#withdraw from ukraine

[deborahdeshoftim5779]

Vladimir Putin continues to prostitute his entire country for the sake of his delusions.

Despite Ukraine having no navy and no operational control over the Black Sea, Russia has lost flagships and ensured repeated missile attacks on the Crimean Peninsula and surrounding occupied regions.

Despite Ukraine failing to reclaim the occupied territories last summer and struggling to half Russian advances on Pokrovsk village, Ukraine has still managed to invade Russian territory and cause the evacuation of over 100 000 Russian citizens in Kursk Oblast. This caught the Kremlin by surprised and embarrassed Putin.

Of course, Putin has responded with typical savagery, launching yet more missile strikes on Kyiv, Lviv, and Kharkiv, hoping to kill as many Ukrainian civilians as possible and terrorise the country into withdrawal and surrender.

This has not worked.

The more the Russians resort to sadistic brutality and terror, the more Ukrainians are united in opposition. Ukraine is not the same as Chechnya or Syria. Putin has failed to understand this, despite his self-appointed title as historical expert of this conflict. In both Chechnya and Syria, Russia, after conducting ruthless bombing campaigns, was able to either install or protect a puppet dictator.

This has not happened in Ukraine, despite over two years of bombing campaigns. Numerous Ukrainian cities were razed to the ground, like Mariupol. Still no surrender.

Prior to Ukraine's invasion of Russia, Putin's propaganda machine assured Russians that the reason for the lack of Russian victory was Western support/Ukrainian attacks/Ukrainian Nazis, and so on. Russians were assured that Russia would triumph soon.

Now that Ukraine has invaded and seized a substantial portion of territory in Kursk Oblast, the fundamental and racist lie that Ukrainians are little peasants or terrible Nazis (whichever portrayal is convenient for Russian propaganda at any given moment) has been blown to bits.

Putin admitted that Ukraine had invaded to improve its negotiating position. He vowed to 'drive the enemy out'. Up until now, he has failed to do so.

Nobody expects Ukraine to seize more of Russian territory, but nobody expected that Ukraine would even seize any Russian territory in the first place. Western observers expected a purely defensive war, with Ukraine increasingly pressured to keep hold of territory and possibly negotiate over the Russian-occupied areas.

Now Russia is the one having to defend itself. How the tables have turned.

Russia produced the great novel, Crime and Punishment. It's time for Russia to read it-- properly.

Russian state-of-the-art tank T-90 Proryv captured by Ukrainians during the attack in the Kursk region, August 19, 2024. Source: ukr.warspotting.net

P.S. Putler's Wunderwafe completely intact with all the "secret" hardware has been put at the disposal of the Ukrainian army... By the 910th day of the war, the army of Russian war criminals has lost 8522 tanks in Ukraine...

[odinsblog]

Idk, but if Putin doesn’t want the Wagner Group to continue challenging him, maybe he should just give the Wagner Group whatever Russian territory they control. Do it for peace and to stop unnecessary bloodshed, like he told Ukraine to do.

[hussyknee]

Not so friendly reminder that Tankies are people who deny not only the genocides of Russia but also Vietnam and China (including the Uyghurs), and are apologists for the North Korean regime. They push Russian propaganda of "colour revolutions" every time a Global South country rises up against a totalitarian government because they believe totalitarianism is merely anti-communist agenda; deriding, dismissing and dehumanizing the liberation movements of our countries that come at great human cost. They're not anti-imperialists or anti-colonial; their chief issue with the imperial core is that it's not their ideology seated at the heart of it. They only care about Global South lives when it serves their ideology, and have no genuine concern or curiosity about the ground realities or agency of the communities impacted by imperialism and colonialism.

I also want you to understand that every major power player involved in this conflict is a genocidal fascist. Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthis that are fighting Israel are funded by the theocratic Iranian regime headed by Ebrahim Raisi (begging you to remember the hundreds of Iranian girls and women killed for protesting it). Iran is also an ally of the notorious Bashar Al-Assad's regime in Syria, responsible for the genocide and displacement of millions of his own people while actively funding the Islamic State he wages war against. Both Assad and Raisi are allies of Putin, who is currently trying to colonize and genocide Ukraine and is terrorising Poland, Hungary, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia etc. However, Iran and Putin (half-heartedly) are also allies of the Armenians who are being genocided by Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is supported by the US, but also Erdogan in Turkey, infamous dictator that hates the European Union and is a close pal of Putin. Meanwhile the US's best friends in the Middle East is Israel, which hates Arabs, and Saudi Arabia, who doesn't recognise Israel as a country but is hated by most of the MENA and is currently in a Cold War with Iran.

*yanks y'all by the shirt and shouts in your face* THERE ARE NO GOOD GUYS HERE, DO YOU UNDERSTAND?? ONLY INNOCENT CIVILIANS CAUGHT IN A SPIDER WEB OF GREEDY, DESPOTIC, GENOCIDAL, FASCIST CUNTS. THERE IS NO POINT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO GLOBAL DEMOCRACY BECAUSE ALL THE FALL OF ONE DOES IS CREATE A POWER VACCUUM THAT WILL IMMEDIATELY BE FILLED BY THE NEXT BULLY.

These governments can only be toppled from within by their own people once external threats like war with their neighbours are eased, because militaries with nothing to fight are economic black holes that try to eat itself, and it's this economic stress that act as catalysts for coalition building and civilian revolt. Military losses weaken imperialists' coercive power and legitimacy over their own people, so the best thing you can do to help them agitate for change is preventing imperialist expansions from claiming any more victims.

[boop-le-snoot]

I am once again begging people to at least backsearch the images on “fundraisers” they are reposting before sending strangers money

[merrymorningofmay]

can the us withdraw from nato faster so that trump's opinion on who should and shouldn't be in nato stops mattering

[enchantedephiphany]

The trazodone must have suppressed some things in my subconscious or something. I was thinking it was strange I hadn't had many dreams about the Ukraine war considering how much I have followed it. But now I have had like 3 dreams related to it in the past week.

Last night I dreamed that someone in the Ukrainian army sent me a video of a captured Ukrainian tortured to death by russians. It was over an hour long. I felt guilty for not wanting to watch all of it, because the guy who sent it wanted me to distribute it as evidence of Russian war crimes.

I saw the 1st part where the soldier was hiding in the woods under some vines. At this point I was seeing it from his POV. The russians were searching the forest for him. I didn't get much further than that.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Andrew Roth and Dan Sabbagh in Washington at The Guardian:

In a critical press conference meant to make or break his presidential campaign, Joe Biden spiritedly defended his foreign policy record even as he faced a barrage of questions on his mental fitness and, in another gaffe, mistakenly referred to Kamala Harris as “vice-president Trump”. Biden offered extensive remarks on thorny foreign policy issues including competition with China and the Israel-Hamas war, in which he said he had warned Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu away from an occupation of the Gaza Strip. He said he was directly in contact with Xi Jinping to warn him not to offer further support for Russia’s war in Ukraine, but not with Vladimir Putin, whom he said: “I have no reason to speak to him right now.”

But Biden, who is running to be president until January 2029, fielded an equal number of questions during the press conference on his mental fitness, an issue that has loomed over his campaign since a faltering debate performance against Donald Trump that he called “that dumb mistake”. Ultimately, it was a performance that supporters will probably say shows he is capable of handling his responsibilities as commander-in-chief, but unlikely to convince those already in doubt about his mental fitness that he can serve another four years in office. Biden, 81, insisted he would stay in the race despite calls from some in his party to drop out and to allow another figure, including Harris, run in the November election.

[...] Biden said he wouldn’t leave the race unless polls showed him that he had no chance of winning against Trump, even if they showed that Harris’s chances in the election were better than his own. Nonetheless, he said Harris was qualified to be president as well, although he misnamed her in the endorsement. “I wouldn’t have picked vice-president Trump to be vice-president, if she’s not qualified to be president,” he said. That gaffe was compounded by the fact that he had introduced the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, as “President Putin” just hours earlier, before correcting himself and saying “we’re going to beat Putin.” Biden initially used the final Nato summit press conference as something of a stump speech, brandishing his national security record in supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression and saying that the November vote was “much more than a political question … It’s a national security issue.”

He then turned to his record on the economy, border security and his efforts to broker a peace in the Israel-Hamas war to bolster his case for his campaign in November. Biden spoke for 58 minutes, including 50 minutes of unscripted question-and-answer. He appeared most comfortable and cogent as he discussed thorny foreign policy questions.

Joe Biden gave an alright presser in which he made a gaffe in which he mixed up the names of his VP and principal challenger when he said “Vice President Trump.” Prior to the presser, Biden mistakenly introduced Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as “President Putin” before correcting himself.

See Also:

The Dworkin Report: Biden Pushes Back, Delivers Strong Press Conference

[niveditaabaidya]

Russia’s Exit From Grain Deal Remains High. #youtube #ukraine #tiktok #g...

[thegirlwhohid]

I don't believe in schemes and cunning planes, but what I think is going on.

Trump admires dictators—manly men and masculine leaders—and wants to be like them. Xi Jinping, Putin, Kim Jong Un, Netanyahu, even Orban—he sees them as his bros, and he wants to join them.

But there's an obstacle. Russian war crimes in Ukraine are so evident that fully embracing his dear friend Vladimir is a little too toxic even for him.

Solution?

To stop the funding team that collects the evidence, withdraw from the group that investigates war crimes and pretend that everything is fine.

And when it doesn't work, to call the evidence 'fake news.'

Feel a bit nauseous, furious, and betrayed. But, well, this is what probably every Ukrainian feels.

[saywhat-politics]

A peace proposal for Ukraine:

1. Russia and North Korea completely withdraw from all Ukrainian territory

2. Ukraine will not give one inch of its soil to Russia

3. Russia will release all prisoners and kidnapped individuals

4. Russia will pay 100% of Ukraine's reconstruction

[kanemanuelkeludbp]

White House Quarrel: Zelensky Punctures Trump's "Ceasefire Bubble"

On February 28th, Zelensky, the President of Ukraine, visited the United States. Unlike in 2022 when Zelensky won applause for his speech in the US Capitol, this time he had a public quarrel with US President Trump. In front of the media cameras, Zelensky had a tense "argument" with Trump and US Vice President Pence. This quarrel in the White House had a higher rating than Trump's reality show.

From the exposed video, it can be seen that the quarrel between the two sides was less like "diplomacy" and more like a "domestic dispute".

First of all, Pence repeatedly emphasized that Zelensky didn't thank Trump, and Trump also thought that Zelensky was ungrateful. The White House thought that Zelensky would be grateful to Trump for bringing about a ceasefire in Ukraine, but Zelensky didn't. This time, Pence took the initiative to accuse Zelensky of being ungrateful to Trump instead of discussing the Ukraine crisis.

Secondly, the question is whether Ukraine should fully accept the US demands. Trump believes that he can broker a ceasefire in a short time, and only he can talk to the leaders of Russia and Ukraine, and only he can get Putin to accept the ceasefire. However, if we look at Russia's stance, we can see that Putin may not necessarily accept Trump's demands. Recently, the Russian government has taken the goals of the "special military operation" three years ago as the bottom line for negotiations. Trump claims that he will not take sides, but will stand with the world and peace, and will not give an advantage to either side. However, what Trump wants is Ukraine's minerals, and Zelensky also hopes to exchange the proceeds from mineral development for US security guarantees. But Trump doesn't give any commitment and thinks that Ukraine's minerals are for "debt repayment". From this perspective, Zelensky's experience in the White House is also a failure of the "minerals for security" plan. In fact, with the war still going on, such a large deal is very difficult, if not impossible.

Finally, Ukraine has no cards to play and can only rely on the United States. Trump believes that it is the United States that has made Zelensky a tough guy against Putin, but if the United States withdraws, there is no possibility of Ukraine winning. Three years ago, most people might have believed such a statement, and even Zelensky might have believed it. But after three years of war, Zelensky's willpower has been tested and his confidence has been enhanced. The Zelensky that Trump is facing now is very different from who he was three years ago. He asked Pence in return, "Have you ever been to Ukraine?" Zelensky said that Ukraine has been fighting alone. Of course, this is just a passionate remark, but in the first few days of the war, Zelensky was indeed facing a life-and-death test. In Kyiv, Zelensky fought the Battle of Kyiv Defense, which was much more difficult than this verbal battle in the White House. Of course, after the baptism of war, Zelensky's way of doing things has also changed, and his strong willpower may also affect his flexibility. The US Secretary of the Treasury believes that this White House diplomacy is a "diplomatic blunder". If Zelensky could have been more flexible, perhaps such a low-level quarrel would not have broken out.

Now it seems that Trump's much-talked-about "art of the deal" doesn't even have the most basic diplomatic etiquette, which is really surprising. In this quarrel, Zelensky punctured Trump's "ceasefire bubble", and the ceasefire negotiations seem to have returned to square one.

[faelapis]

we interrupt this regularly scheduled dashboard to remind you that the eurovision song contest is one of the biggest platforms in the world, and israel is still included and accepted as a participant.

we don't have to take that laying down. after immense pressure from people and broadcasters alike, russia was banned in 2022 for their invasion of ukraine. if we put pressure on broadcasters to do the same for israel, it is possible that we will succeed. already, iceland has threatened to potentially withdraw over israel's inclusion. other countries might follow. please, watch this video and join in the call to action. the video includes ways to contact every single broadcaster, sponsor and artist participating in eurovision 2024.

[porterdavis]

Just....wow.

It couldn't be much clearer that Putin has brought Donnie to heel.

[justacynicalromantic]

In early 2014, Ukraine was a neutral country, with a pro-Russian president, and with 70% of Ukraine's population against NATO membership. Yet Russia bluntly violated Ukraine's neutrality and annexed Crimea, then launched a covert invasion of Ukraine in the east.

Petro Poroshenko won the presidential election later in 2014 having promised a settlement with Russia, keeping a special status of the Russian language in Ukraine. He was initially sceptical regarding NATO accession, underlined Ukraine must rely on its own strength to provide security.

Did Putin meet Poroshenko halfway? Not at all. The regular Russian army entered the Ukrainian territory in mid-2014 to fight the Ukrainian troops, which led to the Minsk-1 agreement signed in September 2014.

Further text - down under the cut, or you can follow the Twitter link to the original post:

Few weeks later, Ukraine's parliament adopted a law that would guarantee the then Russia-controlled part of Donetsk and Luhansk regions additional economic, financial and cultural powers.

How did Putin react? Russia staged sham local elections in the occupied Donbas, and then sent the regular army again to Ukraine in early 2015, which led to the Minsk-2 agreement signed in February 2015.

Zelensky was even more sceptical regarding NATO accession. Asked about NATO, he once famously said he never pays anyone a visit if he has not been invited. He won the presidential election promising to compromise with Russia - to stop shooting, sit down with Putin and talk.

Did Putin meet Zelensky halfway? Not at all. He actually raised the stakes by issuing the Russian passports on the occupied territories of Ukraine even before Zelensky assumed the office, putting him in a difficult political position since the start.

Zelensky was ready to drop Ukraine's NATO bid in an exchange for the Russian troops withdrawing from Ukraine. The talks were held already before 2022. What did Putin do? He launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

In the first weeks of the invasion, Zelensky was yet again ready to drop Ukraine's NATO bid. But he wanted to obtain international security guarantees. What did Putin do? He demanded that Russia must be consulted before any aid would be given to Ukraine in the event of aggression.

To sum up, Ukraine has consistently tried to reach a deal with Russia over the last decade, and was open to giving up on its NATO bid in exchange for the withdrawal of the Russian troops from Ukraine. Russia never reciprocated, never showed a good will, kept raising the stakes.

Both Poroshenko and Zelensky were initially sceptical regarding Ukraine's accession to NATO. Both wanted to get a deal with Putin. And Putin himself pushed both of them to seek NATO membership out of no other viable alternatives.

Up till now, Putin has shown absolutely no willingness to compromise with Ukraine. His war aims remain maximalist - subjugating Ukraine and changing its regime. He seeks Ukraine's partition, and will turn what is left of Ukraine into Russian protectorate.

Russia's imperial self-conception is that of Russian elites at large, and not just Vladimir Putin. The Russian leadership simply cannot reconcile with the existence of a sovereign Ukrainian statehood.

Therefore any sustainable Ukrainian-Russian compromise is currently not possible unless the Russian cost-benefit calculus changes. Only credible risk to the stability of the Russian regime would impact this calculus. The easiest way goes through defeating Russia in Ukraine.

[dontforgetukraine]

Twitter Thread by Dmytro Kuleba

To those who have missed the previous 30 years, here is a short list of the results of negotiations with Russia that it never respected:   1. The Budapest Memorandum of 1994. Russia agreed to “respect independence, sovereignty, and the existing borders of Ukraine” as well as “refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”. Breached by Russia invading Crimea in 2014.   2. The Russian-Ukrainian Friendship Treaty of 1997. Russia agreed to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity and “reaffirmed the inviolability of the borders” between the two countries. Russia breached it in 2014.   3. The OSCE Istanbul Summit in 1999. Russia committed to withdrawing its troops from Moldova’s Transdniestrian region and Georgia until the end of 2002. That never happened.   4. The 2008 Georgia ceasefire agreement following Russian aggression against the country. Russia agreed that “Russian military forces must withdraw to the lines prior to the start of hostilities”. That never happened.   5. The Ilovaysk “Green Corridor” in August 2014 and other “humanitarian” death corridors. Russia pledged to let Ukrainian forces leave the encircled town of Ilovaysk in the east of Ukraine, but instead opened fire and killed 366 Ukrainian troops. In the following years, Russia attacked numerous humanitarian corridors in Syria.   6. The “Minsk” agreements of 2014 and 2015. Russia agreed to cease the fire in the east of Ukraine. There had been 200 rounds of talks and 20 attempts to enforce a ceasefire, all of which the Russian side promptly violated. On February 24th, 2022, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.   7. The 2022 Black Sea Grain Initiative. Russia pledged to “provide maximum assurances regarding a safe and secure environment for all vessels engaged in this initiative." It then hindered the initiative's operation for months before withdrawing unilaterally a year later.   NB: I am only focused on deals made with Russia to address specific issues and conflicts. I am not mentioning almost 400 international treaties that Russia has breached since 2014.   There are no conclusions to be drawn here, except that no one can seriously use the words "Russia" and "negotiations" in the same phrase.   Putin is a habitual liar who promised international leaders that he would not attack Ukraine days before his invasion in February 2022.   Russia's tactic has remained consistent in its many wars over the last three decades: kill, grab, lie, and deny.   Why would anyone genuinely believe that Russia in 2023 is any different from Russia in 1994, 1997, 1999, 2008, 2014, 2015, and 2022?

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Andrew Roth at The Guardian:

The United Nations general assembly has backed a resolution drafted by Ukraine and the European Union condemning Russia on the third anniversary of its full-scale invasion, spurning a rival US resolution reflecting Donald Trump’s split with Europe and growing union with Vladimir Putin. The United States, Russia, Belarus and North Korea all voted against the EU-Ukrainian resolution underlining an extraordinary shift in US policy since the US president’s election that has largely absolved the Russian president of responsibility for the invasion. In the vote, 93 countries supported the joint European resolution that named Russia an aggressor state and called on it to remove its troops from Ukraine, while 18 countries including the US and Russia voted against. The vote came as Trump met with Emmanuel Macron at the White House on Monday and the two spoke with G7 leaders to discuss peace talks to end the war and the growing gulf between Washington and European capitals over the future of the Nato alliance. Germany’s likely next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, warned this weekend that Europe should seek greater independence from the United States and said it was an “absolute priority will be to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that, step by step, we can really achieve independence from the USA”. Macron told reporters outside the White House that the G7 call was “perfect” but did not offer other details. Trump released a statement in which he said that all members of the G7 had said they wanted to achieve peace and that the war would never have happened if he had been president. Trump has quickly moved to direct talks with Putin that have eschewed Ukraine and has also sought to strong-arm Kyiv into a “critical minerals and rare-earths deal” to recoup the cost of US support for Ukraine in the three years since Putin launched his full-scale invasion. “I am in serious discussions with President Vladimir Putin of Russia concerning the ending of the War, and also major Economic Development transactions which will take place between the United States and Russia,” Trump said on Monday. “Talks are proceeding very well!” The UN votes on Monday were mostly symbolic. The US resolution was three paragraphs long and did not include any mention of Russia aggression, saying it “implores a swift end to the conflict and further urges a lasting peace between Ukraine and the Russian Federation”. The Russian ambassador to the UN had called the US resolution a “good move”.

[...] The US had sought to kill the Ukrainian co-sponsored resolution, and US diplomats had pressured EU and Ukrainian officials in foreign capitals this weekend to withdraw their resolution before Monday’s vote, according to cables to US embassies and reports in US media.

Vote sheet, via X:

Shame on the USA for being on the same side as Russia, Israel, Hungary, and North Korea by voting against the UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution from Ukraine condemning Russia for invading Ukraine.