Thanks for watching! Give the video a LIKE and if you appreciate my efforts to bring diversified views then SUBSCRIBE! Part 1: ruclips.net/video/FRJmE1ROqkM/видео.html Part 2: ruclips.net/video/J8p_W3RF2XU/видео.html
Thanks for the links, always very helpful (if I hadn't already bookmarked them back then), and thanks for sharing this thought-provoking conversation. Something tells me there's more to come with Mr. Galeotti? I'll be looking much forward to it.
Kiev has been trying to use the war, and their perceived "special status" (enhanced by lobbying and PR of course) to be able to leapfrog into NATO and the EU. They figured they could demand that "VIP Lane" for themselves...but I think by now they're really beyond that, and several governments across Europe, as well as many ordianry people, are feeling disillusioned about Ukraine and really don't want the hazard and the costs it would mean to bring them in. Ukraine will likely end up being cleft in half, with the eastern half ceded to Russia: where exactly the border will be going depends in part on when the West and NATO are able to admit that the war has been lost.
I support Ukraine but we have to be serious about it there's no way that Ukraine will be in NATO ever it takes all 32 members to allow them to enter and hungry or turkey won't allow it
@@jim2376 It is on your stupid immagination. The war end just on few terms: 1. No NATO for Ukraine. 2. 4 Regions (+ Crimea) will go to Russia. 3. Just a limit to size of the army. End of story.
@@seufer12 Yes! This is a very good example of russian propaganda, thank you! 1. No NATO for Ukraine: The war started before NATO membership was a serious option for Ukraine. Russia's aggression is more about control over Ukraine's sovereignty than NATO alone. 2. Giving up occupied territories: Surrendering territory would encourage more aggression from Russia, as it would validate conquest by force and likely not stop further ambitions. 3. Limiting Ukraine's army: Weakening Ukraine’s defense would leave it more vulnerable to future attacks from Russia, rather than securing peace. Real world vs russian TV.
1. The west and Ukraine didn't wanted to fullfill the Minsk II agreements. 2. Why it is so obsessed? Because Ukraine is losing and they know it. Because the ammunition depots in NATO are empty. USA has with Israel his attention. Perhaps that's why 🤫
@@tomispev of course , a cease fire is totally against Russia advantage , giving time for Ukraine to reorganize , refill , refit and get more weapon supply while making no concession
The US coup in Ukraine in 2014, the breaking of the Minsk agreement by Ukraine,their US puppet masters & the French & Germans is what led us to where we are today.
A simple I don't know would suffice when asked about Putin's intentions. If he is a 19th century man it would be useful to remind ourselves that while Lviv wasn't part of the Russian empire then, Warsaw was, as the were the Baltic states or Finland. So what's the intention here?
nice to see Western wishful thinking verbalized, i am sure the same folks think that Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya are much better off now! when you can do no wrong and project your own values to others, you can only expect the other to change!
Mark mentions that nonsense the Kremlin peddles about the Bolsheviks creating the Ukrainian SSR and before that Ukraine was not a country. Ukraine had a constitution in 1710. Almost 300 years before "ruzzia" got one in 1905! Google - Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk
@@JesterEric That's nonsense the constitution was written in Ukrainian NOT ruzzian (There was also one latin copy for the king of Sweden). Cossacks are Ukrainians. ruzzians are serfs. Modern Ukrainians fight like their Cossack ancestors, they are a direct genetic ethno-cultural lineage. That's why ruzzia can't win.
@@OliverBootle1 I've attached a poll summary below but I'm not sure how helpful that it is. This past year, I've seen far more coverage of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Since almost half of the US electorate supports Trump, at least that many are at least okay with eliminating military aid to Ukraine. "In March 2022, shortly after the invasion, about four-in-ten Americans said the U.S. was not providing enough support to Ukraine (42%). This share has since decreased by nearly 20 percentage points. Meanwhile, the share of those saying that the U.S. is providing too much support to Ukraine has grown from 7% in March 2022 to 31% in April 2024." (Pew Research)
@@OliverBootle1 Yes, but even with near unanimous support from the Dems, recall how tough it was to get a major aid package through Congress earlier this year. Even if Harris wins, we're looking at an uphill climb in 2025. The Senate will probably be controlled by Republicans and I don't know who the new majority leader will be.
I have a sense that the US National Security Council takes Russian Balkanization very seriously. Their red lines make less sense in terms of preventing an already overstretched Russia from attacking NATO than in terms of protecting Russia from an unambiguous loss.
Whenever people suggest a ceasefire, they must explain who will ensure russia complies with the ceasefire, and, if they don't, who will force russia to comply with the ceasefire on the battlefield. Cannot say what group of countries will guarantee compliance with the ceasefire? Then don't suggest it because a ceasefire that cannot be enforced is meaningless.
Western people and "analysts" arrogantly assume that Russia is asking or is desperate for a ceasefire. You're getting total Capitulation of your proxy Ukraine. Wake up
I think we are. But we can ride it out to 2025 when some pundits think ruzzia's war economy will implode and the million casualties will finally break society.
My view is that you've completely missed on half of your points. I enjoyed your previous vidoes, but after listening to this one it became obvious that you have a very narrow Western understanding of the Russia and its goals. In a sense that you only interact with russia through western news/channels/experts and don't study actual russian info-sphere. I suggest you talk more to Vlad Vexler to have a better understanding of the Putins goals.
No, it isn't. It is we, in "the west" who are up against the clock. Democracies look weaker and weaker. It's only a matter of time until russia's invasion spreads and NATO deterrence is proven hollow. We've already observed US and NATO cowardice when Turkiye shot down a russian fighter jet in 2015, complete incoordination and incompetence withdrawing from Afghanistan, and their cowardice every time russian drones and missiles breach NATO members' airspace, and no answer to North Korea sending troops to Europe. And let's not even get into corruptible, weak sanctions. It is us who are running up against the clock, because of incompetence and cowardice in our leadership.
Current russia MUST have an adversary to exist. When more than 40 % of russian gdp goes to fuel it's war, it can't just stop. For Ukraine the endgame is only NATO. No lesser "agreements" will secure it's future. For russia there is no end game, because when the war (smo) stops, the regime has nothing to propose. Please listen to the people, who knows russia not from the tv or news, but from their own history and experience (Ukrainian, Estonian, Latvian, Georgian, Lithuanian, etc.)
Talk of Balkanising Russia is not unlike talking of Wales, Cornwall, and Scotland all gaining independence - too much water under the bridge and shared history. Even if Russia lose completely and Putin is deposed, Russia won't likely break up. The parts of Soviet union that would break off from Russia did, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. I don't agree with the idea that Putin only really wants the minimalist aims of the Donbas though.
The soviet identity meant different things over the 70 years of existence. In the Baltics, there was conformity in because of risk, but deep ethnic identity persisted, especially as Soviet just became Russian.
Good talk. Some comments. Just because a nation loses a war doesn't mean it breaks up and seperates into different countries. Iraq lost the Gulf War of 1991 and it didn't break up (Yes it had to deal with kurdish rebels). A nation may go into an economic slump but I just don't see Russia balkanizing, it's central government is too strong and provides services for people in the far east who are very remote. If it was to balkanize than those services in the far east from the government would cease. But could the government collapse? Sure. Will it collapse? I don't know.
The incentive to support Ukraine is waning in the US and will fully collapse if a Trump presidency is achieved after the election. This is not an outcome I’d like to see, but American interest and attention is very short and this war has inconvenienced American interests way too much. They would like to focus on opposing China and pulling out Russia from the Chinese sphere.
but the ONLY way to pull Ru out from Chinese sphere is defeat of Ru in Ukr, definitive defeat! A coalition of the wiling, probably ten nations can help Ukr nail Ru's ass out of Ukr lands and create a permanent no fly zones. This is increasingly what looks likely bcuz otherwise, Ru will probably start to destroy all of Ukr's infrastructure and Kyiv and ports, which is an unacceptable risk bcuz Ukr would be nonfunctional for 15 years, ie EU would have to take 15 M more ppl, it's impossible. Same w/ cost to repair for 5-15 years of ENTIRE infra. Not feasible. A coalition force makes far more sense! Proactive!
The notion that the war in Ukraine would end if Ukraine abandoned NATO aspirations, surrendered occupied territories, or limited the size of its army is flawed. The war began long before NATO membership was a serious consideration, with Russia’s actions rooted more in its desire for control over Ukraine’s sovereignty than concerns about NATO. Simply giving up occupied territories would likely embolden Russia, signaling that territorial conquest through force is acceptable, which could lead to further aggression. Similarly, limiting Ukraine’s military would weaken its defenses and leave the country vulnerable to future attacks, rather than ensuring lasting peace.
@@shaun1463 they are plain facts that any international court would agree with. Objective reality has always been a problem for modern Ru/soviets. Your disinfo will no longer be tolerated like it was for now 85 years plus! bleep off!
I do encourage you to go to Ukraine recruitment center and get yourself ready for combat. That would mean more than posting in the comfort of your room.
There never has been democracy in Russia, which ponders a question that if the Tzars was still in power today and Russia invaded Ukraine in the name of self defence, what side would the UK have backed?
I think Russia would accept that Ukraine become a part of NATO on condition that they receive recognition of new territory I think that might have to be considered through a referendum in Ukraine plus Ukraine gets 100 billion in reparations
No way. If Russia gets to keep some low value territories in the east, and western Ukraine gets to join NATO, that's what losing the war looks like for the Russians.
If every single NATO country started to contribute 50% of what Denmark does per capita GDP nominal the same way we calculate NATO military spending 2%, and stop putting restrictions on weapons use and stop doing like the USA government who has only allowed Denmark to give 19 F-16 to Ukraine when pilots was ready which is also going slow because the US Government limits the number of pilots trained, the weapons and money are available Norway alone a very small donor similar to the USA who is like number 17 🤷♂️ Norway has 1,8 trillion dollars in their wealth fund there GDP nominal per capita makes Denmark and the USA look like middle income countries 🤷♂️ Denmark also has a little natural resources but Sweden has almost none they have in their latest donation taken up some loans to help Ukraine which is a little sad when you look at Norway profiting from the war enormously while giving as modesty as the USA who is also profiting off the war. Not per capita but in all Denmark gives more than France, Italy and Spain combined, Spain seems to be improving but the new stuff is not delivered just yet and even then the what 170 million people of the tree countries V Denmark 5,9 million people and Denmark still donate more 🤷♂️ it can easily be won if people who claim to support Ukraine start doing so, 50% of Denmarks is enough, and you GDP per capita nominal is of course taken into account, it is the most fair.
Hahahah!!! You started out using Bosnia as an example. Why? I do not believe in forced integrations of people groups, but maintaining Colonial or Versailles Treaty boundaries is just as stupid an idea. The problem with Bosnia is it has 3 mostly defined people group areas. There are Bosniak (Muslim), Croatian, and Serbian areas. Only 1 narrow Canton/Federal State separates 2 large Serbian ethnic areas. I would eliminate Bosnia as a country by allowing the populations to vote on annexation and/or independent status. Many Croatians and Serbian Cantons might vote for annexation. The Bosnian areas may vote for Independence or an autonomous area within another country, like Croatia. Cities and Towns bordering where country lines will be drawn, many have voted to join another country. As long as it is contiguous, this should be allowed. All citizens resident in a country they do NOT want to remain, can apply for resettlement. Land or property will be traded when and where available. If no property is available, up to €250,000 will be paid for resettlement. These costs would be split evenly by each country. The 1 small Canton where forced relocation may occur, up to €1,000,000 will be paid for resettlement. This would better preserve peace than the current structure.
@@bg1616 and it only took you 20 years and 2 trillion $$ to figure that out But remind me again who running Afghanistan and who left billions of $ OF 🇺🇸 weapons 🤔
PENTAGON - Russia's military is bigger and stronger than it was prior to invading Ukraine in February 2022, the commander of United States Air Forces in Europe and Africa cautioned Tuesday. Galeotti: reconstituting their forces is going to take in my opinion at least 8 years Stupidity of this degree already makes him pro-Russian
Quite a level headed expert. I've been listening to his analysis for a while. And though I may not agree in some points, I still appreciate the tone of many of his assesments (today's in particular). Best wishes from Moscow. Hope in the end averyone comes to therir senses, and all those militaty blocks and rivalries can give way to actuall piece and prosperity. In the words from a Russian science fiction novel: "Happiness for everyone, free of charge, and let no one get left behind!"
@@theglobalgambit the Russians never said that, only the western/Ukrainian echo chamber did Putin ever say "in three days we take Kyiv"? Nope, it's a western propaganda narrative. The idea was not to take Kyiv, but force them to negotiations, that aim was achieved, but they tricked the Russians again, and pulled out, when the army left Kyiv region "out of good will"!
How this guy is a. Russian specialist when he doesn’t seems to listen to what the Russian say now, let alone knowing anything Russians since 1991….. or at least since the emergence of Putin from 1999….. He seems a fool to me now!!!! 😢😢😢
@@theglobalgambit Of course he is asking the opposite. This channel is heavily censored. I recently got a 24 hour youtube ban for asking about Putin here. Someone denounced me. No wonder this channel in not growing and views are dismal.
Where do you get the idea that NATO's attention is waning? I can see no sign of that, on the contrary. With the advent of N Korean troops on the battlefield, it will even be rejuvinated. I would rather say it's Putin's race against time, not Ukraine's. Can he sustain the murderous losses until victory before his very small economy gives way? I doubt it.
East Germany was an internationally recognized country of its own and West Germany didn't pursue reunification with military means and did expect it might take a long time or never happen. Ukraine will never agree to something similar. Completely unrealistic.
@@thesilkpainter The comparison isn't about that, it is about a solution for Nato membership. It is proposed that it could be based on the "German model", which is not comparable with Ukrain's situation today.
A bit ironic the a Brit is claiming Russia is imperialistic. How many colonies did Russia have vs UK? Wasnt England the largest colonization of recent history? When was Russia sailing around conquering lands in Africa, India. North America, Asia, etc?
Russia was always a land based imperialist power. It was way more focused on its near abroad terrestrial sphere of influence than in far off continents like Africa. It’s why they never participated in the scramble for Africa. If you read your history you’d know that.
The Brits, however, eventually gave up their colonies and it is accepted that it wasn't that good an idea in the first place. Russia is still trying to gain them. Big difference.
ru propaganda, which has been exposed as pushing or main populist rightwing extremist zealots, a'la Tenet media! Nice try ruskie/russiye! You're soon to be kaput!
@@shaun1463 total b.s. As usual, ru-bots or ru-apologists (torture apologists, replete with sex toy laden torture dens with bins of pulled teeth!!!!!!!!! ,we saw those pics! Now 140K documented cases of war crimes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Half of big city of Kherson was tortured !!!! Mariupol! ). There's no selling of Ukr's raw materials. More ignorance and propaganda so similar to Soviet, hmmm
Gave up on this pompus plank at "a ceasefire is not an agreement". A unilateral ceasefire is a surrender, but a bilateral ceasefire has to be an agreement by definition.
if we look at the current situation , Ukraine has a lack of manpower their enemy has a bigger population four times bigger than Ukraine , and Ukraine is completely depending on their allies , and the only thing that Russia needs from their allies like Iran or china is only drones or missiles , the only way that Russia might lose the war of attrition is a complete collapse of their economy which will take a lot of time because their economy is depends on oil and gas which is easy to sell under sanctions @@leifiseland1218
@@leifiseland1218 really ? i remember not too long ago , the russians were also accused of killing nord stream . after 1-2 years , now they said its not .
😂what a silly foppish circular oratory. The Ukrainian Army is folding, the people will feeze w/o power this winter, Zelensky has forbidden elections, negotiations, and naysayers. And these two talk like there are things Ukrainians can demand..? Poppycock !!
@@LindaJoyce-r2z nope. We (NATO and allies) helped both Afghanistan and Iraq hold elections during widespread war. I was there. It was important. Zelensky will be voted out in a New York minute.
Fact : UKraine has lost all its Counteroffensive gains and in fact this reversal has extended into more losses in terms of land area to the Russians . If there is a ceasefire now , Ukraine would lose over 1/5 of its land since they rejected the 2022 istanbul peace negotiations . Kursk front is also capitulating for the Ukranians .
Russian tanks at this point wouldn't need to enter Kiev at a certain point before then Ukraine would start collapsing and as soon as that happens they sign away the Kharkiv Dnipro and Zap and if that doesn't work they throw in Odessa. Even with a collapse of the front line Ukraine could fall back to the Vorskla or Samara and Severodonetsk rivers and extend the war for months years. Also It doesn't look like Russia could ever capture Odessa so that would be large bargain
![Twenty One Pilots - “The Line” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E2Rj2gQAyPA/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for watching! Give the video a LIKE and if you appreciate my efforts to bring diversified views then SUBSCRIBE!
Part 1: ruclips.net/video/FRJmE1ROqkM/видео.html
Part 2: ruclips.net/video/J8p_W3RF2XU/видео.html
Thanks for the links, always very helpful (if I hadn't already bookmarked them back then), and thanks for sharing this thought-provoking conversation. Something tells me there's more to come with Mr. Galeotti? I'll be looking much forward to it.
Kiev has been trying to use the war, and their perceived "special status" (enhanced by lobbying and PR of course) to be able to leapfrog into NATO and the EU. They figured they could demand that "VIP Lane" for themselves...but I think by now they're really beyond that, and several governments across Europe, as well as many ordianry people, are feeling disillusioned about Ukraine and really don't want the hazard and the costs it would mean to bring them in. Ukraine will likely end up being cleft in half, with the eastern half ceded to Russia: where exactly the border will be going depends in part on when the West and NATO are able to admit that the war has been lost.
I support Ukraine but we have to be serious about it there's no way that Ukraine will be in NATO ever it takes all 32 members to allow them to enter and hungry or turkey won't allow it
Great discussion. Thank you, gentlemen!
@@dougjones4538 much appreciated. Give it a share
Mark is wonderful to listen too. A true expert. Thank you!
"Ceasefire" is Putinese for "stopping to reload."
Why on earth would Putin go for ceasefire now?
@@ThisHandleWasTheOnly1Available Why would he invade Ukraine? Because he thinks he's going to be Russia's greatest tsar. Big mistake.
@@jim2376 It is on your stupid immagination.
The war end just on few terms:
1. No NATO for Ukraine.
2. 4 Regions (+ Crimea) will go to Russia.
3. Just a limit to size of the army.
End of story.
@@ThisHandleWasTheOnly1Available only to reinforce, build up bigger army and using same old threats start again.
@@seufer12
Yes! This is a very good example of russian propaganda, thank you!
1. No NATO for Ukraine: The war started before NATO membership was a serious option for Ukraine. Russia's aggression is more about control over Ukraine's sovereignty than NATO alone.
2. Giving up occupied territories: Surrendering territory would encourage more aggression from Russia, as it would validate conquest by force and likely not stop further ambitions.
3. Limiting Ukraine's army: Weakening Ukraine’s defense would leave it more vulnerable to future attacks from Russia, rather than securing peace.
Real world vs russian TV.
"You can have rule of law without democracy, you can't have democracy without rule of law" Brilliant interview, all three parts!
Shocking level of dissidence here..
Thank you 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
@@Joaodocaminhao0234 pleasure 👍👍👍
I don't understand why the West is so obsessed with a ceasefire. You had one between 2014 and 2022
1. The west and Ukraine didn't wanted to fullfill the Minsk II agreements.
2. Why it is so obsessed? Because Ukraine is losing and they know it. Because the ammunition depots in NATO are empty. USA has with Israel his attention. Perhaps that's why 🤫
because it's the best possible way to cut losses
@@sparkyfromel Temporarily. It will cause a lot more loses when fighting starts again.
@@tomispev of course , a cease fire is totally against Russia advantage , giving time for Ukraine to reorganize , refill , refit and get more weapon supply while making no concession
The US coup in Ukraine in 2014, the breaking of the Minsk agreement by Ukraine,their US puppet masters & the French & Germans is what led us to where we are today.
11:50 _"Europe can not make patriot missiles"_
There is a patriot assembly line in Germany.
it is like China making BMW cars
The Engineering powerhouse in Europe that invented the V rockets that were then taken to the US cannot produce missiles?
@@suganth72 LMFAo no its not. Patriot has capacity of 500 per year. Theres def more than 500 cars per annum. stop lying all over the youtube spheere.
Repair Nordstream please
@@des_smith7658- what for? To celebrate its emptiness??
A simple I don't know would suffice when asked about Putin's intentions. If he is a 19th century man it would be useful to remind ourselves that while Lviv wasn't part of the Russian empire then, Warsaw was, as the were the Baltic states or Finland. So what's the intention here?
Pyotr's pointed yet perceptive questions appear to anticipate Mark's answers. Great interview though. Thankyou.
NATO would learn a lot from Ukrainians on how to fight the modern wars.
nice to see Western wishful thinking verbalized, i am sure the same folks think that Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya are much better off now! when you can do no wrong and project your own values to others, you can only expect the other to change!
@@ozeeo nice to see someone completely incapable of actually understanding the videos topic and perspective
Thank you for your coverage and insights
🇬🇧🇺🇦🏴🇺🇦🏴🇺🇦🇪🇺
Brilliant!
Thanks for watching
Good show!
@@alacazaba thanks. Give it a share
Mark mentions that nonsense the Kremlin peddles about the Bolsheviks creating the Ukrainian SSR and before that Ukraine was not a country. Ukraine had a constitution in 1710. Almost 300 years before "ruzzia" got one in 1905! Google - Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk
Kiev is 650 years older than Moscow.
These two sound like a pair of weak Russian sympathathisers.🤨
Read Putins essay. He wants to rule the whole of Ukraine.
He was a Cossack. Totally different to current west Ukrainians
@@JesterEric That's nonsense the constitution was written in Ukrainian NOT ruzzian (There was also one latin copy for the king of Sweden). Cossacks are Ukrainians. ruzzians are serfs. Modern Ukrainians fight like their Cossack ancestors, they are a direct genetic ethno-cultural lineage. That's why ruzzia can't win.
If anything, Ukraine should own Russia 😊
Who says NATO attention is fading or going to fade?
I can't speak to NATO generally but US attention and support is certainly fading.
@@AfterTheIce-q4j Trump is doing his level best to support his Russian Friend, but is there a Poll to show a lowering of support for Ukraine?
@@OliverBootle1 I've attached a poll summary below but I'm not sure how helpful that it is. This past year, I've seen far more coverage of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Since almost half of the US electorate supports Trump, at least that many are at least okay with eliminating military aid to Ukraine.
"In March 2022, shortly after the invasion, about four-in-ten Americans said the U.S. was not providing enough support to Ukraine (42%). This share has since decreased by nearly 20 percentage points. Meanwhile, the share of those saying that the U.S. is providing too much support to Ukraine has grown from 7% in March 2022 to 31% in April 2024." (Pew Research)
@@AfterTheIce-q4j I am aware of a great many Republicans who do support Ukraine.We will see in a few weeks.
@@OliverBootle1 Yes, but even with near unanimous support from the Dems, recall how tough it was to get a major aid package through Congress earlier this year. Even if Harris wins, we're looking at an uphill climb in 2025. The Senate will probably be controlled by Republicans and I don't know who the new majority leader will be.
I have a sense that the US National Security Council takes Russian Balkanization very seriously. Their red lines make less sense in terms of preventing an already overstretched Russia from attacking NATO than in terms of protecting Russia from an unambiguous loss.
Whenever people suggest a ceasefire, they must explain who will ensure russia complies with the ceasefire, and, if they don't, who will force russia to comply with the ceasefire on the battlefield. Cannot say what group of countries will guarantee compliance with the ceasefire? Then don't suggest it because a ceasefire that cannot be enforced is meaningless.
Russia will ensure as long as Ukraine behaves...remember Minsk 1 & 2
There will be no ceasefire now. In the past there could have been. So the rest of your point is pointless or worthless?
Western people and "analysts" arrogantly assume that Russia is asking or is desperate for a ceasefire. You're getting total Capitulation of your proxy Ukraine. Wake up
@@suganth72 yep, aka nonsense agreement
Is Ukraine up against the clock? Drop your views in a comment
I think we are. But we can ride it out to 2025 when some pundits think ruzzia's war economy will implode and the million casualties will finally break society.
My view is that you've completely missed on half of your points.
I enjoyed your previous vidoes, but after listening to this one it became obvious that you have a very narrow Western understanding of the Russia and its goals. In a sense that you only interact with russia through western news/channels/experts and don't study actual russian info-sphere.
I suggest you talk more to Vlad Vexler to have a better understanding of the Putins goals.
No, it isn't. It is we, in "the west" who are up against the clock. Democracies look weaker and weaker. It's only a matter of time until russia's invasion spreads and NATO deterrence is proven hollow.
We've already observed US and NATO cowardice when Turkiye shot down a russian fighter jet in 2015, complete incoordination and incompetence withdrawing from Afghanistan, and their cowardice every time russian drones and missiles breach NATO members' airspace, and no answer to North Korea sending troops to Europe. And let's not even get into corruptible, weak sanctions.
It is us who are running up against the clock, because of incompetence and cowardice in our leadership.
Current russia MUST have an adversary to exist. When more than 40 % of russian gdp goes to fuel it's war, it can't just stop.
For Ukraine the endgame is only NATO. No lesser "agreements" will secure it's future.
For russia there is no end game, because when the war (smo) stops, the regime has nothing to propose.
Please listen to the people, who knows russia not from the tv or news, but from their own history and experience (Ukrainian, Estonian, Latvian, Georgian, Lithuanian, etc.)
Read what Jack F. Matlock have to say about that.
Talk of Balkanising Russia is not unlike talking of Wales, Cornwall, and Scotland all gaining independence - too much water under the bridge and shared history. Even if Russia lose completely and Putin is deposed, Russia won't likely break up. The parts of Soviet union that would break off from Russia did, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
I don't agree with the idea that Putin only really wants the minimalist aims of the Donbas though.
Thanks!
You bet!
The soviet identity meant different things over the 70 years of existence. In the Baltics, there was conformity in because of risk, but deep ethnic identity persisted, especially as Soviet just became Russian.
Good talk. Some comments. Just because a nation loses a war doesn't mean it breaks up and seperates into different countries. Iraq lost the Gulf War of 1991 and it didn't break up (Yes it had to deal with kurdish rebels). A nation may go into an economic slump but I just don't see Russia balkanizing, it's central government is too strong and provides services for people in the far east who are very remote. If it was to balkanize than those services in the far east from the government would cease. But could the government collapse? Sure. Will it collapse? I don't know.
Great work Thx both
Glad you enjoyed it
Slava Ukraini 😊
Sala uranili, gerojam na sala 🤣
The incentive to support Ukraine is waning in the US and will fully collapse if a Trump presidency is achieved after the election. This is not an outcome I’d like to see, but American interest and attention is very short and this war has inconvenienced American interests way too much. They would like to focus on opposing China and pulling out Russia from the Chinese sphere.
You are correct.
but the ONLY way to pull Ru out from Chinese sphere is defeat of Ru in Ukr, definitive defeat! A coalition of the wiling, probably ten nations can help Ukr nail Ru's ass out of Ukr lands and create a permanent no fly zones. This is increasingly what looks likely bcuz otherwise, Ru will probably start to destroy all of Ukr's infrastructure and Kyiv and ports, which is an unacceptable risk bcuz Ukr would be nonfunctional for 15 years, ie EU would have to take 15 M more ppl, it's impossible. Same w/ cost to repair for 5-15 years of ENTIRE infra. Not feasible. A coalition force makes far more sense! Proactive!
The notion that the war in Ukraine would end if Ukraine abandoned NATO aspirations, surrendered occupied territories, or limited the size of its army is flawed. The war began long before NATO membership was a serious consideration, with Russia’s actions rooted more in its desire for control over Ukraine’s sovereignty than concerns about NATO. Simply giving up occupied territories would likely embolden Russia, signaling that territorial conquest through force is acceptable, which could lead to further aggression. Similarly, limiting Ukraine’s military would weaken its defenses and leave the country vulnerable to future attacks, rather than ensuring lasting peace.
why did you just regurgitate western propaganda?
Ukraine should assume status like that of Taiwan or Palestine, after all US/NATO have been supporting it on those nations.
@@shaun1463 they are plain facts that any international court would agree with. Objective reality has always been a problem for modern Ru/soviets. Your disinfo will no longer be tolerated like it was for now 85 years plus! bleep off!
@@rockmusic175 NATO supported Palestine??
I do encourage you to go to Ukraine recruitment center and get yourself ready for combat. That would mean more than posting in the comfort of your room.
There never has been democracy in Russia, which ponders a question that if the Tzars was still in power today and Russia invaded Ukraine in the name of self defence, what side would the UK have backed?
Ukraine still, the UK and Russia also fought in Crimea a few centuries ago.
For Russia there is only victory & unconditional surrender.
I think Russia would agree to a ceasefire that recognizes the facts on the ground and denies future membership in NATO to Ukraine.
Russia didn't care if USA lead forces stayed in Germany, Poland, etc. Is it too much to ask not to have USA lead NATO in the Ukraine?
Americans are getting ready for Mail order bride this Christmas!
I think he tried both in the beginning of the war.
No. And war ends only when russia is defeated. Since "russia has no borders".
Then the war will not end.
@@AfterTheIce-q4j THUS, a coalition of the willing would be needed to 'contain' ru once and for all. USSR is gone, Ru power is gone. Kaput.
Putin on Russian Balkanization: "Never again!"
You won't decide that 🤣
Nor will the West @@seufer12
I think Russia would accept that Ukraine become a part of NATO on condition that they receive recognition of new territory I think that might have to be considered through a referendum in Ukraine plus Ukraine gets 100 billion in reparations
No way. If Russia gets to keep some low value territories in the east, and western Ukraine gets to join NATO, that's what losing the war looks like for the Russians.
Russia will not accept Ukrainian membership in NATO. Russia will not pay reparations to Ukraine. I support Ukraine but let's be real.
If every single NATO country started to contribute 50% of what Denmark does per capita GDP nominal the same way we calculate NATO military spending 2%, and stop putting restrictions on weapons use and stop doing like the USA government who has only allowed Denmark to give 19 F-16 to Ukraine when pilots was ready which is also going slow because the US Government limits the number of pilots trained, the weapons and money are available Norway alone a very small donor similar to the USA who is like number 17 🤷♂️ Norway has 1,8 trillion dollars in their wealth fund there GDP nominal per capita makes Denmark and the USA look like middle income countries 🤷♂️ Denmark also has a little natural resources but Sweden has almost none they have in their latest donation taken up some loans to help Ukraine which is a little sad when you look at Norway profiting from the war enormously while giving as modesty as the USA who is also profiting off the war.
Not per capita but in all Denmark gives more than France, Italy and Spain combined, Spain seems to be improving but the new stuff is not delivered just yet and even then the what 170 million people of the tree countries V Denmark 5,9 million people and Denmark still donate more 🤷♂️ it can easily be won if people who claim to support Ukraine start doing so, 50% of Denmarks is enough, and you GDP per capita nominal is of course taken into account, it is the most fair.
Bring Ukraine into NATO NOW!
Malo su dve noge za toliku pamet!
That will not happen. Please try to exist in the real world.
Hahahah!!!
You started out using Bosnia as an example. Why? I do not believe in forced integrations of people groups, but maintaining Colonial or Versailles Treaty boundaries is just as stupid an idea. The problem with Bosnia is it has 3 mostly defined people group areas. There are Bosniak (Muslim), Croatian, and Serbian areas. Only 1 narrow Canton/Federal State separates 2 large Serbian ethnic areas. I would eliminate Bosnia as a country by allowing the populations to vote on annexation and/or independent status. Many Croatians and Serbian Cantons might vote for annexation. The Bosnian areas may vote for Independence or an autonomous area within another country, like Croatia. Cities and Towns bordering where country lines will be drawn, many have voted to join another country. As long as it is contiguous, this should be allowed. All citizens resident in a country they do NOT want to remain, can apply for resettlement. Land or property will be traded when and where available. If no property is available, up to €250,000 will be paid for resettlement. These costs would be split evenly by each country. The 1 small Canton where forced relocation may occur, up to €1,000,000 will be paid for resettlement. This would better preserve peace than the current structure.
NATO attention is NEVER going to fade. EVER
With what military. Europe is in recession without Russian energy.
@rockmusic175 Even if that was true and/or relevant, NATO isn't just Europe anyway.
Just like IN Afghanistan
@@amilesangweni3823 Afghans wanted a ride, not ammunition ;)
@@bg1616 and it only took you 20 years and 2 trillion $$ to figure that out
But remind me again who running Afghanistan and who left billions of $ OF 🇺🇸 weapons 🤔
PENTAGON - Russia's military is bigger and stronger than it was prior to invading Ukraine in February 2022, the commander of United States Air Forces in Europe and Africa cautioned Tuesday.
Galeotti: reconstituting their forces is going to take in my opinion at least 8 years
Stupidity of this degree already makes him pro-Russian
How is a Putin-whisperer supposed to answer these questions?
Quite a level headed expert. I've been listening to his analysis for a while. And though I may not agree in some points, I still appreciate the tone of many of his assesments (today's in particular). Best wishes from Moscow. Hope in the end averyone comes to therir senses, and all those militaty blocks and rivalries can give way to actuall piece and prosperity.
In the words from a Russian science fiction novel: "Happiness for everyone, free of charge, and let no one get left behind!"
Obviously.not, stupid question!
@@YannHousden said people at the start of the war. Yet here we are. So no, it’s not.
@@theglobalgambit the Russians never said that, only the western/Ukrainian echo chamber did Putin ever say "in three days we take Kyiv"? Nope, it's a western propaganda narrative. The idea was not to take Kyiv, but force them to negotiations, that aim was achieved, but they tricked the Russians again, and pulled out, when the army left Kyiv region "out of good will"!
🇺🇦
How this guy is a. Russian specialist when he doesn’t seems to listen to what the Russian say now, let alone knowing anything Russians since 1991….. or at least since the emergence of Putin from 1999….. He seems a fool to me now!!!! 😢😢😢
So does your fake account
@@theglobalgambit fake account? Well, you’ll Learn in time when it obvious to you too!!!
Although although you are Ukraine is corrupt anyways Russia is just as corrupt or more! I hope they can get moving into the new year
Why won’t pro Ukraine comments publish? Only the Russian bots getting published here 😢
Errr…you trolling ?
@@theglobalgambitAbsolutely not. Several of my pro Ukrainian comments didn’t appear, yet many of the Russian bot comments did.
@@theglobalgambit Of course he is asking the opposite. This channel is heavily censored. I recently got a 24 hour youtube ban for asking about Putin here. Someone denounced me. No wonder this channel in not growing and views are dismal.
@MrBudgiejoe
I noticed that. I put in a reference to Putins essay, in reply to a pro Putin fan and they never posted it.
@sezwo5774
I got a warning too, in reference to Putin saying if I made another similar remark, I will be barred. 🤨
Where do you get the idea that NATO's attention is waning? I can see no sign of that, on the contrary. With the advent of N Korean troops on the battlefield, it will even be rejuvinated. I would rather say it's Putin's race against time, not Ukraine's. Can he sustain the murderous losses until victory before his very small economy gives way? I doubt it.
I don't know about Europe but US attention and support are certainly waning.
East Germany was an internationally recognized country of its own and West Germany didn't pursue reunification with military means and did expect it might take a long time or never happen. Ukraine will never agree to something similar. Completely unrealistic.
Ukraine was invaded. Germany was divided after it fucked around no end.
@@thesilkpainter The comparison isn't about that, it is about a solution for Nato membership. It is proposed that it could be based on the "German model", which is not comparable with Ukrain's situation today.
This mark character has been utterly wrong with regard to Putin/Russia/Ukraine on every single level. Clueless “professor” I’ll say.
A bit ironic the a Brit is claiming Russia is imperialistic. How many colonies did Russia have vs UK? Wasnt England the largest colonization of recent history? When was Russia sailing around conquering lands in Africa, India. North America, Asia, etc?
Russia colonised Siberia, far east.
All the Central Asian countries.
Parts of central and eastern Europe.
How did a small duchy of Moscovy became a the biggest country ever spanning 11 tiime zones? Did russia set all their colonies free like the British?
Russia was always a land based imperialist power. It was way more focused on its near abroad terrestrial sphere of influence than in far off continents like Africa. It’s why they never participated in the scramble for Africa.
If you read your history you’d know that.
@@widerje look up The Great Game
The Brits, however, eventually gave up their colonies and it is accepted that it wasn't that good an idea in the first place. Russia is still trying to gain them. Big difference.
Mark Galeotti becomes more clueless, more delusional,
and more detached from reality with each passing day.
Maybe a genius like you should explain exactly where you think he’s going wrong and why 😅
@@MrBudgiejoe lol from start to end?
UKRAINE'S WINNING! 😂🤡
The Disrupter in chief has to please the weapons industry. And Trump could lead to worse Business for that profitable industry
ru propaganda, which has been exposed as pushing or main populist rightwing extremist zealots, a'la Tenet media! Nice try ruskie/russiye! You're soon to be kaput!
9:30 US contractors are drooling at the prospects for the reconstruction and rearmament.
lol so ukraine men and women fighting to get the right to sell their raw materials to buy western weapons? say it aint so.
@@shaun1463 It is so!! Ukrainians are suckers!
@@shaun1463 total b.s. As usual, ru-bots or ru-apologists (torture apologists, replete with sex toy laden torture dens with bins of pulled teeth!!!!!!!!! ,we saw those pics! Now 140K documented cases of war crimes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Half of big city of Kherson was tortured !!!! Mariupol! ). There's no selling of Ukr's raw materials. More ignorance and propaganda so similar to Soviet, hmmm
What bogus statement is, Dynamic Stalemates!!! This man is a constant disappointment!!!!😢😢😢
INWOULD ADVICE YOU TO LISTEN TO COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR, THE DURAN, ALEX CHRISTOFOROU, ALEXANDER MERCOURIS AND MANY MORE ABOUT THIS WAR
They are only sources for the gullible.
Gave up on this pompus plank at "a ceasefire is not an agreement".
A unilateral ceasefire is a surrender, but a bilateral ceasefire has to be an agreement by definition.
@@d.e.7210 a ceasefire isn’t a PEACE AGREEMENT. Try learning the lingo before making a fool of yourself
Typical discussion by westerners who think they understand the 5 W's of this conflict. Pretty sad.
Ukr will never be part of nato.
I think the question is will Russia put up with puttin long enough to win the War
lol
Dynamic stalemate. lol. More deluded limeys.
Full of trolls here
This is idiotic analysis.
This guy is a fool there a big chance Ukraine army will break that how war if attrition work.
& you think there's no chance Ruzzia will break?.. why do you think Putin is so eager to use non-ruzzian troops?..🧐
if we look at the current situation , Ukraine has a lack of manpower their enemy has a bigger population four times bigger than Ukraine , and Ukraine is completely depending on their allies , and the only thing that Russia needs from their allies like Iran or china is only drones or missiles , the only way that Russia might lose the war of attrition is a complete collapse of their economy which will take a lot of time because their economy is depends on oil and gas which is easy to sell under sanctions @@leifiseland1218
Putin has to rely on NORTH KOREANS for God’s sake 😂😂
@@MrBudgiejoe we still remember Russia out of missiles, Sanctions are crippling Russia.....blah..blah..blaa...
@@leifiseland1218 really ? i remember not too long ago , the russians were also accused of killing nord stream . after 1-2 years , now they said its not .
😂what a silly foppish circular oratory. The Ukrainian Army is folding, the people will feeze w/o power this winter, Zelensky has forbidden elections, negotiations, and naysayers. And these two talk like there are things Ukrainians can demand..? Poppycock !!
Countries don't usually hold elections during war time xx
@@LindaJoyce-r2z nope. We (NATO and allies) helped both Afghanistan and Iraq hold elections during widespread war. I was there. It was important. Zelensky will be voted out in a New York minute.
Fact : UKraine has lost all its Counteroffensive gains and in fact this reversal has extended into more losses in terms of land area to the Russians . If there is a ceasefire now , Ukraine would lose over 1/5 of its land since they rejected the 2022 istanbul peace negotiations . Kursk front is also capitulating for the Ukranians .
Fact: 2+2= 17
@@LLlap Fandi Ahmad hurray !
Full copium
Says the dumbass simpleton unable to provide any actual counter arguments
@@theglobalgambitThe evidence is on the battlefield: Kiev regime forces are losing everywhere.
@@CountDuckEgg exactly but to be honest your wasting your time on these fools
@@theglobalgambit wait for November 5th .
I guarantee you that Russian tanks will enter Kiev and beyond and that this 'expert: hadn't got a clue.
You troll have a clue
Russian tanks at this point wouldn't need to enter Kiev at a certain point before then Ukraine would start collapsing and as soon as that happens they sign away the Kharkiv Dnipro and Zap and if that doesn't work they throw in Odessa. Even with a collapse of the front line Ukraine could fall back to the Vorskla or Samara and Severodonetsk rivers and extend the war for months years. Also It doesn't look like Russia could ever capture Odessa so that would be large bargain
Your guarantees are as worthless as your life.
20 rubles well earned. or is it 40 now?
Thanks!
Thanks to you!