This is diversionary propaganda in my opinion. The goal is to hand over blame of the attack to Ukraine so it doesn’t harm the US in diplomacy with Europe and Germany going forwards.
Oh and we’re supposed to believe that Ukraine can pull this off but not be able to get the Crimean Bridge?
I think this is just referring to negotiations for a ceasefire or end to the conflict but not a full surrender of the Ukrainian government no?
It’s also difficult for me to gauge how serious these reports are. They could be psy-op work by other side. Perhaps to convince people that the yanks are down to negotiate and then blame Russia when it inevitably does not materialize. I could be wrong, but it seems to me like neither side has any real incentive to negotiate for the time being. The US and Ukraine may be hoping that Russia also bleeds themself enough from attrition on the front lines that they are eventually content with just the Donbass and Crimea. I’d be very interested to see whether or under what conditions Russia would actually come to the table. What incentive do they have now? If the US gets to the point where the situation for Ukraine is so dire that they are willing to get negotiations going and push Ukraine to accept giving these territories, then why would Russia in that situation not simply also have no incentive to negotiate? Why not push up to Kiev? I guess the main obstacle there and possible source of WW3 style crisis would be if there is a nuclear standoff as Russia pushes all the way through Ukraine and the US starts setting nuclear-use related red lines.
Exactly, they angling the move of saying: “it was a rogue agent of Ukraine”. Which is smart in that it is obviously more believable than the narrative of “Russian bombed their own pipeline and a key point of leverage in negotiations with Europe”.
This is diversionary propaganda in my opinion. The goal is to hand over blame of the attack to Ukraine so it doesn’t harm the US in diplomacy with Europe and Germany going forwards.
Oh and we’re supposed to believe that Ukraine can pull this off but not be able to get the Crimean Bridge?
Convenient this out a week after the article saying that the USA gave the its time to surrender talk to Ukraine
Could you send some sources for the claim that the USA are telling Ukraine it needs to consider surrendering?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/us-european-officials-broach-topic-peace-negotiations-ukraine-sources-rcna123628
Okay yeh I seen this.
I think this is just referring to negotiations for a ceasefire or end to the conflict but not a full surrender of the Ukrainian government no?
It’s also difficult for me to gauge how serious these reports are. They could be psy-op work by other side. Perhaps to convince people that the yanks are down to negotiate and then blame Russia when it inevitably does not materialize. I could be wrong, but it seems to me like neither side has any real incentive to negotiate for the time being. The US and Ukraine may be hoping that Russia also bleeds themself enough from attrition on the front lines that they are eventually content with just the Donbass and Crimea. I’d be very interested to see whether or under what conditions Russia would actually come to the table. What incentive do they have now? If the US gets to the point where the situation for Ukraine is so dire that they are willing to get negotiations going and push Ukraine to accept giving these territories, then why would Russia in that situation not simply also have no incentive to negotiate? Why not push up to Kiev? I guess the main obstacle there and possible source of WW3 style crisis would be if there is a nuclear standoff as Russia pushes all the way through Ukraine and the US starts setting nuclear-use related red lines.
Exactly, they angling the move of saying: “it was a rogue agent of Ukraine”. Which is smart in that it is obviously more believable than the narrative of “Russian bombed their own pipeline and a key point of leverage in negotiations with Europe”.
But yeh it is still very funny as a narrative.