Invasion of Ukraine • Page 167

What Putin didn't deny was that they had been sent to Russia. Ukraine, as Putin points out in your quote, has huge amounts of support from NATO on the ground in Ukraine. Until they are deployed, which there is no evidence, DPRK troops being in Russia is no more an escalation than NATO contractors and advisors swarming Ukraine, almost certainly in greater numbers

 

Right, unlike the US, which really cares about Ukrainians

 

lmfaooooooo come on guys https://fotoforensics.com/

 

So you do agree then that they are at least training in Russia. Does that mean they still likely won't be sent to the front? That wouldn't make sense for them to be in Russia then. Plus, highly unlikely North Korea has the right kit that Russia wants their soldiers to have out in the field, and I would assume Russian command would want uniforms to be relatively in line with what Russian troops are wearing, so its less likely most would be kitted out with strictly North Korean gear. Most foreign volunteers fighting for Ukraine follow the same idea.

 

I was much more interested in the reply to that tweet than the original tweet, I have no idea what uniforms they would be wearing. The photo is old and fake is my point. But you make a good point - there have been about 20,000 foreign fighters in Ukraine. What an escalation!

 

I do think though that the decision to allow strikes into Russia is actually more down to Trump winning the election, that Trump might press for terms less favorable to Ukraine in future negotiations in the near-term, so decided to allow these strikes to lessen the chances of these negotiations succeeding after Trump takes office. This North Korean troop thing has been in the news for a few months now, so because of the timing of this announcement I think its more likely in response to Trump becoming president again, and less a response to NK troops being sent. Key will be how many more ATACMS and SCALP/Storm Shadows the US/UK/France sends in the next few months, and if any restrictions are placed on where they can point them.

 

I do agree with that, which is even more psychopathic! They are using foreign soldiers being in Russia as a fake justification for sending NATO missile operators to Ukraine, which is an actual escalation

 

Biden meeting with Xi could also have been an influence. Xi isn’t for nukes at all, regardless of Russia’s status with the war. Depending on what Biden and Xi spoke about, Biden could have felt confident that Xi would keep Putin at bay. Putin cannot afford to lose China.

 

This could also be a reason; looks like Biden last formally spoke with Xi back in April of this year, but I'm sure there's been plenty of back-channel talks between the two since (or at least between each defense minister), and Biden likely got assurances from Xi that China will put pressure on Putin to refrain from major moves/responses (which led to this ATACMS news; they've probably had the decision ready for months, but wanted some cover for it). Like you say, China is the only major friend Putin has, so he likely needs to keep them happy to keep their support. We'll never know for sure of course.

 

You shared an article from the Atlantic Council, a pro-West, Atlanticist organisation which used info from Radiofree Europe, which is funded by the American government and headquartered in Washington, DC. You would have to be a profoundly stupid person to take anything published by such groups with anything more than a pinch of salt. I know that you love your American propaganda though.

 

I also posted an article from The Moscow Times. It is from a treaty draft that was collected by RFE/RL's Russian investigative unit Systema. Here is the original report.
Нейтрализация вместо нейтралитета. Как менялись "цели СВО"

The report above (earlier this month) just so happens to align with a full 17-page document, which was viewed by The Wall Street Journal and others familiar with the negotiations back in April.

https://www.msn.com/en-za/news/worl...putin-s-punishing-terms-for-peace/ar-BB1j9bgO

Better tighten that tinfoil hat.

 

the moscow times article has no original reporting it’s just reiterating the Systema (CIA) report lol

 

Radio Free Europe would NEVER fabricate a document

 

You accused me of being like MAGA because I was skeptical of Pro-Western warmongering outlets repeating Pro-Western warmongering talking points. You too, are ideologically driven. You’re just so doped up on American propaganda you’re blind to it.

 

Yeahhhhhhh, if you could just show me that TPS report supporting that these reports are false that would be greaaat.

 

Wait what is the evidence that Russia was proposing a peace deal that didn't include secession of land and basically handing control of their economy over to Russia? I've seen reports of a reported peace deal that Johnson scuttled (though I've also read the Buccha massacare stuff interfered with those talks as well), but I don't remember the details being explicit/proven?

 

I’d like to see this evidence as well. I’m sure we’ll see it any minute now.

 

Ballet star Vladimir Shklyarov who criticised Putin’s Ukraine invasion dies in fall from... - LBC

 

negotiators on both sides sought to end the fighting by agreeing to turn Ukraine into a “permanently neutral state that doesn’t participate in military blocs,” bar the country from rebuilding its military with Western support and leave Crimea under de facto Russian control.


My god how could those...negotiators on both sides propose this!

 

Putin as Nicholas II is way more fun and interesting than Putler

 

North Korea may send 100,000 troops to Russia as Kim tells them to ‘go all out’

 

"Today, we are quite ready to destroy the entire nuclear potential of England and France with a single strike. This will be one of the options for deterring the United States from striking Russia," the former tank commander added.

United States will disappear, Russian lawmaker threatens on live TV

 

https://jamestown.org/program/russias-fiscal-dependence-on-china-grows/