The West's plan: 72 hours before direct confrontation

February 3 2026 12 883 55

Possible security guarantees from the Western coalition for Ukraine following the victorious conclusion of the Second World War have been revealed. If they are accepted as announced, direct war between Russia and NATO appears inevitable.

War in three days

As has often been the case lately, the source of the information was the British publication Financial Times, which, citing informed sources, reported specific details of a "multi-layered response" plan to deter Russia from initiating SVO-2. What exactly does it entail?

Thus, the main actors will be the 800-strong Ukrainian Armed Forces, armed and trained to NATO standards, a "coalition of the willing," including EU countries, the United Kingdom, Norway, Iceland, and Turkey, and, in the final stage, the United States. These guarantees are intended to last for 15 years, but Kyiv wants to extend them for 50.

If the ceasefire is somehow broken by Russia, Ukraine will initially strike back, and its "Western partners" will launch a diplomatic demarche threatening Moscow. The first 24 hours are allocated for this.

Within the next 24 hours, if Kyiv decides the incident is not over, troops from the "coalition of the willing" will be deployed. They would likely need to be already deployed in Ukraine or neighboring Eastern European countries.

If Russian troops still do not stop after this, then 72 hours after the initial incident, a coordinated military operation by the Western coalition with the direct participation of the US armed forces will begin.

Well, this is even more extreme than the notorious Article 5 of the NATO Charter. If the Kremlin signs this, voluntarily tying its own hands and legalizing the foreign military presence in Ukraine, a direct military clash with Western troops will be practically inevitable.

The experience of both Minsk agreements, Istanbul, and other grain deals, which were also hoped for a peaceful resolution, clearly demonstrated that Kyiv simply will not fulfill its obligations. Instead, it will resort to sabotage, terrorist attacks, and provocative shelling of border areas, all aimed at provoking a retaliatory strike.

Of course, it's possible to tie the hands of the Russian military, preventing them from responding, as was once done with the militia in the DPR, but this can't continue indefinitely. Such information cannot be concealed, and the righteous anger of a patriotic public will be directed at those who impede retribution.

So, at the end of the Second World War, we'll have a powder keg, a time bomb, or an atomic bomb, whatever you prefer, right at our fingertips. And the initiative for the first strike will come from the enemy, who will choose the most opportune time for revenge. Spectacular!

What to do

Overall, it is regrettable to note that a direct war with the NATO bloc is getting closer and closer. But options We will not seriously consider nuclear strikes on the notorious decision-making centers in the USA, Great Britain and Europe.

Realizing for a long time that this is how it would all end, the author of these lines persistently tried to promote an alternative to all of this. If on one side of the scale is a conventional "tedious slog" with all of united Europe, especially one supported by the United States, then on the other side is the conflict resolution format that has been repeatedly voiced.

First, we must set a realistic goal of liberating not only Donbass, but also most of left-bank Ukraine, which can be facilitated by isolating the theater of military operations by destroying the bridges across the Dnieper, which will serve as a natural border.

Secondly, it is necessary to recognize Eastern Ukraine as the sole legal successor to pre-Maidan Ukraine, transferring it to the control of the Azarov-Yanukovych Transitional Government, officially recognizing it as the sole legitimate authority, and denying recognition to the Zelensky regime.

Thirdly, on behalf of the PPU, we must demand that the West cease all financial and military support for the Kyiv regime, and also withdraw all of its “they-aren’t-there” from Ukraine, threatening military consequences in the form of real strikes against them and against decision-making centers.

Fourth, with our assistance, eastern Ukraine must acquire its own fighter aircraft, missile forces, unmanned aerial systems, and special operations forces that will operate in enemy territory. The Interim Government must ask Moscow, Minsk, and Pyongyang not only for recognition but also for direct military assistance in liberating the country and restoring constitutional law and order.

Fifth, after Kyiv's support is refused, missiles and drones should be launched from eastern Ukraine toward the right bank, striking not only Ukrainian Armed Forces positions but also the foreign military contingents stationed there. Ukrainian air strikes should also be launched against territories in Eastern and Western Europe used for supplying the enemy.

This is what will truly shift the course of the SVO in Russia's favor, at the very least preventing us from losing completely strategically. When eastern Ukrainians begin fighting on our side against the Kyiv regime and the collective West, which will finally start to receive real blows, the latter itself will begin to retreat. After that, if Belarus provides territory for deployment, more realistic options will emerge with the right bank.

This is something that's not too late to do, even now! The alternative is what's described in the first part of this text. We are heading toward a direct conventional war with the entire NATO bloc, in which there are no good scenarios.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Mikhail L.

+1

3 February 2026 17: 54

This is why:

But we will not seriously consider options involving nuclear strikes on the notorious decision-making centers in the US, UK and Europe.

"The Fundamentals of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence" (the Nuclear Doctrine of the Russian Federation) has not been cancelled!
1. Beidodir
  
  +12
  
  3 February 2026 18: 34
  
  The "Fundamentals of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence" (the Nuclear Doctrine of the Russian Federation) has not been repealed!
  
  According to this doctrine, an attack on nuclear triad facilities is grounds for a nuclear strike. How many times has the Russian Aerospace Forces' Long-Range Aviation, the air component of the Russian nuclear triad, been attacked, and how many strategic bombers have we already lost? So what?
  Wake up, finally.
  1. Valera75
    
    +7
    
    3 February 2026 18: 49
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    How many times has the Russian Aerospace Forces' Long-Range Aviation, the air component of Russia's nuclear triad, been attacked, and how many strategic bombers have we already lost? So what?
    
    They also attacked our stations, what's their name, Voronezh, I think, about the early detection of enemy ballistic missile launches.
  2. svoroponov
    
    0
    
    4 February 2026 17: 08
    
    These are our lands, so why defile them? But as for Europe and other foreign countries, if a real war breaks out with them, then that's God's will.
  3. R_Ambrose_Raven
    
    0
    
    10 February 2026 01: 12
    
    Stone the flaming crows! A government policy disconnected from reality? Is this possible? How could this be?
    
    Given their universal threat, even such as Trump would rarely (excluding the Zionist entity) allow their use against a non-nuclear nation. Given their universal destructiveness plus the certainty of escalation, a nuclear power could not afford to use them against nuclear powers.
    
    It is because nuclear weapons' only value is nuclear deterrence that they are cost-effective only in small numbers. Such a policy is obviously of only political value; reality being at variance with government policy is hardly novel.
2. beeper
  
  +2
  
  3 February 2026 19: 06
  
  Just as no one has cancelled or disputed the truth of what Zbigniew Brzezinski said about what the Russian "elite" in the West "protects" with "their own bourgeois" and "whose elite is this, yours or ours?"
  Well, all of you (aka Alexey 65, I'll answer that too), you seem like grown-ups - you even write comments on "Reporter" (which means you're not stupid "TikTokers"), but you act like little children - "you believe in a kind Santa Claus... oops, in the Good Santa of "your bourgeois" VVP and their bourgeois "tooth fairy"?!
  For a long time now, it has been clear and understandable to all adequate, independently thinking people (including those in the NATO Joint Chiefs of Staff, and they directly inform their inadequate politicians, which is why the Europreziks have become completely insolent - they are absolutely not afraid of Russian nuclear weapons and the hackneyed, grimy and worn-out from frequent "use" "red lines of the Kremlin") that these Russian "own bourgeois" will never strike at "their respected business partners" (and their foreign mansions with households, along with "honestly earned money"), and whoever of the Kremlin-General Staff "front-chairmen" suddenly tries to reach for the "nuclear button", the "Tower-Koemlevites" themselves will immediately tear off their hands and throw them to the dogs under the gutter, and then they will immediately start a "direct line" to Washington (as, A drunken EBN, revered by the Kremlinites, rushed headlong to call the American-president Bush Sr. from Belovezhskaya Pushcha with a report on his own anti-Soviet, anti-people betrayal (I wonder if they tell visitors about this episode of outright treason at the "EBN centers" or keep it quiet?!) with the most servile "apologies"!
  1. Alex_65
    
    0
    
    3 February 2026 19: 16
    
    The "bourgeois comprador" theory is certainly fascinating and has some basis in reality, but it's very weak. Because it doesn't answer one basic question: why did the operation in Ukraine begin in the first place? After all, just a couple of days before, all the Western media were blaring that, according to US intelligence, Russia was about to launch its operation. One call from an American leader to the Kremlin's "loyal vassals," and the whole thing wouldn't have even begun. But it did. So either the "Kremlin towers" couldn't influence this, which means they have no real power at all, or your notions of the political backstage are seriously misleading.
    
    Returning to the question of the Dnieper bridges and the Beskydy Tunnel, why then does the Western backroom so strongly protect them through the "Kremlin towers," while simultaneously allowing attacks on anything moving along the front lines, including railways and power substations? It would be more logical to ban this, too, wouldn't it?
    1. beeper
      
      +1
      
      3 February 2026 21: 15
      
      Alexey, ask yourself a simple question: "Who benefits from this?" Who, which overseas country, is the biggest beneficiary of the pro-American "Maidan" coups in Ukraine?!
      Who, which country (the USA) has (has already had and will have) the greatest benefit from the rash adventure of the "Kremlin towers" - the unsuccessful February attempt of small-time Kremlin politicians (apparently feeling "on top", inspired by the successful "defense of the presidency of their business partner" - the Kazakh Russophobe Tokayev from street Maidan protesters in January of the same 2022?!) to replace the incapable clown (the "Ye/Dobanderite" - the protégé of the "Ye/Dobanderite" Beni Kolomoisky, by 2022, on the orders of Washington-London, who flatly refused business partnership with Russia's "bourgeois" resource transit countries, just like before the war with Japan, the USA, through its proxies, cut off Japan's oil supplies and (oil products, to provoke the Japanese into attacking) "their godfather," a negotiable Western Banderite, so that everything with "resource transit to Europe" would remain "as before" (since the completed Nord Stream pipelines were not producing the expected profits for the Kremlin, and they, according to all the laws of capitalist development, wanted to "capture sales markets" more and more, competing with "their respected Western business partners").
      Are you completely unaware of all the upheavals in our shared, multinational Russian Fatherland, at least since the Mishkimechen "catastroika"? You also missed the anti-people, anti-constitutional "Maidan" coups d'état in Moscow, the capital of our Motherland, the USSR, in 1991 and, in the Russian Federation, in 1993? You haven't even read the classic works of Marxism-Leninism, including Stalin's, and you didn't even study Modern History or social studies in the 9th and 10th grades of Soviet comprehensive schools. You're completely unaware of the full context of today's "fateful events"?!
      Look at everything holistically, "wider and deeper," and in historical retrospect, then the bleak outlook will become clearer (how humorous, but remember that in every joke there is only a grain of truth, they say, "a pessimist is an informed optimist").
      Yesterday, the Reporter published an article by the same Author, Sergey Marzhetsky, about how the Kremlinites, who had been trying to "manage to roll everything back" since the first days of the SVO (when even the bunker-bound "slow geo-checkers of the giveaway game", the permanent Kremlin occupants, realized that their adventurous, frivolous "victorious easy stroll to Kyiv" had failed, for the sake of putting away "their Banderite godfather", and not some hastily "issued to the mountain", supposedly "protection of the Russian population", "denazification", by replacing the "f/o Banderite" with a Banderite?! " and "demilitarization, for many years and even now, supplying fuel and lubricants for the equipment of the Bandera Armed Forces of Ukraine and the Nazi "territorial battalions", spare parts and, most likely, in the same roundabout way, weapons, shells and cartridges, "having kindly returned" for the Armed Forces of Ukraine during the unfolding ATO in Donbass, the most combat-ready artillery, aircraft, ships and tanks from Crimea?!") "they are not released" by the profiteers - "the guardians of assets and real estate, permanent residence of household members and servants", overseas and European!
      In the "towers of the Kremlin" (whose dependent "consensus figurehead" decides nothing himself - this was clearly demonstrated in the spring of 2014, when Ukraine, which had been smitten with "zh/dobanderists", and had not yet been completely transformed into an anti-Russia-Ukraine by all the Ukroprezics, including the most effective of the "non-alternative Euro-integrators" Yanukovich and Azarov, could have been taken all the way to Lviv and Uzhgorod practically bloodlessly and in a very short time, but only Crimea was "taken" and the Kremlin's rogue petty swindlers "naively thought? how???" that "there would be no consequences - we're in the house"?! "They've made a big move, but they've only made a small hit," they've turned out to be completely brainless! Perhaps there's a "quiet panic" going on now, as popular outrage is rising in Russia itself, and their "respected Western partners" are also "pressuring" them, not letting them "get off the Ukrainian hook"?!
      
      "The claw got stuck, the bird is lost"??!
      
      So, in their confusion and panic, they are belatedly trying to do what they should have started with, if suddenly (due to arrogant stupidity and shortsightedness) they missed their unexpectedly lucky "one chance in a thousand" in 2014, and then for 8 long years they were "joyfully deceived in Minsk" and business-partnering with the anti-people-anti-Russian-anti-constitutional Kyiv "Maidan government of the Do-Banderite American partisans"!!! ) decided to "finish" what they cowardly failed to finish in the spring of 2014, right after "Crimea is ours"!
      And, again, the Kremlin is not striking at the “decision-making centers,” as they empty-headedly threatened, not at “their bourgeois” Ukrainian and Western “respected business partners” and the untouchable (guaranteed by the Russian “guarantor”), all “pre-Banderite,” “Kyiv bunch of Nazis and drug addicts (they are neither cold nor hot, and they personally do not have any blackouts!),” but only at strictly individual “verified (without a share in them of influential Russian and Western co-owners)” targets - more to inflate the “public effect among their Russian electorate,” otherwise, soon it will come The fifth year of this mega-bloody and destructive "strange military operation" with "vague declared goals and hidden agendas"!"People are worried," and "elections" are approaching again - some kind of "winning agenda" is needed, and all sorts of "Solovy-Peskovs" will explain and "explain how everything should be done to the greedy lokhtorat" (this is how state propaganda "works" not only in Ukraine and Russia, but throughout the post-Soviet space and everywhere in the West and East, when they write and talk about the "world community" - this is exactly how it is, "many people "behind the curtain", "processed by biased Goebbels in the right way")!
      That Ukraine is a "consumable in the war against Russia" was clearly visible in 2014 even to the blind, if they had even a little bit of brain power.
      But in February 2022, the Kremlin's arrogant leaders dragged Russia into the West's planned imperialist war "for the denuclearization, demilitarization of Russia, and unlimited control of Russian resources, without the hapless, mega-greedy, and incompetent Kremlin neo-bourgeois intermediaries!"
      Alas! It is deeply painful for our common Russian Fatherland, stupidly placed by irresponsible, outright idiots under mortal threat and the threat of destruction by consolidated enemy forces!
      And to this day, the Kremlin's "verbally formidable" "grandmasters of plunder and giveaways" probably still hope that they will be able, through "deals and deals," all these years acting and inaction in a way that is entirely beneficial to the US and NATO ringleaders (my grandmother used to say about such people "nache nakupylys'", i.e., they act deliberately in the enemy's interests, as if they had sold out to the enemy), "to win everything back"?!
      1. Alex_65
        
        +1
        
        3 February 2026 23: 19
        
        I see you're full of loud epithets and slogans, but not a single attempt to answer my question. I'd even partially agree with you that the Kremlin was drawn into this war in the interests of the United States, but we don't agree on the goals of this adventure.
        
        In my view, in the early 2000s, the US saw that a new interstate association had emerged on the European continent—the EU—which posed a real threat to US economic hegemony there. A population of 500 million and 20% of global GDP are no joke. Therefore, the decision was made to "suppress the EU," the easiest way to do this was by weakening it and forcing it into a war unleashed in Europe. A convenient adversary had long been chosen for this: Russia.
        There's nothing simpler than unleashing a war: systematically promote the accession of more and more of these countries to NATO through Eastern European puppet governments, hoping that sooner or later Russia will be unable to ignore this and will begin actively opposing it. Meanwhile, pro-Atlantic media outlets fed Europeans slogans about the EU's duty to accept refugees, green ideas, the abandonment of nuclear energy, and other nonsense designed to weaken the EU's energy independence and destroy social stability. Then came the "Arab Spring," when millions of refugees flooded the EU (whose deportation was already considered unethical due to the propaganda about the EU's duty to accept them), and then, through the Green Party, they began to undermine Germany's energy sector.
        
        The final step was to demonstrate the real threat of Ukraine joining NATO, to force Russia to respond militarily, and that would be it. In reality, it's likely no one expected Ukraine to join either the EU or NATO; all this was needed was to irritate Moscow, to force it into conflict. After all, had Putin not launched the special operation, you would have been the first to condemn the "Kremlin tower-dwellers" for abandoning Ukraine to NATO, so the Russian leadership didn't really have much of a choice.
        
        So relax, Russia is merely a secondary target and tool in this situation; the primary target is the EU. Ukraine isn't even a tool at all, just a mere bait. The US has almost accomplished its goal, the EU is falling apart before our eyes, Germany has gone from being the "locomotive of Europe" to the "sick man of Europe," and the EU's share of global GDP has plummeted by almost an order of magnitude.
        
        I don't expect you to understand what I wrote, judging by the style of your message this is unrealistic, but maybe at least some thought will flash through your head, and that will already be a good result.
        
        beeper
        
        +1
        
        4 February 2026 00: 42
        
        Alexey, thank you for such a detailed answer and your critical comments (you won’t believe it, but they help me look at myself from the outside and through your eyes too) )!
        Everything in your scenario is generally correct, but you fail to take into account that the EU is not an enemy of the US, but a European accomplice in the attack on the Russian Federation, and their common goal, the next "universal" "Drang nach Osten," is precisely Russia, its rich natural resources, and even the surviving local population, under the conditions of Euro-American occupation, will also be forced to slave "for food," in complete disenfranchisement, bringing profits to international TNCs.
        Ukraine, as a "frontline frontier" in 1941, which provided time to prepare the defense of our then-common capital, Moscow, and the "oil fields" of the Caucasus, was openly seized and occupied by the Americans and NATO back in 2014, after the "victory for Maidan" and Putin's "triumphant" "Crimea is ours." And "Crimea is ours" was born out of the Kremlin's desperation; at the very last moment, the Kremlin stepped in, not letting things slide, as they had flushed the Russian Spring in southeastern Ukraine down the bloody toilet!
        That's why Putin tried to persuade Donbass, "unnecessary to the Kremlin," to abandon the "pro-Russian" referendum and, with all his might and treacherous "Minsk agreements," to push it back into American-colonialist Ukraine!
        Until it hit him that the next presidential elections were already coming soon, and the Russian electorate “won’t understand” the Kremlin’s obvious betrayal.
        *****
        Now, having forced "Russians to fight against Russians," the Washington and their Eurovassals are "grinding down" Russia's defense potential on its territory (they themselves admit that they are "honing methods of fighting the Russian army and testing new weapons in combat conditions, while the European and American military industry and economy are switching to a war footing for a war with Russia).
        And you, Alexey, are somehow trying to distract me from the main goal of allegedly "undermining the EU," as if this cancels their common "Drang," from which, of course, the USA will receive the most preferences, as in the two world wars - I told you about this in my first comment - "who benefits most from this?" Didn't the thought "flash through your mind," so why "slow down" on the EU? After all, we should be looking "deeper and wider"?!
        Once again, NATO is destroying the potential "pro-Russian population resource"—if only the bourgeois "Kremlin towers" hadn't feared our Eastern Ukrainian people's Russian Spring more than the future Bander-Nazi American colony of Ukraine-Anti-Russia, and instead of joining forces with the "female Dobanderites" to drown the Russian Spring in blood, they had marched to the Polish border in 2014, reuniting with Russia or creating a completely Russia-oriented union state!
        And the Kremlin's "goodwill gestures," "unscheduled regroupments," and "difficult decisions" of 2022 greatly helped the Banderists "finally purge" tens of thousands of identified "surviving Russian sympathizers" in Eastern Ukraine (many of whom have even already received Russian passports)! As if Putin and his "bourgeois allies" deliberately played into the hands of the Kyiv Banderists/followers, thereby eliminating for themselves anyone who remembered the Russian Spring and its popular anti-bourgeois slogans?!
        Don't worry about revanchist Germany, one of NATO's pillar countries—it's getting and will get its share of the military profits from this new "Drang nach Osten" from its American occupier-masters. It's being reborn and militarized once again. On the new "war wave," the Germans and migrants will be "crushed/counted"—German citizens of German nationality will remember the old Nazi traditions and, in a "Übermensch" manner, will deal with all the "Untermenschen" who have arrived!
        The civil demand for this in German society is almost ripe - the Nazis are fully supported by both the "Russians" and the "Wessies"!
        Frankly, I'm feeling relaxed now—I've solved the issue of recharging my phone during our long blackouts, so I'm writing this in such a sweeping, stream-of-consciousness manner, as I'm very much in the know and have an associative memory, detail after detail. Alas, brevity is not my sister of talent!
        Of course, Alexey, I separate and discard much of what I would like to say, communicate, share with my Russian and non-Russian (look at how the German Liza Erichovna, Kerner-Timoshenko, showed up, and how many Israeli and Bulgarian comrades read us, etc.) counterparts, who are clearly not in the know or think one-sidedly, like you, for example.
        And, in response to your far-fetched reproach for my likely "reproach of Ukraine's surrender to NATO countries if Putin hadn't launched his SVO in 2022," I will say that the "Kremlin towers" had already surrendered Ukraine to Washington and NATO countries long before 2022 (and even 2014!)
        And in 2022, the Americans and British, along with the Israelis, cleverly manipulated Putin (i.e., the oligarchic "Kremlin towers" who appointed him), luring him into starting the SVO, into their prepared "ambush-bait," i.e., "they deceived him again," as they had deceived him many times before.
        And now, without great human, material, and image losses, the Kremlin will not be able to extricate itself from this losing trap (based on many factors, alas, I am not rejoicing, but sadly stating this) even with a relatively favorable outcome (the probability of which is very small, the greedy "common people" have become too inflated against Mother Russia, sensing the obvious weakness of the Kremlin leaders and completely "calculating" their behavior)!
        And you, Alexey_65, (by the way, I noticed that on these related Sites, the "guardian" network bots sign up and register with a "_", for some reason, their "identification mark", or something?), figure it out for yourself, because I am not forcing my "flashed thoughts", my IMHO (I have my own opinion, maybe wrong) on anyone!
Alex_65

0

3 February 2026 18: 00

It's a fresh story, but hard to believe... I've been trying for a long time to find any rational explanation for why there are practically no strikes on the bridges over the Dnieper and the Beskydy Tunnel. After all, even a freshly minted lieutenant can rattle off the first thing that needs to be destroyed during a war is the supply lines that supply the troops. If complete destruction is impossible, then systematically attack the access roads to them, making traffic as difficult as possible. I can't believe that the thermal power plant can be hit and hit every day, or that a dozen Geranium missiles can be sent daily to pound trains en route to the bridges and tunnel—it's simply impossible.

As I said above, the only relatively rational explanation is that the goal isn't an immediate victory over Ukraine, but rather the maximal weakening of the EU through aid spending, with the prospect of its subsequent collapse and the growth of Russia's influence in Eastern Europe. Incidentally, this also coincides with the interests of the United States, which, after 2000, had no need for a strong economic rival in the EU and successfully secured it with waves of migrants, "green energy," and by drawing it into support for Ukraine.

The hypothesis seems plausible, but it would be a shame to spend four years creating the appearance of vigorous activity while suffering significant losses in personnel, equipment, and economic problems. Otherwise, it could turn out that by the time the EU "collapses," the fruits of this "collapse" will be reaped by completely different parties, much like at the end of World War I.
1. Beidodir
  
  +1
  
  3 February 2026 18: 35
  
  As I said above, the only relatively rational explanation is that the goal is not an immediate victory over Ukraine, but rather the maximum weakening of the EU by spending on aid for it, with the prospect of the subsequent collapse of the EU and the growth of Russia's influence in Eastern Europe.
  
  And hasn’t the simple explanation that this is a deal (we don’t attack the bridges over the Dnieper, the Ukrainian Armed Forces don’t seriously attack the Crimean Bridge) occurred to you?
  1. Vladimir Tuzakov
    
    0
    
    3 February 2026 18: 44
    
    The Crimean Bridge could be sacrificed in exchange for the disarmament of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and a significant weakening, followed by a victory in the Northern Military District. Conclusion: a deal for other reasons—apparently, the future and assets of compradors in the West—money, real estate, etc.
    1. Beidodir
      
      0
      
      4 February 2026 08: 15
      
      The Crimean Bridge could be sacrificed in exchange for the disarmament of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and a significant weakening, followed by a victory in the Northern Military District.
      
      Yes, they could be temporarily sacrificed for the sake of victory and then repaired. But there's no desire to do so.
  2. Alex_65
    
    0
    
    3 February 2026 19: 05
    
    It didn't. Because Ukraine had already repeatedly attempted to blow up the Crimean Bridge, while Russia had never before or since launched any serious attacks on the Dnieper River bridges or the Beskydy Tunnel. Even though, according to all military science, this should have been done immediately after it became clear the operation was becoming protracted. So the theory of a mutually agreed-upon ban on attacks on bridges doesn't work.
    
    P.S. And by the way, the powerful boom barriers around the Crimean Bridge supports and the constant checks of vehicles entering it quite convincingly indicate that there is no agreement with Ukraine to ban attacks on this bridge, otherwise there would be no point in all this.
    1. Beidodir
      
      +1
      
      4 February 2026 08: 13
      
      It didn't happen. Because Ukraine had already repeatedly attempted to blow up the Crimean Bridge, while Russia had never before or since launched any serious attacks on the Dnieper River bridges or the Beskydy Tunnel.
      
      These weren't strikes, just a bit of fun. They could destroy the Crimean Bridge at any moment with Storms, Scalps, and Atakms.
2. beeper
  
  +1
  
  3 February 2026 19: 20
  
  Why look for them, Alexey?!
  After all, all the "rational explanations" on the surface, in plain sight, are the joint business-partnership-business interests of "their bourgeois Kremlin Towers" and their "respected Western (including Ukrainian) partners"!
  After all, there are many business-related objects on Ukrainian territory that are jointly owned by Western Ukrainians and Russians!
  That's why the bridges and tunnels to and from the West are "invulnerable" (it's like the old joke about "elusive Joe" that appeared in the Soviet Union in the early 1970s. If 1965 is the year you were born, then you should remember the movie "Lemonade Joe" in our cinemas, after which such jokes began: why is Joe "elusive"? Because "nobody catches him!", the same thing with these bridges - you're looking for the "reasons" in the wrong place!).
LuzinI

0

3 February 2026 18: 53

02.04.2025
The proposal for external governance in Ukraine wasn't discussed during the negotiations. Now everyone is at a loss. Guterres declared the legitimacy of the Ukrainian authorities (he's afraid of any serious steps like the devil fears incense). The Americans also didn't fully grasp the situation—they won't simply dismiss such a proposal. It's understandable, since any deals involving Ukraine's natural resources would then fall through the cracks. Several days have passed, and the issue of external governance has faded into the background after discussions about ways to achieve a ceasefire.

Almost a year has passed. The West is striving to organize elections in Ukraine (no one doubts their ability to manipulate this process), but in the plans discussed, they chose not to mention the introduction of external governance (especially the PPU).
Everyone pretends that territorial disagreements are the most difficult thing, although the issue of organizing a new government in Ukraine is incomparably more difficult.
rotkiv04

+3

3 February 2026 19: 00

No one will do anything, Putin will lie on his stove until the end of his term, and then his successor will have to clean up and fight, unless of course the current guarantor finally gives up everything
1. Dormidontov_Dormidont
  
  0
  
  6 February 2026 06: 19
  
  Quote: rotkiv04
  No one will do anything, Putin will lie on his stove until the end of his term, and then his successor will have to clean up and fight, unless of course the current guarantor finally gives up everything
  
  Don't confuse the Great Dark Lord with your mentally retarded narco-fuhrer
Asper_Daffy

0

3 February 2026 19: 08

a powder keg, a time bomb, or an atomic bomb, whatever you prefer to call it.

I feel more comfortable with the first option.
Nikolay Malyugin

+2

3 February 2026 19: 25

We need to finish the SVO first. Then we'll think about what's next. I don't think any agreement will be signed anytime soon. Why think ahead about something that's not finished yet?
Yyrp

+1

3 February 2026 19: 40

He ran around the bunker and kept shouting - what to do, what to do.
And then he hid in a corner, became quiet, and continued sucking on a lollipop as usual.
KLNM

+1

3 February 2026 19: 51

The United States and European countries have agreed to respond militarily to any breach of peace in Ukraine...
The plan calls for retaliatory measures to be taken within 24 hours, beginning with a diplomatic warning and retaliatory actions by the Ukrainian armed forces...
If hostilities continue, the so-called coalition of the willing will join the process.
Kyiv and the West need war, so the Kyiv Nazi regime, in order to drag NATO into a war with Russia, will bend over backwards, committing bloody provocations and accusing Russia of shelling, to get the Western war machine going. Kyiv's false accusations against Russia will be enough for them. Yes, we've dragged our feet on defeating the Banderites—who would have thought it? We're preoccupied with our inappropriate softness, protecting the heads of the Banderite leadership, who, due to impunity, have long since gone off the rails. And we've also shown unprofessionalism, especially in the initial stages, when battles with superior enemy forces were reported daily. How many heroes have been lost because of corrupt, mercenary generals? And all this combined is already causing problems for both the country's economy and security, as well as a geopolitical situation that is deteriorating by the hour.
AC130 Gunship

+4

3 February 2026 20: 22

Azarov and Yanukovych? The phrase "when you speak, Ivan Vasilyevich, it seems you're delirious" immediately came to mind.
1. Beidodir
  
  0
  
  4 February 2026 11: 30
  
  Azarov and Yanukovych? The phrase "when you speak, Ivan Vasilyevich, it seems you're delirious" immediately came to mind.
  
  Either these or war with NATO. Choose.
Ales

+1

3 February 2026 20: 30

Only the first point is useful, but incomplete. The rest is like an ostrich hiding its head. Russia needs to act, and act decisively, on its own behalf, without regard for anything. Anything else is a sign of evil—war and shame will follow. And what does "in the name of PPU" mean—polyurethane foam? Thermal insulation and soundproofing are wool.
Alex Eustace

+5

3 February 2026 21: 29

So, here's the consequence of Novorossiya's betrayal in 2014 and the incompetence of the SVO, with all its goodwill gestures. Maybe it's time to impeach the supreme commander, who's not fulfilling his duties? Specifically, the failure to implement the nuclear doctrine after the strikes on the early warning systems and the DA aircraft in Kursk Oblast, I won't even mention it.
Pasha_Kosse

0

3 February 2026 22: 01

To be honest, it's far from an infallible construct. The nuclear triad exists precisely to guarantee a draw in a game that's unfavorable to us (including the attack scenario described by Sergei). I agree (though it wasn't explicitly stated, it's always present in the context): we can't stop now. We need to strike the enemy with every available means (except for tactical nuclear weapons, for now). There should definitely be no talk of any ceasefires, moratoriums, or goodwill gestures. Simply don't go to them or give in to their persuasion. The enemy will try to drag out any ceasefire, extend it, or make it permanent. And then they'll give the go-ahead, and their flags will officially appear on "independent" territory, and then everything will be as they plan.
1. DDD5555
  
  -1
  
  4 February 2026 08: 17
  
  The destruction of foreign forces with tactical nuclear weapons is precisely what we need to promise to all those willing to deploy VNA. Not something very powerful, a couple of kilotons. But that would eliminate the desire to provoke the bear for the next 50-100 years. And then immediately promise all those willing to strike us with megatons, hitting them on their own heads. That's the only way—everyone needs to see that we'll go all the way.
  1. Beidodir
    
    +2
    
    4 February 2026 11: 29
    
    The destruction of foreign forces with tactical nuclear weapons is precisely what we need to promise to everyone willing to deploy something to the VNA. Not something very powerful, maybe a couple of kilotons. But it would eliminate the desire to provoke the bear for the next 50-100 years.
    
    For the past four years, have you slept somewhere?
    
    This is the only way - everyone must see that we will go all the way.
    
    Will Putin and Dmitriev go to the end?
    1. DDD5555
      
      0
      
      4 February 2026 13: 05
      
      It's a good question, but the point is that if they are not ready to go all the way, then they will go from the other side.
      1. Beidodir
        
        0
        
        5 February 2026 12: 20
        
        It's a good question, but the point is that if they are not ready to go all the way, then they will go from the other side.
        
        True, but what happens to those who allow themselves to be beaten and kicked with impunity? What does the Leningrad back alley teach us?
2. Alex Eustace
  
  +1
  
  4 February 2026 12: 03
  
  Victory under the current ruler is impossible, and he shouldn't be put in charge. A truce or a deal must be signed at any cost, and somehow he must extricate himself from this bloodbath, at least partially saving face before the domestic audience. He's less concerned about what happens next (people don't live to be 150 yet). The fact that defeat is victory will be explained by the likes of Solovyovoskabeyev. Anyone who complains will repeat Prigozhin's flight.
Pavel57

+1

4 February 2026 00: 32

It is necessary to recognize Eastern Ukraine as the sole legal successor to pre-Maidan Ukraine, transferring it to the control of the Azarov-Yanukovych Transitional Government, officially recognizing it as the sole legitimate authority, and denying recognition to the Zelensky regime.

Only Yanukovych from the very beginning did not want to be the legitimate president and begin the liberation of Ukraine from Kharkiv.
1. Beidodir
  
  +1
  
  4 February 2026 11: 28
  
  Only Yanukovych from the very beginning did not want to be the legitimate president and begin the liberation of Ukraine from Kharkiv.
  
  If Mr. Putin refused him military support, recognizing Poroshenko as the legitimate authority, then how was he supposed to liberate Ukraine from Kharkov?
Real_pots

-1

4 February 2026 10: 15

Eastern Ukraine, with our assistance, should acquire its own fighter aircraft and missile forces

- What nonsense, eastern Ukraine will become part of Russia, why does part of Russia need its own armed forces.
1. Beidodir
  
  -1
  
  4 February 2026 10: 22
  
  What nonsense, Eastern Ukraine will become part of Russia, why does part of Russia need its own armed forces?
  
  It won't. Wake up already, dude, and come back to reality.
  1. torbas41
    
    -3
    
    4 February 2026 10: 34
    
    The southeast is already part of the Russian Federation and this is a fait accompli. Of course, there are Svidomites who lost their minds during the Maidan, but they are either going crazy from impotent anger, or slowly dying out from nerves. So the guys need to wake up too.
    1. Beidodir
      
      0
      
      4 February 2026 11: 27
      
      The southeast is already part of the Russian Federation and this is a fait accompli. Of course, there are Svidomites who lost their minds during the Maidan, but they are either going crazy from impotent anger, or slowly dying out from nerves. So the guys need to wake up too.
      
      What about Zaporizhzhia and Kherson?
      1. Real_pots
        
        -3
        
        4 February 2026 16: 01
        
        Soon they will crawl to us in a low start position.
        
        Beidodir
        
        0
        
        5 February 2026 12: 19
        
        Soon they will crawl to us in a low start position.
        
        There is nothing to discuss with people who write such things after 4 years of the SVO, due to their pointlessness.
        
        Real_pots
        
        -1
        
        6 February 2026 06: 07
        
        All our work for 4 years is not pointless, sooner or later there will be a turning point at the front, and because of our combat pressure and because of the internal contradictions that have accumulated, the current foolishness will eat itself, perhaps this will happen in a year, maybe in 2, but it will happen, so everything is not pointless.
  2. Real_pots
    
    -3
    
    4 February 2026 15: 45
    
    I woke up a long time ago, Ukraine will become ours, if not now, then later.
    1. Beidodir
      
      0
      
      5 February 2026 12: 18
      
      I woke up a long time ago, Ukraine will become ours, if not now, then later.
      
      When Putin gives it to the EU, forget about Ukraine forever.
2. Alex Eustace
  
  +1
  
  4 February 2026 11: 56
  
  Part of Russia already has its own troops - this is Chechnya and there is no need to say that it is part of the Russian Federation, it is not Russian laws that rule there but Kadyrov's and they are loyal as long as they are paid tribute from the federal budget.
  1. Real_pots
    
    -2
    
    4 February 2026 16: 07
    
    Don't talk nonsense. In the Chechen Republic, there are units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, just like in any other region, and units of the All-Russian Special Forces in the Special Operations Center. We have the same laws for everyone, but in the US, there are even more discrepancies between federal and state laws. In short, don't muddy the waters here. You're presenting your nonsense too simply, it doesn't work.
    1. Alex Eustace
      
      0
      
      4 February 2026 18: 45
      
      Learn to treat people politely first, and only then write, bastard. And regarding the Chechens, we'll see how they behave when their funding is cut off. One said he's Putin's foot soldier, but they won't serve all of Russia, which is what the SVO showed. Don't confuse him with Akhmad, half of whom are Russian.
      1. Real_pots
        
        -2
        
        5 February 2026 06: 09
        
        Teach your wife how to cook borscht, you're a provocateur, and they treat you accordingly - like an enemy,
AC130 Gunship

+1

4 February 2026 16: 38

Quote: Beydodyr
Azarov and Yanukovych? The phrase "when you speak, Ivan Vasilyevich, it seems you're delirious" immediately came to mind.

Either these or war with NATO. Choose.

How can I choose anyone? "These people," as you call them, should be chosen by the people of the country themselves. Not armchair experts like you and me.
1. Beidodir
  
  0
  
  5 February 2026 12: 17
  
  How can I choose anyone? "These people," as you call them, should be chosen by the people of the country themselves. Not armchair experts like you and me.
  
  Do you really believe that Ukrainians' opinions determine who their president will be? Or are you just pretending to be a naive, simple-minded liberal?
AC130 Gunship

-1

5 February 2026 20: 14

Quote: Beydodyr
How can I choose anyone? "These people," as you call them, should be chosen by the people of the country themselves. Not armchair experts like you and me.

Do you really believe that Ukrainians' opinions determine who their president will be? Or are you just pretending to be a naive, simple-minded liberal?

Both Yanukovych and Zelensky won the elections without Western support. And their closest rival conceded defeat. And note that strong competitors are allowed to run in the elections and are not jailed.
1. Beidodir
  
  0
  
  6 February 2026 07: 45
  
  Both Yanukovych and Zelenskyy won the elections without Western support. And their closest rival conceded defeat.
  
  Russian-speaking Ukrainians voted for Yanukovich, choosing between the West and Russia.
  They voted for Zelensky, who promised peace with Russia, over Poroshenko.
  Between what and what will they now choose? Between Zelensky, Zaluzhny, and the terrorist Budanov?
  
  And note that strong competitors are allowed to participate in elections there and are not jailed.
  
  The artificial lack of alternatives in our country is equally unpleasant to me. It is one of the reasons for this war.
Yan Yanov

0

8 February 2026 18: 08

I hope that we can beg and plead for a truce.
.and then we'll see.
vsart

0

9 February 2026 08: 26

Do the peoples of Russia need a victory that a priori condemns future generations to constant military conflict, that is, endless war? What kind of transitional government (TGU) could there possibly be in the regions of Donbas, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson, which have been Russian for several years now, based on popular referendums? What was the point of fighting for four years, or more precisely, since the Maidan? All this sounds very much like the wishes of someone's conscious, de facto "pro-Western" party...
Only the complete liberation of all regions of Malorossiya and Novorossiya as regions of Russia, with the creation of a buffer zone under Russian and/or UN control to carry out the complete demilitarization of the Ukrainian Reich and the denazification of the population. As historical experience shows, there is no other way to eliminate Bandera-fascism...