Ukraine Agrees to a 30-Day Cease Fire

 

From ISW:

The United States and Ukraine agreed on March 11 to an immediate 30-day ceasefire in Ukraine contingent on Russia’s agreement, and the US reportedly restarted intelligence sharing and military aid.

Some of the details from the meetings with US and Ukrainian representatives in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia:

The joint statement noted that the United States will immediately lift its suspension on intelligence sharing and military assistance to Ukraine. The United States and Ukraine also agreed to finalize a deal on minerals as soon as possible. Ukraine reiterated in the joint statement that European partners will be involved in the peace process. The United States and Ukraine also discussed humanitarian relief to Ukraine, especially during the ceasefire, including the return of prisoners of war (POWs), detained civilians, and forcibly deported Ukrainian children to Ukraine. Ukrainian Presidential Office Deputy Head Pavlo Palisa confirmed on March 11 that the United States has already resumed the flow of military assistance to Ukraine. A source close to the Ukrainian government told CNN that the United States also fully restored intelligence sharing to Ukraine on March 11.

Radio Free Europe is reporting that Ukrainian forces are leaving the Kursk region of Russia due to the fact that it is not a realistic bargaining chip in future negotiations. The cease fire would take place across the entire frontlines of Ukraine. US military aid stored in Poland that had been on hold is crossing into Ukraine at the present time.

While there has been no official word from the Kremlin, Russian military bloggers have been stating that the cease fire is unacceptable.

Published in Military
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 30 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Trump has in the past said there will be consequences. Maybe Vladimir the terrorist isn’t done blowing up Ukrainian civilians yet. He might need to see the “economic sanctions” you referred to before. I hope they work.

    • #1
  2. Susan Quinn Member
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    I can’t imagine Putin going along with this agreement. We’ll see….

    • #2
  3. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    Just finished Jim Geraghty’s Morning Jolt. According to him, and he lists lots of other examples of Putin not doing what he promised to do, there is little chance that Putin will agree, and if he does even less chance that he will abide by the terms. His assessment of the Trump administration’s handling of this situation is pretty grim, and I can find no argument against it. Trump seems to want peace at any price, so long as he doesn’t have to pay the price. It all seems a little reminiscent of Biden and the Israel/Hamas conflict. It would be nice, for once, if an American president would allow morality to be the determiner of our foreign policy rather than just getting the job done. Trump’s claim that he would end this war in mere days seems to be motivating him to do anything to achieve that goal, no matter who pays. Unless he pulls a very large, healthy rabbit out of his hat in the next few days, he is going to look like what he so often does look like, a blustering blowhard.

    • #3
  4. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Trump’s contempt for Zelenskyy has been made manifest. Putin has noted that and may play into that by “agreeing” and then provoking the Ukrainians to respond to violations of the cease-fire. Or he could make use of the thirty days to prepare a new offensive. Either way., the “Kick Me” sign on Trump’s back may be more than the KGB thug can resist. I hope I’m wrong.

    • #4
  5. Doug Watt Member
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    An interesting side note when Russian and US reps met Russia wants direct flights to the US to resume. This could lead to resuming normal flights from Europe as well.

    Commercial traffic is more than just landing fees. Releasing sanctions could lead to trade resuming between Russia and the US as well as the EU. 

    • #5
  6. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    An interesting side note when Russian and US reps met Russia wants direct flights to the US to resume. This could lead to resuming normal flights from Europe as well.

    Commercial traffic is more than just landing fees. Releasing sanctions could lead to trade resuming between Russia and the US as well as the EU.

    • #6
  7. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):
    His assessment of the Trump administration’s handling of this situation is pretty grim, and I can find no argument against it. Trump seems to want peace at any price, so long as he doesn’t have to pay the price. It all seems a little reminiscent of Biden and the Israel/Hamas conflict

    I do not follow Jim Geraghty. I understand that some people highly respect his opinions. As such, I am sure someone here can answer my questions and shed light on my ignorance. Has Jim Geraghty approved of anything either Trump administration has done? And for you, Eugene, is there something intrinsically wrong with wanting peace? And if there is a price to be paid, how is it that Trump will be the one paying it, and not you or I or any of 10’s of millions of other civilians affected by World War III? To achieve a possible lasting peace, according to Trump’s stated plan, it is necessary to first stop the killing and start talking. What is it about that plan that you find unacceptable?

    • #7
  8. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    Doug Watt: Radio Free Europe is reporting that Ukrainian forces are leaving the Kursk region of Russia due to the fact that it is not a realistic bargaining chip in future negotiations.

    That’s one way to spin it.

    Reality:

     

    • #8
  9. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    Following up on my previous comment:

     

    • #9
  10. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    cdor (View Comment):

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):
    His assessment of the Trump administration’s handling of this situation is pretty grim, and I can find no argument against it. Trump seems to want peace at any price, so long as he doesn’t have to pay the price. It all seems a little reminiscent of Biden and the Israel/Hamas conflict

    I do not follow Jim Geraghty. I understand that some people highly respect his opinions. As such, I am sure someone here can answer my questions and shed light on my ignorance. Has Jim Geraghty approved of anything either Trump administration has done? And for you, Eugene, is there something intrinsically wrong with wanting peace? And if there is a price to be paid, how is it that Trump will be the one paying it, and not you or I or any of 10’s of millions of other civilians affected by World War III? To achieve a possible lasting peace, according to Trump’s stated plan, it is necessary to first stop the killing and start talking. What is it about that plan that you find unacceptable?

    Jim is very fair with Trump. He is not a fan, but he often compliments Trump for doing things less controverial than this. Jim has been back to Ukraine twice in the last year. He spent a week or more each time, traveling extensively and interviewing a lot of citizens. He has a very good feeling for the country and its people. He understands their fight and their unwillingness to surrender their country to a monster who has murdered thousands of the people and kidnapped their children, not to mention turning their cities into rubble piles.

    I have no problem with peace. I certainly would like to see an end to this particular struggle for both sides. The killing has been appalling, as Jim points out on average the Russians have lost as many soldiers each year of this conflict as we did in the 20 years of the Vietnam war. I do not believe that the Ukrainians should surrender to a criminal dictator who invaded their country twice without provocation and allow that dictator to keep 20% of their country he currently holds. I do not believe that WWIII is a possibility either. Putin is a foul beast, but he isn’t an idiot. He no more wants a nuclear war than we do. If he wasn’t afraid of that he would likely have not waited until Biden took office to start his invasion. He saw a weakened US and thought he could achieve his goals with minimal risk to himself and Mother Russia. He miscalculated. As far as Trump’s “plan”, I suspect that there isn’t one. He is making it up as he goes along. He thought he could bluff Putin into treaty negotiations and that isn’t happening yet. If it does, more power to Trump for doing it, but I wouldn’t be holding my breath, and like his threat to Hamas, it may be exactly what I said it would look like in my previous post. This isn’t a poker game or a business negotiation, it is the real world, and, if you bluff, you had better be ready with something more substantial if your bluff does not achieve your aim.

    • #10
  11. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    cdor (View Comment):

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):
    His assessment of the Trump administration’s handling of this situation is pretty grim, and I can find no argument against it. Trump seems to want peace at any price, so long as he doesn’t have to pay the price. It all seems a little reminiscent of Biden and the Israel/Hamas conflict

    I do not follow Jim Geraghty. I understand that some people highly respect his opinions. As such, I am sure someone here can answer my questions and shed light on my ignorance. Has Jim Geraghty approved of anything either Trump administration has done?

    Geraghty gives Trump praise all the time.  He has given almost no praise at all to the Biden Administration, and to democrats in general.  It’s just that Geraghty is not a worshiping sycophant like many other pundits.  He calls things like he sees them, without regard for his personal feelings about Trump.

    And for you, Eugene, is there something intrinsically wrong with wanting peace?

    “Peace” is a meaningless term without the context.  Poland, Belgium, Holland, Norway, Denmark, and France were at peace after the Nazis crushed them.  So was Korea after the Japanese crushed them and took away 100,000 of their women to be used as sex slaves.  Peace only means the absence of  war, not an equitable situation for both sides.  The 17 countries that the Soviet Union conquered and made subjugated territories were at peace for some 45 years while enduring the hardships of Soviet rule.

    And if there is a price to be paid, how is it that Trump will be the one paying it, and not you or I or any of 10’s of millions of other civilians affected by World War III?

    Trump’s fragile ego will be paying for it.  As far as the rest of us, it depends on your point of view.  I’m not sure what this “World War III” is that you reference.

    To achieve a possible lasting peace, according to Trump’s stated plan, it is necessary to first stop the killing and start talking. What is it about that plan that you find unacceptable?

    Ukraine has agreed to that in very short order.  Now what about Russia?  They’ve been given the opportunity for a few days now with no reply………..

    • #11
  12. Doug Watt Member
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    Putin has a difficult decision to make. His first problem was that the Ukrainians did not welcome him as a liberator three years ago.

    I don’t see an easy path to a cease fire. Putin’s second problem is he cannot afford to see this war end with a Ukraine that is rebuilt and has an economy that begins to thrive with the help of the US and the EU, especially if Russia chooses China to help the Russian economy. That help comes with a heavy price especially if China seeks to be repaid with developing Russian natural resources in the Pacific side of Russia.

    • #12
  13. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    I think that none of us knows where it goes from here. But I also think if we had stayed with the Biden plan, this would’ve ended up with a war between the United States and Russia. That is where World War III comes in.

    • #13
  14. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    cdor (View Comment):

    I think that none of us knows where it goes from here. But I also think if we had stayed with the Biden plan, this would’ve ended up with a war between the United States and Russia. That is where World War III comes in.

    How could that have happened?  Ukraine has never asked us or any other country in the world for troops, and the United States has never even suggested sending any, even under Biden.  This whole idea of World War III has never perturbed me.  If, for some reason, the United States were to get into a war with Russia, we would roll them over within a matter of weeks, if not days.  The buggers can’t even get more than 150 miles into Ukraine in three years.  How long do you think it would have taken the U.S. to plow through 150 miles of Ukraine?

    A very recent clash shows how backwards Russia is militarily vs. the United States.  In 2018, a group of 500 Russian and Syrian Soldiers in tanks attacked a small U.S. outpost of ten(!) soldiers in Syria in the middle of the night in 2018.  30 U.S. Delta Force Soldiers and Rangers scrambled from 20 miles away to help defend the tiny outpost.  The result was that the Russians and Syrians fled in terror, about 300 of them being killed in the process.  The Americans even gave the attackers a 15 minute window at the very beginning of the attack in which they withheld their fire.  An estimated 200 Russian Soldiers died that night.  There wasn’t a single casualty among the Americans, not even an injury. 

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/battle-syria-us-russian-mercenaries-commandos-islamic-state-a8370781.html

    • #14
  15. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    I think that none of us knows where it goes from here. But I also think if we had stayed with the Biden plan, this would’ve ended up with a war between the United States and Russia. That is where World War III comes in.

    How could that have happened? Ukraine has never asked us or any other country in the world for troops, and the United States has never even suggested sending any, even under Biden. This whole idea of World War III has never perturbed me. If, for some reason, the United States were to get into a war with Russia, we would roll them over within a matter of weeks, if not days. The buggers can’t even get more than 150 miles into Ukraine in three years. How long do you think it would have taken the U.S. to plow through 150 miles of Ukraine?

    A very recent clash shows how backwards Russia is militarily vs. the United States. In 2018, a group of 500 Russian and Syrian Soldiers in tanks attacked a small U.S. outpost of ten(!) soldiers in Syria in the middle of the night in 2018. 30 U.S. Delta Force Soldiers and Rangers scrambled from 20 miles away to help defend the tiny outpost. The result was that the Russians and Syrians fled in terror, about 300 of them being killed in the process. The Americans even gave the attackers a 15 minute window at the very beginning of the attack in which they withheld their fire. An estimated 200 Russian Soldiers died that night. There wasn’t a single casualty among the Americans, not even an injury.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/battle-syria-us-russian-mercenaries-commandos-islamic-state-a8370781.html

    How could that have happened? I don’t know Steven, it seems very obvious to me. The United States is supplying Ukraine with weapons. Those weapons continue to get more and more lethal. Ukraine decides to use those weapons to attack a major Russian city. The attack is successful and kills thousands upon thousands of Russians. The Russians respond. And send a nuclear weapon into the United States. You would rather take that chance it seems, than attempt a chance for a resolution of this conflict. I am glad that Trump is president and you are not because I hope that he is successful in ending this war that I believe the Biden administration encouraged.

    • #15
  16. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    cdor (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    I think that none of us knows where it goes from here. But I also think if we had stayed with the Biden plan, this would’ve ended up with a war between the United States and Russia. That is where World War III comes in.

    How could that have happened? Ukraine has never asked us or any other country in the world for troops, and the United States has never even suggested sending any, even under Biden. This whole idea of World War III has never perturbed me. If, for some reason, the United States were to get into a war with Russia, we would roll them over within a matter of weeks, if not days. The buggers can’t even get more than 150 miles into Ukraine in three years. How long do you think it would have taken the U.S. to plow through 150 miles of Ukraine?

    A very recent clash shows how backwards Russia is militarily vs. the United States. In 2018, a group of 500 Russian and Syrian Soldiers in tanks attacked a small U.S. outpost of ten(!) soldiers in Syria in the middle of the night in 2018. 30 U.S. Delta Force Soldiers and Rangers scrambled from 20 miles away to help defend the tiny outpost. The result was that the Russians and Syrians fled in terror, about 300 of them being killed in the process. The Americans even gave the attackers a 15 minute window at the very beginning of the attack in which they withheld their fire. An estimated 200 Russian Soldiers died that night. There wasn’t a single casualty among the Americans, not even an injury.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/battle-syria-us-russian-mercenaries-commandos-islamic-state-a8370781.html

    How could that have happened? I don’t know Steven, it seems very obvious to me. The United States is supplying Ukraine with weapons. Those weapons continue to get more and more lethal. Ukraine decides to use those weapons to attack a major Russian city. The attack is successful and kills thousands upon thousands of Russians. The Russians respond. And send a nuclear weapon into the United States. You would rather take that chance it seems, than attempt a chance for a resolution of this conflict. I am glad that Trump is president and you are not because I hope that he is successful in ending this war that I believe the Biden administration encouraged.

    I am not afraid of a Russian nuclear attack (assuming they could even carry one out.  It is not clear whether they have even maintained their nuclear arsenal over the last 35 years).  It would end their country within a week.  Putin knows this.  Your alternative is that the United States  must bow down to every demand Russia makes in the future.  If we have to do this against military weakling Russia, what happens when China starts making demands on us?  We are supposed to be the strongest country on Earth, but we are not acting like it.

    Ronald Reagan never gave in to Soviet demands, and the Russians were far closer to us in military strength then than they are now.  Even Jimmy Carter, considered a weak President, sent weapons to Afghanistan fighters without fear of  Soviet reprisals despite the specter of nuclear war.  We lived through 40 years of the constant threat of nuclear annihilation.  I went through drills of “duck and cover” in elementary school in preparation for such an attack and we had special places set aside as “fallout shelters.”

    Now, our new generation cowers in fear from a backwards country that couldn’t even reach our shores if they wanted to do us harm.

    • #16
  17. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    An interesting side note when Russian and US reps met Russia wants direct flights to the US to resume. This could lead to resuming normal flights from Europe as well.

    Commercial traffic is more than just landing fees. Releasing sanctions could lead to trade resuming between Russia and the US as well as the EU.

    This seems very dangerous to me, like Biden’s releasing the sanctions on Iran. We know how that turned out. 

    • #17
  18. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    MarciN (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    An interesting side note when Russian and US reps met Russia wants direct flights to the US to resume. This could lead to resuming normal flights from Europe as well.

    Commercial traffic is more than just landing fees. Releasing sanctions could lead to trade resuming between Russia and the US as well as the EU.

    This seems very dangerous to me, like Biden’s releasing the sanctions on Iran. We know how that turned out.

    And letting Putin get more money again could lead to more invasions in the future, as well as other mischief.

    • #18
  19. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    cdor (View Comment):

    I think that none of us knows where it goes from here. But I also think if we had stayed with the Biden plan, this would’ve ended up with a war between the United States and Russia. That is where World War III comes in.

    I don’t think that there is any question that Trump is far better on this and just about every other than the Biden administration (note, I cite the “administration” not Biden who I consider a wax effigy dressed in a suit.) I only question Trump’s bombast which is far more wind than substance on this and the issue of Hamas. At least in the latter case he is supplying the arms needed to finish the job. Trump isn’t perfect, probably isn’t even great, but compared to any Democrat he is, as said in Hamlet, Hyperion to a satyr.

    • #19
  20. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    I’m glad that the US and Ukraine have finally agreed on a ceasefire. It’s been rather unseemly for the US to be attacking the victim and its erstwhile ally.

    Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect.

    • #20
  21. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    I’m glad that the US and Ukraine have finally agreed on a ceasefire. It’s been rather unseemly for the US to be attacking the victim and its erstwhile ally.

    Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect.

    It takes two to do a Ceasefire Tango. Absent that, a ceasefire cannot be in effect. Definitionally.

    • #21
  22. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    I’m glad that the US and Ukraine have finally agreed on a ceasefire. It’s been rather unseemly for the US to be attacking the victim and its erstwhile ally.

    Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect.

    It takes two to do a Ceasefire Tango. Absent that, a ceasefire cannot be in effect. Definitionally.

    Exactly. Russia has agreed to nothing. So there is no ceasefire. We’ve just agreed to stop our shameful behavior of attacking the victim.

    • #22
  23. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    I’m glad that the US and Ukraine have finally agreed on a ceasefire. It’s been rather unseemly for the US to be attacking the victim and its erstwhile ally.

    Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect.

    It takes two to do a Ceasefire Tango. Absent that, a ceasefire cannot be in effect. Definitionally.

    Exactly. Russia has agreed to nothing. So there is no ceasefire. We’ve just agreed to stop our shameful behavior of attacking the victim.

    From “Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect” to “Exactly. Russia has agreed to nothing. So there is no ceasefire”, in under 15 minutes.

    Amazing rhetorical “dexterity”.

    • #23
  24. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    I’m glad that the US and Ukraine have finally agreed on a ceasefire. It’s been rather unseemly for the US to be attacking the victim and its erstwhile ally.

    Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect.

    It takes two to do a Ceasefire Tango. Absent that, a ceasefire cannot be in effect. Definitionally.

    Exactly. Russia has agreed to nothing. So there is no ceasefire. We’ve just agreed to stop our shameful behavior of attacking the victim.

    From “Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect” to “Exactly. Russia has agreed to nothing. So there is no ceasefire”, in under 15 minutes.

    Amazing rhetorical “dexterity”.

    I think you misunderstood.

    • #24
  25. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    I’m glad that the US and Ukraine have finally agreed on a ceasefire. It’s been rather unseemly for the US to be attacking the victim and its erstwhile ally.

    Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect.

    It takes two to do a Ceasefire Tango. Absent that, a ceasefire cannot be in effect. Definitionally.

    Exactly. Russia has agreed to nothing. So there is no ceasefire. We’ve just agreed to stop our shameful behavior of attacking the victim.

    From “Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect” to “Exactly. Russia has agreed to nothing. So there is no ceasefire”, in under 15 minutes.

    Amazing rhetorical “dexterity”.

    I highly suspect Steve knows what a ceasefire is and wrote it how he did for a slight comic effect.

    • #25
  26. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    I’m glad that the US and Ukraine have finally agreed on a ceasefire. It’s been rather unseemly for the US to be attacking the victim and its erstwhile ally.

    Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect.

    Enough time has passed that I feel pretty confident that Russia has already rejected the ceasefire, as expected.  The ball is back in Trump’s court again, and it will be very revealing how he handles this uncertain situation.

    • #26
  27. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    I’m glad that the US and Ukraine have finally agreed on a ceasefire. It’s been rather unseemly for the US to be attacking the victim and its erstwhile ally.

    Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect.

    Enough time has passed that I feel pretty confident that Russia has already rejected the ceasefire, as expected. The ball is back in Trump’s court again, and it will be very revealing how he handles this uncertain situation.

    Well, I didn’t speak soon enough.  News is out that Putin has rejected the ceasefire and has even made ridiculous demands on top of this!  For instance, Ukraine should not be allowed to mobilize nor train soldiers during a ceasefire, while Russia gets to do whatever it wants.  This was not from the Babylon Bee:

    https://www.nationalreview.com/news/russia-says-its-ready-to-discuss-peace-negotiations-with-u-s-immediately/

    Meanwhile, Putin claims he is very interested in continuing the useless peace negotiations (that have led to absolutely nothing but further Russian demands), thereby leading the naive Trump on a never-ending game of “catch me if you can.”  So much for Trump’s 24-hour resolution to the war!

     

    • #27
  28. Susan Quinn Member
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Steven Seward (View Comment):
    Meanwhile, Putin claims he is very interested in continuing the useless peace negotiations (that have led to absolutely nothing but further Russian demands), thereby leading the naive Trump on a never-ending game of “catch me if you can.”  So much for Trump’s 24-hour resolution to the war!

    Steve–doesn’t this sound eerily like Hamas and Israel?!

    • #28
  29. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):
    Meanwhile, Putin claims he is very interested in continuing the useless peace negotiations (that have led to absolutely nothing but further Russian demands), thereby leading the naive Trump on a never-ending game of “catch me if you can.” So much for Trump’s 24-hour resolution to the war!

    Steve–doesn’t this sound eerily like Hamas and Israel?!

    Yep!  That’s one of the reasons we used to employ the concept of “don’t negotiate with terrorists.”  That applies to autocratic dictators, too.  We never negotiated with Saddam Hussein, Muammar Quaddafi, or Japan and Germany.  We just made demands and then destroyed them when they didn’t comply.

    We have regrettably returned to the Obama era of “Diplomacy Junkies.”

    • #29
  30. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    I’m glad that the US and Ukraine have finally agreed on a ceasefire. It’s been rather unseemly for the US to be attacking the victim and its erstwhile ally.

    Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect.

    It takes two to do a Ceasefire Tango. Absent that, a ceasefire cannot be in effect. Definitionally.

    Exactly. Russia has agreed to nothing. So there is no ceasefire. We’ve just agreed to stop our shameful behavior of attacking the victim.

    From “Now if we can just let Russia know that a ceasefire is in effect” to “Exactly. Russia has agreed to nothing. So there is no ceasefire”, in under 15 minutes.

    Amazing rhetorical “dexterity”.

    I think you misunderstood.

    Sorry, I was being sarcastic. The headlines all sound like the US and Ukraine agreed to a ceasefire to end the war between the themselves, which seems accurate but ironic. Trump/Vance forgot that Russia was the aggressor and the enemy, NOT Ukraine.

    Someone should have reminded Trump/Vance that you usually have to get the aggressor to agree to a ceasefire, not the victim. And that you beat up on the enemy, not your ally. We have a great National Security Advisor and SecState – how come our foreign policy is being run by childish buffoons?

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.