The conversation between Vladimir Putin and CIA Director William Burns took place in Moscow in the fall of 2021, as detailed by American journalist Bob Woodward in his new book War.
“We are alarmed that you are seriously considering a major invasion of Ukraine. That would be a mistake. If you do that, here’s what we’re going to do,” Burns said, detailing the instructions given by President Biden, the intelligence on Russian troop movements, and the serious measures the U.S. was prepared to take in response. Putin did not interrupt and appeared to listen closely as Burns outlined the consequences. https://twitter.com/user/status/1846390209975382449
According to reports on Russian channels, "someone" has been placing dragon's teeth (concrete anti-tank obstacles) on roads in the Kursk region at night. These roads are used by Russian soldiers attempting to flee from Ukrainian FPV drones.
We're really starting to see the culmination point of the war coming. 2025 is likely to be the decisive year, even if it isn't necessarily the final year. As APN says here, signs of attrition are easy to see on both sides.
On one hand, Russia stockpiles have started to show real signs of depletion, and we don't really know if Russia can hold on without them. On the other hand, we have the US election which will affect what kind of support Ukraine is going to get. (It might end up being much less decisive than people expect, but it will still have some effect.)
On both sides, war weariness is really starting to kick in and morale is down. Russian economy is still a bit of a house of cards.
All end scenarios are still on the table (a frozen war, a stalemate peace, a Russian victory and a Ukrainian victory). Ukraine is I think less likely to completely collapse, simply because the stakes are just so much higher for them, but if nothing changes in the war during 2025, I think both sides will start giving up on finding ways to win and start looking for ways out.
If Harris wins, I think that's it for Russias chance to win, but it doesn't necessarily mean Ukraine will win. If Trump wins, it's likely the same in reverse... or worse. Trump is just much more unpredictable.
By this time next year, I think everyone will be able tell where this is going, and that will be the beginning of the end.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
How do you even respond to people these days who say things like "this war is America's & NATOs fault, Russia had to invade to defend itself" or "don't believe everything you see on the news, etc" or who are just generally are Russia apologists?
I get so frustrated with them I just want to scream at them, and sadly I feel like there's more and more of them in my life.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
Earlier in this thread, I had shared my thoughts that the west gives zero effs about Ukraine and its people. They are quite simply using Ukraine as their pawn to bleed Russia as best they can, knowing many Ukrainians will die and the country will be levelled in the process.
But as long as American soldiers are not the ones getting killed, the mission will go on as long as it can.
Saw some clips today on the news of Zelenskiy at meetings, again, insisting on entry into NATO. He's been asking for 2 years. It's obvious the west is not going to agree to this.
The Following User Says Thank You to activeStick For This Useful Post:
Earlier in this thread, I had shared my thoughts that the west gives zero effs about Ukraine and its people. They are quite simply using Ukraine as their pawn to bleed Russia as best they can, knowing many Ukrainians will die and the country will be levelled in the process.
But as long as American soldiers are not the ones getting killed, the mission will go on as long as it can.
Saw some clips today on the news of Zelenskiy at meetings, again, insisting on entry into NATO. He's been asking for 2 years. It's obvious the west is not going to agree to this.
Yeah, I've been on that page for a long time, too. It is in the west's best interests to aid Ukraine in bleeding Russia. I know I don't want my 18-year-old heading over there, so I don't expect any other westerner to want their kid going to Ukraine, either.
Also no point in letting Ukraine in NATO. They're a better buffer for us between Russia and NATO countries as is.
That perspective is, of course, ice cold toward Ukraine and their people; however, from a strategic perspective that advances - and preserves - the lives of people in the west I'd say the west is doing things well so far.
The Following User Says Thank You to Sliver For This Useful Post:
Yeah, I've been on that page for a long time, too. It is in the west's best interests to aid Ukraine in bleeding Russia. I know I don't want my 18-year-old heading over there, so I don't expect any other westerner to want their kid going to Ukraine, either.
Also no point in letting Ukraine in NATO. They're a better buffer for us between Russia and NATO countries as is.
That perspective is, of course, ice cold toward Ukraine and their people; however, from a strategic perspective that advances - and preserves - the lives of people in the west I'd say the west is doing things well so far.
You and I have been discussing this since the beginning but I think the west/NATO is in kind of a pickle on this. The west can't and should not allow Russia to swallow Ukraine as the message it sends to other adversaries is quite loud and clear, you will face consequences if you want to expand your military and economic powers elsewhere.
A lot of countries like Poland are really concerned about a lot of the US and NATO dithering when it comes to action and support because they don't really know what it would mean for them, if and probably when Russia expands. Sure Poland is NATO a are other countries but let's get real, how much would that really matter in some ways?
Plenty of US Presidents have given Putin very stern warnings about a lot of things and been written off. I have no doubt in my mind that the US and other strong NATO countries like France, Germany, UK and more would be really well protected in case of an attack. Would Estonia be? Do we see significant public and global militarily support for the protection of downtown Talin? Northern Canada?
This new crew of Russia/ China/India/ North Korea and Iran etc are the ones who are looking to take over
The West is not really in a pickle, they're just indecisive, scared and stupid.
What the US especially should have done is flex their military industrial muscle and bury Russia through massive military support to Ukraine.
But as with every other major problem facing them (climate crisis, crumbling government finances...), they're doing weak half-measures, letting the situation grow worse and worse just because they're worried about making big decisions, and worrying because they don't know what would happen if Ukraine wins.
The answer is: no one knows, except that it would almost certainly be better than any other option, and that's why you do it.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
The Republic of Korea (South Korea) has confirmed that North Korea has sent around 10,000 troops to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops. This has been confirmed by South Korean intelligence.
Putin labeled Zelensky's statement about the possibility of Ukraine creating nuclear weapons as another provocation, asserting that Russia will not allow this under any circumstances. He warned that any steps taken by Ukraine towards developing nuclear weapons will face an appropriate response https://twitter.com/user/status/1847280621501985145
"Our position is clear: no accession to NATO, neutral status, resolution of the problems of the Russian-speaking population, which was in gross violation of the UN Charter and numerous conventions, deprived of the right to do anything in their native language. https://twitter.com/user/status/1847271466301088194
Yeah, I've been on that page for a long time, too. It is in the west's best interests to aid Ukraine in bleeding Russia. I know I don't want my 18-year-old heading over there, so I don't expect any other westerner to want their kid going to Ukraine, either.
Also no point in letting Ukraine in NATO. They're a better buffer for us between Russia and NATO countries as is.
Buffer countries are stupid. If russia so desperately wants a buffer zone, they can implement a buffer zone in their own stupidly large country on their western border. They already have land borders with 6 NATO countries and there certainly is no outcry that those should be buffer countries.
Quote:
That perspective is, of course, ice cold toward Ukraine and their people; however, from a strategic perspective that advances - and preserves - the lives of people in the west I'd say the west is doing things well so far.
The west is not doing things well, no matter what kind of hopium is being ingested. There is such a massive domino effect in all of this that gets ignored if we simply look at is like all that is happening is russia is being bled out. Due to this slow boil-the-frog policy, this has resulted in a massive advancement in drone warfare in which russia themselves are probably the biggest beneficiary of this technology and knowledge. They are literally teaching their operators how to terrorize by hunting down civilians and cars across the border. That should horrify anybody who imagines what terrorism will be like down the road.
We laugh at russia getting help from NK, but the other side of the coin is that while NK has some baby nukes that lack a sturdy delivery system, they are now in a position to get that kind of help and tech from russia. Whether that happens or not remains to be seen, but we can't pretend that discussion hasn't been had. Was that part of the plan when NATO sat down and decided to drip feed aid, that a hostile nuclear power gets stronger?
Iran is almost certainly going to get help from russia on their own nuclear program. We joke that they've been "4 weeks away" for the past 20 years, but now there is actually incentive to accomplish this and a reliable partner to make it happen. I can't imagine that was part of the west's plan either. Again, time will tell if this happens. Huge risk to take simply to burn a bunch of old tanks in a field in Siberia.
The wave of UA refugees that have ripped through Europe has caused a lot of strain, and a russian victory means even more will come. Is the EU happy to bleed out a bunch of useless tanks in a field in Siberia in exchange for the financial cost waves of refugees pouring over?
This isn't even mentioning China's own aspirations to potentially try to take Taiwan one day. Had the west sacked up and helped Ukraine to put a stop to russian advances back in the fall of '22, they would have realized the west doesn't fck around and it's not worth the risk. Instead, China is watching intently on the west's reaction to this and measuring how long western aid will last before they get bored. If western aid tails off, this will embody China even more.
I don't see any kind of 4D chess plan being played here. I think the west thought russia would back off when the gas deliveries got diverted elsewhere and the sanctions began to take effect. But the west also forgot that the human greed element that comes into play and russia simply makes deals with countries like Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, India and China to easily circumvent said sanctions. Now they are scrambling to sell this as a bleed-them-out approach where burning off a bunch of old tanks in a field is Siberia in exchange for Ukrainian lives is somehow a good thing.
Sorry for the long rant. I just think it's a bit short sighted to think that somehow things are going all good because some rusty tanks are being burned through and sacrificing the lives of people you don't know will keep your own family safe. Plenty of us here have family there and don't see if that way. The domino effects I mentioned are an even bigger risk down the road and I think the west screwed up badly in those regards, not taking those into consideration.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
Yeah I don't get that. If anything, by this time I was hoping that the Americans would get involved using their drones. Not putting boots on the ground, but able to provide support. I am sure some of those drones are nasty.
The Republic of Korea (South Korea) has confirmed that North Korea has sent around 10,000 troops to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops. This has been confirmed by South Korean intelligence.
Now SK has pretty much confirmed that NK troops are headed to Ukraine in a combat role.
Great to see escalation management has worked so well, to the point we now have literal NK soldiers invading a European nation on European soil, with NK Iranian and Russian weapons being used. The nation that gave up their nukes now being invaded by not 1, but 2 nuclear countries. Man, this world is pathetic. Can't wait for the day Ukraine nukes up themselves.
Surely we can keep boiling the frog and the problem will magically disappear.
Last edited by Huntingwhale; 10-18-2024 at 09:44 AM.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
Hopefully Churchill was right when he said Americans will always do the right thing, after they've tried everything else first.
Now is the time to flex their industrial and military might. Send all the boom boom to the frontline, repel the invasion, and build the biggest and baddest Maginot line between Ukraine & Russia. Give NK a smack on the snout too for sticking their nose where it don't belong.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
