Kissinger says Ukraine should cede territory for peace with Russia

Yeah, that's me. My name is Ivan and I am a ""Muslim's cuckold".
its ok for a slave,

1653670916984.png


and you can´t get us, FREE MEN...

 
Not to hijack the thread, or even return it to the track, lol, but is the West's apparently ceasing to provide Ukraine with arms that could decimate Russian artillery tacitly doing what Kissinger suggested. Peace but with donbass and crimea in Russian hands?
 
It's a no-brainer. The least Ukraine will have to cede is the Donbass and a land corridor to the Crimea. The positive side is that they won't be landlocked having retained Odessa and they will have solidified a pro-Western state giving them the opportunity to join the EU and NATO.

It may well be a new "Iron Curtain".
Even if Ukraine keeps Odesa, it will nonetheless become a landlocked state de-facto. Russian fleet controls almost entirely the northern part of the Black Sea. Also, their bases in Crimea with medium range missiles.
 
Not to hijack the thread, or even return it to the track, lol, but is the West's apparently ceasing to provide Ukraine with arms that could decimate Russian artillery tacitly doing what Kissinger suggested. Peace but with donbass and crimea in Russian hands?
It seems that yes. Not sure what 'peace' will mean in this case. Russia seems to step on a new stage of the Cold War with the West.
 
It seems that yes. Not sure what 'peace' will mean in this case. Russia seems to step on a new stage of the Cold War with the West.
I don't understand the west's position here. Given the cost to the West already in arming Ukraine, and the sanctions on Russia, I understand the desire to end this thing on terms Russia can live with. Ceding the entire Luhansk and Donetsk, and a road to Crimea seems a hefty price to ask Ukrainians to accept. I previously thought a return to the pre-invasion "lines" with Russia being tasked with the cost of administration, and reparations in the form of "free" natl gas might have seen both sides "getting something."

But even that would leave Russia 300-400 km from Moldova.

I don't think the West should even consider leaving Ukraine to have this happen again. Perhaps some kind of "clear skies" and free passage in the black sea from Odessa.
 
I don't understand the west's position here. Given the cost to the West already in arming Ukraine, and the sanctions on Russia, I understand the desire to end this thing on terms Russia can live with. Ceding the entire Luhansk and Donetsk, and a road to Crimea seems a hefty price to ask Ukrainians to accept. I previously thought a return to the pre-invasion "lines" with Russia being tasked with the cost of administration, and reparations in the form of "free" natl gas might have seen both sides "getting something."

But even that would leave Russia 300-400 km from Moldova.

I don't think the West should even consider leaving Ukraine to have this happen again. Perhaps some kind of "clear skies" and free passage in the black sea from Odessa.
Who will enforce this clear sky and free passage from Odesa? It will require a direct military involvement of NATO countries. The Europeans are too scared and won't dare to think about that.
 
Who will enforce this clear sky and free passage from Odesa? It will require a direct military involvement of NATO countries. The Europeans are too scared and won't dare to think about that.
yes, it would require Nato. The precedence is Kosovo, and a UN sponsored peace keeping force, which would require Russia to sign off.
 
yes, it would require Nato. The precedence is Kosovo, and a UN sponsored peace keeping force, which would require Russia to sign off.
The UN peace keeping force will require the UN Security Council resolution to be approved. Russia has the right on veto.
 
The UN peace keeping force will require the UN Security Council resolution to be approved. Russia has the right on veto.
Yes. But Russia's option is to have the US equip Ukraine with mobile missile artillery that outranges anything Russia has ... outside of aircraft
 
Yes. But Russia's option is to have the US equip Ukraine with mobile missile artillery that outranges anything Russia has ... outside of aircraft
Those mobile systems should have been delivered 'yesterday', not after three month of the war.
 
Those mobile systems should have been delivered 'yesterday', not after three month of the war.
Russia's "resurgence" caught both Ukraine and the US unawares. We can only guess at the US's reasons, but it may be that on at least some level Biden's admin (and imo he's actually directly setting policy here) decided it was not in anyone's interest to have Ukraine really defeat Russia. We may have thought the howitzers were enough "to keep them in the game," but apparently that was not the case.
 
Russia's "resurgence" caught both Ukraine and the US unawares. We can only guess at the US's reasons, but it may be that on at least some level Biden's admin (and imo he's actually directly setting policy here) decided it was not in anyone's interest to have Ukraine really defeat Russia. We may have thought the howitzers were enough "to keep them in the game," but apparently that was not the case.
It is a proxy war, on our side at least.
 

Forum List

Back
Top