|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On September 03 2023 05:12 sertas wrote:
This war was such a failure for russia, they could've kept donbas , luhansk and crimea indefinently and had all that gas and oil money, now they got maruiopol and melitopol, wow i guess those cities are worth burning your entire state budget and losing who knows how many troops and burning the 1 billion dollar per day they got from europe gas money.
Now they risk losing even what they had when they started, who knows where the war will be in a year if it continues
Yeah, while they do hold territory which they shouldn't, having north korea and Iran as last friends is kind of red flag.
Russia has no long term plan, since everything is done for the short term survival of Putin.
|
Yeah, the idea that negotiations can start as soon as the west demands it is nonsense. I don't see any evidence of war support coming anywhere close to faltering for Ukraine, and a removal of western support would not change this. Same for Russia tbh, so it wouldn't surprise me whatsoever to see this thread up for a couple more years.
|
On September 03 2023 07:44 0x64 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2023 05:12 sertas wrote:
This war was such a failure for russia, they could've kept donbas , luhansk and crimea indefinently and had all that gas and oil money, now they got maruiopol and melitopol, wow i guess those cities are worth burning your entire state budget and losing who knows how many troops and burning the 1 billion dollar per day they got from europe gas money.
Now they risk losing even what they had when they started, who knows where the war will be in a year if it continues Yeah, while they do hold territory which they shouldn't, having north korea and Iran as last friends is kind of red flag. Russia has no long term plan, since everything is done for the short term survival of Putin.
There's something else about this that worries me, and that's the long term ramifications of this war on global stability.
As Russia and China get further and further isolated from the West via sanctions and other diplomatic pressures (and I'm not saying we shouldn't be doing these things, there's definitely good reasons to be doing so), the more they start to rely on each other for economic and military support.
I worry about a formation of a new kind of Central Powers with Russia, China, N. Korea, Iran and Belarus forming formal alliances with each other.
We've been able to keep something like that from happening because economic interest in Western Markets, has kept relations relatively cool over the last few decades, but if we keep isolating them then who knows.
Just something to consider for the future.
|
So, Ukrainians have confirmed they have secret bases inside Russia, from which they're executing strikes deep behind the lines at the airfields. The airfield close to Finland was struck from such a hidden outpost with the use of cardboard drones.
https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-australian-made-cardboard-drones-used-to-attack-russian-airfield-show-how-innovation-is-key-to-modern-warfare-212629
Once again the Ukrainians have shown up quite a bit of ingenuity with their application. Basically they turned those light recon drones into a sort of cluster bombs. They fly them over the airplanes and detonate them with the effect similar to a claymore mine (a lot of shrapnel covering wide area below the drone, puncturing fuel tanks, fuselage and thus taking aircraft out of commission most likely permanently). Using ~$4k worth of drone + explosives to disable multi-million dollar aircraft that are vital for Russian strategy must feel good for Ukraine.
|
On September 02 2023 13:54 StasisField wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2023 10:37 Mohdoo wrote:On September 02 2023 04:09 Sent. wrote:
I think we don't have to worry about anyone important pushing Ukraine to the negotiating table unitl at least 2024 winter. The West committed a lot of resources and political will to help Ukraine win this conflict. It wouldn't make sense to suddenly change tone and try to convince them to give up some land. It's a long term investment. Ukrainian fighting spirit seems strong as well so I doubt they'd be the first to push for cease fire.
They're supposed to get F-16s and Abrams tanks this or the next year, why would you want them to stop fighting a few months after receiving that kind of equipment? tbh the main thing, IMO, is that this is informally a flex competition between Russia and the US. The US would lose such an unfathomable amount of global influence if they were to give up on Ukraine. It would empower Russia to basically do anything, and prevent the US from wielding any power whatsoever without direct boots on the ground conflict. Have we been watching the same war? Geopolitically, Russia has already lost. Even if they end up taking every inch of Ukrainian land, they have already lost. NATO expanded, EU is waning off of Russian gas, the Russian economy isn't doing well, Russia is using up its old stockpiles, etc. Russia has already failed to achieve its wider geopolitical goals. The only thing Russia can hope to do is claim some land to save face and sell a victory at home.
You are right, but I think that only reinforces the need for the US to see it through. Yes, from a technical perspective, Russia has been shown to be less military capable than the US by a trillion years. But in many ways, you could argue that means Russia being successful in spite of the US directly seeking to prevent it would indicate the US is not a threat to Russia.
|
On September 03 2023 07:32 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2023 04:07 pmp10 wrote:On September 02 2023 18:53 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 18:40 pmp10 wrote:
Slippery slope towards effective surrender.
If you start the discussion you cannot be sure were it will end. Kyiv HAS offered to talk many times in early 2022. Putin used every single one of these opportunities to attempt to gain tactical advantages on the battlefield. He didn't engage in any talks whatsoever. He is the one who's not interested in negotiations, he's interested only in total surrender by Kyiv. When are you finally going to accept this reality and stop pretending there's an alternative as long as Putin is in power? As soon as the west does. Zelensky had to drop his 'no talks with Putin' condition for a reason. In practice if Putin lacks credibility then west should resolve itself to a regime change in Russia, or in the very least ignore all diplomatic overtures. We will see how that works out. Zelensky has never had a "no talks with Putin" condition. In fact, he has repeatedly claimed since day 1 that there is only one acceptable deal, and that is the full return of Ukraine territory. His words have always been "A deal won't happen with Putin", because Putin isn't willing to meet these demands, or any diplomatic efforts at all, not because Zelensky refuses to deal with him.
At the beginning? No.
He did make one after annexations.
He was made to climb down from it of course.
After all Putin can be the leader of Russia for a long time to come.
|
On September 03 2023 10:24 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2023 07:44 0x64 wrote:On September 03 2023 05:12 sertas wrote:
This war was such a failure for russia, they could've kept donbas , luhansk and crimea indefinently and had all that gas and oil money, now they got maruiopol and melitopol, wow i guess those cities are worth burning your entire state budget and losing who knows how many troops and burning the 1 billion dollar per day they got from europe gas money.
Now they risk losing even what they had when they started, who knows where the war will be in a year if it continues Yeah, while they do hold territory which they shouldn't, having north korea and Iran as last friends is kind of red flag. Russia has no long term plan, since everything is done for the short term survival of Putin. There's something else about this that worries me, and that's the long term ramifications of this war on global stability. As Russia and China get further and further isolated from the West via sanctions and other diplomatic pressures (and I'm not saying we shouldn't be doing these things, there's definitely good reasons to be doing so), the more they start to rely on each other for economic and military support. I worry about a formation of a new kind of Central Powers with Russia, China, N. Korea, Iran and Belarus forming formal alliances with each other. We've been able to keep something like that from happening because economic interest in Western Markets, has kept relations relatively cool over the last few decades, but if we keep isolating them then who knows. Just something to consider for the future.
China is not allied to Russia or even particularly friendly. And it's not isolated at all.
|
On September 03 2023 15:01 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2023 13:54 StasisField wrote:On September 02 2023 10:37 Mohdoo wrote:On September 02 2023 04:09 Sent. wrote:
I think we don't have to worry about anyone important pushing Ukraine to the negotiating table unitl at least 2024 winter. The West committed a lot of resources and political will to help Ukraine win this conflict. It wouldn't make sense to suddenly change tone and try to convince them to give up some land. It's a long term investment. Ukrainian fighting spirit seems strong as well so I doubt they'd be the first to push for cease fire.
They're supposed to get F-16s and Abrams tanks this or the next year, why would you want them to stop fighting a few months after receiving that kind of equipment? tbh the main thing, IMO, is that this is informally a flex competition between Russia and the US. The US would lose such an unfathomable amount of global influence if they were to give up on Ukraine. It would empower Russia to basically do anything, and prevent the US from wielding any power whatsoever without direct boots on the ground conflict. Have we been watching the same war? Geopolitically, Russia has already lost. Even if they end up taking every inch of Ukrainian land, they have already lost. NATO expanded, EU is waning off of Russian gas, the Russian economy isn't doing well, Russia is using up its old stockpiles, etc. Russia has already failed to achieve its wider geopolitical goals. The only thing Russia can hope to do is claim some land to save face and sell a victory at home. You are right, but I think that only reinforces the need for the US to see it through. Yes, from a technical perspective, Russia has been shown to be less military capable than the US by a trillion years. But in many ways, you could argue that means Russia being successful in spite of the US directly seeking to prevent it would indicate the US is not a threat to Russia.
If you don't understand geopolitics, sure, I could see that argument being very effective. Good thing the people in charge tend to understand at least the very basics. This isn't a real concern.
|
On September 02 2023 21:55 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2023 21:54 Vindicare605 wrote:On September 02 2023 21:44 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 21:19 Vindicare605 wrote:On September 02 2023 18:53 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 18:40 pmp10 wrote:
Slippery slope towards effective surrender.
If you start the discussion you cannot be sure were it will end. Kyiv HAS offered to talk many times in early 2022. Putin used every single one of these opportunities to attempt to gain tactical advantages on the battlefield. He didn't engage in any talks whatsoever. He is the one who's not interested in negotiations, he's interested only in total surrender by Kyiv. When are you finally going to accept this reality and stop pretending there's an alternative as long as Putin is in power? Not that I don't agree with you, but let's look at this another way. Russia is not going to back out of this war. They can't afford to. The West has effectively backed them into a corner where they have lost nearly all of the economic leverage they used to have with Oil and Gas. Finland and Sweden are joining NATO. If they pull back with anything less than a victory they will be humiliated to a fatal degree. They will lose all power and authority as a serious state. They can't afford to lose this war. They will keep sending men and material, since they are now being armed by N. Korea and by proxy probably China indefinitely until their own people rise up against the regime to stop the war (which doesnt seem like it will ever happen since Russia's propaganda machine is so strong) or until Kyiv folds, and those are the good outcomes because there's the obvious Nuclear Option still sitting on the table that as much we don't want it to be real is still a real possibility if Putin gets desperate enough. So that being said. How does Ukraine actually win this war? They don't have enough men to kick out Russia completely, not if Putin is willing to sacrifice every man and boy in Russia to keep the war going, and Russia isn't going to withdraw with anything less than a bullshit treaty that massively favors them. So how do they win? This looks to me like a stalemate that doesn't have an end. Is that a good outcome for Ukraine? For any of us? If there are no diplomatic solutions to be had here, because Putin can't be trusted to negotiate in good faith, (which I agree with, he cant be trusted) then the only solution is a complete military victory one way or another, and right now it doesn't seem like either side is capable of actually achieving that. So what the hell are we supposed to do? Just let the war go on forever? Russia can not only afford to lose this war, but they absolutely have to lose it. Putin is the one who can't afford to lose it. Putin is not Russia, but he successfully lied to people so that they think Russia is under an existential threat by Ukraine/NATO. The only existential threat Russia is facing is Putin. Yes of course, obviously. But for all intents and purposes Putin IS Russia right now and for the forseeable future. To say anything else is to deny reality. Putin has absolute control over everything Russia does, and he will not withdraw from this conflict under any circumstances. So that brings us back to my original question. How does this end? It ends when Russia is pushed back out of Ukraine. And the West will keep arming and supplying Ukraine until that happens.
I have to disagree. It ends when Russia decides to stop the shelling and bombing. Pushing the frontlines up to the border does not mean that the war ends. And while Ukrainian morale is apparently high and western support apparently strong, I would guess if there is a way to end the conflict earlier rather than later a lot of people would like to see that happen - in Ukraine and in Europe, too. This war is ruinous for both parties of the conflict and afterwards its going to be very expensive for Ukraine to rebuild, demine and still keep their military strong enough to deter Russia.
There are valid reasons for wanting negotiations and an agreed peace, even if it's hard to trust Russia.
|
On September 03 2023 17:13 schaf wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2023 21:55 Gorsameth wrote:On September 02 2023 21:54 Vindicare605 wrote:On September 02 2023 21:44 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 21:19 Vindicare605 wrote:On September 02 2023 18:53 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 18:40 pmp10 wrote:
Slippery slope towards effective surrender.
If you start the discussion you cannot be sure were it will end. Kyiv HAS offered to talk many times in early 2022. Putin used every single one of these opportunities to attempt to gain tactical advantages on the battlefield. He didn't engage in any talks whatsoever. He is the one who's not interested in negotiations, he's interested only in total surrender by Kyiv. When are you finally going to accept this reality and stop pretending there's an alternative as long as Putin is in power? Not that I don't agree with you, but let's look at this another way. Russia is not going to back out of this war. They can't afford to. The West has effectively backed them into a corner where they have lost nearly all of the economic leverage they used to have with Oil and Gas. Finland and Sweden are joining NATO. If they pull back with anything less than a victory they will be humiliated to a fatal degree. They will lose all power and authority as a serious state. They can't afford to lose this war. They will keep sending men and material, since they are now being armed by N. Korea and by proxy probably China indefinitely until their own people rise up against the regime to stop the war (which doesnt seem like it will ever happen since Russia's propaganda machine is so strong) or until Kyiv folds, and those are the good outcomes because there's the obvious Nuclear Option still sitting on the table that as much we don't want it to be real is still a real possibility if Putin gets desperate enough. So that being said. How does Ukraine actually win this war? They don't have enough men to kick out Russia completely, not if Putin is willing to sacrifice every man and boy in Russia to keep the war going, and Russia isn't going to withdraw with anything less than a bullshit treaty that massively favors them. So how do they win? This looks to me like a stalemate that doesn't have an end. Is that a good outcome for Ukraine? For any of us? If there are no diplomatic solutions to be had here, because Putin can't be trusted to negotiate in good faith, (which I agree with, he cant be trusted) then the only solution is a complete military victory one way or another, and right now it doesn't seem like either side is capable of actually achieving that. So what the hell are we supposed to do? Just let the war go on forever? Russia can not only afford to lose this war, but they absolutely have to lose it. Putin is the one who can't afford to lose it. Putin is not Russia, but he successfully lied to people so that they think Russia is under an existential threat by Ukraine/NATO. The only existential threat Russia is facing is Putin. Yes of course, obviously. But for all intents and purposes Putin IS Russia right now and for the forseeable future. To say anything else is to deny reality. Putin has absolute control over everything Russia does, and he will not withdraw from this conflict under any circumstances. So that brings us back to my original question. How does this end? It ends when Russia is pushed back out of Ukraine. And the West will keep arming and supplying Ukraine until that happens. I have to disagree. It ends when Russia decides to stop the shelling and bombing. Pushing the frontlines up to the border does not mean that the war ends. And while Ukrainian morale is apparently high and western support apparently strong, I would guess if there is a way to end the conflict earlier rather than later a lot of people would like to see that happen - in Ukraine and in Europe, too. This war is ruinous for both parties of the conflict and afterwards its going to be very expensive for Ukraine to rebuild, demine and still keep their military strong enough to deter Russia. There are valid reasons for wanting negotiations and an agreed peace, even if it's hard to trust Russia. Russia won't give up the territory's it has claimed and Ukraine won't settle for less then their entire country back.
So what way to end the conflict early is there?
|
Also, you simply can't trust Russia. So any end of the conflict would need to be one that also enables Ukraine to join Nato, or something similar that protects them in the future.
Because without that physical guarantee, Russia will just try the same shit at the next opportunity. No matter what is written on any paper anywhere.
|
On September 03 2023 15:05 pmp10 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2023 07:32 Excludos wrote:On September 03 2023 04:07 pmp10 wrote:On September 02 2023 18:53 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 18:40 pmp10 wrote:
Slippery slope towards effective surrender.
If you start the discussion you cannot be sure were it will end. Kyiv HAS offered to talk many times in early 2022. Putin used every single one of these opportunities to attempt to gain tactical advantages on the battlefield. He didn't engage in any talks whatsoever. He is the one who's not interested in negotiations, he's interested only in total surrender by Kyiv. When are you finally going to accept this reality and stop pretending there's an alternative as long as Putin is in power? As soon as the west does. Zelensky had to drop his 'no talks with Putin' condition for a reason. In practice if Putin lacks credibility then west should resolve itself to a regime change in Russia, or in the very least ignore all diplomatic overtures. We will see how that works out. Zelensky has never had a "no talks with Putin" condition. In fact, he has repeatedly claimed since day 1 that there is only one acceptable deal, and that is the full return of Ukraine territory. His words have always been "A deal won't happen with Putin", because Putin isn't willing to meet these demands, or any diplomatic efforts at all, not because Zelensky refuses to deal with him. At the beginning? No. He did make one after annexations.He was made to climb down from it of course.After all Putin can be the leader of Russia for a long time to come.
That is the part in question. I've not heard of Zelensky being pressured in any capacity into offering talks with Putin.
|
On September 03 2023 17:13 schaf wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2023 21:55 Gorsameth wrote:On September 02 2023 21:54 Vindicare605 wrote:On September 02 2023 21:44 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 21:19 Vindicare605 wrote:On September 02 2023 18:53 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 18:40 pmp10 wrote:
Slippery slope towards effective surrender.
If you start the discussion you cannot be sure were it will end. Kyiv HAS offered to talk many times in early 2022. Putin used every single one of these opportunities to attempt to gain tactical advantages on the battlefield. He didn't engage in any talks whatsoever. He is the one who's not interested in negotiations, he's interested only in total surrender by Kyiv. When are you finally going to accept this reality and stop pretending there's an alternative as long as Putin is in power? Not that I don't agree with you, but let's look at this another way. Russia is not going to back out of this war. They can't afford to. The West has effectively backed them into a corner where they have lost nearly all of the economic leverage they used to have with Oil and Gas. Finland and Sweden are joining NATO. If they pull back with anything less than a victory they will be humiliated to a fatal degree. They will lose all power and authority as a serious state. They can't afford to lose this war. They will keep sending men and material, since they are now being armed by N. Korea and by proxy probably China indefinitely until their own people rise up against the regime to stop the war (which doesnt seem like it will ever happen since Russia's propaganda machine is so strong) or until Kyiv folds, and those are the good outcomes because there's the obvious Nuclear Option still sitting on the table that as much we don't want it to be real is still a real possibility if Putin gets desperate enough. So that being said. How does Ukraine actually win this war? They don't have enough men to kick out Russia completely, not if Putin is willing to sacrifice every man and boy in Russia to keep the war going, and Russia isn't going to withdraw with anything less than a bullshit treaty that massively favors them. So how do they win? This looks to me like a stalemate that doesn't have an end. Is that a good outcome for Ukraine? For any of us? If there are no diplomatic solutions to be had here, because Putin can't be trusted to negotiate in good faith, (which I agree with, he cant be trusted) then the only solution is a complete military victory one way or another, and right now it doesn't seem like either side is capable of actually achieving that. So what the hell are we supposed to do? Just let the war go on forever? Russia can not only afford to lose this war, but they absolutely have to lose it. Putin is the one who can't afford to lose it. Putin is not Russia, but he successfully lied to people so that they think Russia is under an existential threat by Ukraine/NATO. The only existential threat Russia is facing is Putin. Yes of course, obviously. But for all intents and purposes Putin IS Russia right now and for the forseeable future. To say anything else is to deny reality. Putin has absolute control over everything Russia does, and he will not withdraw from this conflict under any circumstances. So that brings us back to my original question. How does this end? It ends when Russia is pushed back out of Ukraine. And the West will keep arming and supplying Ukraine until that happens. I have to disagree. It ends when Russia decides to stop the shelling and bombing. Pushing the frontlines up to the border does not mean that the war ends. And while Ukrainian morale is apparently high and western support apparently strong, I would guess if there is a way to end the conflict earlier rather than later a lot of people would like to see that happen - in Ukraine and in Europe, too. This war is ruinous for both parties of the conflict and afterwards its going to be very expensive for Ukraine to rebuild, demine and still keep their military strong enough to deter Russia. There are valid reasons for wanting negotiations and an agreed peace, even if it's hard to trust Russia.
It's impossible to trust Russia under the Putin administration. Trust is over, forever. Russia has to go the same route as Germany did after WW2 to rebuild its bonds with neighboring nations.
This is also why negotiations are impossible. Since Russia can't be trusted, therefore Ukraine can't accept a deal that isn't a complete withdrawal of all Russian troops to the pre-2014 borders. In fact Ukraine would likely demand a sort of de-militarization (in particular nukes) from Russia to prove their goodwill.
But Russia currently has only one kind of goodwill, and it's that of Putin. That's the goodwill that always ends with many dead Ukrainians.
The claim that Zelensky is unwilling to hold negotiations is false. He's willing. Putin isn't.
|
On September 03 2023 18:07 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2023 15:05 pmp10 wrote:On September 03 2023 07:32 Excludos wrote:On September 03 2023 04:07 pmp10 wrote:On September 02 2023 18:53 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 18:40 pmp10 wrote:
Slippery slope towards effective surrender.
If you start the discussion you cannot be sure were it will end. Kyiv HAS offered to talk many times in early 2022. Putin used every single one of these opportunities to attempt to gain tactical advantages on the battlefield. He didn't engage in any talks whatsoever. He is the one who's not interested in negotiations, he's interested only in total surrender by Kyiv. When are you finally going to accept this reality and stop pretending there's an alternative as long as Putin is in power? As soon as the west does. Zelensky had to drop his 'no talks with Putin' condition for a reason. In practice if Putin lacks credibility then west should resolve itself to a regime change in Russia, or in the very least ignore all diplomatic overtures. We will see how that works out. Zelensky has never had a "no talks with Putin" condition. In fact, he has repeatedly claimed since day 1 that there is only one acceptable deal, and that is the full return of Ukraine territory. His words have always been "A deal won't happen with Putin", because Putin isn't willing to meet these demands, or any diplomatic efforts at all, not because Zelensky refuses to deal with him. At the beginning? No. He did make one after annexations.He was made to climb down from it of course.After all Putin can be the leader of Russia for a long time to come. That is the part in question. I've not heard of Zelensky being pressured in any capacity into offering talks with Putin.
Not offering talks outright, it was way too early back then.
Just stopping the insistence that Putin himself is a deal-breaker.
|
On September 03 2023 17:52 Simberto wrote:
Also, you simply can't trust Russia. So any end of the conflict would need to be one that also enables Ukraine to join Nato, or something similar that protects them in the future.
Because without that physical guarantee, Russia will just try the same shit at the next opportunity. No matter what is written on any paper anywhere.
And Russia will never sign a peace treaty without a written guarantee that Ukraine won't join NATO, and until the war is actually over officially, according to NATO's own rules Ukraine CAN'T join because it has a border dispute with a neighboring country.
So the only way that Ukraine ever joins NATO is if Russia allows them to which they never will.
I suppose you COULD change the bylaws if you're NATO, but that would require a unanimous consent of all of the member nations at the bare minimum and something tells me that is extremely unlikely to happen because it would set a bad precedent about just changing all sorts of bylaws whenever the situation makes it convenient.
So we're back to square one.
|
Ukraine can get article 5-like protection from a number of key NATO members before it formerly joins NATO. Finland did, for example.
|
it can, it won't.
Its important to remember that NATO absolutely does not want to get into an active war with Russia. The entire point of NATO is to be such a fearsome block (mainly under the umbrella of the US) that no one wants to go to war with them. That also ties into why a country can't join while it is in an active dispute, because it would pull NATO into a war.
Any security guarantee that would draw countries into a war with Russia is pretty much off the table.
Finland was never in any actual danger of being attacked. The UK made a show of giving security guarantees but that was just because, since the left the EU, they no longer had a mutual defence agreement. Finland was already basically protected by the EU, which would naturally lead to the rest of NATO.
|
On September 03 2023 19:07 pmp10 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2023 18:07 Magic Powers wrote:On September 03 2023 15:05 pmp10 wrote:On September 03 2023 07:32 Excludos wrote:On September 03 2023 04:07 pmp10 wrote:On September 02 2023 18:53 Magic Powers wrote:On September 02 2023 18:40 pmp10 wrote:
Slippery slope towards effective surrender.
If you start the discussion you cannot be sure were it will end. Kyiv HAS offered to talk many times in early 2022. Putin used every single one of these opportunities to attempt to gain tactical advantages on the battlefield. He didn't engage in any talks whatsoever. He is the one who's not interested in negotiations, he's interested only in total surrender by Kyiv. When are you finally going to accept this reality and stop pretending there's an alternative as long as Putin is in power? As soon as the west does. Zelensky had to drop his 'no talks with Putin' condition for a reason. In practice if Putin lacks credibility then west should resolve itself to a regime change in Russia, or in the very least ignore all diplomatic overtures. We will see how that works out. Zelensky has never had a "no talks with Putin" condition. In fact, he has repeatedly claimed since day 1 that there is only one acceptable deal, and that is the full return of Ukraine territory. His words have always been "A deal won't happen with Putin", because Putin isn't willing to meet these demands, or any diplomatic efforts at all, not because Zelensky refuses to deal with him. At the beginning? No. He did make one after annexations.He was made to climb down from it of course.After all Putin can be the leader of Russia for a long time to come. That is the part in question. I've not heard of Zelensky being pressured in any capacity into offering talks with Putin. Not offering talks outright, it was way too early back then. Just stopping the insistence that Putin himself is a deal-breaker.
There's nothing indicating that the Kyiv administration or Zelensky specifically have been pressured by anyone. Firstly that news post remains unconfirmed, and only Washington Post has reported it. Secondly it's phrased as an encouragement, not a coercion or anything of that sort.
Putin is the only one who's not interested in talks. Zelensky would love to talk, but Putin has used every opportunity to gain tactical advantages. Every single offer from Putin was a bluff. He then stopped bluffing and dropped his pretense because Zelensky started calling every single one of his bluffs.
|
On September 03 2023 19:49 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2023 17:52 Simberto wrote:
Also, you simply can't trust Russia. So any end of the conflict would need to be one that also enables Ukraine to join Nato, or something similar that protects them in the future.
Because without that physical guarantee, Russia will just try the same shit at the next opportunity. No matter what is written on any paper anywhere. And Russia will never sign a peace treaty without a written guarantee that Ukraine won't join NATO, and until the war is actually over officially, according to NATO's own rules Ukraine CAN'T join because it has a border dispute with a neighboring country. So the only way that Ukraine ever joins NATO is if Russia allows them to which they never will. I suppose you COULD change the bylaws if you're NATO, but that would require a unanimous consent of all of the member nations at the bare minimum and something tells me that is extremely unlikely to happen because it would set a bad precedent about just changing all sorts of bylaws whenever the situation makes it convenient. So we're back to square one.
Ukraine doesn't need to accomplish peace with Russia to be able to join NATO. They only need to create de facto stability at their borders while upholding democracy. So basically as soon as martial law ends they can be welcomed into NATO. It's not required for Ukraine to stop Russia from firing missiles. What's required is that such attacks don't result in an escalation into another war.
|
I'm pretty sure Ukraine won't be able to join NATO while Russia is firing missiles in their direction.
Unless NATO changes their rules about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
