Gonna retract as it appears the majority are trying to have valid discussions and I don't want to interfere with that

100 percent agree.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

When Tom Cotton is called a RINO you can pretty much discount anything else the deliverer of such a message has to say.

---

Do you have anything of substance to add? We're trying to clean up these childish zingers so we don't get locked again.

---

Here's your substance. To call Tom Cotton a RINO is a ridiculous enough statement to be called out on its own, but declaring him a RINO for supporting Ukraine is a whole different level. Apparently, not everyone shares the view…….he'll be called a "CM" next on here.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/31/tom-cotton-gop-conservatives-00035784

B-1 83 said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

When Tom Cotton is called a RINO you can pretty much discount anything else the deliverer of such a message has to say.

---

Do you have anything of substance to add? We're trying to clean up these childish zingers so we don't get locked again.

---

Here's your substance. To call Tom Cotton a RINO is a ridiculous enough statement to be called out on its own, but declaring him a RINO for supporting Ukraine is a whole different level. Apparently, not everyone shares the view…….he'll be called a "CM" next on here.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/31/tom-cotton-gop-conservatives-00035784

---

Then take it elsewhere. Other than being another war-mongering swamp critter, Tom Cotton has nothing to do with this thread. He was only included in the discussion as it relates to his actual support of more money and toys for Ukraine.

fka ftc said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

When Tom Cotton is called a RINO you can pretty much discount anything else the deliverer of such a message has to say.

---

Do you have anything of substance to add? We're trying to clean up these childish zingers so we don't get locked again.

---

Here's your substance. To call Tom Cotton a RINO is a ridiculous enough statement to be called out on its own, but declaring him a RINO for supporting Ukraine is a whole different level. Apparently, not everyone shares the view…….he'll be called a "CM" next on here.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/31/tom-cotton-gop-conservatives-00035784

---

Then take it elsewhere. Other than being another war-mongering swamp critter, Tom Cotton has nothing to do with this thread. He was only included in the discussion as it relates to his actual support of more money and toys for Ukraine.

---

Now I get it…….this thread is only for people who disagree with giving money to Ukraine! Tom Cotton can only be brought into the discussion when the anti-Ukraine crowd want to berate him.

B-1 83 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

When Tom Cotton is called a RINO you can pretty much discount anything else the deliverer of such a message has to say.

---

Do you have anything of substance to add? We're trying to clean up these childish zingers so we don't get locked again.

---

Here's your substance. To call Tom Cotton a RINO is a ridiculous enough statement to be called out on its own, but declaring him a RINO for supporting Ukraine is a whole different level. Apparently, not everyone shares the view…….he'll be called a "CM" next on here.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/31/tom-cotton-gop-conservatives-00035784

---

Then take it elsewhere. Other than being another war-mongering swamp critter, Tom Cotton has nothing to do with this thread. He was only included in the discussion as it relates to his actual support of more money and toys for Ukraine.

---

Now I get it…….this thread is only for people who disagree with giving money to Ukraine! Tom Cotton can only be brought into the discussion when the anti-Ukraine crowd want to berate him.

---

Not at all, but you seem hyper-focused on one tweet and one person in that tweet referring to him as a RINO. Weird flex bro, put a little Bailey's in the coffee and relax a bit.

Quote:

---

There is a legitimate argument that the West forced the issue by boxing in Russia as confirmed by the NATO Gen Sec this week.

---

"Boxing in" is one way to describe counties voluntarily joining a defensive alliance to escape Russian aggression.

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

When Tom Cotton is called a RINO you can pretty much discount anything else the deliverer of such a message has to say.

---

I certainly don't think he is a rino, but he is fully on the war cheerleader side.

---

"war cheerleader"


Remember that the next time he claims to be above the fray.

---

Tom Cotton literally is a war cheerleader, based on that letter he signed and then published on social media. He's advocating/cheering on sending more money/weapons to Ukraine to widen the war.

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

There is a legitimate argument that the West forced the issue by boxing in Russia as confirmed by the NATO Gen Sec this week.

---

"Boxing in" is one way to describe counties voluntarily joining a defensive alliance to escape Russian aggression.

---

The fact that the Warsaw Pact countries formerly under the benevolent "protection" of their Soviet masters jumped at the offer for NATO membership seemingly escapes some. They didn't join to attack, they joined for unified protection.

notex said:

---

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

When Tom Cotton is called a RINO you can pretty much discount anything else the deliverer of such a message has to say.

---

I certainly don't think he is a rino, but he is fully on the war cheerleader side.

---

"war cheerleader"


Remember that the next time he claims to be above the fray.

---

Tom Cotton literally is a war cheerleader, based on that letter he signed and then published on social media. He's advocating/cheering on sending more money/weapons to Ukraine to widen the war.

---

Who f'ng started the war, driving forces into Ukraine? Nobody is a "war cheerleader", just supporting defending Ukraine instead letting Putin get what he wants.

If you think Cotton is a warmonger, what is Putin?

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

There is a legitimate argument that the West forced the issue by boxing in Russia as confirmed by the NATO Gen Sec this week.

---

"Boxing in" is one way to describe counties voluntarily joining a defensive alliance to escape Russian aggression.

---

Irrelevant to my point though. Russia is on the other side of this and feels they are getting boxed in. Ukraine being as tied to Russia as it has been over its history was always going to be a hot spot. Western countries joining NATO partly forced this issue to happen by removing all pretenses of a buffer between NATO and Russia.

Russia hasn't helped matters by their own actions. My only point is that all sides pretty much willingly led themselves to this outcome. We walked into this war with open eyes and anyone that says they are surprised by it are liars or ignorant.

From a NATO historian:

Quote:

---

From the beginning, Russia strongly objected to NATO's borders creeping closer to its territory. In 1997, Russian President Boris Yeltsin tried to secure a guarantee from President Bill Clinton that NATO would not add any former Soviet republics. Clinton refused.

"The Russians were always concerned about how far NATO enlargement was going to go. It's one thing for Poland to come in, or the Czech Republic to come in. That's not such a big deal. But there was always a concern about Ukraine," Goldgeier said.

---

Russia has seen any spread and strengthening of NATO as an act of aggression and a justification for it to be preemptive in taking defensive positions or even being the aggressor to stop NATO from encroaching on what it considers its territories and adjacencies.

Anyone who has paid attention to NATO v Russia for 50+ years has understood this, even Trump.

Advocating for the spread of NATO and the strengthening of NATO is the geopolitical equivalent of poking your fingers into Putin's eyeballs. At some point, that fool going to get mad. FAFO if you will.

So Russia invaded ukraine to stop nato expansion which resulted in two more countries joining nato, one of which shares a border with Russia.


Fafo indeed.

Teslag said:

---

So Russia invaded ukraine to stop nato expansion which resulted in two more countries joining nato, one of which shares a border with Russia.


Fafo indeed.

---

When they invade Poland it will certainly make the world more interesting.

fka ftc said:

---

Teslag said:

---

So Russia invaded ukraine to stop nato expansion which resulted in two more countries joining nato, one of which shares a border with Russia.


Fafo indeed.

---

When they invade Poland it will certainly make the world more interesting.

---

Invade Poland with what?

#Russia has withdrawn its military from the border with #Norway, said the chief of the Norwegian General Staff

Only about 20% of the number of soldiers stationed there before Russia's full-scale invasion of #Ukraine are currently deployed near the border with Norway, said the… pic.twitter.com/HbxnjvjkFM

— NEXTA (@nexta_tv) September 16, 2023

Russia is so much stronger now with record recruiting that they now have to give up securing their border against ultra hostile NATO. You know, the NATO that should never be allowed near their borders.

Teslag said:

---

So Russia invaded ukraine to stop nato expansion which resulted in two more countries joining nato, one of which shares a border with Russia.


Fafo indeed.

---

And the sanctions thrown down onto Russia has recruited alot of countries to BRICS which will hasten the collapse of the dollar as the world reserve currency. Especially those in Latin America and Africa which we are battling against China for influence.

Economic warfare is gonna be just as devastating as military conflict.

The US ****ed around and is about to find out.

The US and western europe just made a great case for developing nations to ditch the dollar and strengthen trade ties with China even as we court them as potential trade partners, try to move manufacturing there and try to decouple manufacturing with China. Talk about shooting urself in both feet.

In addition to BRICS, the Ukraine conflict has restarted and/or hastened development of intermodal shipping routes that rely less and less on western-controlled paths.

Russia just opened up large portions of their Eastern Europe / Western China highway, Iran is going to allow for more rail transport through its land and to the port for shipment to the Saudis and onward from there.

China and India establishing more linkages for oil & gas.

This conflict is much much bigger than stacking Russian corpses.

I agree. It's a proxy war that both blocks (the russia/China block and the US/Western Europe bloc) are using to make the case that developing nations should ally with them.

The west is losing that proxy war miserably as developing nations see that post modern western values are antithetical to their traditional culture and that the West will be punitive towards them unless they give up their culture to the western plague of post modernism/degeneracy and our particular brand of cronyism.

For the most part China And Russia have shown a willingness to let regions keep their culture as long as they can extract resources from these nations and readilyagree to enrich the current regimes instead of installing their own cherry picked government.

The US and Western Europe demand total economic, cultural, capitulation and regime change so the west's cronies are enriched the most and enforce capitulation with the threat of massive sanctions if the country steps out of line.

Between the two options most countries are choosing Russia and China, the more mellow and less overt form of subjugation.

Ukraine is the proving ground most countries are looking to.

They see Russia as defending the eastern Ukrainians that had been persecuted by western Ukraine and the Americans. The western Ukraine regime was cherry picked by the west and then tried to culturally and politically obliterate the eastern Ukrainians until Russia stepped in. And then the US and Europe tried to punish Russia for defending these people by putting onerous economic sanctions on them.

This is how many developing nations see the situation there and why alot of them are rooting for Russia and waiting to see how this resolves..

And they are not completely wrong.

Interesting and excellent takes. Had not really thought much about the culturally aspects, but there is a point there. Also, Russia and China do not widely tolerate outside cultural influences in their countries.

The US should forego the idea of a melting pot of cultures and instead be more like a stew. We can all reside intermingled and complimentary of the other ingredients whilst maintaining our unique and distinct characteristics.

Current libs and progressives want everything melted down to where no original cultural elements or values exist outside of the ones they intend to imprint upon you,

Quote:

---

I agree. It's a proxy war that both blocks (the russia/China block and the US/Western Europe bloc) are using to make the case that developing nations should ally with them.

---

I partially agree, but note that developing nations loyalty could be purchased for a lot less, so I don't think the western powers/US is really doing this to that end.

For instance, if we accept rough figures for argument's sake of $120 billion in US aid so far, and a trillion to follow in the 'post-war' rebuilding phase per blackrock etc., that could have bought the loyalties of all the 'new' BRICS nation states easily. To me, the more logical and likely motivation is the effort to 'level' or destroy western economies and specifically the US with inflation/disruption a la the goals of Beijing/CCP/WEF/Soros etc.

Ultimately it remains true that the outcome thus far is;

• Weakened EU (both within and abroad such as in Africa)
• Strengthened Sino-Russian alliance
• Strengthened russian military
• Depleted American/European arsenals
• Growth in drone warfare knowledge
• Massive energy inflation in the US/Europe
• Destruction of any possibility of a long term future for Ukraine as a nation state of any material size/relevance
• Turkey moving away from EU
• BRICS growth/doubling of their alliance' power/member's population/GDP
• Decreased US influence in the Middle East

And the cheerleaders like Tom Cotton/Lindsey Graham/Tony Blinken don't give a damn. None of this is in American interests, clearly.

I agree.

I should restate. Russia and China are using this to try to sway developing nations over to their side. And are using this as a test case from which they can show nations they are courting how the US will treat them in the future.

The US is making a pathetically minimal attempt to counter, arrogantly confident in our superiority.

However I am seeing more and more articles and interviews with African and Latin American leaders who are outright saying they are happier dealing with the Russians and Chinese than the Americans and specifically because while they are happy to take the money being offered by either side, the money offered by the americans is being offered with strings (to further lbgtq agendas and create cultural change) which they do not like and given the choice they are more and more siding with the Russians and Chinese.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

I agree.

I should restate. Russia and China are using this to try to sway developing nations over to their side. And are using this as a test case from which they can show nations they are courting how the US will treat them in the future.

The US is making a pathetically minimal attempt to counter, arrogantly confident in our superiority.

However I am seeing more and more articles and interviews with African and Latin American leaders who are outright saying they are happier dealing with the Russians and Chinese than the Americans and specifically because while they are happy to take the money being offered by either side, the money offered by the americans is being offered with strings (to further lbgtq agendas and create cultural change) which they do not like and given the choice they are more and more siding with the Russians and Chinese.

---

They probably grew tired as well with us preaching voting rights, free and fair elections, democracy and such then watch as we threw all that out the window because Orange Man Bad and sends mean tweets.

The CIA/Victoria Nuland/John F Kerry/GCF/John McCain's of our diplomatic corps have not won us many friends, either.

Think about how easy it would be for a neutral third world leadership to pick between our respective ideal of American vs. the CCP as an alliance, based on our relative perceptions. But that's not what has been happening throughout this war, at an increasing rate.

Anyone else watching Z on 60 minutes rn?

Strangely enough, he seems to differ from some of his supporters here. He clearly thinks Russian's threats to initiate WW3 are credible.

Later on, the reporter acknowledges the offensive failed and describes the situation on the front as "WW1 with drones."

IMO Z muffed his response to "what is it like on the front lines?" by not reiterating the true horrors of war.

Overall, and maybe I'm being optimistic, but it sounds like they're doing the prep work for peace "when the front freezes" and Ukraine is 75-80% of what it once was yet they try to convince you thats a "victory"

ETA: the reporter referenced the front freezing in 6 weeks. I think he was talking about a winter freeze, not a stalemate.

Hopefully I can link clips from the interview tomorrow, but I'm posting this live. Anyone else see it?

ETA: he did mention that Ukraine must be whole, "including Crimea" before there can be peace. I think that one needs a bookmark.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Anyone else watching Z on 60 minutes rn?

Strangely enough, he seems to differ from some of his supporters here. He clearly thinks Russian's threats to initiate WW3 are credible.

Later on, the reporter acknowledges the offensive failed and describes the situation on the front as "WW1 with drones."

IMO Z muffed his response to "what is it like on the front lines?" by not reiterating the true horrors of war.

Overall, and maybe I'm being optimistic, but it sounds like they're doing the prep work for peace "when the front freezes" and Ukraine is 75-80% of what it once was yet they try to convince you thats a "victory"

Hopefully I can link clips from the interview tomorrow, but I'm posting this live. Anyone else see it?

---

Saw it he's gonna ask for another 24 billion for the grift

Said he usually gets what he wants from Biden

Quote:

---

ETA: he did mention that Ukraine must be whole, "including Crimea" before there can be peace. I think that one needs a bookmark.

---

Completely delusional. He knows that isn't possible. It's just part of the messaging now because he knows as soon as he backs off that this thing is over and the unaudited money dries up.

Quote:

---

Overall, and maybe I'm being optimistic, but it sounds like they're doing the prep work for peace "when the front freezes" and Ukraine is 75-80% of what it once was yet they try to convince you thats a "victory"

---

Compared to Russias goal of it being 0% in a few days?

60-minutes Dan Rather-level lies/propaganda is about perfect for saint zelensky the wonderful.

‼️⁉️ “We're fighting for real with a nuclear state that threatens to destroy the world”

-> Dude … Just negotiate pic.twitter.com/or1VM047o0

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 18, 2023

LOL.

Quote:

---

The Russians do not want to repeat this debacle on their doorstep, let along within their own borders. Although the capacity of the Russian state is impressive, and far beyond what any Western commentators expected two years ago, it cannot be expected to rapidly replace capital infrastructure across the entire territory of an occupied or annexed Ukraine postwar. This infrastructure was constructed by the Soviet Union at enormous expense over the course of decades, and much of it is in bad enough shape already and will have to soldier on for some time still before it can be replaced in the normal course of national business. The Russians do not want to find themselves in a situation where they shortened the war by six months or a year by destroying infrastructure only to have to confront a decade of insurgency from angry, miserable locals and an enormous repair bill to fix this self-created problem.

* I can already hear people in the comments claiming that the Russians tried to destroy Ukraine's infrastructure last winter. The claim falls apart if you look at what was actually hit - mostly (relatively) easily replaced power equipment like 330kv transformers. The Russians were actually going after Ukraine's air defense network, and the pressure on infrastructure forced those defenses to unmask to be targeted and destroyed. All of which supports my theory above.

---

Commentors have complained throughout the Ukrainian War that the Russians are not striking enough "dual use" infrastructure - bridges, power plants, even hydroelectric dams. Allow me to explain why I believe they have avoided this war-shortening measure.

Prior to the 2003… pic.twitter.com/HR7peqFqDI

— Armchair Warlord (@ArmchairW) September 18, 2023

North Korea will supply Russia with about 10 million shells of 122 and 155 mm caliber , - political scientist Yuri Baranchik

According to the expert, the deal will also include improved “analogues” of the American HIMARS, capable of hitting targets at a distance of up to 400 km. pic.twitter.com/oF0LYTara2

— Sprinter (@Sprinter99800) September 17, 2023

The one thing North Korea has a lot of is artillery, so I can believe this number is about right.

nortex97 said:

---

60-minutes Dan Rather-level lies/propaganda is about perfect for saint zelensky the wonderful.

‼️⁉️ “We're fighting for real with a nuclear state that threatens to destroy the world”

-> Dude … Just negotiate pic.twitter.com/or1VM047o0

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 18, 2023

---

Cold War porn for neocons and those simply interested in stacking Russian bodies to keep the war going so the grift can continue.

Yep.

Interesting to know exactly who is responsible, as a person, for this war in the first place.

WAR: NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg revealed that Russia offered not to invade Ukraine if the alliance would agree to deny Zelenskyy membership. Our refusal triggered the war - we are complicit. pic.twitter.com/Rj9jbOoLVA

— @amuse (@amuse) September 18, 2023

It's interesting he didn't share this little tidbit until September of 2023.

Again, this war has a lot to do with helping Biden's pay masters profit from it, both Russian and otherwise…

Biden Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen insists “[Joe Biden] wants to make sure that gas prices remain affordable for Americans.”

When Biden took office, a gallon of gas was $2.39. Today, a gallon is $3.88 and the price of gas has been above $3 per gallon for over 850 days. pic.twitter.com/SaP5U2WaWS

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) September 18, 2023

Hasn't Ukraine been through enough at the hands of American Democrats? pic.twitter.com/tB2CQrZbbn

— DD Geopolitics (@DD_Geopolitics) September 18, 2023

Apparently…not.

🇺🇦🇺🇸On his second trip to the US, Zelensky will not only beg, but also say "thank you"

The last time Zelensky visited the US was after the Kharkov/Kherson "offensive" last year. Of course he presented the Russian retreat as a glorious victory and people believed him.

This time… pic.twitter.com/4XZnBwIzRQ

— DD Geopolitics (@DD_Geopolitics) September 18, 2023

Personally, I think he will say 'thank you' only in the same sentence as demands for faster/more money/weapons. I've never seen even the sycophants in the media describe him as something resembling 'gracious.'

Update: mailbag answers.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Simplicius, could you please address how much support you think there is for Russia in the non-occupied oblasts, particularly the ones most people think could be likeliest to absorbed into Russia at some point in the future, and how important this could be or how linked it is to Russia's decisions to (or not to) launch a major offensive?

I'd like to imagine that support for Russia is high in Kharkiv, Nikolaev, Odessa, Sumy Regions, etc.., or in the cities of Zaporizhia and Kherson, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part. People in those regions may have brainwashed over the years by the Ukro-nazi propaganda and may have become more culturally attuned to the national ideology coming from Galicia/Volynhia. Seems to me that if there really were high support for Russia in non-occupied Oblasts, and if Russia wanted to occupy that territory eventually, they would create shadow governments and launch insurgencies in eastern Ukraine, but that hasn't happened. It could be that Russia hasn't done that because Russia wants to preserve undamaged the areas they want to occupy later, want to avoid a major escalation that could draw in Nato, or maybe because Russia really doesn't have broad territorial ambitions. But the lack of a Russian offensive could be just because Russia doesn't think they're supported outside the areas they occupy now, so they don't want to launch offensives in territory where the population is hostile.

---

Firstly, let's state that as of right now the "official" position is that Russia will not absorb any further, as Peskov himself stated Russia's present goal is only to administer the currently annexed regions which are Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye.

However, many of us realize that at the minimum several other key regions may eventually be annexed either way. Like you said, potentially Odessa, Nikolayev, Kharkov and maybe even Dnipropetrovsk, Sumy, Chernigov, etc.

Let me address the shadow insurgency stuff. There is a lot more of that going on than most people know about. You have to really have your ear to the ground to make note of it, but there is a significant partisan factor going on in exactly the areas you speak of. I've reported on it from time to time, for instance several videos a while back from the Nikolayev region which showed masked partisan members with disguised voices who state that they're carrying out sabotage attacks in the rear.

Last week this video made waves where a Ukrainian soldier said that up to a full battalion of men have been killed in the rear:

If you dig down the rabbit hole of what's happening, there is a lot of information pointing to a strong partisan force that's taking out Ukrainian forces in the rear, sometimes when soldiers are on vacation, or out for a smoke, or a variety of other scenarios.
A recent Kherson partisans transmission:

LordBebo on Telegram did a small deep dive on it, uncovering a lot of such deaths:

As for support, ultimately the only true signifier we have are the now-famous election maps showing vote percentages from previous elections which I'm sure everyone has seen by now:



And those spreads stayed roughly the same from all the way back to Kuchma's time. The only interesting thing is that, when presented with these maps, pro-Ukrainians like to show Zelensky's election and how the spread changed drastically, with much of Donbass even voting for him.

But of coursethe alternative was Poroshenko, and Zelensky lied, presenting himself as a uniter of all people. He promised to end the conflict, uphold the Russian language, and various other 'populist' talking points aimed at eastern Ukraine. But as soon as he won he immediately flipped the script.

The other thing you have to consider is that, if and when Russia begins actually approaching those provinces, the anti-Russian segment will presumably flee to western Ukraine/Europe, etc. That means much more of the pro-Russian population will stay and wait for their liberation. That means subsequent referendum votes to join Russia should theoretically privilege all the stay-behinds who are pro-Russian, which would swing those numbers even higher than normal.

Thus I do believe Russia will easily gain a high/favorable referendum percentage in the regions you mentioned, like Nikolayev, Odessa, Kharkov, probably even Sumy, etc.
After all, the percentages for the previous ones were extremely high:
[url=https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F26268422-830d-432e-a5d4-2b6515c03a8d_500x488.webp][/url]

---

On desperation/corruption/motivation:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I'd like to follow up on the previous question in light of Joe Biden's corruption: Can the current U.S. government even afford to withdraw from Ukraine? There must be a lot of incriminating material on Biden on the Ukrainian side. If Biden disappoints the Banderists, they will be able to pass the deals to the U.S. judiciary and the whole Biden family will be busy with trials and jail terms for the rest of their lives. So my question: Can Biden withdraw from Ukraine - even if he wants? And can Biden afford to lose the US elections? Thanks to Biden's corruption, the future for the world as well as the US seems very bleak...

---

That's a good point, and it's one of the reasons I previously wrote how I believe as Ukraine gets closer and closer to teetering on the brink, Zelensky will become increasingly unhinged, threatening to expose his Western backers' dirty secrets as blackmail for continued support in the war.

So it certainly is a very complicated situation where there are clear incentives for both sides. On one hand to stop the clearly disastrous war, which will look more and more disastrous for the sitting administration as the months go on, but on the other hand, the need to continue it so as not to risk exactly what you outlined.
However, the one trump card they have (no pun intended) is by simply getting rid of Zelensky. You see, in recent months many of Ukraine's top leadership has already been purged, guys like Reznikov and others who have potential dirt. Just today another huge purge occurred: the cabinet of ministers fired all 6 defense ministers of the country:
[url=https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F446bdc62-baad-4ed9-831c-defd395de0f0_822x165.png][/url]


The final one that remains is Zelensky himself, and there have been increased talks lately that U.S. may end up axing him by the end of the year. They may not even have to do it "messily" because the presidential elections for Ukraine are early next year. Poroshenko and others have already been building themselves up for a return while U.S. officials have placed pressure on Zelensky to have the elections. Lindsay Graham recently posted a video nearly demanding that Zelensky run the election. This could be the U.S.'s "hedge play" where they may intend to replace him early next year with another more amenable candidate, who perhaps can freeze the conflict without exposing any pesky and unnecessary dirt on anyone.

They may let the offensive run its course enough to build up some bad karma on Zelensky and then threw him under the bus with a campaign of blame, so they can get rid of him if need be, should he signal any 'bad intentions' of the blackmail sort.

As for whether Biden can afford to withdraw from Ukraine for his own political career. Well firstly, I don't believe there's any way Biden can conceivably run for re-election. I believe his people are just putting on a show to give an appearance of virility and strength but in reality, I question whether he'll even finish his term.

So as far as Biden's own administration I don't think it matters, as he's a goner politically anyway. However, the failed Ukraine conflict will still look bad on his administration and anyone who supported it in general, which will give huge ammunition to all opposition figures in blaming them. Thus even whoever the democrats choose to replace Biden will likely "inherit" the tarnished reputation from the Ukrainian conflict.

This means I agree with your view thatrather than Biden himselfthe establishment in general "can't afford" to lose in Ukraine. However, given no choiceif Russia really decisively ups the ante soonthey may have to compromise and try their best at finding a temporary solution in the form of ceasefire that can be sold by loyal media propagandists as a "victory" of some sort.

---

That sounds about right to me. If/when the Democrats finally dump Biden, whoever ascends as the candidate next year (Ted Cruz is speculating it could be pocahontas yesterday on his podcast) will probably want this disposed of quickly, as an inherited anchor around their neck politically.

Europe, under pressure from their U.S. "Allies", scrapped all commercial dealings with Russia.

Meanwhile, according to the US Statistics Service, the U.S. increased purchases of Russian fertiliser to a record $944 million, making Russia their second biggest fertiliser supplier pic.twitter.com/38pNu3kpr2

— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) September 18, 2023

Well well well…

the MSM are starting to admit they lied about Ukraine.

Newsweek admits the highly promoted Ukrainian counter-offensive has produced “no meaningful progress”, and that Western pundits are being untruthful about the war.

Imagine that.https://t.co/rd8xSdLegG

— Clandestine (@WarClandestine) September 19, 2023

Why are “Ukrainian soldiers” in a NYC hospital?

How and when did they get here?

Who is paying for their care?

When are they going back to Ukraine - or are they here for good? https://t.co/EmhsQqxyjp

— Monica Crowley (@MonicaCrowley) September 19, 2023

The Russian army destroyed the warehouse of the Ukrainian army in Lviv with high-precision missiles. pic.twitter.com/XETGjukfMV

— Sprinter (@Sprinter99800) September 19, 2023

I'd read about this missile/incident from very biased sources, interesting to see this covered in the NYT as such now though.

Free to read ... https://t.co/BGJMhmwqZd

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 19, 2023

Simplicius above did have a section on increased lethality/strength of the Russian military, and note below production rate increases:

🇷🇺 The production of “Kinzhal” and “Iskander” missiles has increased.

Bekhan Ozdoev, industrial director of the Rostec:

— production volumes of various types of weapons have increased by two to ten times, and some by tens of times

— production of ammunition for the Pantsir… pic.twitter.com/3X0vPSfLFt

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 19, 2023

Again, if one of the nominal goals in this conflict is to weaken Russian military capabilities, it's been an abject failure, and one whose outcome is only increasingly going the other way now.

No worries, Biden just spoke at the UN and is going to expand the Security Council to focus on among other things "sovereignty" and something new called "territorial integrity". Going to need more billions to accomplish this objective. Though not to diminish the announcement that trillions must be spent in the name of combatting climate change.