Please be open to feedback and constructive criticism from others, and consider their suggestions and advice when making decisions or forming opinions.
- Manlobbi
Stocks A to Z / Stocks B / Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) ❤
No. of Recommendations: 20
A lot of effort over the past couple of weeks has seen President Donald Trump meeting with Vladimir Putin and separately with a distinguished group of European leaders.
But Volodymyr Zelenskyy, president of Ukraine, was not included in these meetings.
What a waste of time!
Putin has been clear from the start that he intends to reconstruct the Russian Empire with himself as head. He has violated every treaty to attack Ukraine.
Zelenskyy has declared that he will never voluntarily cede any part of Ukraine. The Ukrainian Constitution states that Ukrainian territory is indivisible. Also, Zelenskyy knows that any cease fire or treaty would only enable Russia to re-arm and attack later.
Trump and Europe could starve Ukraine of weapons so Russia can over-run them. But that would throw Europe back to the pre-World War 2 regime of imperialist aggression. Everyone knows that the war would end if Putin decided to end it. The Europeans would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they abandon Ukraine.
Trump could say "America First" and back out.
That would be an invitation for China to invade Taiwan.
Meanwhile, Trump is angling for a Nobel Peace Prize to stroke his own ego.
Truly bizarre.
Wendy
No. of Recommendations: 0
Zelensky has more control than any of them. There is a lot to be said for the better political argument winning out.
WWE is not a better political argument for anything.
No. of Recommendations: 0
BBC
Kremlin plays down Zelensky talks as Trump warns Putin may not want to make deal
Wendy,
It is hard to tell just how much Trump is blowing in the breeze. He has his rationale for arming Ukraine again.
No. of Recommendations: 0
No. of Recommendations: 4
It's another Forever War. Those "talks" were to absolutely no end other than for "pervy pedo" keeping his name in the news. More "no publicity is bad publicity". So stupid that he doesn't get Putin was laughing at him while appearing to kiss his ring.
No. of Recommendations: 2
The only thing in the United States that is worse than our politicians is our press. A couple of things.
During Putin's visit to Alaska there was a fly over consisting of our 5th gen fighters and B-2 bombers. Personally, I thing that was a message given the timing and aircraft chosen.
In the entire time this has been going on, no one has talked about European troops in Ukraine or US airpower being a backstop for them. Both of those are now publicly in the mix.
The Trump team has made much political hay of the Biden Team's botching of Afghanistan...they know Ukraine going under on their watch would be a catastrophic historical black eye that would forever be theirs. They also know it says a lot about the deterrence effectiveness of the west which has implications for China/Taiwan.
I think we are in a completely new political phase of the conflict and none of us are all that well informed as to what is actually going on.
No. of Recommendations: 30
"The Trump team has made much political hay of the Biden Team's botching of Afghanistan"Trump invited the Taliban leadership to Camp David in 2019. He was only forced to withdraw because they killed a US service member in a terrorist attack in Kabul.
Trump's team subsequently signed the "Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan" or Doha Accords, with the Taliban but without the Afganistan goverment. The Trump administration surrendered to the Taliban, sold out our allies in the ANDSF, and performed most of the retreat. The final withdrawal under the Biden was about 15% of the US presence when the agreement was signed.
You can read more here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States%E2%80%.... I quote
The agreement stipulated fighting restrictions for both the U.S. and the Taliban, and provided for the withdrawal of all NATO forces from Afghanistan in return for the Taliban's counter-terrorism commitments. The U.S. agreed to an initial reduction of its force level from 13,000 to 8,600 within 135 days (i.e. by July 2020), followed by a full withdrawal within 14 months (i.e. by 1 May 2021) if the Taliban kept its commitments. The United States also committed to closing five military bases within 135 days, and expressed its intent to end economic sanctions on the Taliban by August 27, 2020. The agreement was welcomed by Pakistan, China, Russia and India,[4][7][8] and unanimously endorsed by the UN Security Council.[9]
Insurgent attacks against the Afghan security forces surged in the aftermath of the deal, however, with thousands killed. Regardless, withdrawals per the agreement continued. By January 2021, just 2,500 U.S. troops remained in the country, and NATO forces fully evacuated by the end of that summer. The U.S. completed its full evacuation on August 30, 2021, as the Taliban took control of the country by force.It was a deal driven by a narcissistic idiot, brokered by a scam artist, and to my perpetual surprise honored by a decent human being. The "botching of Afghanistan" was 100% by the design and intention of the first Trump administration. If you are not well informed about this phase of the war in Ukraine, then you slept through the first Trump adminstration or have selective amnesia. They are running from the same play book, to the letter.
The full text of the agreement the Trump administration made with the Taliban can be read here
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/A... if anyone want to know what lies ahead.
No. of Recommendations: 7
In the entire time this has been going on, no one has talked about European troops in Ukraine or US airpower being a backstop for them. Both of those are now publicly in the mix.
Yes, publicly stated in such a Well Maybe Sort of We Might Do This way that I actually burst out laughing at the time, wondering who the heck would ever believe that statement when the gov't official uttering it couldn't even bring themself to do so. I am sure the Ukrainians are feeling confident that they have the full backing of the US given that statement without teeth.
The Trump team has made much political hay of the Biden Team's botching of Afghanistan...they know Ukraine going under on their watch would be a catastrophic historical black eye that would forever be theirs.
Nope, Teflon Don would just blame it on Biden and rearrange the displays in the Smithsonian to make it so.
"I think we are in a completely new political phase (of the conflict) and none of us are all that well informed as to what is actually going on." Remove the words in parentheses and I would be in full agreement.
IP
No. of Recommendations: 4
Putin has been clear from the start that he intends to reconstruct the Russian Empire with himself as head.On Monday, Trump declared he made a breakthrough, stating the Putin would be willing to accept an Article 5 style security agreement for Ukraine.
Yesterday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov clarified that Russia would have to be on the guarantors, essentially giving Russia veto power over the security agreement. This is essentially the same as Russia's proposal in the draft 2022 Istanbul Protocol which was never signed.
In short, Russia hasn't budged a bit.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/20/world/europe/uk...Ukraine's hand isn't great, but it isn't all bad either. Russia is still advancing, but at a glacial pace. Mostly capturing empty fields and tiny villages. Analysts suggest Russia suffers about 20,000 casualties per month, and is generating about 20,000 troops per month. So their rate of advance appears to matched to their ability to generate new forces.
No. of Recommendations: 3
No. of Recommendations: 11
Putin clarified Russia's conditions:
It doesn’t matter what they are: Trump will accept them and Ukraine won’t.
Russia gets to decide what the security conditions are, and will agree only if he get to keep the territory and keep NATO out. Sounds fair.
I’m reminded that in 1945 the Japanese proposal floated to 3rd parties to end the war was that there would be no Americans/Allies permitted on the island, they would conduct their own war crimes trials, and the militarists and Emperor would remain the seat of government.
If Trump had been President, he would have said “OK”.
No. of Recommendations: 0
If Trump had been President, he would have said “OK”.
All my life I was a progressive. There is no point in that. The most ardent feminists among them are supporting men in Gaza who would marry them as property and kill anything remotely homosexual.
The US is crumbling around the center.
Maybe that is best. Next year we find out how big our bigger mousetrap gets. The human mind gets larger than our tools.
No. of Recommendations: 0
>>But Volodymyr Zelenskyy, president of Ukraine, was not included in these meetings.<<
In another forum, I dubbed the Alaska thing "Yalta II".
>>Meanwhile, Trump is angling for a Nobel Peace Prize to stroke his own ego.<<
In another forum, I offered that he wants a Nobel, and he doesn't care who he stabs in the back to get it.
Steve
No. of Recommendations: 1
>>The final withdrawal under the Biden was about 15% of the US presence when the agreement was signed.<<
We old phartz remember the last days of Saigon. Remember when Jerry Ford, with the best of intentions, organized an airlift of orphans or mixed race spawn of GIs? He sent a C5, then the biggest cargo plane the USAF had, to Saigon, where it was packed full of children. The plane took off, the back cargo door blew out, and the plane crashed. I think Jerry was a fundamentally decent person, but his administration was snake-bit. So was Carter's.
Retreats, when you lost, are always a mess. There is a section of stairway in the Ford Museum, in Grand Rapids. It is from the stairway that lead to the rooftop helipad of the US embassy in Saigon. Newspapers were full of pix of people crowding on those stairs, trying to get on a helo, to be evacuated to US ships standing offshore.
Steve
No. of Recommendations: 3
Steve,
One of the things that drove me from TMF was the huge number of posts that really said nothing. I love that very few posts here leave me asking "What's your point?" Restrain yourself, PLEASE! These boards may look like TMF, but they are not.
IP
No. of Recommendations: 0
BBC
Kremlin plays down Zelensky talks as Trump warns Putin may not want to make dealPutin is not interested in ending the war. Certainly not with European troops in Ukraine or US airpower being a backstop.
Russia started this war to prevent a further extension of NATO into Ukraine [though I know there are those that would argue with that statement]. Why should it end the fighting if, in consequence, Ukraine would end up as a quasi-member of that pact? Putin wants to also permanently bar Ukraine from NATO.
This is a war of attrition and of industrial production of munitions & weaponry.
The US & Nato's industrial production is inadequate to the task of supplying adequate munitions.
The Russian population is 3.75 times Ukraine's. Yes Russia is losing more men than Ukraine. But Ukraine's manpower is finite.
https://www.newsweek.com/russian-breakthrough-high..."From what I saw previously, and from what I'm seeing now in open-source, is that what has been building up for the Ukrainians is fundamentally a manpower issue."
No. of Recommendations: 1
No. of Recommendations: 6
The US & Nato's industrial production is inadequate to the task of supplying adequate munitions.
The Russian population is 3.75 times Ukraine's. Yes Russia is losing more men than Ukraine. But Ukraine's manpower is finite.I'd frame it more as the US and NATO are unwilling to supply adequate munitions. I'd also say Russia's industrial production isn't up the task either. Russia is just about out of armored vehicles and troops now enter battle on ATVs and electric scooters. Yes, electric scooters. This results in very high casualties, but the Russians are able to "flood the zone" using superior numbers.
Today's ISW report had a good summary of Russia's negotiating position.
The sources reported that Putin continues to demand that NATO fundamentally alter one of its core tenets and commit to a legally binding pledge not to expand eastward, a demand that would require the renegotiation and re-ratification of the NATO treaty by all NATO member states. Lavrov recently stated that the Kremlin's objective is to politically control all of Ukraine rather than to seize select Ukrainian territories such as Donetsk Oblast, further demonstrating that Russia remains unwilling to accept any agreement that falls short of Ukraine's full capitulation.https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russ...Russia isn't offering anything that would be remotely acceptable to the west or to Ukraine. And Russia has been very consistent on this policy since the war began. Since Russia will not negotiate, IMO the only rational option the west has is vastly increase the amount the aid to Ukraine. The cost relative to the size of the defense budget isn't very much, we'd be neutering one of our biggest geopolitical foes which is the purpose of the defense budget in the first place, and most of the money is spent inside the beltway anyway.
No. of Recommendations: 0
But Ukraine's manpower is finite.
Two years ago, the number of active military personnel and reserves for each country was approximately equal.
Russia has problems. Their losses are extreme. In our press Ukraine needs to be the victim or silly people will walk away.
Putin can only lose about half his army. If the Russian people turn on him, he needs what is left of his army.
No one in the entirety of Putin's life will ever love him. That is totally impossible.
No. of Recommendations: 1
I'd frame it more as the US and NATO are unwilling to supply adequate munitions.The US is supply both Ukraine & Israel. And the US has to replenish the US Navy has expended in the Red Sea.
I don't believe the US industrial plant is up to the task.
Russia now uses ATV & scooter as tanks are vulnerable to drones. A new development in land warfare. And Russia is utilizing drones also to pound Ukrainian infrastructure.
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/us-stockpiles-mi...By the numbers: US missile capacity depleting fast
Our industrial base isn't keeping up with the pace of weapons transfers to Ukraine and IsraelThis missile deficit parallels the well-documented lack of U.S. artillery shell production that has enabled Russia to increase the rate at which it’s taking control over territories in Ukraine today.
Moreover, while our proxy war on Russia has strained our resources, an outbreak of hostilities with China could easily increase the burn rate of our ship-based missiles by an order of magnitude over what we have been seeing in the Middle East. And speaking of our supply of ship-based missiles, as of Feb 1, 2024, the U.S. Navy had used at least 100 of its standard series class missiles in the Red Sea.
No. of Recommendations: 0
No. of Recommendations: 11
That goes both ways.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/almost-70-ukra...
Almost 70% of Ukrainians want to see end of war through negotiations as soon as possible – Gallup surveyThe money shot was at the bottom of the article:
A recent poll by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) showed that 76% of Ukrainians firmly reject any "peace plan" on Russian terms. Just 17% said they might agree to some of Russia’s demands. The majority of respondents said the most acceptable option would be a joint peace plan developed by Ukraine and European partners.Ukrainians want peace, but not on Russia's terms.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ukrainians want peace, but not on Russia's terms.
So the war will continue. But we knew that from Putin's demands. He believes he can grind down Ukraine. We'll see.
No. of Recommendations: 0
The US is supply both Ukraine & Israel. And the US has to replenish the US Navy has expended in the Red Sea.
I don't believe the US industrial plant is up to the task.
_______________________________________________
I suspect that, on a pragmatic basis, the US needs 155mm shells and tactical missles more than we need a newly designed billion dolar fighter jet.
Jeff
No. of Recommendations: 0
I suspect that, on a pragmatic basis, the US needs 155mm shells and tactical missles more than we need a newly designed billion dolar fighter jet.
Jeff
While I agree; likely the defense industry & Pentagon disagree.
No. of Recommendations: 0
That goes both ways.
No. of Recommendations: 0
That goes both ways.
Sorry about the misfire
What you are saying is a false equivalent
No. of Recommendations: 0
He believes he can grind down
Putin is a very limited thinker
No. of Recommendations: 0
I suspect that, on a pragmatic basis, the US needs 155mm shells and tactical missles more than we need a newly designed billion dolar fighter jet.
It's not an either or.
Sk is doing a lot of lifting
No. of Recommendations: 2
Apparently, we learned nothing from the F22 extravaganza/debacle.
No. of Recommendations: 3
On munitions and attrition.
If the will were there producing more would not be an issue. A small tidbit of military history...for just about every large war in the last 100 years the respective militaries involved have been surprised at how many shells they were going through and would need to produce going forward.
Attritional wars tend to follow Hemingway's "going broke gradually, then suddenly" quote.
I don't think Ukraine's victory or defeat is all on the the US, though it does sadden me to see we've stepped away from what we used to stand for. Trump is Trump and we all know what that is bringing to the conflict. However, I also felt the Biden administration's slow dripping of support was just morally bankrupt. I understood the caution to not throw a bunch of arms and resources to a country potentially going down, but once it became clear Ukraine could hold, really disgusting.
This sort of stuff was my life for a long time...and I don't think we've had a really solid foreign policy team since Bush 1.
No. of Recommendations: 7
Trump is Trump and we all know what that is bringing to the conflict. However, I also felt the Biden administration's slow dripping of support was just morally bankrupt.
I agree with this, the only rationalization I can come up with is that Biden’s advisors were afraid of widening the war into a full fledged conflagration. I don’t know if those fears were justified (or even if that was the real reason), but I don’t think it has turned out for the best.
The best way to get rid of a bully is to punch him in the nose, not tap him lightly and repeatedly in the belly.
No. of Recommendations: 0
I am not sure what we get with Trump.
The WWE fake entertainment always beat up the fighters far more than they let on.
Russia is in the ring.
The Russian economy is worse than we are led to believe. Putin is getting close to losing half his army.
The only problem, we do not know who in Russia would put in a bid to remove or replace Putin. That does not mean there is no one.
No. of Recommendations: 2
No. of Recommendations: 0
Zeihan on the new Russian strategy.
We all know about the rise of the drone in the Ukraine War.
Artillery has taken a back seat to the drone. Russia now sends massive numbers of drone to head Ukraine infrastructure and fortified positions. In fact, many of the drone sent are decoys without advanced Chip or war heads. But the Ukrainian did not which is which so they have to try to take down all of them. The drone attacks are combined with guided missile and glide bombs from Russian aircraft.
Once Russia bought whole drones from Iran & China. Now the components are sent to Russia to be assembled and used.
Russia now sends small units of a few men to probe Ukraine line rather than a massive attack all along the line. The small purpose is to find weak spots where a massive attack can occur.
It is way too soon to say that this is going to work. And of course, the Ukrainians will have to adapt to it by making their own changes. But we have seen a significant shift in the way that the Russians are prosecuting the war.https://zeihan.com/russian-evolutions-in-the-ukrai...
No. of Recommendations: 1
the only rationalization I can come up with is that Biden’s advisors were afraid of widening the war into a full fledged conflagration.
The other rationalization that I mentioned earlier is that perhaps one of the goals of the war (US goals) is to bleed Russia out for a long as possible. One, to weaken them for a decade or two, and two, to illustrate an abject lesson to China lest they begin to have a desire for military adventures (in Taiwan).
The best way to get rid of a bully is to punch him in the nose, not tap him lightly and repeatedly in the belly.
Yep. Maybe they don't want to "get rid of" the bully. Or at least not yet.
