Elon Musk proposals to end the war in Ukraine

Or only as a recipient of services.

 

Yes, DEF, I realize that as an ardent 'Rodina'-loving nationalist, Putin cannot be trusted to do ANYTHING but pursue what he thinks of as glory for 'the Motherland'. I'm just trying to theorize a scenario that leaves the Kiev government in possession of the majority of the country -- including viable access to the only ocean access it has through the Black Sea -- and to do so in a way that doesn't involve plunging the entire world into a thermonuclear war! Many people don't think Putin could possibly, really do this... and I can't swear that he would -- but -- based on everything I've read about the man for years, I do believe he could get himself 'whipped-up' enough to do EXACTLY that.








search recall marker

 

Yes, Putin began making nuclear intimations, a full month before the date of your article. His invasion of Ukraine began, remember, in February. Here is a link, about his talk of nuclear weapons' use.

https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2022-03/news/putin-orders-russian-nuclear-weapons-higher-alert

<Snip>

Amid a full-scale military assault on Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered his country’s nuclear forces to move to the heightened alert status of a “special regime of combat duty,” further escalating a catastrophic war in Europe and upending international stability and nuclear arms control and disarmament.

“Western countries aren’t only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major NATO countries are making aggressive statements about our country,” Putin said on Feb. 27 during a meeting with defense officials. “So, I order to move Russia’s deterrence forces to a special regime of combat duty.”

Belarus, Russia’s client-state, followed up by agreeing to abandon its status as a non-nuclear weapon country and reaffirming its offer to host Russian tactical nuclear weapons on its territory...


Although Putin’s decision raised the risk of nuclear weapons confrontation, it was not entirely unexpected given that a few days earlier the Russian leader threatened any country that tries to interfere in Ukraine with consequences “such as you have never seen in your entire history.”

The United States and NATO immediately criticized Moscow’s move, but their response was measured and there was no indication that the status of U.S. and NATO nuclear forces would mirror Russia.

“This is really a pattern that we’ve seen from President Putin through the course of this conflict, which is manufacturing threats that don’t exist in order to justify further aggression,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said on Feb. 27. “At no point has Russia been under threat from NATO [or] has Russia been under threat from Ukraine.”

“This is dangerous rhetoric,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said of Putin. “This is a behavior which is irresponsible.”

 

Nope, that wasn't nuclear saber rattling. Not just the Russians, but the US has gone on higher nuclear alerts in the nuclear age. The real answer to my question was May 1st, when Putin threatened the UK and Ireland.

I wanted to give you a chance to have an honest conversation and predictably you failed. Now, are you going to admit you were wrong, and that the US really did threaten regime change? You previously denied that, and since that seems to be the main issue here between us, let's get that settled.

 

At least Putin would be dead by then and the people will be too beat up to start another war for awhile. We have been delaying wwiiifor awhile now and I think continuing that's is the only real option we have.

 

The goggle force is strong in this forum, Master Tofiks. Harness it, you can... mmm... yes...

Lithium for starters!

 

You have not addressed the reason that Biden made his comment: Putin's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine-- you admit that he did this much, without exculpatory excuses, don't you? And this was #2, on my list. Additionally, during that invasion, there had been mounting and soon overwhelming evidence, of the Russian army's targeting of civilians, and committing war crimes.

So all you have done--
though I, personally, have no recollection of any other Russian or Soviet (or American) leader, suggesting nuclear consequences, "such as you have never seen in your entire history (Donald Trump-- but to North Korea-- excepted)" during my lifetime, or moving nuclear forces to a "special regime of combat duty," as well as pressuring another country (here, Belarus) "to abandon its status as a non-nuclear weapon country and... host Russian tactical nuclear weapons on its territory"--
has been to offer an argument as to why one might consider changing the order, between numbers 3 and 4, from my list.
Can you not see and admit this much?

So your case would seem to be, that Putin was entitled to invade Ukraine, and purposely target civilians, without any U.S. or European leader suggesting that this was cause for Putin to go. Is that the argument you wish to prosecute?


Let us put aside the other argument, for the moment, as to whether this comment from Biden-- though never suggesting that we, as a foreign nation, were the ones to remove Putin from power (in fact, I am relatively certain, Pres. Biden has always maintained that this was for the Russian people to do), so that to call this a U.S. threat of Russian "regime change," seems a bit hyperbolic-- should be considered a valid excuse for nuclear saber- rattling. We can take up that one, after settling whether or not Putin's aggression, in all its atrociousness, was insufficient cause for an American President to comment that such a Russian leader "cannot remain in power."

 

So, you will write here some nonsense and arguments behind it should found others in google, because you don't have them?

 

Too many gaffes for a president to clame that he is in a clear state of mind. Your explanations of his behavior do not hold water.

 

I'm sorry that your education system has failed you. I'm also sorry that you have no geographical understanding of your Baltic neighbors. As an Australian, I see no reason why I should educate you upon the Baltic region within which you live! Yet still, I gave you an example... Lithium! Do I also need to explain why lithium is important to the West? That we need it for our solar panels and batteries? Ukraine has it and the West wants it!

You would do well to remember that the West are the wolves in sheep's clothing. We don't care about peace in your region... we care about power, control and resources!
The West has already put paid to any kind of negotiation that Ukraine's dictator had hoped for with Russia and we have no issue destroying lives and livelihoods of the Ukrainians. We call that 'collateral damage'. I am sure that the West has promised to help Ukraine rebuild through low interest loans, further indebting that war ravaged nation, so long as we get access to mine for the lithium!

Now, tell me this... What has Latvia got that the West can take?
Oh. wait... skip that question, because you don't know the geography of your own region... but the West does!

 

And I feel the same way: that your speculations seem ludicrous, and way over the top.

 

Hi, just saw this which sort of follows on from what we were talking about the other day regarding your point in regional influence...

...I mean this isn't going to happen overnight but certainly Kazakhstan has been sending some very strong messages to Putin about where he can shove his war (they were quite clear about that at the Dubai Economic Forum earlier in the year) and especially Putin demanding the other day that Kazakhstan should close the Ukrainian embassy and being to by Kazakhstan to sod off and keep their dicks out of their business. Anyway....

linky thing if interested..Turkey's influence grows as Putin's crisis deepens (msn.com)

 

What are you still arguing about? You were wrong about the US threatening regime change. You didn't think we did it, I showed you we did, and now...what? You want to argue that it was OK because Putin? Well OK, you're free to argue that, but it's dangerous and stupid foreign policy to constantly be hawking, "[fill in the blank foreign leader] must go!"

But if you like that kind of foreign policy...well you got it, enjoy!

 

You are confused. Perhaps it is in part my fault, for including my own personal views, alongside my take on Biden's views.

I dispute that what Biden said, is tantamount to us having at all "threatened," Putin, with regime change. How do you propose we would do this, by Biden saying bad things about him? Because that is all that will happen, and that's all you've got, for your tenuous claim. But yet, in your mind, it's enough to warrant the threatening of the entire world, and the neighboring country, which he deliberately invaded, to initiate this entire situation, with nuclear warfare?

Hard to know, what to say to that. Putin's nuke threat was not, "if America acts on Biden's 'threat'," you understand? It was only because he is losing his war, so might need to pull out bigger weapons. But we can blame that on Biden, huh?

FYI, Biden's comment about a war criminal like Putin, not remaining in power, is absolutely no different than what we said, at one point, about Syria's President, Bashar al-Assad. And note, even all these years after gassing his own people, he is still in charge. President Biden's statement was only a stating of our American principles; IOW, just as with Assad, the "cannot remain in power," comment-- I note you use quotes around "must go," in your own post, which I believe is a misrepresentation of truth, if anyone's counting-- should be interpreted as truly meaning (if our stated view is that it is the Russian people who "must" remove Putin), that we think Putin should not, remain in power. Hardly something that I believe should endow a nuclear leader with carte blanche, to throw around using nukes, in any circumstance, to be billed to our own leader's tab. I wonder, did you felt that way about Kim Jong-un's nuclear threats, after Trump threatened him with absolute destruction?

 

Exactly!

"FYI, Biden's comment about a war criminal like Putin, not remaining in power, is absolutely no different than what we said, at one point, about Syria's President, Bashar al-Assad. And note, even all these years after gassing his own people, he is still in charge."

That was a stupid thing to say. Particularly when the most likely replacements for Assad were Islamic terrorist groups.

But that's beside the point. The US threatened Russia with regime change and don't be surprised if Putin, like Assad, goes to extremes to make sure that doesn't happen.

 

You completely missed all my points. But the main one, is that you are still putting the cart, before the horse. Putin's invasion of Ukraine had nothing to do with any calls for his ouster. It is the other way around: any comments about that he should not stay in power, are a direct result of his actions, specifically both breaking international law-- which did not immediately result in our challenging his role, as a leader-- and the numerous WAR CRIMES that his forces are perpetrating, including things like targeting civilians & schools, which are clearly at Putin's own direction.

You have made your view clear: we should not speak ill of war criminals. You cannot even claim this only applies to those with nukes, as you criticize our condemnations of Assad, as well. All I can say, is I strongly disagree with your viewpoint which, in all honesty, even strikes me as an unAmerican one; but that's still your right, to have & voice that opinion.

 

You are trying to make up an argument between us when none exists except for you lying about things I've said like, "You have made your view clear: we should not speak ill of war criminals."

If you stop making up crap about me and what I say, you might find that we agree sometimes.

 

Because we can't take it back without worldwide devastation...

 

Yeah Elon, stop openly defying a ruthless dictator, as an individual, and providing the Starlink system to the Ukranians to use to oppose said dictator, at great risk to yourself. The cult will not remember in 2 months.

 

Putin is now a very desperate and dangerous. IMO, anything that can end this war and the Putin regime fast should be considered. So far, Ukraine with support from the US, the EU and NATO has performed beyond all expectations -- time to keep the peddle down.

 

I remember.

I still think he should shut up.

 

You lose all credibility on your, what passes (in your case) for the offering of an olive brach, when you make B.S. allegations against my character, like this:

Lil Mike said: ↑
Nope, that wasn't nuclear saber rattling. Not just the Russians, but the US has gone on higher nuclear alerts in the nuclear age. The real answer to my question was May 1st, when Putin threatened the UK and Ireland.

I wanted to give you a chance to have an honest conversation and predictably you failed. Now, are you going to admit you were wrong, and that the US really did threaten regime change? You previously denied that, and since that seems to be the main issue here between us, let's get that settled.
<End>

Just because you disagree with my interpretation-- or even if I just happen to have incomplete information, in some case-- does not imply that I am not willing "to have an honest conversation." God, are there any bounds, to your hypocrisy?

I would still maintain that any "nuclear alerts," you may be alluding to, in the past, were of very short duration, when we have detected something on our radar equipment, or the like, and in no way comparable to this public nuclear menacing, by Putin. The only situation that comes to my mind, as having any real similarity, was the Cuban Missile Crisis, which was also quite a different circumstance, than our current one. That took both our placing of nuclear missiles near Russia's border, and our CIA's coordination of the Bay of Pigs fiasco, in which Cuban nationals did actually, pathetically attempt to overthrow the Castro government, to bring about the placement of Russian nukes, secretly, in Cuba. We have given Russia no such provocation, in this instance.

If seeing his forces pummel residential areas with missiles, and discovering mass civilian graves, where Putin's forces have been dislodged, is insufficient reason in your mind, for an American President to express that the orchestrator of this carnage does not belong as a leader, without that somehow making our own President responsible for that leader's future acts, as you have stated--

then forgive me for not understanding the subtile logic of your mind, to not see this as saying that we "should not speak ill of war criminals (who are in charge of a country & its military forces, obviously implied from the voluminous context)."

 

There is one big difference between the Chamberlain appeasement, and the so called appeasement of Putin. At the time of the Chamberlain appeasement, England and France easily had the power to crush Hitler (and indeed German command had orders to immediately withdraw upon any resistance in the early annexations). That is the main reason Chamberlain's appeasement was so shameful.

We don't have that situation with Putin. We don't have the power to remove Putin. I only see one possible good outcome for us at this point: the Russian people remove Putin AND whoever takes over reverses course. And I pray that happens even if it means I would have to eat every word I've said on US strategy on Ukraine.

But I don't like us not being in control of our destiny, and I still wouldn't forgive Biden for risking the world for his, his son's, Pelosi's kid's, Kerry's kid's, and who knows how many other corrupt Congress members', and DC bureaucrats' shady energy deals and kickbacks in Ukraine.

 

There is nothing subtle about our discussion. You claimed that the US hadn't threatened the Russians with regime change, I proved you wrong, and you are trying to generate new drama and controversy to cover up for the fact that you were proven wrong.

 

Keep the peddle down until when? The Kremlin? So the Ukrainians are just going to traverse those same 300 or 400 miles to Moscow as Hitler and Bonaparte, and the vast majority of Russia's rockets, and air power just sits there, unused?