Unfortunately I don't see an end to this conflict if Ukraine is unwilling to meet Russian and US demands in the ceasefire. I understand why Rubio wants to walk away at this point as Zelensky is delusional and not someone that can be reasoned with. How a man with a 4% approval rating hasn't been snuffed out by his own people yet is beyond me. We have been too patient with this man and at this point I don't think there are any branches left to extend to him.

quote:

I understand why Rubio wants to walk away at this point as Zelensky is delusional and not someone that can be reasoned with.

Walking away may be our best option. We've continued to fund him, though not as much as under Biden.

There's always the "Arm Russia" option, that would finish the lil weasle Zelenskyy, quickiy.

I suggested that previously but a less extreme choice would be to let the patriot deliveries dry up for a few weeks. It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking you are invincible and in a position of strength when protected by American weapons.

We absolutely need to stop sending every last bit of money and “aid” (weapons). Now. Yesterday, even.

US Will Drop Russia–Ukraine Peace Push in Absence of Progress, Trump and Rubio Warn
Following Rubio’s comments, the Kremlin said it was committed to resolving the conflict and open to dialogue.

US Will Drop Russia–Ukraine Peace Push in Absence of Progress, Trump and Rubio Warn

U.S. President Donald Trump will drop efforts to clinch a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine in the absence of any clear signs of progress.

“We’re not going to continue with this endeavor for weeks and months on end,” Rubio told reporters in Paris on Friday after meeting with European and Ukrainian leaders.

“We need to determine very quickly now—and I’m talking about a matter of days—whether or not this is doable in the next few weeks,” he added.

Rubio’s comments reflect mounting U.S. frustration with the lack of progress in securing a peace deal—something Trump had pledged to do soon after returning to office in January.

“If it’s not possible—if we’re so far apart that this is not going to happen—then I think the president is probably at a point where he’s going to say, ‘Well, we’re done,’” Rubio said.

Trump reiterated Rubio’s call for progress in peace negotiations later on Friday, during a White House swearing-in ceremony for Dr. Mehmet Oz to be the next administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. The president declined to provide a more specific timeline for a deal, but said he wants to decide “quickly.”


Ukraine Says Outline of Minerals Deal Signed With US

Chinese ‘Mercenaries’ Caught in Ukraine Reveal More of Beijing’s Involvement in Russia–Ukraine War
“If, for some reason, one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say, ‘You’re foolish, you’re fools, you’re horrible people,’ and we’re going to just take a pass,” Trump said. “But hopefully we won’t have to do that.”

In an effort to push both sides to the negotiating table, Trump has threatened to impose tougher sanctions on Russia and end further U.S. military support for Ukraine.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that diplomatic contacts were “quite complicated, because, naturally, the topic is not an easy one.”

“Russia is committed to resolving this conflict, ensuring its own interests, and is open to dialogue,” he added.

“We continue to do this.”

Despite a flurry of recent diplomatic activity, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said this week that it was “not easy to agree” on what he called “key components” of a peace settlement.

Speaking to the Russian press on April 14, Lavrov confirmed that Moscow and Washington had yet to agree on even the basic parameters of a cease-fire deal.

Nevertheless, he added, “They are being discussed.”

Moscow’s terms for ending the three-year-old war include recognition of its sovereignty over four Ukrainian regions that it invaded in 2022 and currently views as Russian territory.

Russia also demands the withdrawal of all Ukrainian forces from these regions, along with iron-clad guarantees that Ukraine will never join the Western NATO alliance.

But Kyiv and several European capitals, along with some Trump administration officials, say Moscow’s demands are unacceptable and would amount to Ukraine’s de facto capitulation.

On April 18, U.S. Vice President JD Vance expressed optimism that a cease-fire agreement could, despite current difficulties, be achieved.

“Even in the past 24 hours, we think we have some interesting things to report on,” Vance told reporters in Rome at a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.

“Since there are the negotiations, I won’t prejudge them. But we do feel optimistic that we can hopefully bring this war ... to a close.”

A day earlier, Kyiv announced it had signed a memorandum with Washington as a step toward finalizing a deal on the development of Ukraine’s mineral resources.

The prospective deal has been touted by Trump as a means of fostering peace between Russia and Ukraine by giving the United States a financial stake in Ukraine’s future.

“We’re still working on the details,” U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said this week.
‘Matter of Days’
Last month in Saudi Arabia, U.S. officials held separate talks with their Russian and Ukrainian counterparts, who agreed to a limited truce aimed at ending hostilities in the Black Sea.
The Kremlin, however, later added several conditions to the prospective truce, which Rubio said U.S. officials would “evaluate.”

Results of that evaluation, however, remain unclear.

During the talks in Saudi Arabia, Moscow and Kyiv also pledged to abide by a 30-day U.S.-brokered moratorium on attacking each other’s energy facilities.

Since then, however, both sides have accused each other of repeatedly breaching the moratorium, casting doubts on the efficacy of U.S. peacemaking efforts.

After holding “constructive” talks in Paris with European and Ukrainian leaders, Rubio said he had spoken to Lavrov and briefed him on “elements” of the U.S. peace framework.

According to Rubio, European capitals would play a central role in any peace deal, because their sanctions on Russia—over which Washington has no control—would likely need to be lifted to secure an agreement.

“There’s no one saying this [a peace deal] can be done in 12 hours,” Rubio told reporters in Paris.

“We need to figure out here and now—within a matter of days—whether this is doable in the short term,” he added.

“Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on.”

The Kremlin, meanwhile, has yet to comment on those remarks.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...f%2BACNgMZKs1ywoM%3D

Behold the emerging end-game narrative, as the Proxy War devolves into its predictable sorry conclusion. NBC ran its story yesterday below the headline, “Trump slams Zelenskyy for rejecting Ukraine-Russia negotiations, saying a deal was 'very close.’ The sub-headline added, “High-level talks in London aimed at bringing a pause to fighting in Ukraine disintegrated after Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff pulled out.” If he’s not careful, pugnacious comedian and understated dresser Zelensky is about to be left holding the bag.

U.S. negotiators had organized a high-profile Wednesday meeting to discuss terms for a permanent cease-fire plan with top Ukrainian officials in London. The US intended to present a deal the Russians had allegedly agree to, which would have completely and indefinitely halted the fighting while a final peace deal could then be negotiated at leisure.

Problems arose when Kiev’s thespian-in-chief got an advance copy of the agenda. His bloodshot eye was immediately drawn, not to his side of the ledger, but to something the U.S. had offered Russia to lock in Putin’s agreement. Specifically, the Americans offered to recognize Crimea as Russian territory. But the deal did not require Ukraine to make the same concession. It was win-win.

But winning was too much for the vertically-challenged Martial Law Administrator. He blew his short stack. Zelensky, enraged, got in front of Ukrainian media before yesterday’s talks began and delivered a defiant diatribe that would make a South African military dictator blush. Never Crimea! We won’t do it! We won’t let YOU do it! And more ranting to the same effect.

Secretary of State Rubio and Special Envoy Steven Witkoff immediately pulled out, scratched, and canceled their reservations, and let the junior members of the team handle the Ukrainians instead. Surprising no one, the discussions came up empty, or as NBC put it, “the high-level talks disintegrated.”

Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister, Yulia Svyrydenko, who attended the short-lived meeting explained, “Our people will not accept a frozen conflict disguised as peace.” Whatever that means.

Crimea is literally the dumbest place imaginable to stake out a red line.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...rue&utm_medium=email

Refusing to accept the obvious will be his ultimate downfall; whether by external or internal forces, the outcome will be the same.

https://www.americanthinker.co...else_can_you_do.html

‘Make Peace, You Fools! What Else Can You Do?’

It would take 81 days for the Allies to move from the killing beaches of Normandy to parading down the Champs-Élysées in Paris. The months of June and July 1944 were spent in a brutal and slow fight across the small fields and farms of Normandy. One objective was the city of Caen, barely nine miles from the beaches. Its capture would open the way for the push on to Paris.

Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt was the overall commander of German forces in the West. His job was to slow the Allied advance. He had Caen fortified, and the fighting around the city was fierce. Slowly, the German forces were giving way to the inevitable.

On July 1 von Rundstedt got a call from Berlin. Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel, chief of the German army, was on the phone. Von Rundstedt briefed him on the deteriorating situation. Keitel was distressed and asked for his opinion about what to do next. Von Rundstedt retorted, “Make peace, you fools. What else can you do?” For his insubordination, von Rundstedt was relieved of his duties the next day.

This story comes back to us after an exchange on April 18 between President Trump and a news reporter. When asked about the lack of progress in the American efforts to broker a cease-fire in Ukraine, Trump retorted,

Now, if for some reason, one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say: “You’re foolish. You’re fools. You’re horrible people”—and we’re going to just take a pass.

Trump was talking about both Russia and Ukraine, but it is clear that the fools he had in mind are in Ukraine. A day earlier, Trump had said that he “is not a big fan” of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and that he hasn’t done “the greatest job” as Ukraine’s wartime leader.

Trump may have believed that he could bring the Ukraine war to an end early in his administration, but now he finds himself in a situation where he may have to “take a pass” on peace efforts. There is practically no chance that Ukraine or Russia can be brought together.

Russia’s terms for peace have taken several forms over the course of the war, but many observers point to a June 2024 speech by Russian President Vladimir Putin as the outline of a peace settlement. Putin said Russia would halt combat operations and enter into peace talks if Ukraine accepts the following conditions:

Ukrainian forces must withdraw from the four disputed provinces in eastern Ukraine, provinces that Russia annexed in 2022.

Ukraine and its allies must recognize Russia’s sovereignty over those provinces.

Ukraine must abandon its plans to seek membership in NATO.

Ukraine must adopt a policy of neutrality and refrain from aligning with any military bloc.

Ukraine’s allies must agree to remove the economic sanctions they imposed on Russia.

To Zelensky, accepting these terms would be tantamount to surrender. He is right: The Russian terms amount to a Ukrainian surrender.

In contrast to the Russian position, the Trump Administration has reportedly been urging a cease-fire plan associated with Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine, retired Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg. Parts of it have made their way into the news and in opinion pieces, and from what we can piece together, that approach includes the following elements:

Combat operations would be frozen along the existing line of contact.

A demilitarized zone would separate the warring factions.

Russia would have de facto control over those territories in the disputed provinces that it now holds.

The status of Crimea, which was annexed into Russia in 2014, is not clear, with some reports saying the U.S. would commit to recognizing it as part of the Russian Federation.

Ukraine would acknowledge the loss of territory but would not be required to extend formal recognition.

Ukraine would not be admitted into NATO.

European “peacekeepers,” sometimes referred to as a “reassurance force,” would take up positions in Ukraine’s western provinces. Britain and France have talked about forming such a force, which would exist outside the structure of NATO.

Both warring parties have strong objections: Ukraine because it does not accept the loss of land, and Russia for several reasons, notably because the presence of a European “reassurance force” does not square with its long-held position that NATO’s expansion eastward is one of the “root causes” of the war. The so-called Kellogg Plan does not see the future Ukraine as a neutral state, which is Russia’s vision, but rather as a territory existing under some kind of East-West spheres of influence.

On April 18, Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned that progress must either be made on a peace deal within a matter of days or the U.S. will close down its peace brokering and “move on.” Speculation on social media expects Trump to make that decision at the end of April.

Note that, from the outset of Trump’s initiative, there has been a disconnect between Washington and Moscow on the sequencing of events. The U.S. thinks of a ceasefire as something that takes place before peace talks begin. But Russia’s position has been to front-load the political settlement before halting military operations. Russia does not want to be left holding the bag if the guns fall silent and there is no progress on achieving its political goals. To the Kremlin, a ceasefire and a political settlement blend into one another.

If the U.S. “takes a pass,” as Trump says, on a peace deal, what will that mean for the future of U.S. support towards Ukraine? At this juncture, we don’t know. There is only speculation. Will Trump get tough on Ukraine and stop the future flow of military aid? Will he get equally tough on Russia and impose even more stringent economic sanctions?

There is more certainty when we consider what might happen on the battlefield. The war will run to its “natural conclusion,” which we can define as an either/or outcome: Either Ukraine accepts Russia’s terms in a diplomatic exchange, or the Russian army will impose them in a military decision.

There is no alternative. There is no middle ground. There is no “compromise.” Russia has the upper hand on the battlefield. The U.S. should know this. Russia is not looking for an exit ramp. To the contrary, along the line of contact, the Ukrainian army is slowly giving way to the inevitable.

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is known for his brutally frank posts on social media. On April 18, he posted his own take on the situation:

In 1944, Gerd von Rundstedt figured it out faster than the others in the German government. His advice to Berlin then suffices as advice to Ukraine today: “Make peace, you fools. What else can you do?”

One issue not mentioned here is the fact that hundreds of Ukranian children have been abducted and sent to Russia. That is a fact. I saw an interview on the BBC with two fathers who said they will fight to the death until their children are returned. What are the Ukranians fighting for? What happens if they lose? They can expect that their homes will be looted. Washing machines, toilets and other items are in short supply in Russia, particularly in poor areas where most of the Russian soldiers are recruited. Rapes have happened. So the Ukranians have a lot more incentive to fight than the Russians and North Koreans. The Russians may very well have been some very slow progress on the battlefield, but the Ukranians have done a lot better than many realize. Recently they destroyed 105,000 tons of Russian Munitions. The explosion was visible from the space station. I think the war will continue.

https://odessa-journal.com/pub...s-exploded-in-russia

End all US Support and let the Ukrainians fight with sticks if they're so motivated.

Here is more proof that large numbers of typical Russian soldiers have no real incentive to fight. In fact, refusals to fight and outright rebellions are not at all unusual. Here is just one example. Am I suggesting that a Ukranian victory is in sight. No. I am simply saying that the war in my view will likely continue for a long time.

https://www.uawire.org/russian...er-refusing-to-right

^^ I doesn't matter how long it lasts, Ukraine is losing, and will lose this war! Honestly, it's a lost cause already, and has basically been so since not long after it started. In fighting on they will only further decimate the Ukrainian population, feeding even more 'fighting age' males (as well as many that are much older than that!), into the meat grinder! How anyone thinks they should soldier on losing entire generations of Ukrainian males in this endeavor is beyond comprehension!

quote:

Originally posted by braillediver:
End all US Support and let the Ukrainians fight with sticks if they're so motivated.

If the EU wants to support them, then so be it.
The US should stay out of it. We've done enough.

Ukraine is fighting Stage 4 Russian cancer.

Valiant as it may be...

i am thinking a russian refusing to fight for putin is a certain death sentence. To think otherwise is just plain dumb. believe as you will.

Russia currently has no death penalty and claims not to have executed anyone since 1996.

Much of what's reported/promoted about this conflict is simply propaganda...It's all either Pro-Ukraine propaganda, Pro-Russian propaganda, propaganda promoted the West/NATO, so it's all suspect until confirmed. Basically, you can find whatever propaganda that pleases you.

Obviously, the Odessa Journal is Pro-Ukraine, so it's pretty clear what you'll find reported by that 'news outlet'.

Here's one view on the UAWire and it's reporting, which seems to be Solidly Left-of-Center, and their record when it comes to presenting factual information is well, 'MIXED' according to the source.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/uawire/

I'll believe what's being said/reported about this conflict when it's over...OR when the missiles are flying! Thankfully, with DJT in Oval Office, the latter seems particularly unlikely!

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
Honestly, it's a lost cause already, and has basically been so since not long after it started.

I've been saying that since almost the start. Russia doesn't historically start wars strong, but it tends to just keep throwing bodies at the problem until they win. They want what they've fought for, they're going to have it. At this point, I think it's a matter of how much more territory Ukraine is going to lose, and that's likely going to come down to whether Zelensky's own people pull off their own successful Operation Valkyrie.

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
Here is more proof...

[Quotes Ukrainian news.]

I'm sorry, but that's hilarious. I'm with nhracecraft on this one, also. If it's a Ukrainian new source, it's almost always that the Russians are losing, their equipment and morale is dogshit, they're surrendering, deserting, or simply won't fight. It's all horseshit. This thread and the now-defunct Cold Warrior Blueball Extravaganza thread that preceded it are loaded with forum members who've fallen for this crap. Russia's been losing the war since the first week they invaded, yet here we are three years later with however many dead on either side and more of Ukraine is now Russian.

"Russian warship, go fuck yourself" - Ghost of Kyiv, probably.

Ukrainian media:

Zelenskyy: Ukraine lacks weapons to retake Crimea, but the world has means to pressure Russia

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/.../2025/04/25/7509209/

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has stated that Ukraine does not currently have enough weapons to regain control over temporarily occupied Crimea. However, he emphasised that the world has various tools at its disposal to exert pressure on Russia in order to raise territorial issues.

Source: Zelenskyy during a conversation with journalists, as reported by Interfax-Ukraine

Quote: "It is true what President Trump says. I agree with him that we do not currently have enough weapons. Weapons specifically, not people. Because our people are more important, the most important thing. But it is not true to say we do not have an army."

Details: Zelenskyy stressed that the world does have tools such as sanctions, economic pressure and diplomatic pressure "to say this, to discuss territorial issues, but only after a complete and unconditional ceasefire".

He also commented on US President Donald Trump’s statement that Crimea should remain Russian.

Quote: "Our position remains unchanged: only the Ukrainian people have the right to decide which territories are Ukrainian. And the Constitution of Ukraine decides: all temporarily occupied territories – they are temporarily occupied, they all belong to Ukraine, to the Ukrainian people. Ukraine will not legally recognise any temporarily occupied territories."

Background:

On 22 April, Zelenskyy stated that Ukraine does not recognise Crimea, which is internationally recognised as Ukrainian territory, as Russian.
Trump criticised the statement, saying that "Crimea was lost years ago" and that Zelenskyy’s words were "very harmful to the peace negotiations with Russia".
US President Donald Trump reiterated in an interview with Time that he believes Ukraine's aspiration to join NATO is the main reason behind Russia's military aggression. He also stated that he considers Crimea to be lost to Ukraine.

quote:

Originally posted by bdylan:
Russia currently has no death penalty and claims not to have executed anyone since 1996.

That's as likely as Christie Brinkley picking me up in a red Ferrari.