Putin Confirms Trip to Alaska Military Base to Help Trump Arrest Soros-Satan-Analists in Donbass!

Game over, globalists! Jesus Values Morals Putin and Trump have won.

The patriot freedom-fighter against Globalisms, Vladimir Putin, has agreed to ride into Donald Trump’s military encampment for surrender peace and victory negotiations.

Now, many of my hate-readers are also history buffs.

Tell me then, dear email-detractors: does the winner of a war usually come to the military base of his enemy for negotiations? Or, traditionally, is this an honor reserved for losers of wars or at least those who occupy a severely disadvantageous position ahead of negotiations?

Let’s look at a more modern example of the phenomenon.

The Dayton Peace Agreement that ended the war in Bosnia was also signed at an American military base. And who won that war? This is not a trick question, folks. Most people agree that the winner wasn’t the Serbian government, which became a vassal state of Washington afterwards (and arguably earlier than that too).

And if Washington is the seat of the Analic-Satan-Soros, as Z-propaganda claims (I somewhat agree with that sentiment, by the way) why then would you go to one of their military bases on their territory for negotiations? After publicly declaring that Washington isn’t even “agreement-capable”? After framing your conflict as being a moral crusade against oath-breakers and amoral spawns of the Devil? Seems strange to trust your fate to the hands of such an avowed enemy, no?

No???

…

Anyway.

Total Putin-Patriot Victory!

At the very least, it seems that the Kremlin has a very weak hand to even agree to this kind of ritual humiliation implicit in the very terms of the meeting.

Let’s see what the Kremlins are saying about it though. Below is an RT op-ed is from Dmitri Suslov, a typical Moscow administrative caste apparatchik. They mass produce these types at the Higher School of Economics, which is the unofficial intellectual think tank of Russia dedicated to producing neoliberal satraps that run Russia as a gas colony for the West.

Here are his optimistic predictions:

By Dmitry Suslov, member of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, deputy director of World Economy and International Politics at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics, and Valdai Club expert.

On Friday, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump will meet in Alaska. This will be the first full-scale Russia-US summit since June 2021 in Geneva, and the first official visit by a Russian president to American soil since Dmitry Medvedev’s trip in 2010 at the height of the “reset.”

It will also be the first time the leaders of Russia and the US have met in Alaska, the closest US state to Russia, separated only by the narrow Bering Strait, and once part of the Russian Empire. The symbolism is obvious: as far as possible from Ukraine and Western Europe, but as close as possible to Russia. And neither Zelensky nor the EU’s top brass will be in the room.

The message could not be clearer – Moscow and Washington will make the key decisions on Ukraine, then inform others later. As Trump has said, “they hold all the cards.”

From Geneva to Alaska: A shift in tone

The Alaska summit marks a sharp departure from the Biden years, when even the idea of such a meeting was unthinkable and Washington’s priority was isolating Russia. Now, not only will Putin travel to Alaska, but Trump is already planning a return visit to Russia.

Moderate optimism surrounds the meeting. Summits of this type are rarely held “just to talk”; they usually cap a long process of behind-the-scenes negotiations. The idea for this one emerged after three hours of talks in Moscow on August 6 between Putin and Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff. Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov described Washington’s offer as “very acceptable.” That suggests Putin and Trump will arrive in Alaska with a preliminary deal – or at least a framework for a truce – already in place.

Why Trump needs this

Trump has good reason to want the summit to succeed. His effort to squeeze Moscow by pushing China and India to stop buying Russian oil has backfired badly. Far from isolating Russia, it triggered the worst US-India crisis in 25 years and drove New Delhi even closer to Moscow. It also encouraged a thaw between India and China, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi now set to attend the SCO summit in Tianjin.

BRICS, which Trump has openly vowed to weaken, has only grown more cohesive. The Alaska summit is Trump’s chance to escape the trap he built for himself – trying to pressure Moscow through Beijing and New Delhi – and to show results on Ukraine that he can sell as a diplomatic victory.

Why Russia does too

For Moscow, a successful summit would be a powerful demonstration that talk of “isolation” is obsolete – even in the West. It would cement Russia’s standing with the “global majority” and highlight Western Europe’s diminished influence. The transatlantic split would widen, weakening Brussels’ claim to be Russia’s toughest opponent.

Most importantly, Washington today has little real leverage over Russia, especially on Ukraine. If the summit yields a joint Russian–American vision for a truce or settlement, it will inevitably reflect Moscow’s position more than Kiev’s or Brussels’. And if the Western Europeans try to derail it, the US could pull the plug on all aid to Ukraine – including intelligence support – accelerating Kiev’s defeat.

Resistance at home and abroad

Not everyone in Russia is cheering. Many prominent “Z”-aligned war correspondents see the war as unfinished and oppose any truce. But they have been asked to stick to the official line. If the Alaska meeting produces a deal, they will be expected to back it – or at least use “cooling” language for their audiences. The Kremlin is betting it can manage this dissent.

Western Europe, for its part, will be watching from the sidelines. Its leaders are “scrambling” for scraps of information via secondary channels. The optics will underline a humiliating reality: for the first time in almost a century, decisions about Europe’s security will be made without the likes of Italy, France and Germany in the room.

Beyond Ukraine

The location hints at other agenda items. Arctic economic cooperation, largely frozen since 2014, could be revived. Both sides stand to gain from joint development in the far north, and a deal here would be politically symbolic – proof that the two countries can work together despite the baggage of the last decade.

Arms control will also be on the table. Moscow’s recent decision to end its unilateral moratorium on deploying intermediate-range missiles was almost certainly timed to influence the talks. Strategic stability after the New START Treaty expires in February 2026 will be a central concern.

The stakes

If Alaska delivers, it could reshape the conflict in Ukraine and the broader Russia-US relationship. A joint settlement plan would marginalize Kiev and Brussels, shift the diplomatic center of gravity back to Moscow and Washington, and reopen channels for cooperation on global issues – from the Arctic to arms control.

If it fails – if Trump bends to last-minute EU pressure – Moscow will continue fighting, confident that US involvement will fade. Either way, Russia’s position is stronger than it was two years ago.

What’s different now is that the two powers with “all the cards” are finally back at the same table – and Western Europe is on the outside looking in.

Very droll.

Thanks for the chuckle, Dima.

I just thought the part about the Kremlin preparing to put pressure on Russian patriotic internet samizdat to prevent complaints about the deal were interesting. Why would Russia’s Z-patriots complain if the deal is going to be so damn amazing for Russia? Are these Z-patriots simply insane and evil, like the Kremlin portrays them as being? Or is it more probably because this is simply not going to be a very patriotic deal.

But we will talk about this topic more after Putin orders the next wave of Z-patriot arrests.

More Peaceful Territory Swaps

What is far more interesting are the “swaps” that Trump said would occur as a result of these negotiations. This seems to me to be a misdirection. Because, it seems clear to me that we are witnessing this “swap” occurring right now with the allowed “breakthrough” of Russian troops near Pokhrovsk, in the townlet of Dobropillya.

Kiev’s best troops, the mobile units of highly trained and well-equipped and motivated pros are of course nowhere to be found in this area of the fighting. Probably because they’re massing somewhere else. For this to be a swap like all the other swaps, Moscow has to slowly grind against poorly equipped cannon fodder holding defensive positions in Donbass while Kiev executes a lightning fast blitz into other Russian territory.

Pattern recognition, folks.

We’ve covered the previous iterations of the “Swap Offensives” before.

A refresher:

And another refresher:

What I’m driving at here is that this “swap” process has happened enough times already for it to be more or less easy to predict what happens next. What remains to be determined is where the other half of this “swap” will occur. If I had to guess, in the north-east, of course. All of the UAF’s previous pushes there have been relatively successful, encountering no defenses or resistance in the initial push.

The UAF push to take Crimea back will occur later in the “ceasefire”.

Not a Ceasefire

Word are misused routinely in this war. The fact that Putin insists that this is not even a war but a “special policing/military operation in brotherly, socialist shared history Ukraine” really sets the tone nicely for the rest of the propagandistic deception that surrounds the narratives around this Not-War.

I believe that what is being actually discussed in Alaska and in all previous meetings has more to do with the Kremlin oligarchs’ confiscated assets and the sanctions that have been put on Russia and the “air war” of bombings that is being waged against the assets of said oligarchs.

They may indeed come to an understanding on that front.

However, geostrategically, Washington is killing at least two birds with one stone with this war. Russia is taking horrendous losses and bleeding out all of its USSR-era stockpiles of weapons and spending all of its treasure. The second stone is that Ukraine is also bleeding out and Ukrainians, despite their protestations, are also considered Russians by Washington, which means that they want as many of them dead in the process of defeating Russia as possible. Meanwhile, EUrope is being remilitiarized and forced to pay the Americans more for the American occupation of their nations. In other words, this entire situation is a WIN, WIN, WIN for Washington.

So, why would they produce an actual total ceasefire and peace now?

For Christian Moral Values Anti-Globalist Patriot Alliance concerns?

Don’t make me laugh!

No, the plan is clearly to get the EUropeans to start shouldering the brunt of the burden of the war in Ukraine while the Americans shift their focus over to either Iran or China (we don’t know yet). From what I gather, there is a Deep State faction around the public figure of Musk and Thiel and Carlson and “Vance” and all of those shady defense contractors that wants to basically arm up America’s allies and then cut them loose to handle their sections of the global Judeo-Anglo Empire on their own.

This will then free Washington up to pursue a series of wars in East Asia against China.

Basically: these types want to arm Kiev up to the teeth, force the EUropeans to support their efforts in the war, and then retreat and refocus elsewhere. There may even be reason to believe that they seek the same policies vis a vis Israel i.e., to arm them to the teeth and give them carte blanche to establish their Greater Israel Empire, while keeping American strength in reserve for China.

Who knows.

I don’t even think that they’re powerful enough to replace Zelensky, let alone to defy the far more powerful neocon (Trotskyite) Deep State that wants America to essentially commit itself wholeheartedly to the annihilation of Russia + Iran project over the next decade.

…

Now, for years, I have alleged that Kiev does not care about Donbass and would rather be rid of it than have it reattached to Ukraine. It is actually Putin who wanted Donbass to be reintegrated into Ukraine, as evidenced by the terms of the agreements signed at Minsk I, Minsk II and Istanbul I, which insisted on reintegrating Donbass into Ukraine. You would know this, dear detractors, if you bothered to actually read the agreements or even simply asked AI to summarize them for you.

But luckily, you could just read what I wrote instead:

The reasoning for this is simple: Donbass’ ethnic mafia clans have controlled politics in Ukraine for half a century. Putting them back into the Ukrainian political system and giving them extra privileges, as Putin has tried to do, would put Ukraine firmly back under the control of the Donbass mafia clans. Because these mafia clans are well-connected and friendly with Moscow’s elite, this has been the Kremlin’s strategy for managing Ukraine since forever. The SMO only kicked off because of the arrest of one of these mafia dons, Medvedchuk, who was personal friends with Putin.

Also, public perception matters to the Kremlin and to Washington.

Both “sides” seem very motivated to portray these deals as being immensely beneficial to the Kremlin. Putin is portrayed in Western media as having all the cards on his side and Trump is excoriated for caving to the tyrant-dictator. I mean, just look:

The goal of these alarmist headlines are obviously to drum up support for Kiev and Zelensky and the UAF war effort. Trump is routinely portrayed as a traitor to the cause of Ukraine Freedom Democracy Value Rare Earth Borders despite the fact that he’s throwing ultimatums at Putin, sending over loads and loads of weapons to Kiev (in his first term too!) and continuing the boa constrictor foreign policy strategy of surrounding Russia with NATO allies to be used in the next proxy war against Russia.

It baffles me that people simply cannot detect patterns here.

Look: every single time that Zelensky needs a new shipment of money and weapons, the Russians conveniently snatch away a townlet or a suburb from the UAF. The headlines then blare: “UKRAINE DEMOCRACY DIES IN DARKNESS HITLER PUTIN TRUMP!” or some variation of that, and then Zelensky gets more stuff, the front miraculously stabilizes, and the UAF demonstrably invades Russia to show what a good investment they are to NATO.

…

Let’s see if the following happens:

• a territory swap

• lifting of some sanctions on Kremlinoid oligarchs

• EUropean countries pledging more to defeat Putin, seemingly “in defiance” of Trump abandoning Ukraine (actually exactly what Washington has been demanding of them)

I would be very very very very very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very very surprised to hear after Friday that the Not-War is now officially over.

That is, I actually wouldn’t be surprised to hear those kinds of headlines everywhere at all.

In fact, I expect them.

But I’d be very very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very veryvery very very surprised if the actual fighting came to the end over the weekend.

And: can you even have a “peace” while a “war” continues?

Why sure! All you have to do is redefine “peace” and redefine “war”.

Let’s just lean back and see what new linguistic tricks they manage to come up with this time.