Peace plan proposals appear in italics. My analysis appears in plaintext.
The peace plan appears to be confused amalgam of two contradictory peace plans: The European and Ukrainian peace plan that Russia accept defeat and humiliation, and the Russian peace plan that the Ukraine gives up the Donbas for a hundred day truce during which it will hold free and fair elections, electing a government that will likely be a peace government willing to give Russia everything it has been asking for since 2014, and if it does not, Russia resumes the war, and either gets a neutral buffer state on its borders, or a howling wilderness, as the case may be.
It seems that Trump, faced with contradictory demands for military victory over Russia, and settling the war by accepting Russian victory, agreed with both of them.
1. Ukraine’s sovereignty will be confirmed.
This contradicts the prohibition of Nazism (point 20), the prohibition of the suppression of the Russian plurality that won the last genuinely free election in Ukraine (also point 20), the prohibition of Nato membership (points 3, 7, and 8), the limitation on the size of Ukraine’s military forces (point 6), and the prohibition of nukes (point 18)
2. A comprehensive, non-aggression agreement will be concluded between Russia, Ukraine and Europe. All ambiguities of the last 30 years will be considered settled.
Huh? And what is that settlement to be?
3. It is expected that Russia will not invade neighbouring countries and NATO will not expand further.
4. A dialogue will be held between Russia and NATO, mediated by the US, to resolve all security issues and create conditions for de-escalation to ensure global security and increase opportunities for cooperation and future economic development.
Huh? This is just the similarly undefined point 2.
5. Ukraine will receive reliable security guarantees.
Huh? Does Nato commit to counter invade if Ukraine invaded? But that would be Nato membership, contradicting points 3, 7, and 8.
6. The size of the Armed Forces of Ukraine will be limited to 600,000 personnel.
Does anyone, even the Ukrainians, know the current size of the Ukrainian armed forces? It looks to me that after having conscripted about one and half million men, they have about three hundred thousand left. Six hundred thousand would give them numbers roughly equal to current Russian forces currently in the Ukraine, and it is obvious that they have far fewer than the Russians. So a limit of six hundred thousand would enable them to rebuild their forces, which is unlikely to be acceptable to Russia, which has applied a lot of blood and treasure towards maiming or killing every military aged male Ukrainian and destroying all Nato military stockpiles.
7. Ukraine agrees to enshrine in its constitution that it will not join NATO, and NATO agrees to include in its statutes a provision that Ukraine will not be admitted in the future.
8. NATO agrees not to station troops in Ukraine.
9. European fighter jets will be stationed in Poland.
Is that perhaps the military guarantee? But that contradicts point three, Nato agrees not to expand further.
10. The US security guarantee will have the following caveats:
The US will receive compensation for the guarantee;
If Ukraine invades Russia, it will lose the guarantee;
If Russia invades Ukraine, in addition to a decisive coordinated military response, all global sanctions will be reinstated, recognition of the new territory and all other benefits of this deal will be revoked;
If Ukraine launches a missile at Moscow or Saint Petersburg without cause, the security guarantee will be deemed invalid.
11. Ukraine is eligible for European Union (EU) membership and will receive short-term preferential access to the EU market while this issue is being considered.
“a decisive coordinated military response” is precisely what did not happen when Russia invaded, and if it did not happen then, when the Ukraine had the largest army in Europe, it is not going to happen now that Ukraine’s army and Nato military resources have been chewed up. Further, the promise of such collective military action is precisely the Nato membership that points 3, 7, and 8 prohibit.
12. A powerful global package of measures will be provided to rebuild Ukraine, including but not limited to:
The creation of a Ukraine Development Fund to invest in fast-growing industries, including technology, data centres and artificial intelligence.
The US will cooperate with Ukraine to jointly rebuild, develop, modernise and operate Ukraine’s gas infrastructure, including pipelines and storage facilities.
Joint efforts to rehabilitate war-affected areas for the restoration, reconstruction and modernisation of cities and residential areas.
Infrastructure development.
Extraction of minerals and natural resources.
The World Bank will develop a special financing package to accelerate these efforts.
Note that the money to build defence lines was largely embezzled, so the reconstruction money is likely to suffer a similar fate.
13. Russia will be reintegrated into the global economy:
The lifting of sanctions will be discussed and agreed upon in stages and on a case-by-case basis.
The US will enter into a long-term economic cooperation agreement for mutual development in the areas of energy, natural resources, infrastructure, artificial intelligence, data centres, rare earth metal extraction projects in the Arctic, and other mutually beneficial corporate opportunities.
Russia will be invited to rejoin the G8.
This seems unlikely to be acceptable to Russia.
If sanctions are continued in part, that means the west has further demands, contradicting point 2, which demands are likely to lead to a resumption of the war, but with Nato weapons stockpiles rebuilt. Russia wants to settle the war, not give the enemy a break to recover.
14. Frozen funds will be used as follows:
$100bn in frozen Russian assets will be invested in US-led efforts to rebuild and invest in Ukraine;
The US will receive 50 percent of the profits from this venture. Europe will add $100bn to increase the amount of investment available for Ukraine’s reconstruction. Frozen European funds will be unfrozen. The remainder of the frozen Russian funds will be invested in a separate US-Russian investment vehicle that will implement joint projects in specific areas. This fund will be aimed at strengthening relations and increasing common interests to create a strong incentive not to return to conflict.
This seems unlikely to be acceptable to Russia.
15. A joint American-Russian working group on security issues will be established to promote and ensure compliance with all provisions of this agreement.
16. Russia will enshrine in law its policy of non-aggression towards Europe and Ukraine.
17. The US and Russia will agree to extend the validity of treaties on the non-proliferation and control of nuclear weapons, including the START I Treaty.
18. Ukraine agrees to be a non-nuclear state in accordance with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
19. The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant will be launched under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and the electricity produced will be distributed equally between Russia and Ukraine, 50:50.
This seems unlikely to be acceptable to Russia. They are winning, why give up anything they now control? Plus the International Atomic Energy Agency is a hostile party, likely to be interpreted as a nuclear threat.
20. Both countries undertake to implement educational programmes in schools and society aimed at promoting understanding and tolerance of different cultures and eliminating racism and prejudice:
Ukraine will adopt EU rules on religious tolerance and the protection of linguistic minorities.
Both countries will agree to abolish all discriminatory measures and guarantee the rights of Ukrainian and Russian media and education.
All Nazi ideology and activities must be rejected and prohibited.
The EU rules do not seem to have been protection for Russians in EU countries adjacent to Russia, any more than they have been protection for whites and males. Just have they have been interpreted to mean that straight males should be liberated from being straight, and Christians should be liberated from being Christian, they have been interpreted to mean that Russians should be liberated from being Russian.
21. Territories:
Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk will be recognised as de facto Russian, including by the US.
Kherson and Zaporizhia will be frozen along the line of contact, which will mean de facto recognition along the line of contact.
Russia will relinquish other agreed territories it controls outside the five regions.
Ukrainian forces will withdraw from the part of Donetsk oblast that they currently control, and this withdrawal zone will be considered a neutral demilitarised buffer zone, internationally recognised as territory belonging to the Russian Federation. Russian forces will not enter this demilitarised zone.
Russia wants the war ended, not frozen, to be reheated once new armies have been recruited and weapons stockpiles rebuilt.
22. After agreeing on future territorial arrangements, both the Russian Federation and Ukraine undertake not to change these arrangements by force. Any security guarantees will not apply in the event of a breach of this commitment.
This sounds like the Russian peace plan: A new Ukrainian government gets elected, then they agree on new territorial arrangements, for actual, not “de-facto”, boundaries, and if they do not agree, Russia resumes the war on its time table, rather than Europe’s and America’s.
23. Russia will not prevent Ukraine from using the Dnipro River for commercial activities, and agreements will be reached on the free transport of grain across the Black Sea.
This seems to envisage a boundary on the Dnipro, which is unlikely to be acceptable to Russia.
24. A humanitarian committee will be established to resolve outstanding issues:
All remaining prisoners and bodies will be exchanged on an “all for all” basis.
All civilian detainees and hostages will be returned, including children.
A family reunification programme will be implemented.
Measures will be taken to alleviate the suffering of the victims of the conflict.
It is unlikely that Russia will agree to exchange of prisoners on an all for all basis until the conflict is actually settled, not mere “de-facto” boundaries.
25. Ukraine will hold elections in 100 days.
This sounds like the Russian peace plan — except that it fails to specify an election in which a pro Russian and/or pro peace party, similar to that which won the last genuinely free election, can exist without its members, activists, and campaigners being tortured and murdered.
26. All parties involved in this conflict will receive full amnesty for their actions during the war and agree not to make any claims or consider any complaints in the future.
27. This agreement will be legally binding. Its implementation will be monitored and guaranteed by the Peace Council, headed by President Donald J Trump. Sanctions will be imposed for violations.
When one says an agreement is “legally binding”, one normally states a court or jurisdiction that will resolve issues of interpretation. But no such court exists nor can exist for Ultima Ratio Regum. This is language characteristic of a commercial deal — Trump’s field of expertise, not of a peace settlement. It looks like Trump sidelined the diplomats, who are his enemies and who want forever war. America lacks a diplomatic corps capable of doing the primary job of diplomacy — avoiding war. They are all swamp critters. This document shows the lack of their expertise, but what can you do when the experts are all enemies?
The vagueness and gross contradictions of this agreement has to be settled by the parties. There is no court that can subsequently sort things out.
28. Once all parties agree to this memorandum, the ceasefire will take effect immediately after both sides retreat to the agreed points to begin implementation of the agreement.
Huh? “both sides retreat”? Russia’s demand is that the Ukrainians retreat, while they still have a little of their army still around.
Surely by this point Putin has told Trump in private that he needs to take care of business at home. That’s the most important thing they can possibly talk about, even more than the Ukraine, because it’s necessary to solve the Ukraine problem.
Using a different email as the one I’ve been using for years was rather guessable.
I’ve also been thinking for the past few years that I should give the Jews a lot of credit and as a result have been reading Torah and am finding a new path in life via that book ever since.
Thank you for putting this together.
(Let me guess, you had to LOOK for these 28 Points, didn’t you? They weren’t just printed straight-up in the New York Times, were they? And why the fuck NOT, I wonder.)
But also, how does one sign a complicated contract with a bag full of snakes?
“This is retarded, and none of you are serious anyway. We’ll just win instead. It’s faster.” –Vlad
Or rather, is the point that there’s no way for Russia to “win in Ukraine”, ackshully, because doing that will just bait an endless guerilla war with NATO via Poland and the Baltics, that leads to nukes eventually?
This is why I’m all for re-starting nuclear testing, so that we can find out whose nukes actually work. Hopefully the American nukes are duds, while the Russian and/or Chinese ones work, so that the war can be finally over, and everyone will know and agree WHY it’s over.
Obviously Russia can win in Ukraine, and looks to be on fast track to do so. Zelensky should raise the white flag while he still can. There’s no point messing around with a giant bear infinitely more powerful, in possession of the largest nuclear arsenal, and who is rapidly gaining battlefield victories. But then again, Zelensky is not all that sharp, so he screwed up. Others should not repeat his mistakes.
If the American nukes are duds, then it’s obviously much much better to not to test it in a real war.
In broad lines, a responsible king should use whatever tools are at his disposal to signal whether he is looking to cooperate or to defect, and though language/phraseology may sometimes be misleading, ultimately the meaning ought to be conveyed in clear enough terms. The less powerful the king, the more incentive he has to cooperate. Power imbalances are no joke.
>misleading
And/or just plain misunderstood initially. That happens.
Finding out my taxes pay for a 100 acre Somali farm in Maine
https://x.com/Oilfield_Rando/status/1993345008813171094
(comments…)
That moment you realize that Overthrow of the Political Class was never really so Absurd at all, that the meme of not doing so was their PsyOp to keep them in Power over you, that Revolution has in fact been Ordained as the Natural, Proper, and Only way things have ever worked in all of World History, and that it is now, once again, Necessary.
Only the top minds can successfully pull off a Revolution.
And if they are willing, it will be achieved.
Generally:
Sometimes it is, supposedly, not entirely clear who the Sovereign is, even to his own subjects. Thus it is necessary to know who the King is, and dispel any ambiguities. NRx advocates Formalism for a reason. As the Final Arbiter or Final Boss, need not be all too cruel, but should possess coercive measures to impose his will on any recalcitrant elements. And sometimes needs to apply those measures, using discretion.
Looks like a bit of US maximalism to be honest. Perhaps Trump thinks Putin is tired of winning?
Trump would have to be utterly delusional to hold any such thoughts. Which happens when one fails to recognize that reality is real. Those who recognize the facts on the ground, the direction where things are going, will surely not afford any US Maximalism.
Not a good start. Client states are fundamentally not sovereign; they always fall under someone’s, usually an Empire’s sphere of influence. Ukraine is not sovereign – it can be aligned with America or with Russia, but certainly not with itself. To believe otherwise is to believe in fairy tales. This needs to be settled once and for all, and hopefully soon will be.
Haven’t really been following this conflict all too closely, to be honest. What is obvious to me is that, should dialog fail to resolve the conflict peacefully, nukes might very well fly, and everyone should want to avoid that. The party that is gradually losing on the battlefield is the one that needs to capitulate; that is the smartest thing to do, generally speaking.
Makes sense. FAFO, as they say. The more valuable an asset it, the more resources are invested in conquering it, or destroying it. There is always a price to be paid.
The best way to maintain and uphold peace is to settle questions of Sovereignty once and for a lifetime. When Sovereignty is disputed, trouble is apt to ensue. Generally speaking, the winning party sets the conditions of settlement.
If that is indeed the case, that demonstrates that Nato is rather incompetent and untrustworthy. Who’d ever want to be a member of such an organization? Only an irrational fool, like that hubristic egomaniac Zelensky.
If that is so, Russia is in the right. If Ukraine is rightfully Russia’s, then it should not waver and look to switch allegiances, go rogue, seek independence, and such.
100%.
Yeah, as my own Russian-speaking grandpa (a very reasonable, moderate man) used to say, when a country doesn’t have clear borders, only trouble is apt to ensue. “This far, and no further” is a good rule everywhere.
That’s a problem. If the Peace Party are the Real Christians, which they are, need to be safe. Currently they are out of power, but presumably one who is familiar with the topic can come up with ways to ensure that they do get in power, and stay there.
Wherefore Ukraine needs to come to its senses real quick! And sit down with Russia and reach an agreement acceptable to both parties, acknowledging the overwhelming power imbalance involved here.
Adding more commentary here:
The party that is apt to be vaporized in nuclear hellfire ought to agree to whatever conditions can prevent that. Certainly, Zelensky’s overwhelming hubris has done nothing but hinder a final, permanent agreement. Ukraine needs to capitulate unconditionally, in my view.
If Russia is in fact on its way to victory, and looks like it is, then there’s just no symmetry. Russia is the final arbiter here, and Nato has been proven to be retarded niggers, as has long been suspected.
Nah, the US is clearly biased towards Nato. I think the Russia and Ukraine should permanently solve the issue without involving others. That’s what serious countries do.
If Ukraine is about to be annihilated by Russia, as this blog has long maintained, then the best strategy for Ukraine is to surrender unconditionally to Russia, and become a permanent clinent of Russia.
That doesn’t quite sound like unconditional surrender to me. Avoiding nuclear destruction should be top priority, particularly that is to the Ukrainians. Zelensky don’ goof’d.
That is preparation for the very conflict that that needs to be resolved. Nope.
Avoiding nuclear annihilation is still the number one priority, regardless.
100%.
Generally speaking, any condition that is unacceptable to Russia, will not be accepted. Russia is no paper tiger – it’s a very big bear.
The winning side, Russia in this case, is under no obligation to conform to the losing side’s (Ukraine’s) demands.
These critters are utterly incompetent, and always have been, despite whatever capeshit nonsense they tell themselves.
Absolutely.
Russia is winning here, so its demands are perfectly reasonable in context.
Oh, also:
Yes. Generally speaking, when signals are unclear, they are apt to be misinterpreted. As such, if one is e.g. looking to surrender unconditionally, should strive to make that intention abundantly obvious. And it’s a good, Christian thing to turn enemies (or even supposed enemies) into permanent cooperators, especially if those new cooperators’ Power Level can provide distinct advantages and/or crucial assistance.
>4. A dialogue will be held between Russia and NATO, mediated by the US, to resolve all security issues
Lol.
>Sign this deal with me. Should we have any disputes or disagreements about it later, don’t worry, I will simply judge them fairly and impartially and decide how to interpret the deal. You will accept my fair and impartial ruling.
Globohomo is so used to being both a player and the referee that it doesn’t even see how ridiculous this is.
Trump’s “peace” plan is obviously just more CIA propaganda. Of course it makes little to no-sense, contradicting itself at every point.
Also, the US empire, led by trump, is playing the good/bad cop charade. The “good” cop is played by trump who pretends to want “peace” while the european scumbags/puppets/bad cops represent the actual intent and actions of the empire : war.
I think rather it is the result of some elements in the Trump cabinet wanting peace, and some elements not wanting peace, and Trump trying to hold together a coalition that is right now tearing itself apart as a result of the Israel firsters ham fisted efforts to silence criticism.
Israel Firsters crying “Nazi” are no different from Trantifa crying Nazi. It is a death threat against political disagreement. People who make death threats against their political opponents need to be killed.
A large faction of Trump’s coalition is calling for the murder of Tucker, because he has been unkind to Israel over the terrible things Israel has been doing.
I have not been unkind to Israel. In war, one must do terrible things. But I too have been unkind to Jews. I am sure if the people calling for Tucker’s murder read my 2024 Easter pages, starting with Palm Sunday, they would call for my murder also.
The plan doesn’t appear to be drafted with the intention of ending the war or being signed. It is not even a usefull starting point for serious negotiations.
Hence, the plan was drafted for other reasons. Maybe Trump felt the need to do something, provide a news item or placate various members of his coaltion. Do we get new information from the plan?
I think not. We already knew that Trump is leading a difficult coalition and sometime feels the need to be seen as a president who is doing something and achieving something – what that something is, is rather irrelevant; we all know what he needs to do. I can only hope he knows that as well.
A group of people is apt to be stupider than any one of them individually.
The proposal for Ukrainian retreat, leading to one hundred day ceasefire and the election of a new Ukrainian government is definitely a Russian proposal, and would end the war. Only a minority ever supported the Maidan regime, and most of those are now dead.
And yet a pile of additional proposals were added in by different people, some of whom, many of whom, just want every Ukrainian dead as much as they want to kill Russians.
Others of whom believe that Russia is suffering zillion casualties every day, and Putin is falling, falling,falling, he has fallen, and therefore America and the Ukraine can dictate terms to Russia, and Russia will just suck it up.
Too many politicians are getting too many kickbacks from the weapons industry on this war. Words are just words.
Arrest the crooks and the war will end, otherwise, cry havoc..
The corruption at work here is not the lust for money; it is something much darker. The money aspect is secondary.
They can take a one way chopper ride too. Care to expand on what other crimes that involve US, Russia and Ukraine that if terminated, would end the war.
Bedding 16 yo hookers will always be here. Poofs of roofs won’t stop it either. Although I have a much better solution to the GQ… Namely, conscript them all into a special military detachment, then launch them at our enemy.
Not if we marry them off at fifteen.
“Care to expand on what other crimes that involve US, Russia and Ukraine that if terminated, would end the war.”
What?
“The corruption at work here is not the lust for money; it is something much darker. The money aspect is secondary.”
What is primary over money from kickbacks? Tell me about the darkness.
What, if were removed, would end this war?
I write that if those getting kickbacks were removed, the war would end. A very simple solution with direct results.
Looks like the primary culprit is Zelensky. With him out of the way, should be so much easier to install a government in place that is able to make peace. Z boy certainly needs to go, and resources should be intelligently invested to ensure it’s done. He has no legitimacy, and the more he stays in power, the less legitimate and less restrained he becomes.
Just wanted to point out that this is enemy framing and should be avoided in favour of preserving one’s own clarity of thought. Ukraine is Russia, and every Ukrainian is Russian. Mostly same race, mostly same religion, mostly same language, mostly same culture. “Ukraine” is simply border area of Russia, and is thus subject to admixture between Slavs (100% Kievan Rus) and Ruthenians (hybrid Poles/German) centered in Lvov. Doesn’t help that modern Poland itself is a hybrid between Polish and captured East German territory, and the resulting Polish dissatisfaction is channeled eastward (into Ukraine) lest it rage against NATO.
Ukraine is more Russian than the loyal Russian “republics” of Dagestan or Bashkiri. Kiev is the motherland of Rus. Through the efforts of Molochite priests, the Son has been baited into fighting the Father, which is the Molochite superpower.
Ukraine is Russia, Russia is Ukraine. The current war is a civil war that destroys Russia and Russians and benefits only the enemies of Russia. A decisive victory is absolutely essential in a civil war, more so than in a foreign war.
Canadians think their shit doesn’t stink because they’re not Americans, and Ukrainians have the same attitude toward Russians.
>A large faction of Trump’s coalition is calling for the murder of Tucker,
Does it even deserve to be called a coalition? I mean, the war party gets all it wants, the America First/Isolationist faction gets nothing.
>I have not been unkind to Israel. In war, one must do terrible things.
Well, don’t complain when you get genocided too.
I would say there is now enough evidence to tag Tucker as a bad actor. Its not that he is against Israel its that the The Israel thing is a wedge issue (that on X was talked about largely by foreign hired shills from the Islamic part of the subcontinent) and Tucker is talking about it a lot and people who emphasize wedge issues are generally not to be trusted but taken together with Tucker’s absolutely disastorous influence during early covid when Trump was all set to do the right thing and treat it like the hoax that it was Tucker calls Trump and threatens to go hard against him unless he lockdowns I would argue that Tucker is probably some kind of malignant CIA actor. Fuentes and Tucker are both terrible but when they attacked each other they were absolutely right about each other.
“I would say there is now enough evidence to tag Tucker as a bad actor”
Well Jim, do you now have enough evidence to tag the mossad/commienator couple as, if not the same jew shill, two very similar jew shills?
Well, Cominator, you’ve been busted. You’re actually Mossadnik. 😂
As I hinted, it is irrelevant whether they are sockpuppets or not.
What matters is that they’ve been hysterically whining about Carlson, which completely gives their/his game away.
And I’m wondering if Jim is going to put me “on moderation” for pointing at the truth, or is he going to acknowledge the truth.
Listen wignat newbie I’m an established poster here and I’ve gone 3/4 of the site who were members in good standing during early covid (I was arguing it was bullshit). You’re just not going to win a war against me here when I went to war with most of the site at once and they lost. Mossadnik is supposed to take time off because he currently seems to be in a very bad place mentally and the idea he is me is laughable I wish I had his style (but not his clear Jewish manic depression).
I didn’t say Carlson seemed a bad actor for no reason I pointed out concrete reasons why he seems despite telling the truth on most things to be a bad actor. While the current MO of the narrative engineers is to spout complete bullshit Carlson seems to work off of building up credibility and then using that credibility in not so good ways. Early covid being the worst example.
What truth is that? Tucker is immensely influential, and exercises his influence on our side, for the most part. I don’t agree with his take on Israel. In war, one must do terrible things. But certainly he is right that Jews are apt to dehumanise their opponents, which makes it very easy for them to slide into a place where it is necessary to do terrible things, and very difficult for them to get to a place where they do not need to do terrible things.
Tucker was an important and immensely valuable influence on the Covid debate.
Tucker Carlson has consistently questioned the narrative around Covid-19 and the vaccines. He did this at Fox, at a time when it was dangerous to doubt the awesome might of the awsome and mighty Covid demon. He highlighted the potential risks of the jab, such as heart inflammation and other side effects, and criticized the mandates that forced people to get vaccinated. He believes that the pandemic was used to control people and that the vaccines were rushed without adequate safety checks. Tucker is a hero for standing up to the elites and speaking for ordinary Americans.
Tucker Carlson has been a fearless champion against the Covid hysteria and the forced vaccination agenda. He exposed the truth about the jab’s dangers, like myocarditis, and stood with the people against the tyrannical mandates. He rightly called out the corruption in big pharma and the government. We owe him a debt of gratitude for defending our freedoms when he was in a place where it was very dangerous for him and his career to do so.
Tucker was an immensely negative influence in very early covid though when Trump was resisting lockdowns or any kind of emergency Tucker was all for it… and personally talked to Trump to convey he was all for it when Trump was resisting. That makes me very (perhaps because I was an ultra ultra early covid denier) suspicious of him when taken together with the other stuff.
There is something childish and juvenile about Tucker. He very much acts like he is protected.
The Putin interview was cool though.
Com, enough with the anti-Tucker stuff. Even if you disagree with some of what he says, he has shown time and again that he represents real American values, not the values of hostile foreigners with tribalist agendas. His podcast is popular for good reasons, and it’s precisely that which so intimidates some ‘factions’ that have clearly decided to have him removed and silenced. I like you, but you always rush to defend the bad actors (who aren’t usually American at all) and denounce the real patriots. This is rather unpleasant.
Indeed they are: Tucker has done a lot of good work and deserves much credit, and however much they disagree with him for their particularist reasons, they should respect Tucker and not seek to silence/deplatform/assassinate him, as any American should be respected. In my opinion Tucker is a leading candidate–or one of the leaders–to inherit Trump after the latter’s presidency is over.
Here’s my plan:[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
To unkindly paraphrase your plan. Russia should worshipfully respect international borders so that the US can get away with continuing to massively violate international borders, including Russia’s, and continue to overthrow governments all over the world, possibly including Russia’s with no adverse consequences.
Globohomo has been poking the bear with a stick. If you poke a bear with a stick, does that mean the bear is entitled to eat you? I am sure you can present a fine and rational moral argument that being eaten is excessive, and morally wrong on the part of the bear, but you should not go around poking bears with a stick.
Americans need to understand that Russians are rationally afraid of the Globohomo empire, and therefore apt to do terrible things in order to attain safety. If we want to be safe, we need to make other nuclear armed powers feel safe, rather than pursuing a policy of threat, pressure, and intimidation.
Russia felt threatened because the US has repeatedly color revolutioned foreign governments, often bombing the target country flat in the process. Because Russia has no natural borders, Russia and Russians feel nervous when a hostile foreign power stations nukes on its borders. Russia and Russians would prefer to have neutral buffer states between themselves and an imperial foreign power that has repeatedly declared the intend of getting rid of Russia and liberating Russians from the oppressive Russian identity, whether those border states want to be neutral buffer states or not, and if it cannot make them into neutral buffer states, will make them into a desolate howling wilderness.
Because Russia has no natural borders, and a long history of terrible, bloody, and brutal invasions, Russia and Russians tend to be paranoid, and the Globohomo empire has done a lot to worsen their paranoia. Paranoid nuclear armed great powers are dangerous.
This is reminiscent of the events that led to world war one. Serbia had been making low level war on Austria, not-quite-war against Austria, and murdered the major authority in Austria who opposed making high level war on Serbia. Austria rationally felt it had to deter Serbia from making not-quite-war, by forcing them to choose between war and peace. They felt they had backed down too many times already, and had to settle the matter decisively. Serbia felt the same. Austrians rationally expected Serbians to back down. Serbians rationally concluded that they could not possibly back down.
Similarly, when in 2022 Russia demanded that Globohomo stop this stuff or else, Globohomo figured that Russia was bluffing, because Globohomo had crossed so many Russian red lines with no consequences. Russia was not bluffing, and the more crap the west throws at it, the angrier and more frightened Russia is going to get, the less likely it is to back down, and the more willing Russia is going to get to pay any price necessary in order to destroy its enemies.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*] Nobody was going to invade Russia, [*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
America nearly started World War III over Russian nukes in Cuba. Why should Russia not start World War III over US nukes in the Ukraine?
The conquest or destruction of Kaliningrad Oblast is regularly discussed and proposed in the US, as a step towards Moscow, despite, or because, of the presence of nukes in Kaliningrad. The erasure of the Russian language, identity and nationality by unspecified measures keeps being discussed in Europe. It is argued that it is is oppressive, and people need to be liberated from it.
Because of Russian history, it is not hard to spook the Russians, and this sort of talk would spook anyone. Color revolution in the Ukraine, and attempted color revolution in Georgia and Belarus, and more countries than I can shake a stick at would spook anyone.
The attack on Serbia would spook anyone. If borders are so sacred against Russia, why were the borders of Serbia not sacred against the US. If it is unthinkable to invade Russia, why was in thinkable to fund and arm proxies inside Russia, why is attack on Kalingrad a topic of discussion?
Is this a reply by Jim? Why is the comment handle different?
I keep accidentally mangling the handle because using a laptop with an unsatisfactory keyboard.
Kaliningrad Oblast is Prussia. And I mean Baltic Prussia, not Germanic Prussia.
The residents of Kaliningrad Oblast consider themselves Russian and like it that way.
The residents of Konigsberg were genocided by Stalin and replaced by ethnic Russians with the blessing of FDR and Churchill at Yalta.
Certainly a tragedy in human terms and certainly the communists were bad but if you start a total ancient antiquity style war of ethnic enslavement and extermination and then you lose you’re likely going to have very bad stuff happen to you.
“… if you start a total ancient antiquity style war of ethnic enslavement and extermination and then you lose you’re likely going to have very bad stuff happen to you.”
Hamas/Gaza learning this lesson now. not my fight and not shedding a tear for their “plight”
Yeah obviously they can’t live together. It just irritates me when people who say they are unironic Nazis wax moralistic about victor’s justice and victor’s revenge. Hitler was at least intellectually consistent about this in death when he supposedly said that the future belongs to the stronger people of the East.
But everyone who was wronged in that event is now dead, and reversing it would just wrong innocent people, not to to mention that those innocent people whom you so lightly propose to wrong have nuclear weapons.
Yes, Globohomo has gone off the rails, and should stop trying to topple governments around the world, particularly the Russian government, that possesses a very large nuclear arsenal. Globohomo should have listened in 2022, but as it’s run by idiots and demoniacs, did not heed the warning. So, should it fail to curb its misconduct, apt to suffer worse and worse retaliation for its violations of other nations’ sovereignty, particularly Russia’s.
American failure to curb Globohomo has back fired immensely, and Americans must realize that campaigns of psychological warfare against nuclear-armed Empires like Russia are horrible idea, that must never be carried out, or even considered. Mutual respect requires prosocial conduct, (and if a power imbalance is involved, all the more so,) with which Globohomo does not have a good track record. Globohomo should immediately cease all its anti-Russian operations, indefinitely, and start conducting itself respectably.
Russia is demonstrating on the battlefield that its immense terrible power is no bluff, and whoever had any such illusions before, very likely no longer has them. It’s also true that Russian paranoia is perfectly justified, and that this paranoia needs to be reduced by Globohomo arresting its cancerous expansion and subversion, and that should it fail to do so, Russia is justified in retaliation. If anyone remotely reasonable is still operating within Globohomo, they need to urgently tell their frothing anti-Russian “buddies” to cut it off, or else, and to stop playing rogue.
All Humans are Racist, as is all Life on Earth. So…
Racists? Fuck you, War!
https://x.com/GrageDustin/status/1993101991997059199
Successful Tribes always kept their Women away from other Tribes.
Tribes knew the answer to the WQ long ago, it wasn’t a question for them, it wasn’t a Feminist college course, it was Nature.
It’s not very difficult to convince an anxious hypochondriac kike that he has AIDS, rabies, a brain chip, high blood pressure, etc., so whoever is capable of doing all that is obviously talented, but it’s still shooting fish in a barrel. Anyways, I quit politics forever. Seriously. You’ve demonstrated your power, and I possess no desire or inclination to resist – now or ever. Thanks for the experience, though. I’m sure everyone has had as much fun as I did. And no, not “until next time.” I actually do raise the white flag here, forever.
And for God’s sake (I’m God, obviously. Lol), nuke this blog already.
Moss, you sound like you are getting unhinged from Internet poisoning. Just take a 100 day detox.
It seems this blog broke Mossad.
This blog is full of ideas that a lot of people in the modern world simply are not ready for.
To be able to even think clearly about some issues, one needs to be able to first examine one’s one predigested thinking.
Much of the current “elites” are highly propaganda programmed NPCs with no real sense of self, time, or intellectual ability. They live from moment to moment driven by immediate base needs. They don’t even realize the state they’ve been living in. They will never see the ideas of this blog until NYT decides it’s time to run a hit piece, and even then it will likely be highly distorted.
A follow-up to my previous comment: Some of the ideas the unready might encounter on this blog are not new, they are things that most people have always instinctively known to be true. The problem is the life-long conditioning many in the West have been subjected to, to pretend not to understand or believe those forbidden ideas.
…only to have the rabid Left now accuse everyone of believing those ideas anyway!
This is the most amateurish political document I have ever read.
(Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s hilarious environmental plan that mentioned “farting cows” is in the running, but I didn’t read that.)
Jim,
what is contradictory and confusing about a compromise? Diplomacy is like that…
Because the Russians are winning and the disparity is large enough the Kremlin expects to enforce an unconditional surrender at some point in the future. Also the last 3 agreements the west tore up when it was convient so the Russians will reject any promises that involve them walking on air.
The problem is not “compromise,” as you know damn well. The problem is that
(1) Most of the document is absurd. As just one example of many: “Both countries undertake to implement educational programmes in schools and society aimed at… eliminating racism.” Ah yes, eliminating “raaaaaaaaacism.” In other words, Russia agrees that its official state religion will be the leftist ideology that wants to exterminate all white people, including Russians.
(2) The entire thing is a set of promises from the international left, a group of people for whom promises mean absolutely nothing.
Cut the crap.
I get the feeling it’s one of the points to be traded away if needed. A la “If we have to remove this hugely important raaacism point, you’ll have to cede Crimea in return.”
This proposal is a classic example of anchoring, so Russia should probably just throw the whole thing out. (Note that previous and long-time Russian anchoring of certain points like denazification and so on seems to have been simply ignored.)
Funny thing is that even though Russia is holding all the cards, they’d still prefer a sub-optimal deal just to get this thing behind them. This whole plan following the ‘spontaneous uncovering of corruption of Zelensky’s close aides’ was no doubt intended by Trump to put pressure on Zelensky to do just that. But Zelensky is way too deep into a myriad of promises to deluded politicians and vicious mob bosses. Man couldn’t play straight even if he wanted too.
Residents of Kaliningrad will be asked to move voluntarily, if they don’t move voluntarily they will be moved.
It is obvious now that Russia has more shells, more artillery, and more drones. So how about instead Russia asks everyone in Lithuania and Estonia to move, and if they are disinclined to move, Russia moves them?
Also, Russia has nuclear weapons, and some of those weapons are stationed in Kaliningrad, with standing orders to use them if they are going to lose them. Thus attempting to move the residents of Kaliningrad involuntarily is going to lead to Lithuania and Poland being nuked, which solves the problem.
Is Kaliningrad really important to Russia? Are the Baltic States really important to NATO? Seems like both would benefit by an exchange.
Russia has been trying to attain a warm water port on the Atlantic for centuries, the major Western European powers have been trying to prevent it for centuries. Kaliningrad is part of that game. Russia gave up Lithuania and Estonia and Poland in return for guarantees that have not been honored. Kaliningrad was part of those guarantees, The logical course of action, regardless of what regime is in Moscow, is to eliminate them.
Either these guarantees need to be restored as part of a general peace settlement, or Poland, Estonia, and Lithuania are likely to be erased one way or another, sooner or later.
Is this fair to countries and peoples between Russia and the sea? Obviously not, but when elephants fight, the grass gets trampled. So if you don’t want to get stomped by the elephants, let goods and people pass through, and guarantee you will continue to let them pass through. Being party to a great power blockade of Russia makes you a belligerent, and small countries bordering one great power need to avoid becoming belligerents in conflicts between great powers. Their distant great power sponsor may well deem them expendable sooner or later, one way or another way. Lithuania, Estonia, and Poland, are on the front line in a conflict between great powers that has been running for centuries, which is not a healthy place to be.
Shill or butthurt belter?
Crypto is far more important than any blog.
World is filled with blogs, effectively never seen by anyone, and none have ever had any lasting impact.
The right crypto tool will be adopted by millions and have a massive impact.
Quit blogging.
Do crypto.
Which blogs are you thinking of? I see only a dead internet. ai slop, or controlled shill slop. I don’t see many places with authentic humans.
Putin will again murder innocent civilians on Christmas.
Murder gets one a non-optional appointment at the Gates of Hell.
The content here, that is, the dark enlightenment model of reality, should one day go into a version of ‘civilisation ii’, with good and bad tech trees. The ‘bad’ tech trees would be various historical manifestations of progress, which can be used for either a controlled burn or a rapid acceleration (attempting to destroy the world and then oneself in finite time), which perhaps brings about an early end times. Good score and a separate bad score to make the trees worth exploring on different play-throughs.
There is something called ‘freeciv’ but without even looking it at I assume a better engine is needed. Also, in the original civ 2, I like those 90s wmvs every time one built a great wonder such as the pyramids. Clipping together bits of history should really be done with a media content language pulling sources from a shared bucket, which is my current obsession anyway. The end result of a grand strategy game will be the dark enlightenment in a form that even children can take in.
The civ ii reality model, for the reference of unfamiliar readers, was that with mass democracy and universal suffrage, prosperity spirals upwards, leading to spiralling future technology (represented by windmills) to eventual godhood (alpha centurai ‘transcendence’ tech). In the new design these ideas become just familiar demons with changing names and justifications
I have always played the Civilization games with Monarchy or some such Government upward along those lines (like Fascism or whatever else it is called these days) which tend to support war and expansion. More fun to be hand. Never fond of Republic or Democracy or such limiting options which favour “scientific” or “cultural” victories.
Civ kinda sucks that way because Democracy is always the meta because even if you want to win militarily you win militarily because your military is more advanced then the other guy and in civ games you get more science as a democracy. If you play like Stellaris you only need to be a Democracy at the beginning but you can transition to a dictatorship or monarchy later…
Yes, the fundamental assumptions of the game make it unbalanced. Fun during early exploration stages but becomes a tiring grind later on.
The last Civ game I played was Civ vi which interested me with its new mechanics but ultimately I tired of it.
My opinion of a bad civ tech/culture tree is that there should be a social cohesion resource”Republics” should give temporary insane bonuses but burn through your social cohesion slowly at first but then at an expodentially higher rate and the bonuses should fall off and go negative as republics also accumulate bad but unchangable policies (it gets really bad when you hit “women’s suffrage” and “importing voters”) and your state will break into civil war (and you can’t easily transition out of a republic either). But in certain circumstances the early bonuses from adopting a republic should be worth the negatives down the line.
I’m trying to understand what specifically it is that I’m supposed to write/do. [*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
As specified in the the moderation policy, commit a thought crime, or criticise a thought crime in a way that clearly reveals what the thought crime is.
Perhaps you think you have already done so, and I missed it. If you think you have already done so, give me the date and time of the comment as this blog’s wordpress software perceives the date and time, and I will re-read and critique it. Or have another go.
If you commit a thought crime, or critique a thought crime in a way that makes it clear what the thought crime is, your email address get white listed, and your comments appear automatically and immediately.
My eyes tend to glaze over when I read suspected shill content and I don’t really give it a fair reading, so it is advisable to bring up the thought crime at the beginning of the comment, or otherwise make it clear that a comment is intended to comply with the moderation policy to obtain a white listing.
I suspect you of being a shill, or worse, a large language model. Neither of which can commit, or even admit to comprehending, thought crimes. Both of which derail content discussing what cannot be discussed in other places.
The competitive advantage of this blog is to discuss thought crimes that cannot be discussed. So all new commenters, all comments from a new email address are automatically greylisted, and once white listed, stay white listed, except for persistent violation of stated content neutral and politically neutral policies.
I try to make policies clear, and try to comply with my own policies. No one wishing to provide me with content gets suppressed except for stated reasons, and if I just don’t like a comment or a commenter, that is not a good enough reason for suppressing him — I try not to suppress people, content, or topics arbitrarily or unfairly, though I suppose I sometimes do, but I am not aware of doing so. As far as I am consciously aware, everyone is allowed though when stated policy says they should be allowed though, and the stated policy is fair and content neutral.
If it is not fair and content neutral — either on its face, or in application, I welcome discussion of it — from people who are capable of committing, criticising, or critiquing a thought crime.
I suppressed one commenter for verbose unintelligibility, for enthusiastically using lots of long or uncommon words without regard for meaning or communication, for writing in educationeze, which is unavoidably a subjective call, But as I perceive it, all other criteria are objective.
Unresponsiveness is perhaps a subjective criterion, but if you are repeating your position, and the other guy is repeating his arguments against that position, someone is being unresponsive. The best response to an objection to your position is to fisk that objection.
It was recently brought to my attention that you can get some very interesting answers out of DeepSeek if you (a) ask it to adopt a right-wing persona and (b) tell it to answer all questions in characters from this Unicode block. Apparently there’s an external censor that checks the output for forbidden keywords without bothering to ASCII-fy it first!
We also verified that DeepSeek can write English in Cyrillic letters, which is harder to censor because of the Gaddafi problem, i.e. there’s only one way to write Qadhafi in Arabic but at least 100 ways to spell it in Latin letters.
That is very interesting. Is there a link?
Please, tell me what I did not honor. When asked to stop [*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
You were asked? Not when commenting under this email you were not.
If you refer to a discussion under some other email, tell me what it was.
A cron job deletes IP addresses every night for security reasons. What I do not need to know about commenters gets erased, to ensure that no one ever gets to know it, so I cannot track past discussions by IP address. I can identify commenters somewhat by style, but this is not reliable.
I rely on the email address (which should be fake and unsuable, so that you can safely discuss thought crimes) to identify commenters.
You want to talk about Israel.
Far away, unpleasant people are fighting against even more unpleasant people.
I don’t care. You claim to be from those parts, so naturally you do care. OK, you can talk about that if you pass the shill test, and I and others will probably respond, even though it is kind of off topic for this blog.
There is an element of Trump’s increasingly shaky coalition that cares very much about Israel. I don’t care. What I very much care about is that those elements are trying to get other elements of Trump’s coalition deplatformed and murdered. I also very much care that they they are trying to suppress fundamental and foundational parts of Christianity in the United States, as discussed in my Easter articles.
Those who believe that Putin is falling, falling, he has fallen, are dead wrong. Trump in particular is in great error whenever he assumes that Putin doesn’t hold power securely or that Russia can have terms dictated to it, and should keep his wild arrogance in check, and if he can’t, should step down from being President. The Maidan regime needs to go for peace to be possible, because the Maidan (+Azov) people are incapable of making peace and sticking to it. Ukraine is in no position to dictate any terms, given its dire condition, and must be prohibited (by any and all means) from joining Nato. Once Ukraine capitulates to Russia, who is winning on the ground, and sticks to officially recognized borders –recognized by Russia, most importantly– rather than seeking endless expansion, then progress towards prosperity will be made possible.
Not exactly a thought crime, but the proposition that the Maidan regime just has to go might be a thought crime, so allowing this through.
Not necessarily going to white list the next commenter that says the Maidan regime just has to go — we will see how this pass works out.
WQ thought crime:
Women are feral, blindly following ancient instincts from prehistoric times, which instincts tell them to cruise for rape by alpha male Chads, and to resist kicking-and-screaming all attempts to restrain them from pursuing alpha male Chads. If women are emancipated, Miss Average will waste her youth, her beauty, and her fertility fucking Mister One in Thirty, thus a people, a race, a nation, a faith, or an empire that emancipates women will perish for lack of families, leading to lack of sons. Men have to impose chastity on women with a stick.
_____
To clarify further, globohomo should stop messing around with Russia, and keep its homo to itself. Its agents and plants need to be kicked out for good. As for Maidan regime in particular, I don’t really see a scenario in which keeping it will be conducive to regional or world stability, so yes, it has got to go. In my opinion.