And like I've stressed repeatedly, we are talking about global markets where any sudden decline in supply will drive up prices for everyone and/or cause malnourisment among the poorest of the poor.



Of course a country's population pyramid gets out of whack when half of its working-age men are in the trenches to defend the country from a hostile foreign power while half of their working-age women have fled to Western Europe with their kids. Ukraine needs peace so that its population can return safely and economic activity and investment can go back to normal. Iirc, nobody ever denied that the current state of affairs wouldn't be tenable indefinitely.

Not possible in the near future, unless they are willing to give up territories, which is not possible, if the US decided to break faith and negotiate peace with the Russians they will have to give up land which the Ukrainians are not willing to.
I will say a 38th Parallel sort of arrangement with Cold Peace lasting for at least half a century.

They will have no other choice than to give up some territory. They're not getting Crimea back, and probably also won't get the parts of the Donbass back which Russia already had before Feb 22. To be honest, I believe that most Ukrainian politicians and generals also know this. It's just that they can't signal a willingness to concede territory in public because it would weaken their position when they eventually enter negotations with the Russian side.

A "Korea scenario" is very possible, but a lot will hinge on where exactly the line of demarcation will lie.

Where did that occur? In your dreams

This is what I think.

What do you think ? I added the black line.



This post was edited by Hamsterbaby on Aug 16 2023 11:47pm

It doesn't necessarily have to be a straight line. In particular, the recent Ukrainian attacks on the Crimean bridge have proven how vulnerable Crimea is without a land connection, so Russia will fight tooth and nail to retain the land connection they currently hold.

lazy to do wavy ones
I mean more or less you know what i mean. i am giving an example.

Yes, an 'L'- or 'C'-shaped line of demarcation.

What about the Minsk agreements ? I accept this is difficult to swallow but western leaders have recently come out and said that they signed those agreement(s) in bad faith with no intention to abide by them but rather to give Ukraine time (presumably to build up its army). Feel free to correct me if I said anything wrong there. Does this not affect your position that "The only kind of peace deal they're interested in is one on their terms?" If the west takes such an approach to serious international matters and there is such bad faith, it is a wonder that Russia does not do total war (invading all of Ukraine, indiscriminate war). Look at the Iran nuclear deal. When a country (the US) acts in such bad faith, it erodes any legitimacy it has in the region, the same principal applies to Ukraine.

The fact is that Russia has ever sought to negotiate but that the US and England are on record (this is freely available information online) as explicitly telling Ukraine not to negotiate and now is not the time to negotiate. Well, if now is not the time, when is the time ?? In terms of negotiating, as it stands currently, Russia would be in a position of strength, and therefore yes they would have terms, which would include Donetsk and Luhansk as well as Crimea not being a part of Ukraine. but ultimately its a negotiation. You speak of further conquests, but what further conquests are you talking about ? if Russia wanted to invade all of Ukraine they would have done that already, and they are not about to invade Poland. Independent observers reported that Ukraine misbehaved before the outbreak of war, this fact seems to have been forgotten. From the Russian viewpoint they are protecting their interests, they are not seeking to rebuild the USSR (i accept that this is a narrative spun in our media).

Realistically a decisive victory on the battlefield, for Ukraine, would result in Russia mobilizing more troops. Russia has already indicated it is now upgrading its armed forces in response to this conflict. Therefore a decisive victory from Ukraine will not have the intended affect in my opinion. I do agree that the conflict may at times stall or "freeze" until ukraine regroups and tries again. This could last 20 years until Ukraine accepts the reality.



Nato is the most deadly and powerful military alliance in history. It is a deterrent against Russian aggression just as the US is a deterrent against Chinese aggression. In this regard it is false to state that Nato is a paper tiger. Both Russia and China are surrounded by either Nato or the EU and that cage is becoming smaller and smaller, which is a dangerous fact.

This post was edited by ferdia on Aug 17 2023 01:32am

In regards to all those agreements. I m sure FEP and Potus will look at you and say. It is what it is.

This post was edited by Hamsterbaby on Aug 17 2023 01:30am