Russia invades Ukraine

[Harpo]

Much like Vance tearing into Europe recently, this was all for domestic consumption.

 

[AlterEgo]

Having looking back I am absolutely certain that was a trap laid for him.

I don't think he stood a chance.

It was definitely a trap. He was incredibly naive - outnumbered, on away turf, speaking his third language. And we know he desperately wanted to give soundbites to his people back home which is why he did engage in that discussion on live television. In my view that is because he thinks his people are looking for a source of hope or morale.

 

[simonw]

Zelensky is still planning on doing a fox news interview.

Can't help but think he will be similarly shouted down there to further confirm his humiliation in the eyes of that sect of the USA.

I have to feel for the man, as a person, as a human being. He just got bullied Infront of the whole world.

Two school bullies tried to bully him. They got handed their a****

 

[Ivor]

Zelensky is still planning on doing a fox news interview.

Can't help but think he will be similarly shouted down there to further confirm his humiliation in the eyes of that sect of the USA.

I have to feel for the man, as a person, as a human being. He just got bullied Infront of the whole world.

Wasn’t aware of the Fox News interview that could be another huge body blow, it goes from bad to worse.

 

[DanNCL]

Morale is very low in Ukraine and more people are now fixated on the security guarantee, having abandoned the idea of ever recovering the territory lost. Essentially, the people are at a stage where they'd like the war to finish and be concluded, rather than grinding on for more years.

This has been the case since Trump won the election and it became clear the US' priorities would change and a carve up would be likely. https://www.lemonde.fr/en/internati...er-more-than-1-000-days-of-war_6736769_4.html

That's why the Ukrainian President is at the stage of signing a huge minerals deal which is not favourable to him, and hasn't even been at the negotiating table half the time because he's been excluded. If there was will to continue the war, he'd be cracking on with it and not entering into negotiations which approach the humiliation of his country.

That link is behind a paywall.

Maybe, just maybe, he entered the negotiations out of necessity rather than choice? It was obvious that Trump wasn't going to provide the support that Biden had provided, and without that support, at least unless/until the EU step up, Ukraine are screwed.

More than half want the war done quickly, and a minority wanted Ukraine to "fight until they win": https://news.gallup.com/poll/653495/half-ukrainians-quick-negotiated-end-war.aspx

You can expect these trends to have accelerated since the inauguration and recent events. The war will be over quite soon and not necessarily to Ukraine's advantage to coin a phrase.

I think that depends how you define a "win". If a "win" is taking back all of the occupied areas including Crimea and Donbas then yes no doubt there's little motivation as it's an unrealistic goal.

Zelensky is still planning on doing a fox news interview.

Can't help but think he will be similarly shouted down there to further confirm his humiliation in the eyes of that sect of the USA.

I have to feel for the man, as a person, as a human being. He just got bullied Infront of the whole world.

He's got time to think a strategy before that interview. I think after that White House event that he would likely choose a different approach.

If he has any sense he'd also do an interview on a channel that may have some basic respect.

 

[AlterEgo]

Maybe, just maybe, he entered the negotiations out of necessity rather than choice? It was obvious that Trump wasn't going to provide the support that Biden had provided, and without that support, at least unless/until the EU step up, Ukraine are screwed.

You're sort of right - of course it is necessity. Ukraine cannot prosecute the war without America's help. Well, it could, of course, poorly, but who would want to? The situation has changed so rapidly and drastically since November that the will "to fight until Ukraine wins" has gone sharply downhill. It's not because the people inhaled some sort of gas which changed their mind or suddenly became irrationally demoralised; the situation changed in a way which seriously disadvantages Ukraine's war aims.

I think that depends how you define a "win". If a "win" is taking back all of the occupied areas including Crimea and Donbas then yes no doubt there's little motivation as it's an unrealistic goal.

If you look at that link you will see the survey shows that of the people who think Ukraine should keep fighting until it wins, 81% still believe this takes the form of regaining all territory lost between 2014 and now, including Crimea.

That is what victory looks like to a great many Ukrainians.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Zelensky being packed away with his tail between his legs having been shouted down. No historian will consider it anything but a Ukrainian loss, I feel.

Historians will see it for what it is: a Russian shill selling Ukraine down the river. The meeting went exactly how Putin intended for it to go.

The UK should be responding immediately by telling the USA to get out of Menwith Hill and to get off Diego Garcia.

 

[Yew]

More than half want the war done quickly, and a minority wanted Ukraine to "fight until they win": https://news.gallup.com/poll/653495/half-ukrainians-quick-negotiated-end-war.aspx

You can expect these trends to have accelerated since the inauguration and recent events. The war will be over quite soon and not necessarily to Ukraine's advantage to coin a phrase.

It's worth noting that in this case "continue fighting until victory over Russia" often means a return to 1991 borders.

This Survey was discussed by the Defence Economist Perun (

), I've paraphrased the analysis he provides below as per forum rules

It's worth noting the answers to the question "Do you agree or disagree that Ukraine should be open to making some territorial concessions as a part of a peace deal to end the war?", has an important caveat "This question was asked only of people who think "Ukraine should seek to negotiate an ending to the war as soon as possible."" Therefore, only about half of Ukrainians that say they want a fast negotiated peace, are willing to give up territory to secure it.

If we remove the non responses and compound those two questions together, we get something like:

- 42% of Ukrainians are happy to fight-on to victory
- Around 33% saying that territorial concessions might be necessary
- The remainder are happy to negotiate a rapid peace, but aren't willing to give Russia any territory for it.

 

[sor]

I don't think there's much saying that hasn't already been said, but what has particularly angered me about today's events (and I suppose also yesterday with the free speech jibe at Starmer) is how Vance thinks he has a right to treat heads of state/government like that.

Trump has the "right" to do that, though it is still disgusting - but the point of the vice president is that they have no power or authority, they're just there as a reserve. Zelenskyy is higher up in the order of precedence.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Two school bullies tried to bully him. They got handed their a****

That’s how I see it too.

The whole of Europe needs to turn its back on the USA. Force them out of all military installations in Europe or in territories controlled by Europe.

You can’t appeal to Trump’s better side because he doesn’t have one.

If the USA want to do isolationism then let them. Show them the door.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I don't think there's much saying that hasn't already been said, but what has particularly angered me about today's events (and I suppose also yesterday with the free speech jibe at Starmer) is how Vance thinks he has a right to treat heads of state/government like that.

Trump has the "right" to do that, though it is still disgusting - but the point of the vice president is that they have no power or authority, they're just there as a reserve. Zelenskyy is higher up in the order of precedence.

Starmer was hoodwinked yesterday as was Chamberlain back in 38. He's got EU coming in force to UK on Sunday time for him to decide which side of the fence he wants to be on. Piggy in the middle wont cut it.

 

[AlterEgo]

It's worth noting that in this case "continue fighting until victory over Russia" often means a return to 1991 borders.

This Survey was discussed by the Defence Economist Perun (

), I've paraphrased the analysis he provides below as per forum rules

It's worth noting the answers to the question "Do you agree or disagree that Ukraine should be open to making some territorial concessions as a part of a peace deal to end the war?", has an important caveat "This question was asked only of people who think "Ukraine should seek to negotiate an ending to the war as soon as possible."" Therefore, only about half of Ukrainians that say they want a fast negotiated peace, are willing to give up territory to secure it.

If we remove the non responses and compound those two questions together, we get something like:

- 42% of Ukrainians are happy to fight-on to victory
- Around 33% saying that territorial concessions might be necessary
- The remainder are happy to negotiate a rapid peace, but aren't willing to give Russia any territory for it.

Yes, noted as we've cross posted. But less than half of Ukrainians are happy to fight on until victory, and by "territorial concessions" this also includes Crimea, which may be considered to even be outside the scope of the war, as there is no fighting going on there. It seems reasonably fair to assume most Ukrainians believe Crimea would be a "territorial concession" and that even of those who don't want to keep fighting, many would consider a victory would take the form of regaining Crimea.

Historians will see it for what it is: a Russian shill selling Ukraine down the river. The meeting went exactly how Putin intended for it to go.

The UK should be responding immediately by telling the USA to get out of Menwith Hill and to get off Diego Garcia.

I would love to see that, to be honest. They can leave Cyprus too, and in fact all the installations they have here. We could turn some of them into new towns; Fairford would be a good one.

 

[Killingworth]

Vance knows that he gets to be President if anything happens to Trump before 2028/9. If it does he then gets an even easier run to be elected as President in his own right until 2037.

There's a thought!! Hopefully he'll be wiser by then.

 

[DanNCL]

If you look at that link you will see the survey shows that of the people who think Ukraine should keep fighting until it wins, 81% still believe this takes the form of regaining all territory lost between 2014 and now, including Crimea.

That is what victory looks like to a great many Ukrainians.

Then no wonder there's no motivation. I think if the question were to be asked on whether they wanted to fight to get back to the borders as they were in January 2022, specifically those borders rather than a vague "territorial concessions", the answers would be different.

The whole of Europe needs to turn its back on the USA. Force them out of all military installations in Europe or in territories controlled by Europe.

You can’t appeal to Trump’s better side because he doesn’t have one.

If the USA want to do isolationism then let them. Show them the door.

Fully agreed. They need us more than they realise, they'd quickly regret it.

Starmer was hoodwinked yesterday as was Chamberlain back in 38. He's got EU coming in force to UK on Sunday time for him to decide which side of the fence he wants to be on. Piggy in the middle wont cut it.

It'll be very interesting to see how Starmer handles it in the next few days. If he screws this up then I could see it being the end of his political career.

I would love to see that, to be honest. They can leave Cyprus too, and in fact all the installations they have here. We could turn some of them into new towns; Fairford would be a good one.

Absolutely. Good riddance to them.

 

[simonw]

Vance knows that he gets to be President if anything happens to Trump before 2028/9. If it does he then gets an even easier run to be elected as President in his own right until 2037.

There's a thought!! Hopefully he'll be wiser by then.

Only if Trump exits before half of his term is up, if not Vance would only get a max of the remainder Trumps term plus 4 years.

 

[Grimsby town]

You're sort of right - of course it is necessity. Ukraine cannot prosecute the war without America's help. Well, it could, of course, poorly, but who would want to?

I'm sure most Ukrainians want the war to end. Most people around the world want the war to end. I certainly do but I don't want throw Ukraine to the Russian wolves to achieve that. I've not forgotten what happened at Bucha so I doubt the Ukrainians have. If peace means giving russia 5 years to recover and then finish the job then I'm sure most Ukrainians don't want that kind of peace.

I also disagree that Ukraine would be finished without US weaponry. They had very little Western weaponry during the initial invasion and managed to resist and push back the Ukrainians. Russia's economy is on the edge of being in real trouble. It can't continue to sustain the loses it is sustaining. Its currently losing 1000s of men to take small villages, it doesn't have the ability to take Ukraines larger cities even in the absence of US weapons.

 

[Killingworth]

I'm sure most Ukrainians want the war to end. Most people around the world want the war to end. I certainly do but I don't want throw Ukraine to the Russian wolves to achieve that. I've not forgotten what happened at Bucha so I doubt the Ukrainians have. If peace means giving russia 5 years to recover and then finish the job then I'm sure most Ukrainians don't want that kind of peace.

I also disagree that Ukraine would be finished without US weaponry. They had very little Western weaponry during the initial invasion and managed to resist and push back the Ukrainians. Russia's economy is on the edge of being in real trouble. It can't continue to sustain the loses it is sustaining. Its currently losing 1000s of men to take small villages, it doesn't have the ability to take Ukraines larger cities even in the absence of US weapons.

There is war weariness on both sides. Past conflicts have ended very quickly when momentum begins, as demonstrated so recently in Syria. Sadly tonight's performance makes such an event less likely in Ukraine's favour.

 

[Annetts key]

With regards to what happened in the Oval Office today, just wow. And not in a good way. Trump and Vance displayed their true colours. Both are nasty pieces of “stuff”.

Starmer now really has no choice. Spain has already backed Ukraine (link https://www.barrons.com/articles/ukraine-spain-stands-with-you-pm-sanchez-b918bc00). I currently can’t quote from that link. I’ll try to add a quote later.

After that show of bullying from Trump and Vance I think all the good nations of Europe and the rest of the Western democratic countries will also back Ukraine. Hence Starmer will as well.

The only way to deal with Trump is to stand up to him while supported by other like minded democratic countries.

With regards to what this means to Ukraine, yes, of course this is not good news. But I think it is extremely unlikely they will give up. There is no way they are going to put down their weapons with the kind of deal that Trump and Putin are concocting.

The loss of support from the U.S.A. will be a blow. Europe now has to get its act together. If necessary by buying weapons from the U.S.A. and then passing them on to Ukraine. The frozen Russian funds and assets can be used to help fund this.

Russia has not changed its demands, but the war is not going well for them as I outlined in an earlier post. I think it is far to soon to say that Ukraine won’t get any territory back.

With more support from the friendly counties (and I don’t include the U.S.A. here) that have backed them, Ukraine can continue to defend itself. The Ukrainians own drones, huge numbers of which are built in Ukraine continue to cause the Russian army severe problems.

 

[Jimini]

Spain has already backed Ukraine (link https://www.barrons.com/articles/ukraine-spain-stands-with-you-pm-sanchez-b918bc00). I currently can’t quote from that link. I’ll try to add a quote later.

Here you go:

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez on Friday said his country would stand by war-torn Ukraine after its leader Volodymyr Zelensky and US President Donald Trump's extraordinary Oval Office row.

"Ukraine, Spain stands with you," Sanchez, a staunch backer of Ukraine since Russia's 2022 invasion who pledged one billion euros of aid in a visit to Kyiv this week, wrote on X.

imm/giv
The Barron's news department was not involved in the creation of the content above. This article was produced by AFP. For more information go to AFP.com.
© Agence France-Presse

 

[Grimsby town]

There is war weariness on both sides. Past conflicts have ended very quickly when momentum begins, as demonstrated so recently in Syria. Sadly tonight's performance makes such an event less lively in Ukraine's favour.

Syria is a completely different situation. A hated dictator from an ethnic minority group. Most people in Ukraine don't want to be occupied by Russia. They know what happened at Bucha. Are they going to lie down and let that happen? I certainly wouldn't.

 

[Annetts key]

Here you go:

Why thank you, much appreciated

 

[Jimini]

Why thank you, much appreciated

My pleasure

 

[brad465]

Virtually every European leader who has backed Ukraine from the outset has tweeted/voiced support for Ukraine in the aftermath of that meeting. But there is one notable absentee at the time of writing, Starmer. Even Macron has spoken out, despite being the other prominent European leader to visit the White House this week. All I'm saying is, I hope when he does speak out it's got some huge substance behind it.

 

[Killingworth]

Syria is a completely different situation. A hated dictator from an ethnic minority group. Most people in Ukraine don't want to be occupied by Russia. They know what happened at Bucha. Are they going to lie down and let that happen? I certainly wouldn't.

No two situations are ever the same. In WW1 both Russia and Germany effectively gave up and went home. After tonight's performance the solidarity of most of Europe with Ukraine might just get through to ordinary Russians who might throw down their arms and walk home. Wishful thinking, perhaps. If Ukraine is standing up to Trump as well as Putin the game's up. But do they see that, yet?

 

[Yew]

Virtually every European leader who has backed Ukraine from the outset has tweeted/voiced support for Ukraine in the aftermath of that meeting. But there is one notable absentee at the time of writing, Starmer. Even Macron has spoken out, despite being the other prominent European leader to visit the White House this week. All I'm saying is, I hope when he does speak out it's got some huge substance behind it.

Hmm, where is he at the moment, it's entirely possible that he's on a plane, or working to do more impactful things than tweet?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I like the way all the Tory lot and there right wing mates are suddenly against what Trump has done today conveniently forgetting how they've talked up Trump in the past.

 

[Ivor]

Watching again on the news an American reporter kicked things off by asking Zelenensky if he even owned a suit? he has always attended every meeting in his current outfit or similar & not in a suit so I do wonder if said reporter was primed by the Trump administration to insult the Ukrainian President & lay the foundations to get him on the ropes from the start?

 

[Tetchytyke]

But there is one notable absentee at the time of writing, Starmer. Even Macron has spoken out, despite being the other prominent European leader to visit the White House this week. All I'm saying is, I hope when he does speak out it's got some huge substance behind it.

Starmer’s just a soggy tissue. An absolute waste of oxygen.

Now is the time to stand up. Starmer goes and has a nap.

 

[DanNCL]

Zelenskyy has spent the last couple of hours posting individual thank you messages to various world leaders on Twitter, at least 15 of them at my last count.

Thank you for your support.
Quote

Justin Trudeau @JustinTrudeau · 1h
Russia illegally and unjustifiably invaded Ukraine. For three years now, Ukrainians have fought with courage and resilience. Their fight for democracy, freedom, and sovereignty is a fight that matters to us all. Canada will continue to stand with Ukraine and Ukrainians in achieving a just and lasting peace.
10:10 PM · Feb 28, 2025

·
821.9K
Views

https://x.com/zelenskyyua/status/1895597417535578321?s=46

Thank you for your support.
Quote

Emmanuel Macron @EmmanuelMacron · 2h
Il y a un agresseur : la Russie. Il y a un peuple agressé : l'Ukraine. Nous avons tous eu raison d'aider l'Ukraine et de sanctionner la Russie il y a trois ans et de continuer à le faire. Nous, c’est les Américains, les Européens, Canadiens, Japonais et plusieurs autres. Merci à tous ceux qui ont aidé et continuent. Et respect à ceux qui, depuis le début, se battent. Parce qu'ils se battent pour leur dignité, leur indépendance, pour leurs enfants et pour la sécurité de l'Europe. 8:39 PM · Feb 28, 2025

The post by Emmanuel Macron translates to English as follows:

There is an aggressor: Russia. There is a people under attack: Ukraine. We were all right to help Ukraine and sanction Russia three years ago and to continue to do so. We are Americans, Europeans, Canadians, Japanese and many others. Thanks to all those who helped and continue. And respect to those who, since the beginning, have been fighting. Because they are fighting for their dignity, their independence, for their children and for the security of Europe.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Virtually every European leader who has backed Ukraine from the outset has tweeted/voiced support for Ukraine in the aftermath of that meeting. But there is one notable absentee at the time of writing, Starmer. Even Macron has spoken out, despite being the other prominent European leader to visit the White House this week. All I'm saying is, I hope when he does speak out it's got some huge substance behind it.

I think Starmer may well be having some very, very serious meetings right now with some of the very best defence minds in the country. This is not just "get stuffed, Trump", but a serious question about whether the UK can actually afford to rely on America. At this precise moment, if I were Starmer, I'd be calling Macron and asking him for a very urgent chat about the possibility of using French nuclear weapons technology in the Trident replacement, with a plan to develop (in the medium term) an independent launch platform, perhaps in cooperation with Poland through a nuclear-sharing deal.

Expensive? Very. But cheaper than relying on America, who may well sabotage our nuclear launch platform in a fit of rage.

The only way to deal with Trump is to stand up to him while supported by other like minded democratic countries.

I also think that it might not be a terrible idea to simply tell the Americans to leave. Russia is no threat to Europe, and Europe (with Ukrainian drone know-how) can easily turn the weaker borders into killing fields should they get any ideas. We can also mine the borders quickly and easily, while simultaneously blocking off all access to/from Russia and Belarus. Perhaps one corridor could remain for humanitarian reasons, but other than that, let's fortify the borders.

The Americans will certainly have severe problems if we start cutting the cord. They rely heavily on assets such as the spy station in Ayios Nikolaos (SBA Dhekelia on the island of Cyprus), and without these assets, America will start to have really big problems. Likewise, cut off Starlink completely from the EU, as well as known propaganda platforms like Twitter, Rumble, etc.

Let them feel the pain. If they want to come back, they're going to have to offer a lot more than they do now. Oh, and their defence contractors? Well, obviously there can be no more expensive contracts for American weapons systems. We might not be able to create truly cutting-edge weapons in the short term, but we can certainly create weapons that will do large amounts of damage.

The Ukrainians own drones, huge numbers of which are built in Ukraine continue to cause the Russian army severe problems.

I've been reading quite a few independent analyses of the situation with drones, and they all are absolutely clear: Ukraine is building a drone production capability that is frankly frightening. They are developing so many things that Russia simply cannot counter them all, and this drone warfare capability is likely to become in huge demand in coming years because they've got tried and tested battlefield products. It seems that what's actually happening in Donetsk is that Ukraine isn't really engaging the Russians on the battlefield, but rather they're letting the Russians come forward, get blown to pieces with drone warfare, the Russians suffer dreadful losses when moving forward, and meanwhile the Ukrainians are retreating tactically while incurring relatively few losses.

Trump, I think, simply doesn't understand exactly where Ukraine is right now. With a new German chancellor who will be absolutely determined to kickstart German industrial capabilities, the UK with a new commitment to spend, spend and spend on defence, and countries like Poland who are willing to spend big, there is every possibility that Ukraine will do a deal with the EU/EEA/CH/UK for their resources rather than America. If that happens, and Europe starts to develop some serious military-industrial capabilities, America might be in real trouble, and so will their politicians in marginal seats.

Now is the time to stand up. Starmer goes and has a nap.

I would give him the benefit of the doubt here.The UK support for Ukraine is not in any doubt, and it may well be that the UK top brass are telling Trump's goons that they either sort this situation out or the UK will be going for deeper European cooperation at the expense of the US. The Americans are relying heavily on our assets in various places, and if they're booted out, it will hurt them immensely.

Unlike many other European countries, we can make life very difficult for the American military and other agencies.