From spy to president: The rise of Vladimir Putin

Salaam

Another update

A Classic Clown World Caper

Whenever anything is fake, gay, and beyond retarded, you know Clown World must be involved somehow. These “peace talks” in Jeddah make the endless, pointless Israeli-Palestinian peace talks look substantive and meaningful by comparison.

Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman hosted a summit of 42 nations over the weekend to draft principles for the end of Putin’s War in Ukraine. Russia was not invited to the talks, but China and the remainder of the BRICS group sent delegations. The talks concluded with a statement of principles, and the group agreed to meet again in the next few weeks and that Russia would be excluded from the process.

Ukraine Peace Talks Move Forward With China Present and Russia Excluded, RED STATE, 7 August 2023

This is as if Germany, Italy, Romania, Norway, Finland, and Japan had met at Yalta to discuss the terms for the end of World War II. Personally, I suspect China only attended because none of the Standing Committee could believe that it was real and they wanted to read the transcripts just for the comedy.

Foreign Minister: Now we should discuss the matter of this invitation from the Saudis to the peace talks.

Prime Minister: What do our friends in Moscow say?

Foreign Minister: The Russians are not invited.

Security Minister: Is Lukashenko representing the Union State, then?

Foreign Minister: Belarus isn’t invited either.

Political Minister: So who is offering the terms?

Foreign Minister: Apparently Zelensky, by the looks of them.

Prime Minister: And they’re offering these terms to Russia?

Foreign Minister: Yes.

Prime Minister: To the side that is actually winning the war?

Foreign Minister: Yes.

Prime Minister: And they delusional?

Economics Minister: Jane Yellen’s proposals were less hallucinatory than this and she was on ‘shrooms.

Foreign Minister: So we’re not sending anyone?

Prime Minister: Are you kidding? Tell Li Hui to make sure he gets this on video! It will be even funnier than that time Chen sent a pair of Brazilian trannies to Hunter Biden’s hotel room and he was too cracked out to notice.

Foreign Minister: Right. And we’ll release the usual statement afterwards, of course.

Foreign Ministry Spokesperson’s Remarks on China Attending the Meeting in Jeddah on Ukraine

The Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs had extensive contact and exchanges with participating parties, made clear China’s position and propositions, listened to the opinions and advice from various parties, and worked for more common understandings on the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. China’s positive role in promoting talks for peace was fully recognized. China will continue to act in the spirit of the four principles, joint efforts in four areas and three observations proposed by President Xi Jinping, work on the basis of the document of China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis, enhance dialogue and communication with all parties, and contribute to the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis.

I’ll admit it, the diplomatic statement made me laugh. While it may not initially strike the average reader as amusing, it is if you happen to have made a regular habit of reading Chinese diplomatic responses. By changing just a few words, it could easily pass for the Foreign Ministry Spokesperson’s Remarks on the Situation in Niger, the Foreign Ministry Spokesperson’s Remarks on Media Reports that Italy Is Considering Not Renewing the Belt and Road Cooperation Document, or the Foreign Ministry Spokesperson’s Remarks on the Breaking of a Window of the Chinese Embassy in Odessa That May Have Been Caused by a Russian Hypersonic Missile or Perhaps by a Careless Romanian Cleaning Lady Who is Known to Drink Țuică While She Works.

I don’t know what the eventual terms will be when the Kiev regime finally admits the obvious and surrenders while there is still the possibility of an independent Ukrainian state and before the land is entirely divided up between Russia, Belarus, Poland, Hungary, Moldova, Romania, and Slovakia. But I’m confident they won’t very closely resemble the terms now being proposed in Jeddah.

https://voxday.net/2023/08/08/a-clas...n-world-caper/

Salaam

Another update.

Nato official apologises over suggestion Ukraine could give up land for membership

Secretary general’s chief of staff says statement was ‘mistake’ and part of wider discussion – but does not completely rule out idea

A senior Nato official has apologised and clarified his comments a day after he said publicly that Ukraine could give up territory to Russia in exchange for Nato membership and an end to the war.

Stian Jenssen, the chief of staff to the Nato secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, told a Norwegian newspaper that he should not have spoken as simplistically as he did, after his initial comments prompted an angry reaction from Kyiv.

At a panel event in Norway on Tuesday, Jenssen had said that while any peace deal reached would have to be acceptable to Ukraine, alliance members were discussing how the 18-month war might be brought to an end.

“I think that a solution could be for Ukraine to give up territory and get Nato membership in return,” Jenssen told his audience, noting that discussions about Ukraine’s postwar status were continuing in diplomatic circles.

A day later, he gave an interview to the same newspaper, VG, that had reported on his original comments. “My statement about this was part of a larger discussion about possible future scenarios in Ukraine, and I shouldn’t have said it that way. It was a mistake,” he said.

But Jenssen did not walk back the idea that a land-for-Nato-membership deal could ultimately be on the table. If there were serious peace negotiations then the military situation at the time, including who controls what territory, “will necessarily have a decisive influence,” the chief of staff said.

“Precisely for this reason, it is crucially important that we support the Ukrainians with what they need,” the official continued as he sought to emphasise that Nato members remained behind Ukraine.

Ukraine has consistently called for a restoration of its internationally recognised pre-2014 borders and is engaged in a counteroffensive in an attempt to recapture large parts of its territory seized by Russia.

Jenssen was careful in his initial comments to stress that he was simply airing an idea and that “it must be up to Ukraine to decide when and on what terms they want to negotiate”, reflecting Nato’s position that no peace settlement with Ukraine should be agreed without Ukraine.

But this was not enough for Kyiv, unhappy that Jenssen, an important figure and close ally of Stoltenberg, was even discussing the proposition in public.

Kyiv said any land-for-Nato deal would reward Russian aggression. Mykhailo Podolyak, a senior adviser to Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, said: “Trading territory for a Nato umbrella? It is ridiculous. That means deliberately choosing the defeat of democracy, encouraging a global criminal, preserving the Russian regime, destroying international law and passing the war on to other generations.”

Podolyak said that unless Russia took a heavy loss in the war, it would continue to pose a long-term problem for the west. “If Putin does not suffer a crushing defeat, the political regime in Russia does not change and war criminals are not punished, the war will definitely return with Russia’s appetite for more.”

Ukraine’s position is being tested by the slow progress of its counteroffensive, which began in June. Although Kyiv has received donations of western tanks and long-range rockets and artillery, its forces have so far made only limited territorial gains against heavily defended Russia positions.

Nato put out a clarifying statement on Tuesday night aimed at cooling the Jenssen row. “We will continue to support Ukraine as long as necessary, and we are committed to achieving a just and lasting peace. The position of the alliance is clear and has not changed,” a spokesperson said.

Discussions about how peace might be achieved are unlikely to subside, particularly given the relative deadlock on the battlefield. “I’m not saying it has to be like this. But that could be a possible solution,” Jenssen said on Tuesday.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...for-membership

Russia will not tolerate NATO next door. Ukraine cannot join NATO while at war so the Russians will just keep the war going until the Ukrainians surrender. What do those Jewish leaders want in Ukraine? Another Masada type outcome perhaps?
The USA could not even conquer little Vietnam so how can they beat Russia? Nukes are out of the question. It is a "war crime" those Zionists are sending Ukrainians to their deaths.

is this a bio of putin?

When Najmudin Gotsinskiy recommended English military support to use against bolsheviks, sheikh Uzun Hadji said: "There is no difference between a white pig and a black pig"

1919–1920 North Caucasian Emirate


Just a short reminder. Don't let disbelievers fool you with their sick propaganda, unfortunately many so-named Muslims take pro-Russian side.. both Russian and Ukraine are the same

Salaam

Another update

Ukraine in the Bunker

Despite the obvious and observable fact that a negotiated surrender is the best remaining option for the defeated Ukro-NATO alliance, any talk of surrender is strictly verboten.

German officials are eager for a negotiated solution and are talking about how Russia might be brought to the negotiating table, but are only doing so in private and with trusted think tank specialists, several of them said. But the officials also understand that they can’t push Ukraine in any way, because they don’t want Russia to smell weakness.

Still, there is a desire in Berlin as in Washington that the war not continue indefinitely, in part because political willingness for indefinite military and financial support for Ukraine is already beginning to wane, especially among those on the right and far right, who are gaining ground.

But for many others, the suggestion of a negotiated solution or a Plan B is too early and even immoral, said Constanze Stelzenmüller of the Brookings Institution. Mr. Putin has shown no interest in talking, but the younger generation of officials around him are, if anything, even harder-line, she said, citing a piece in Foreign Affairs by Tatiana Stanovaya.

“So anyone who wants to articulate a Plan B with these people on the other side is facing a significant burden of proof question,” she said. “Putin has said a lot of times he won’t negotiate except on his own terms, which are Ukraine’s obliteration. There is no lack of clarity there.”

Any credible Plan B would have to come from the key non-Western powers — like China, India, South Africa and Indonesia — that Russia is depending upon telling Moscow it must negotiate.

“These are the countries Putin is betting on,” she said. “It’s nothing we can say or do or offer.”

Eagerness from Paris or Berlin to negotiate too early will simply embolden Mr. Putin to manipulate that zeal, divide the West and seek concessions from Ukraine, said Ulrich Speck, a German analyst.

“Moving to diplomacy is both our strength and weakness,” he said. “We’re great at compromise and coalition, but that requires basic agreement on norms and goals. The shock of Ukraine is that this simply doesn’t exist on the other side.”

It’s always a shock to those who bluff when they deal with an opponent who is not bluffing. The Russians have made it very clear why they believe the USA to be “agreement-incapable”, which is based on the fact that the USA has reliably failed to honor its past agreements with Russia. I tend to doubt it even makes any sense for Russia to agree to a negotiated surrender, because all that will do is give NATO time to recuperate and rearm, just as it did after the Minsk agreements.

Since the neoclowns who are driving the war effort are so desperate to pivot to China, which unlike Russia is an existential threat to their influence, it’s probably in Russia’s strategic interests to refuse any negotiated surrender and hold to its objectives of freeing the nations of Europe from their subordination to US financial and military hegemony.

But Putin is fundamentally a moderate, so it wouldn’t be surprising if he would accept surrender in Ukraine in lieu of surrender in Europe, and leave the larger task to his more hardline successors.

https://voxday.net/2023/09/02/ukraine-in-the-bunker/




Ukraine Endgame

As US supports pivots to the Middle Eastern front, Russian strategists are already contemplating what comes after the surrender of Ukraine, the fall of the Kiev regime, and the end of the Special Military Operation in Novorossiya.

Immediately after the end of the Special Military Operation, the West will not be able to fight with us. It does not have a trained army, it will not accumulate the required amount of resources, it has no plans for war with Russia. It only has scraps of speculation and guesswork. These three factors make war with NATO unlikely. It is clear that the United States can push the Europeans to take crazy steps. But on the economic and diplomatic front we have specialists who will try to keep them from doing this. And the NWO will lead to processes that will lead to a split in the European Union and NATO. If we break through a land corridor to Hungary, then Serbia will be magnetized to this axis. And it can be followed by Slovakia and Romania, where very interesting processes are taking place. Eastern Europe will begin to break away from old Europe, which will be severely depressed due to the economic situation. After all, Europe is defeated not only on the eastern front, but also in the global south.

Consider this: Romania, Hungary, Slovakia and Serbia have a combined population of roughly 42 million. This is substantial, it is also a promising market–make your own conclusion. As I already stated many times, Russia doesn’t need love or obedience, Russia is interested in trade with people who still recognize that there are only two genders. Simple as that. Once the land bridge is built, European structure changes dramatically.

It’s unlikely that either Zelensky or the Kiev regime will long survive the fall of Avdeevka, whether it is followed by a Russian winter offensive or not. Post-Zelensky succession struggles have already begun, and as the assassination of the top personal aide to the Ukrainian Armed Forces shows, they are likely going to be very violent and nasty. And the first priority of whoever wins will be to surrender to Russia on the most favorable terms possible.

My assumption is that Russia will not accept any settlement that does not include the transfer of Odessa. And while it is clear that Ukraine does not have the ability to prevent Russian forces from taking it, there is no reason for Putin to spend the Russian blood required to do so when a little patience and a new regime will likely allow him to accomplish his goals without it. This patient approach might, in fact, be a micro-analogy for the way Xi is approaching China’s desired reunification with its wayward island.

The longer Israel is enmeshed in Gaza, and the more US resources that pour into the region, the more it looks to me as if the October 7 attacks were intended to draw the US deep enough into the conflict to prevent its full engagement on any other front. While both the Netanyahu government and the anti-China faction of the neocons welcomed the redirection of the US military focus from Ukraine to Israel, it chiefly appears to serve the strategic interests of the Russians, which might explain why the Russians have been surprisingly inactive in Syria while Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran have all been unexpectedly passive in response to the slow-paced Israeli invasion.

The scale of the global violence may be limited and regional to date, but the strategic scope is observably worldwide. It appears the complexities of WWIII will pose an even greater challenge to historians than its predecessor. But now that the second front appears to have been opened, it can only be a matter of time before the third one – presumably Taiwan, though possibly the Philippines – follows suit.

https://voxday.net/2023/11/12/ukraine-endgame/







Endgame Ukraine II

The unravelling has started and it’s obvious that the neocons have already decided to pull the plug and turn off the life support system of the Kiev regime.

Let’s summarize recent developments:

• Zaluzhny’s aides are deleted, one by assassination
• Large-scale new ‘house cleaning’ of entire general staff is reportedly announced from Zelensky’s side
• Major media campaigns from both sides push urgent narratives of stalemates, Zaluzhny implying the war will be lost, and an eye-opening exposé on a ‘isolated’ and ‘messianic’ Fuhrer-bunker version of Zelensky
• Zelensky suddenly cancels presidential elections, likely sussing the plan to promote Zaluzhny as challenger
• Money spigot has still been turned off for the foreseeable future, with no realistic plans on horizon at the moment
• Ukraine now catastrophically losing on virtually every front of the war, set to soon lose another major, strategically critical city
• Many influential voices like Arestovich now openly push ceasefire

The ‘grim reaper’ CIA director set to pay visit, which only happens on eve of some major pivot or escalation. Diplomats and Foreign Secretaries are sent to ‘discuss options’ or ‘negotiate’—CIA directors are sent to deliver final threats of action

Now, much of the foregoing information is already being discussed elsewhere. But the one chief question no one else seems to be asking is the most critical of all: if factions in the West intend to replace Zelensky with Zaluzhny, then what is the actual purpose? What do they intend for Zaluzhny to do or accomplish that Zelensky cannot?

Some haven’t thought this through, and just assume that “Zaluzhny is a strong leader” and therefore is being made to replace Zelensky so that he can whip the military into shape and win the war. But why would Zaluzhny need to be president to do that? He’s already the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and that’s literally his job description.

So, logically speaking, the only possible explanation I can see making sense is that Zaluzhny is being chosen to sell the ceasefire to the people. Such a thing would sound more acceptable from the standpoint of a military leader and strategist who can explain that the situation is hopeless without time to recover and replenish the forces with an armistice. And more importantly, to sell it to the troops.

Notice how all of this has been transparent to anyone who simply watches the direction that the elite neocons are taking. This was obvious as far back as April and May, but the need to focus on the defense of Israel, which is the absolute #1 neocon priority, means that the Ukraine war will be over as soon as a military leader a) replaces Zelensky/Yermak and b) meets Putin’s terms.

However, it may not be as easy to accomplish (b) as the neocons and the media believe. I expect Putin will demand, at the very least, a complete end of the collective sanctions regime, a disinvitation to NATO, and the province of Odessa, and it’s going to be very, very difficult for all the true believers in the Narrative to accept that.

Notice, in particular, that the CIA director who is meeting with Zelensky this week wrote the following to his then-boss, Condoleeza Rice, in 2008 when he was the ambassador to Russia:

“Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.”

In any event, don’t be surprised if the collapse and first attempt to reach a settlement happens considerably sooner than anyone expects. Keep in mind that the speed with which these events are taking place tend to indicate that the war in the Middle East is not proceeding as well as anticipated.

https://voxday.net/2023/11/13/endgame-ukraine-ii/