Putin responds by proposing a temporary cease-fire in exchange for a resumed US suspension of arms shipments to Ukraine and a suspension on further Ukrainian military mobilization.
I was a bit hesitant to read this column as I thought you might be supportive of Trump's rather odd about turn re Zelensky. However, you have not disappointed and I agree with much of what you say here. It's a real shame about whoever has changed Trump's approach.
I can see though that Trump is in a difficult place with so many people being afflicted by their hate for Russia at any cost attitudes as, well as a big dollop of TDS.
When Zelensky was doing his really brazen act at the White House meeting it did cross my mind that someone had put him up to it and it had to be someone he would trust to support him fully. It made me wonder about the British involvement then. I'm a Brit who doesn't support her government one inch. Nor the last umpteen British governments. I wasn't at all surprised to read here (and in a UK newspaper) of Jonathan Powell, our new-ish National Security Adviser, coming up with the most ridiculous ceasefire proposals which Zelensky grabbed with both hands.
Luckily one man has kept his head. You have to hand it to Putin that he hasn't fallen into Rubio's trap of dismissing the ridiculous ceasefire plan outright and has instead countered with his proposals whilst sounding statesman-like and as well as emphasizing how he's all for peace. Bad luck Rubio.
Perhaps Witkoff was the right man to send despite his lower rank. The American higher ranks appear to have lost the plot somewhat.
With Putin's well tempered response plus the acknowledgment (at last) in all the Western media that Kursk is a failure, there is still much hope that there will be peace. I'm being optimistic.
As regards China. I think there is little chance that the US will prise Russia away from the understanding they have with China. I was always doubtful of this even when Trump was being more Russia positive but with all this US flip flopping? I know who I would trust as a partner and it wouldn't be the US. Sorry.
Yes its sad to see that the UK Labour Government has been so hostile to Russia in trying to prolong the killing of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and the loss of its territory to Russia while at the same time trying to provoke Russia to attack NATO. I think if war were to break out with Russia and NATO, the UK would be the first Russian target though that will change if Poland gets the US or France to deploy nukes to its territory making it the first target of a Russian pre-emptive strike, that would likely be nuclear. With regards to China, I don't think its possible for Trump to get Russia to annul its military alliance with the PRC but if we established our own entente/strategic partnership with Russia we could neutralize their military alliance with the PRC to make it of no effect.
Yes, that's a good point about neutralising the threat.
I read that somewhere before (probably in one of your columns!) and thought it very much a possibility,, but have since rather lost sight of it. A timely reminder. Thank you.
David, I intend to write a letter to the White House that President Trump needs to fire Mike Waltz. I will also warn him against starting a war with Iran. Please let me know what you think of the draft I have posted here:
"Dear Mr. President,
I am one of 77 million people who voted for you last November. The main reason I voted for you was to bring peace to the world. You have been disappointing me for the past few weeks with your rhetoric regarding Iran, and, most recently, your announcement that you are angry with Putin for the slow progress on peace talks.
During your inaugural speech, you made the following statement: 'Like in 2017, we will again build the strongest military the world has ever seen. We will measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.'
If you get us into a war with Iran, not only will you fail to achieve your proudest legacy of being a peacemaker and a unifier, but you will also subject our nation to devastating cyber attacks on our electrical grid.
Please also fire Mike Waltz. Not only was he grossly negligent when he organized that Signal chat with the Atlantic Reporter, but he is also an America-Last neocon. Most importantly, he believes that the United States should come to Taiwan's defense in the event of a Chinese invasion or blockade. Defending Taiwan militarily against China will also result in devastating cyber attacks on America's electrical grid, along with a likely EMP attack.
If you still want a legacy of being a peacemaker and a unifier, you must NOT start wars with Iran and China. You must also stop all military aid to Ukraine and negotiate a peace plan with President Putin without Zelenskyy's involvement."
Please let me know of any changes you think I should make. I also request that you post my draft letter so your 9,000+ followers can also write to the White House with a similar message. Here is the link to contact the White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
"In fact, you even previously called him a "Dictator without elections", and you were absolutely correct in doing so.
Please think very carefully about your peacemaking goals, and the lives of the American people before you make threats to bomb Iran, before your next call with President Putin and when your are confronted with Chinese aggression against Taiwan."
- I fear the US will try to attack China's most vulnerable spot. The "weak" financial situation of China. China is NOT "in the best of financial shapes".
China is much stronger economically than the US is with an industrial base nearly four times larger. We can hurt them financially and economically but their ability to hurt us is greater unfortunately.
- I must admit that I don't have the numbers at hand about the industrial base but I do know that China's Debt-to-GDP ratio is at 290%. Perhaps the chinese economy is larger than that the US economy. But chinese domestic demand is weak as a result of the low chinese household's share of GDP. It's among the lowest in the world, if not THE lowest in the world.
- Let's assume that chinese production is at say 100 and - as a result of low chinese household income - household consumption is at 60 then it's no wonder that the remaining (100 - 60 =) 40 is exported to the rest of the world. It makes China very vulnerable to changes in demand in e.g. the US and Europe, etc..
- Mr. Micheal Pettis explained why China is in such deep do-do.
No it doesn't. Thanks to their massive nuclear buildup which is being completed later this year, China has substantial nuclear superiority over us. Xi has calculated that the risks of war are lower with Trump in office because of his aversion to WW3 so he is likely to blockade Taiwan by 2027 but as soon as early next month.
Because US intelligence is politicized and engages in Chinese and Iranian threat deflation and liberal media believes everything they are told to believe by the globalists without question.
Words of a true expert!
Thanks Chet!
I was a bit hesitant to read this column as I thought you might be supportive of Trump's rather odd about turn re Zelensky. However, you have not disappointed and I agree with much of what you say here. It's a real shame about whoever has changed Trump's approach.
I can see though that Trump is in a difficult place with so many people being afflicted by their hate for Russia at any cost attitudes as, well as a big dollop of TDS.
When Zelensky was doing his really brazen act at the White House meeting it did cross my mind that someone had put him up to it and it had to be someone he would trust to support him fully. It made me wonder about the British involvement then. I'm a Brit who doesn't support her government one inch. Nor the last umpteen British governments. I wasn't at all surprised to read here (and in a UK newspaper) of Jonathan Powell, our new-ish National Security Adviser, coming up with the most ridiculous ceasefire proposals which Zelensky grabbed with both hands.
Luckily one man has kept his head. You have to hand it to Putin that he hasn't fallen into Rubio's trap of dismissing the ridiculous ceasefire plan outright and has instead countered with his proposals whilst sounding statesman-like and as well as emphasizing how he's all for peace. Bad luck Rubio.
Perhaps Witkoff was the right man to send despite his lower rank. The American higher ranks appear to have lost the plot somewhat.
With Putin's well tempered response plus the acknowledgment (at last) in all the Western media that Kursk is a failure, there is still much hope that there will be peace. I'm being optimistic.
As regards China. I think there is little chance that the US will prise Russia away from the understanding they have with China. I was always doubtful of this even when Trump was being more Russia positive but with all this US flip flopping? I know who I would trust as a partner and it wouldn't be the US. Sorry.
Yes its sad to see that the UK Labour Government has been so hostile to Russia in trying to prolong the killing of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and the loss of its territory to Russia while at the same time trying to provoke Russia to attack NATO. I think if war were to break out with Russia and NATO, the UK would be the first Russian target though that will change if Poland gets the US or France to deploy nukes to its territory making it the first target of a Russian pre-emptive strike, that would likely be nuclear. With regards to China, I don't think its possible for Trump to get Russia to annul its military alliance with the PRC but if we established our own entente/strategic partnership with Russia we could neutralize their military alliance with the PRC to make it of no effect.
Yes, that's a good point about neutralising the threat.
I read that somewhere before (probably in one of your columns!) and thought it very much a possibility,, but have since rather lost sight of it. A timely reminder. Thank you.
David, I intend to write a letter to the White House that President Trump needs to fire Mike Waltz. I will also warn him against starting a war with Iran. Please let me know what you think of the draft I have posted here:
"Dear Mr. President,
I am one of 77 million people who voted for you last November. The main reason I voted for you was to bring peace to the world. You have been disappointing me for the past few weeks with your rhetoric regarding Iran, and, most recently, your announcement that you are angry with Putin for the slow progress on peace talks.
During your inaugural speech, you made the following statement: 'Like in 2017, we will again build the strongest military the world has ever seen. We will measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.'
If you get us into a war with Iran, not only will you fail to achieve your proudest legacy of being a peacemaker and a unifier, but you will also subject our nation to devastating cyber attacks on our electrical grid.
Please also fire Mike Waltz. Not only was he grossly negligent when he organized that Signal chat with the Atlantic Reporter, but he is also an America-Last neocon. Most importantly, he believes that the United States should come to Taiwan's defense in the event of a Chinese invasion or blockade. Defending Taiwan militarily against China will also result in devastating cyber attacks on America's electrical grid, along with a likely EMP attack.
If you still want a legacy of being a peacemaker and a unifier, you must NOT start wars with Iran and China. You must also stop all military aid to Ukraine and negotiate a peace plan with President Putin without Zelenskyy's involvement."
Please let me know of any changes you think I should make. I also request that you post my draft letter so your 9,000+ followers can also write to the White House with a similar message. Here is the link to contact the White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
That's a great letter! Please forward it to the White House.
Just done!
I also added the following clauses:
"In fact, you even previously called him a "Dictator without elections", and you were absolutely correct in doing so.
Please think very carefully about your peacemaking goals, and the lives of the American people before you make threats to bomb Iran, before your next call with President Putin and when your are confronted with Chinese aggression against Taiwan."
I also included in my letter links to two of your articles (https://dpyne.substack.com/p/a-proposal-to-avert-the-outbreak) and (https://dpyne.substack.com/p/why-a-grand-comprehensive-peace-settlement) as well as the following:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/on-iran-what-would-pat-buchanan-do/
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/trump-iran-2671616967/
- Larry Johnson's take on the "Cease Fire" proposal:
https://sonar21.com/regarding-a-ceasefire-putin-says-it-is-about-nuance/
- I fear the US will try to attack China's most vulnerable spot. The "weak" financial situation of China. China is NOT "in the best of financial shapes".
China is much stronger economically than the US is with an industrial base nearly four times larger. We can hurt them financially and economically but their ability to hurt us is greater unfortunately.
- I must admit that I don't have the numbers at hand about the industrial base but I do know that China's Debt-to-GDP ratio is at 290%. Perhaps the chinese economy is larger than that the US economy. But chinese domestic demand is weak as a result of the low chinese household's share of GDP. It's among the lowest in the world, if not THE lowest in the world.
- Let's assume that chinese production is at say 100 and - as a result of low chinese household income - household consumption is at 60 then it's no wonder that the remaining (100 - 60 =) 40 is exported to the rest of the world. It makes China very vulnerable to changes in demand in e.g. the US and Europe, etc..
- Mr. Micheal Pettis explained why China is in such deep do-do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWOfETepcRk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE5VczIFGZA
What would China risk Ww3 now to blockade Taiwan ?
The USA appears to have substantial nuclear superiority over China ?
No it doesn't. Thanks to their massive nuclear buildup which is being completed later this year, China has substantial nuclear superiority over us. Xi has calculated that the risks of war are lower with Trump in office because of his aversion to WW3 so he is likely to blockade Taiwan by 2027 but as soon as early next month.
So why do podcasters and journalists continue to say that Iran has no nukes and China has a small nuclear stockpile of about 600 warheads ?
Because US intelligence is politicized and engages in Chinese and Iranian threat deflation and liberal media believes everything they are told to believe by the globalists without question.
But many podcasters also say all the time that Iran has no nuclear weapons
So how can they call be so wrong