Some excerpts included below;

Russia controls a large swath of Ukrainian territory, and Kyiv has little chance of dislodging it, as Ukraine’s failed counteroffensive in 2023 demonstrated. To be sure, recent Russian gains have come very slowly and at significant cost; over the last three years, Russia has taken a mere one percent of additional Ukrainian territory. But that does not change the reality that Russia now holds almost a fifth of the land within Ukraine’s 1991 borders—or that Russia’s greater resources and population mean that Moscow can fight on for years to come. Overcoming those Russian advantages and clawing back lost land on the battlefield would require time and investment that Ukraine doesn’t have. Current circumstances are therefore pushing Kyiv toward a compromise peace—one that will necessarily include the surrender of Ukrainian territory.

I’m not going to address the casualty counts- because the author understands they are likely not accurate

…. the war is depleting a greater proportion of its manpower. Ukraine’s population today is just under 36 million, which is about 26 percent of Russia’s population of 140 million. Ukraine has just under 9.5 million men between the ages of 25 and 54, and it has lost between one and two percent of that cohort.For Russia, which has a little over 30.2 million men in the same age group, somewhat higher losses account for just 0.5 to 0.7 percent of the total. Ultimately, Russia, with its much larger population, can sustain larger total losses than Ukraine can.Moreover, Russia is fighting mostly with contract soldiers—people who have volunteered—and keeping conscripts away from the front. The result is more motivated Russian soldiers. So far, Moscow is not having much trouble meeting recruitment needs.

Ukraine, in contrast, relies heavily on conscription. Recent recruitment shortfalls and desertions have prompted increasingly draconian efforts to meet conscription a goal of 30,000 men per month. These include “busification,” the practice of grabbing men off the street and taking them in minivans to the local recruitment office. In addition to being unpopular, harsh methods are netting mostly older, less healthy, and clearly unwilling soldiers, many of whom desert at the first opportunity. Those who remain contribute little to the war effort.

When it comes to major weapons systems, Ukraine is outgunned across the board. As of 2025, Russia’s tanks outnumbered Ukraine’s at a ratio of nearly five to one.

Russia had more than three times as many infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers as Ukraine. It had 670 pieces of towed artillery to Ukraine’s 543. It had five times as much mobile artillery, nearly ten times as many multiple launch rocket systems, and nearly five times as many mortars. Russia had 163 combat aircraft; Ukraine had 66. Although Russia’s huge advantage rests, in part, on older, stored equipment, much of the Western equipment sent to Ukraine is also old, coming from partner countries’ stockpiles. But even excluding stored equipment, in most categories, Russia’s stocks are at least double Ukraine’s.

Economic power is foundational to military power, and Russia has an advantage there, too. Russia’s 2024 GDP (measured by purchasing power parity) was almost $7 trillion. Ukraine’s, in contrast, was almost $657 billion, less than ten percent of Russia’s. Nominal measures show the same substantial gap. Spending around seven percent of GDP, Russia can allocate $484 billion to defense. Even if Ukraine spends 30 percent of its GDP, it will be able to muster a defense budget of only $197 billion, less than half of Russia’s.

Admittedly, this figure underestimates Ukraine’s long-term military capacity because it excludes the substantial financial and in-kind assistance the country has received from western Europe and until recently (???) the United States. But Ukraine is more dependent on foreign partners than Russia is. Russia has a large indigenous defense industry and massive military stockpiles, although it, too, has come to rely to some extent on allies, including China and North Korea. Russia may not have all the cards, but it has big battalions and deep pockets.

Rampant corruption has undermined all aspects of Ukraine’s war effort.

Yet there can be little doubt that Russia can achieve more limited aims by force of arms. Roughly 2,866 square miles of Donetsk remain under Kyiv’s control. If Russian forces continue at last year’s rate of advance, they could take it in a year and a half, a reasonable time frame. They may also grab more chunks of Kharkiv, Sumy, and Zaporizhzhia. Doing so would cost Russia additional blood and treasure, to be sure, but it would impose greater relative costs on Ukraine, which Kyiv can ill afford.

The Ukrainians and their allies must now ask themselves what another year of war will achieve and at what price

Much more at the link included.

Just some food for thought.

For weeks the question animating the Washington D.C. commentariat has been this: When will President Donald Trump make good on his threat and launch a second round of airstrikes on Iran? So far at least, the answer is “not yet.”

Many explanations for Trump’s surprising (but very welcome) restraint have emerged. Among the most troubling, however, is that it is a lack of the necessary munitions, and in particular air defense interceptors, that is giving Trump second thoughts. “The missile defense cupboard is bare,” one report concludes based on interviews with current and former U.S. defense officials.

The idea of the US weapons cupboard being bare doesn’t hurt my feelings in the least. Far from it. It gives me hope that the US won’t launch an, utterly insane, completely unnecessary war against Iran.

Even those who hope Trump chooses to avoid military action in Iran altogether should be taken aback to hear that eight months after the last extended U.S. military campaign ended (the defense of Israel during the 12-day war and Operation Midnight Hammer), American missile defense arsenals could still be in such rough shape.

To be sure, slow production timelines and the deep materiel debt mean that any effort to fully restore U.S. stockpiles to their pre-2022 level will take time. But eight months should be sufficient to return stocks of some types of defense interceptors to less critical levels. If the missile defense cupboard is truly still bare, however, something else must be going on.

That something else, it turns out, is Ukraine.

Although President Trump and his advisers are quick to argue that the United States is no longer paying for the military aid supporting Ukraine’s ongoing war, (they would be lying) this is only one piece of a larger story. In fact, the United States is still sending billions in weapons to Ukraine, often diverting new weapons intended for the U.S. military directly to Ukraine instead. The implications of this reality are far-reaching — for U.S. military readiness, the Pentagon’s ability to respond in case of a real threat to U.S. interests, and diplomatic efforts to end the war.

To understand the scope of the continuing U.S. commitment to Ukraine, we need to look closer. There are two primary channels through which U.S. weapons continue to make their way to Ukraine instead of into U.S. military arsenals.

For starters, there is the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which the Trump administration tried to cut out of its most recent budget, before Congress saved it. The $400 million in aid allocated for 2026, however, is a small piece of resources currently in this aid pipeline. Something on the order of $19 billion in outstanding orders, contracts signed under the Biden administration, have yet to make it to Ukraine. This new production will flow into Kyiv and to Ukraine’s frontline over the course of 2026 and 2027. Among the weapons included are air defense interceptors as well as other types of valuable munitions, GMLRS and 155mm shells.

This money was appropriated before Trump came into office, so this is not new spending. But the orders themselves are filled from the same production lines as the ones that would go to replenish the U.S. military’s own stockpiles. In effect, Ukraine’s defense needs compete with those of the U.S. military for scarce U.S. defense industrial capacity.

The second way that Washington continues to arm Ukraine at the expense of production that might go to the U.S. military is through the PURL program. Promoted as a mechanism to force Europeans to pick up the bill for arming Ukraine, the program does not directly involve U.S. taxpayer funds. Instead, European countries buy new U.S. weapons that then go to Ukraine.

We talked about the PURL program last year

So far, NATO has pledged over $4 billion in funds for PURL and two $500 million shipments have already been sent through the program, which expects to grow to $15 billion in 2026. PURL has been heavily used for specific types of weapons, including especially air defense and munitions of all kinds. Reports suggest that as much as 75 percent of Patriot missiles used in Ukraine (and 90 percent of all air defense) comes through this mechanism. Reports say two additional packages (via Canada and Germany) at $500 million a piece were being readied, and more were being coordinated by the U.S., at the end of 2025.

PURL sounds good on the surface, since it shifts the cost of arming Ukraine from the United States to Europe. However, once again, the U.S. military likely comes out on the losing end.

What Europeans actually purchase through PURL is prioritized spots in the manufacturing queue, near the front of the line. This allows Europe, and by association Ukraine, to again skip the wait, receiving new missiles and military hardware originally intended for other buyers right away. The defense contractor gets money, but orders for the original buyers, including most likely the Pentagon, are necessarily delayed in part or in full. In some cases, PURL buys weapons directly out of U.S. stocks, meaning that PURL not only slows replenishment of U.S. arsenals, but drains them further.

On one hand, yeah to the idea of the US not having enough weapons to launch a full scale attack on Iran. On the other hand.. would Usrael resort to nuclear weapons??- Which causes me concern

I do wish my lurkers would let their thoughts be known?

And the Russian’s have provided evidence to the US..UAWwire

Russia has handed a representative from the office of the U.S. Embassy’s defense attaché decoded routing data and the controller from one of the Ukrainian drones that, according to Moscow, allegedly took part in an attack on Vladimir Putin’s residence at Valdai, said Russia’s Defense Ministry.

The ministry also released video of a meeting between Adm. Igor Kostyukov, head of Russia’s Main Directorate of the General Staff (GRU), and a representative of the U.S. defense attaché. “I invited you on an important matter. We want to inform you: we found debris from unmanned aerial vehicles involved in this attack. In a number of these UAVs, the navigation systems are well preserved; they are technically functional,” Kostyukov said.

He said the controller and a description of it prepared by the Russian side are being turned over to the U.S. to “remove all questions” and “help establish the truth.”

I can only conclude the US & Ukraine undertook this extremely dangerous and risky attack-together!

Russia struck Lviv with the Oreshnik- by all reports it was a devastating blow
I’m omitting the spin about the missile being nuclear capable because it’s irrelevant to what actually occurred, although every media outlet is hyping this feature. The US also has missiles that can carry nuclear and conventional payloads- This is never mentioned

Example- The Tomahawk

The Tomahawk is an intermediate-range, subsonic cruise missile that is launched from U.S. Navy ships and submarines. It provides a long-range, deep strike capability. The Tomahawk can carry either conventional or nuclear payloads,….

Interfax.com.ua

According to the Air Force, the strike on Lviv was carried out by a ballistic missile. The air target was traveling on a ballistic trajectory at a speed of approximately 13,000 kilometers per hour—an extremely high speed, stated Lviv Mayor Andriy Sadovy.

It is reported, a critical infrastructure facility in Lviv region was attacked; a series of explosions were heard in the city during the air raid alarm.

Asiaone

One of the targets was a massive underground gas facility

The governor of Ukraine’s western Lviv region had earlier said that a Russian attack had struck an infrastructure target, which unverified social media reports said was a massive underground gas storage facility.

RT.com

Kiev Mayor Vitaly Klitschko has urged the city’s residents to evacuate, stating that some 6,000 apartment buildings in the Ukrainian capital have been left without central heating.

Klitschko blamed the “extremely difficult situation” in the city on overnight Russian strikes. Moscow has said it targeted drone production facilities, energy infrastructure, and other military-related facilities across Ukraine in response to an attempted “terrorist attack by the Kiev regime” on Russian President Vladimir Putin’s residence in late December.

“I appeal to residents of the capital who have the opportunity to temporarily leave the city, where there are alternative sources of power and heat, to do so,” Klitschko wrote on his Telegram channel, stating the overnight attack became the most “painful” for the city of three million amid the Ukraine conflict.

According to the mayor, nearly half of Kiev’s residential buildings ended up without central heating after the strikes. An unspecified number of buildings have also been hit by water supply disruptions. He said that the city’s authorities “hope” to restore central heating for “some” of the affected buildings by the evening. The situation in the city is further aggravated by heavy snowfall and low temperatures.

Instead of facing trial for their participation in war crimes during WW2, they became top generals in NATO.

Which is why, NATO, like Nazi Germany, is always targeting Russia.

Kyivpost

The move ties economic recovery to wartime governance, as Zelensky reshapes his team around security, technology and Western-backed expertise amid prolonged uncertainty.

President Volodymyr Zelensky has appointed former Canadian deputy prime minister Chrystia Freeland as an advisor on economic development, adding an internationally experienced figure to his team as Ukraine recalibrates its government to meet the dual pressures of war and long-term recovery.

The appointment was announced by Volodymyr Zelensky on social media, where he framed the move as part of a broader effort to strengthen Ukraine’s internal resilience amid uncertainty over the pace of diplomacy and continued delays in external support.

“Chrystia is highly skilled in these matters and has extensive experience in attracting investment and implementing economic transformations,” Zelensky wrote. He said Ukraine must be prepared both for rapid recovery if negotiations yield results and for prolonged resistance if the war continues.

A high-profile economic appointment

Freeland’s role will focus on economic development at a time when Ukraine faces enormous reconstruction needs alongside the demands of a wartime economy. Zelensky emphasized that the appointment is meant to deepen engagement with international partners and mobilize investment critical to sustaining the state.

After leaving Canada’s cabinet, Freeland was appointed (readied) special representative for the reconstruction of Ukraine, a role that positioned her at the intersection of international finance, diplomacy and postwar planning

The SMO will carry on. Because the US and the Ukraine have no desire for peace or to respect Russia’s legitimate security concerns

Read what he said, link to source Including link to original Polish source

I did not have a chance to put it through translate- sorry

Link

Tusk stated that for the first time he heard from U.S. negotiators that the United States “will commit to providing Ukraine with security guarantees in such a way that the Russians will have no doubts that (in the event of a ceasefire violation — ed.) the U.S. response will be military.”

According to him, U.S. President’s special envoy Steve Witkoff “was unequivocal on this point.”

“It is a fact that for the first time it has become so clear that the Americans, Europeans, and Ukraine are on the same side,” the Polish prime minister said.

The head of the Polish government also stressed that the only real chance to persuade Russia to engage in serious negotiations on ending the war, or “at least on a ceasefire,” is the unity of the entire West.

“We need to remain allies together with the Americans and Ukrainians so that the Russians and Putin see that it is impossible to drive a wedge between these three sides,” he said.

My feeling is this is not entirely accurate, but, don’t know.

When asked if peace was closer or further away after the meeting, Ushakov replied, “Not further, that’s for sure,” adding that “there’s still a lot of work to be done, both in Washington and in Moscow,” the Associated Press reported.

Nothing has changed.

I've serious doubts these meetings are anything other than appearance making for all parties- And why is Jared Kushner there at all? Nepotism reigns supreme in the Trump admin as it did in the Biden administration. Not a shocker, really.

Being brutally honest here, I still see no reason to believe the US really wants peace with Russia or truly wants to end the conflict. They’d have it done it already! It would be a simple as cutting off weapons, intelligence and other supports.

As for the EU..

BRUSSELS — The European Union on Wednesday revealed details of its plan to use billions of euros in frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine’s needs over the next two years, but Belgium rejected the scheme and insisted that it poses major financial and legal risks.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that the EU would cover two-thirds of Ukraine’s financial and military needs for 2026 and 2027, which the International Monetary Fund puts at 137 billion euros ($160 billion), by providing 90 billion euros ($105 billion).

She said that other international partners would be called on to cover the remaining third.

Von der Leyen said that using the frozen assets would strengthen the Ukrainian position at peace negotiations with Russia and the U.S. but it would also send a message to Moscow that “the prolongation of the war on their side comes with a high cost for them.” She said that she had informed the Trump administration about the proposal.(Of course, she did!)

EU leaders have committed to fund Ukraine over the next two years, whatever the method. The EU has already poured in over 170 billion euros ($197 billion) since the war started in 2022.

EUInsanity

Von der Leyen said that if the loan plan didn’t pass muster, the bloc could borrow the money on international markets in a scheme underpinned by its long-term budget. The problem here, though, is that it would require the approval of all 27 member countries, and Hungary has consistently blocked aid to Ukraine.

The biggest pot of ready funds available is through frozen Russian assets. Most of the money is held in Belgium – around 194 billion euros as of June – and outside the EU in Japan, with around $50 billion, and the U.S., U.K. and Canada with lesser amounts. A total of 210 billion euros worth ($245 billion) are held in Europe.

Canada holding a smaller amount of these stolen funds has been mentioned here previously

To address Belgian concerns, the commission’s complex proposal includes safeguards to protect EU nations from “possible retaliation from Russia,” a prohibition of any release of the frozen assets, and a way to borrow money as the EU to “underpin a loan to Ukraine.”

But Belgian Foreign Minister Maxime Prévot said that his country considers “the option of the reparations loan the worst of all, as it is risky. It has never been done before.” Russia has described the scheme as “theft.”

Haltingly reading prepared remarks to reporters at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Prévot urged the EU to borrow the money for Ukraine on international markets. “It is a well-known, a robust and a well-established option with predictable parameters,” he said.

“The reparation loans scheme entails consequential economic, financial and legal risks,” he said, adding that the commission’s proposals do not address Belgium’s concerns. “It is not acceptable to use the money and leave us alone facing the risks.”

Belgium fears that the Brussels-based financial clearing house holding the frozen assets, Euroclear, could take legal action if Russia challenges any use of the funds or if the move harms its image and business interests.

Meanwhile Russia continues on making trade deals..

Belgium’s Prime Minister Bart De Wever has called an EU plan to use frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine “fundamentally wrong”, throwing further doubt on a push to agree on the move next month.

In a letter to European Commission head Ursula von der Leyen seen by AFP on Friday, De Wever pushed back strongly on the initiative and urged against venturing “into uncharted legal and financial waters”.

The EU executive and multiple member states are pressing for the bloc to tap immobilised Russian central bank assets to provide Kiev with a $162 billion loan to plug looming budget black holes.

Belgium is the key voice on the issue as it hosts international deposit organisation Euroclear, where the vast bulk of the assets are held.

De Wever has repeatedly said the plan could leave his country facing crippling legal and financial reprisals from Moscow, and called for cast-iron guarantees from other EU countries that they will share the risk.

He said he would only agree to the scheme at a crunch EU leaders’ summit on December 18 if binding guarantees “are delivered and signed by member states at the time of decision”.

De Wever’s letter comes as von der Leyen has promised to come up with legal texts soon, laying out the exact proposed structure of the scheme.

EU officials have asserted that the risks for Belgium of a successful legal challenge are small, an argument rebutted by the straight-talking De Wever.

“Let me use the analogy of a plane crash: aircraft are the safest way of transportation and the chances of a crash are low, but in the event of a crash, the consequences are disastrous,” he said.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said he was in contact with De Wever and was pressing for an agreement.

“I understand his concerns; he has good arguments, but we also have good arguments about reaching our common goal,” he said.

“We are looking for a joint solution with the Belgian state and also with Euroclear so that we can decide on this within the EU with the widest consensus possible.”

Proponents argue that if the bloc does not act now to use the money, then it risks losing control of it under a potential US-backed peace deal.

The proposed EU “reparations loan” envisages that Ukraine would only pay back the funds once Russia had coughed up for the damages inflicted by its war on Kiev.

In the face of Belgian opposition to the plan, von der Leyen has laid out other options to keep financing Kiev, including EU countries taking out joint borrowing.

But the commission has warned that those options would prove more costly for member states at a time when many are struggling with stretched national budgets.

Have mentioned the desire to steal Russia’s assets a number of times already

TRT- An American/Turkish outlet

Ukrainian negotiators are set to visit the United States this weekend to discuss Washington’s plan to end the war in Ukraine, a senior official told AFP on Friday.

“The delegation is planning to meet with the American side at the end of this week,” the source said, requesting anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter.

The delegation, which includes senior security official Rustem Umerov and First Deputy Foreign Minister Sergiy Kyslytsya, is expected to meet with US special envoy Steve Witkoff and former White House adviser Jared Kushner, according to Bloomberg News.

Talks may take place in Florida, the source added.

Former Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, was initially scheduled to join the discussions but was dismissed on Friday, the official said.

Dismissed? Or Stepped Down?

Russo-Ukrainian war, day 1374: Yermak resigns as Ukraine’s biggest corruption scandal engulfs Presidential Office

Ukraine’s chief of staff stepped down just 24 hours before planned talks with Trump envoys, as leaked US peace plan offers Putin recognition of seized territories

How damaging could the Ukraine corruption scandal be for Zelensky?

Andriy Yermak, the cryptic aide who shadowed Volodymyr Zelensky through every phase of the war, resigned Friday after anti-corruption investigators searched his office and house. Yermak was the center of Zelensky’s wartime team – and the consequences of his resignation could be far reaching.

In an evening address, Zelensky thanked Yermak for representing Ukraine’s negotiating position in recent tense talks with the United States, “as it should be” and stressed that it had “always been patriotic,” while urging Ukrainians to ignore rumors around the resignation. He said he would begin consultations on a new chief of staff immediately. With more talks looming, he underlined that, in wartime, every institution must stay focused on defending the state. Meetings with the American side, he added, are expected in the coming days.

But Yermak rarely acted on his own; he was, in many ways, an extension of Zelensky. He handled the tough, unappealing tasks for the wartime president. He appeared to control the President’s decisions, because the President wanted it so. “Firing him feels like prosecuting his own actions,” an official said. “On a personal level, it feels like a betrayal because half of Yermak’s actions come from the President,” he added.

Since the beginning of Russia’s invasion, Yermak followed Zelensky from bunker meetings to front-line inspections and wielded enormous influence behind closed doors. Over the years, his controlling nature earned him disdain across the board. “He’s a control freak with a psychopathic nature, a maniac for power,” said a senior Ukrainian official. “Letting him go gives a second chance for the President to reset everything.

Midas” vs. Mindich: How Ukraine’s NABU executed the biggest anti-corruption operation in its history — and why the EU is getting involved

Kyiv is facing one of its biggest domestic political challenges since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion. Following the unprecedented “Midas” operation, Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies have accused senior officials in the energy sector of running a large-scale illegal enrichment and money-laundering scheme. The investigation may also implicate Tymur Mindich, a close associate of President Volodymyr Zelensky and co-owner of the comedy studio Kvartal 95. The case marks another attempt by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) to defend its independence and restore international support. Since Donald Trump took office, the United States has lost interest in Ukraine’s anti-corruption efforts, leaving the European Union to take the lead.

Content

• NABU takes aim at Zelensky’s associates
• “Midas” and the European Union
• Who is responsible for fighting corruption in Ukraine
• Fighting those who fight corruption
• How the EU stepped in to defend NABU

NABU takes aim at Zelensky’s associates

In November, NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) announced that they had uncovered a large-scale, high-level embezzlement scheme in the country’s energy sector. According to the investigators, it was orchestrated by business executive Timur Mindich, a longtime friend of Zelensky and co-owner of Kvartal 95, the production company Zelensky founded with two other associates in 2003.

Anti-corruption officials allege that Mindich’s trusted associates received illicit payments from counterparties engaged in transactions with Energoatom, Ukraine’s largest producer of electricity and the operator of all functioning nuclear power plants in the country. SAPO believes they siphoned off 10–15% of contract values and funneled the money through an underground financial center allegedly set up by financier Oleksandr Tsukerman, an associate of Mindich’s. Investigators say roughly $100 million passed through this channel. The scheme traces back to the 2000s and is linked to former lawmaker Andriy Derkach, who fled to Russia in 2022.

Mindich’s trusted associates siphoned off 10–15% of contract values and funneled the money through an underground financial center

The above is a lengthy detailed read.

You may recall Mindich fled to Israel??