I’ve said what should be done. Putin and Zelenskyy need their heads banged together and a solution, however unpalatable to each, found to stop the carnage. Once the killing stops some sort of process can be put in place (as should have happened in 2014) to calm the situation and resolve the issues that will last for decades to come.
Meanwhile, having screwed up big time on Russia the Global clowns that lead us now need to focus on China and our local boys on that bastard Orbán and the stroppy Poles
And Johnson should be imprisoned for visiting Ukraine and stirring it.
The only way Putin will stop, is if he is either assassinated or deposed, he will never loose face and negotiate, he is a totally deranged psychopath who has planned this for many years.
While I agree that the West should have dealt with him when he invaded the Crimea, he had the route map for this conflict set out over a decade ago and I doubt anything would have deterred him from acting on it.
I’m curious what solution you think might work, and be acceptable, for either side far less both.
It’s ok for us to talk about unpalatability of the solution when it’s not us who are being killed and having our territory taken, and it smacks somewhat of Western arrogance to think that we can impose such a solution
I’m not sure that is true, but it’s certainly what our own propaganda is telling us. Like all propaganda I’m sceptical.
I don’t know, it’s not my job to fix this. We pay for a lot of “leaders” and hanger ons to do that. BUT, I think Ukraine is too gung-ho and the West is stoking the fire rather than trying to douse it.
May I return the compliment () and ask you how you think this will finish? I’ve been advocating/predicting the outcome Geof mentions above for a long time now. If we have an end state, no matter how unpalatable the two protagonists may consider it today, then we at least have something to work towards.
All this talk of Russia loosing is bollox IMHO. Everyone says Putin’s a madman. But if that’s true then the madman has nuclear weapons yet there is still talk of him “loosing”. That doesn’t add up. Even before this conflict I noted an aggressiveness and toxic nationalism in Ukrainian MPs I saw interviewed which I guess is now driving the “we’ll push him out of out Country at all costs” approach. All costs seems to include the rest of Europe burning in the pursuit of their goals, if needs be. So I think both sides are difficult. This good guys/bad guys view of the World is as false now as it ever was. It’s all grey.
Do you think he is not behind all the “Accidents” and mysterious heart attacks/strokes that lots of prominent Russians are experiencing all over the world recently.
It is a really risky business being associated with our friend Putin just now, even those who were meant to be his staunch allies.
I genuinely don’t know as I don’t think either of them could politically survive a negotiated peace that involves loss of territory, especially Zelensky, and they therefore don’t have any motivation to negotiate.
But the question I always ask is how much of our own country (wherever that might be) would we be happy to hand over to an aggressor so that there can be peace.
Ni, I’m sure he is responsible. However Mossad have executed abroad and Saudi did so only recently and I’m sure there are many other states that have in the past. The issue for me isn’t that there are bad people around, the issue is how well are our leaders protecting us from them.
I don’t think he would have taken any notice of anything short of direct intervention in the Crimea, sanctions don’t and haven’t worked, he just doesn’t care about anything the west could do.
That’s a complex question John. Is it territory (land) or the freedom of the people in the territory that’s important. I don’t know if Crimea or Donbas are definitively Russian or Ukrainian. Once again a grey area. I think the resolution of what they are has been handled extraordinarily badly.
And I can understand that. Crimea was part of Russia until ‘54 and is the location of a significant Russian naval base. Once Bush started pushing for Ukraine to join NATO it should have been obvious to any fool that Putin would take action. What would the US have done if one of their most important navel bases was to fall into the sphere of the Soviet bloc in the day?
So because of Putin, a sovereign democratic country should not be allowed to join NATO like others have done, does that give him the right to invade Sweden and Finland as well because they border him and he feels threatened by them.
Yes. Other ways could have been found to underwrite Ukraine’s security. Just as until this whole thing kicked off Sweden and Finland didn’t feel the need to.
Edit: The US, once again, stuck a stick into a hornets nest from afar. They’re the ones creating the problems and then “riding to the rescue” of those they have put in peril (until they’ve had enough and bugger off).
Putin should not be allowed to dictate what a country is or isn’t allowed to do, it’s their right to choose not ours, it isn’t a game of pass the parcel.
Life is life. If I go for a stroll in the bush a lion shouldn’t be allowed to kill me, but naughty them, they will (happened to a Japanese family while I was in Jo’burg, they went for a stroll ) It’s all about being smart and managing risk. We knew what Putin was, it was published enough, he won’t be around forever so why not manage him rather that bait him?
They choose, they pay the consequences. Ukraine isn’t the angelic state it is bring painted as today. It has a chequered past. All this black and white stuff that we are fed disturbs me. Life is not like that.
Because I severely doubt whoever takes his place will be any different to him, the corruption at the top in Russia makes our lot look like rank amateurs.
There’s lots of criticism of the US but I’m not sure that’s right. Bush left office in 2008 and his successors can’t be accused of going all out for NATO expansion, Trump was even suggesting the US pull out of NATO throughout his presidency.
Given the inaction from NATO over various conflicts that Putin’s Russia has been involved in (Crimea, Chechnya and Georgia) it’s not hard to see why he believed he could get away with invading Ukraine but he has made a huge mistake, NATO’s European partners and the US are now closer than ever.
If there is to be peace I sadly agree with others that Ukraine will have to swallow the permanent loss of Crimea and the annexation of the Eastern regions as I just can’t see Putin accepting anything less, he has set his country back decades but I doubt he cares one bit.
) It’s all about being smart and managing risk. We knew what Putin was, it was published enough, he won’t be around forever so why not manage him rather that bait him?