US forced Ukraine to reject peace with Russia – ex-German chancellor
(www.infowars.com)
Comments (3)
sorted by:
Curiously has it been conformed now, and why. It was obvious at the time. Although the who and how and why was inconclusive.
Ukraine specifically flopped on Russian build up. Zelenskyy literally said he was willing to conceed the Donbass, the Crimea, and not join Nato. It's in the press prior to an escalation also at the further summit.
Suddenly billions arrived in aid and that tone changed rapidly.
But I suppose the rather quick extermination of anti tanks and failed negotiation with paratroopers changed and tone.
Again there was further thought to certain terms, although Zelenskyy became stanch on Nato, its security after conflict occurred. As aid arrived by the billions. At this point the Capital and language changed names.
Then the supposed warcrimes occurred, cementing patriotism, and Mauripol was taken.
It's in the press specific statements, the backflipping of any rhetorical suggestion, specifically as aid and arm packages arrive. Obviously there are delaying tactics, and also negotiating on an issue that cannot be solved now. Ukrainian coastline. Hence Crimea was always sanctioned prior to any supposed conflict.
Has this topic confirmed the obvious speculation? Or is it also speculating?
Europe will also have to step up filling in a potential gap of funding as another conflict rears. Hence any supposed press.
In any speculation there's far too much bullshit to trust the press , it obviously airs propaganda that has objections.
But at this point, what's that endgame and what exactly is the narrative. It is almost beyond negotiation.
There is no deal now on one for the other. They are almost inevitably interlinked. They were years prior when any Euromaidan occurred.
I wish it were as simple as pied piper. But any sides have further developed. Or is there peace for another 5 minutes? The climate, promise, guys, peace.
Something still stinks. In its occurrence. Can't put a buzzer on it. Any can. The tactics of Ukraine have been for negotiation, or attrition, and not for its annihilation. Why therefore does it continue to develop if there weren't another construct provoking its rat armies as agenda swings, advances, stalls, escalates, into? The dumbest being fiddled.
Rat armies, you say? I've got just the thing. My relevant comment elsewhere on .win
Haha. Pied piper reference. The lemmings follow. Not kids you pedo. Not going into its original fairytale. A simple metaphor you're twisting. If there's a much greater play here. Connecting into a much bigger stage, such as depopulation, or a NWO.
I doubt it, as formerly speculated. The sides are different and they are playing across a much bigger geopolitical field to what end is only escalation.
While proxies erupt, they have been for much longer. Both claim other agendas and NWOs, how they seek any gain, and agenda, but are they combined by another play. Is there darker horse like A.I, of course that's programming. No, Intelligence profiting off its rats. Who are simply being led.
Of course if there isn't, it's a much bigger war. But I struggle to see how its marching band, hearld anything except their demise.
Let's play that scenario, nukes go off, are they localised. No oil no food. Billions starve. At this rate that region is fucked anyway especially upon escalation. It is massively overpopulation its trade is oil. Try it. It will cascade first. Then what truce?
What's the endgame?
That nuke/s increase planet temperature or decrease it. Along that Planetary line is a pile of dust. That price today could hit a bad harvest anyway, at its increasing costs. If it's contained. If not it chains. It chains anyway affecting, cascading, the increasing populations adding, hyperinflation already. Into collapse. It will be as bad as any war.
Sure they think they'll win, it's the cost of assuming freedom, it always is. It becomes the price of change.
In any rate those moves are pushing the board into, constant check. Any pieces are pawned. Attrition.