Zelenski Says Trump Can't Make Him Negotiate With Russia....Practically Admitting He's Not Trying To End It

[Zavulon]

I have years in SAC and are more versed that there are no winners, only losers, in a Nuclear exchange. It's not winning, it's whom loses the least and who loses the most. When the Us will lose almost a 1/4 of it's population in the first few minutes of a Nuclear exchange, that's not winning losing about 90 million people in minutes. Then there is the aftermath which the total population will end up being about 85%. Sounds like the USA would be the big loser. Nope, not even close. Our population is scattered throughout our entire nation. Russia and China has a more condensed population in the more habitable regions. Their losses will end up being closer to 95% in the first year. No one wins.

Ok. Its all comparable, isn't it? Losing 30% or even 70% of population is definetely better than losing 100% of population.
And no, the difference between survival of 90% population and survival of 10% of population mostly depends on:
1) how good is your first counter-force strike;
2) how good is your ABD in interception of incoming retaliation warheads;
3) how good were your evacuation and sheltering before the strike;
4) how much material resources do you have in national reserves;
5) how good is your patching-up and recuperation after the strike;
6) how good is rebuilding of economy and the new post-war world order (including taking resources from your neighbours).

There are plenty of difference between Russia and the USA, but first of all, you must ask yourself and answer - what is the acceptable price of victory (in Ukraine) for the USA? If acceptable price is lesser than 1 mln of Americans (and I believe so - more or less equal to acceptable price for Russia for return of Alaska) - you shouldn't have even start the game that you can't finish.

 

[Zavulon]

They were part of Ukraine, NOT Russia.

Yes. As American colonies were part of British Empire, Texas was a part of Mexico, Kosovo was (and legally still is) a part of Serbia and Taiwan was (and legally still is) a part of China.

It was an internal Ukrainian matter. In fact Russia created the problem by creating an insurrection where none had existed. You will go to the ends of the earth to find excuses for Russian aggression.

Its not "excuses". The genocide of Russians there was pretty real. And NATO expansion was and still is pretty real.

NATO has done nothing to violate international law, but Russia has ever since April 1945.

Really? Did you forget the illegal and unprovoked aggresions against Serbia in 1999 and against Iraq in 2003?

 

[Vrenn]

I’ve tried to make that point to Zavulon but he refuses to recognize reality. I suppose that is what they teach Russians in school. Fortunately, I think the Russian generals are aware of that and aren’t going to allow Putin to murder the Motherland in his quest for glory. Putin isn’t Stalin and doesn’t have the same grip on his generals.

Here is a bit of pre internet history that has been buried by all involved. During the early 70s, they did the first video link between the Polituburo, US Congress, US President, Soviet Premier and both sides of Generals. What came out of it was the Politburo and the US Congress were making all sorts of threats, both Presidents stayed quiet but the Generals on both sides were trying to keep the top on things. Both Military Leaders (all) knew what you and I know. There are no winners, just losers in a Nuclear Exchange.

 

[Vrenn]

Ok. Its all comparable, isn't it? Losing 30% or even 70% of population is definetely better than losing 100% of population.
And no, the difference between survival of 90% population and survival of 10% of population mostly depends on:
1) how good is your first counter-force strike;
2) how good is your ABD in interception of incoming retaliation warheads;
3) how good were your evacuation and sheltering before the strike;
4) how much material resources do you have in national reserves;
5) how good is your patching-up and recuperation after the strike;
6) how good is rebuilding of economy and the new post-war world order (including taking resources from your neighbours).

There are plenty of difference between Russia and the USA, but first of all, you must ask yourself and answer - what is the acceptable price of victory (in Ukraine) for the USA? If acceptable price is lesser than 1 mln of Americans (and I believe so - more or less equal to acceptable price for Russia for return of Alaska) - you shouldn't have even start the game that you can't finish.

Easy answer. When the US loses 15% of it's entire population it also loses the same amount of production. Meanwhile, Russia (like china) has the bulk of it's population lumped around their production and military. Care to guess what the loss rate for them will be? Both goes back to the stone age. Or at least pre industrial revolution.

Then you don't add to the fact that the sun will be partially blocked with the crap that is thrown into the atmosphere. This means an average of about 7 degrees colder for about 10 months. This means that the bread baskets will be moved south. The US can handle that pretty well. China can as well. But Russia is screwed big time when they lose their main farmlands that are in the southern portion of their country.

It was once estimated that it would only take 12 one megaton bombs to set off a 10 month Nuclear winter. Now, figure out what it's going to do if 3000 were to go off. Luckily, most warheads today are in the 125 to 250 kt . So the minimum that will happen is the Nuclear Winter will last at least 10 months.

 

[beagle9]

Rubbish. There wouldn't be a NATO without a belligerent expansionist Russia, which is why NATO grows instead of shrinks, but morons keep bleating as if Putin is a hippie Ghandi or something.

Interesting... Since the Soviet Union during world War two, has Russia shrank or grown since that time period ?

After world War two, and after NATO was formed, has NATO expanded or stayed relatively the same size ?

Looking into Russian society as it stood 3 years ago, was it changed since the wall had been removed or had it doubled down on being the same oppressive communist regime that it illustrated behind the wall after Berlin was split between the east and the west ?

Looking into Russia during the 80s through 2016, it appears as modernized with malls, fast food resteraunts, and skyscrapers like any other modernized society, so what happened ?

How does Russia after the crumbling of the wall become the bane of global society opinion ? Is it the disagreement with it's leadership, and it's style of governing and policy making in Russia ?

What type of government is a Zelensky government ? Capitalist or what ?

 

[Zavulon]

Easy answer. When the US loses 15% of it's entire population it also loses the same amount of production.

It depends. If the USA lose 15% of its population in the port cities and don't recuperate its destroyed ports and all former ports captured by Chinese and Latino-Americans, and if after massive fallouts American agriculture can't be sold on foreign markets - US production lose much more than 15%. Even if we don't count parasitic parts of American economy - lawyers, prostitutes, shrinks, drug-dealers, etc...

Meanwhile, Russia (like china) has the bulk of it's population lumped around their production and military. Care to guess what the loss rate for them will be?

It depends. What is much more important, Russia and China have a lot of relatively rich and almost defenceless neighbours, who will be ready to give at least half of their food.

Both goes back to the stone age. Or at least pre industrial revolution.

It depends.

Then you don't add to the fact that the sun will be partially blocked with the crap that is thrown into the atmosphere. This means an average of about 7 degrees colder for about 10 months.

No. This theory is based on some false assumptions:
1. Nuclear war is mostly exchange of nuclear bursts in the cities. It's lie. Both Russia and America prefer to save their citizens to murder civilians of the adversary. Therefore the first strike is counter-force in the both side strategies.
2. Nuclear bursts in the cities will cause massive fires. It's lie. For most air conditions and yields of nukes, radius of demolition is larger than the radius of wood ignition. There will be no "city fires" (as it was in Hiroshima). There will be "soldering in debris".
3. Numerous city fires unite in a super-firestorm. It's lie. In the modern cities with their concrete buildings and wide streets small fires doesn't really spread and unite.
4. Super-firestorm burn all organic in ash and send it stratosphere. Its lie. Super-firestorms means high temperature and it means that all organic is burning to CO_2 and H_2O. No ash.
5. Ash cause decreasing of temperature. Its lie. The guys simply ignore greenhouse effects of CO_2 and water vapour.
6. The lack of harvest cause starvation. Only if you don't reserves and can't take food from someone else.

This means that the bread baskets will be moved south. The US can handle that pretty well. China can as well. But Russia is screwed big time when they lose their main farmlands that are in the southern portion of their country.

The southern part of our country is Ukraine. And we are going to retake it. What is even more important - harvest depends not only on temperature, but on fuel and fertilizers (and for it they are going to ask Russia, too).

It was once estimated that it would only take 12 one megaton bombs to set off a 10 month Nuclear winter.

Plain lie. In fact, climatic changes are simply unpredictable, but there are more chances on the moderate warming.

Now, figure out what it's going to do if 3000 were to go off. Luckily, most warheads today are in the 125 to 250 kt . So the minimum that will happen is the Nuclear Winter will last at least 10 months.

No problem. We can handle three years without harvest at least (and with taking food from Europeans and their extinction).

 

[Zavulon]

Interesting... Since the Soviet Union during world War two, has Russia shrank or grown since that time period ?

Russia have been recuperating.

After world War two, and after NATO was formed, has NATO expanded or stayed relatively the same size ?

It has expanded.

Looking into Russian society as it stood 3 years ago, was it changed since the wall had been removed or had it doubled down on being the same oppressive communist regime that it illustrated behind the wall after Berlin was split between the east and the west ?

In Russia everything is changing in three years and nothing is changing in 300 years.
Basically, Russians are pretty same that defeated Hitler and Napoleon.

Looking into Russia during the 80s through 2016, it appears as modernized with malls, fast food resteraunts, and skyscrapers like any other modernized society, so what happened ?

NATO expansion happened. Illegal and unprovoked aggresion against Serbia happened. Illegal maidan coup and Odessa massacre happened. US B-52s visited Ukrainian airspace. A lot of things happened, and it was the time to say "Enough! We should stop and/or eliminate those bastards".

How does Russia after the crumbling of the wall become the bane of global society opinion ? Is it the disagreement with it's leadership, and it's style of governing and policy making in Russia ?

First of all Russia is more or less supported by the world's majority (and by significant minority in the West).

What type of government is a Zelensky government ? Capitalist or what ?

No. He is just a foreign puppet. So, his government is "colonial administration". Negros in Africa had been sell each other to American magnats to work on their cotton plantations. Ukrainians sell each other as cannon fodder to fight for Biden's interests.

 

[beagle9]

Russia have been recuperating.

It has expanded.

In Russia everything is changing in three years and nothing is changing in 300 years.
Basically, Russians are pretty same that defeated Hitler and Napoleon.


NATO expansion happened. Illegal and unprovoked aggresion against Serbia happened. Illegal maidan coup and Odessa massacre happened. US B-52s visited Ukrainian airspace. A lot of things happened, and it was the time to say "Enough! We should stop and/or eliminate those bastards".


First of all Russia is more or less supported by the world's majority (and by significant minority in the West).


No. He is just a foreign puppet. So, his government is "colonial administration". Negros in Africa had been sell each other to American magnats to work on their cotton plantations. Ukrainians sell each other as cannon fodder to fight for Biden's interests.

Interesting listening to your perspective on everything, but counter perspectives must be listened to as well. One thing is a plain fact, and that is that communism doesn't work in most people's opinions around the world, and there is plenty of history to prove those opinions correct.

Reforms in Russia have been significant, but old ideological hold outs from the Soviet era are fearful of going to far. So why does Putin feel threatened by progress towards a more unified modern world ? Is it specific trends and cultural changes that has made his nation step back ? What is it that him and the Chinese president not like about western society changes and it's march towards what it thinks is a more progressive society developing out in the world ?

 

[Zavulon]

Interesting listening to your perspective on everything, but counter perspectives must be listened to as well.

No problem. That's one of the reasons why I'm here. To study alternative points of view.

One thing is a plain fact, and that is that communism doesn't work in most people's opinions around the world, and there is plenty of history to prove those opinions correct.

It mostly depends on your definition of the term "communism". There were no "true communism" anywhere, and I don't think it should be. The only question is the finding the best balance between government control and individual initiatives. And, in some way, modern Russian economy is lesser government regulated than American one.

Reforms in Russia have been significant, but old ideological hold outs from the Soviet era are fearful of going to far.

Definitely not. I don't think anybody is actually afraid of "going so far". In some ways Russian economy is even more free and modernised than American one.

So why does Putin feel threatened by progress towards a more unified modern world ?

We have nothing against "idea of unified modern world". We don't like idea of "Pax Americana" and mostly because they do kill us. We do like idea of the "world government". We don't like idea of the world government that discriminate, abuse and genocide us. Weird, isn't it? Would you like idea of Pax Sinica or Pax Russika in which North America is "decolonised"?

Is it specific trends and cultural changes that has made his nation step back ?

Some of your "specific cultural changes" are definitely unacceptable for any sane person, but it's not the point.

What is it that him and the Chinese president not like about western society changes and it's march towards what it thinks is a more progressive society developing out in the world ?

Chinese president (as far as I can understand) likes western society. He doesn't like that Western society steals his money and occupies his land.

 

[Picaro]

Interesting... Since the Soviet Union during world War two, has Russia shrank or grown since that time period ?

After world War two, and after NATO was formed, has NATO expanded or stayed relatively the same size ?

Looking into Russian society as it stood 3 years ago, was it changed since the wall had been removed or had it doubled down on being the same oppressive communist regime that it illustrated behind the wall after Berlin was split between the east and the west ?

Looking into Russia during the 80s through 2016, it appears as modernized with malls, fast food resteraunts, and skyscrapers like any other modernized society, so what happened ?

How does Russia after the crumbling of the wall become the bane of global society opinion ? Is it the disagreement with it's leadership, and it's style of governing and policy making in Russia ?

What type of government is a Zelensky government ? Capitalist or what ?

Already posted a list on Russia's invasions under Democrats in another thread. If Russia was doing so well, people would be fleeing en masse to places like London and the U.S.. Yes, like Red China, the Cadre has created demand for luxury goods for itself. People should load up on those valuable Rubles if they really believe that stuff. Russia made a lot off of their oil and gas, much like the one trick ponies in the ME. The only people moving there are assorted criminals and dictators.

 

[Picaro]

Reforms in Russia have been significant, but old ideological hold outs from the Soviet era are fearful of going to far.

It was run by thugs under Lenin and STalin, and nothing has changed; it's economy collapsed in 1973 and has only changed with selling lots of oil and gas to Europe. The same thugs control that industry as well.

 

[Picaro]

Since the little prick is totally independent, he can do whatever the heck he wants, right?

The point here is that this war is more about money than anything else.

Some people in Ukraine are doing quite well, especially since they've taken all of this cash from the US and bought several expensive properties and yachts to have bikini parties on.

And where in the world is it any different? Should the U.S. roll over and die just because some Burb Brats are crying about stuff that happened 200 years ago and Jacob Astor made a killing in Manhattan real estate? Not everything is about money, despite how convenient a narrative that is for some ideologies.