Trump is in talks with Russia to end the war

[Kurokage]

Can you share sources that support this?
I am reading below that Russia wants Ukraine to be neutral.  To be neutral is to retain sovereignty and not have military alliance with US or Russia. 
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-says...025-02-12/

Russian forces invaded Ukraine in 2014 after signing an agreement with Ukraine back in 1994, Ukraine, Russia, the US, and the UK signed the Budapest Memorandum. Under this agreement, Ukraine acceded to the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapon state. In exchange, Russia promised to refrain from threatening to use military force or economic coercion against Ukraine and respect the signatory's independence and sovereignty in the existing borders (in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act). The agreement was intended to provide Ukraine with security assurances.  How did that go for the Ukrainian people????

[quintessentone]

I
Russian forces invaded Ukraine in 2014 after signing an agreement with Ukraine back in 1994, Ukraine, Russia, the US, and the UK signed the Budapest Memorandum. Under this agreement, Ukraine acceded to the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapon state. In exchange, Russia promised to refrain from threatening to use military force or economic coercion against Ukraine and respect the signatory's independence and sovereignty in the existing borders (in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act). The agreement was intended to provide Ukraine with security assurances.  How did that go for the Ukrainian people????

When I look at President Yanukvych's time in office, I can plainly see Putin's hand at work.
 

Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych (born 9 July 1950) is a former Ukrainian politician who served as the fourth president of Ukraine from 2010 to 2014.[sup][4][/sup] He also served as the prime minister of Ukraine several times between 2002 and 2007 and was a member of the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) from 2006 to 2010. A member of the pro-Russian Party of Regions, Yanukovych suffered mass protests — the Euromaidan — after his unexpected rejection of the European Union–Ukraine Association Agreement approved by the Rada,[sup][5][/sup] under the pressure from Russia[sup][6][/sup][sup][better source needed][/sup] and was removed from the presidency by the Ukrainian parliament in 2014,[sup][7][/sup] as a result, neighboring Russia started to annex Ukrainian Crimea. Since then, he has lived in exile in Russia.[sup][8][/sup]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych

It's obvious to me Putin won't be appeased with any leader in Ukraine but one of his choosing.

I picture Putin popping champagne right now...win, win.

(not sure why text is bolded)

[putnam6]

LIVE | Russia's Lavrov Reveals Trump-Putin Plan to End Ukraine War After Saudi Talks | World News

Sounds like a non-starter

Ceasefire

Ukrainian Elections

Sign agreement 

Can't stand watching Lavrov but it is just a necessary opening step...



Clash Report

@clashreport
·
1m

Zelensky: Negotiations should not take place behind our backs.

[sahgwa]

Russian forces invaded Ukraine in 2014 after signing an agreement with Ukraine back in 1994, Ukraine, Russia, the US, and the UK signed the Budapest Memorandum. Under this agreement, Ukraine acceded to the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapon state. In exchange, Russia promised to refrain from threatening to use military force or economic coercion against Ukraine and respect the signatory's independence and sovereignty in the existing borders (in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act). The agreement was intended to provide Ukraine with security assurances.  How did that go for the Ukrainian people????

Thank you for bringing that up; here is the relevant text for reference:

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/...-52241.pdf

[quintessentone]

Europe could confiscate $300 Billion of Putin's money that is frozen in central bank reserves that Europe holds. Europe can then pick up the slack by giving it to the Ukrainian war effort, or perhaps leverage more negotiating power with Putin (?)

Edit to add:

Take a listen to Putin's Russia's historical account:




It boggles the mind.

[Oldcarpy2]

I would trust Lavrov about as far as I can throw him.

You can tell when he's lying...his lips move.

[Maxmars]

No matter who ends up "leading" Ukraine, one or other side will characterize him or her as the other's 'lapdog' or 'choice.'

What does that tell you?

That the 'foreign' interference has usurped the local/regional gestalt?  No?

That the "what ought to be" from the "voices" around the world are knee-deep in their business... while supranational interests drool over the prospects of "access?" No?

What has happened in the past may have been, no actually was tragic...

Might it not be "respectful," more "supportive," to let the Ukrainians actually decide how they want this matter handled?  In no world were they not the 'abused victim' in this scenario. Insofar as their representative government... well... they have work to do there - no doubt.  But as the center of the conflict, they (as a people) have been mutilated by the entire affair...  

(What?!!! Actual "respect" in human affairs???  
Anathema, a pox on the idea...
peace is a requisite for the growth of the people...
war is the requisite for the growth of the machine.)

Russia, or should we acknowledge plainly what's now normal, those 'now' in control of the Russian government, can hardly ever be accused of 'thoughtless' international aggression, their objectives may already have been met... or, maybe the battlefield is changing into a less acceptable endgame. 
But extricating themselves from the inevitable quagmire might now apparently be, in the cards.

The obvious winner in all this serves the bank... the industrial combine... the war industry... and all her vassals.  Their motto: "War... yummy.™"

In all this the loser... NATO.  Who should (and may yet) find itself owning a full bodysuit of excuses and 'PR management' nightmares over how exactly it's conduct can possibly be said to not have substantially contributed to the war itself.

The turf games they play destroys lives... which appears to be OK with them, as long as it's not their own.

[sahgwa]

No matter who ends up "leading" Ukraine, one or other side will characterize him or her as the other's 'lapdog' or 'choice.'

What does that tell you?

That the 'foreign' interference has usurped the local/regional gestalt?  No?

That the "what ought to be" from the "voices" around the world are knee-deep in their business... while supranational interests drool over the prospects of "access?" No?

What has happened in the past may have been, no actually was tragic...

Might it not be "respectful," more "supportive," to let the Ukrainians actually decide how they want this matter handled?  In no world were they not the 'abused victim' in this scenario. Insofar as their representative government... well... they have work to do there - no doubt.  But as the center of the conflict, they (as a people) have been mutilated by the entire affair...  

(What?!!! Actual "respect" in human affairs???  
Anathema, a pox on the idea...
peace is a requisite for the growth of the people...
war is the requisite for the growth of the machine.)

Russia, or should we acknowledge plainly what's now normal, those 'now' in control of the Russian government, can hardly ever be accused of 'thoughtless' international aggression, their objectives may already have been met... or, maybe the battlefield is changing into a less acceptable endgame. 
But extricating themselves from the inevitable quagmire might now apparently be, in the cards.

The obvious winner in all this serves the bank... the industrial combine... the war industry... and all her vassals.  Their motto: "War... yummy.™"

In all this the loser... NATO.  Who should (and may yet) find itself owning a full bodysuit of excuses and 'PR management' nightmares over how exactly it's conduct can possibly be said to not have substantially contributed to the war itself.

The turf games they play destroys lives... which appears to be OK with them, as long as it's not their own.

Not to mention that elections have been suspended in Ukraine for quite some time, and a lot of Ukrainians dislike Zelensky. 
NATO was selling it's wares in Kiev but they were not found worthy enough to join the club, over 10 years ago, due to corruption.
Russia invaded after pro Russian referendums and their annexing of Crimea.
Just another state caught in the middle of two powers.
Like it or not, it IS a proxy war. 
I don't know if I could say Trump is going behind Zelensky's back, he is just negotiating with Putin directly as Zelensky has always been a western puppet.

[Oldcarpy2]

"Not to mention that elections have been suspended in Ukraine for quite some time, and a lot of Ukrainians dislike Zelensky. "

"Russia invaded after pro Russian referendums .."

Elections? In time of War?

Pro Russian referendums?

Blimey.

So where is your evidence of Ukrainians disliking Zelensky?

You sound rather... familiar? ????

[sahgwa]

"Not to mention that elections have been suspended in Ukraine for quite some time, and a lot of Ukrainians dislike Zelensky. "

"Russia invaded after pro Russian referendums .."

Elections? In time of War?

Pro Russian referendums?

Blimey.

So where is your evidence of Ukrainians disliking Zelensky?

You sound rather... familiar? ????

Blimey guv!
4 out of 10 ukrainians distrust him
i think that's a lot. 

Is it huge? no. 
Sorry I posted, your grace. 
https://kyivindependent.com/poll-ukraini...i-is-high/
jesus christ..