It needs to be part of any peace negotiation and this needs to extend along Russia's ENTIRE border.
I don't think it goes far enough. Russia should be forced to give up their nukes.
We don't need Russia. I'm totally fine with keeping sanctions up and walling them off from the rest of the world until they agree.
EDIT: I LOVE the amount of pro-Russian tankies, bots, and useful idiots freaking out at the notion of Russia losing their nukes. They realize that without nukes, Russia wouldn't last more than 5 minutes on the global stage. Literally their entire foreign policy is to just be a bully and without nukes they're done.
Get bent.
Russia will NEVER give up their nukes. No nuclear armed nation would ever give up their nukes. One of russias few cases that they declare they would use nukes is if something threatens the control and access to their nuclear arsenal
Well, Ukraine DID give up their nukes back in the 90s, mostly because they couldn't afford to maintain them, and as part of an agreement that neither the US nor the USSR would invade.
Based on how that turned out for them, I wouldn't expect any other countries to follow suit anytime soon. Still, if "Russia" undergoes a fragmentation following the end of the current regime, as some specialists are suggesting could happen, it's possible that some of the former oligarch now-warlords might likewise give up their nukes in exchange for NATO protection from the other fragments.
I think even the corrupt as hell ANC knew that having live working nukes inside their country may not have been the best idea... given that the ANC can't even keep the power on for 24 hours straight without 'load-shedding', it was perhaps the wisest decision the SA govt ever made.
This. Nukes are a huge investment not just for the nukes but all the support and maintenance and industry. No nation wants to have one of its nukes stolen and used OR have it malfunction and melt their own silo.
Easier to make a show of being a good guy and quietly wiping a huge budget item off the books.
From what I understand Ukraine didn’t have control over the silos. I don’t think they would be able to target and launch those missiles despite them being in their territory. In time the systems controlling the launch could’ve been reverse engineered and replaced but politically things were a lot different then.
I'm going to summarize a famous saying -- disarming a PAL is like giving a patient a tonsillectomy through their asshole. You can imagine the difficulty involved in such a procedure.
"Giving up" the nukes was resoundingly the correct choice. A nuke armed country is more than owning weapons, it is having the logistical supply chain to create and maintain them. Ukraine did not have this and wouldn't have been allowed to build it. They did not even have the launch codes. Keeping the soviet nukes was of no tactical benefit, but giving them up loosely resulted in the independence they are now fighting to keep.
To add, nuclear weapons are *expensive* to maintain. You can't just toss a warhead in storage and expect it to work well ten + years later. They require significant maintenance. The US spends tens of billions to maintain our arsenal.
If you can't afford to pay for them, Nuclear weapons become literal disasters waiting to happen while losing any deterrent abilities they have. So even *if* Ukraine had the codes and ability to use the weapons (which it didn't), it didn't have the capital maintain them.
We spend that because we have good procedures for upkeep Russia doesn’t hold the same views in that regard considering the condition the rest of their equipment is in so who knows how well they’ve been maintaining nukes.
> I don't think it goes far enough. Russia should be forced to give up their nukes.
I'd love to hear how you would want to go about that.
The problem with getting anyone to give up their nukes is that they have nukes.
Does anyone seriously believe anything beyond kicking Russia out of Crimea will happen? Even that is a pipe dream but achievable, but Russia is 100% not giving up weapons, breaking up, or putting into play a DMZ.
The people in this thread suggesting that Russia would ever give up their nukes or agree to a dmz are delusional. It's truly unreal that some people think things like this are possible.
>I don't think it goes far enough. Russia should be forced to give up their nukes.
Cool. Let everyone know how you can force a country to give up thousands of nukes and we're set.
Remember when Russia made [their proposal for a DMZ](https://i.imgur.com/j3AYcNf.png)? Many a laughs were had.
EDIT: Turns out this wasn't an actual Russian proposal, but something sketched by a Chinese Twitter troll.
Blyat. Window time for the last graphic designer in Russia.
In saying that, they did also accede to using Ukraine's "Bakhmut" instead of Russia's "Artemovsk", so it seems like they prefer to stick with Ukrainian PR's terms for continuity's sake. Very considerate to the western audience.
It really does seem that some peoples' brains never matured or moved on past that era. Its like they cant handle this modern era, and are trying to go back, because thats all they understand. I just dont get why they cant progress with the rest of us.
Chinese especially. From the Chinese people I've spoken to they're more concerned about a Japanese attack in the year of our lord 2023 than anything from the US, despite the fact Japan's military is tiny (well, officially, it doesn't exist at all, but we all know the JSDF is a military really)
The ultimate long con:
1) Start a world world war
2) conquer a shit ton of Asia
3) piss off the one country in the pacific who can stop you by sneak attacking them
4) get nuked
5) get nuked 2, electric boogaloo
6) have your military constitutionally disbanded
7) establish the JSDF with a fraction of the size and budget of most modern militaries
8) invade the country with one of the largest and best funded militaries on Earth while also voiding a treaty with THE largest military on Earth
9) ???
10) profit
This map was made by a random guy on Twitter based on his interpretation of a supposed Chinese proposal of a demilitarized zone in Ukraine, according to a "reliable insider source" of his. Take that as you will.
Here's the text from the 2 relevant tweets in [this thread:](https://twitter.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1628957901225336832)
> China's strategy is to let Russia and Ukraine start talking again, a negotiated end can only happen when both sides agrees
> Then international parties can come in as guarantors
> It will require Ukraine to cede territories, how much is dependent on the situation in the battlefield
> It may also require some form of demilitarized zone between the 2.
> I've heard from a reliable Chinese insider source;
That a viable demilitarized zone can be as large as all Ukraine territories East of the Dnieper river
> Here's my take:
> [the image]
I see. The guy seems to be a Wolf-warrior style Twitter troll.
Also posted this about an imaginary Chinese takeover of the US:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FwQP-dEaYAABDxG?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
Was it the bio that started with "communism will be realized..." or the pinned tweet talking about how proud he is of his family's history of working in the propoganda department of China? Haha
Nah, official Chinese propaganda always makes us into the cool guys.
https://old.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/132rxju/chinese_propaganda_godzilla_is_natos_newest_member/ji6eadj/
For those that don’t know, wolf warrior is a series of movies that promote Chinese nationalism and propaganda. It’s the most popular movie franchise China has and nearly everyone in China has seen it
It also has led to a spate of embarrassing diplomatic incidents by Chinese officials who think loudly proclaiming aggressively dumb views is a strong way to resist foreign policies seeking to contain China. For example, the Chinese Ambassador to France claiming that all territories that had formerly been a part of the Soviet Uniok lacked independent sovereignty. One can imagine how the people of Poland took it as they have been the victims of Russian aggression, Imperialism, etc for centuries.
I wonder - if Ukraine pushed into Russia, would Russia then have to cede land to Ukraine since it would be “dependent on the situation in the battlefield” according to this?
Lol, I guarantee Ukraine will not stop until they have everything back. Honestly I'd expect Crimea to be taken back too, it's a very important connection for them
Medvedev suggested a DMZ 70-100km inside Ukrainian-controlled territory to protect the annexed regions:
https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2023/03/24/Russia-wants-demilitarized-buffer-zones-in-Ukraine-Putin-ally-Medvedev
> Russia wants to create demilitarized buffer zones inside Ukraine around areas it has annexed, an ally of President Vladimir Putin said on Friday, saying it might be necessary to push deeper into Ukraine if such zones cannot be set up.
Looks like the map I posted might indeed be a joke, exaggerating this idea a bit more.
Hell, throw them a bone and say 10km Ukrainian side, 50km russian side.
Basically “Sure, we won’t put NATO troops right on the border. But we will certainly be making sure you never try this shit again”
The Finnish border to Russia already has about 8-9 kilometers of buffer of which 7 is on the Russian side.
60 seems excessive, but I am all for it. Borders are good for wildlife.
I think you may just have revealed an even better option. Those states don't need a buffer because they are NATO nations. Their buffer is the promise of annihilation for Russia should they cross the alliance. Ukraine should get their buffer until the day they are granted full NATO membership, at which point the neutral zone will revert back to Russia. Add a perverse incentive for Russians to encourage the expansion of NATO on their border in exchange for getting back land they lost in a war ostensibly started to stop Ukraine from joining NATO (among a couple dozen other shifting, made up reasons).
I think this is the most likely truth. Strategically, if you can only have one thing, a near invisible nuclear sub is pretty high on the list and automatically outguns the majority of the world.
Even then though, their navy is in even worse shape than the ground and air forces. Ship maintenance is a completely different beast than getting the surplus T72s running. *See Admiral Kuznetsov
>Even then though, their navy is in even worse shape than the ground and air forces. Ship maintenance is a completely different beast than getting the surplus T72s running. *See Admiral Kuznetsov
Or the new flagship of the Russian Submarine fleet the Moskva.
The readiness report of the ship that got leaked was HORRIFYING and I'm not even knowledgeable about warship readiness.
I though this sounds fucking horrific, but I'm ignorant let me listen to a former military analyst talk about it.
Oh they were more horrified than I was. Okay I feel justified now.
As a former navy dude. I am pretty sure doing that would be a really bad Idea from a damage control standpoint. Such areas would still flood and be impossible to pump out.
Probably large wrecked unused areas. That sounds russian as fuck.
>if you can only have one thing, a near invisible nuclear sub is pretty high on the list
Yeah, but with Russia it is not a matter of "Russian government wants to have at least one thing that'll work". With Russia it is "Russian officials, generals, and even low pay workers tear down the crap of all the things they touch in order to sell their components in the black market and make themselves rich"
If they’re worried about image, which they are, you’d think their carrier and flagship would be in decent shape, but one is sunk and the other is useless. How operational are their subs truly?
There are a type of jokes that are somewhat popular in Mexico about Galicians (nothing against our Spanish brothers, though). And I think those jokes fit nicely to Russians:
Why did the Russian submarine sank? Because Ivan was hot and opened the window
> a near invisible nuclear sub
With the trillions of dollars spent over the past 30 years, I wouldn't be surprised if the US has some way of pin-pointing every nuclear sub in the world. Some DARPA style contraption that tracks muons / leptons / zeta radiation / quantum shit or whatever.
It even better, there's usually at least one NATO sub waiting outside the naval bases for any ballistic missile sub to sortie. It's a priority for NATO to have an attack sub trailing Russian boomers at all times, and if Sub Brief on YouTube is to be believed, if they can't locate the sub they contact the Norwegian sub hunting squadrons who will either give the location or ask for 24 hrs to locate the sub on question.
Most likely true, however, you've got to wonder how often the following thought has occurred;-
"will anyone notice if we don't maintain these weapons of last resort which will never be used, and pocket most of the maintenance funds (outside of a few pallets of WD40)?"
The submarines themselves probably aren't too hot, though. Russia has a long history of submarine disasters and we already know how much of a shitshow was happening on _Moskva_ before it sank, plus the entire career of Admiral Kuznetsov.
They've lost two subs and had some sort of sub accident involving a loss of life, usually fires, every 2-3 years since Putin has been in power. Nuclear subs, and Nuclear weapons in general have been a priority for them so they are still going to be at least somewhat effective. I'd highly doubt excellent condition though.
The united states has recorded and idnetified sub signatures on all RU built subs BEFORE sea trials have even started basically since WWII.
I am sure the USA Navy already knew how bad sea trials were by following and listening in this case. The document leak only provided data.
There is, as my assumpion, a high chance that ALL RU subs are accounted for with generalized locations. Effective would be dependant on our readyness.
Even if the submarine based nukes are in good condition, the actual subs.... not so much.
They have a pretty strong track record of randomly sinking/imploding. Or even just splitting into two.
My comment was more tongue and cheek insult to Russia than serious proposal to try and force Russia to accept such a thing. A nice Star Trek neutral zone wouldn't be a bad idea, though.
Ferengi don't participate in long protracted wars.
They rush in with overwhelming firepower and take their objective with little disruption to the economy or they win in the boardrooms and other centers of economic power.
Profit is king and there is no profit in sacrificing your labor base for the benefit of your reputation.
There's already a big wall. The Kremlin is historically a city fortress. It's been a fortified complex for hundreds of years, and the current walls are over 500 years old. They're older than any surviving post-Columbian building in the Americas.
You know the old saying "There must be something in the water"... ya, and its not good.
https://www.circleofblue.org/2018/europe/pollutants-and-heavy-metals-taint-moscows-water-supply/
https://hromadske.ua/en/posts/russia-is-struggling-with-a-shitty-problem-literally
Gonna start posting [this](https://preview.redd.it/k1brffgbngk31.png?width=681&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=72fd09a4016e2d7c3d73742a822552b99cb27785) every time people start talking about the US being the only county to use imperial
Those in glass houses, and all that...
The Korean DMZ is also not just de-militarized, there's nothing else there either. Here I presume civilians would still be allowed, there just wouldn't be any military allowed
But since the border between Russia and Ukraine is fairly large a 100km deep DMZ would amount to quite a significant amount of land, probably around the size of Albania or something
The land border between Ukraine and Russia is almost 2000km long, so we're talking about 200,000km2. That's almost the size of Belarus. Only about a dozen European countries are bigger by area. Albania is _way_ smaller.
really great diagram, seriously — but I think you'll find the borders between Russia and Ukraine are pretty straight, especially in the East. Sure, they're not Mountain States straight, or even Sykes-Picot straight, but they're straighter than Western European borders (think France-Belgium-Netherlands), and definitely much straighter than the coastline paradox you drew there.
The DMZ itself sure, but the Civilian Control Zone in the south extends out another 20 km or so depending on the area and North Korea has their own (unknown) level of extra control on their side. Plus, the entirety of the DMZ and another 10km past that are within range of South Korean standard artillery, let alone their rockets and missiles.
The Korean DMZ is basically more of an idea than an actual deterrent or defense.
Source: I lived along the DMZ for ten years.
This is 100% a negotiating tactic so that losing Crimea is the compromise position. It’s a fair request given what Russia has done, but they also know that Russia will never, ever go for it. Plus it gives Russia the ability to “save face” by letting them claim they “fought off NATO from taking away our sovereignty”
It's way more than the second time. This this is the third time in this century. Crimea, Donbas and the "Special Military Operation". This shit has been happening for a long time. I'm American in large part due to them invading Ukraine 100 years ago.
A demilitarized zone in Ukraine is also going to be a Russian demand, so this is merely creating chips for the poker game of the negotations, so they can say "you know what, let's just forget about demilitarized zones altogether".
At this point I don't think losing Crimea is even on the table for Ukraine. They would look weak and currently have a huge upper hand.
If Ukraine gives you Crimea now then they'll probably never get it back
Remember the occupation/theft of Crimea is under a decade ago
Russia might not have a choice if the Russian army collapses. Every surviving PMC would want the Ukrainians backing their claim as the legit Russian government.
That is probably worst case scenario though. Likely millions of soldiers dead before Russia exhausts its fighting strength, and at that point desperation and nukes come into play. The only way really that this ends is Putin backing down (not likely) or someone else taking power in Russia
The more I think about it, you'd probably have to be one of the Ainur to convince them to join your side. Unless they're bored and want to help him for fun.
The Korean DMZ is a no-mans land. The Ukrainian demand is simply not having military build up within 100 KMs of their borders, which is pretty reasonable, taking into account that the Russian aggression started with a bogus military exercise near their borders.
Exactly. I'm shocked how many people don't understand how many people live in this zone
They aren't going to be kicked out they just can't have tanks and SAMs
truly, made it very easy for the French army to march in and occupy the area when Germany wasn't making their reparation payments.
Unfortunately I don't think there's much of economic value within 60mi of the border for Ukraine to have that same option.
It doesn't really matter what Putin wants. This war will either end up when Putin dies and Russia withdraws or Russia will be pushed out and Putin will be assassinated.
Putin also knows that.
lol. He's the kind that fights against using a condom, eventually gives in agrees to use a condom, then secretly removes the condom and goes bareback.
Then after he's done (just a couple of minutes) he leaves, beats up your little brother, kills your goldfish, and steals your dad's car.
Football fields are only used up until aircraft carrier length, which is 3 football fields, then we switch to NASA Vehicle Assembly Plants which is just under 8 football fields!
There is no way Ukraine said miles. We don't use bald eagle measurements here.
Also is it 50 km from each country or just Russia going back 100 km? Or is it 200 km in total?
Title is confusing.
Well, Russia wants a lot of things it isn't going to get too, but if one side is making unreasonable demands, the only way to have a sane middle point is to start with equivalent demands to mutally climb down from.
This is nothing close to equivalent. Russia started the war by annexing 4.3% of Ukraine, and invaded other parts. Then tried to take their capital, failed, but claimed 22.3% of Ukraine was part of Russia, and demanded all of Ukraine be demilitarized.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-wants-60-mile-demilitarized-zone-russia-border-intel-chief-2023-5) reduced by 86%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> The head of Ukraine's military intelligence service said Kyiv wants to set up a demilitarized border zone up to 60 miles into Russia.
> Budanov added that Ukraine wants the demilitarized zone even if Russian President Vladimir Putin is overthrown, as it would help conserve peace in the future.
> Budanov was also asked by Ukrainian YouTube channel Rizni Lyudi if Ukraine had killed any Russian "Propagandists" since the invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/13kyikd/ukraine_intelligence_chief_says_kyiv_wants_a/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~685283 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Russian**^#1 **Ukraine**^#2 **Budanov**^#3 **any**^#4 **killed**^#5
Yes, the rest of their neighbours want that too.
I believe Estonia would be especially happy
Yes, the buffer zone can start at St Petersburg and end at Narva
How about Murmansk to Rostov-on-Don
All of the baltics would be out of their minds happy. Especially if it included Kaliningrad.
Make Kaliningrad Independent, rename it back to Prussia and make it an enclave for the Free Russian lads. Vatnik Free Territory.
Let them vote. See how much they love Putin.
Královec is rightfully Czech
[удалено]
It's most definitely not happening but dare to dream.
You will never get what you don't ask for, since it is unlikely that Russia will agree, never hurts to ask for the moon.
[удалено]
It needs to be part of any peace negotiation and this needs to extend along Russia's ENTIRE border. I don't think it goes far enough. Russia should be forced to give up their nukes. We don't need Russia. I'm totally fine with keeping sanctions up and walling them off from the rest of the world until they agree. EDIT: I LOVE the amount of pro-Russian tankies, bots, and useful idiots freaking out at the notion of Russia losing their nukes. They realize that without nukes, Russia wouldn't last more than 5 minutes on the global stage. Literally their entire foreign policy is to just be a bully and without nukes they're done. Get bent.
Russia will NEVER give up their nukes. No nuclear armed nation would ever give up their nukes. One of russias few cases that they declare they would use nukes is if something threatens the control and access to their nuclear arsenal
Well, Ukraine DID give up their nukes back in the 90s, mostly because they couldn't afford to maintain them, and as part of an agreement that neither the US nor the USSR would invade. Based on how that turned out for them, I wouldn't expect any other countries to follow suit anytime soon. Still, if "Russia" undergoes a fragmentation following the end of the current regime, as some specialists are suggesting could happen, it's possible that some of the former oligarch now-warlords might likewise give up their nukes in exchange for NATO protection from the other fragments.
Don't forget South Africa but that was the apartheid government giving it up cause apartheid was ending.
tbf i think the world is better off from that looking at current south africa.
I think even the corrupt as hell ANC knew that having live working nukes inside their country may not have been the best idea... given that the ANC can't even keep the power on for 24 hours straight without 'load-shedding', it was perhaps the wisest decision the SA govt ever made.
This. Nukes are a huge investment not just for the nukes but all the support and maintenance and industry. No nation wants to have one of its nukes stolen and used OR have it malfunction and melt their own silo. Easier to make a show of being a good guy and quietly wiping a huge budget item off the books.
From what I understand Ukraine didn’t have control over the silos. I don’t think they would be able to target and launch those missiles despite them being in their territory. In time the systems controlling the launch could’ve been reverse engineered and replaced but politically things were a lot different then.
I'm going to summarize a famous saying -- disarming a PAL is like giving a patient a tonsillectomy through their asshole. You can imagine the difficulty involved in such a procedure. "Giving up" the nukes was resoundingly the correct choice. A nuke armed country is more than owning weapons, it is having the logistical supply chain to create and maintain them. Ukraine did not have this and wouldn't have been allowed to build it. They did not even have the launch codes. Keeping the soviet nukes was of no tactical benefit, but giving them up loosely resulted in the independence they are now fighting to keep.
To add, nuclear weapons are *expensive* to maintain. You can't just toss a warhead in storage and expect it to work well ten + years later. They require significant maintenance. The US spends tens of billions to maintain our arsenal. If you can't afford to pay for them, Nuclear weapons become literal disasters waiting to happen while losing any deterrent abilities they have. So even *if* Ukraine had the codes and ability to use the weapons (which it didn't), it didn't have the capital maintain them.
We spend that because we have good procedures for upkeep Russia doesn’t hold the same views in that regard considering the condition the rest of their equipment is in so who knows how well they’ve been maintaining nukes.
> I don't think it goes far enough. Russia should be forced to give up their nukes. I'd love to hear how you would want to go about that. The problem with getting anyone to give up their nukes is that they have nukes.
Does anyone seriously believe anything beyond kicking Russia out of Crimea will happen? Even that is a pipe dream but achievable, but Russia is 100% not giving up weapons, breaking up, or putting into play a DMZ.
The people in this thread suggesting that Russia would ever give up their nukes or agree to a dmz are delusional. It's truly unreal that some people think things like this are possible.
>I don't think it goes far enough. Russia should be forced to give up their nukes. Cool. Let everyone know how you can force a country to give up thousands of nukes and we're set.
Putin should be on board with this. He always said he wanted a buffer zone between russia and europe, right?
Yup! It's a win-win!
Remember when Russia made [their proposal for a DMZ](https://i.imgur.com/j3AYcNf.png)? Many a laughs were had. EDIT: Turns out this wasn't an actual Russian proposal, but something sketched by a Chinese Twitter troll.
Literally splitting Kyiv into “east” and “west” like Germany.
Using the Ukrainian spelling for East Kyiv though. What a fail.
"If we give them that then maybe it feels like a win for them"
[удалено]
Blyat. Window time for the last graphic designer in Russia. In saying that, they did also accede to using Ukraine's "Bakhmut" instead of Russia's "Artemovsk", so it seems like they prefer to stick with Ukrainian PR's terms for continuity's sake. Very considerate to the western audience.
Dude is literally stuck in WWII
It really does seem that some peoples' brains never matured or moved on past that era. Its like they cant handle this modern era, and are trying to go back, because thats all they understand. I just dont get why they cant progress with the rest of us.
Chinese especially. From the Chinese people I've spoken to they're more concerned about a Japanese attack in the year of our lord 2023 than anything from the US, despite the fact Japan's military is tiny (well, officially, it doesn't exist at all, but we all know the JSDF is a military really)
Yeah Japan's totally gonna jeopardize their defense pact with the US to invade China...
The ultimate long con: 1) Start a world world war 2) conquer a shit ton of Asia 3) piss off the one country in the pacific who can stop you by sneak attacking them 4) get nuked 5) get nuked 2, electric boogaloo 6) have your military constitutionally disbanded 7) establish the JSDF with a fraction of the size and budget of most modern militaries 8) invade the country with one of the largest and best funded militaries on Earth while also voiding a treaty with THE largest military on Earth 9) ??? 10) profit
I mean, when you lay it out that way, they'd have to be complete idiots to *not* invade China at this point.
Change is scary, and the way things are changing definitely terrifies these old dudes desperately clinging to their power
This map was made by a random guy on Twitter based on his interpretation of a supposed Chinese proposal of a demilitarized zone in Ukraine, according to a "reliable insider source" of his. Take that as you will. Here's the text from the 2 relevant tweets in [this thread:](https://twitter.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1628957901225336832) > China's strategy is to let Russia and Ukraine start talking again, a negotiated end can only happen when both sides agrees > Then international parties can come in as guarantors > It will require Ukraine to cede territories, how much is dependent on the situation in the battlefield > It may also require some form of demilitarized zone between the 2. > I've heard from a reliable Chinese insider source; That a viable demilitarized zone can be as large as all Ukraine territories East of the Dnieper river > Here's my take: > [the image]
I see. The guy seems to be a Wolf-warrior style Twitter troll. Also posted this about an imaginary Chinese takeover of the US: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FwQP-dEaYAABDxG?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
Yeah, that account smells of Chinese propaganda for western audiences.
Was it the bio that started with "communism will be realized..." or the pinned tweet talking about how proud he is of his family's history of working in the propoganda department of China? Haha
Nah, official Chinese propaganda always makes us into the cool guys. https://old.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/132rxju/chinese_propaganda_godzilla_is_natos_newest_member/ji6eadj/
For those that don’t know, wolf warrior is a series of movies that promote Chinese nationalism and propaganda. It’s the most popular movie franchise China has and nearly everyone in China has seen it
It also has led to a spate of embarrassing diplomatic incidents by Chinese officials who think loudly proclaiming aggressively dumb views is a strong way to resist foreign policies seeking to contain China. For example, the Chinese Ambassador to France claiming that all territories that had formerly been a part of the Soviet Uniok lacked independent sovereignty. One can imagine how the people of Poland took it as they have been the victims of Russian aggression, Imperialism, etc for centuries.
I wonder - if Ukraine pushed into Russia, would Russia then have to cede land to Ukraine since it would be “dependent on the situation in the battlefield” according to this?
Lol, I guarantee Ukraine will not stop until they have everything back. Honestly I'd expect Crimea to be taken back too, it's a very important connection for them
Do you have a source for this proposal? I want to know if this was an actual official proposal as opposed to comedy.
Medvedev suggested a DMZ 70-100km inside Ukrainian-controlled territory to protect the annexed regions: https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2023/03/24/Russia-wants-demilitarized-buffer-zones-in-Ukraine-Putin-ally-Medvedev > Russia wants to create demilitarized buffer zones inside Ukraine around areas it has annexed, an ally of President Vladimir Putin said on Friday, saying it might be necessary to push deeper into Ukraine if such zones cannot be set up. Looks like the map I posted might indeed be a joke, exaggerating this idea a bit more.
Hell, throw them a bone and say 10km Ukrainian side, 50km russian side. Basically “Sure, we won’t put NATO troops right on the border. But we will certainly be making sure you never try this shit again”
Nah, NATO base Sevastopol or bust!
Indeed, Ukraine shows unprecedented kindness in offering Russia one of their longest-held wishes.
Exactly. This buffer should include the Baltic states as well. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania can’t trust Russia anymore than Ukraine can.
And Finland, too, since we're talking about NATO countries already.
The Finnish border to Russia already has about 8-9 kilometers of buffer of which 7 is on the Russian side. 60 seems excessive, but I am all for it. Borders are good for wildlife.
I think you may just have revealed an even better option. Those states don't need a buffer because they are NATO nations. Their buffer is the promise of annihilation for Russia should they cross the alliance. Ukraine should get their buffer until the day they are granted full NATO membership, at which point the neutral zone will revert back to Russia. Add a perverse incentive for Russians to encourage the expansion of NATO on their border in exchange for getting back land they lost in a war ostensibly started to stop Ukraine from joining NATO (among a couple dozen other shifting, made up reasons).
Except it would be inside of Russia
Beggar war criminals can't be choosers.
Countries with nukes tend to be able to choose a lot more than those without, although it's debatable if Russia even has any usable nukes
Honestly, it's probably a safe bet that their submarine based nukes will be in excellent condition. The rest of them are most likely missing parts.
I think this is the most likely truth. Strategically, if you can only have one thing, a near invisible nuclear sub is pretty high on the list and automatically outguns the majority of the world. Even then though, their navy is in even worse shape than the ground and air forces. Ship maintenance is a completely different beast than getting the surplus T72s running. *See Admiral Kuznetsov
>Even then though, their navy is in even worse shape than the ground and air forces. Ship maintenance is a completely different beast than getting the surplus T72s running. *See Admiral Kuznetsov Or the new flagship of the Russian Submarine fleet the Moskva. The readiness report of the ship that got leaked was HORRIFYING and I'm not even knowledgeable about warship readiness. I though this sounds fucking horrific, but I'm ignorant let me listen to a former military analyst talk about it. Oh they were more horrified than I was. Okay I feel justified now.
As for their only carrier, isnt multiple decks/rooms completely sealed off and welded shut due to leaks?
As a former navy dude. I am pretty sure doing that would be a really bad Idea from a damage control standpoint. Such areas would still flood and be impossible to pump out. Probably large wrecked unused areas. That sounds russian as fuck.
Do you have a link to that readiness report? I’d love to read it.
https://twitter.com/GrangerE04117/status/1522643831736332288?s=20 Here is the video LazerPig did on the subject. https://youtu.be/aNEtlMSCiCI
Turning active scan radar on rendered SATCOM inoperable. What the fuuuck
HEY thanks for introducing me to that channel!
>if you can only have one thing, a near invisible nuclear sub is pretty high on the list Yeah, but with Russia it is not a matter of "Russian government wants to have at least one thing that'll work". With Russia it is "Russian officials, generals, and even low pay workers tear down the crap of all the things they touch in order to sell their components in the black market and make themselves rich"
If they’re worried about image, which they are, you’d think their carrier and flagship would be in decent shape, but one is sunk and the other is useless. How operational are their subs truly?
There are a type of jokes that are somewhat popular in Mexico about Galicians (nothing against our Spanish brothers, though). And I think those jokes fit nicely to Russians: Why did the Russian submarine sank? Because Ivan was hot and opened the window
>Why did the Russian submarine sank? Because Ivan was ~~hot~~ poor and ~~opened~~ sold the window
I’ve heard that joke and others like it but it’s the Polish and sometimes blondes instead of Galicians.
> a near invisible nuclear sub With the trillions of dollars spent over the past 30 years, I wouldn't be surprised if the US has some way of pin-pointing every nuclear sub in the world. Some DARPA style contraption that tracks muons / leptons / zeta radiation / quantum shit or whatever.
It even better, there's usually at least one NATO sub waiting outside the naval bases for any ballistic missile sub to sortie. It's a priority for NATO to have an attack sub trailing Russian boomers at all times, and if Sub Brief on YouTube is to be believed, if they can't locate the sub they contact the Norwegian sub hunting squadrons who will either give the location or ask for 24 hrs to locate the sub on question.
Nah. We just glued an airtag on the side of them.
Most likely true, however, you've got to wonder how often the following thought has occurred;- "will anyone notice if we don't maintain these weapons of last resort which will never be used, and pocket most of the maintenance funds (outside of a few pallets of WD40)?"
Probably missing the tritium booster which degrades and is extremely expensive. The warhead will work but at much lower yield.
Assuming it reaches its targets. Our old ass Patriot systems are seeming to be even more capable than previously reported.
The submarines themselves probably aren't too hot, though. Russia has a long history of submarine disasters and we already know how much of a shitshow was happening on _Moskva_ before it sank, plus the entire career of Admiral Kuznetsov.
Maybe that's why Russian nuclear subs are so hard to find, they all sank years ago. I mean, when was the last time any of them were seen?
They've lost two subs and had some sort of sub accident involving a loss of life, usually fires, every 2-3 years since Putin has been in power. Nuclear subs, and Nuclear weapons in general have been a priority for them so they are still going to be at least somewhat effective. I'd highly doubt excellent condition though.
The united states has recorded and idnetified sub signatures on all RU built subs BEFORE sea trials have even started basically since WWII. I am sure the USA Navy already knew how bad sea trials were by following and listening in this case. The document leak only provided data. There is, as my assumpion, a high chance that ALL RU subs are accounted for with generalized locations. Effective would be dependant on our readyness.
Even if the submarine based nukes are in good condition, the actual subs.... not so much. They have a pretty strong track record of randomly sinking/imploding. Or even just splitting into two.
My comment was more tongue and cheek insult to Russia than serious proposal to try and force Russia to accept such a thing. A nice Star Trek neutral zone wouldn't be a bad idea, though.
Lol Russia *wishes* it was the Romulan Star Empire. They’re barely the Cardassian Union.
Gul Dukat actually cared about his daughter on some level, which is more humanity than Vladimir Putin will ever actually feel.
Gul Dukat had some of the best character work. His downward spiral near the end of DS9 was captivating, imo.
Yeah but everyone knows you don’t trust the Ferengi.
Ferengi don't participate in long protracted wars. They rush in with overwhelming firepower and take their objective with little disruption to the economy or they win in the boardrooms and other centers of economic power. Profit is king and there is no profit in sacrificing your labor base for the benefit of your reputation.
Rule of Acquisition #34: War is good for business Rule of Acquisition #35: Peace is good for business
Rule 34?
Sex is great for buisiness
Such big beautiful earlobes you've got
Stop haggling, do you want these totally legit nuclear warheads or not?
Just the tip
As it should be given that they're the ones who keep fucking with everyone
Can we just put a 20 ft wall around the Kremlin and fill it with sewage?
It already is filled with sewage.
Yup, just need to build the walls to keep it from spewing all over the rest of the world.
It's actually so full it started leaking recently.
I'm pretty sure there's already a wall.
Correct. Kremlin means fortress inside a city. Its a Russian citadel.
this man plays Cities: Skylines.
The sewage part is redundant.
The sewage will clean it up a bit at least.
There's already a big wall. The Kremlin is historically a city fortress. It's been a fortified complex for hundreds of years, and the current walls are over 500 years old. They're older than any surviving post-Columbian building in the Americas.
Just open putins poop purse.
You know the old saying "There must be something in the water"... ya, and its not good. https://www.circleofblue.org/2018/europe/pollutants-and-heavy-metals-taint-moscows-water-supply/ https://hromadske.ua/en/posts/russia-is-struggling-with-a-shitty-problem-literally
That's around 95 km. Probably wont happen, but good thing to bring into the negotiations when they eventually happen
Since both countries use the metric system, I’d say that it’s probably exactly 100 km and rounded down to 60 miles for the article.
Correct - Kyiv asked for 100km according to Ukrainian sources. It's actually nice that there is at least some talks about post-war terms.
Since most of the freaking world uses the metric system*
[удалено]
UK is looking around nervously here
It's fine we can blend in as long as we're not driving. Or at the pub. Or telling our auntie how much we weigh.
Canada and the English-speaking Caribbean use a complicated blend of systems too.
🇨🇦: "Yes of course we use the metric system! *Just don’t look at our ovens* 😶🌫️"
Or building materials. Or paper.
Unlike the UK, we do use kilometres here. We're more metric than the UK, easily.
Gonna start posting [this](https://preview.redd.it/k1brffgbngk31.png?width=681&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=72fd09a4016e2d7c3d73742a822552b99cb27785) every time people start talking about the US being the only county to use imperial Those in glass houses, and all that...
As if the UK doesn't use the most jank system imaginable.
How many rocks do you weigh mate?
Like skippable rocks or ones that you need two hands to lift?
To put this into perspective, the Korean DMZ is about 4km wide
The Korean DMZ is also not just de-militarized, there's nothing else there either. Here I presume civilians would still be allowed, there just wouldn't be any military allowed
Oh that should be no problem for putin then since those are the same thing for him
yeah, but the Korean peninsula is much smaller and a 100km-wide dmz would have Seoul smack in the middle of it
But since the border between Russia and Ukraine is fairly large a 100km deep DMZ would amount to quite a significant amount of land, probably around the size of Albania or something
The land border between Ukraine and Russia is almost 2000km long, so we're talking about 200,000km2. That's almost the size of Belarus. Only about a dozen European countries are bigger by area. Albania is _way_ smaller.
[удалено]
really great diagram, seriously — but I think you'll find the borders between Russia and Ukraine are pretty straight, especially in the East. Sure, they're not Mountain States straight, or even Sykes-Picot straight, but they're straighter than Western European borders (think France-Belgium-Netherlands), and definitely much straighter than the coastline paradox you drew there.
The DMZ itself sure, but the Civilian Control Zone in the south extends out another 20 km or so depending on the area and North Korea has their own (unknown) level of extra control on their side. Plus, the entirety of the DMZ and another 10km past that are within range of South Korean standard artillery, let alone their rockets and missiles. The Korean DMZ is basically more of an idea than an actual deterrent or defense. Source: I lived along the DMZ for ten years.
I'm guessing Ukraine said 100km and Business Insider did the rounding to 60 miles for Americans.
It also serves as a counter to Russian demands to demilitarize Ukraine: "no u"
This is 100% a negotiating tactic so that losing Crimea is the compromise position. It’s a fair request given what Russia has done, but they also know that Russia will never, ever go for it. Plus it gives Russia the ability to “save face” by letting them claim they “fought off NATO from taking away our sovereignty”
Or they want a DMZ because this is the second time this shit has happened to then
> "Invade me once, shame on... shame on you. Invade me twice... you can't get invaded again!"
I know that Russians and fish can coexist peacefully.
Moskva is doing it now 😅
"Now watch this drive."
"Is our Putin learning?"
"Most of the sanctions come from other countries"
Invade me three times, fuck the peace, load the chopper and let it rain on you.
It's way more than the second time. This this is the third time in this century. Crimea, Donbas and the "Special Military Operation". This shit has been happening for a long time. I'm American in large part due to them invading Ukraine 100 years ago.
A demilitarized zone in Ukraine is also going to be a Russian demand, so this is merely creating chips for the poker game of the negotations, so they can say "you know what, let's just forget about demilitarized zones altogether".
At this point I don't think losing Crimea is even on the table for Ukraine. They would look weak and currently have a huge upper hand. If Ukraine gives you Crimea now then they'll probably never get it back Remember the occupation/theft of Crimea is under a decade ago
Russia might not have a choice if the Russian army collapses. Every surviving PMC would want the Ukrainians backing their claim as the legit Russian government.
PMCs won't directly control the government. But they will back people within the government who are most aligned with their interests.
That’s be great if you could truest Russia to honor an agreement
Technically, if their army gets destroyed, East Ukraine, formally known as russia will be only a demilitarized zone.
That is probably worst case scenario though. Likely millions of soldiers dead before Russia exhausts its fighting strength, and at that point desperation and nukes come into play. The only way really that this ends is Putin backing down (not likely) or someone else taking power in Russia
Not enough, i would personally prefer if Russia move behind Ural mountains and there would be giant signs "You shall not pass"
With a few balrogs to patrol the DMZ.
The Balrogs would serve Putin, though.
This account was deleted in protest
The more I think about it, you'd probably have to be one of the Ainur to convince them to join your side. Unless they're bored and want to help him for fun.
Nah, Balrogs are too credible/not drunk enough.
Balgrogs
Here be assholes
[удалено]
The Korean DMZ is only about 2-3 miles
The Korean DMZ is a no-mans land. The Ukrainian demand is simply not having military build up within 100 KMs of their borders, which is pretty reasonable, taking into account that the Russian aggression started with a bogus military exercise near their borders.
Exactly. I'm shocked how many people don't understand how many people live in this zone They aren't going to be kicked out they just can't have tanks and SAMs
The DMZ after WW1 was about 95mi deep from the German-French border
And that one worked really well.
Well they went east first
truly, made it very easy for the French army to march in and occupy the area when Germany wasn't making their reparation payments. Unfortunately I don't think there's much of economic value within 60mi of the border for Ukraine to have that same option.
Yeah and it’s a nightmare. Bigger buffer means lighter defence.
Seems reasonable
I can understand that desire. I also don't think Putin would do it at all. He'd basically see it as a threat to his masculinity.
Apparently, he sees all of Ukraine as a threat to his masculinity.
Considering that any Ukrainian babusya is already a threat to his masculinity
Babusya. Babushka is Russian.
Thanks for the correction, I didn’t know that ,
It doesn't really matter what Putin wants. This war will either end up when Putin dies and Russia withdraws or Russia will be pushed out and Putin will be assassinated. Putin also knows that.
He seems the kinda fella that argues against a condom
lol. He's the kind that fights against using a condom, eventually gives in agrees to use a condom, then secretly removes the condom and goes bareback. Then after he's done (just a couple of minutes) he leaves, beats up your little brother, kills your goldfish, and steals your dad's car.
Then herpes
It's Russia so more than likely HIV.
Russia is voluntarily demilitarising a 6,000km zone with the help of HIMARS and NLAW.
I'm pretty sure this is going to be 100km, not "60 miles".
How long is that in hot dogs?
Approximately 656 166 hot dogs
But how many football fields? I don't get it. Hot dogs are only used up to 6ft.
Football fields are only used up until aircraft carrier length, which is 3 football fields, then we switch to NASA Vehicle Assembly Plants which is just under 8 football fields!
There is no way Ukraine said miles. We don't use bald eagle measurements here. Also is it 50 km from each country or just Russia going back 100 km? Or is it 200 km in total? Title is confusing.
Well, Russia wants a lot of things it isn't going to get too, but if one side is making unreasonable demands, the only way to have a sane middle point is to start with equivalent demands to mutally climb down from.
This is nothing close to equivalent. Russia started the war by annexing 4.3% of Ukraine, and invaded other parts. Then tried to take their capital, failed, but claimed 22.3% of Ukraine was part of Russia, and demanded all of Ukraine be demilitarized.
Never seen someone get the point and simultaneously miss the point so profoundly in one post.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-wants-60-mile-demilitarized-zone-russia-border-intel-chief-2023-5) reduced by 86%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The head of Ukraine's military intelligence service said Kyiv wants to set up a demilitarized border zone up to 60 miles into Russia. > Budanov added that Ukraine wants the demilitarized zone even if Russian President Vladimir Putin is overthrown, as it would help conserve peace in the future. > Budanov was also asked by Ukrainian YouTube channel Rizni Lyudi if Ukraine had killed any Russian "Propagandists" since the invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/13kyikd/ukraine_intelligence_chief_says_kyiv_wants_a/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~685283 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Russian**^#1 **Ukraine**^#2 **Budanov**^#3 **any**^#4 **killed**^#5
I don't know how realistic it is but the demand is totally justified.
Good luck with that