Putin starts “military operation” on Ukraine

[Ghgan]

 

[Jamesc]

It's all Ukraine fault. 

Just like all Bidon fault  

Hahaha

[Jamesc]

I heard Russia is winning the war.

From the same people for the last 3 years.

 

[Jamesc]

Same bull shit 

Different day

[Ender]

On 4/28/2025 at 11:18 PM, Ender said:

 Putin is no longer hiding the fact that his ally has sent soldiers to fight Ukraine. One rule for you, but none for me.

 

 

North Korea has acknowledged being involved in pushing Ukrainian out of Kursk. While the western partners of Ukraine are dilly dallying, the Coalition of Willings, whether to even send a peace keeping force, for fear of crossing Putin's no western soldiers on Ukraine soil. It seems Putin has more committed partners than Ukraine. For years since Merkel, this fear of crossing Putin's red line has caged their mentality, unable to break out and ultimately embolden Putin's aggression. Just hope the new Chancellor Merz can lead them out of this mental cage. Really wanted to say they have the 病夫 mentality.

From having partner country on Russia soil to push out Ukraine and now Russia is proposing having their partners in Ukraine to participate for the invasion. Is this not escalation for the Western partners? It's a mirror of Putin's red line.

 

[Ghgan]

Hey, they are the willing, not the doing. That's someone else.

“Russia has 800,000 [troops]. Let me tell you this, if we can’t even raise 64,000 that doesn’t look weak — it is weak.”

https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/04/30/the-times-coalition-of-the-willing-for-ukraine-struggles-to-materialize-amid-europe-hesitation/

The Times: “Coalition of the willing” for Ukraine struggles to materialize amid Europe hesitation

The “coalition of the willing” formed in March 2025 to support Ukraine’s security amid Russian aggression is facing a critical shortage of actual willing participants apart from mainly the UK and France.

byVira Kravchuk

30/04/2025

4 minute read

An illustrative image. Ukrainian soldiers during a training. Source: The 82nd Separate Airborne Assault Bukovina Brigade

The Times: “Coalition of the willing” for Ukraine struggles to materialize amid Europe hesitation

European nations would struggle to collectively deploy 25,000 troops to Ukraine as part of a “coalition of the willing,” a proposed deterrence force, according to sources cited by The Times.

This falls far short of the 64,000-strong force originally suggested by British military leadership.

A recently formed “coalition of the willing” is an initiative established by Ukraine’s partners in March 2025 as an alternative to immediate NATO membership, which aims to strengthen Ukraine and help secure lasting peace amid the ongoing war with Russia.

The peacekeeping contingent is expected to include “over 10,000 military personnel,” according to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, with forces primarily from the United Kingdom and France.

Russia firmly rejected proposals for European peacekeeping forces in Ukraine, characterizing such deployments as “direct NATO aggression” and a threat to its strategic interests.

The Times gained insight into high-level discussions between Europe’s defense ministers and military chiefs who are developing plans for a “coalition of the willing” force in Ukraine.

Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, Britain’s chief of defense staff, reportedly proposed the 64,000-strong force during a meeting earlier this month.

However, defense ministers across Europe expressed serious doubts about reaching these numbers.

“There was no chance they could reach that number and even 25,000 would be a push for a joint effort,” said a source familiar with discussions in Brussels.

The numerical challenge appears significant when considering rotation requirements. Allies pointed out to John Healey, the British defense secretary, that a force of that size would require 256,000 troops over two years to maintain rotations.

Lithuania’s defense minister Dovilė Šakalienė reportedly delivered a stark assessment:

“Russia has 800,000 [troops]. Let me tell you this, if we can’t even raise 64,000 that doesn’t look weak — it is weak.”

Several major European nations expressed reluctance or outright refusal to commit ground forces. Poland, Spain and Italy made clear they will not contribute soldiers, while Finland and Estonia raised concerns that deployments would “dilute” their own border defenses. Germany is reportedly against sending ground forces but has not completely ruled it out.

France has indicated it would match the UK’s commitment of 5,000-10,000 troops.

The discussions highlight Europe’s continued reliance on the United States for serious deterrence against Russia.

As one source noted: “Without large populous countries committing [troops], it is a dead end.”

The British Army faces its own challenges, including a shrinking force, artillery shortages, and problems with support equipment normally supplied by America, according to a UK source.

Given these constraints, plans are shifting toward a more limited approach. The most likely scenario now involves sending British and French military trainers to western Ukraine, well away from front lines, rather than troops to guard key installations or protect Ukrainian forces.

Earlier, British Defense Minister John Healey clarified that the UK-led “coalition of the willing” will deploy British troops to Ukraine for non-combat roles, focusing on training Ukrainian forces away from frontlines to bolster their capabilities and support peace efforts.

He also emphasized compliance with international law and rejected exemptions from the European Convention on Human Rights despite Russian “lawfare” risks.

During a 10 April NATO meeting in Brussels, bringing together approximately 30 nations, Healey announced that only six countries, including the UK, France, and Baltic states, had so far committed to deploy their troops to Ukraine.

While the Trump administration refuses to deploy troops, it privately signaled openness to providing intelligence and logistical aid

[Ghgan]

Green t-shirt guai guai sign deal liao

 

[Kb27]

On 4/29/2025 at 4:51 PM, Ender said:

North Korea has acknowledged being involved in pushing Ukrainian out of Kursk. While the western partners of Ukraine are dilly dallying, the Coalition of Willings, whether to even send a peace keeping force, for fear of crossing Putin's no western soldiers on Ukraine soil. It seems Putin has more committed partners than Ukraine. For years since Merkel, this fear of crossing Putin's red line has caged their mentality, unable to break out and ultimately embolden Putin's aggression. Just hope the new Chancellor Merz can lead them out of this mental cage. Really wanted to say they have the 病夫 mentality.

From having partner country on Russia soil to push out Ukraine and now Russia is proposing having their partners in Ukraine to participate for the invasion. Is this not escalation for the Western partners? It's a mirror of Putin's red line.

 

Korean war all over again ?

[Ender]

Some details of the deal signed. The No Debt, might suggest that Ukraine doesn't have to pay back the initial $300 bil claimed by Trump initially.   

 

 

[Ender]

A little bit more details on the deal signed. Ukriane nego team might have changed quite a lot of the initial negative demand in the first few draft. Seems fairer.

 

 

[Ender]

Grok verified to be credible base on open source information.

 

[Ender]

This post is much clearer on the deal signed. The Ukrainian Negotiation Team managed to tone down a lot of the aggressive demands in the initial draft.

 

 

[Ender]

North Korean soldier strong attributes are their physical fitness and Marksmenship. North Korean soldiers initially were ineffective, but they adapted and gained quite a significant battlefield experience. South Korea should be concerned. Their KDrama super agents aren't going to compensate or match the battlefield experience that North Korean are getting.

 

 

[Ct3833]

On 5/1/2025 at 10:14 PM, Ender said:

This post is much clearer on the deal signed. The Ukrainian Negotiation Team managed to tone down a lot of the aggressive demands in the initial draft.

 

 

My fear is after all the agreement, the siao lang will continue to offer more lands on behalf of Ukraine to the other siao lang . Wtf !

[Jamesc]

Ukraine should just tell US all the land you can dig is under Russian control. 

Please get rid of them before you start digging.

And Ukraine will still have all the mineral rights.

Edited Friday at 04:23 AM by Jamesc

[Ender]

On 5/2/2025 at 9:20 AM, Ct3833 said:

My fear is after all the agreement, the siao lang will continue to offer more lands on behalf of Ukraine to the other siao lang . Wtf !

The way I see it, the Trump peace talk is going nowhere, neither side is giving in. With the terms of the minerals deal being fairer (it's actually quite a huge difference from the initial demands from Trump), I see some silver lining for Ukraine. Ukraine will even more won't agree to recognize any lands once the deal is ratified by both sides. As Trump said, USA is vested to protect their interest. And for the first 10 years, USA will not see the profit, 100% goes into Ukraine defense and restoration, That's extra fund to fight Russia for at least 10 years. 

Downside is there's no explicit agreement for USA to provide security guarantee. Ukraine hopes that with USA vested, they will not likely sit by and do nothing. But with Trump, as you said is a siao lang. When he lose his balls, he can pull out like what he did with his EU partners.

Edited Friday at 06:54 AM by Ender

[Ender]

Key points on White house statement on the minerals deal.

 

[Kb27]

On 5/1/2025 at 10:14 PM, Ender said:

This post is much clearer on the deal signed. The Ukrainian Negotiation Team managed to tone down a lot of the aggressive demands in the initial draft.

 

 

Ukraine needs a deal for many reasons.

I'm sure all are considered. This deal is better than nothing.