) should ask themselves one simple question: How much of their own nation would they be prepared to surrender and abandon to a brutal occupation by the Putin regime, it’s Chechen henchmen, and Wagner hired thugs in order to buy peace?
The Ukrainian counteroffensive may well be proceeding slowly, but given it’s their blood that it’s being paid with, they can take as long as they like in my opinion.

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago
Reply to  M F

Describing Ukraine as a democracy is like describing NATO as a defensive alliance.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

Doh ! NATO is a defensive alliance.
Amongst many stupid comments on here, yours is one of the worst.
Why bother with facts at all ?
It doesn’t matter whether Ukraine is a democracy. It was illegally invaded. It’s arguable that Poland wasn’t a democracy in 1939. We still had an obligation (which we voluntarily undretook) to defend it then. And did so.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

“We still had an obligation (which we voluntarily undretook) to defend it then. And did so.”(sic).

An idiotic decision that effectively destroyed three centuries of English/British endeavour.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago

Could you care to explain how not defending Poland, which anyway was just paper exercise, would stop Hitler from invading France and rest of Europe and the attacking Britain anyway?
There is obviously another little problem here.
If USA took the view you promote where would uk be now?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

Hitler would have attacked the Soviet Union sooner rather than later.
An ideal opportunity for us, yes even Northern Ireland, to have traded with BOTH the belligerents.

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

Hitler would have attacked the Soviet Union sooner rather than later.
An ideal opportunity for us, yes even Northern Ireland, to have traded with BOTH the belligerents.

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago

Could you care to explain how not defending Poland, which anyway was just paper exercise, would stop Hitler from invading France and rest of Europe and the attacking Britain anyway?
There is obviously another little problem here.
If USA took the view you promote where would uk be now?

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Britain cynically gave the guarantee to Poland not in regard to any interest of Poland’s, but rather to engineer its own entry into a war with Germany.

They were quite worried that a deal between Poland and Germany over Danzig was in the offing!

And how did Britain’s defence of Poland turn out?

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Dumetrius

First time I’ve heard that we wanted WWII.
So how does that argument stack up with the Munich agreement in 1938 then (and all the preceding events like thje occupation of the Rhineland and the Austrian Anschluss) when we definitely acted to avoid war ?
Surely that can’t contradict your new theory, can it ?

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Dumetrius

First time I’ve heard that we wanted WWII.
So how does that argument stack up with the Munich agreement in 1938 then (and all the preceding events like thje occupation of the Rhineland and the Austrian Anschluss) when we definitely acted to avoid war ?
Surely that can’t contradict your new theory, can it ?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

“We still had an obligation (which we voluntarily undretook) to defend it then. And did so.”(sic).

An idiotic decision that effectively destroyed three centuries of English/British endeavour.

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Britain cynically gave the guarantee to Poland not in regard to any interest of Poland’s, but rather to engineer its own entry into a war with Germany.

They were quite worried that a deal between Poland and Germany over Danzig was in the offing!

And how did Britain’s defence of Poland turn out?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

What is it then ? How would you describe Ukraine if not a democracy ?

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
1 year ago

My mate who lived in the Ukraine for years said it is a kleptocracy.

Last edited 1 year ago by Dumetrius
Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Dumetrius

Lol but I did not ask for your mate’s opinion. Kleptocracy is an element of Democracy. Look at the history of 19th-20th century american political bosses, for example. Still by far more democratic than Russia and most other post soviet countries

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Dumetrius

Lol but I did not ask for your mate’s opinion. Kleptocracy is an element of Democracy. Look at the history of 19th-20th century american political bosses, for example. Still by far more democratic than Russia and most other post soviet countries

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
1 year ago

My mate who lived in the Ukraine for years said it is a kleptocracy.

Last edited 1 year ago by Dumetrius
Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

Doh ! NATO is a defensive alliance.
Amongst many stupid comments on here, yours is one of the worst.
Why bother with facts at all ?
It doesn’t matter whether Ukraine is a democracy. It was illegally invaded. It’s arguable that Poland wasn’t a democracy in 1939. We still had an obligation (which we voluntarily undretook) to defend it then. And did so.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

What is it then ? How would you describe Ukraine if not a democracy ?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  M F

Well said.

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago
Reply to  M F

Describing Ukraine as a democracy is like describing NATO as a defensive alliance.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
1 year ago
Reply to  M F

Well said.

M F
M F
1 year ago

As if a brutal invasion by the Putin regime was not enough to contend with, Ukraine now appears to also have fallen victim to “Biden Derangement Syndrome.” During the Trump presidency, we had the opposite where, regardless of the merit of the Mr Trump’s actions / words, there’d be a pile-on of derision and criticism from his political opponents. The Biden administration, notwithstanding other examples of it’s ineptitude and ill-judgement, is actually doing the right thing in helping a young democracy defend itself from an unprovoked invasion, but in doing so is similarly being pilloried for it by the predictable range of right wing cranks, Putin strongman fetishists / useful idiots, and conspiracy theorists. Freedom is simply a campaign slogan for these people who, it seems, wouldn’t know what a real challenge to their actual freedom is. I would contend that the principles of Ukrainian freedom and democracy and the blood of those trying to defend it should be above this petty nonsense and cynical political point scoring, but sadly not.
All those currently urging “negotiations” (in effect a Ukrainian surrender to Russia) should ask themselves one simple question: How much of their own nation would they be prepared to surrender and abandon to a brutal occupation by the Putin regime, it’s Chechen henchmen, and Wagner hired thugs in order to buy peace?
The Ukrainian counteroffensive may well be proceeding slowly, but given it’s their blood that it’s being paid with, they can take as long as they like in my opinion.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

The fascinating part is that Russia has essentially become one giant Gaza Strip.
Gaza can never take Israel, or even win a war against it.
But it does have missiles that it fires off once in a while at the civilian population. Those missiles do kill civilians, just as Russia’s did in Chernihiv. But they aren’t militarily significant. And they certainly won’t bring an end to the conflict.
So, Gaza’s and Russia’s strategies are essentially identical. Neither are going to convert their enemy’s population to their way of thinking. Neither now has enough power to decisively change the current status. Significantly, Russia still has not been able to rebuild its regular army, or even dare to begin total mobilization.
For both, the goal is simply to keep the conflict going.
Neither has a strategy, much less a capability, to bring an end to either conflict.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Agreed. Lots of downvotes from the usual Unherd Quisling Rooskie stooges, but no coherent rebuttals.

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

And what pray does McCusker’s ‘the usual Unherd Quisling Rooskie stooges’ contribute to any form of coherent proposal or rebuttal?
McCusker should grow up and start to see his own hypocrisy.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

Thanks for not giving a coherent rebuttal.
That’s really what he was asking for.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

Thanks for not giving a coherent rebuttal.
That’s really what he was asking for.

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

And what pray does McCusker’s ‘the usual Unherd Quisling Rooskie stooges’ contribute to any form of coherent proposal or rebuttal?
McCusker should grow up and start to see his own hypocrisy.

Anna Bramwell
Anna Bramwell
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Except that the missiles were fired to the east, for eight years.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

Oh really ? Dobass Devushka is that you ?

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna Bramwell

Oh really ? Dobass Devushka is that you ?

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Well here is a “coherent” rebuttal. Gaza is tiny compared to Israel both in land, population and military capabilities. Now compare Russia and Ukraine, and the correct partitioning would be that Russia was equivalent to Israel and Ukraine to Gaza. as I mentioned above the real analogy is the the two sides of the US Civil War. And make no mistake the Russian-Ukraine war is a Civil war in all but name. Just as the North vanquished the south owing to its greater industrial strength and larger population, so will the Russians eventually vanquish Ukraine. The only reasonable solution and one that will save Western Ukraine as an independent polity is to broker a peace deal in which Ester Ukraine, currently under Russian occupation, is annexed into Russia. That may appear to reward aggression, but recall that (a) Eastern Ukraine was shelled continuously from Western Ukraine since 2014 with the loss of over 10,000 Eastern Ukrainian lives; and (b) the origins of this war lie with the US, expanding NATO ever eastward, and initiating/organizing a coup in 2014 that overthrew the legitimately elected pro-Russian regime in Kiev.
Now, one may not like how Russia is governed, and indeed who would since it isn’t a free country. But that is neither here nor there when it comes to geopolitics. The fact of the matter is that had the same goings on between the Kiev government and Eastern Ukraine (the latter being shelled) occurred at the US Southern border with Mexico, you can bet that the US would invade Mexico and put a stop to it.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

“Russia will eventually vanquish Ukraine” lol sounds like a toned down Dmitry Medvedev telegram post. Btw vatnik lovers should always read his telegram before posting

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

“Russia will eventually vanquish Ukraine” lol sounds like a toned down Dmitry Medvedev telegram post. Btw vatnik lovers should always read his telegram before posting

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Poor ol’ Logan – all he ever does is to regurgitate the propaganda spewed out daily in the Western MSM. No possibility whatsoever of any independent thinking or researching alternative perspectives.
Knock, knock, anyone there ol’ chap?

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

You conflate contrarian thought with wisdom; rarity with specialness – and vice versa. Quite common on this thread.

The first step is to determine whether they are a reliable actor, interested mostly in the world…… or if their interest is more in the vein of feeling better – psychological boosterism. Conspiracy theories supply certainty, in response to overwhelming anxiety (a sure path when one feels lost); prestige, where there are self-esteem problems (‘I possess important information most people do not have – specifically those experts that make me feel bad) & ability (‘I have the power to reject “experts” and expose hidden cabals’); vindication when one feels besieged (my ‘enemies’ are wrong, morally, scientifically)’; connection when one feels alone; and liberation:, ‘If I imagine my foes are completely malevolent, then I can use any tactic I want’.

Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

I take your point but, that said, we are at an interesting juncture in relation to “conspiracy theories”.

There is clearly a slippery slope lubricated by the psychological factors you list which cause people to propagate all sorts of bizarre theories. Traditionally, most sensible people have dismissed all CTs as saying more about their authors than reality – even if very occasionally they later proved right.

But we appear to have reached a tipping point. More and more people seem to have acquired a newfound willingness to embrace CTs. Episodes like the Fauci/ Wuhan Lab “censorship” have highlighted the widespread manipulation of news and opinion while, especially in America, the disjunction between the economic marginalisation of the average worker and the preoccupations of the political class has encouraged cynicism about Congress and the mainstream media alike. 

I fear one can no longer be as dismissive and automatically win the argument. One has to use whatever evidence is available, add judgement and evaluate each CT on its merits. That said, I agree with you that there are – in my judgement – some very odd perspectives being shared in this thread.

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Carnegie

Between Dominic and yourself we’ve got some nice reflections on the perils of the of the comment sections. It’s messy, like the raw nature of real world interchanges, but you can find sense and even enlightenment if you tread carefully.

Stevie K
Stevie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Carnegie

Between Dominic and yourself we’ve got some nice reflections on the perils of the of the comment sections. It’s messy, like the raw nature of real world interchanges, but you can find sense and even enlightenment if you tread carefully.

Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic A

I take your point but, that said, we are at an interesting juncture in relation to “conspiracy theories”.

There is clearly a slippery slope lubricated by the psychological factors you list which cause people to propagate all sorts of bizarre theories. Traditionally, most sensible people have dismissed all CTs as saying more about their authors than reality – even if very occasionally they later proved right.

But we appear to have reached a tipping point. More and more people seem to have acquired a newfound willingness to embrace CTs. Episodes like the Fauci/ Wuhan Lab “censorship” have highlighted the widespread manipulation of news and opinion while, especially in America, the disjunction between the economic marginalisation of the average worker and the preoccupations of the political class has encouraged cynicism about Congress and the mainstream media alike. 

I fear one can no longer be as dismissive and automatically win the argument. One has to use whatever evidence is available, add judgement and evaluate each CT on its merits. That said, I agree with you that there are – in my judgement – some very odd perspectives being shared in this thread.

Dominic A
Dominic A
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

You conflate contrarian thought with wisdom; rarity with specialness – and vice versa. Quite common on this thread.

The first step is to determine whether they are a reliable actor, interested mostly in the world…… or if their interest is more in the vein of feeling better – psychological boosterism. Conspiracy theories supply certainty, in response to overwhelming anxiety (a sure path when one feels lost); prestige, where there are self-esteem problems (‘I possess important information most people do not have – specifically those experts that make me feel bad) & ability (‘I have the power to reject “experts” and expose hidden cabals’); vindication when one feels besieged (my ‘enemies’ are wrong, morally, scientifically)’; connection when one feels alone; and liberation:, ‘If I imagine my foes are completely malevolent, then I can use any tactic I want’.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Agreed. Lots of downvotes from the usual Unherd Quisling Rooskie stooges, but no coherent rebuttals.

Anna Bramwell
Anna Bramwell
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Except that the missiles were fired to the east, for eight years.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Well here is a “coherent” rebuttal. Gaza is tiny compared to Israel both in land, population and military capabilities. Now compare Russia and Ukraine, and the correct partitioning would be that Russia was equivalent to Israel and Ukraine to Gaza. as I mentioned above the real analogy is the the two sides of the US Civil War. And make no mistake the Russian-Ukraine war is a Civil war in all but name. Just as the North vanquished the south owing to its greater industrial strength and larger population, so will the Russians eventually vanquish Ukraine. The only reasonable solution and one that will save Western Ukraine as an independent polity is to broker a peace deal in which Ester Ukraine, currently under Russian occupation, is annexed into Russia. That may appear to reward aggression, but recall that (a) Eastern Ukraine was shelled continuously from Western Ukraine since 2014 with the loss of over 10,000 Eastern Ukrainian lives; and (b) the origins of this war lie with the US, expanding NATO ever eastward, and initiating/organizing a coup in 2014 that overthrew the legitimately elected pro-Russian regime in Kiev.
Now, one may not like how Russia is governed, and indeed who would since it isn’t a free country. But that is neither here nor there when it comes to geopolitics. The fact of the matter is that had the same goings on between the Kiev government and Eastern Ukraine (the latter being shelled) occurred at the US Southern border with Mexico, you can bet that the US would invade Mexico and put a stop to it.

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Poor ol’ Logan – all he ever does is to regurgitate the propaganda spewed out daily in the Western MSM. No possibility whatsoever of any independent thinking or researching alternative perspectives.
Knock, knock, anyone there ol’ chap?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

The fascinating part is that Russia has essentially become one giant Gaza Strip.
Gaza can never take Israel, or even win a war against it.
But it does have missiles that it fires off once in a while at the civilian population. Those missiles do kill civilians, just as Russia’s did in Chernihiv. But they aren’t militarily significant. And they certainly won’t bring an end to the conflict.
So, Gaza’s and Russia’s strategies are essentially identical. Neither are going to convert their enemy’s population to their way of thinking. Neither now has enough power to decisively change the current status. Significantly, Russia still has not been able to rebuild its regular army, or even dare to begin total mobilization.
For both, the goal is simply to keep the conflict going.
Neither has a strategy, much less a capability, to bring an end to either conflict.

Matthew Powell
Matthew Powell
1 year ago

By most measures, Ukraine has won this war.

The Russian offensive of winter 2022 looked to encircle Kyiv to force a quick surrender, capture Ukraine’s second city Kharkiv, force the Ukrainian army from the Donbas, establish a land bridge to Crimea and take the port city of Odesa, cutting Ukraine off from the sea. Has these goals been achieved, Ukraine would have been made an impoverished rump state, dependant on Russian consent to trade with the world and having lost 2 of its 3 largest cities. Russia would have probably established a border along the southern half of the Dnieper taking some 50% of the country. Take a look at the election results of 2010 or 2014 and you probably get a pretty good sense of areas Putin felt he could annex.

As it is, despite being the larger and wealthier of the two adversaries, Russia has only achieved one of these goals, the land bridge to Crimea and it has only done this at great cost. If the conflict could now be frozen, it would be prudent for Ukraine to accept the new borders as they stand. It may be a bitter pill to swallow but could rule form Kyiv really be restored to the Donbas and Crimea without resorting to some form of ethic cleansing of the populations? If Russia will not negotiate then an offensive targeted at Bakhmut could be psychological decisive even if it is not strategically so. The Russians there are not dug in there to the same extent they are the rest of the south and losing a city they fought for 6 months to capture could just impress into the minds of the Russian public that this war is unwinnable.

I know there are those who feel that to end the war at this point would be a green light to others who seek to redraw the borders of the world by force but seeing how a supposedly weaker foe has thwarted its opponent at such great cost, it hardly makes military conquest look a viable option.

Ukraine has won this war. It would be better for them to accept this victory for what it is, not what they would prefer it to be.

J B
J B
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Powell

I respectfully disagree as one of “those who feel that to end the war at this point would be a green light to others who seek to redraw the borders of the world by force”.

L Easterbrook
L Easterbrook
1 year ago
Reply to  J B

Unfortunately, that green light has already been on for some time. For a few examples, in the 80s, Iraq (with US support) tried to change borders with Iran, then tried again with Kuwait (which we stopped). Nato countries also redrew the Serbian border (I’m only talking factually, not morally about the Yugoslavian war) and helped to create Kosovo.
From our perspective, the key thing is to ensure that countries understand that the cost of redrawing borders is not worth the asking price, so that even if they do win territory it will only be a Pyrrhic victory at best.
The same thing should apply to Taiwan. Yes, we can’t actually stop China from invading Taiwan if Xi suddenly decided to go ahead, and so it is up to Taiwanese to enlist citizens into militias and train a large army (like Ukraine did) and use Western weapons to resist, thereby exacting such a cost from China to make true victory impossible.

L Easterbrook
L Easterbrook
1 year ago
Reply to  L Easterbrook

Although my preference in Ukraine’s example is that not territory should be surrendered. If Luttwak’s idea of referendums were possible, that would be the best outcome. Even if there were an armistice, we don’t know whether territory could eventually go back to Ukraine (the tug of war over Alsace-Lorraine went from 1871-1945 after all)

Last edited 1 year ago by L Easterbrook
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  L Easterbrook

1552-1945.

Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago

840-1945? Trouble started with the division of Charlemagne’s empire into three parts.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Carnegie

Before with the failure of Germanicus & Co to complete the Roman conquest up to the line of the Elbe.

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago

You win.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Carnegie

No I don’t it’s just a friendly exchange of ideas between two Englishmen, nothing more.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Carnegie

No I don’t it’s just a friendly exchange of ideas between two Englishmen, nothing more.

Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago

You win.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Alex Carnegie

Before with the failure of Germanicus & Co to complete the Roman conquest up to the line of the Elbe.

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago

840-1945? Trouble started with the division of Charlemagne’s empire into three parts.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  L Easterbrook

I am always puzzled why intelligent people keep claiming that another referendum is required.
In 1991 Ukrainian independence referendum both Donbas and Luhansk voted over 83% to be part of Ukraine.
Even Crimea voted 54% for that.
Idea that referendum now after Russia ethically cleansed the occupied lands is fair and equitable is just nonsense.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  L Easterbrook

1552-1945.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  L Easterbrook

I am always puzzled why intelligent people keep claiming that another referendum is required.
In 1991 Ukrainian independence referendum both Donbas and Luhansk voted over 83% to be part of Ukraine.
Even Crimea voted 54% for that.
Idea that referendum now after Russia ethically cleansed the occupied lands is fair and equitable is just nonsense.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  L Easterbrook

The ‘Green light’ is always on, in fact I very much if it has ever been turned off!
To plagiarise Vegetius*:-“Si vis pacem, para bellum”, If you wish for peace, prepare for war.

(Roman.Late fourth century.)

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Indeed.
The delusional “holiday” we had after 1991 is over.
This is the new normal.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Indeed.
The delusional “holiday” we had after 1991 is over.
This is the new normal.

L Easterbrook
L Easterbrook
1 year ago
Reply to  L Easterbrook

Although my preference in Ukraine’s example is that not territory should be surrendered. If Luttwak’s idea of referendums were possible, that would be the best outcome. Even if there were an armistice, we don’t know whether territory could eventually go back to Ukraine (the tug of war over Alsace-Lorraine went from 1871-1945 after all)

Last edited 1 year ago by L Easterbrook
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  L Easterbrook

The ‘Green light’ is always on, in fact I very much if it has ever been turned off!
To plagiarise Vegetius*:-“Si vis pacem, para bellum”, If you wish for peace, prepare for war.

(Roman.Late fourth century.)

D Walsh
D Walsh
1 year ago
Reply to  J B

Like Israel and the US for example

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

The same thing really!
But who is the ‘monkey’ and who is the ‘organ grinder’? That is the question.

Jake Dee
Jake Dee
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

Both being nations armed with nuclear weapons. Ukraine gave up theirs in the Budapest Memorandum. I’m not saying it would have been easy to keep them, but it wouldn’t have been impossible either.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

The same thing really!
But who is the ‘monkey’ and who is the ‘organ grinder’? That is the question.

Jake Dee
Jake Dee
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

Both being nations armed with nuclear weapons. Ukraine gave up theirs in the Budapest Memorandum. I’m not saying it would have been easy to keep them, but it wouldn’t have been impossible either.

L Easterbrook
L Easterbrook
1 year ago
Reply to  J B

Unfortunately, that green light has already been on for some time. For a few examples, in the 80s, Iraq (with US support) tried to change borders with Iran, then tried again with Kuwait (which we stopped). Nato countries also redrew the Serbian border (I’m only talking factually, not morally about the Yugoslavian war) and helped to create Kosovo.
From our perspective, the key thing is to ensure that countries understand that the cost of redrawing borders is not worth the asking price, so that even if they do win territory it will only be a Pyrrhic victory at best.
The same thing should apply to Taiwan. Yes, we can’t actually stop China from invading Taiwan if Xi suddenly decided to go ahead, and so it is up to Taiwanese to enlist citizens into militias and train a large army (like Ukraine did) and use Western weapons to resist, thereby exacting such a cost from China to make true victory impossible.

D Walsh
D Walsh
1 year ago
Reply to  J B

Like Israel and the US for example

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Powell

I don’t know how you can say that Ukraine has won. It has lost around 20% of its land, the most productive parts of the country and they won’t be getting any of it back and are likely lose even more as the SMO is not over by along chalk.
In addition to that, millions of its citizens no longer live in Ukraine having fled to Europe and Russia and that is without counting the massive loss of manpower due to battlefield losses. NATO has not gifted their assistance to Ukraine so that bill will have to be paid as well.
Borrell stated that Ukraine only exists because the US and NATO are paying the bills, so they exist due to the indulgence of their “friends”who are looking to abandon them as we speak.
The war has been a catastrophe for Ukraine and is still ongoing and likely to last another 12 months or more. There will be nothing left of the place.
If that is winning, I shudder to think what losing looks like.

Matthew Powell
Matthew Powell
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Because Russia’s war aims were far in excess of what they have achieved and every military analysts I read believed they’d achieve them with relative ease given the disparity between the two countries. The situation on the ground right now probably represents the best Ukraine could have hoped for at the start of the conflict. I understand the desire they have to fight on but if they exhaust their army and Western inventories, they may end up handing Russia the victory they fought so hard to deny them.

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Powell

I would be surprised if you actually knew what Russia’s war aims were and as to whether they achieve them, the conflict is ongoing so time will tell.
Ukraine has nothing left and the west has nothing to supply them with either. I don’t see the situation improving for Ukraine.

Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

I agree. We don’t know what Putin will settle for. It is mistake to go from being entirely gung-ho – and stating that there should be no peace until Ukraine has regained Crimea and the Donetsk – to panicky scuttle without pausing for breath (even if the conventional groupthink seems to be performing just that pirouette right now). I would have thought it entirely possible that a deal might prove attractive to Putin within a few months provided there is a degree of resolve.

Matthew Powell
Matthew Powell
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

They can easily be extrapolated from the concentration of Russian forces, the direction of attack and the logistical limits of the Russian army. Combine this with the fact they were focused on key strategic locations which were largely sympathetic to the Russians pre war and it should be obvious.

Last edited 1 year ago by Matthew Powell
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

The problem is you know nothing about the situation in the present Russian military–just visions from WW2 documentaries.
Almost no one from the regular army is left. And there is no one to train the new “mobiks” in anything more than basic soldiering.
And F-16s aren’t exactly “nothing.”
Bother to read the news sometime.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

https://ccl.org.ua/en/news/ria-novosti-has-clarified-russias-plans-vis-a-vis-ukraine-and-the-rest-of-the-free-world-in-a-program-like-article-what-russia-should-do-with-ukraine-2/
They say publicly what their aims are. They wanted to remove Zelensky and set up a pro russian puppet government with Medvedchuk as its head

Alex Carnegie
Alex Carnegie
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

I agree. We don’t know what Putin will settle for. It is mistake to go from being entirely gung-ho – and stating that there should be no peace until Ukraine has regained Crimea and the Donetsk – to panicky scuttle without pausing for breath (even if the conventional groupthink seems to be performing just that pirouette right now). I would have thought it entirely possible that a deal might prove attractive to Putin within a few months provided there is a degree of resolve.

Matthew Powell
Matthew Powell
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

They can easily be extrapolated from the concentration of Russian forces, the direction of attack and the logistical limits of the Russian army. Combine this with the fact they were focused on key strategic locations which were largely sympathetic to the Russians pre war and it should be obvious.

Last edited 1 year ago by Matthew Powell
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

The problem is you know nothing about the situation in the present Russian military–just visions from WW2 documentaries.
Almost no one from the regular army is left. And there is no one to train the new “mobiks” in anything more than basic soldiering.
And F-16s aren’t exactly “nothing.”
Bother to read the news sometime.

Tony Testosteroni
Tony Testosteroni
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

https://ccl.org.ua/en/news/ria-novosti-has-clarified-russias-plans-vis-a-vis-ukraine-and-the-rest-of-the-free-world-in-a-program-like-article-what-russia-should-do-with-ukraine-2/
They say publicly what their aims are. They wanted to remove Zelensky and set up a pro russian puppet government with Medvedchuk as its head

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Powell

And how exactly do you know what Russia/Putin’s war aims actually were. Could it not simply have been to take over the Russian-speaking portions of the country in the East who in any case overwhelmingly want to be with Russia.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Still repeating Russian lies you stooge?
In Ukrainian independence referendum 1991 both Donbass and Luhansk voted over 83% to be part of Ukraine.
Even Crimea voted 54% for the same.
So much for your claims that Russian speaking parts want to be with Russia.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

As you should know, Russia didn’t have any “war aims” since it’s a “special military operation” and not a war.
But the fact that you apparently don’t know what “Russia’s war aims” are and imply that there’s a huge uncertainty about these – doesn’t that suggest a complete failure of leadership on the Russian side ? How can you successfully pursue a military campaign if your servicemen don’t know what they’re fighting for ? Show me some historical examples where that worked out !
Aside from which, I understood that Ukraine needed to be “de-Na**fied”. The boss said so. So it’s got to be true, right ? How’s that going ?

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Still repeating Russian lies you stooge?
In Ukrainian independence referendum 1991 both Donbass and Luhansk voted over 83% to be part of Ukraine.
Even Crimea voted 54% for the same.
So much for your claims that Russian speaking parts want to be with Russia.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

As you should know, Russia didn’t have any “war aims” since it’s a “special military operation” and not a war.
But the fact that you apparently don’t know what “Russia’s war aims” are and imply that there’s a huge uncertainty about these – doesn’t that suggest a complete failure of leadership on the Russian side ? How can you successfully pursue a military campaign if your servicemen don’t know what they’re fighting for ? Show me some historical examples where that worked out !
Aside from which, I understood that Ukraine needed to be “de-Na**fied”. The boss said so. So it’s got to be true, right ? How’s that going ?

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Powell

I would be surprised if you actually knew what Russia’s war aims were and as to whether they achieve them, the conflict is ongoing so time will tell.
Ukraine has nothing left and the west has nothing to supply them with either. I don’t see the situation improving for Ukraine.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Powell

And how exactly do you know what Russia/Putin’s war aims actually were. Could it not simply have been to take over the Russian-speaking portions of the country in the East who in any case overwhelmingly want to be with Russia.

Anna Bramwell
Anna Bramwell
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

About 6% of its land. It has coal mines and other industry, but surely the most fertile areas areas are in the north and north west, the black earth district. The maps that place Kiev on the,western borders are 75 years out of date. Kiev is in the centre of the country now.

Last edited 1 year ago by Anna Bramwell
Matthew Powell
Matthew Powell
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Because Russia’s war aims were far in excess of what they have achieved and every military analysts I read believed they’d achieve them with relative ease given the disparity between the two countries. The situation on the ground right now probably represents the best Ukraine could have hoped for at the start of the conflict. I understand the desire they have to fight on but if they exhaust their army and Western inventories, they may end up handing Russia the victory they fought so hard to deny them.

Anna Bramwell
Anna Bramwell
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

About 6% of its land. It has coal mines and other industry, but surely the most fertile areas areas are in the north and north west, the black earth district. The maps that place Kiev on the,western borders are 75 years out of date. Kiev is in the centre of the country now.

Last edited 1 year ago by Anna Bramwell
J B
J B
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Powell

I respectfully disagree as one of “those who feel that to end the war at this point would be a green light to others who seek to redraw the borders of the world by force”.

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  Matthew Powell

I don’t know how you can say that Ukraine has won. It has lost around 20% of its land, the most productive parts of the country and they won’t be getting any of it back and are likely lose even more as the SMO is not over by along chalk.
In addition to that, millions of its citizens no longer live in Ukraine having fled to Europe and Russia and that is without counting the massive loss of manpower due to battlefield losses. NATO has not gifted their assistance to Ukraine so that bill will have to be paid as well.
Borrell stated that Ukraine only exists because the US and NATO are paying the bills, so they exist due to the indulgence of their “friends”who are looking to abandon them as we speak.
The war has been a catastrophe for Ukraine and is still ongoing and likely to last another 12 months or more. There will be nothing left of the place.
If that is winning, I shudder to think what losing looks like.

Matthew Powell
Matthew Powell
1 year ago

By most measures, Ukraine has won this war.

The Russian offensive of winter 2022 looked to encircle Kyiv to force a quick surrender, capture Ukraine’s second city Kharkiv, force the Ukrainian army from the Donbas, establish a land bridge to Crimea and take the port city of Odesa, cutting Ukraine off from the sea. Has these goals been achieved, Ukraine would have been made an impoverished rump state, dependant on Russian consent to trade with the world and having lost 2 of its 3 largest cities. Russia would have probably established a border along the southern half of the Dnieper taking some 50% of the country. Take a look at the election results of 2010 or 2014 and you probably get a pretty good sense of areas Putin felt he could annex.

As it is, despite being the larger and wealthier of the two adversaries, Russia has only achieved one of these goals, the land bridge to Crimea and it has only done this at great cost. If the conflict could now be frozen, it would be prudent for Ukraine to accept the new borders as they stand. It may be a bitter pill to swallow but could rule form Kyiv really be restored to the Donbas and Crimea without resorting to some form of ethic cleansing of the populations? If Russia will not negotiate then an offensive targeted at Bakhmut could be psychological decisive even if it is not strategically so. The Russians there are not dug in there to the same extent they are the rest of the south and losing a city they fought for 6 months to capture could just impress into the minds of the Russian public that this war is unwinnable.

I know there are those who feel that to end the war at this point would be a green light to others who seek to redraw the borders of the world by force but seeing how a supposedly weaker foe has thwarted its opponent at such great cost, it hardly makes military conquest look a viable option.

Ukraine has won this war. It would be better for them to accept this victory for what it is, not what they would prefer it to be.