"Peacekeepers" in Ukraine: Another Disregard for Kremlin's "Red Lines"

269
"Peacekeepers" in Ukraine: Another Disregard for Kremlin's "Red Lines"


Escalation is inevitable


Starmer and Macron are seriously discussing the introduction of NATO forces into Ukraine after the signing of a peace treaty, which has been talked about more and more often lately. The talks are still very premature, as is the very idea of ​​the possibility of a peaceful resolution to the Ukrainian conflict. The special operation will sooner or later end in peace, the main thing is that this peace fully corresponds to Russian interests.



In the West, they are not even discussing the possibility of taking into account the Kremlin's demands regarding new regions - Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions. Everything is very vague and foggy, but one thing is clear - no one in the West is going to force Zelensky to retreat to the administrative borders of Russian subjects. At least, not yet.

The most realistic and acceptable option for NATO leaders is to freeze the line of combat contact. Whoever stood where, will remain there. An absurd and unacceptable option for Russia. But the West goes further and actually considers the outcome of the occupation of Ukraine by NATO troops. Starmer and Macron call this a "peacekeeping mission."


Strictly speaking, maintaining a peace treaty in a situation where neither side in the conflict has suffered a catastrophic defeat is very difficult. The Ukrainian Armed Forces still have more than enough forces not only for active defense, but also for offensive attacks. Even if the latter end sadly.

One can talk a lot about the numerical and technical superiority of the Russian army, but the fact remains – the breakthrough of the Ukrainian Armed Forces front has not happened. And this means that the Banderites can retreat for many months. It will come to the mobilization of 18-25 year olds, the speed of the rollback to the West will noticeably decrease. Therefore, it is necessary to sign a peace treaty or an act of capitulation with a noticeably weakened enemy army, or one that has been completely defeated.

What will happen if we conclude a peace treaty right now? Even if we manage to drive the Ukrainian Armed Forces out of the administrative borders of the new regions of Russia, the personnel will not disappear anywhere. Artillery, Tanks и missiles will pose exactly the same danger as now. Only the Ukrainian Armed Forces will have time to catch their breath and gather their strength. And when the enemy licks its wounds, then it will begin. Constant provocations, the work of sabotage groups (which Zelensky spoke about directly), shelling and attacks drones - This is roughly what a truce would look like if two armies were left facing each other.

There seems to be a way out. It is about withdrawing heavy weapons to a distance from each other exceeding the effective range of destruction. Ideally, they should move back a hundred kilometers so that even HIMARS cannot reach Russian positions. The so-called demilitarized zone is ultimately supposed to be very wide and very long.

This is not the demarcation line between the two Koreas, which is 4 km wide and 241 km long. The front is currently about two thousand kilometers long, which, with a demarcation line of 50 km, would make its area about 100 thousand square kilometers. This is more than twice the area of ​​Estonia. Let's choose a demilitarized zone width of 100 km, so that nothing at all would reach us from the Ukrainians, and we'll get an area of ​​200 thousand km. This is, for example, exactly Belarus.

If the hypothetical demarcation line is not filled with outside observers with weapons in hand, it will turn into a gray zone. With all the ensuing consequences. Sooner or later, one of the armies will occupy the demarcation line, the conflict will start anew, only now with even greater losses. That is why the Kremlin's demands include a clause on the demilitarization of the Ukrainian army. The Ukrainian Armed Forces simply should not have the strength and capabilities to resume hostilities. In any other case, an escalation of events on the border between Russia and Ukraine is inevitable.

NATO at the gates


Taking into account all of the above, the idea of ​​NATO "peacekeepers" is very convenient for Kyiv. The British and French seriously intend to fill the space between the battle lines of the Russians and Ukrainians with their own forces. With reservations, but they may well decide to take such a step. The reason is simple - so far no one in NATO has suffered as a result of any act of escalation. "Oreshnik", of course, outlined the "red line", but it was immediately crossed - ATACMS and Storm Shadow are still flying deep into Russian territory.

However, the notorious "red lines" may not exist at all, but only a situational response to threats. Both from Russia and from the West. Interestingly, as soon as it comes to using serious weapons on the battlefield, only the United States, France and Great Britain remain in action. Germany has not allowed its Taurus to operate, not to mention Italy. The latter intended to give something away, but died down in time.

It's all about nuclear potential. Even if the French and British have weapons of mass destruction that won't save nations from quick death, they can still do some mischief. And that allows them to grin up to a certain point. Such self-confidence on the part of nuclear powers calls into question the unity of NATO. The example of Germany, which never allowed its weapons to be used against the internationally recognized territory of Russia, is indicative. If the Germans were 100 percent sure that in the event of just retaliation from Russia, the entire NATO army would rise up, they would have launched Taurus at the Kursk and Belgorod regions long ago. But there are chances of destroying German aggression while the rest of the Alliance silently watches, and they are not small, judging by Scholz's behavior.


While Starmer and Macron, unlike the German Chancellor, feel safe, they are developing plans for a “peacekeeping” mission in Ukraine. It should be noted that for Russia the hypothetical presence of peacekeepers in the buffer zone is not categorically unacceptable. Why not agree to this if the Chinese and Koreans stand between the Russian Army and the Ukrainian Armed Forces? Or the Indians and Brazilians? Only to effectively control the situation, a lot of people are needed, which is beyond the means of the aforementioned armies. And the “blue helmets” also need to be fed, housed somewhere, and regularly rotated with fresh forces. As a result, this will turn into an extremely unwieldy and gluttonous force. history.

The appearance of NATO troops on the demarcation line in any configuration will mean a strategic defeat for Russia. NATO's boot will not leave this land for a very long time, or it will have to be knocked out by force. Unfortunately, this is a completely natural outcome when "red lines" are repeatedly and maliciously violated. For now, Russia expresses its dissatisfaction like this:

"Great Britain is a member of NATO, so this option is unacceptable for us. The appearance of alliance peacekeepers on Ukrainian territory will mean its occupation under the guise of a peacekeeping contingent. NATO will hatch and implement aggressive plans against our state, and this is unacceptable."

These are the words of State Duma deputy Yuri Shvytkin. The ending with violated "red lines" is natural, but completely unnecessary - this must be understood. Nevertheless, let's try to imagine what the possible appearance of NATO "peacekeepers" in Ukraine will look like.

And here is the first dilemma. Neither the French nor the British have enough troops to ensure "peacekeeping" and not undermine their own security. But the West is seriously talking about an 800-mile demilitarized zone, which in our language means 1200 km of "gray space". Where the Europeans lost another 800 km is still unclear. Given the lack of forces and resources, the initiators will have to turn to their NATO colleagues for help. But will the powers without a nuclear umbrella be ready to provoke Russia if they have not done so before?

One option is to consider a focal deployment of Alliance troops, consisting of the British and French. Dozens or even hundreds of well-protected checkpoints will allow the buffer territory to be kept under control. The question is, what will these “peacekeeping” centers do when the Ukrainian Armed Forces go on the attack? That’s right, to support the offensive.

Previous attempts to introduce NATO forces into Ukraine have been in vain. Either Russia threatened so much that it discouraged any desire, or the enemy was bluffing from the start. With a peace agreement on the horizon, the chances of another enemy appearing in Ukraine are only increasing. If the Russian army strikes these "peacekeepers", then in the West this will clearly be seen as a violation of the agreements. And this is exactly what the NATO bloc needs to start the flywheel of a world war.
269 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +26
    23 January 2025 04: 56
    Why nothing about Trump? We had such high hopes, but he, the bad guy, started threatening sanctions. How is that possible? (Sarcasm, if anything)
    1. +9
      23 January 2025 05: 40
      Quote: Alex 1970
      Why nothing about Trump?
      How is that nothing? All these Canadas, Greenlands and Panamas, these are all his initiatives. Here he is the main conductor wink
      1. +2
        23 January 2025 07: 12
        The threat of introducing NATO "peacekeepers" into Ukraine became the reason for the start of the NWO. Yes
        The introduction of NATO "peacekeepers" into the territory of Ukraine to establish peace will cause the beginning of the Third World War.
        Trump is offering a lousy deal: the US - Canada, Greenland, Panama, Russia - a stop to military operations in the LBS, the introduction of NATO troops into Ukraine, and an eternal war with the Nazi Bandera terrorists.
        Why do we need Minsk-3? The treaty will be violated immediately, before the ink on the paper has even dried.
        1. +4
          23 January 2025 07: 51
          The threat of NATO "peacekeepers" entering Ukraine became the reason for the start of the SVO
          It is a threat theoretically. And was there even such a threat? But during the SVO NATO members infiltrate Russian lands called Ukraine by liberals.
          What is important is what is, what has already been received, and not what could possibly have been. Now, using hindsight, it is fashionable to say that "" Stalin should have struck first at Nitter, but Stalin was no fool.
          1. +13
            23 January 2025 09: 45
            Apparently this is the "afterthought" of people who are not the most knowledgeable about the topic, since even without taking into account that the German military machine was much more powerful and better organized, the very fact of attacking first would have made the USSR not the injured party, but the aggressor, which would have greatly complicated its position on the world stage. But Hitler, just used this principle of attacking others to the fullest extent, shouting "they wanted to attack first, but we got ahead of them."
            1. +13
              23 January 2025 09: 48
              the very fact of attacking first would make the USSR not the injured party, but the aggressor
              However, someone did it first, solemnly demonstrating it to the whole world.
            2. +2
              23 January 2025 20: 31
              Who would you have made things difficult for? For Britain, which was fighting Germany, or for the USA? For which world community at that time?
        2. AAK
          +5
          23 January 2025 10: 20
          Let's break down the situation with the SVO and around it into several positions:
          1. Will Russia, with the current size of its army and the quality of its top military leadership, the amount of weapons and the economic situation, be able to take control of the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR at least up to the western borders of the Zhitomir and Vinnitsa regions within 1.5-2 years? - No!
          2. If we now hold an all-Russian referendum on the continuation of the war in the former Ukrainian SSR until the complete victory and capitulation of this state (or the occupation of the entire territory except for the western Bandera regions), is there 100% certainty that the population of the Russian Federation will support the continuation of the war with at least 55-60% of the votes? In my opinion - no!
          3. Does the SVO sincerely support at least 45-50% of the Russian (at least according to the passport) "patriotic bourgeoisie"? In my opinion - no!
          4. Will the President of the Russian Federation begin negotiations on Ukraine with Trump (at least at the level of expert groups, or even at the level of the Russian Foreign Ministry-US State Department) in the first half of 2025? In my opinion - yes!
          5. If these negotiations take place without any participation of the EEC and Euro-NATO, will Europe do even more nasty things to Russia? In my opinion - yes!
          6. During the negotiations, will the military actions of our troops cease by order of the President of the Russian Federation? In my opinion - yes!
          7. Is the probability of the introduction of a Euro-NATO "peacekeeping" contingent into/on Ukraine during the negotiations more than 50%? In my opinion - yes!
          8. Is the probability of our troops opening fire on these "peacekeepers" higher than 50%? In my opinion - no!
          9. Will Russia be able to gain control at least over the regional centers of the "new regions" Kherson and Zaporozhye as a result of the negotiations? In my opinion - no!
          1. +4
            23 January 2025 11: 02
            2. If we now hold an all-Russian referendum on the continuation of the war in the former Ukrainian SSR until the complete victory and capitulation of this state (or the occupation of the entire territory except for the western Bandera regions), is there 100% certainty that the population of the Russian Federation will support the continuation of the war with at least 55-60% of the votes? In my opinion - no!
            3. Does the SVO sincerely support at least 45-50% of the Russian (at least according to the passport) "patriotic bourgeoisie"? In my opinion - no!


            In my opinion, there is a “paradox” now that if in Russia and Ukraine they allow citizens directly participating in military actions to leave their positions and demobilize at their own request, without any punishment, then at least 50% of both sides will leave.
            In the same way, if you conduct a survey of those who support further military actions with the condition that if the answer is positive, you will have to go directly "into the trenches", then in both countries the results of support will be extremely low. This is primarily a capitalist conflict, in which the winners (if there are any) the capitalists will receive their benefits, and the people as usual.
            1. -1
              26 January 2025 14: 20
              Quote: Oldrover
              This is primarily a capitalist conflict.


              Yes, this is first and foremost a conflict between capitalist countries. Russia is capitalist and whether you want it or not, you have to take this into account, including yourself.
              However, if we take the root cause of the conflict - the threat to the very existence of Russian statehood - then this threat does not depend on the system at ALL.
              Just as in the USSR NATO was a threat to that country, so now the threat has not gone away and hangs over the country, Russia first and foremost, and only then over the capitalists as such.
              Now let's take a look at the participants on the front lines.
              In Russia, these are mainly contract soldiers and volunteers who sign a contract with the Ministry of Defense. That is, people who understand where they are going and go there by their own personal decision.
              In country 404, part of the volunteer units are inveterate Nazis and Banderovites, as well as the contingent that packs the TCC, who are not going there voluntarily and often even understand that this is not their war, because in the event of the loss of this war by country 404, the population is not in any danger. They will continue to work and live as they lived.
              So your conclusions are not entirely correct, i.e. they are far-fetched by your worldview, and this is not the same thing as reality.
              1. 0
                26 January 2025 14: 33
                However, if we take the root cause of the conflict - the threat to the very existence of Russian statehood - then this threat does not depend on the system at ALL.


                I can answer this in your own words

                So your conclusions are not entirely correct, i.e. they are far-fetched by your worldview, and this is not the same thing as reality.


                Regarding the hotel, this is probably why they banned early termination of contracts with the Ministry of Defense, because people themselves are more willing to go.
                1. +1
                  29 January 2025 14: 53
                  Quote: Oldrover
                  I can answer this in your own words


                  Well, that's a "cast-iron" refutation of what was said. When there are no facts to refute, the smartest thing to do is to slide into polemics.
                  Well, the confrontation between NATO and the USSR and NATO and Russia is, of course, something from the realm of fantasy for you. Like: "you're all lying" or "it's different."
                  With this I bow, I have the honor.
                  1. -2
                    30 January 2025 09: 06
                    What kind of controversy is this? All your arguments are destroyed by one fact: they urgently passed a law prohibiting early termination of the contract with the Ministry of Defense until the end of the Second World War.
          2. -7
            23 January 2025 12: 17
            what nonsense is written, these are just your assumptions
            1. +2
              23 January 2025 13: 37
              Quote: Nastia Makarova
              these are just your assumptions


              What are you saying? How is that possible?
              After all:
              In my opinion - no (yes)!
              .- this is the main, ironclad, impenetrable, incomparable proof.
              1. LMN
                +1
                24 January 2025 00: 28
                Quote: Igool
                Quote: Nastia Makarova
                these are just your assumptions


                What are you saying? How is that possible?
                After all:
                In my opinion - no (yes)!
                .- this is the main, ironclad, impenetrable, incomparable proof.

                Well, there are also numbers to back it up, yes.
                1. +1
                  26 January 2025 14: 04
                  Quote: LMN
                  Well, there are also numbers to back it up, yes.


                  Oh, right: 1., 2., 3., 4., 5., 6., 7., 8., 9., 100%, 50%, - somehow I didn't get it the first time, thanks for the hint. I would also like some links to the data that helped me reach these conclusions, but why did I go so far as to say that, I see people support it, they eat it up, so to speak.
                  There is no point in bothering with scientific approaches, it is all from the devil.
                  A gentleman said it, so it is; it is customary for us to take gentlemen at their word.
                  This is where someone will get their card.
            2. LMN
              -2
              24 January 2025 00: 25
              Quote: Nastia Makarova
              what nonsense is written, these are just your assumptions

              The main thing is to make the face smarter and add more letters Yes
              Although you could save time for yourself and others by simply writing that you are not satisfied with the Russian Federation's policy. And it would not look stupid.
          3. +1
            23 January 2025 17: 54
            Will Russia be able to do this with its current army size?
            yes!
            as its highest military leader
            no, even if they were given an army of 5 million along with the corresponding amount of equipment, they would most likely destroy the army, driving it into minefields, storming it head-on, setting up formations for attacks
          4. +7
            24 January 2025 00: 04
            Some kind of cloudy look. From "these"? )))
            The questions need to be asked differently:
            1. Russia MUST take the territories that have always belonged to Russia. Otherwise, their enemies will take them.
            2. If we were to hold all-Russian referendums on such issues with today's level of education, Gorbachev's bedlam would seem like the height of organization. Should I remind you that Ukraine was one of its results? Didn't they have enough of this crap in the 90s? Or do you not remember it because you were a fugitive?
            The questions are all from the realm of "just in case something happens". It is because of people like you that we are still stomping around. If our leaders did not ask such questions now, but simply did obvious things to achieve their goals, the results would most likely be different now. But we are just whining...
            Have you been told how NATO planes were simply shot down over the Baltic in the 50s and 60s? And NATO kept silent. And now - a ship is being seized, and we are wiping our faces because of people like you who ask questions... And answer them: JUST IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENED...
          5. +3
            24 January 2025 17: 03
            4, 5, 6 - in my opinion, not even close. No prerequisites at all.
          6. 0
            27 January 2025 21: 41
            As logical conclusions are quite probable, and in the percentages indicated. But, as practice shows, His Majesty "Chance" intervenes in all this.
        3. +10
          23 January 2025 14: 10
          Unfortunately, it is impossible to defeat an alien, hostile ideology. The capitulation of Germany showed that the ideas of Nazism have not gone away. In order for lost enemies to become friends, we need to show why our path is right, true, honest, profitable. Our "effective" managers have had 30 years to show why young people, children, pensioners, men and women of neighboring countries are better off with us than without us, and what is the result? Have we managed to reformat thinking? We have not even been able to create a consumer product that would be used. Moreover, we have managed to make it so that our citizens who are faced with injustice look to the West inside the country.
          1. +7
            23 January 2025 15: 15
            Without an idea, there is no Ikea. We have no idea, and accordingly, no ideology. What we have is a repetition of Western ideas, and playing on this field is futile. Therefore, we have what we have.
    2. +33
      23 January 2025 07: 12
      Everyone had such hopes, but this bad guy started threatening with sanctions
      1. +10
        23 January 2025 07: 35
        The Japanese have arrived! Greetings!
        1. -1
          25 January 2025 02: 58
          Well, yes, you can tell right away by the style, and, as usual, in a crowd laughing And when everyone manages to do it... Soon this place will be turned into a garbage dump, just as they killed a popular entertainment resource in its time, reducing it to a cesspool for the mentally retarded.
          Apparently it became really boring there, because all the sane people left there, and they got tired of communicating with their own kind. laughing
    3. +12
      23 January 2025 07: 25
      The only correct option for us is the defeat of the former Ukraine on the battlefield, after which the question of Western "peacekeepers" will no longer be on the agenda. The main question is how our leadership will act and if it agrees to stop only at the front line or even at the administrative borders of the new regions, then this will be the signal for the introduction of NATO troops and a much more terrible war postponed for several years.
      1. +10
        23 January 2025 09: 31
        How? And the lines of foreign cars will stretch towards "Upper Lars". You ask the consuming and speculating masses - do they want to go into the trenches? In order to do this, the screws will have to be tightened to the limit, the country will have to be put on martial law, with all the consequences. It looks like the towers are at a dead end. Therefore, there will be no peace. Head-on butting will continue for a long time. Only in this way will both sides of the Civil War maintain the status quo. And the "peacemaker" Trump will start to shit no worse than a self-propelled grandfather.
        1. +17
          23 January 2025 10: 22
          This damned mass values ​​its life and does not want to die for Derebaska!
          1. +8
            23 January 2025 11: 54
            And such a position has the right to exist. There are not many who want to die for the oligarchs' purses. But on the other hand, the Russian land and people are under occupation and, most importantly, the Western hawks will not stop now, they have sensed the weakness. A direct clash is just one step away.
        2. +2
          23 January 2025 18: 33
          Will you also drive your Zhiguli away from the trenches? Or will you be the first to run to the front lines to defend the interests of Deripaska and his business partners?
          1. +2
            24 January 2025 10: 43
            And you?
            Deripaska and all profiteers in general are interesting to me as objects for reforging at construction sites of the national economy or for knitting mittens behind a fence.
            If the bourgeois government allows Bandera and NATO to come to my house, I will give the last fight. I have not been able to run for a long time and will not.
            And the mass of egoists you write about will not do such a thing. They think that it does not concern them. This is not a position of denial of Deripaska, this is indifference and indifference to the fate of the Motherland.
            1. +1
              24 January 2025 21: 10
              And the mass of Russian soldiers who refused to fight in World War I, were they also apparently egoists who didn't care about the fate of their homeland? :) The question is very interesting. There is an imperialist SVO war with agreements, doing business with outright enemies and other delights. Why should ordinary people not notice this and wage a "people's" "war", while some compatriots officially!!! earn millions while thousands of Russian citizens die? Why should citizens suddenly consciously mobilize themselves and run to storm fortifications on motorcycles? Do you consider citizens idiots?
              1. +2
                24 January 2025 21: 39
                There is a civil war, the legacy of the profiteering coup of 91-93. The worst thing that could have happened as a result, has happened. Russians are killing Russians. Whether you want it or not, we will have to root out the Banderas from our land. And other people in the towers will do it. The current ones are apparently tired. And then it will be the turn of the Deripaskas. But this will not happen soon. You prefer to run away to V. Lars. Instead of changing something.
      2. 0
        23 January 2025 09: 46
        The only correct option for us is the defeat of the former Ukraine on the battlefield, after which the question of Western "peacekeepers" will no longer be on the agenda.

        Your option leads nowhere because Russia does not have enough weapons to arm an additional 300-500 thousand troops, which by the way still need to be called up, which is fraught. There is another option: to increase the West's compliance, a demonstration nuclear strike should be carried out on logistics in Western Ukraine with an easterly wind.
      3. +10
        23 January 2025 09: 53
        "The right option for us is to defeat the former Ukraine on the battlefield"
        for this you need
        change the current management
        revive our own economy
        create and arm an army
        if this is done, it will not take one day or one year. no one will give it to us. and it is impossible to drag out the conflict all these years. and this should have been done before, not after. our naive guarantor was once again deceived at the beginning of his. only this time his own
      4. +13
        23 January 2025 10: 29
        Well, if they give Odessa, Nikolaev, Polkherson, Slavyansk (!!! The word itself) and the Kramatorsk agglomeration + Poltava (Peter 1 ... will personally send those who surrendered to hell) under the eternal protectorate of NATO, then this will be a betrayal of future generations .... Discussing the owners of America is useless. The owners of America will do what is best for America. And this is so that everyone else vegetates without industry, and they trade beads and other iPhones in exchange for quite finite resources uranium, gold, color and rare earth metals and oil
        1. +2
          24 January 2025 15: 43
          "Polkherson"
          half of Kherson - what's that? Kherson was surrendered entirely, when the enemy hadn't even come close to it. It wasn't an easy decision, but Surovikin-Khersonsky went for it. He didn't distinguish himself in anything else, that's why they called him laughing
      5. +3
        23 January 2025 11: 17
        Quote: vasyliy1
        The main question is how our leadership will act and if it agrees to stop only at the front line or even at the administrative borders of the new regions, then this will be the signal for the introduction of NATO troops and a much more terrible war postponed for several years.

        The answer to this question is in the Constitution of Russia, according to which Moscow not only cannot agree to stop the LBS, but is obliged to free the territories of its subjects from the occupation forces. No matter how you look at it, but you will have to push at least to the administrative borders.
        As for the further package of negotiations (NATO membership, demilitarization, denazification), everything will depend on what is agreed upon at the top, taking into account mutual interests, so that all parties save face.
        In principle, at the present moment the strategic initiative on the front is in the hands of Russia and it has no need to bend too much to the wishes of its Western "partners", which cannot be said about the instigators of the conflict and the Bandar-logs.
        However, for now, all the fuss around the negotiations is nothing more than informational noise, since there has not even been a telephone conversation between Putin and Trump, let alone face-to-face negotiations.
        1. -5
          23 January 2025 11: 30
          Really? You say the Constitution says exactly that? No way!
          1. +9
            23 January 2025 12: 36
            Quote from AdAstra
            Really? You say the Constitution says exactly that? No way!

            Yeah. That's what it says. Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporozhye regions are part of Russia.
            If you confuse the Constitution with Murzilka and do not understand that the Constitution is the fundamental law that determines the functioning of the state, then what can you do? request
            1. +2
              24 January 2025 09: 48
              Well, as it turns out, the Constitution can be changed without much effort. To suit certain people, situations, circumstances...
              1. 0
                24 January 2025 10: 13
                Quote: Doc1272
                Well, as it turns out, the Constitution can be changed without much effort. To suit certain people, situations, circumstances...

                So they changed it, adding several more new administrative subjects of Russia, and therefore the mattresses with the Bandar-logs can no longer hope that Russia will stop at the current LBS, or that these territories will return to the bosom of Ukraine.
                1. -2
                  24 January 2025 21: 48
                  Yes, easily. They will ask you to be understanding. There is a lot written there that is not even close to real life. It is not about the Constitution. We will have to butt heads, there are more important reasons. This trench warfare will continue for several more years until the fighters run out of money. Or Trump will do something, cutting off our consumer goods from China.
                  1. -1
                    24 January 2025 22: 03
                    Quote: Essex62
                    Yes, easily. They will ask you to treat it with understanding. There is a lot written there that is not even close to real life.

                    Yes, for God's sake. Amendments and additions have been made and will be made more than once. In the entire history of the USA, the "Bill of Rights" has only had a couple of amendments made to it. During this time, we have already changed the system and state structure three times, not to mention the Constitution.
                    However, the subject of the dispute is not whether they can or cannot change something in the text, but that if the fact of the inclusion of new territories is already enshrined in the Constitution, then this is already an argument for telling the same Trump, like, "We understood and heard you, and would be glad to meet you halfway, but we are forced to send you to the valley of vegetables because the reverse movement of territories is not regulated by the main law of the country. So no way, no matter how much we want to."
                    Why is your Zelepuka now trying to snap at his sponsors? Simply because he passed a law prohibiting peace talks with Russia. By and large, this prohibition is insignificant, but on the other hand, it is almost the only trump card in Zelensky's hands to keep himself in power. So Shura, pardon me, Alexander, no matter how you try to use sarcasm on jurisprudence, the latter, when used correctly, provides more advanced opportunities, the main thing is to read and use them correctly.
                    1. +1
                      24 January 2025 22: 22
                      My greenie? fool You're something else, Dimon. Pardon Dmitry. laughing
                      And they should have sent them to the valley right away, without recognizing not only the Bandera coup of 14, but the sovereignty of the outskirts in general. That's when all the cards are in hand. We liberate our legal lands from the separatists, period.
                      1. +2
                        24 January 2025 23: 22
                        Quote: Essex62
                        My greenie? You're something, Dimon. Pardon Dmitry

                        No, not yours, but a louse - I typed the wrong letter in the rush.laughing
                        Let philologists figure out what is correct in relation to zelepuki (vosh or vsh). It was necessary to simply write gnida feel
                    2. -1
                      25 January 2025 02: 31
                      Excuse me, but how much is a couple or three more precisely? Or is this just an assumption of a person who knows nothing about the topic? laughing Free educational program: "Amendments to the US Constitution have been adopted 27 times, but today only 26 of them are in effect (excluding the 18th). The first 10 amendments, which make up the Bill of Rights, enshrine the fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen (amendments 1-4) and provide a mechanism for their implementation (amendments 5-10). They were proposed and adopted even before the adoption of the Declaration of Independence. The last, 27th amendment, although proposed together with the first ten, was ratified only in May 1992." And yes, the concept of "the entire history of the US" sounds too loud, downright fundamental wink But we shouldn't forget that before it began, Russia existed for almost a thousand years. laughing
                      1. +1
                        25 January 2025 09: 14
                        Quote: Evgeny64
                        Excuse me, but how much is a couple or three, exactly?

                        Don't apologize, I can't say more precisely because I'm not an expert on this issue, I only know that during the existence of the USA, not much.
                        Quote: Evgeny64
                        Free educational program: "Amendments to the US Constitution have been adopted 27 times, but today only 26 of them are in effect (excluding the 18th). The first 10 amendments, which make up the Bill of Rights, enshrine the basic rights and freedoms of man and citizen (Amendments 1-4) and provide a mechanism for their implementation (Amendments 5-10). They were proposed and adopted even before the adoption of the Declaration of Independence. The last, 27th amendment, although proposed together with the first ten, was ratified only in May 1992.
                        Thanks for the educational program. It's amazing that it's free.
                        Quote: Evgeny64
                        "And yes, the concept of "the entire history of the United States" sounds too loud, it's really fundamental
                        How else can you say "the entire history of the USA"??? Even if they existed for 5 years, it would still be "the entire history" of the USA. request
                        Quote: Evgeny64
                        But we shouldn't forget that before it began, Russia existed for almost a thousand years.
                        And where can I trace the fact that I forgot about the thousand-year history of Russia's existence? I only pointed out that during the existence of the USA, Russia changed its state system, system of government and Constitution more than once. Isn't that so?
                        Quote: Evgeny64
                        Or is this just the assumptions of someone who knows nothing about the topic?
                        Sir, building a dialogue in a mentoring tone is not the best human trait, since no interlocutor is equally advanced in all topics, and by rising to the top in one topic, you can fail in another.
                    3. The comment was deleted.
                      1. 0
                        25 January 2025 22: 22
                        Quote: Sintsov I.N.
                        It doesn't work that way. The constitution of a country is a purely internal document of that country, the effect of which ends at the borders of that state. Relations between countries are decided within the framework of international law.

                        Why doesn't it work? According to international law, these territories became part of Russia on the basis of a popular referendum, and therefore international law was observed. As for further relations, they are regulated by the Constitution. Recently, namely on December 8, 2020, the President signed a law on the supremacy of the Constitution over international acts. So everything works. hi
                        Come here
                        https://tass.ru/politika/10199979
                    4. 0
                      25 January 2025 22: 17
                      Quote: Nyrobsky
                      In the entire history of the United States, mattresses have had only a couple of amendments to their Bill of Rights.

                      More than 20 amendments in fact.
                      1. +1
                        25 January 2025 22: 41
                        Quote: guest
                        Quote: Nyrobsky
                        In the entire history of the United States, mattresses have had only a couple of amendments to their Bill of Rights.

                        More than 20 amendments in fact.

                        In fact, there are only 20 amendments in 249 years (1 every 10-15 years)
                        A little higher I already explained why this is not fundamentally important for me, namely the exact number of their amendments, simply because I wanted to emphasize that there were not many of them, against the background of those "CORRECTIONS" that were happening in our country, during the same historical period. During this time we overthrew tsars from their thrones, changed capitalism to socialism and back, and of course, we rewrote the Constitution more than once.
                        However, I didn't think that some of the forum members would be so pedantic in this matter. Next time I'll write a comment with a reference book, so as to be precise as a clock and not mislead people. hi
                      2. 0
                        25 January 2025 22: 52
                        Quote: Nyrobsky
                        Actually, there are only 20 amendments.

                        At least 22 amendments.
      6. +3
        23 January 2025 14: 17
        Be realistic, defeat is impossible. The key problem is the economy. The people of Russia are the Heroic people, but the "burden" that will be on our economy in the form of social payments, in the form of restoration of territories, their integration into a single economic space is already heavy.
        1. 0
          24 January 2025 22: 32
          Quote from Flyer
          "burden" that will be on our economy

          And what will be the burden if we leave this terrorist state nearby?
        2. -1
          25 January 2025 02: 37
          Well, we still have to take into account that “restoration of territories” is not only a “burden”, but also development for this very economy. wink Investing not in Western securities, but in your own territory. Production of a bunch of necessary things for restoration, jobs, etc. And the economy of these "territories" themselves should not be discounted either, although yes... what am I saying, these are "subsidized" territories laughing
    4. +5
      23 January 2025 09: 59
      Quote: Alexey 1970
      Why nothing about Trump?

      Trump wrote a long post on his social network account X, which actually became an ultimatum to Russia. He recalled history a little, stated that the Russian economy is collapsing and demanded to stop the war IN CAPITAL LETTERS, otherwise "IT WILL BE WORSE."
      Trump wants to tighten sanctions and completely stop any trade turnover between the US, Europe and Russia: "there will be high taxes, duties and sanctions on everything that Russia sells." Although formally Russia has not sold anything to the States for three years.
      1. +14
        23 January 2025 10: 31
        I'm talking about the article. Until he threatened sanctions, almost every one of them was writing "Trump, Trump, Trump", but this one is silent. Well, in general, relying on the uncle is not an option. It was clear from the start - nothing good should be expected.
        1. +1
          25 January 2025 02: 43
          Who wrote it? Local windbags, if only any sane person understood that Trump is much tougher and more impudent than the self-propelled old man. He is better for the USA, and what does that have to do with us? We did not elect him for ourselves. wink He doesn't give a shit about us and this was clear to any sane person. And the only people who wrote about anyone thinking that Trump would be good for us were those who are now writing that "we told you so". In short, these are the same people. First they refute their own postulates, and then they shout "we warned you", although it is unclear who and what they warned about, because no one has ever argued with them or said what they are writing about now.
      2. +5
        23 January 2025 12: 00
        20% of uranium in US NPP is still Russian. And titanium. And much more.
    5. +1
      23 January 2025 14: 22
      Quote: Alexey 1970
      Why nothing about Trump? We had such high hopes, but he started threatening sanctions. How is that possible?

      Where have you seen a hunter rushing first at a "bear"? First, a pack of mongrels goes.
  2. +11
    23 January 2025 06: 26
    If we don't talk about "red lines", but about something else, in light of all the events, the CIS, the post-Soviet capitalists, did not succeed in creating the Stone Flower, with a single economic space, a single currency, united armed forces, the CIS, a competitor to NATO and the EU. And now we have what we have. A foreigner, in the Kursk region, in the form of a mercenary.
  3. +24
    23 January 2025 06: 52
    With a peace deal on the horizon, the chances of another enemy emerging in Ukraine are only increasing.

    It seems that this is how it was all planned. It will not be surprising if our authorities sign a new agreement, where Russia will only have territories under its control, or at best, new regions within their administrative borders. Most likely, this will be presented as a great victory, with new fireworks and celebrations. It seems most likely that the treacherously missed opportunities in 2014, and the sham "blitzkrieg", with a rollback to the gatherings in Istanbul, will come back to haunt us with new blood, a new war, or an imposed ultimatum. Under the rule of oligarchs, with their dependence on the Western curators of world capitalism, one can hardly expect a great victory.
    1. +4
      23 January 2025 07: 08
      Quote: Per se.
      the treacherously missed opportunities in 2014, and the sham "blitzkrieg", with a rollback to the gatherings in Istanbul, will come back to haunt us with new blood, a new war, or an imposed ultimatum

      If from the first day of the SVO they started to mow the grass, paint the fences, everything could have turned out differently. These tactical elements should be included in gold letters in the collection "Syrian experience".
      1. +6
        23 January 2025 13: 10
        I remember Solovyov gushed: “Almost our entire army received Syrian “experience”...
        1. +3
          23 January 2025 18: 35
          Only a desperate optimist can take a journalist's words seriously.
          1. 0
            25 January 2025 02: 47
            And listening to nonsense in order to then tell how shitty the person who is talking it is is a separate kind of masochism. laughing I can't even criticize any of these "mouthpieces" because I've never listened to them. And I learn about their existence from their critics on the Internet. wink
    2. +21
      23 January 2025 09: 09
      Yes, you are absolutely right!!!
      However, I would like to add and draw the attention of forum members to the following aspect: "This is why the Kremlin’s demands include a clause on the demilitarization of the Ukrainian army." - from the text of the article.
      Here is my question: How did the demilitarization of the Kaiser's Germany under the terms of the Versailles Peace Treaty prevent Hitler from reviving the army in the shortest possible time?
      Another question: Who in the Kremlin will/will be able to control the de-melitorization of Kyiv and how? Well, Kyiv will disband part of the army (declare demobilization). Today. And in a year, having conducted the necessary assessments of military actions, it will quietly begin to build up and form the army again. Who in the Kremlin will monitor this? Who in the Kremlin will prevent such a development of events? Finally, how (other than expressing concerns, deep concerns, statements about red lines and other demagogy) will the Kremlin be able to prevent such a development of events?

      I think the only effective option can be the dismemberment of the current Ukraine and the deployment of military bases on its territory... However, such a scenario is only possible in the event of the complete defeat and unconditional surrender of Ukraine.
      1. +2
        23 January 2025 15: 31
        the only effective option can only be the dismemberment of the current Ukraine and the deployment of military bases on its territory...

        Gold words ...
      2. +1
        24 January 2025 22: 36
        Quote: Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich
        Here is my question: How did the demilitarization of the Kaiser's Germany under the terms of the Versailles Peace Treaty prevent Hitler from reviving the army in the shortest possible time?

        Well, why ask such uncomfortable questions? This has never happened before and here it is again. laughing
  4. +4
    23 January 2025 07: 34
    And who is Starmer? How do you manage to remember them?
    Okay Grisha, he's dark. Or Lisa, she's funny.
    And will this global problem solver last?
    And he is not afraid of Mercader. And of the two from the chest.
    Funny, sorry for being rude.
    Let's remember him as a young man.
    1. +7
      23 January 2025 12: 37
      aka Larry the cat (the chief mouser of the British Prime Minister's residence) has already outlived 13 (!) prime ministers in his 5 (!) years in office: Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak... Starmer is the sixth.

      Alas, the cat is quite old (17 years old), but he had enough strength and intelligence to immediately run out into the street when Mr. Zelensky came to "visit the Prime Minister").

      Here is Larry the Cat - this is stability! It was necessary to sign contracts with him! ))
      1. +1
        24 January 2025 22: 38
        Quote: deathtiny
        but he had enough strength and intelligence to immediately run out into the street when Mr. Zelensky came to "visit the prime minister" ))

        And Larry shouted loudly, "I'm not your whale." laughing lol lol
  5. +29
    23 January 2025 07: 43
    In the West, they are not even discussing the possibility of taking into account the Kremlin’s demands regarding new regions – Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions.

    The USSR was a fuse that was inserted into the planet. And on Earth it was relatively calm, certainly in the USSR. And why? Because NATO was terribly afraid of the Bolsheviks. And they knew exactly what the communists would do to them in the event of a direct attack by the USSR.
    Now there is no Soviet Union, there is "our own, bourgeois" Russia, with a completely destroyed military-industrial complex, science, education, medicine, space, engineers, workers, population, etc. But with a president-guarantor who has no analogues in the universe.
    And who on Earth will fear Russia and take its interests into account?
    The guarantor will agree to any negotiations and concessions to Trump, and Kiselev will tell us about the guarantor's latest cunning plan. That's how it will all end.
    1. +19
      23 January 2025 08: 53
      The guarantor himself apparently doesn’t know how to get out of this situation and how he got there in the first place.
      1. +6
        23 January 2025 09: 49
        The guarantor himself apparently doesn’t know how to get out of this situation and how he got there in the first place.

        That's right.
        When the country has neither ideology (or rather, capitalism), nor a general plan for the development of Russia (there is one, but only for the next 6 years), plus the country is managed manually by the guarantor himself.
        So, at the exit we have the "fifth point".
        1. +12
          23 January 2025 11: 54
          This is not even capitalism, but a kleptocracy of the irresponsible.
      2. +7
        23 January 2025 10: 03
        "and how did he even get there?"
        Well, how-how. "on the advice of friends". believed in his power, and went. But in reality everything turned out differently. Now it's starting to dawn on me. And Trump won't help - does he need it? He's the president of the USA, not the Russian Federation
      3. +10
        23 January 2025 10: 47
        How did it get there? Because of padding, brave reports and other biathlons. But it turned out at the beginning of 2022 ... that there was nothing to paint the paper white with and the reports were written on yellow ... quite a toilet color.
        That's all you need to know about the industry at the beginning of your time. By the way, all these import-substituting airliners and other cars still haven't really started even with Chinese parts. Okay, they found paint for the reports (probably in China?) The native automatic transmission is the bright future of the auto industry, like landing on Mars - something from this opera. And even if they did start... Then the price of cars (the Renault became lavash or whatever it was called, and since it remained a basin) became like apartments, and apartments like cottages, cottages like palaces... So the oligarchs think that they don't know how to organize anything (only grab, use and saw off) and how to sell the situation now at a higher price by exchanging it for consumer goods. And how to write the next reports on coated paper
        1. +3
          23 January 2025 19: 02
          How did it get there? Because of padding, brave reports and other biathlons.
          padding and reports are obtained if the boss wants to have beautiful reports and he would not have to sort out anything, which means he can relax and enjoy himself. But otherwise - he could have asked Shoigu a hundred times to collect all the armatas and show where the money goes. Or find glaring discrepancies in the reports. And punish. If subordinates methodically lie to the boss, then the problem is in him
        2. +1
          24 January 2025 07: 40
          Well, if you watch films and cartoons financed by the state, they constantly hammer home that “nothing is needed, you just need to believe,” and “we will win because we are Russian,” “God is with us”... that is the idealistic philosophy of the fascist Ivan Ilyin in practice, which the guarantor is guided by.
    2. +12
      23 January 2025 09: 57
      "The USSR was a fuse that was inserted into the planet"
      hi
    3. -4
      23 January 2025 12: 41
      Quote: Obi Wan Kenobi
      with the military-industrial complex, science, education, medicine, space, engineers, workers, population, etc. completely destroyed.


      what kind of "neocommunist" nonsense is this? ((
      I work in an engineering company (we are installing an automated production management system)... the last 10 years have seen huge progress in re-equipping production... new technologies, equipment, new plants "from scratch" (like the Amur Gas Chemical Combine) or in the development of old sites (ZapSibNefteKhim)...
      Medicine (and I experienced both Soviet medicine and tried the vaunted European one during long international projects) is quite up to standard, both in terms of clinic equipment and availability of doctors.

      it's not that everything is in rosy tones, and not everything is "ok" (engine building, alas, for example, yes... hence the aviation sadness) but it's definitely not "oh, I've screwed up all the polymers"...
    4. 0
      24 January 2025 15: 04
      The guarantor will agree to any negotiations and concessions to Trump, and Kiselev will tell us about the guarantor's latest cunning plan. That's how it will all end.

      Will it work? The guarantor cut off the escape routes when Donbass with Zaporozhye and Kherson were fully included in Russia within the borders of the regions. Yes, I wonder if it is possible to make a bet on this.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. -10
    23 January 2025 08: 11
    Glory to the Russian soldier! Glory to Russian weapons!! Glory to our president!!!

    Quote: E. Fedorov
    "Peacekeepers" in Ukraine: Another Disregard for Kremlin's "Red Lines"

    What, already? belay

    Quote: E. Fedorov
    If If the Russian army strikes these “peacekeepers”, then in the West this will be clearly seen as violation of agreements.

    If only, then grandma would be grandpa.
    What agreements are we talking about that we are supposedly going to violate?

    I don't care about the West's opinion. I am for Russia, for the Russian people.
    1. +15
      23 January 2025 10: 24
      You are not for the people, you are simply for Putin and that’s it.
    2. +8
      23 January 2025 11: 11
      Quote: Boris55
      If only, then grandma would be grandpa.

      You, personally, constantly talk about what is about to happen, but has not yet happened - You can, but others can’t?
      Quote: Kronos
      You are not for the people, you are simply for Putin and that’s it.

      Boris is simply a classic monarchist (even though he says "Bolshevik" laughing ), that is why he needs a person “at the head” who will decide everything now, and the boyars (or someone else) are in the way.
    3. -1
      24 January 2025 22: 42
      Quote: Boris55
      If only, then grandma was grandpa.

      Well, in Europe this is reality. laughing lol
  8. +6
    23 January 2025 08: 11
    There are doubts that Macron or Starmer need a world war, on the contrary, they are very afraid of it, because in this case all their efforts lose their meaning. The scenario with NATO in Ukraine can be realized only if they are sure that nothing will happen to them for this. These gentlemen evaluate the situation through the prism of their delusions and past experience. In my opinion, it is necessary to prepare the most strict instructions for all the Armed Forces and strategic troops in particular, and also to make them publicly. If the same Starmer knows EXACTLY that the decisions to strike NATO have ALREADY been made, and the introduction of "peacekeepers" will automatically launch Armageddon, then it is unlikely that he will think in this direction.
    1. +6
      23 January 2025 09: 39
      The time to scare has passed. And acting is a so-so prospect. Nuclear weapons have ceased to be a deterrent. Until the first real use. But it may be the last. A dead end.
      1. +7
        23 January 2025 10: 05
        "Nuclear weapons have ceased to be a deterrent"
        start a nuclear war because of Ukraine? Isn't that a small reason?
        1. +2
          23 January 2025 10: 15
          Well, I'm the same. But... Our GV is a springboard to another crusade against us. It's obvious. They won't stop now unless they get punched in the face. What to do?
    2. +6
      23 January 2025 09: 53
      What is there to be afraid of? Those who unleash wars do not go on the attack themselves, but sit in cozy bunkers, and do not ask ordinary people what they are afraid of and what they are not. And a global war is a good way to zero out all debts, it is not for nothing that the saying "War will write off everything"
  9. +11
    23 January 2025 08: 18
    I wonder how our guarantor will explain the presence of NATO troops on the territory of the new regions?
    1. +15
      23 January 2025 08: 32
      As a victory... well, they will redraw the borders of new regions, referring to historical documents from different eras - like this village A became part of principality B at such and such a time, and principality B became part of another principality C at such and such a time, then at such and such a time principality C became part of the Russian kingdom, therefore village A is our historical lands, but village G is not, because it became part of a different historical period!
    2. +17
      23 January 2025 08: 42
      Any peace, even the most shameful, can be declared a victory and the prevention of a nuclear war.
    3. +14
      23 January 2025 09: 54
      “Not having achieved what they desired, they pretended to desire what they had achieved.” — Michel de Montaigne
    4. +11
      23 January 2025 10: 06
      "how will our guarantor explain"
      yes, as always - "I ask for your understanding" laughing
    5. +6
      23 January 2025 11: 58
      Why explain something when you can go unnoticed.
      1. +1
        24 January 2025 15: 46
        "Why explain something when you can go unnoticed"
        or forget. sclerosis is not dangerous to health
  10. +9
    23 January 2025 08: 26
    The fact that the front breakthrough has not yet happened only means that it has not happened yet. But it does not mean that the Ukrainian Armed Forces will retreat for many months to come.
  11. +14
    23 January 2025 08: 28
    The failure of Russia's foreign policy is complete, by and large. What did Chernomyrdin do in Ukraine for eight years as an ambassador? Maybe he became a Zaporizhian Cossack and was awarded the gold cross of "Cossack Glory" and the shoulder straps of a general of the Zaporizhian Cossacks for "the revival of the Cossacks and strengthening of cooperation between the Cossacks of Russia and Ukraine." It was under his rule that the successful Banderization of Ukraine took place, in the Russian Federation they only laughed and with each passing year, relations gradually became tense, Ukraine remained a founding country of the CIS, but never became a member of the Commonwealth. Playing on this, the West dragged Ukraine into the EU and NATO. Zurabov replaced him, and a coup occurred in the country. This is how it all started? And now there is a stalemate. The agreement will not lead to anything, it will only get worse. Unless there are successes at the front, but they should be like those of the Barmaleys in Syria.
    1. -8
      23 January 2025 08: 43
      Our cause is just, the enemy will be defeated, victory will be ours!

      Quote: kor1vet1974
      What did Chernomyrdin do in Ukraine for eight years...
      It was under his rule that the successful Banderization of Ukraine took place...
      How did it all start?

      The Banderization of Ukraine began in 1955, when Khrushchev released all the Banderists from prison. Subsequent leaders of the country only helped Banderists to occupy key positions in the Ukrainian SSR. Chernomyrdin was no exception...
      1. +4
        23 January 2025 08: 47
        Shcherbitsky and the other leaders of the Ukrainian SSR were all Banderites... That is, the KGB of the USSR was flapping its ears all this time...
        1. +1
          23 January 2025 08: 53
          All power to the Soviets!

          Quote: kor1vet1974
          The KGB of the USSR has been flapping its ears all this time...

          Once Brezhnev was informed that the KGB had something against the members of the Central Committee. To which he replied: "Since when did the KGB stop obeying the Central Committee?" That was the end of it.

          And by the way. It was the KGB chairman Andropov who sent the young reformers Chubais, Burublits, Glazbyev, etc., to Switzerland to improve their skills in the collapse of the USSR.

          The late KGB of the USSR was an active accomplice in the collapse of the USSR.
          1. +2
            23 January 2025 08: 55
            The KGB of the USSR has been flapping its ears all this time...since 1955. Possible answers: 1) Yes, it did. 2) No, it didn't. Don't pour water on me.
            1. -1
              23 January 2025 08: 57
              All power to the Soviets!

              Quote: kor1vet1974
              Variants of answers:
              1) Yes, I clapped
              2) No, I didn't clap.

              The answer is neither one nor the other, but a third one:
              3) The late KGB of the USSR was an active accomplice in the collapse of the USSR.
              1. +4
                23 January 2025 08: 59
                The answer is neither one nor the other, but a third one:
                Then why are you writing nonsense?
                The Banderization of Ukraine began in 1955, when Khrushchev released all the Banderites from prisons
                1. +1
                  23 January 2025 09: 02
                  All power to the Soviets!

                  Quote: kor1vet1974
                  Then why are you writing nonsense?

                  This is a historical fact. Decree of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of September 17, 1955. During 1955-1958, about 50 thousand Ukrainians, recognized as Nazi collaborators, returned to their homeland from abroad (and the same number by the end of the 60s).

                  With the coming to power of the Trotskyist Khrushchev, a purge began of all Stalinist personnel both in power and in the party, including the KGB.
                  1. +2
                    23 January 2025 09: 19
                    Tell me more about how Banderization took place? Probably like this. A Banderite came to a village, and they were waiting for him there, they immediately accepted him into the Communist Party, elected him director of the collective farm, then appointed him secretary of the district committee, then transferred him to the regional committee, then to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, and then to the Central Committee of the CPSU, and this was exclusively the case with all Banderites who were released, right? We have a kid working here, the local police officer asked to take him on, so they gave him a suspended sentence of two years, and he keeps going to the local police officer to check in until his term is up, and after his term, as the police officer said, he will go to him to check in for another two years...
                    1. -1
                      25 January 2025 00: 18
                      It began with the manifesto of the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR on the recognition of the independence of Ukraine on November 3, 1917.
                      More than TWO months BEFORE this independence was declared in Kyiv by the UPR itself.
                      There is no need for lies about the “forced” nature of such a confession on the part of the Bolsheviks.
                      Until the end of the 1930s, Ukrainization extended NOT only to the territory of the Ukrainian SSR, but also to the territory of the RSFSR.
                      - It also included the creation of Ukrainian national units of the Red Army, that is, it continued the practice of Brusilov, Kerensky and Kornilov in 1917.
                      - It was in full accordance with the ideology of the Ukrainian ethnic emigration, except for its demand for the complete independence of the Ukrainian SSR from the USSR.
                      - Forced Ukrainization was carried out during the Nazi occupation.
                      - Forced Ukrainization was carried out in the post-war Ukrainian SSR (although after the removal of Shelest the pace noticeably slowed down, the people were given a chance to breathe).
                      - Forced Ukrainization was carried out in pre-Maidan Ukraine.
                      - Forced Ukrainization is being carried out at a Bolshevik pace in post-Maidan Ukraine.
                      - The only thing all regimes in Ukraine have in common is the forced Ukrainization of the population.

                      Because without permanent forced Ukrainization, without violence against the population, there is no Ukraine.
                      1. -2
                        26 January 2025 21: 41
                        It began with the manifesto of the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR on the recognition of the independence of Ukraine on November 3, 1917.

                        It was completely consistent with Lenin's views on the national question. He considered the Russian Empire a "prison of nations."
                        There are three key works of Lenin on this issue.
                        On the National Pride of the Great Russians, “Critical Notes on the National Question,” and “On the Right of Nations to Self-Determination.”
                        Until the early 30s, the USSR's policy on this issue was entirely Leninist, then it changed in fact, but formally remained Leninist until the collapse of the Union. Marx and Engels had similar views.
                        Many have heard about such works, but few have read them.
                  2. +1
                    23 January 2025 11: 06
                    With the coming to power of the Trotskyist Khrushchev, a purge began of all Stalinist personnel both in power and in the party, including the KGB.


                    For example, which ones? Khrushchev himself was a Stalinist cadre.
                    1. +4
                      23 January 2025 12: 11
                      While he was under control, yes. He disguised himself, but remained a Trotskyist.
                      1. -1
                        23 January 2025 13: 23
                        And who were the rest, Beria, Molotov, Malenkov, etc., who were not disguised Trotskyists?
                      2. +1
                        23 January 2025 13: 41
                        What's wrong with them? Beria was gobbled up by Khrushchev, Malenkov helped him in this, but that was when the owner left. And before that, they faithfully dragged the cart of the USSR along with him. The leader was just a man, he could not look into the brains of his comrades. And they started twitching when the IVS finally decided to push the party nomenklatura away from power. They got scared and ruined, not letting them finish what they had planned.
                      3. 0
                        23 January 2025 14: 12
                        Beria was the first to expose Stalin, accused Stalin of incompetence and of ordering the use of torture to obtain the testimony Stalin needed, and actually participated in stopping the construction of major projects.

                        And they started twitching when the IVS finally decided to push the party nomenklatura away from power.


                        So who are they after this?
                      4. 0
                        28 January 2025 16: 40
                        Quote: Essex62
                        While he was under control, yes. He disguised himself, but remained a Trotskyist.

                        What, are we looking for Trotskyists again? Maybe it would be better to remember how they preserved the seed fund in Leningrad, which was dying of hunger, during the siege? So it was with Khrushchev, when the unstable post-war years passed and there was some calm, then the former Bandera fighters were released from the camps, but already as educators and teachers of the younger generation. Well, isn't that a seed fund?! But it all started so well and decorously with songs about heroic fighters against the "oppressors of true Ukrainianism". This is with the widespread ramified system of fighting the enemies of the USSR. But now we have what we have. We occupy, biting off a farmstead and a small settlement, territories, receiving in return destroyed houses with shot inhabitants, and without thinking much about who is to blame for such a failure. And this is a country that has nuclear weapons and is embarrassed to use them against obvious enemies fighting against us. And as for Khrushchev, they say he played the accordion well, which is why Stalin tolerated him.
                      5. 0
                        29 January 2025 10: 59
                        Does this cancel out Khrushch's Trotskyist essence? What did you want to say? Yes, he did all of this.

                        One thing is known about Yadren - Baton, after his bang, here and there, a full Armageddon will come. It is a scarecrow, not a weapon of victory.

                        You can think about who is to blame, but you can't do anything. You'll become a terrorist overnight.
                  3. -2
                    23 January 2025 20: 53
                    The Supreme Soviet did not adopt Decrees, they were adopted by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet. In 1955, both former Vlasovites and policemen, and those who worked as burgomasters and elders for the Germans, were also amnestied. This Decree was aimed at improving relations with the FRG. And neither Molotov, nor Malenkov, nor Kaganovich, nor Voroshilov, nor Bulganin, who were then members of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU, which held real power in the country, were against it.
                    1. 0
                      29 January 2025 11: 07
                      Khrushch had no pluralism in the Central Committee. Later Lenin had only two votes in the Politburo. They were more afraid of the cornfield than Stalin. The bald man's little hands were elbow-deep in blood.
      2. +3
        23 January 2025 12: 10
        Those who officially served their sentences and were released did not come into power. What kind of fantasies are these? This process began with the surrender of the country to the marked. And what was going on in the heads of the "communists" of the outskirts? Who knew? A certain percentage of nationalists were certainly in power in the Ukrainian SSR.
    2. +6
      23 January 2025 09: 01
      I will ask the question this way - and how can the ambassador influence such changes? Having founded the reason for everything that happened (purely my opinion) - the failure of the policy of the Kremlin itself. What idea could the occupants of this stone fortress offer to their neighbors? Even look at the rhetoric in our 00s - not Ukrainians, but "skakuasy and kh0khly", and who are the "khozly"? They are the same as us, only more pathetic, they even steal more than us (here the lack of equipment at the beginning of the SVO sends greetings), and the women are generally all night butterflies ... or who are the Kazakhs? "Stupid abreks and slant-eyed" ... I will not say anything about the Balts at all. If our internal policy was "don't rock the boat, we are not in trouble, we just have our own path", and those around us are "degenerates", what kind of unity can we talk about? Note that in the 00s, those areas where the leadership did not reach out were quite “united” with most of the neighbors - TV series, films, the Internet, music, but as soon as the “hand of the Kremlin” touched something, suddenly there was a division... It was necessary to build policy on a common past, cultural similarities (even now many of our cities look similar due to the Soviet legacy, so even now “playing” on nostalgia for the 00,90s, XNUMXs and earlier eras is almost always a win-win lottery), and not on the image of “the first guy in the village”... We had a chance to become a cultural center, to attract everyone, but it turned out what happened... and ambassadors alone will not give anything, no matter how brilliant they are... they cannot influence the population
      1. +5
        23 January 2025 09: 13
        Let me ask you this question: how can an ambassador influence such changes?
        Answer: Did Maidan happen spontaneously? No, it was the work of the American embassy. I will not list all the coups carried out in the world with the help of American ambassadors in different countries.
        1. +2
          23 January 2025 09: 18
          Well, there weren't any other problems in the country? Everyone was sitting quietly and peacefully, then the ambassador arrived and here you go, is that how it turned out? Or did one weak-willed president refuse to sign an agreement "with the countries of the light elves", where Ukrainians were called a "nation", promised "brotherly love", "lace panties" and various "goodies" (whether they would have given them or not is question 10), and publicly declared that it would be better to be friends with the eastern neighbor (having incidentally received the dissolved 4 billion eternally greenbacks), where they said "h0khly"?
          1. +4
            23 January 2025 09: 22
            Do you think they didn't work before? Ukraine was a founder of the CIS, but it wasn't a member. Did the division of the Black Sea Fleet in the 90s just happen? The US influenced Ukrainian politicians, but the Russians didn't.
            1. +8
              23 January 2025 09: 56
              Well, those Americans were pursuing a policy, but we weren't? In other words, the "light elves" predicted a lot of things, and we only mocked independence (although in fact we ourselves were exactly the same fragment of the USSR), even without promises and examples of a wonderful future...
              1. +5
                23 January 2025 10: 21
                That is why ambassadors are needed, to influence the policies of a particular state.
                1. +3
                  23 January 2025 10: 56
                  That's how it is... And I always thought that the ambassador acts as an authorized representative within the framework of the policy developed by the ministry. He can conduct negotiations, sign documents, etc., but the policy itself is not determined by him, the rest is assessments of effectiveness, but they are also carried out by the developer of the policy and the decision maker.
                  1. +4
                    23 January 2025 11: 07
                    General directions of policy, ambassador of the chief of staff, are set... A simple example, once England was going to war with Russia, ambassador Vorontsov received an order to do something, as was not ordered. He began to write articles in English newspapers about how war with Russia is not needed by England, as a result, he pulled public opinion to the side of Russia and the war did not take place. And Chernomyrdin, as it turns out, did nothing at all for 9 years, or rather did, but according to other instructions, which did not concern pulling Ukraine to the side of Russia.
                    1. 0
                      23 January 2025 11: 39
                      The ambassador is given a task (policy), what to achieve, resources are allocated. In your example, a specific task was set - to avoid war and the ambassador accomplished it.
                      I don't know what tasks were set for Chernomyrdin, but the fact that he held the post of ambassador for 9 years kind of hints that the task was carried out, the leadership of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the country were satisfied with the results. What questions to the ambassador? Accordingly, the question arises - what do you not like about my initial comment? The policy was one-sided and failed, the task was incorrectly set by the leadership.
                      1. +1
                        23 January 2025 11: 41
                        You and I are talking about the same thing but in different words.
                      2. +2
                        23 January 2025 12: 29
                        But today there are open arms for everyone. And they are still looking for someone else to "befriend". They fingered each other while the redistribution was going on, showed off in crimson jackets and that's it. A hangover has set in. Although, to be fair, the neighbors had the same process. And they spoke about us the same way. The collapse of empires is always like that.
              2. +2
                23 January 2025 16: 19
                After Maidan, a meme was circulating on the RuNet that Russia poured $200 billion into Ukraine, and the US spent $5 billion and took it all for itself, and it was all presented as "the Americans are bastards", but if you think about it, what happens for the ineffective use of funds on the Russian side... Ukraine got $200 billion, NATO froze $400 billion, and even so, 120-150 billion were officially taken out of the country every year... (I'm not even talking about the 90s, when the country was simply smashed for several trillions)... I just can't believe that such huge amounts of money left the country just like that, from ineffective use and because they were now leading us on... I understand that the standard of living in the country would be somewhat different if these HUNDREDS of billions of dollars were invested in the development of the country! But if there were a powerful economy, then it would start to suck in surrounding countries like into a funnel, and they would be more willing to “be friends” since they would have a direct financial interest in this, and under the financial interest they could already push their ideology.
      2. +6
        23 January 2025 10: 08
        Even without an idea, it was possible to set the condition "If you like Bandera, get gas at full price!" But it turned out that the Ukrainian leadership is pursuing an anti-Russian policy, and our bosses are supplying them with cheap gas, which they resell to other countries, but at a normal price. So it was Chernomyrdin, a gas specialist, who was sitting there for a reason, so that gas would go to Europe and the right guys would earn billions. Capitalists have no homeland!
    3. +10
      23 January 2025 09: 57
      Well, all these decades Ukraine (where anti-Russian propaganda was conducted at the state level) was supplied with gas at preferential prices... Well, that is, in fact, with Russian money, a Nazi hydra was being grown... But on both sides of the border, apparently, someone was receiving their benefit in crisp bills
      1. +4
        23 January 2025 10: 26
        But on both sides of the border, apparently, someone was getting their profit in crisp bills.
        Apparently that is why Chernomyrdin sat as an ambassador for 9 years. During these years, Ukraine, with the good work of the embassy, ​​should have come under the influence of Russia, at least become a member of the CIS or become a member of the Union State of Russia and Belarus. But apparently during these 9 years, Chernomyrdin himself became a Banderite, and also made money on the gas trade.
        1. +3
          23 January 2025 15: 50
          He wasn't poor before that, under Yeltsin, if I'm not mistaken he had either 2.4 billion dollars, or 4.2 (I don't remember exactly because it's been that long) and this was at a time when the country depended on IMF tranches. And when NATO bombed Yugoslavia, Chernomyrdin flew to Belgrade and twisted Milosevic's arms (and in fact saved his billions in Western banks, which the Americans threatened to freeze)
  12. +1
    23 January 2025 08: 30
    And in the case of our allied peacekeepers, and non-allied NATO ones, we will catch our breath and begin to accumulate forces for revenge. And they will go to Russia sooner or later, shitting on any treaties, gray or hundred-kilometer zones. The goals of the SVO were not fools.
    1. +5
      23 January 2025 09: 59
      Excuse me, what are the goals of the SVO?
  13. +8
    23 January 2025 08: 38
    The topic of a peacekeeping contingent has been popping up since 2014. It hasn't gone beyond talk. And it won't go further. And it sounds funny somehow. "NATO peacekeepers"
  14. +6
    23 January 2025 08: 41
    The reason is simple: so far, no one in NATO has suffered as a result of any act of escalation.


    And this is the main reason for NATO's growing impudence. Until they get what they deserve, they will take full advantage of our restraint and increase the escalation.

    I would like to express my personal opinion on the significance of statements by State Duma deputies and other politicians on whom decision-making does not depend. You shouldn't just pay attention to them.
  15. +12
    23 January 2025 08: 48
    I hope the Kursk region will remain Russian?
    And then the brave generals promised to drive out the Banderites from there in 3 days.
    1. +8
      23 January 2025 08: 58
      I hope the Kursk region will remain Russian?
      They were also going to cleanse Ukraine in three days.
      1. +9
        23 January 2025 09: 29
        They were also going to cleanse Ukraine in three days.
        And a lot of people published entire articles about this, and now you can get a warning for reminding us about it.
        1. +9
          23 January 2025 09: 33
          Yes, yes, I remember that unprecedented patriotic frenzy, when hats were flying up... and try to stutter... And minuses and warnings, and now, negotiations? Yes, yes... but it must be done in such a way that they don't deceive, etc. And three years ago for something like that? They would have burned you on the forum... or beaten you with hats.
      2. +1
        24 January 2025 10: 02
        Well, or "take Grozny in 24 hours, with the forces of one airborne division"... They also forgot about promises...)))
        1. +1
          24 January 2025 10: 04
          Yes, there were so many of them and the fact that someone will lie down on the rails if prices go up... laughing
    2. -8
      23 January 2025 12: 27
      so it is still Russian except for a small village
      1. +1
        23 January 2025 21: 28
        If your relatives were in the occupied territory, they wouldn’t say that.
        At least think with your head a little!
        1. -3
          24 January 2025 07: 19
          This is all just lyrics that are of no interest to anyone
    3. -4
      23 January 2025 21: 16
      Isn't it Russian? The occupied piece of the region has an area of ​​400-500 square kilometers, the entire area of ​​the region is 30 thousand square kilometers.
      1. +2
        23 January 2025 21: 27
        500 sq. km - is that not enough for you??? Is it not our people who live there?
  16. -4
    23 January 2025 09: 24
    Who sees changes in our ultimate goals? By the way, yesterday Solovyov voiced a very simple option, in the folder about the peace treaty there should be a draft constitution of Ukraine written by Russia. Example. Why there is no peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan and there will not be one for the greatest time. Ilham Aliyev said briefly and clearly, the Constitution of Armenia should include a clause "Nagorno-Karabakh is the territory of Azerbaijan". Let Pashinyan dodge as much as he wants, but he will still have to be accepted.
  17. -1
    23 January 2025 09: 27
    A hypothetical option would be to divide Ukraine into the Left and Right Banks, but to do this it would need to be strategically defeated.
    1. +5
      23 January 2025 09: 35
      division of Ukraine into the Left and Right Bank
      So that the Nazis can multiply on the right bank, should we leave it for their own profit?
      1. 0
        23 January 2025 09: 40
        Firstly, I am writing as an option: to Dnepr, and this is not the city of Dnepr, and Kyiv is still a long way to go, and secondly, what method can you suggest to speed up the progress?
        1. +2
          23 January 2025 09: 42
          You are writing about division, not about advancement, and the option of advancement is like in Syria, Barmaley, but there must be conditions for this.
          1. -1
            23 January 2025 09: 46
            We need to move on the ground, and to do this quickly we need to apply the Soviet Doctrine from the Brezhnev-Andropov era.
            1. +1
              23 January 2025 09: 47
              Who's stopping us? Am I suggesting we move by air?
              1. -3
                23 January 2025 09: 49
                So you agree? You agree to the use of tactical nuclear weapons?
                1. 0
                  23 January 2025 09: 51
                  I suggest moving by land, not by air. You wrote about this:
                  You have to move on the ground
                  1. -4
                    23 January 2025 10: 07
                    Advancement on land must be ensured by the destruction of enemy troops stationed there and the infrastructure supporting them: bridges, power plants, factories. In particular, the Aerospace Forces are used for this purpose. Unfortunately, conventional weapons are not entirely effective. Therefore, in the 80s of the last century, it was assumed that tactical nuclear weapons would be used, and if necessary, nuclear weapons. I proceed from the premise that in this way it is possible to really speed up the advance of our troops by an order of magnitude and ensure a quick exit first to the Dnieper, and then to the Danube. That's all for now.
                    1. +2
                      23 January 2025 10: 30
                      "if nuclear weapons are required. I proceed from the premise that in this way"
                      thousands of civilian victims, destroyed infrastructure, land contaminated with radiation - and all this is on our territory, or somewhere out there, far away?
                      "Unfortunately, conventional means of destruction are not entirely effective."
                      quite effective - you just need to aim better laughing
                      1. +2
                        23 January 2025 12: 42
                        Exactly. Throwing a loaf of bread on your own land is absurd and a crime. We need to go further, deeper. fool and wait for it to fly back negative . That's the end of the story. It just doesn't get through to those who like to wave the nuclear club - it's the last straw, not a means to achieve victory. There was a doctrine, but LIB never thought of using it. He always found other ways to shorten the enemy.
        2. +4
          23 January 2025 09: 46
          And for this, a larger-scale mobilization and a major strategic offensive were immediately needed. From the very beginning, I spoke about this, and everyone answered me - where to get troops, and "you are writing from the trenches"?
        3. +10
          23 January 2025 09: 57
          Firstly, judging by the map, there are a lot of opportunities for boilers. There is no desire. Enter from the territory of the Bryansk region, here is another opportunity to speed up.
          1. 0
            23 January 2025 10: 38
            "Enter from the territory of the Bryansk region here is another one"
            oh well, they've already come from the Kursk region (or not?)
    2. +3
      23 January 2025 09: 44
      I have been talking about this from the very beginning - the Korean option and the creation of a buffer state.
      1. +7
        23 January 2025 09: 49
        You are not the only one, I suggested the experience of the Far Eastern Republic... I wrote about it three years ago... They threw minuses at me... Someone else wrote about it...
        1. 0
          23 January 2025 10: 11
          When I write about it, I also get bombarded with minuses and accusations of bloodthirstiness.
          1. +2
            23 January 2025 10: 32
            The Far Eastern Republic is not a nuclear or thermonuclear weapon, it is a Far Eastern Republic, which was created in the Far East as a buffer state, as a result of its creation Soviet Russia, without entering into conflict with either the USA or Great Britain and Japan, withdrew the troops of the said countries from the Far East, although the withdrawal from Northern Sakhalin dragged on until 1925
      2. +4
        23 January 2025 10: 46
        "and the creation of a buffer state"
        as long as there is at least one region under Kiev's rule, a new war will be inevitable! only the complete destruction of statehood and occupation by the Russian Armed Forces, or joining the Russian Federation can guarantee a peaceful life for both us and them. but only for a while. Nuland cookies, Bandera's ideas will not disappear on their own, they must be fought. and our government has already demonstrated the ability to do this. and it will take more than a decade to create such a buffer state, judging by the current pace
        1. +1
          23 January 2025 11: 14
          So this is the purpose of creating a buffer state in this case, to close the conflict between two equal halves of the former on itself, Russia would only have to reinforce the balance of power, so that the army of the Russian Federation (see map) does not roll back, for which it is fed with weapons, ammunition, combat equipment, and support with missile and combat strikes on the enemy. And let this confrontation last as long as it takes, it is only beneficial to us. Orders for the military-industrial complex, training of our Aerospace Forces and maintaining in good shape all the RF Armed Forces, which would occasionally take part in some particularly large battles there.
          1. +2
            23 January 2025 14: 40
            "And let this confrontation go on for as long as it takes, it is only beneficial to us"
            a very controversial statement. and look at the area - what strip of land did the RF Armed Forces occupy as a result of battles over 3 years, and how much, according to your map, needs to be occupied. it will take more than a dozen years, and the population of the RFDR will agree to play the role of a buffer, being constantly under the threat of war
            1. +3
              23 January 2025 15: 05
              So, for this, a completely different strategy was needed. The first army should advance from Belarus west of Kyiv, to Uman. The second army from Crimea to Uman. They should quickly unite, deploy the front to the west along the line, and hold the front. The third army should engage the enemy troops to the east of the line, in the Donbass and in other places, not allow them to move in columns to the west and not allow them to strike the first two armies in the back. For the entire operation - a month for the active phase, after which all the Ukrainian Armed Forces troops remaining east of the line should be surrounded in large pockets, left without ammunition, food and water, and perish. Or go over to the side of the Russian Federation.
              1. 0
                24 January 2025 15: 49
                "So this required a completely different strategy."
                and I have no other Hindenburgs for you. It was said - the first column of marching - that means marching laughing
                1. +1
                  24 January 2025 20: 07
                  I don't have any other Hindenburgs for you

                  That's exactly it, there are no others, but there is gnawing and squeezing, there is 0 strategy in this, 0.01 tactics
        2. -5
          23 January 2025 12: 32
          there will be no complete liberation and destruction of the ukri, forget it and don't remember it, if several regions remain, how can they threaten? the scope is no longer the same
          1. +2
            23 January 2025 14: 28
            "if a few regions remain, what threat will they be able to pose? the scope is no longer the same"
            they will be given everything - weapons, volunteers, money - no one has removed the task of defeating Russia from the West. Yes, and not much land is needed - now the fighting is taking place - on the territory of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporozhye and Kursk regions. In comparison with the whole of Ukraine, not very much
            1. -3
              23 January 2025 15: 56
              but who will they give it to? There is no one to give it to now and then these people will run away, who will they give it to then?
              1. 0
                24 January 2025 15: 38
                "But who will they give it to? There is no one to give it to now"
                whoever stays and asks will be given laughing whoever doesn't ask, doesn't get anything
                and if now there is no one to give it to - who is keeping our troops in the Kursk region and under the sentry ravine? then they should already be in Kyiv, and in Lvov. but something did not work out
                1. -1
                  24 January 2025 17: 13
                  So far there are still about a million security forces there.
  18. -3
    23 January 2025 09: 32
    And who said that the Russian Federation agreed to a truce along the front line? So far, all these are thoughts not supported by reality "on the ground".
    1. 0
      24 January 2025 16: 48
      Well, no matter how the people are asked what they agree to and on what terms. The guys at the top solve their problems guided by their own interests, and then the people will be presented with a fait accompli, and through the media they will tell that what happened is an incredible victory and an unprecedented success. (And this applies to all parties to the conflict)
  19. +4
    23 January 2025 09: 42
    Well, we will continue to advance, through the regiments of Anglo-French peacekeepers, they will bomb with atomic bombs, we will bomb them in response. We will destroy them, they will partly destroy us. The SVO will pause for some time, while we will restore the destruction, then we will continue.
  20. +4
    23 January 2025 09: 58
    Everyone is such a "hawk"...)
    "War to the bitter end"!
    There will be no victorious end. Even if the formidable couch-keyboard warriors personally go to the trenches (they won't).
    No one will let Russia conquer all of Ukraine. Otherwise it would have conquered it already.
    Trump is making sense when he proposes an end to hostilities.
    You can reflect as much as you like on his maxims about 60 million and who defeated whom, but the essence of his proposal is adequate.
    Come down to earth already.
    The senseless (from the very beginning) slaughter must be stopped and ended.
    1. +2
      23 January 2025 10: 03
      The dangerous junta must be driven out of Ukraine, and for that we must take Kyiv. And then all the issues will be resolved.
      1. +2
        23 January 2025 10: 29
        The capture of Kyiv (which in itself is an event with zero probability) will not in any way solve the problem of the "junta", which will simply move its headquarters to Lviv.
        Only the complete capture and occupation of the whole of Ukraine with Russian tanks reaching the Polish border.
        Nobody needs Russian tanks on the Polish border. That's why they won't be there.
        Accordingly, it is time to sit down at the negotiating table.
        Which is what is proposed.
        1. 0
          23 January 2025 10: 34
          which will simply transfer its bet to Lviv

          Let him sit there, maybe even the whole Lviv region will join NATO.
          1. +4
            23 January 2025 10: 52
            NATO in Kyiv is a mortal threat to Russia, but NATO in Lviv is not? Am I right?
            1. +5
              23 January 2025 11: 13
              Yes, it’s like in 2004, the Baltic countries joined NATO, the borders from Narva immediately moved deeper into Europe. Yes Almost to the Atlantic..
            2. +2
              23 January 2025 11: 21
              Still, there is almost a 400 km difference, for launching drones and missiles at Russia this is important, the line of their reach will be moved by this distance
              1. +4
                23 January 2025 12: 40
                NATO will launch drones and missiles at Russia from the Baltics. The closest distance to Moscow is there.
            3. +4
              23 January 2025 11: 46
              Quote: Veselov-Poselkin
              NATO in Kyiv is a mortal threat to Russia, but NATO in Lviv is not? Am I right?

              Yes, that's right. Everything is fine with NATO near St. Petersburg!
            4. -5
              23 January 2025 12: 36
              that's right, the Balts. The Finns have no army at all, there is no threat from them and there were up to 40 million Ukrainians there
              1. +7
                23 January 2025 12: 42
                NATO, if it wishes, can transfer and form strike armies in any of its countries.
                1. -8
                  23 January 2025 13: 18
                  NATO is nothing without America!!!!
                  1. +5
                    23 January 2025 13: 27
                    Excellent. Accordingly, Ukraine's entry into NATO will make Ukraine nothing.
                    Ukraine will cease to be an independent force threatening the Russian Federation and will be controlled by the United States.
                    1. -4
                      23 January 2025 13: 54
                      that's right, without America there hasn't been any strengthening for a long time
                      1. +1
                        23 January 2025 14: 43
                        Therefore, from a security point of view, Ukraine’s entry into NATO is beneficial for Russia.
                        It will become as quiet and peaceful as the Baltics.
                      2. -3
                        23 January 2025 15: 58
                        most likely it will be like that, the Baltics only bark and don't bite
                  2. +1
                    23 January 2025 13: 28
                    It depends on who it’s against; judging by the progress of the SVO, it’s very much so.
                    1. -6
                      23 January 2025 13: 54
                      in what very? without support for a couple of months
                      1. +4
                        23 January 2025 14: 16
                        Well, we already see how these couple of months have passed in Ukraine, that the SVO has been going on for three years already, and NATO has not yet arrived to war.
                        There is no need to throw hats, but to look at things realistically: without nuclear weapons, Russia alone has no way to defeat NATO, even NATO without the US.
                      2. -6
                        23 January 2025 15: 54
                        NATO is fighting alongside the Americans, that's why it's been going on for so long
                      3. +1
                        23 January 2025 18: 38
                        No, they are not fighting, what American divisions are currently in Ukraine? Here is the neighboring news that almost all the transferred Abrams were destroyed and they give the number of 31 transferred, 26 were destroyed, that is, NATO even supplies "pennies" by the standards of their military-industrial complex.
                      4. -4
                        23 January 2025 19: 17
                        All weapons, supplies, money, everything from the West
                      5. +3
                        23 January 2025 19: 48
                        No, not everything. For example, for the transit of gas and oil to NATO countries, the Russian Federation pays a total of about 2.1-2.3 billion dollars per year. Well, let's say that Ukraine's military budget until 2014 was about +/- 2 billion dollars per year. And in 2023, there was a situation where Hungary and the Czech Republic received oil from the Russian Federation above the norm by 40 and 20%, and resold these surpluses to Ukraine. Do you think those people who sell oil don't know where this surplus goes? They know, they just don't care.
                      6. -6
                        24 January 2025 07: 16
                        What does NATO oil supplies and weapons have to do with it?
                      7. +1
                        24 January 2025 07: 32
                        And what does NATO equipment run on, water? Deutsche Welle journalists (they are lying, of course) conducted an investigation that during the Ukrainian Armed Forces offensive in August 2022, Lukoil's Bulgarian subsidiary provided the Ukrainian Armed Forces with 40% of all fuel (and Vagit Alekperov, the owner of Lukoil, is the highest-earning Russian billionaire). But I am sure that the supply of oil to the enemy has nothing to do with his financial success, and in general the Germans slandered him!
                      8. -5
                        24 January 2025 07: 34
                        and no one is hiding that fuel is being supplied, but we are talking about weapons
                  3. 0
                    24 January 2025 15: 59
                    "NATO is nothing without America!!!!"
                    No way! It can't be!
      2. +2
        23 January 2025 19: 44
        Has at least one bomb or missile landed on the junta in these three years? No? Maybe that's not the goal of knocking it out?
    2. +5
      23 January 2025 10: 34
      Okay, the agreement will be signed, what next?
      1. +8
        23 January 2025 11: 08
        Yes, the same as before, selling resources, palaces, yachts, etc.
        1. +6
          23 January 2025 11: 11
          Well, yes, "vote, don't vote... anyway..." you'll lose Yes
      2. -3
        23 January 2025 12: 47
        That's all for now.
        Establishing a peaceful life and restoring broken political and economic ties with half the planet.
        1. +6
          23 January 2025 12: 51
          That's all for now.
          Uh-hum. Peace, friendship, chewing gum, lifting sanctions, returning to the world sports arena, investing in the economy that we have ruined, investing... Again, friendly partners, everyone is buying gas, repairing SP-2, etc. Vague doubts torment me.
          1. -2
            23 January 2025 12: 56
            Well, not everything is so cheerful... "Peace/friendship/chewing gum" are collapsing - quickly. Literally in one day and one tank invasion. And now they will be restored - for years/decades.
    3. 0
      24 January 2025 16: 54
      For ordinary people it is meaningless, but for those who are warming their paws on it, it makes sense, more than likely they are still heating up this discord and not letting it die out. I wholeheartedly recommend everyone to read the hundred-year-old fable by Demyan Bedny "Peace Deal", in my opinion it more than clearly shows the situation.
  21. +8
    23 January 2025 10: 09
    Isn't the last 10 years enough to understand that the national football team is playing worse and worse, and there is no place for victories. There are some games that are not bad, bright, but there are very few of them and they do not affect the final result at all. When the great Tikhonov was asked about the reason for the national team's poor performance at the last World Cup with his participation, he answered, I can put the players in their places, I can tell who should do what, but I can't teach a player to shoot past the goalkeeper, they teach that in the Children's Sports School)....and now we don't even have Tikhonov(
    1. +2
      23 January 2025 17: 26
      If you watch KVN over the last 30 years, the themes of the jokes have always been the same: losing in football (except 2008) and the economic crisis
  22. +6
    23 January 2025 10: 31
    "NATO at the gates"
    The Baltic countries, the Neuvegs, and now the Finns are also in NATO. And if I remember correctly, we border on all of them. And here is my question - how do these "NATO at the gates" differ from "NATO at the gates" in the form of the Brits and Franks in Ukraine?
    1. +2
      23 January 2025 10: 38
      Nothing.
      But for most people this is a thought that is completely overwhelming in its complexity.
      Ukraine is "different"!
    2. +1
      23 January 2025 11: 19
      hi Well, how can you not understand, these are different gates... New... The same gates, but old... even with Finland, Finland, having joined NATO, closed the gates so that Russians would not go for cheap products. Yes And in Ukraine, these are new gates...what to look at them...They already looked at those... Yes Well, you got it..
      1. +1
        23 January 2025 11: 21
        Well, yes. Yes hi "" "" ""
      2. +1
        23 January 2025 11: 40
        Finland does not launch drones and missiles at us, but the Kiev junta does, and will probably continue to do so for decades to come, so the junta will have to move to the West, the further the better.
        1. 0
          23 January 2025 11: 43
          Finland doesn't fire drones and missiles at us

          Since joining NATO, the Baltics have not launched drones and missiles at Russia... You won't believe it, since 2004...
          1. +1
            23 January 2025 11: 45
            Perhaps they are saving the Baltics for meat for a suitable occasion, when there will be a mess with Kaliningrad?
            1. +2
              23 January 2025 11: 46
              And why? The Baltics? As our leadership claims, there are no Nazis there. Not since 1990.
              1. +1
                23 January 2025 11: 51
                The West, as a thrifty owner, puts everything to work, and will not waste a penny. It did not destroy the USSR so that its fragments could live in peace and build capitalism. But so that when the time comes, it could use every fragment and every inhabitant to pit us against each other in a war, so that we would all self-destruct with our own hands. And then the American "peacekeepers" will come in, like on the cover of Colliers magazine, when there is almost no one left here to extract resources.
                1. 0
                  23 January 2025 11: 54
                  And what do you propose? Use tactical nuclear weapons? And the whole world will crumble into dust. They will die, and we will go to heaven.
                  1. 0
                    23 January 2025 11: 57
                    A comprehensive long-term strategy is needed to counter this line.
                    1. +4
                      23 January 2025 11: 59
                      You know, I don’t object to the lines and strategies, there have been so many of them already, one line or strategy more, one less...
        2. 0
          23 January 2025 19: 35
          "Finland doesn't launch drones and missiles at us, but the Kiev junta does." I wonder why that is?
          P.S.: it would be better to move the junta not to the West, but two meters underground
    3. +4
      23 January 2025 12: 21
      Then let's remember 2014. Then Crimea was shabby because NATO "was going" to build its base in Crimea.
      1. +1
        23 January 2025 13: 35
        We need to bring in the Finns too, NATO wants to build bases there too.
        1. +2
          23 January 2025 13: 44
          Another situation. While Kyiv was jumping around, Moscow was printing ballots for the referendum. Everything is stable in Helsinki now, they themselves want to bite off Vyborg, while the Kremlin is playing around.
  23. +8
    23 January 2025 10: 44
    Quote: Mikhail Krivopalov
    Excuse me, what are the goals of the SVO?

    Well... Eh... But if anything happens, then it won't seem like a small thing!
    1. +3
      23 January 2025 10: 57
      And as time showed later, it didn’t seem like much either. laughing Yes
  24. +2
    23 January 2025 11: 01
    Starmer and Macron seriously discuss NATO deployment to Ukraine after peace deal

    This will be the reason for the termination of the Treaty, if there is one at all.
    We would be more satisfied with complete capitulation and military tribunals for war criminals. Yes
  25. kvv
    +4
    23 January 2025 11: 46
    How much longer can we cut sawdust, there is only one solution to the problem - the liquidation of the outskirts, everything else is a postponed war and the Minsk agreements are an example of this
  26. +1
    23 January 2025 11: 48
    Without the US, no one will mess with us. Another question is who and by what private parts the West holds us, who can seriously offer us capitulation. And that would be capitulation. With all the consequences. Trump gave Putin 90-100 days. Now we'll see who's worth what...
  27. +8
    23 January 2025 11: 51
    Finally, even the most stubborn people are starting to understand, here is what Zakhar Prilepin writes today:
    But Trump knows what we want.
    We want a "deal".
    That's why he talks to us like that. Like we deserve.
    "You want a deal? I'll give you a deal."
    He does not believe for a single minute in our "ideology" (we don't have one), in our new "friendships" (ha-ha), in our global prospects for establishing new rules for planetary coexistence (ho-ho). He is a pragmatist. He talks to whomever he sees.
    And he sees the shadow of the “European world”, which wants to “return to the way it was” and again become “part” of their “white civilization”.
    Is he wrong?
    Well then, let's show him that he's wrong.
    He's not wrong?
    …Then it’s sad.”
    Was it not immediately clear, when there was a "gathering" in Istanbul, what exactly they wanted, "let's return to how it was before." It's not sad here, it's scary that human blood is like water to someone. Eh...
  28. +3
    23 January 2025 12: 02
    Why did E. Fedorov write this article? Normal people have long understood: there will never be any peacekeepers, this is a way through the media, cheap pressure on Russia
  29. +1
    23 January 2025 12: 50
    Quote: okean969
    there will never be any peacekeepers


    "Remember this tweet" (c)
  30. 0
    23 January 2025 13: 48
    hello regarding the flywheel of the 3rd world war, for which the NATO countries are waiting for a reason for the 3rd world war, it is a little bit out of touch with reality
    NATO member countries could easily enter the War with Russia individually but simultaneously, under the pretext of providing assistance to the former Ukraine in repelling Russian aggression
    but this has not happened yet, perhaps NATO is waiting for Russia to exhaust its military and human potential
  31. +2
    23 January 2025 14: 57
    Frankly speaking, no peace treaty has a chance at the moment. Diametrically opposed positions, their desire is a freeze and then they do whatever they want, our desire is peace with the disarmament of Ukraine, a ban on NATO and at least 4 regions in our composition, and these are, for a second, cities such as Slavyansk, Kramatorsk, Kherson and Zaporozhye with a total population of under 2 million people. That is, they will not leave there themselves, guaranteed, but for us, a freeze is to consider admitting defeat and dooming ourselves to another war in the next 3-5 years.
    So even though Donnie barks there, there is little sense in it; Ukraine needs to be completely defeated and all of Novorossiya, including Odessa, Kharkov, Nikolaev and Dnepropetrovsk, taken home.
  32. +2
    23 January 2025 15: 25
    To push the Ukrainian Armed Forces back to the administrative borders in the current format of military operations, at the current pace, it will take at least three years. Unrealistic. The Russian Federation does not have that much time to maintain its current capabilities.
    1. +2
      24 January 2025 00: 16
      It follows that the pace must be different, and, accordingly, the strategies must be different.
      Namely, don't mumble that "we haven't started yet"... but really start. Declare martial law, conduct mass mobilization, close the borders, recreate something like SMERSH, revoke the moratorium on the death penalty and "everything for the front, everything for victory."
      1. 0
        29 January 2025 16: 50
        Namely, don't mumble that "we haven't started yet"... but really start. Declare martial law, conduct mass mobilization, close the borders, recreate something like SMERSH, revoke the moratorium on the death penalty and "everything for the front, everything for victory."
        You are certainly right, but here is the question - who will do all this? I think it is easier to teach a tiger to eat grass than to force our elite to mobilize. How is that possible? hi
    2. +1
      24 January 2025 13: 22
      There is a chance that the Ukrainian army will crumble at some point and then everything will happen very quickly. And if we continue to press, then it will crumble for sure.
  33. +1
    23 January 2025 16: 50
    Read the beginning of the article.
    It says there, after the signing of the peace treaty.
    When, who and with whom it will be signed is unknown.
    NATO would have been in Ukraine anyway, even if we hadn’t started the war.
    That's actually why we started.
    If we sign a peace treaty now, then there would be no need to arrange all these efforts on the Western front.
    Another matter is whether there is enough political will to win without looking back at the opinion of “civilized” people.
  34. +3
    23 January 2025 17: 36
    Quote: Boris55
    Chernomyrdin was no exception...

    You shouldn't say that about the ChVS.
    One of the last interviews of Chernomyrdin the Ambassador about Ukraine:
    Are the US ready to save on economic and political support for Ukraine now? - I don't think so. There is a new administration there now, we don't know how yet. Although we only hear from the Ukrainian side that they have already talked to Hillary... But I am sure of one thing: they will not let Ukraine go. They will drag it into NATO, and they themselves will interfere with the gas transportation system. - Does Russia have no chance of outplaying America in Ukraine? - No, we don't know how to do it. - Haven't they learned? - And are we learning? We are not learning. They have, it's embarrassing even to say, more than 2 thousand funds. Everywhere. With newspapers, with television. They give grants. They invite people to come to them, they just drag them in for training, for free. American representatives are sitting in the Ministry of Defense. They work openly. They have long ago rewritten everything to NATO affairs. Here among us some people still say: where will Ukraine go from us? It will! Of course!

    Far-sighted, unlike the current government.
  35. +3
    23 January 2025 18: 58
    Russia, in the given circumstances and given the possible development of events, has only one option - to end the so-called SVO in the area of ​​Cape Roca (Portugal), having first "taken off the white gloves"... It is possible that after this operation, the respected Donald Fredovich, and not only him, will stop talking "through his lips" with Russia and will take the right "steps" towards Russia...
  36. -5
    23 January 2025 23: 12
    All these gentlemen studied history poorly! How did it all end? With visits of the Russian Army to the capitals of slow-witted countries! Do we really need to repeat it all over again?
  37. +3
    24 January 2025 00: 20
    What needs to be done.
    1. declare martial law.
    2. carry out a mass mobilization
    3. close the borders
    4. conduct nuclear tests
    5. recreate something like SMERSH
    6. revoke the moratorium on the death penalty and do not hesitate to use it in the Armed Forces and the bureaucracy in cases where it is truly deserved
    7. "everything for the front, everything for victory"
    8. conclude a military-strategic alliance with Iran and China (already concluded with the DPRK)
    9. in every possible way establish mutually beneficial partnership relations with neutral governments of Europe (Hungary, Serbia, Slovakia and perhaps others) in all respects.
    10. take the elite by the balls with a lightning-fast throw, betting on the people
  38. +1
    24 January 2025 00: 21
    Well, that means there is no need to agree to any peace negotiations and continue the SVO until the goals of such are achieved.
    What's not clear? And what does Trump have to do with his peace initiatives?
  39. The comment was deleted.
  40. +1
    24 January 2025 01: 42
    Bueno, lo primero es ver si en realidad Rusia va aceptar una línea de demarcación y un congelamiento de las acciones y del frente. En puridad eso equivaldría a un "descanso" para Kiev y sus promotores en espera de una mejor oportunidad de agredir a Moscú. Y mientras, las tropas de la OTAN ya estarían "legalmente" en suelo ucraniano y listas para secundar a Ucrania. Eso de hecho puede significar la continuación del conflicto, porque a todas luces Rusia no aceptaría un "arreglo" que huele a chamusca, como todo lo que proviene de los interlocutores occidentales. For good reason. con tales maniobras la solución se reduce a ocupar militarmente toda Ucrania y volver a las fronteras anteriores al golpe fascista de 2014, pero con un territorio bajo control y limpio de elementos hostiles y agresivos.
  41. 0
    24 January 2025 11: 50
    I am not a couch critic, but I also try to think independently, my opinion is not a stupid, fashionable "IMHO", but an opinion, if you get involved, you have to go to the end, otherwise, it will turn into even greater losses and much more...
  42. 0
    24 January 2025 15: 16
    Trump has spoken. Now it's up to us. And we don't give a damn about additional sanctions. We are a self-sufficient state after all.
  43. 0
    24 January 2025 19: 13
    For now, this is just hot air. Makaron, Starmer and Co. are trying to pretend that they can do something. The British Armed Forces, 183 thousand mugs - that's on paper, in reality there are fewer combat-ready and it tends to decrease. TOTAL - army, air force and navy. Ground forces - 85 thousand. Does Starmer have the ability to send at least 20 thousand to Ukraine?
  44. -1
    24 January 2025 20: 00
    Quote: volgast1970
    We are a self-sufficient state.


    It wasn't written "made in China" on the device, was it?
  45. -2
    24 January 2025 21: 24
    There is only one way to discourage the "Peacekeepers" from entering the urine territory. When this territory is a little... untidy, as in the photo, then the desire to stay there among Europeans who love good toilet paper will not arise in principle.
  46. 0
    25 January 2025 00: 01
    Overall, the article is like reading coffee grounds. A million "if onlys". Everything is simpler, strike ahead, and don't play according to their plan. It is obvious that "non-partners" are following the path of a clearly planned escalation, step by step, strictly according to plan. If you want to throw them off track, do something they don't expect. You can and should increase the degree of escalation, and wet pants will be guaranteed. Otherwise, to be or not to be, to hit or not to hit. It's even funny.
    Ps: of course, if our plans include chewing shit and killing tens and hundreds of thousands of guys, then okay.
  47. 0
    27 January 2025 16: 29
    Peacekeepers who arrive on Ukrainian territory without Russia's consent will become a military target of the Russian Armed Forces
    https://news-front.su/2025/01/27/mirotvorczy-kotorye-pribudut-na-territoriyu-ukrainy-bez-soglasiya-rossii-stanut-voennoj-czelyu-vs-rf/
  48. -1
    28 January 2025 13: 38
    Many people fell into euphoria after the use of the Oreshnik by the Russian Armed Forces. I hope that the Russian Defense Ministry is aware that similar developments are being carried out in the United States and this obliges them to be ready for their practical use directly by the NATO alliance or indirectly, through third countries. Today, the development of hypersonic aircraft by the Russian Armed Forces is a temporary advantage and this cannot be ignored, just as the enemy cannot be underestimated. As soon as the prototypes of hypersonic aircraft developed and manufactured by the United States are ready, they will definitely be tested through third countries against targets on the territory of the Russian Federation. Upon receiving data on the high efficiency of overcoming missile defense and air defense systems, serial production of hypersonic aircraft in the United States, primarily with nuclear warheads, will be increased. The current situation in the world brings us closer to a direct military clash with the US Armed Forces. From all of the above, it follows that it is necessary to accelerate the development of air defense and missile defense systems capable of detecting, tracking and destroying hypersonic aircraft. The use of the Oreshnik by the Russian Armed Forces simply opened a new technological and technical stage in the development of weapons and military equipment.