US tells Putin to choose confrontation or dialogue over Ukraine

The Western Countries, NATO/EU/US just lost recently in Afghanistan after 20+ years after 20 years of military NATO occupation of Afghanistan fighting Taliban militant groups which gained power quickly.

Now you have an American admin that of Biden admin telling the Russians to either choose confrontation or dialogue over Ukraine? last time i saw Ukraine doesn't belong to EU, NATO nor America.

The only interests that America/NATO have on Ukraine is because closer to Russia.
I dont think the Biden admin or NATO are in a position of strength to confront Russia or anyone what happened in Afghanistan showed it. The Taliban are mocking NATO's defeat.

US tells Putin to choose confrontation or dialogue over Ukraine

The Biden administration insists that sovereign states’ right to apply for Nato membership is not negotiable. Nor are US troop deployments in Europe, administration officials have stressed. They said, however, that Washington would discuss other security guarantees, such as mutual limits on missile deployments and military exercises on the continent. That would fall far short of the comprehensive changes Moscow is demanding.

Nor are US troop deployments in Europe, administration officials have stressed
The US troop deployments in Europe for what? a Military confrontation with Russia? looks like this meeting changes nothing.


NATO created Libya's current turmoil after military intervention/regime.
NATO with western countries failed to defeat Taliban in Afghanistan, back on Eastern Europe.

All this confrontation talk is from a admin that doesn't know when inflation is going to end.
Let alone the wokeness in parts of Western culture's which had being caught at the eyes of both Russia and China.

Russia would be crushed in a conventional war and Putin knows it. His ONLY stick is nuclear and that ruins ALL our days.

That being said, Ukraine has nothing to do with EU/NATO. Likewise is does NOT belong to Russia either.

Sadly after china joe's top military brass to vacate Afghan in less then 60 hours, I believe we have enough top brass to obey orders if it comes down to war with Russia.
Since everything is top top secret concerning Ukraine , we won't know the truth just like wtf were we in Afghan for 20 years and then left the Afghans mostly still living in caves in the countryside. Most Americans have only seen the few improvements that were done in 20 years, but NHK brought in some journalist there and from what I could see is mass starvation, poverty beyond belief, contaminated water supplies, broken down schools and hospitals and people living in tents mostly.

Good luck to Ukraine if the USA gets involved there, going to be another sh$h hole.

a reply to: vNex92

I think this comes down to history and Churchill's policy of appeasement. Nobody wants a strong Russia, except Russia. Sure Europe is willing to take the natural resources that are cheap, but they don't want another war on their back yard (Meaning GB, France, and Germany) Their aim is to force a small skirmish in Ukraine with "Volunteer" forces fighting in Eastern Ukraine, against Russia's "Volunteer" forces fighting in Ukraine in order to spare a greater war which has russia fully mobilizing, and sending troops to the baltics and into Poland. Put simply, if you can bloody Putins nose, the thought is he will back down for having a greater war in Europe. Here is the issue, if it escalates, you can see a greater war as a result, which could see Russia against Europe and the US, and China taking Taiwan, and moving on SE Asia, Mongolia, and into Kashmir. This would open up more land, and resources for China, and since the USA is occupied in Europe, would not be able to bring the full force of America against it. On top of that, this would also cause trade, as well as supply chain issues in the USA, as well as inflation. It is actually a benefit to the USA long term to use this as an excuse to break trade with China, to rebuild the supply network for the USA in the USA. Politically speaking while 100's of 1000's would die in the conflict, the reality is the "vietnam" war model would make the USA stronger in the long run, hence why we would be willing. It would give Europe some show of power, as it would show what its combined military can do, and it would give china the resources as well as the added industry they want, along with a unified China, hence why they want too.

To put it simply, all the parties here see a benefit to a small brief war to show power and dominance to the weaker nations. It solidifies relations between Europe, the US, Australia, Japan, SK, and everyone gets what they want. I can see why everyone is interested in Ukraine then. Not that I agree with it, but it is what it is.

Camain

a reply to: ARM1968

Russia could overrun Ukraine before the US and Western Europe knows what hit them. At that point, I don't think the US has the audacity to even try to push them back out. Especially given the fact that Western Europe is dependent on Russian energy and would balk, big time, at starting a ground conflict with Russia during the winter months.

If Russia did overrun Ukraine, the only option the US would have would be nuclear, and this fool we have now wouldn't surprise me in the least if he did authorize that nuclear option.

a reply to: vNex92

This is a very reasonable ultimatum considering the draft agreements made by Russia mid December, love how our MSM barely reported on them though.

Link to Official Draft - NATO

Give it a read and you'll notice Russia has actively pissed all over some of the things it wishes to demand

The Russian Federation and all the Parties that were member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as of 27 May 1997, respectively, shall not deploy military forces and weaponry on the territory of any of the other States in Europe in addition to the forces stationed on that territory as of 27 May 1997. With the consent of all the Parties such deployments can take place in exceptional cases to eliminate a threat to security of one or more Parties.

Russians weren't in Donbass 1997 (interesting date to refer to) so why are they there now? That said I do fully understand Russia's issue with offensive weaponry being deployed within range of Moscow. Although it's well worth noting that Ukraine is a sovereign nation and NATO historically has an open door policy. Russia has no right to dictate Ukrainian policy or NATO policy.

Link to Official Draft - US

Again Russia has actively pissed all over the things it suggests. It isn't expecting NATO or the US to abide by the things it suggests. Not while they're actively militarizing the Arctic, silencing dissidents, using hired goons on foreign fields or actively testing the metal of foreign defences and response times with nuclear capable weapons platforms... Not to mention it's reckless interceptions that are also historic.

Point being I don't think Russia is being serious, it can't be considering it's referring to old understandings it still actively breaks whilst demanding new understandings it is actively undermining.

And Putin pissed himself laughing as Biden's nurse got the old man ready for bed.

Hilarious.

Russia has been asking for gialogue for some time.

And it has already begun.

More lies and sabre rattling by the corrupt us 🇺🇸

a reply to: musicismagic

Trying to turn a country from a crap hole into not a craphole in under 100 years i s not possible in a country as backward as Ghanistan. Only the cities were fixed,until the pull out .

we are in the fourth turning
everyone knows there is going to be a war with large casualties

its unfortunate that the Ukraine volunteered to be the focal point

although everyone is going to get bloody

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov's interview with the Izvestia newspaper, January 6, 2022

6 January 2022 19:47

Question:

In January, Russian diplomats will have a series of meetings on the dialogue on security guarantees initiated by Moscow: a meeting with the United States in Geneva on January 10, a Russia – NATO Council meeting on January 12 and a meeting with the OSCE, a regional security body, on January 13. Considering this multitude of negotiation platforms, the proposed draft treaties with NATO and the United States and reaction from the countries, what do you think the outcome will be and when can it be achieved?

Sergey Ryabkov:

The outcome and when it will be achieved depend on our counterparts participating in these meetings. I would like to note that we will work on these matters with Alexander Grushko and Alexander Lukashevich. The arrangement is clear. We will hold an initial meeting next week to explain the logic behind our approach and lay down the terms without which a productive process would be out of the question. At this stage, the most important matter for us is to understand our opponents’ stance. So far, we have only heard rather general and abstract commentaries from the United States, NATO and other countries, along the lines of some things are acceptable and are not but dialogue is most important and tt is also important that Russia de-escalates. There are very few rational kernels in this approach due to NATO’s continuous and extremely intense military and geopolitical development of the territories near the Russian border, the deployment of weapons there, the intensification of military exercises and so on, which we have mentioned multiple times. Due to drastic changes in Russia’s security situation, we had to urgently launch this process as instructed by the President. As the President himself has said repeatedly, we expect a rather quick result. However, after the events of next week, it will become clear whether rapid progress is possible and whether there is any chance of pursuing the course that we are primarily interested in.

I am not ready to talk about the scale of priorities right now. First, we need to hear what our opponents have to say in response to the drafts we have literally put on the negotiating table and what our partners have to say. I want to stress that immediately after these drafts were handed over to the Americans, we had a very productive conversation with our CSTO allies and several other countries in Moscow, and we are maintaining this dialogue. This is not a circle of contacts that is closed to our Western counterparts. Not at all. We are fully transparent with our closest allies and partners in various formats. This work will continue as it is an integral part of the corresponding efforts. We are launching this comprehensive process in the next few days.
.....................................

mid.ru...

Imagine Russia having their nukes positioned at America's border, even worse lets imagine that Russia turned the people of Mexico against their government and replaced it with a puppet government in order to place nukes at the border with America.

a reply to: camain

Umm..You mean Chamberlain?

Churchill definitely wasn't appeasing anyone except the bottom of his beer bottle and the poor poor children he intentionally massacred. Off-topic, that man is no better than Hitler himself. At least Hitler liked dogs..

ETA: Churchill was such a drunkard, most of his speeches aren't even him speaking, it's a hired actor because he was always too wasted to be on the microphone.

Just examining Biden's policies for the US, he gives the appearance of being not rational.
I do not pretend to hope that somehow, the Biden Administration can possible act either competent or rational in negotiations with Russia.
Consider his foreign policy decisions on Afghanistan.

I do not see Biden finding any successful way out of any negotiation with anyone
. . . especially since his biggest backing comes from China
and China seems to be aligned with Russia.

a reply to: ARM1968

Russia would be crushed in a conventional war and Putin knows it? how many wars had the west past 20 years now had won a conflict? Libya? Iraq? Afghanistan?

Likewise is does NOT belong to Russia either.
I can see you're history lessons had being paying u badly,

Russia would be crushed in a conventional war and Putin knows

If anyone would be crushed in a conventional war it would be NATO/EU/US. The war mongers who keep pushing this russophobia they know it.

Supporting Jihadist elements in the Eastern Asian countries had shown it.

Ukraine has nothing to do with EU/NA
Is that why than the EU/NA keeps supporting fascist, nationalist groups in Kiev, Ukraine? for years agaisnt the Eastern Ukrainian slavs?



China is aligned with Russia. There is nothing that it would break that star alliance.

originally posted by: ARM1968
Russia would be crushed in a conventional war and Putin knows it. His ONLY stick is nuclear and that ruins ALL our days.

That being said, Ukraine has nothing to do with EU/NATO. Likewise is does NOT belong to Russia either.

Yeah but would the Russians be further from, or closer to, us in the rearview than the Taliban were?

I don't think we have much worth putting on the table anymore when the TALIBAN takes everyone by surprise.

Moscow is a days drive from Kiev. Logistics and resupply for the Russians is greatly facilitated by proximity.

The Washington is 5000 miles - separated by the Atlantic, Mediterranean, and the Black Sea - logistics will be difficult and air superiority is far from being assured.

a reply to: ARM1968

His ONLY stick is nuclear and that ruins ALL our days.

If anyone or any nation that would be willing to star a nuclear warfare that wont be started by China or Russia look at the recent history there mate.

Who has being war mongering agaisnt the Russians for the past five 10 years now? as an enemy? threatening to attack Russian forces in Syria?

Ukraine has nothing to do with the US/EU/NATO the current puppets in Kiev which are Washington puppets they are listening what their handlers US/EU/NATO push for their polices of the country.


As for Russia being crushed in a military conflict. Russia and China had decades of preservation,preparation when it comes to Military. The Obama admin wasn't expect that Assad's Syrian govt would go and get support from the Russians in 2015.


You know far well that Russia would never accpet Syria being turned into another failed state like Libya.

Whatever this Administration is "saying" be wary.

Their track record on "saying" is dismal at best and full of lies and deception 🎻

The stronger the words, the more likely the opposite is reality 😁

a reply to: vNex92

There is a huge difference between total war and police action, everything the US has done since WW2 has been police action. As mentioned previously, police actions can be economically beneficial with "minimal" risk, total war is total war and we're all pretty well screwed.

China keeps their relationship with Russia around as a deterrent to NATO, because as it stands now China needs the support. Give it another couple of decades provided we don't kill ourselves in the meantime and China will kick Russia to the curb.