86
Zelenskyy says quick end to war directly depends on global support
(www.pravda.com.ua)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2023
86 points (97.8% liked)
Ukraine
8251 readers
717 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Meawnhile Ben "please thank me" Wallace is worried about Putin losing the war.
"If Putin loses in Ukraine, he will be deeply wounded,” Wallace said. “He’s still got an air force and he’s still got a navy — and we see his navy do quite aggressive manoeuvres. Putin is not done with us yet. There is an ability for him, in the next three or four years, to lash out."
"If Putin loses in Ukraine", "If" not "when".
"If" as if there's a choice, as if they dont know that Ukraine will only survive if he loses. That "if" ays they'renot prepared for the "When".
When UK's Secretary of State for Defence publicly says "If Putin loses in Ukraine", you know that Western Europe fears Putin and would appease him if not for the pesky Ukrainians who just won't stop fighting him. They fear him so much they try to bully someone who doesn't, because Ukraine depends on them for arms.
This fear is why ukraine is denied NATO access & protection. Because NATO appeases & protects Putin. No lessons were learnt at all from WW2.
source : https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-polytics/3736330-wallace-says-putin-may-lash-out-in-next-three-or-four-years.html
Archive link to main article in the times : https://archive.ph/CviEG
The guy who is stepping down due to backlash over his ridiculous statements of late? Quite the opposite is the reality here. The only thing NATO is concerned about at this point is the Nukes. Every other concern is like a Parent being concerned their toddler might throw a tantrum. Changes nothing. The child gets punished for its bad behaviour regardless.
Politicians are the talking heads here. Our military leadership, in at least the oldest of the NATO states, know exactly what they're doing. The military, in the US at least, doesn't talk to the public except through the president, or very few, select press hearings with very high-level brass, and what they say is almost always directed at the international opposition (China and Russia) and as such never reflects the true strategy. I fully believe that NATO is maneuvering to destabilize Russia, and that their goal is regime change.
NATO is acting after loads of Russian aggression. Above sounds too much like the Russian talking point that Russia somehow is a victim and was somehow forced to annex the various regions over the last 20 years or so.
While the WW2 comparisons are of course not perfect they're still certainly interesting to make. Appeasement seems to have had very similar results. Both Germany and Japan also miscalculated when they thought the western powers would be willing to just sue for peace at certain points (Germany thought Britain would give up the fight and go for peace talks once France fell and Japan thought USA would if taking their occupied areas back would be costly enough).