International Russia/Ukraine Megathread V15

Concerning developments the last 72 hours, but it seems that most of it still is dismounted infantry.

Last November I predicted that Donetsk wouldn't be conquered in its entirety until June or July. We are in mid-August. So... all things considered, this offense is still going really poorly.

However. I would be surprised if Pokrovsk is still in UA hands by September 1st.
I believe they started attacking over a year ago trying to take it… so ya slow to say the least. They want it at all costs and are paying a big price for it.
 
11 August 2025
Russia has just doubled its mass production of the deadly Iskander-M ballistic missiles, sending shockwaves through NATO and raising fears of a new escalation in the Ukraine war. Capable of striking with pinpoint accuracy and evading modern air defenses, the Iskander-M is a game-changing weapon that could shift the balance of power in Eastern Europe.

how much you getting paid by Sherdog?
 
It is in Alaska and in the Arctic that the economic interests of our countries converge and prospects for implementing large-scale mutually beneficial projects arise,’ said Yuri Ushakov, Vladimir Putin’s long-time foreign policy adviser and former Russian ambassador to the United States, at a Friday press conference in Moscow. His words pointed to Arctic economic cooperation being firmly on the agenda when Donald Trump meets Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. For Trump, a massively important commercial deal of this kind is his typical negotiating strategy. It’s the ‘Art of the Deal’ – offer something big, lucrative and tangible, then leverage it to unlock political concessions. It’s the template Trump just used to broker a peace agreement between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, where economic incentives were bound up with resolving a long-running security dispute.

An Arctic agreement between the US and Russia could revive energy collaboration between the two countries on a breathtaking scale. A deal would be massively lucrative for both sides. The Arctic contains an estimated 13 per cent of the world’s undiscovered oil, roughly 90 billion barrels, and 30 per cent of its undiscovered natural gas. Russia controls around half of that, with explorers pointing to 2,300 million metric tons of oil and condensate, and 35,700 billion cubic metres of gas. It’s a bonanza tailor-made for Trump’s America First. Parlay US expertise and capital into these frozen assets and the pay-off would be staggering. The shipping upside is no less compelling. The Northern Sea Route offers the promise of slashing shipping times between Asia and Europe by up to 50 per cent. As melting ice slowly opens the Arctic lanes, that cut becomes ever more real: less fuel burned, no queueing at chokepoints, and avoidance of piracy hotspots. Pair that with a fleet of US oil champions and Arctic logistics savvy, and Trump suddenly holds a commercial deal that has the feel of an irresistible boardroom trophy.

The US and Russia have been here before. In 2011 ExxonMobil struck a landmark deal with Russia’s Rosneft to explore and drill in the Russian Arctic, including the Kara Sea. It was a project worth tens of billions, giving Exxon access to vast untapped reserves and giving the Russians US technology and expertise. Drilling began, but the partnership was suspended in 2014 when western sanctions were imposed after Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Bringing it back to life, or using it as the template for new ventures, would be straightforward in commercial terms. The infrastructure, geological data and corporate relationships already exist. A revived Arctic partnershipcould go beyond oil and gas to include liquefied natural gas terminals, port upgrades, and joint development of the Northern Sea Route, binding the two economies together in one of the last great frontiers for energy extraction.

There is no confirmation that the Arctic and Ukraine will be explicitly linked. Yet the logic is obvious enough and the hints coming from Moscow cannot be ignored. For Putin, the Arctic could be the sweetener that secures US agreement to a settlement on his terms in Ukraine. Moscow is unlikely to shift on the fundamentals: Crimea and the Donbas are written into Russia’s constitution as part of its territory. Any deal would lock in those gains, demand Ukraine’s demilitarisation and secure a buffer against Nato. Trump could claim an Arctic deal as a massive commercial win for the US and the end of a war which he insists was caused by Biden. Putin could gain Washington’s help in pushing Kyiv to accept the deal.

Trump’s leverage is blunt. Kyiv’s very survival depends on American weapons and cash. By threatening to cut them off, Trump can force Zelensky to the table on terms Kyiv has long rejected. For Trump, this is straight from his negotiating playbook: create a crisis point, hold the most valuable card, and make sure everyone knows you are prepared to walk away. For Zelensky, the choice would be between accepting a peace agreement that leaves Ukraine truncated, or facing a war without US backing.

Ukraine’s position is fragile. Its army is drained, its economy battered, and its war effort hinges on western aid. European and UK promises mean little without US firepower and financing. If Trump decides to pivot towards an Arctic bargain with Putin, Kyiv may need to fall in line or face the battlefield more or less alone. Zelensky can draw red lines, but without American support they’ll count for little.

The EU and Britain would protest loudly, but they lack the leverage to block an American/Russian deal. Brussels, London, Paris and Berlin have all made clear that no settlement should be struck over Ukraine’s head, yet moral objections are no substitute for raw power. British, French and German support for Ukraine may not make much of a difference to the Russian advance if the war were to drag on without full US support.

Kyiv would be furious about a deal on the Arctic linked to Ukraine. Zelensky has built his presidency on reclaiming occupied land and has vowed never to cede Crimea or the Donbas. A deal that locks in those losses would be denounced as a betrayal. London would echo the outrage, while Brussels would convene summits and issue condemnations. Yet despite the rhetoric, the Europeans would be powerless to change the outcome. The settlement would already be signed and control of US financing of the war firmly in Trump’s hands.

Beyond the western alliance, the reaction would be far warmer. Much of the global south sees the war in Ukraine less as a clash over borders, and more as a drag on global trade and growth. For China, India and Brazil, an end to the war, even entirely on Russia’s terms, would be hailed as pragmatic diplomacy. Trump could present the Arctic bargain as proof that US-Russia cooperation can solve global problems, and this would help blunt criticism from Europe and the UK.

The incentives for both Trump and Putin line up neatly. For Trump, it would be another Trump ‘deal’ in which commercial muscle underwrites a political settlement. Putin would keep his territorial gains and reopen the Arctic to US investment, and Ukraine would be left to make the best of a settlement it didn’t shape. Britain and the EU would be reduced to a role of bystanders.

Written by
James Tidmarsh
 
So am I, but not when the country in question would join NATO and become a threat to Russia. Remember Cuba? How about Iraq? Where those borders respected?

I think you mean respecting borders when it fits your political ideology.

Did the US or allies annex Cuban or Iraq territories during the years you typically mention like Cuban Missile Crisis or Iraqi War?
 
I don't think that europe even does wants to prevent pumps deals about ukraine.
They not likely wants to invest in chinesse american colonium reconstruction ....they aren't complete idiots....
Also ofc due huge debts ukr will be de militatized and why even to bother about this?
Where they ( ukr ) will get money to support their military?
 


Not good.




Yes, Russia sent in the meat-wave before Putin's meeting with Trump in the Donbas, but now...

Can they hold it? Their supply lines will be dental floss thin and the Ukrainian drones have air dominance over the Russian infantry. The drones will feast.
 
Did the US or allies annex Cuban or Iraq territories during the years you typically mention like Cuban Missile Crisis or Iraqi War?
The US told Cuba it could not have nuclear missiles in its island. Whynot? It is a sovereign country like Ukraine.
The US did not like missiles in Cuba and Russia does not like NATO in Ukraine.
Was Iraq not invaded by the United States? Are you that stupid? Well, actually, I do know the answer to that. A big yes!
 
Did anyone keep track of the lies out of Trumps mouth? I’m not sure if he is misinformed, delusional, dementia or just flat out lying but he said a bunch of crap that was way out in left field.
Like Joe Biden in his 4 years in office?
 
The US told Cuba it could not have nuclear missiles in its island. Whynot? It is a sovereign country like Ukraine.
The US did not like missiles in Cuba and Russia does not like NATO in Ukraine.
Was Iraq not invaded by the United States? Are you that stupid? Well, actually, I do know the answer to that. A big yes!

How many countries in the world are not allowed to have nuclear weapons?

I did not support invasion of Iraq. We either should have went to Iran and KSA. But that's a whole other subject. But even with all that the US didn't keep any of the Iraqi territories...

I wouldn't question other people's intelligence if I were you....you have shown very little of it here ...

So what's the scoop are you married to a Russian national or with ties to Russia?
 
Can they hold it? Their supply lines will be dental floss thin and the Ukrainian drones have air dominance over the Russian infantry. The drones will feast.
Of course Russian supply lines can hold. Can Ukrainian supply lines hold?
Drone air dominance is the same for both sides, but of course you are going to discriminate and favor Ukraine.
Why don't you cover Ukrainian casualties and desertions? How big is the Ukrainian Army this week?
 
How many countries in the world are not allowed to have nuclear weapons?
Well, let me think. That is a hard question indeed. Is it a trick question? 🤣
Currently just one. Iran.
...and again, it is a sovereign country like Ukraine and should be allowed to have nuclear weapons if it wants to.
But even with all that the US didn't keep any of the Iraqi territories...
No, but it invaded Iraq and killed thousands of innocent civilians. ...and we still have a military presence in Iraq.
I must have been an incredibly intelligent baby.
No, you weren't.
What makes you think that you were? Have you taken an IQ test yet? I think you would score between 90 and 100.
 


The Russian advance gets stalled.

For a video made 5h ago this dude is terrible outdated.
Every other pro ukraine channel is talking about the Zolotyi Kolodyaz breaktrough that happened north of that, whoever made this video didnt register it on the map. The probblem with the breaktrough it's that they simply took very good defensive positions. You cant just rain down drones there.
 
Well, let me think. That is a hard question indeed. Is it a trick question? 🤣
Currently just one. Iran.

Try again..
...and again, it is a sovereign country like Ukraine and should be allowed to have nuclear weapons if it wants to.

Major world powers draw a line in the sand at nuclear weapons.
No, but it invaded Iraq and killed thousands of innocent civilians. ...and we still have a military presence in Iraq.

Not the same. The world is literally asking Russia to just win. There's even a proposal to let it have Donbas and Crimea....that's far more than US ever got for anything....you're grasping at straws...
No, you weren't.
What makes you think that you were? Have you taken an IQ test yet? I think you would score between 90 and 100.

It took you days and this is the best you came up with? Underwhelming...

I am a person of average intelligence so 100-110 is a good guess at my IQ level.
 
For a video made 5h ago this dude is terrible outdated.
Every other pro ukraine channel is talking about the Zolotyi Kolodyaz breaktrough that happened north of that, whoever made this video didnt register it on the map. The probblem with the breaktrough it's that they simply took very good defensive positions. You cant just rain down drones there.

I get the information as it comes and the battlfield is fluid.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top