It doesn't make that territory any less Russian. You don't recognise it. But Russia are a veto power with those nukes again.

No, the war ends on a conundrum with nukes becoming a very big oxymoron you simply haven't thought through.

Again

1. Peace deal

2. Ukraine conceeds territory, or is defeated.

3. Russian nukes. It means Russia is substantially defeated, withdrawing, or does not protect the territory under its protection. Big if. Nukes from a nuclear power are often easier before then. There are very few variables there. Like internal collapse. But it is under emergency warfare powers.

So the conundrum. Any peace deal cannot be made because Ukraine is being armed to not accept it. It is a loss to its sovereignty. Crimea and other separation territories. It means Ukraine must be defeated. Because Russia won't be if it has nukes. It will use them tactically prior to being defeated.

So what is the response? Armaggedon. Ukraine makes everything, all of our global economies are indebted to the Ukraine, and therefore it must nuke the World first, before Russia claims it? Seriously. It won't win otherwise. Or are you gonna figure out that knot? Quick slice the funding.

Or some other kind of Peace, presumably. It still means somebody conceeding something. Those odds don't favour Ukrainian sovereignty.

Not a Russian at all. I question causality. Far easier to just ignore it with Russia will lose, because we're paying Ukraine to win. Except that's not the conclusion. It's Santa's, wishlist, Ukraine has been really good this year and Russia very naughty. Santa give Ukraine back, it wants Russia for Xmas. Not in the real World.

The real World the Xmas lights are out. Because they cost too much electricity. Somehow it's Ukraine's fault.

It doesn't make that territory any less Russian. You don't recognise it. But Russia are a veto power with those nukes again.

No, the war ends on a conundrum with nukes becoming a very big oxymoron you simply haven't thought through.

Again

1. Peace deal

2. Ukraine conceeds territory, or is defeated.

3. Russian nukes. It means Russia is substantially defeated, withdrawing, or does not protect the territory under its protection. Big if. Nukes from a nuclear power are often easier before then. There are very few variables there. Like internal collapse. But it is under emergency warfare powers.

So the conundrum. Any peace deal cannot be made because Ukraine is being armed to not accept it. It is a loss to its sovereignty. Crimea and other separation territories. It means Ukraine must be defeated. Because Russia won't be if it has nukes. It will use them tactically prior to being defeated.

So what is the response? Armaggedon. Ukraine makes everything, all of our global economies are indebted to the Ukraine, and therefore it must nuke the World first, before Russia claims it? Seriously. It won't win otherwise. Or are you gonna figure out that knot? Quick slice the funding.

Or some other kind of Peace, presumably. It still means somebody conceeding something. Those odds don't favour Ukrainian sovereignty.

Not a Russian at all. I question causality. Far easier to just ignore it with Russia will lose, because we're paying Ukraine to win. Except that's not the conclusion. It's Santa's, wishlist, Ukraine has been really good this year and Russia very naughty. Santa give Ukraine back, it wants Russia for Xmas. Not in the real World.

The real World the Xmas lights are out. Because they cost too much electricity.

It doesn't make that territory any less Russian. You don't recognise it. But Russia are a veto power with those nukes again.

No, the war ends on a conundrum with nukes becoming a very big oxymoron you simply haven't thought through.

Again

1. Peace deal

2. Ukraine conceeds territory, or is defeated.

3. Russian nukes. It means Russia is substantially defeated, withdrawing, or does not protect the territory under its protection. Big if. Nukes from a nuclear power are often easier before then. There are very few variables there. Like internal collapse. But it is under emergency warfare powers.

So the conundrum. Any peace deal cannot be made because Ukraine is being armed to not accept it. It is a loss to its sovereignty. Crimea and other separation territories. It means Ukraine must be defeated. Because Russia won't be if it has nukes. It will use them tactically prior to being defeated.

So what is the response? Armaggedon. Ukraine makes everything, all of our global economies are indebted to the Ukraine, and therefore it must nuke the World first, before Russia claims it? Seriously. It won't win otherwise. Or are you gonna figure out that knot? Quick slice the funding.

Or some other kind of Peace, presumably. It still means somebody conceeding something. Those odds don't favour Ukrainian sovereignty.

Not a Russian at all. I question causality far easier to just ignore it with Russia will lose, because we're paying Ukraine to win. Except that's not the conclusion. It's Santa, wish, Ukraine has been really good this year and Russia very naughty. Santa give Ukraine back, it wants Russia for Xmas. Not in the real World.

The real World the Xmas lights are out. They cost too much electricity.

It doesn't make that territory any less Russian. You don't recognise it. But Russia are a veto power with those nukes again.

No, the war ends on a conundrum with nukes becoming a very big oxymoron you simply haven't thought through.

Again

1. Peace deal

2. Ukraine conceeds territory, or is defeated.

3. Russian nukes. It means Russia is substantially defeated, withdrawing, or does not protect the territory under its protection. Big if. Nukes from a nuclear power are often easier before then. There are very few variables there. Like internal collapse. But it is under emergency warfare powers.

So the conundrum. Any peace deal cannot be made because Ukraine is being armed to not accept it. It is a loss to its sovereignty. Crimea and other separation territories. It means Ukraine must be defeated. Because Russia won't be if it has nukes. It will use them tactically prior to being defeated.

So what is the response? Armaggedon. Ukraine makes everything, all of our global economies are indebted to the Ukraine, and therefore it must nuke the World first, before Russia claims it? Seriously. It won't win otherwise. Or are you gonna figure out that knot? Quick slice the funding.

Or some other kind of Peace, presumably. It still means somebody conceeding something. Those odds don't favour Ukrainian sovereignty.

It doesn't make that territory any less Russian. You don't recognise it. But Russia are a veto power with those nukes again.

No, the war ends on a conundrum with nukes becoming a very big oxymoron you simply haven't thought through.

Again

1. Peace deal

2. Ukraine conceeds territory, or is defeated.

3. Russian nukes. It means Russia is substantially defeated, withdrawing, or does not protect the territory under its protection. Big if. Nukes from a nuclear power are often easier before then. There are very few variables there. Like internal collapse. But it is under emergency warfare powers.

So the conundrum. Any peace deal cannot be made because Ukraine is being armed to not accept it. It is a loss to its sovereignty. Crimea and other separation territories. It means Ukraine must be defeated. Because Russia won't be if it has nukes. It will use them tactically prior to being defeated.

So what is the response? Armaggedon. Ukraine makes everything, all of our global economies are indebted to the Ukraine, and therefore it must nuke the World first, before Russia claims it? Seriously. It won't win otherwise. Or are you gonna figure out that knot? Quick slice the funding.

Or some other kind of Peace, presumably. It still means somebody conceeding something.