Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, quoted in "Bennett advises Zelensky to surrender to Russia, Zelensky refuses - report/Vladimir Putin made an offer to end the Russian war with Ukraine, but it includes many Ukrainian sacrifices" (The Jerusalem Post).
The report comes from an unnamed "Ukrainian official," who said: "Bennett told us to surrender. We have no intention of doing so. We know Putin's offer is only the beginning... If Bennett wants to be neutral and mediate, we would expect to see him appoint someone to work on it day and night and try to get a compromise." Instead, according to the official, Bennett is just acting like a "mailbox," passing messages back and forth.
Posts
71 comments:
One doubts that Bennett will say the same when Iran demands Israel's surrender under threat of annihilation. Israelis will go down fighting, to the last one.
If true, Bennett should watch his words. They may come back to bite him some day.
I wonder how Netanyahu would have handled this. But I stress the words, "if true". The fog of war lends itself to a mass of information, misinformation, and disinformation.
The article didn't tell us what the offer was.
"Nuts"
"If I were you, I would consider the relationship between Israel and Russia and surrender to the Russians because you know, they're helping us out in Syria or whatever and this is very complicated. Do the right thing Zel!"
Bennett denied the report.
Other reports I have read mention Uraine giving up Crimea and the Donbas region. The article mentions surrender, but giving up Crimea is not a surrender, and Ukraine does not control Crimea anyway, so what it would be giving up is an option of very uncertain value to somehow sometime retake Crimea in some far-off future. So, if this is the offer from Russia, it is hardly equal to a demand for surrender. Zelensky is a brave guy. Putin is a thug and a criminal. But that does not mean that Zelensky is beyond criticism. For example, was Zelensky's loose talk about Ukraine aquiring a nuclear weapon, made eight or so days before the invasion, something a prudent statesman would say? {Note the US has threatened to bomb and perhaps even nuke Iran if Iran gains a nuclear weapon, and I have not looked a at a map recently, but I think Iran is a lot further from the US than Ukraine is from Russia}
No one seems to be realistically talking about any possible solutions. People seem to think that a Venn diagram of steps that would satisfy Russia and steps that would satisfy Ukraine would show a null set. But that is a failure of imagination and statecraft.
Yep what was the offer? If it is not joining EVER joining NATO and recognize Crimea as Russia then accept.
I know I am in the minority thinking right now with all the RAH RAH Ukraine going on. However, I can see how the NATO expansion toward Russia could be seen as an exist threat by Russia. Usually both sides with only defensive motives seek buffer zones. If Ukraine joined NATO there is no buffer and NATO is on Moscow's door step. NATO expansion through the buffer looks offensive minded to me.
I am not saying Putin was justified in the attack. However, understanding why he might have attacked and ensuring him that NATO is not trying to park an army on Moscow's door step would be a huge step in gaining the peace.
Bob Boyd said...
The article didn't tell us what the offer was.
My guess is because the terms were entirely reasonable.
The last offer was:
1. Ukraine not joining NATO or EU ever.
2. Crimea is a part of Russia.
3. Two separatist regions independent.
The first issue is sticky because it is a sovereignty issue for me.
The second one is just self evident and nobody in Crimea seems to want it to change.
The third one would be better for those two regions because Ukraine sent actual Proto-Nazis into them to rough up the citizens who are ~80% Russian for the last several years.
And Russia probably added a fourth stipulation. No more US "Biodefense" labs laundering money for DC corruptocrats like Mitt Romney and Nancy Pelosi.
Zelensky is apparently going to go to the mat to protect his country's sources of US Taxpayer dollars.
How dare he not accept a few amputations and castration from the friendly wolf at his door.
He can't take the offer because the US won't let him. We wanted the war all along, we just didn't want the odium of starting it. Yes, I have been reading The Guns of August.
Bennett wouldn't be caught in a similar situation because he has nukes and Ukraine does not.
Buffer zones have been around for as long as great powers have existed, but in this case, Russia is aiming to occupy all of Ukraine, erasing the buffer zone between Russia and Slovakia/Poland, etc. Total doublespeak from Russia (shocking, I know), and I have zero faith that if Ukraine ceded the Donbas the Russians would be satisfied. We know they didn't stop with Crimea, they didn't stop with Georgia, they won't stop with Ukraine until forced to.
Zelensky is a brave guy. Putin is a thug and a criminal.
Zelensky may be brave, but he and his govt are thugs and criminals too. Not as big as Putin, perhaps but it's a smaller country
If Ukraine joined NATO there is no buffer and NATO is on Moscow's door step
NATO has been on Russia's doorstep since it inception. Norway has a common border with Russia and is close to the big naval base in Murmansk. When Norway applied to join as a charter member in 1949, Stalin called it a provocation.
After the Cold War, the Baltic States joined NATO with Estonia and Latvia bordering Russia, and Lithuania controlling the land access to Kalingrad. None of those countries are a military threat to Russia. They joined NATO purely as a defensive measure, not with a view to take Russian territory sometime in the future.
The only guarantee for Ukraine's future sovereignty is by joining NATO. Treaties or assurances by the Russians mean nothing now. Perhaps some agreement can be made as to Ukraine's NATO membership, such as a limit on offensive weapons, foreign troops or joint military exercises in Ukraine to placate Russia or let them save some face.
I'm guessing NATO has a shitload of special forces guys, Intel paramilitaries and military contractors working with the locals in Ukraine and this explains the surprisingly high degree of success the Ukrainian military is having against the Russians.
Koot Katmandu said...
"I know I am in the minority thinking right now..."
Probably not. Warmongers are loud but in the minority. "Don't give a hoot" is probably in second place, after "Ukraine is screwed anyway, solve it diplomatically."
“Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky …” FIFY. Now if the Ukrainian Prime Minister was reported to have said that, that would be quite a story.
So if Ukraine agrees and then later changes its mind and joins NATO/EU, is Russia going to sue? Seems it would deserve the "lawsuits I hope will lose" tag.
"Send These MiGs... Enough Talk. People Are Dying. Send Them The Planes That They Need. They Say They Need MiGs... They Want MiGs. Get Them the MiGs."
Is it clear now to you people just what the Republican party in DC is yet?
We now know why Mittens viciously attacked the Republican field in 2012 and went so easy on Barrack.
Obama and Mittens were business partners in Ukraine.
They just wanted to make sure someone on the board was elected president.
Koot Katmandu said...
The same argument can also go other way. demand any ceded territories become independent states without any Russian interference.
Keep in mind NATO exists because Russia has traditionally enslaved eastern Europe. It isn't unreasonable for any eastern Europe state to want to protect themselves from Russia.
Koot Katmandu said...
Yep what was the offer? If it is not joining EVER joining NATO and recognize Crimea as Russia then accept.
No no no no.
You don't understand. Mitt Romney and Lindsey Graham and Joe Biden got a biz going on.
They cannot lose the Odessa facility.
And Ukranians need to fight to the death for it.
tim in vermont said...
He can't take the offer because the US won't let him.
Bingo.
When asked about the Donbas, Kamala Harris said Joe Biden is back in Delaware resting.
The first issue is sticky because it is a sovereignty issue for me.
I agree. And the EU part is grayer than the NATO part, IMO.
Kind of thinking out loud here. Why invite Ukraine into NATO if not to bring NATO military power onto Russia's doorstep? NATO is a mutual defense pact, but what does Ukraine bring to the table regarding defense of US territory or even that of France, England or Germany? Bringing Ukraine into NATO seems more on the offensive side. NATO's steady expansion is almost like conquering territory. Okay, the best defense is a good offense, I get that, but the idea of NATO is peace through strength. Seems like insisting on Ukraine has provoked war.
For a comparison, Israel will not give up the Golan Heights because it would allow their enemies to put missiles so close to their cities that they could not be defended. It's an existential matter for Israel and nobody blames them for drawing a red line on that.
Russia sees Ukraine the same way.
Does the EU have an Article 5 equivalent regarding it's member nations? Would Ukraine joining the EU effectively be the same as joining NATO? I don't know.
"It isn't unreasonable for any eastern Europe state to want to protect themselves from Russia."
And NATO has been used to overthrow governments, like the "shit show" in Libya that Hillary and the Neocons cooked up. How did that one work out, and why should the Russians not see it as an aggressive military alliance. Yeah they had a UN resolution, which they lawyered and twisted until it allowed them to overthrown Khadafy with a no fly zone + bombing.
Remember how the US twisted the intent of the UN resolution on Iraq and avoided any further meetings of the UN which might have clarified it? Both Iraq and Libya, like Syria, were Russian client states.
The traditional solution to create peace between hostile powers has been neutral buffer states, but we want a knife to Russia's, not the temporary Putin's, but a permanent knife to Russia's throat.
Hasn't all of the lying that our government has done, RussiaGate, Hunter Biden's laptop, Fauci's germ weaponization lab in Wuhan, Nazi truckers, "Trump supporters are Nazis," hasn't any of this had any effect on your trust?
So, the Russians kindly offered to let the Ukrainians surrender. And they declined. How is this news? I wish the Ukrainians the best of luck.
Amexpat said...
The only guarantee for Ukraine's future sovereignty is by joining NATO.
Having Nukes would have served them better than making an agreement with the US.
Treaties or assurances by the Russians mean nothing now.
They mean the same as Treaties with the current US regime.
Perhaps some agreement can be made as to Ukraine's NATO membership, such as a limit on offensive weapons, foreign troops or joint military exercises in Ukraine to placate Russia or let them save some face.
Maybe just agreeing to not have the US funding "Biodefense" labs on Russia's border would be enough.
Total disarmament was one of the conditions in the last two negotiations until the most recent one. No import of weapons from "western countries" is the latest offer.
I don't believe Ukrainians will stop fighting no matter what Zelensky says. The HATE the Russians.
If the offer was neutrality with 2 independent states in the east, you take the deal. But, it's always more, not to mention you can't trust Putin.
Will Putin take possession of a totally demolished country he can't afford to rebuild?
Time will tell.
Achilles - What is your evidence that there are bioweapon labs in Ukraine? I'm sorry but "Tucker says so" doesn't really count.
Do you understand the difference between a biolab and a bioweapons lab? Or are you just a lying piece of shit? I think the later.
I think I once suggested that Achilles an the FBI provocateur aiming to foment arrests for seditious conspiracy. But I see now from his “entirely reasonable” terms of surrender that I was mistaken, he is definitely FSB.
I'm told that Norway made a deal with the Soviets: no NATO bases and no nuclear weapons in the country and they could join NATO. I don't know if that's true, but Austria and Finland were "allowed" to remain neutral, and so far it looks like Ukraine on its own and with moral and material support from the West isn't as weak as many thought. Joining NATO may not be necessary. NATO expansion looks a little like a US vanity project.
NATO Armies in Ukraine, so close to Moscow, will keep the world on the brink of nuclear war, no matter what strongman thug or enlightened leader of the Russian people controls the Russian state. If observing this makes me a traitor, so be it; it has been long held view of the foreign policy establishment until the neocons took over at the State Department. I have already been denounced as a traitor for voting for Trump, for doubting RussiaGate, for strongly suspecting all along that what the New York Times reporter recently said about J6 was correct, and for not believing that the Canadian truckers were Nazis.
Joe Biden blundered into this war by promising Ukraine, in November of last year, NATO membership. The NPCs who vomit up the "Trump green lighted this war" propaganda have nearly perfect ignorance of the sage advice that Trump offered them, which could have avoided his horrific war, and that the Europeans are just now ruefully taking, far too late.
They cannot lose the Odessa facility.
Odessa hasn't been touched because Putin wants his newly acquired Russian port intact.
Putin has made his demands clear:
1. Ukraine recognizes Crimea part of Russia
2. Ukraine recognizes independence of the two breakaway republics
3. Ukraine forgoes any NATO membership and importation of offensive weapons.
That's what the war is about. Zelensky refuses to accept these terms. That's why Ukrainians are still dying. This is NOT about Putin CONQUERRRING THE WORLD11!!!
Joe Biden just tweeted he wasn't sending Jets to Ukraine or declaring a no fly zone. Considers it the equivilent to starting WW III.
Thank God we have POTUS Biden and not President Mittens or President Ladybug Graham.
From the Jerusalem Post report itself, it is clear Bennett did NOT tell Ukraine to surrender (as some "unnamed" source put it). He supposedly told them, or advised them, to "take the offer" Putin supposedly made, which is a LOT less than Putin originally indicated he wanted. This current under consideration compromise (which it is) is entirely different. It does not involve surrender, which given Putin's initial statements would mean giving up on Ukrainian sovereignty entirely. It is outrageous that Israel, the only nation acting rationally in this entire rush to WWIII, should get this kind of reaction. It tells me the West's fake adulation of Zelensky (which it will never back up anyway) has perhaps continued to give him false hopes. He needs to do a deal along the lines Bennett has induced them to consider. The alternative will be horrendous and will likely destroy Zelensky's chance to do anything at all. Those, including some here, who think NATO is or will be Ukraine's savior are deluding yourselves.
Just to add to what I said here already, it is also absurd to think anyone quoted saying anything about this is doing anything other than playing the game. That is, it could easily be the case the Ukrainians want to sound more adamant than they will ultimately be in order to push Putin as far as they can get away with doing so. I would mistrust ANY definitive statement by anyone about where these interactions are going right now.
and I have not looked a at a map recently, but I think Iran is a lot further from the US than Ukraine is from Russia}
*************
Utterly irrelevant.
Iran has sworn to annihilate our ally Israel, and could use those nukes to do it.
Does NATO have a mission statement?
What might a win-win negotiated solution look like? Both sides would have to get something:
(1) Russia gets Crimea and Ukraine can join the EU but not NATO (like Sweden and Finland).
(2) Russia pays money that can be used for rebuilding Ukraine, and the West removes the sanctions against Russia.
But there will need to be some sort of stalemate on the ground before any deal like that can be considered.
My mailbox has never told me to take the deal. Not even Outlook does that.
They should have surrendered because nobody is going to help them. The Ukrainians are foolish.
"However, I can see how the NATO expansion toward Russia could be seen as an exist threat by Russia."
That was my position before the war. The problem is that no matter how understandable Putin's reasons might be, he invaded a sovereign nation. He didn't just support a couple of breakaway provinces, he tried to decapitate the government of the Ukraine. Rewarding him for such a breach of order would be wrong, because the same justification he's using for the Ukraine would apply to Poland once he's done. That's not something the international community can accept.
"Go quietly, don't make a fuss." Warsaw Ghetto Judenrat, 1939-1943.
Wince's pun about the Donbas is enough to trigger my Manych Depression.
32 trimesters, in progress. Groundhog day in Spring.
He can't take the offer because the US won't let him.
From Obama to his heir apparent, Biden, there is a compelling cause to protect sources, methods, and "benefits". Meanwhile, in other places uplifted, where there was Spring, there is now summer, fall, winter, and spring.
Maybe just agreeing to not have the US funding "Biodefense" labs on Russia's border would be enough.
You take up a lot of real estate here repeating, again and again, baseless bullshit. You don't provide any links, just wild conspiracy theories that go beyond what even RT tries to promote. You don't even have the integrity to show your face or anything about yourself in your profile. I wonder how many aliases you use here?
It's nice to see so many of you geniuses trust Vlad as a man of honor. I could imagine you cucks selling out your families and neighbors quickly to the Daesh.
Chris Lopes said...
That was my position before the war. The problem is that no matter how understandable Putin's reasons might be, he invaded a sovereign nation. He didn't just support a couple of breakaway provinces, he tried to decapitate the government of the Ukraine. Rewarding him for such a breach of order would be wrong, because the same justification he's using for the Ukraine would apply to Poland once he's done. That's not something the international community can accept.
Putin really fucked up when he invaded the country entire. ~130000 troops invading a country of 41000000 people is just stupid.
There is also no way he can occupy Ukraine with such a small force. So his only options now are to inflict casualties until Ukraine capitulates.
He listened to some obviously incompetent generals who got sacked and are probably dead now.
He is going to pay for this by being ousted. It is just a matter of time now before someone decides he needs to go. I doubt he gets to enjoy retirement.
Left Bank of the Charles said...
I think I once suggested that Achilles an the FBI provocateur aiming to foment arrests for seditious conspiracy. But I see now from his “entirely reasonable” terms of surrender that I was mistaken, he is definitely FSB.
This is what a stupid supporters of every illegitimate regime in history have said.
They are losing power at home so they start wars and call their enemies traitors.
I deployed 4 times for this country. You are just a piece of shit.
jim5301 said...
Achilles - What is your evidence that there are bioweapon labs in Ukraine? I'm sorry but "Tucker says so" doesn't really count.
Do you understand the difference between a biolab and a bioweapons lab? Or are you just a lying piece of shit? I think the later.
Nuland admits it under oath.
You should really not be so stupid before opening your mouth. The answer to your question is open and out there for all to see.
What does the level 3 designation mean?
jim5301 said...
Achilles - What is your evidence that there are bioweapon labs in Ukraine? I'm sorry but "Tucker says so" doesn't really count.
Do you understand the difference between a biolab and a bioweapons lab? Or are you just a lying piece of shit? I think the later.
<a href="https://americanbuddhist.net/2022/03/09/flashback-obama-spearheads-biolab-in-odessa-ukraine/>It is right there in black and white traitor.</a>
I look forward to everything that was "researched" and kept at this lab being released.
I look forward to all of the funding for this facility being reported.
I look forward to finding out how much money Barrack Obama and his cronies got in the kickback schemes.
Neville Chamberlain's ghost says "That didn't work out so well last time, you know."
When Russell Brand and Glenn Greenwald and myself agree on something it wont be long.
Explaining is not condoning.
Even before Russia came in picture : Ukrainians were killing "fellow" Ukrainians for past 8 years since 2014
If Ukraine has nuclear weapons now is to show them
@jim5301
Hi Chuck!
Blogger Achilles said...
....
1. Ukraine not joining NATO or EU ever.
2. Crimea is a part of Russia.
3. Two separatist regions independent.
The first issue is sticky because it is a sovereignty issue for me.
==========
UK sovereignty was issue in Brexit >> contradicts your point??!!!
Achilles said...
My guess is because the terms were entirely reasonable.
No, the terms were a complete medium term victory for Putin, which is the opposite of "reasonable"
The last offer was:
1. Ukraine not joining NATO or EU ever.
Ukraine must permanently remain vulnerable to Russia invasion and domination
2. Crimea is a part of Russia.
3. Two separatist regions independent.
Ukraine must remain permanently dismembered, at least until Russia conquers the rest of it
Now, could you explain to us what part of that is "reasonable" for Ukraine?
Or have you decided that the Ukrainians aren't real people, so their desires don't matter?
The first issue is sticky because it is a sovereignty issue for me.
The second one is just self evident and nobody in Crimea seems to want it to change.
The third one would be better for those two regions because Ukraine sent actual Proto-Nazis into them to rough up the citizens who are ~80% Russian for the last several years.
The level of propaganda about Ukraine/Putin right now has been over 11 on a scale of 1 to 10 for weeks. I originally thought Biden stirred this up as a "wag the dog" scenario but Putin bit on the provocation and did something stupid. I expect the ultimate solution will be the eastern Ukraine areas added to Russia and Ukraine neutralized.
That is if Miss Graham and Mr Romney don't get us into a nuclear war.
BothSidesNow said...
Other reports I have read mention Uraine giving up Crimea and the Donbas region. The article mentions surrender, but giving up Crimea is not a surrender, and Ukraine does not control Crimea anyway
Ukraine does not control Crimea because Russia invaded it in violation of the 1994 agreement by which Ukraine gave up its nukes.
To agree to giving up any part of Ukraine is to agree that Russia will over time dismember, absorb and destroy Ukraine.
It is defeat
For example, was Zelensky's loose talk about Ukraine aquiring a nuclear weapon, made eight or so days before the invasion, something a prudent statesman would say? {Note the US has threatened to bomb and perhaps even nuke Iran if Iran gains a nuclear weapon, and I have not looked a at a map recently, but I think Iran is a lot further from the US than Ukraine is from Russia}
Iran is a State sponsor of terrorism whose rulers routinely chant "death to America". If you give Iran nukes, it will use them, against the US or US allies.
Ukraine is a country that was willing to give up its nukes in exchange for its territorial integrity being respected.
It's entirely reasonable for a Ukraine leader to say "if our territory is not going to be respected, then we should probably get the nukes back".
Ukraine isn't going to unilaterally nuke Russia because taht would end Ukraine. That's entirely different from Iran
No one seems to be realistically talking about any possible solutions. People seem to think that a Venn diagram of steps that would satisfy Russia and steps that would satisfy Ukraine would show a null set. But that is a failure of imagination and statecraft.
Nope, the Venn diagram is empty.
ALL of Putins demands come down to "Russia must have the power to bully Ukraine, and invade whenever we don't get what we want by bullying." That's what "Ukraine shoudl be in Russia's sphere of influence" means: What the Ukrainians want doesn't matter, only what Putin wants.
Either Putin wins, and Ukraine is enslaved, or Ukraine wins, and Putin loses his and Russia's ability to bully Ukraine.
There is no compromise between the two
Narayanan said...
Blogger Achilles said...
....
1. Ukraine not joining NATO or EU ever.
2. Crimea is a part of Russia.
3. Two separatist regions independent.
The first issue is sticky because it is a sovereignty issue for me.
==========
UK sovereignty was issue in Brexit >> contradicts your point??!!!
I said it was sticky for me.
You going to go shoot some Russian tanks for it?
You ready to send in NATO planes and start WW3 for it?
Howard said...
It's nice to see so many of you geniuses trust Vlad as a man of honor. I could imagine you cucks selling out your families and neighbors quickly to the Daesh.
Since you and the Regime you support started this war you can go fight it. The DC regime has been driving Putin into this for decades now.
You can join the Romney clan on their trip over to Ukraine. You can take Hunter Biden with you. I hear he brings entertainment.
Meanwhile when the food riots all over the world start we know it is pieces of shit like you that caused it.
And when Biden dies and the Regime starts to melt away we will have Trump put together the world You and Biden broke.
And don't forget to go visit the "Biodefense" labs.
Take your COVID mask. It will keep you safe.
1. What was the offer? Seems important.
2. We aren't Ukraine.
3. We are not at war with Russia.
4. Our interest is to limit the war. Ukraine's interest is to expand it.
5. Ukraine can't capture Moscow and depose Putin.
6. The war will only end through negotiation.
7. Putin is unlikely to be deposed by Russians.
8. Therefore, Ukraine must negotiate with Putin.
9. Continued fighting only makes sense if it results in a better negotiated settlement.
20. Thousands die every day and more are forced to flee.
So, Bennet isn't necessarily wrong. If Ukraine isn't going to get a better deal it may make sense to quit now. The Russian army is still advancing and taking cities. Also, again, WE ARE NIT UKRAINE and WE ARE NIT AT WAR WITH RUSSIA.
What matters is the result of the peace talks and the cost incurred before the war ends.
Our interest is avoiding WW 3. If we had wanted to defend Ukraine, we should have done so before the war started instead of letting this happen.
Blogger rcocean said...
"Putin has made his demands clear:
1. Ukraine recognizes Crimea part of Russia
2. Ukraine recognizes independence of the two breakaway republics
3. Ukraine forgoes any NATO membership and importation of offensive weapons.
That's what the war is about. Zelensky refuses to accept these terms. That's why Ukrainians are still dying. This is NOT about Putin CONQUERRRING THE WORLD11!!!"
Putin doesn't want the world,. Putin wants Ukraine. He wants the two breakaway republics and Crimea today and if Zalensky acquiesces the rest of Ukraine tomorrow. Traditionally Russia has only stopped when they have been forced to stop.
Achilles - LOL. It's a biolab. They research dangerous pathogens. That's something good scientists do throughout the world. To protect morons like you.
A first year trainee with the Russian/Chinese disinformation service has you figured out.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/stephen-kotkin-putin-russia-ukraine-stalin
The problem with their argument is that it assumes that, had NATO not expanded, Russia wouldn’t be the same or very likely close to what it is today. What we have today in Russia is not some kind of surprise. It’s not some kind of deviation from a historical pattern. Way before NATO existed—in the nineteenth century—Russia looked like this: it had an autocrat. It had repression. It had militarism. It had suspicion of foreigners and the West. This is a Russia that we know, and it’s not a Russia that arrived yesterday or in the nineteen-nineties. It’s not a response to the actions of the West. There are internal processes in Russia that account for where we are today.
I would even go further. I would say that NATO expansion has put us in a better place to deal with this historical pattern in Russia that we’re seeing again today. Where would we be now if Poland or the Baltic states were not in NATO? They would be in the same limbo, in the same world that Ukraine is in.
***
The fault is with Russia,a nd Putin. not with those who wish to keep the evil Russia contained in as small of a hole as possible
Rusty said...
That's what the war is about. Zelensky refuses to accept these terms. That's why Ukrainians are still dying. This is NOT about Putin CONQUERRRING THE WORLD11!!!"
And I already detailed above why the demands are utterly illegitimate
Putin doesn't want the world,. Putin wants Ukraine
Bullshit
Today, Putin wants Ukraine. If he got Ukraine, then he would want the Baltic States, Then Finland. Then Poland. Then whatever else is nest in line.
In each case, because he'd absorbed previous victims, he'd have more power for taking the next ones.
Which is why those of us who do not have our heads up our asses don't want to let him get Ukraine.
But I do thank you for having the basic honesty to admit that what Putin wants right now is to conquer and absorb Ukraine
Achilles said...
Howard said...
It's nice to see so many of you geniuses trust Vlad as a man of honor. I could imagine you cucks selling out your families and neighbors quickly to the Daesh.
Since you and the Regime you support started this war you can go fight it. The DC regime has been driving Putin into this for decades now.
Apparently you missed taht no US troops are being sent to fight there?
That the US is spending money to send weapons to Ukraine, because they're using the, apparently effectively, to fight our mutual enemy Putin?
That at least is what's happening in the real world. What's happening in your fantasy world?
"Bennett is just acting like a "mailbox," passing messages back and forth."
Obviously not, if he's encouraging surrender, for the sake of "the lives of my people."
Bennett: another pro-Putin figure, by the standards of commentators oaths blog.
So, Zelensky, if the "sacrifices" demanded by Russia are unacceptable, at what point do the sacrifices your people are already making become unacceptable? How do you weigh them?
To get back in here, as I suspected the "Bennett tells Zelensky to surrender" line is garbage. Likely disinformation from Israel haters. Ukraine is flat out denying that spin. And it appears Zelensky is turning to the Israelis to try to get prisoners released and to try to set up a meeting with Putin in Jerusalem.
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-701097
I imagine it's going to be slim odds on that, but it is the only game going. NATO and Biden have got nothing to show. If the Israelis can pull it off, it would be a real hoot given all the Jew haters out and about these days. What an irony if even as the Europeans and Biden's Democrats dis Israel while sucking up to Iran, Israel helps pull Zelensky's fat out the fire, and, at his maximum heroic stature status he helps pull their fat out of the fire, too. Oh well, odds are slim. But I can dream.
Sebastian said...
So, Zelensky, if the "sacrifices" demanded by Russia are unacceptable, at what point do the sacrifices your people are already making become unacceptable? How do you weigh them?
You weigh them by what you get from them.
The sacrifices from fighting Putin until he and Russia are gone I that then the Ukrainians aren't slaves to the people who perpetrated the Holodomor, and millions of other atrocities, on them.
The sacrifices demanded by Putin, OTOH, tuen them into a satellite of Russia, to be gobbled up when and where the Russian despite choses.
You're surely not stupid enough to think that, having won part of Ukraine, Russia / Putin's going to stop before they have the whole thing.
Or are you that stupid?
Let me guess, you oppose the Florida Parental Rights in Education law, because it's "just too much of a fight." Right?
You are really pathetic
Post a Comment