re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict

quote:

---

you haven't answered substantively, with respect to Macron, to whether the evidence suggests that the Russians were negotiating in good-faith

---

This is either a comprehension issue on your part, or more likely you simply overlooked a response in the thread.

The Kremlin was crystal clear about asks/demands in the months predating war. Macron brought no redress to the table. Macron naively anticipated months of talks with the Russian army massed at the border.

You claimed the matters at hand would require months or years to work through. in fact Ukraine distancing from NATO, and fully abiding the Minsk Accords were agreements which could have been put together in days, and nearly were until the West scuttled talks.

War makes for strange bedfellows. Thanks for the update.

quote:

---

In a strange twist, now the Americans who support Russia are supporting a military alliance with Iran against Ukraine and the West.

---

quote:

---

According to Kremlin sources. Other sources paint an entirely different picture of those interactions.

---

NO!
The Kremlin was crystal clear about asks/demands for 5yrs. When Macron mischaracterized conversations, the Kremlin immediately and publicly corrected the record.

quote:

---

Macron could not negotiate on behalf of Ukraine, nor NATO.

---

Hello!
Ukraine could negotiate on its behalf, but chose to let Macron step to the role. Mistake? You bet.

quote:

---

NATO-Russia Founding Act.

---

That is quite a rabbit hole. Suffice it to say there is plenty of blame to go around. Starting with NATO's exclusion of and expansion against Russia under Yeltsin.

quote:

---

Why should you negotiate their supposed security concerns at all?

---

Because the alternative is war. We negotiate with China regularly. China is about as unreliable as they come. The fact is NATO had no intent to negotiate with Russia. That became crystal clear with Bucharest 2008. You already know that though, which means you're spinning instead of discussing.

quote:

---

Zelensky cannot negotiate on behalf of other powers.

---

Oh come on!
Regarding who would provide Ukrainian security? There were a dozen potential solutions.
You don't even believe that BS.
The April breakdown, as you know, had to do with the West insisting Ukraine play patsy-fodder to NATO's proxy war with Russia.

quote:

---

Regarding who would provide Ukrainian security? There were a dozen potential solutions. You don't even believe that BS.

---

You can’t believe the BS you post.
Russia didn’t live up to the Budapest accords. They violated Ukrainian borders.
Russia, nor their surrogates lived up to Minsk1.
Russia, nor their surrogates lived up to MinskII.
Finally Russia violated the UN Charter with an all out invasion of Ukraine.
The fact is no one can guaranty Ukraine’s sovereignty if everyone is going to give in to Russian threats.

quote:

---

You can’t believe the BS you post.
Russia didn’t live up to the Budapest accords. They violated Ukrainian borders.
Russia, nor their surrogates lived up to Minsk1.
Russia, nor their surrogates lived up to MinskII.
Finally Russia violated the UN Charter with an all out invasion of Ukraine.
The fact is no one can guaranty Ukraine’s sovereignty if everyone is going to give in to Russian threats.

---

You're kind of hopping around there, doubleb.
The quote you're responding to refers to Apr2022 when Ukraine-Russia negotiations were progressing.

quote:

---

Russia, nor their surrogates lived up to Minsk1.
Russia, nor their surrogates lived up to MinskII.

---

Let's keep it to separatists. There is no evidence Russia was directly involved. Regardless, Russia was not the country under threat of potential invasion. Ukraine should have ensured they adhered to Minsk. Ukraine should have sought direct convos with the Kremlin. Is that fair? Nope. But it is what it is.

quote:

---

Finally Russia violated the UN Charter with an all out invasion of Ukraine.

---

You refer to war as a violation the UN Charter. Given UN impotence, my focus is on avoidance. War is the failure of diplomacy. In that, ALL parties failed so miserably that it appears some were looking for war.

quote:

---

Ukraine should have sought direct convos with the Kremlin. Is that fair? Nope. But it is what it is.

---

They did. Zelensky opened up negotiations with the Kremlin in 2019 after he was elected. It was only after that point that he signed the plan to de-occupy the Crimea. Maybe he knew something that you don't?

quote:

---

War is the failure of diplomacy.

---

Not according to Clausewitz.

I thought all the Russian fanboys loved Clausewitz?

quote:

---

War is the failure of diplomacy.

---

I don’t think the Kremlin views it this way… they see war has an extension of diplomacy… they go hand in hand for Russia.

quote:

---

the way international relations works is lost on you

---

Your repeated projection here is revealing.

quote:

---

Why do you always assume complete honesty on the part of the Kremlin

---

My statements are neither assumptions, nor do they have to do with Russian "honesty." I don't trust Russia. I don't trust Ukraine. I don't trust PotatoBrain & Co.

In this instance, the Kremlin made repeated public statements regarding NATO presence in Ukraine/Georgia. Those were public. They were published. They were consistent. They were rationally backed. Concern about both NATO and its proximity to historical invasion routes was expressed on a litany of occasions.

quote:

---

No. The agreement makes it clear that Russia will have no say about the potential enlargement of NATO, and that Russia will respect the sovereignty of other states.

---

Interesting "agreement," especially in light of conversations involving German reunification under NATO.
I'll repeat though, there is plenty of blame to go around. Starting with NATO's exclusion of and expansion against Russia under Yeltsin. Yeltsin was elected. He was a potential ally. It was a window of opportunity. Instead of embracing him, NATO expanded against Russia which politically undercut Yeltsin. That stupidity combined with health issues forced Yeltsin to bring in a strong Russian nationalist as heir apparent. The nationalist's name was Vlad Putin.

quote:

---

Putin made it clear that whatever security concerns the US had after 2001 would be regarded as a threat to Russia.

---

FALSE, and dumb.
Putin reiterated a desire for Russia to join NATO. It was a request first made by Gorbachev, then Yeltsin, and finally Putin in 2001. All were denied. After NATO, the world's most significant military alliance, refused Putin's 2001 request, Putin said NATO would be regarded as a threat to Russia. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

quote:

---

All of which require multilateral negotiations, which have never occurred at any point, with respect to all the powers that are interested.

---

Which had ziltch to do with the collapsed April talks.

quote:

---

Not according to Clausewitz

---

Then he was wrong. This war as a case in point. Had Clausewitz actually finished his work, perhaps he'd have arrived at a different conclusion.