Ag with kids said:

---

FJB24 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Nothing, at all, in his excerpt which you've gladly latched onto questions what I posted.

Quote:

---

It remains unclear whether the defense industry will be able to mass produce modern or advanced weapon systems or sustain production over the long term

---

Speculations about what will happen in the future, long term, from one sentence of a multi-page analyses, doesn't mean they aren't stronger today. In fact, it is couching an optimistic/overall strengthened analyses with a minor caveat/variable, but as a partisan who only sees things from the Ukrainian Pravda side it is the only bit read/pasted in return.

Please advise what tangential statistical means you have to show Russia is presently "weaker today" than in early 2022. No, total casualty figures don't count (neither Putin nor Zelensky care about their cannon fodder). Misdirection about what an article says or ad Homs won't work, and I'll just ignore it.

---

FWIW, that article doesn't say Russia is stronger today than they were when the war started.

It says that they've essentially stanched the bleeding and are now building back up at a good pace.

---

Well look at the other one though.

Quote:

---

At a news conference, Austin and Gen. CQ Brown, America's top military officer, again detailed Russia's losses. But they added another trend: Russia's recovery.
"Russia has ramped up its production," Austin said. "All of their defense industry really answers directly to the state, so it's easier for them to do that a bit quicker."
Brown put it more simply: "Russia has aggressively reconstituted its military force."
Coming a month apart, the two sets of comments show a distinct change in how the U.S. views Russia's military. While American officials have long detailed the costs of Moscow's invasion for its armed forces and its economy, in the last two months they've started to acknowledge Russia is recovering faster than the U.S. expected.

---

Quote:

---

Still, European and American defense officials, along with experts on the Russian military, told Defense News the Kremlin's force is reconstituting faster than expected. They gave three main reasons why.
The first is the resilience of Moscow's defense industry.
During the war, Russia has almost tripled its defense budget, according to Richard Connolly, an expert on the country's economy at the London-based Royal United Services Institute think tank. Russia is set to spend somewhere between $130 billion and $140 billion on defense in 2024, which is about 6% of gross domestic product and a third of the government's overall budget, Connolly approximated.
But because costs and wages are lower in Russia than in high-income countries, like many in NATO, the Kremlin's defense fund buys much more than it would in the United States. When that conversion is taken into account, Russia's 2024 defense budget falls between $360 billion to $390 billion, Connolly estimated.
The spending trend itself has raised salaries. Working in the defense industry was once a middling career in Russia; it's now lucrative and attracting more workers. Based on official Russian figures, which Connolly noted may be inflated, the number of people working in the defense industry rose 20% during the war, from 2.5 million to about 3 million now.
The funds have also gone toward procuring military hardware. Connolly estimates this share of the defense budget probably doubled during the war, helping Russia replace lost equipment.
Connolly said he doubts the state of Russia's economy will factor into how the war ends. Moscow has a cadre of policy wonks guiding its country through sanctions, he noted, and they have lots of practice doing so. In fact, Putin recently replaced a general at the helm of the Defence Ministry with an economist.

---

There's no reason to think Russia is weaker today than in early 2022. At least, none that have actually been posted/cited here.

---

Again...none of that says Russia is STRONGER. It just says they are building up faster than we expected.

In addition...the numbers being looked at are all supplied by the Russian government, which is known to lie about that kind of stuff...

---

If the numbers are wrong because they are Russian, can you provide the correct numbers? Or should we just believe you?

Its worth noting, certain posters in this thread believed every number Moscow published relative to the Moscova. If you could also indicate when Moscow is to believed, I would appreciate it.

As a lawyer, Putin is sincerely concerned about the legality, and subsequent compliance, of an eventual peace agreement with Ukraine.

As Head of State at war, it is also clear that Putin is not interested in entering into peace talks without having completed denazification.🤠

— Jose Delgado (@Jodega19) May 24, 2024

About right, LOL. I laughed at the initial headline.

Scholz declines to send Tauruses again to Ukraine to prevent escalation. The real war commanders; Hunter declared FJB and Xi in love with each other.

For a country (supposedly) "begging" NK for ammo, I see no indication they are have had enough of Uke.

On the heels of insurmountable US aid Putin is now buckling and ready for a ceasefire along current lines. This is my shocked face.

Teslag said:

---

On the heels of insurmountable US aid Putin is now buckling and ready for a ceasefire along current lines. This is my shocked face.

---

Did you not listen to what he said, literally today?

I cannot see what you post to me as you remain blocked

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-wants-ukraine-ceasefire-current-frontlines-sources-say-2024-05-24/

Looks like we can put that "Russia can and will fight for as long as he wants with unlimited bodies" narrative to bed.

Quote:

---

Three sources said Putin understood any dramatic new advances would require another nationwide mobilisation, which he didn't want, with one source, who knows the Russian president, saying his popularity dipped after the first mobilisation in September 2022.

The national call up spooked part of the population in Russia, triggering hundreds of thousands of draft age men to leave the country. Polls showed Putin's popularity falling by several points.

---

This is how you says "With US Aid and our inability to mount offensive we have peaked in Ukraine"

Quote:

---

Based on their knowledge of conversations in the upper ranks of the Kremlin, two of the sources said Putin was of the view that gains in the war so far were enough to sell a victory to the Russian people.

---

Teslag said:

---

I cannot see what you post to me as you remain blocked

---

There's never been a better example of the willful ignorance of the Ukrainian position, in my opinion.

To the reader, I strongly encourage you to contrast what Putin said today with what media and posters claim he said.

I am asking a legitimate question. Why did cancel election? This seems strange. We wouldn't cancel an election during a war

Teslag said:

---

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-wants-ukraine-ceasefire-current-frontlines-sources-say-2024-05-24/

Looks like we can put that "Russia can and will fight for as long as he wants with unlimited bodies" narrative to bed.

Quote:

---

Three sources said Putin understood any dramatic new advances would require another nationwide mobilisation, which he didn't want, with one source, who knows the Russian president, saying his popularity dipped after the first mobilisation in September 2022.

The national call up spooked part of the population in Russia, triggering hundreds of thousands of draft age men to leave the country. Polls showed Putin's popularity falling by several points.

---

This is how you says "With US Aid and our inability to mount offensive we have peaked in Ukraine"

Quote:

---

Based on their knowledge of conversations in the upper ranks of the Kremlin, two of the sources said Putin was of the view that gains in the war so far were enough to sell a victory to the Russian people.

---

---

Putin just blinked first, period. When this all started I wouldn't have believed he'd be the first one to blink. Then again, I wouldn't have imagined him making himself Xi's little beech either.

He's very unpopular in even the remaining parts of Ukraine (Russians now having the more Russian parts). I think I posted an article from Le Monde of all places noting his rising unpopularity in the past few days. There's no freedom of press or speech in Ukraine so most information is suppressed, but even in places like Venezuela or Cuba faux elections are held, so the outright cancellation of any future elections are pretty damning, imho.

Keep in mind he was elected on the platform of peace/ending the 'wars' with Russia, and anti-corruption.

Your Lemond article that you referenced…

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/05/23/volodymyr-zelensky-a-president-with-no-term-end_6672475_4.html#:~:text=Still%2C%20while%20the%20president%20enjoyed,the%20war%20has%20gone%20on.

Most Ukrainians don't want an election

Quote:

---

According to various polling organizations, most Ukrainians consider it impossible to hold an election because of the state of war

---

Zelensky remains popular despite some that say hes "very unpopular".

Quote:

---

A sociological survey published in early April by Razumkov, a Kyiv think tank, showed that 58.6% of Ukrainians trust their president. "There's less emotion and a more rational attitude towards him as head of state," Fessenko explained.

---

Always read a Nortex link…

backintexas2013 said:

---

I am asking a legitimate question. Why did cancel election? This seems strange. We wouldn't cancel an election during a war

---

The non-Russian propaganda answer to this (aka the actual reasons) are that 1. Millions of Ukrainian citizens have fled the country due to Putin's invasion, meaning it would be impossible for them to get an accurate vote. 2. Gathering large groups of people during a time where your neighbor has shown repeatedly that they have no problem bombing civilians is a pretty terrible idea.

I have no idea what we'd do in that situation but since we are never going to be outnumbered the way Ukraine is there's not really a comparison.

Thanks. So he will remain in power until this ends. We will keep sending money including cash to prop them up. Sounds like a no win for anyone.

No Spin Ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-wants-ukraine-ceasefire-current-frontlines-sources-say-2024-05-24/

Looks like we can put that "Russia can and will fight for as long as he wants with unlimited bodies" narrative to bed.

Quote:

---

Three sources said Putin understood any dramatic new advances would require another nationwide mobilisation, which he didn't want, with one source, who knows the Russian president, saying his popularity dipped after the first mobilisation in September 2022.

The national call up spooked part of the population in Russia, triggering hundreds of thousands of draft age men to leave the country. Polls showed Putin's popularity falling by several points.

---

This is how you says "With US Aid and our inability to mount offensive we have peaked in Ukraine"

Quote:

---

Based on their knowledge of conversations in the upper ranks of the Kremlin, two of the sources said Putin was of the view that gains in the war so far were enough to sell a victory to the Russian people.

---

---

Putin just blinked first, period. When this all started I wouldn't have believed he'd be the first one to blink. Then again, I wouldn't have imagined him making himself Xi's little beech either.

---

Yep. But in all fairness to Putin he had no choice but to blink once the US approved aid. He knew his only shot was incite enough backlash here to prevent it and it failed. Putin may be a failed military leader and buffoon when it comes to his vision for Russia but he's not completely stupid.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Thanks. So he will remain in power until this ends. We will keep sending money including cash to prop them up. Sounds like a no win for anyone.

---

See the actual link and quotes I posted. Zelensky remains popular in Ukraine and the people don't even want elections during war.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Thanks. So he will remain in power until this ends. We will keep sending money including cash to prop them up. Sounds like a no win for anyone.

---

Who is in charge in Ukraine has no bearing on how long this lasts. It ends when Putin decides to give up, which it sounds like we may be getting closer to, or when Russia takes over the whole country, which seems unlikely.

The truth is they don't want the refugee Ukrainians to be allowed to vote, as many of them have fled conscription and are angry. Even members of parliament have to be in good standing to be allowed to travel abroad. That…kinda tells you what they think of freedom in Kiev these days, let alone elected officials/travel.

Quote:

---

On the domestic front, the national unity that prevailed in the early days of the invasion has also been cracked by the return of opposition criticism. Some members of parliament are no longer shy about speaking of an "authoritarian" drift when they refer to the concentration of power in the presidential office.

Consensus on the absence of an election

According to Haran, this practice, which dates back to before the war, has reduced the responsibilities of the government and parliament. "I don't think we'll be able to improve this situation because Zelensky has immense trust in his inner circle," he said. "The European Union and Ukrainian civil society are there to bring pressure to bear if need be."

Another source of contention concerns travel permits for members of parliament. For just over a year now, MPs of all political persuasions have had to apply to parliamentary president Ruslan Stefanchuk, a member of the presidential Servant of the People party, to secure a green light to leave the country. This measure was taken in response to the controversy sparked by MPs taking advantage of business trips to go on vacation. The opposition sees it as a tool of "political pressure" aimed in part at limiting MPs' contacts with Western allies.

---

I didn't say anything about your link. I said he stays is power which seems like a fact. Not sure what you are babbling about but not shocked you read in that I believed he was unpopular. I never ever said anything about popularity or not. Not sure if you are the husband or wife posting so will refrain from commenting more.

backintexas2013 said:

---

I didn't say anything about your link. I said he stays is power which seems like a fact. Not sure what you are babbling about but not shocked you read in that I believed he was unpopular. I never ever said anything about popularity or not. Not sure if you are the husband or wife posting so will refrain from commenting more.

---

You didnt say he was unpopular, Nortex did despite his very own source saying otherwise

Welll ma'am or sir then why did you reply to me with your statement? Seems like you bringing in an argument I didn't make. Maybe you switched users and that's why that happened.

Just making sure you knew he was actually popular in Ukraine and that the Ukrainians didn't want elections.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

FJB24 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Nothing, at all, in his excerpt which you've gladly latched onto questions what I posted.

Quote:

---

It remains unclear whether the defense industry will be able to mass produce modern or advanced weapon systems or sustain production over the long term

---

Speculations about what will happen in the future, long term, from one sentence of a multi-page analyses, doesn't mean they aren't stronger today. In fact, it is couching an optimistic/overall strengthened analyses with a minor caveat/variable, but as a partisan who only sees things from the Ukrainian Pravda side it is the only bit read/pasted in return.

Please advise what tangential statistical means you have to show Russia is presently "weaker today" than in early 2022. No, total casualty figures don't count (neither Putin nor Zelensky care about their cannon fodder). Misdirection about what an article says or ad Homs won't work, and I'll just ignore it.

---

FWIW, that article doesn't say Russia is stronger today than they were when the war started.

It says that they've essentially stanched the bleeding and are now building back up at a good pace.

---

Well look at the other one though.

Quote:

---

At a news conference, Austin and Gen. CQ Brown, America's top military officer, again detailed Russia's losses. But they added another trend: Russia's recovery.
"Russia has ramped up its production," Austin said. "All of their defense industry really answers directly to the state, so it's easier for them to do that a bit quicker."
Brown put it more simply: "Russia has aggressively reconstituted its military force."
Coming a month apart, the two sets of comments show a distinct change in how the U.S. views Russia's military. While American officials have long detailed the costs of Moscow's invasion for its armed forces and its economy, in the last two months they've started to acknowledge Russia is recovering faster than the U.S. expected.

---

Quote:

---

Still, European and American defense officials, along with experts on the Russian military, told Defense News the Kremlin's force is reconstituting faster than expected. They gave three main reasons why.
The first is the resilience of Moscow's defense industry.
During the war, Russia has almost tripled its defense budget, according to Richard Connolly, an expert on the country's economy at the London-based Royal United Services Institute think tank. Russia is set to spend somewhere between $130 billion and $140 billion on defense in 2024, which is about 6% of gross domestic product and a third of the government's overall budget, Connolly approximated.
But because costs and wages are lower in Russia than in high-income countries, like many in NATO, the Kremlin's defense fund buys much more than it would in the United States. When that conversion is taken into account, Russia's 2024 defense budget falls between $360 billion to $390 billion, Connolly estimated.
The spending trend itself has raised salaries. Working in the defense industry was once a middling career in Russia; it's now lucrative and attracting more workers. Based on official Russian figures, which Connolly noted may be inflated, the number of people working in the defense industry rose 20% during the war, from 2.5 million to about 3 million now.
The funds have also gone toward procuring military hardware. Connolly estimates this share of the defense budget probably doubled during the war, helping Russia replace lost equipment.
Connolly said he doubts the state of Russia's economy will factor into how the war ends. Moscow has a cadre of policy wonks guiding its country through sanctions, he noted, and they have lots of practice doing so. In fact, Putin recently replaced a general at the helm of the Defence Ministry with an economist.

---

There's no reason to think Russia is weaker today than in early 2022. At least, none that have actually been posted/cited here.

---

Again...none of that says Russia is STRONGER. It just says they are building up faster than we expected.

In addition...the numbers being looked at are all supplied by the Russian government, which is known to lie about that kind of stuff...

---

If the numbers are wrong because they are Russian, can you provide the correct numbers? Or should we just believe you?

Its worth noting, certain posters in this thread believed every number Moscow published relative to the Moscova. If you could also indicate when Moscow is to believed, I would appreciate it.

---

Do whatever you want. You've believed the Russians this whole time, I see no reason for you to stop.

However, I don't necessarily buy their numbers. It's known that they purposely put out disinformation.

And, you're still hung up on that "flagship" issue? Ok.

But, nothing you said address my MAIN point of the post:

Quote:

---

Again...none of that says Russia is STRONGER. It just says they are building up faster than we expected.

---

I think it's safe to say the only reason tyrants don't hold elections is because/when they don't have a means to safely fix them. Even NPR has noted his loss of approval/popularity.

There's a reason he fired then excommunicated his main plausible rival in a theoretical election to the UK/MI6.

nortex97 said:

---

The truth is they don't want the refugee Ukrainians to be allowed to vote, as many of them have fled conscription and are angry. Even members of parliament have to be in good standing to be allowed to travel abroad. That…kinda tells you what they think of freedom in Kiev these days, let alone elected officials/travel.

Quote:

---

On the domestic front, the national unity that prevailed in the early days of the invasion has also been cracked by the return of opposition criticism. Some members of parliament are no longer shy about speaking of an "authoritarian" drift when they refer to the concentration of power in the presidential office.

Consensus on the absence of an election

According to Haran, this practice, which dates back to before the war, has reduced the responsibilities of the government and parliament. "I don't think we'll be able to improve this situation because Zelensky has immense trust in his inner circle," he said. "The European Union and Ukrainian civil society are there to bring pressure to bear if need be."

Another source of contention concerns travel permits for members of parliament. For just over a year now, MPs of all political persuasions have had to apply to parliamentary president Ruslan Stefanchuk, a member of the presidential Servant of the People party, to secure a green light to leave the country. This measure was taken in response to the controversy sparked by MPs taking advantage of business trips to go on vacation. The opposition sees it as a tool of "political pressure" aimed in part at limiting MPs' contacts with Western allies.

---

---

And absolutely of them would have fled or would have to worry about conscription had Putin not decided to invade.

You also forgot to include another part of the article:

Quote:

---

According to various polling organizations, most Ukrainians consider it impossible to hold an election because of the state of war, while several hundred thousand are serving in the army and millions more are refugees elsewhere in the world. "We're unable to conduct real competitive elections while the entire country is being bombed."

---

nortex97 said:

---

I think it's safe to say the only reason tyrants don't hold elections is because/when they don't have a means to safely fix them. Even NPR has noted his loss of approval/popularity.

There's a reason he fired then excommunicated his main plausible rival in a theoretical election to the UK/MI6.

---

When you click Nortex' NPR link above the entire text you get is below…

Quote:

---

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy's approval rating soared to a high of 90% after Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022. As the war drags on, his popularity has waned.

---

That's it. That's the entire article. Didn't say unpopular. Just "waned".

Again, always read the links.

Teslag said:

---

Your Lemond article that you referenced…

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/05/23/volodymyr-zelensky-a-president-with-no-term-end_6672475_4.html#:~:text=Still%2C%20while%20the%20president%20enjoyed,the%20war%20has%20gone%20on.

Most Ukrainians don't want an election

Quote:

---

According to various polling organizations, most Ukrainians consider it impossible to hold an election because of the state of war

---

Zelensky remains popular despite some that say hes "very unpopular".

Quote:

---

A sociological survey published in early April by Razumkov, a Kyiv think tank, showed that 58.6% of Ukrainians trust their president. "There's less emotion and a more rational attitude towards him as head of state," Fessenko explained.

---

Always read a Nortex link…

---

If they held an election, would they include the Russian occupied parts of Ukraine or not? (kinda like the south didn't get a vote in 1864)

If they don't include them, will it be considered an illegitimate election because they excluded part of the country that Ukraine is still claiming is part of their country?

How would Ukraine hold an election in those Russian occupied parts of Ukraine?

If they DIDN'T include them, would that be seen as an acknowledgement that they've ceded those parts to Russia?

Would Putin use the exclusion of those parts as yet another excuse to claim that Zelensky was illegitimate?

An election right now is not a cut and dried subject...

5 day old BBC article

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn007p39zdzo.amp

Quote:

---

After a high of 90% following the full-scale invasion, today around 65% of Ukrainians still trust President Zelensky to guide them through these times.

---

We can put this one to bed I think.

Erik Prince Tucker Carson interview is worthwhile perusing. Fiddling while Rome burns.

Quote:

---

TUCKER CARLSON: So, yeah, I mean, he's a child, obviously. And like an angry destructive child. But what happens? Like, where does this go? We send another $60 billion to Ukraine.

ERIK PRINCE: Most of that money goes to five major U.S. defense contractors to replace at five times the cost, what the weapons cost that we already sent the Ukrainians. Meaning, you know, if we send them something that was built 10 years ago, well, now it's gonna cost four and five times as much. So, again, it's a massive grift paid by a Pentagon that doesn't know how to buy stuff cost-effectively. It doesn't change the outcome of the battle.

As the fields dry, it's May now, coming up on tank season. Weather still matters in warfare. If you have a wet, snow-covered farm field, it's very muddy, very gooey. Not great for tanks, mud season, I think the Russians call it the great slush. That's done now.

As June comes, it'll be game on and I think the Russian bear is hungry, and they're gonna have a time. So the war should have been ended. It never should have started. They should have made a deal, and froze the lines six months into it. But the Biden administration believed that all this American weaponry would have saved the day.

It hasn't. And it's ugly. And you know, the Russian commanders are not idiots. They know their history. The Battle of Kursk, which happened just North of where the fighting is now was the largest tank battle in history. It was the last offensive effort of the German army against the Soviets. They tried to push from the north and south on this salient. It was a bulge and the Russians knew they were coming. So they built lots of lines of defenses. It's the same thing they've done now, that they did last summer, which ate up all that equipment.

And now the Ukrainians are very thin. They've had a lot of corruption issues. All the defenses that were supposed to be built by the Ukrainians are much smaller or non-existent. So now it's allowing maneuver and especially as the tanks, as the fields dry and you can maneuver, it's gonna be a very ugly summer.

TUCKER CARLSON: What do you think the Russians want?

ERIK PRINCE: I'd say now they want to absolutely humiliate the West and make sure that they never have a problem with Ukraine again.

---

More at the link, as they say. And it's not just the Russians; the CCP partners clearly intend the same outcome.

Now that it's armor season, we should see a lot of 50-70 year old armor rolling across Ukraine blitzkrieg style

nortex97 said:

---

Erik Prince Tucker Carson interview is worthwhile perusing. Fiddling while Rome burns.

Quote:

---

TUCKER CARLSON: So, yeah, I mean, he's a child, obviously. And like an angry destructive child. But what happens? Like, where does this go? We send another $60 billion to Ukraine.

ERIK PRINCE: Most of that money goes to five major U.S. defense contractors to replace at five times the cost, what the weapons cost that we already sent the Ukrainians. Meaning, you know, if we send them something that was built 10 years ago, well, now it's gonna cost four and five times as much. So, again, it's a massive grift paid by a Pentagon that doesn't know how to buy stuff cost-effectively. It doesn't change the outcome of the battle.

As the fields dry, it's May now, coming up on tank season. Weather still matters in warfare. If you have a wet, snow-covered farm field, it's very muddy, very gooey. Not great for tanks, mud season, I think the Russians call it the great slush. That's done now.

As June comes, it'll be game on and I think the Russian bear is hungry, and they're gonna have a time. So the war should have been ended. It never should have started. They should have made a deal, and froze the lines six months into it. But the Biden administration believed that all this American weaponry would have saved the day.

It hasn't. And it's ugly. And you know, the Russian commanders are not idiots. They know their history. The Battle of Kursk, which happened just North of where the fighting is now was the largest tank battle in history. It was the last offensive effort of the German army against the Soviets. They tried to push from the north and south on this salient. It was a bulge and the Russians knew they were coming. So they built lots of lines of defenses. It's the same thing they've done now, that they did last summer, which ate up all that equipment.

And now the Ukrainians are very thin. They've had a lot of corruption issues. All the defenses that were supposed to be built by the Ukrainians are much smaller or non-existent. So now it's allowing maneuver and especially as the tanks, as the fields dry and you can maneuver, it's gonna be a very ugly summer.

TUCKER CARLSON: What do you think the Russians want?

ERIK PRINCE: I'd say now they want to absolutely humiliate the West and make sure that they never have a problem with Ukraine again.

---

More at the link, as they say. And it's not just the Russians; the CCP partners clearly intend the same outcome.

---

What the Russians WANT and what they can DO are two completely separate things...

Please don't quote a whole post, it makes the thread difficult to read (and I almost never edit a post unless an embed error etc). Just a request, thx.

What your analysis yet again misses is that the CCP is the proxy in charge here, on both sides, Xiden and Putin.
What they want, they get…for now.

Quote:

---

And you know, the Russian commanders are not idiots.

---

Except that Russian commanders have shown over two years that they are in fact idiots. The battle of Kursk happened 80 years ago.

GAC06 said:

---

Now that it's armor season, we should see a lot of 50-70 year old armor rolling across Ukraine blitzkrieg style

---

By August Eric Prince's analysis will have been hand waved away. Just like the "weeks maybe" prediction.

nortex97 said:

---

Please don't quote a whole post, it makes the thread difficult to read (and I almost never edit a post unless an embed error etc). Just a request, thx.

What your analysis yet again misses is that the CCP is the proxy in charge here, on both sides, Xiden and Putin.
What they want, they get…for now.

---

Oh yes, the "China, Russia, and the US" are colluding to fight in Ukraine trope resurfaces