Why would Putin not want a cease fire while a long term peace agreement is finalized.

[Missourian]

Surrender is an option to stop the killing. If somebody invades your country would you surrender?
It gives the green light to Russia and any large country to invade other countries to take land.

Then you agree, stopping the killing is not the primary goal of either side.

It does matter wht the rest of the world thinks. The rest of the world places sanctions and aid to Ukraine. The US does not go this alone.

In the end, the only thing to stop Putin is power. Ramp up the sanctions, the world has to decide how much aid they will give.

Does Putin have power?

We're three years into a war with a single country.

Russia is fielding T-72 thanks that were ancient 25 years ago when I was in the Army. Russia's tank naming convention is similar to our early 20th century small arms nomenclature.

An M-1903 Springfield rifle was accepted into service in 1903. The M1911 sidearm was adopted in 1911.

The Soviet T-72 was first produced in 1972. They have a newer advanced tank, the T-14 Armada from 2014. They've manufactured 14 of them in eleven years.

By comparison, tiny Latvia has 500 advanced tanks, mostly American Abrams but some newer Polish composite armor main battle tanks.

Russia is not a threat.

We are attempting to destroy them.

We know it, they know it, the only people who don't know it are you uninformed sheeple that only believe what you've told to believe.

If either or both sides want peace, a cease fire makes sense. Putin wants Ukraine over peace.

No, it doesn't. It makes sense for Russia to continue their advanced. It increases the pressure and the urgency to complete a peace deal.

That makes perfect sense if you are in Russia's position.

Look what he has done since the Alaska summit. He has ramped up their attacks. Even attacking a US owned factory. Putin is using Trump.

Once again, to maintain a sense of urgency to finalize a peace deal on Russia's terms.

This is a strategically sound course of action.

 

[Missourian]

The cold war was restarted by Putin. He wants the Soviet Union back. He wants more power for Russia and himself. Strength will stop him, not kissing his ass.

I don't think that is an accurate analysis.

Lybia was a Russia ally. Iraq was a Russian ally, Syria was a Russian ally, Iran is a Russian ally, Afghanistan is on Russia's border.

From Europe the Western Powers continue to encroach on Russia's border.

We blew up their pipelines.

And then some village idiots bought the propaganda that Russia destroyed their own pipelines. Where you one of those? I mean, come on?!?

I look at it this way.

If our positions were reversed, I would encourage the exact same response from us as Russia is using.

That is my gold standard for forming an opinion.

If this (whatever topic) was happening to me, what action would I support.

I have no qualms about invading Cuba.

I'd invade Cuba tomorrow morning if I believed their continued existence was an existential threat to America.

That is the difference between believing propaganda and making critical decisions based on actual facts.

You keep regurgitating whatever propaganda you're spoon fed. I'll keep acting on informed opinion.

In the end, the likelihood is neither of us is moving the needle in any meaningful way.

But, here is my prediction.

Russia is going to keep the pressure on, they are going to get the settlement they want... all of Eastern Ukraine, Servastopol and Crimea, they'll get access to fresh water. Because no one is willing to boots on the ground to stop them.

Ukraine will sour on NATO. Russia has already won in this regard. The NATO countries were too fearful to commit to defeating Russia in Ukraine, and over time that realization is going to sink in deeper and deeper.

Western Europeans aren't fighters.

They like their way of life and are not going to risk all out war for anyone but themselves.

They honestly expected the US to do their wet work.

**** that.

You have love for Western Europe.

I am ambivalent.

Watching a power struggle between Russia and the EU is no more motivating for me than watching the San Francisco Giants play the Anaheim Angels. It's diverting, but I don't give a damn who wins.

You are invested, and your analysis is biased by that investment.

My analysis is unbiased. If Russia loses, I don't care. If Ukraine loses, I equally don't care.

I am not in the least compelled to incorporate any bias or propaganda into my analysis.

Now, if you please. What is your honest prediction for the end of this conflict?

We'll bookmark it, and next year we'll see who was right.

 

[ElmerMudd]

Keitel at Berlin
Napoleon aboard the HMS Bellerophon
Sultan of Grenada to Isabella and Ferdinand
Bailan to Saladin at Jerusalem

Any examples in the 20th or 21st centuries? We are no longer in feudal times, where conquering land was an everday thing.

 

[ElmerMudd]

I don't think that is an accurate analysis.

Lybia was a Russia ally. Iraq was a Russian ally, Syria was a Russian ally, Iran is a Russian ally, Afghanistan is on Russia's border.

From Europe the Western Powers continue to encroach on Russia's border.

We blew up their pipelines.

And then some village idiots bought the propaganda that Russia destroyed their own pipelines. Where you one of those? I mean, come on?!?

I look at it this way.

If our positions were reversed, I would encourage the exact same response from us as Russia is using.

That is my gold standard for forming an opinion.

If this (whatever topic) was happening to me, what action would I support.

I have no qualms about invading Cuba.

I'd invade Cuba tomorrow morning if I believed their continued existence was an existential threat to America.

That is the difference between believing propaganda and making critical decisions based on actual facts.

You keep regurgitating whatever propaganda you're spoon fed. I'll keep acting on informed opinion.

In the end, the likelihood is neither of us is moving the needle in any meaningful way.

But, here is my prediction.

Russia is going to keep the pressure on, they are going to get the settlement they want... all of Eastern Ukraine, Servastopol and Crimea, they'll get access to fresh water. Because no one is willing to boots on the ground to stop them.

Ukraine will sour on NATO. Russia has already won in this regard. The NATO countries were too fearful to commit to defeating Russia in Ukraine, and over time that realization is going to sink in deeper and deeper.

Western Europeans aren't fighters.

They like their way of life and are not going to risk all out war for anyone but themselves.

They honestly expected the US to do their wet work.

**** that.

You have love for Western Europe.

I am ambivalent.

Watching a power struggle between Russia and the EU is no more motivating for me than watching the San Francisco Giants play the Anaheim Angels. It's diverting, but I don't give a damn who wins.

You are invested, and your analysis is biased by that investment.

My analysis is unbiased. If Russia loses, I don't care. If Ukraine loses, I equally don't care.

I am not in the least compelled to incorporate any bias or propaganda into my analysis.

Now, if you please. What is your honest prediction for the end of this conflict?

We'll bookmark it, and next year we'll see who was right.

There is no way in hell I would expect the USA to do the same thing as Russia.
Putin is a despot, who seeks more power, that includes more land. He could give a crap about the people of Russia. He is the Htler of the 21st century.

 

[Missourian]

There is no way in hell I would expect the USA to do the same thing as Russia.
Putin is a despot, who seeks more power, that includes more land. He could give a crap about the people of Russia. He is the Htler of the 21st century.

Then how do you explain the Bay of Pigs?

 

[Missourian]

Putin is a despot, who seeks more power, that includes more land. He could give a crap about the people of Russia. He is the Htler of the 21st century.

This is 100% propaganda.

Crazy propaganda.

It is also anti-anthropological.

The motivations of societies are universal.

 

[AZrailwhale]

We tried though.

We blockaded their entire country and launched an operation on their soil to overthrow their government AND assassinate Castro (more than once).

We also operate a military base in Cuba against the expressed will of a sovereign nation.

So, that's not exactly an overwhelming argument against the actions of Russia.

In fact, the argument can be strongly made that WE instigated the overthrow of the duly elected government of Ukraine that directly led to the current open hostilities.

Europe wants natural gas, but they don't want to fund Russia.

IMO, we've engaged in many dirty tricks to that end, including the war in Iraq, interventions in Syria, and Iran. And Lybia to a lesser extent.

We are not the "good guys" in the sense that we do very, very bad things in the pursuit of "noble goals".

We, the people, may believe the cold war is over... but the western powers are still fighting it.

We only didn't blockade Cuba; we blocked SOVIET ships carrying offensive medium range ballistic missiles from making port. The SOVIET ships turned back when they encountered the USN patrols rather than take a chance of provoking military action. Ships from every other country in the world could enter Cuban waters without hindrance.

The LEASE on Guantanamo Bay predates the Communist takeover just like the British lease on Hong Kong predated the Communist takeover. Under international law, the lease is valid until it expires.

We didn't instigate the LEGAL removal of the president that RUSSIA installed in Ukraine. The citizens of Ukraine who didn't want to be forced back into the control of Russia did that.

 

[Missourian]

We only didn't blockade Cuba; we blocked SOVIET ships carrying offensive medium range ballistic missiles from making port. The SOVIET ships turned back when they encountered the USN patrols rather than take a chance of provoking military action. Ships from every other country in the world could enter Cuban waters without hindrance.

The LEASE on Guantanamo Bay predates the Communist takeover just like the British lease on Hong Kong predated the Communist takeover. Under international law, the lease is valid until it expires.

We didn't instigate the LEGAL removal of the president that RUSSIA installed in Ukraine. The citizens of Ukraine who didn't want to be forced back into the control of Russia did that.

Ok.

Let's say China leased the land adjacent to Guantanamo Bay and built their own naval base.

You think we'd be good with that?

Be honest.

Keep in mind we just exerted our leverage to have them thrown out of Panama.

We even threatened to reassert control over the Panama Canal itself.

I believe this was justified. But let's not pretend it was anything other than protecting our hemisphere through the threat of military force.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Ok.

Let's say China leased the land adjacent to Guantanamo Bay and built their own naval base.

You think we'd be good with that?

Be honest.

Keep in mind we just exerted our leverage to have them thrown out of Panama.

We might be unhappy, but we'd accept it, just like we accepted Soviet submarines being based in Cuba in the sixties and seventies.

 

[Missourian]

We might be unhappy, but we'd accept it, just like we accepted Soviet submarines being based in Cuba in the sixties and seventies.

Sorry, I added to that post. I remembered an additional detail that bolstered my argument.

 

[JWBooth]

Any examples in the 20th or 21st centuries? We are no longer in feudal times, where conquering land was an everday thing.

Keitel was the senior officer representing the Third Reich, a 20th century example.

Then there were these fellows

While there were no terms of surrender signed, there is this photographic evidence as the US Military bugged out surrendering Saigon to its fate:

and again here surrendering Kabul to the Taliban:

 

[JWBooth]

Ok.

Let's say China leased the land adjacent to Guantanamo Bay and built their own naval base.

You think we'd be good with that?

Be honest.

Keep in mind we just exerted our leverage to have them thrown out of Panama.

We even threatened to reassert control over the Panama Canal itself.

I believe this was justified. But let's not pretend it was anything other than protecting our hemisphere through the threat of military force.

Then there was the fit the US threw over Chinese operation of the Panama Canal and their proposed port facility at Alcapulco.

 

[Mrkelly]

You misspelled "Hamas".

Link?

 

[JWBooth]

There is no way in hell I would expect the USA to do the same thing as Russia.
Putin is a despot, who seeks more power, that includes more land. He could give a crap about the people of Russia. He is the Htler of the 21st century.

Of course not, that is in no way comparable to the forced shearing off of Kosovo from Serbia after bombing the shit out of the Serbs, or creating South Sudan out of thin air.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Link?

Google is your friend. Israel did not accept a cease-fire to rearm. They wanted their hostages back. Why would they need to rearm?

 

[Mrkelly]

Google is your friend. Israel did not accept a cease-fire to rearm. They wanted their hostages back. Why would they need to rearm?

Google is your friend. Israel did not accept a cease-fire to rearm. They wanted their hostages back. Why would they need to rearm?

Are your fingers broke?


AI Overview

+11


Yes, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have repeatedly stated concerns that Hamas would use a ceasefire to rearm and regroup in the Gaza Strip
.
Netanyahu has emphasized that Israel insists on Hamas being disarmed and that Israel enforces the demilitarization of the Strip over time through continuous action against any attempt at rearmament or organization by any terror group. He has also stated that Hamas's demand for Israel to fully exit Gaza, including the Philadelphi Corridor, would enable Hamas to regroup, rearm, and attack Israel again

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ukraine has our logistics, Intel, satellites, tanks and arty...what else do they need?

More of those things.

 

[ElmerMudd]

Then how do you explain the Bay of Pigs?

The Bay of Pigs was a handful of untrained mercineries that failed. The US realized the mistake. End of story.
How can you compare that to an invasion that has taken hundreds of thousand lives. You can't.

 

[ElmerMudd]

Keitel was the senior officer representing the Third Reich, a 20th century example.

Then there were these fellows
View attachment 1152407

While there were no terms of surrender signed, there is this photographic evidence as the US Military bugged out surrendering Saigon to its fate:

View attachment 1152406

and again here surrendering Kabul to the Taliban:

View attachment 1152408

Countries kept their borders and ultimately their independence after WWII. The losers, Japan, Germny, Italy lost no land. Try again.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Why would Putin not want a cease fire while a long term peace agreement is finalized.
A cease fire would stop the killing of many Russians. It would stop the monetary cost of war.
If you are committed to peace, stop the fighting and work out an agreement.

He is not committed to peace. If he were, he would not have invaded Ukraine.

He is committed to getting as much land as possible out of any proposed deal. With a cease fire, Ukraine could stall forever, standing on Zelensky's committment to not give up a square inch to Russia.