What's your reply to Nobel Peace Prize winning Irina Scherbakova/Memorial? Its co-founder knows Russia far better than both of us and she sees diplomacy without Ukrainian victory as pointless. Is she also a war-monger in need of de-escalation therapy?
"Exiled Memorial, which won the Nobel Peace Prize, understands what Mr. Dunn doesn't: that negotiations are pointless until Ukraine kicks Russian forces out of Ukraine:
"There is currently no diplomatic solution to the war in Ukraine, Irina Scherbakova, a co-founder of the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Russian rights organisation Memorial, said.
“I am absolutely convinced that there is not a diplomatic solution with Putin’s regime, so long as it is still there,” she said.
“The solution that there will now be is a military one,” said Scherbakova, who was presented with an award for her human rights work at a ceremony in Hamburg, Germany.
“But these decisions, this diplomacy will only happen when Ukraine believes it has won this war and can set its terms.”
Scherbakova added that calls for peace were “childish”, she said, adding that things would not return to the way they were before the outbreak of the conflict.
“This war has turned so many things upside down, it will never be like that again.”
Or do you still prefer the fantasy world of RT honored useful idiot guest, Jacques Baud, who denied the Bucha killings and Russia's poisoning of Navalny and the Skripals in Salisbury?
He also still refers to Ukraine as "the Ukraine" (the bigoted sovereignty-cancelling na Ukraina in Russian), which means he considers it the province of another country. If he does so out of ignorance, it means he's a totally untrustworthy source. If he uses the obsolete sovereignty nullifying "the Ukraine" consciously, that's even worse.
(https://dailysceptic.org/archive/how-accurate-is-jacques-bauds-analysis-of-the-war-in-ukraine/)
"Considering all of this, I find Baud’s assessment to be misinformed and misleading. The fundamental problem is that he’s clearly an intelligent and articulate man who can string together factoids into a coherent and persuasive-sounding whole – which is pernicious, when those facts are wrong. But I would still urge readers to listen to the interview: it’s informative for its clever-sounding, insidious mendacity."
Fortunately you are easily shown to be more naive than mendacious, even if you never, ever take responsibility for previously inaccurate writings and forecasts ("the Ukraine war is a manufactured distraction", "surrender better than war", "stalemate").
