Yesterday, RT reportedly received a copy of Russia’s peace memorandum given to Ukraine.
- Crimea, Donbass, Kherson, Zaporozhye internationally recognized as Russian.
- Ukraine doesn’t join NATO or any military bloc.
- Holds ELECTIONS
- Withdraws troops from new Russian regions
- BANS Nazi propaganda
- Martial law be CANCELLED
- Russian language granted official status
![[Image: FJ0NGMs.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/FJ0NGMs.jpg)
https://x.com/RT_com/status/1929579665913495641
FULL LIST of Russia’s proposals to Ukraine.
Given to Kiev in Turkey (June 2)
Memorandum includes ceasefire conditions.
Note this is a Draft from RT:
![[Image: zYxBnc9.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/zYxBnc9.jpg)
![[Image: Scfopxc.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/Scfopxc.jpg)
Speculative opinion:
It’s difficult to overstate the theatrical nature of Ukraine’s latest drone operation inside Russian territory—dubbed "Operation Spider's Web."
Dozens of small drones (reportedly 117), smuggled into Russia over ~18 months, were stored in compartments of commercial trucks and launched at strategic airbases. The headlines now celebrate it as a major coup, an ingenious display of asymmetric warfare. But peel back the media hype, and the picture that emerges is perhaps far more sobering.
Ukraine claims the attacks caused $7 billion in damage. Western media outlets parrot this number uncritically, while footage so far suggests only 4 to 6 destroyed aircraft. Even if we take Kyiv’s highest estimates at face value—claiming 34% of Russia’s cruise missile carrier fleet was hit, this leaves Russia with overwhelming superiority in cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, drones, artillery, and glide bombs. In other words, Russia’s strategic edge remains untouched. So, what was the real objective of this operation?
It was never about turning the tide of war.
It was a psychological operation—a stunt, meticulously timed with "peace talks" in Istanbul, designed to inject drama into Ukraine’s collapsing military position and distract from NATO’s own lack of options.
Ukrainian officials are arriving at the negotiation table not with leverage, but with illusions of victory manufactured for Western consumption. This is not a repeatable military capability. It's a one-time, resource-intensive show. The only reason Ukraine’s SBU even exposed how it was done is because it can’t be done again at scale. And now that Russia knows the method, it will adapt, tightening its internal security and rewriting the rules of defense against long-range sabotage.
What we are witnessing is not Ukraine "going rogue" as some in the American right, like General Flynn suggested. It's the continuation of a US-run proxy war, one that started long before 2022, as even the New York Times had admitted. The CIA has been embedding itself in Ukraine’s intelligence apparatus for over a decade, training and directing sabotage operations inside Russia. This drone strike was no different—it bore the signature of US operational planning, logistics, and strategic timing.
Targeting nuclear-capable bombers openly displayed onthe tarmac due to nuclear treaty obligations sets a dangerous precedent. Not because it tipped the military balance (it didn’t), but because it crossed a red line that until now had remained largely unchallenged. Zelensky, with Washington’s backing (Sen. Lindsey Graham & State Dept officials were in Kyiv that day), struck strategic assets on Russian soil in a moment when ceasefire talks were allegedly underway. This was not a misstep. It was intentional escalation disguised as tactical brilliance.
General Flynn is right about one thing: if such an attack had happened at a US bomber base, we would call it an act of war, the gloves come off and the generals would be spinning up any remaining bombers + ICBMs. But when it happens to Russia, Western commentators applaud it as "ingenuity." This hypocrisy is dangerous and suicidal. What happens when Russia retaliates? When it no longer limits its strikes to Ukrainian military infrastructure but begins to hit NATO intelligence nodes, supply hubs, or CIA installations operating in Ukraine?
Are Western capitals prepared for that chain reaction?
And to be brutally honest about Ukraine’s role in this equation they are not a sovereign actor. It is a vessel—a delivery system for NATO aggression. Washington superhawks do not want peace in Ukraine. It wants Russia bled dry at Ukraine’s expense. That’s the real war effort: sacrifice a nation to weaken a geopolitical rival no matter the cost.
And to those comparing this drone operation to a "Ukrainian Pearl Harbor", ask yourself: What happened to the country that carried out the original one?
It is a geopolitical provocation of the highest order—one that could provoke retaliation with catastrophic consequences not only for Ukraine, but for Europe and the world. Ukraine has now transitioned from proxy to existential threat, not just to Russia. A regime, armed and directed by NATO, attacking nuclear powers without regard for consequence or restraint.
Whomever is running this show is taking a very high risk gamble.
History may look back on this moment not as a clever gambit, but as the spark that lit a global fire.
On the bright side, the sun will rise tomorrow.
- Crimea, Donbass, Kherson, Zaporozhye internationally recognized as Russian.
- Ukraine doesn’t join NATO or any military bloc.
- Holds ELECTIONS
- Withdraws troops from new Russian regions
- BANS Nazi propaganda
- Martial law be CANCELLED
- Russian language granted official status
https://x.com/RT_com/status/1929579665913495641
FULL LIST of Russia’s proposals to Ukraine.
Given to Kiev in Turkey (June 2)
Memorandum includes ceasefire conditions.
Note this is a Draft from RT:
Speculative opinion:
It’s difficult to overstate the theatrical nature of Ukraine’s latest drone operation inside Russian territory—dubbed "Operation Spider's Web."
Dozens of small drones (reportedly 117), smuggled into Russia over ~18 months, were stored in compartments of commercial trucks and launched at strategic airbases. The headlines now celebrate it as a major coup, an ingenious display of asymmetric warfare. But peel back the media hype, and the picture that emerges is perhaps far more sobering.
Ukraine claims the attacks caused $7 billion in damage. Western media outlets parrot this number uncritically, while footage so far suggests only 4 to 6 destroyed aircraft. Even if we take Kyiv’s highest estimates at face value—claiming 34% of Russia’s cruise missile carrier fleet was hit, this leaves Russia with overwhelming superiority in cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, drones, artillery, and glide bombs. In other words, Russia’s strategic edge remains untouched. So, what was the real objective of this operation?
It was never about turning the tide of war.
It was a psychological operation—a stunt, meticulously timed with "peace talks" in Istanbul, designed to inject drama into Ukraine’s collapsing military position and distract from NATO’s own lack of options.
Ukrainian officials are arriving at the negotiation table not with leverage, but with illusions of victory manufactured for Western consumption. This is not a repeatable military capability. It's a one-time, resource-intensive show. The only reason Ukraine’s SBU even exposed how it was done is because it can’t be done again at scale. And now that Russia knows the method, it will adapt, tightening its internal security and rewriting the rules of defense against long-range sabotage.
What we are witnessing is not Ukraine "going rogue" as some in the American right, like General Flynn suggested. It's the continuation of a US-run proxy war, one that started long before 2022, as even the New York Times had admitted. The CIA has been embedding itself in Ukraine’s intelligence apparatus for over a decade, training and directing sabotage operations inside Russia. This drone strike was no different—it bore the signature of US operational planning, logistics, and strategic timing.
Targeting nuclear-capable bombers openly displayed onthe tarmac due to nuclear treaty obligations sets a dangerous precedent. Not because it tipped the military balance (it didn’t), but because it crossed a red line that until now had remained largely unchallenged. Zelensky, with Washington’s backing (Sen. Lindsey Graham & State Dept officials were in Kyiv that day), struck strategic assets on Russian soil in a moment when ceasefire talks were allegedly underway. This was not a misstep. It was intentional escalation disguised as tactical brilliance.
General Flynn is right about one thing: if such an attack had happened at a US bomber base, we would call it an act of war, the gloves come off and the generals would be spinning up any remaining bombers + ICBMs. But when it happens to Russia, Western commentators applaud it as "ingenuity." This hypocrisy is dangerous and suicidal. What happens when Russia retaliates? When it no longer limits its strikes to Ukrainian military infrastructure but begins to hit NATO intelligence nodes, supply hubs, or CIA installations operating in Ukraine?
Are Western capitals prepared for that chain reaction?
And to be brutally honest about Ukraine’s role in this equation they are not a sovereign actor. It is a vessel—a delivery system for NATO aggression. Washington superhawks do not want peace in Ukraine. It wants Russia bled dry at Ukraine’s expense. That’s the real war effort: sacrifice a nation to weaken a geopolitical rival no matter the cost.
And to those comparing this drone operation to a "Ukrainian Pearl Harbor", ask yourself: What happened to the country that carried out the original one?
It is a geopolitical provocation of the highest order—one that could provoke retaliation with catastrophic consequences not only for Ukraine, but for Europe and the world. Ukraine has now transitioned from proxy to existential threat, not just to Russia. A regime, armed and directed by NATO, attacking nuclear powers without regard for consequence or restraint.
Whomever is running this show is taking a very high risk gamble.
History may look back on this moment not as a clever gambit, but as the spark that lit a global fire.
On the bright side, the sun will rise tomorrow.
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong." – Thomas Sowell