All the lives lost, on both sides, during this tribute to one Russian’s ambition is tragic.
I wonder how many North Koreans are being sacrificed and if anyone will ever know.
1 Like
I was listening to Paddy O’Connell’s Broadcasting House this morning. Three years ago he spoke to a Ukrainian child in Ireland where a family kindly invited her and her mother to seek refuge. Today Victoria, her mother and their host spoke about the situation. The grandparents joined them but her father remains in Ukraine. Broadcasting House - 23/02/2025 - BBC Sounds 32 mins into the show.
If it wasn’t clear from the beginning the real reason for the invasion becomes transparent - asset (or natural resource) stripping.
2 Likes
Not so sure, suspect Russia’s still thinking in terms of coal and wheat 
Russia’s disinformation techniques may be very sophisticated, but at times it seems as though most of the country hasn’t moved on that much since Stalin’s era…
1 Like
Started me thinking about Russia and their position vis à vis electric cars -
I’ve since learned that they’re now prototyping, presumably with the aim of capturing the Fiat Multipla’s Most Ugly Car in the World title. Can’t decide if it looks startled, or demented…
As was Adolf. With a spot of Lebensraum thrown in.
2 Likes
I’ve just watched this piece by Times Radio. Very informative
One of the points discussed was how Zelensky realises it will not be possible to remove the enemy from occupied lands militarily. One option would be to freeze the current position in a similar way to East and West Germany. Much of the occupied territory has been levelled with infrastructure destroyed. With this freeze, Ukraine would be spared the expense of restoring ruined parts of the country, concentrating on rebuilding it’s economy and defence forces. They would look for a diplomatic solution to regain annexed land in the future knowing it’s unlikely living conditions would have improved significantly there. Another expert talked about the impact on Russia’s economy, it’s military assets including manpower, and said Putin is very eager to push for an end to the conflict as soon as possible. The longer it goes on, the more dire their position trying to replace casualties with growing reluctance from potential volunteers and sustain it’s manufacturing base suffering chronic understaffing. Their sovereign wealth fund has taken a hammering. The longer it goes on the more concessions they are likely to have to make. Interesting discussion.
2 Likes
These are good suggestions, what disturbs me is that they could have been made/pushed six months into the war and saved countless lives and suffering. No time should be wasted in pushing them forward now.
The Ukrainians needed their arms (no pun intended) twisted to face reality. The focus two years ago should have been on really strong defence, not on a futile summer offensive.
Agree to a point John. Although, if the Eastern states were still functioning and not war-blasted, then I can see the desire to fight for them. Today, though, they are desolate places with the populations all but scattered to the four winds, infrastructure decimated and the fields full of ordnance. Cut the losses, build an “Iron Curtain” along the Russian frontier, and the New Inner Ukranian Border, and let the Russians spend their money rebuilding the place whilst the rest of Ukraine rebuilds with the help of European partners.
If the US wants the minerals then they will have to cough up the necessaries to get them.
It seems not.
Faced with withdrawal of US support Zelenzky seems to have pretty well capitulated.
As I said - stitch up.
the Ukranians could fight Russia,with help, but facing up to Russia and the US was too much 
1 Like
As you know @John_Scully we agree on many things but not on that. What you are suggesting is that the Ukrainians will give up part of their land under threat of Russian aggression, which can be renewed at any time after the Russians rebuild their forces (nobody trusts a Russian to keep to his word, they have proved that by ditching the agreement they made in the '90s in return for Ukraine giving up nuclear weapons). There is no guarantee that they won’t come back for the whole country one day.
However, Trumpist actions across the Atlantic might well persuade them to go along with it. If so I really hope that Zelensky asks his people first, a truce to allow for a referendum perhaps, otherwise he will have squandered his heroic place in history.
I’m not sure his statement is really much different from what he’s said before. There was no direct apology (not that I think one was necessary) and he repeated that he was grateful, that he’d be happy to come to the table (noting that Ukraine hasn’t actually been invited to the negotiations), then blew some smoke up Trumps backside. He’d already agreed to sign a minerals deal, so that wasn’t new either.
He’s effectively dropped the “with security guarantees” clause - that’s quite a climb down.
A disastrous one imo as you can’t trust the Russians to keep their word, it appears not to be in their vocabulary.
But he, and his people will have to make up their own minds, it is their country after all, but if I was in charge in 1940 and the Germans had annexed the Isle of Wight (or’widget’ as my Pompey friend used to call it), I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have signed it away. I know the decision was taken to not defend the Channel Islands, but that was slightly different case.
Well, what I’m really saying David is Ukraine lost Crimea (which it only had since 1954) due to overly aggressive expansion of NATO. That should have been a wake up call not only to Ukraine but to the West. Ukraine did a magnificent job in repelling the first Russian attacks but from there on in it became jingoistic, not pragmatic. With blustering Johnson and Biden stoking the fire. Way back then I was squeaking on here why is nobody talking about peace. So it all became about the big summer offensive, rather than defensive and holding what they had. Russia has approached war just as Stalin did, and that was damn predictable.
So IMHO Ukraine would have been better off battening down the hatches, getting a peace deal on the best teems it could, having consolidated a strong defensive position and potentially having negotiated some backup support from NATO.
Sometimes Carl the pragmatic course, however unpalatable, is the right course. Especially when it turns out to actually be the only viable option.
I can’t agree that NATO has been overly aggressive, in fact it could be said that this Russian aggression only goes to prove the opposite. Highly unlikely it would have invaded if Ukraine had been a member.
If it succeeds there, Hungary and Slovakia could be next on the list, unless their electorates recover from their collective amnesia. Remember Budapest in '56? Or Prague in '68? It appears that many in those countries do not.
Agree.
In fact this whole NATO expansion thing is to make the blame fall on the victim.
NATO is a mutual defence group and defender of individual rights and democracy, not an aggressor - Ukraine as a sovereign nation and NATO member on the borders of Russia is no more a threat that Ukraine as a sovereign nation is - and, ultimately, that was Putin’s problem, that Ukraine wanted true independence and NATO membership would have underscored that.
The difference that would have made was that Putin would have a harder job of installing a pet leader friendly to his aims as he has done in Belarus.
As to the US, suddenly cutting off military support and intelligence are not the actions of an ally.
NATO is only a threat if you believe you have a right to aggressively take over weaker states, as though they were a business. AIUI Russia was even given opportunity to apply for membership at one stage, but weren’t sufficiently flattered to do so. And because it’s a coalition of countries, if one were to go rogue as the US may be doing, the other states as not likely to fall in line.
1 Like
Sooner he takes Hungary, the better 
It really doesn’t matter whether we (the EU/UK/NATO) think as whether expansion was aggressive or not, it’s what the “victim” of the aggression thinks. That’s what should have been considered and calculated. If implementing a policy, eg expansion, it’s important to understand what the ramifications of that could be, and to ensure there’s mitigation in place should it backfire. Our politicians and NATO were caught with their trousers down when, after IMO a lot of provocation, Putin reacted. Everyone knew he was a unscrupulous dictator and yet nobody said (or more importantly planned) for when he kicked off.
The same is true in Gaza. Netanyahu and his henchmen turned Gaza into a concentration camp for fourteen years and turned a blind eye to Hamas because it suited their anti Palestinian state agenda. And then they were shocked when it all blew up.
The same is true of 9/11. The US arm, train and support the Afghan mujahideen and Bin Laden which then morphs into Al-Qaeda which bit the hand that fed it.
I think there is far too little analysis of the root causes of the problems we have today.