skumar wrote:….. Sanctions will be eased off within 3-5 months.
I agree with this. I think they will all come to the table to talk. Ukraine because they’re losing. Putin because of the losses and the need to close. Western nations - That sweet sweet Russia oil and gas are too hard to give up.
sanjaykumar wrote:…
From the Economist above,
…city is already in danger of falling. Andriy Biletsky, the founder of Azov regiment, a paramilitary outfit defending Mariupol alongside elite Ukrainian navy seals from the 36th Marine Brigade, …But the prospects do not look good: Ukrainian forces in Mariupol are vastly outnumbered, with 3,500 soldiers facing 14,000 invaders, around a tenth of the total estimated Russian force in the country.
If the Economist had qualified this reference to the Azmov regiment with their "alleged" Nazi nature, the Economist would have been credible.
…
Great post and great find (I don’t subscribe to them). This really pissed me off. I’ve been following this theatre for a while and the Azov battalion is as fascist as it gets. Dyed in the wool Nazis. I guess they become brave fighters when it comes to supporting the west. One should never forget the role of US companies in engaging with Nazis before WWII.
Aside 1: Also the other comments in this thread about Ukrainian people in WWII targeting Jews are spot on. There’s a streak of racism and anti semitism running in that region which tends to get overlooked.
Aside 2: On Zelenskyy - although I empathise with the man, even personally like what I see of him- there is every chance he will have peaked or will be peaking In terms of his gravitas and authority. If he agrees peace deal -most concessions he makes will make him weaker in the eyes of his people - for example giving up Crimea and Donbas. Not only weaken some may even consider him as a quisling. So he’s he’s a rock and a hard place. It all depends on the capacity of the coming Ukrainian people to endure - how long they are willing to suffer. His most likely options are a violent demise and martyr status, or a post war short career as a contested and increasingly unpopular national leader, and/ or a lucrative career on the western circuit giving gyaan to all and sundry for top dollar.
He could also emerge as a great leader for the Ukrainians, but the other options are more likely.
Aside 3: regarding other posts on this thread about how US and UK are constructing their opinions about India’s stand, personally nothing is more infuriating to me than Western national - US and UK- talking down to India about how disappointed they are with us.
Because, f@ck you.
- These are countries that went to war on a false premise on Iraq and killed hundreds of thousands on that fake premise.
- the Secretary of State, a certain Ms Clinton, went to war in Libya and destroyed an entire nation because she wanted to establish her credentials as a war leader in the run up to the next presidential election which she would contest. This is documented!
And you’re giving us gyaan? Hack thoo.
Indian does what India decides. And you can take your ‘disappointment’ and put it where the sun don’t shine.
There's only so much the first lady...no wait, the VP...can cover.