|
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 August 18 2024 21:44 KwarK wrote:
Did you forget which side of the debate you were arguing? You made this point in favour of Ukrainian disarmament and trusting that Russia wouldn’t attempt to expand into nearby land just because it wasn’t defended. My point wasn't in favour of Ukrainian disarmament and trusting Russia.
If you read what I wrote again but with more attention, you'll see that I'm saying there's no need to bring up previous 500 years (which are not relevant IMO), because previous 80 should be enough.
I think what you're arguing for is correct, I just find this specific argument to be flawed.
One can argue for good/correct things with bad arguments.
|
On August 18 2024 22:29 maybenexttime wrote:
Nice try but the abortion law was changed without a popular vote precisely because it had no popular support. And this war of course started with a popular vote? I don't remember it this way.
Your law is still in place, even though vast majority didn't vote for it, and they don't support it even now - still it wasn't rescinded. It's almost as if vast majority's support is not needed for government to do what it wants...
On August 18 2024 22:29 maybenexttime wrote:
You can be in denial all you want. That won't change the facts. And you can trust surveys made among people who are not afraid to voice their opinion and think they are representative of everyone, that also won't change the facts.
|
On August 18 2024 22:32 ZeroByte13 wrote:
And this war of course started with a popular vote? I don't remember it this way.
It didn't start with popular support, although the Kremlin has been manufacturing consent for many years prior to the invasion. There are heaps of evidence that the vast majority of Russians support the war, however.
Your law is still in place, even though vast majority didn't vote for it, and they don't support it even now - still it wasn't rescinded. It's almost as if vast majority's support is not needed for government to do what it wants...
Because that would require changing the constitution under a stacked constitutional court. By the way, your deflections and whataboutism are truly pathetic.
And you can trust surveys made among people who are not afraid to voice their opinion and think they are representative of everyone, that also won't change the facts.
I'm sure there's an FSB agent stalking every Russian living in the EU as well, because polls are showing that their opinions aren't that much different from the Levada polls.
|
On August 18 2024 22:51 maybenexttime wrote:
By the way, your deflections and whataboutism are truly pathetic. You're talking to someone who knows personally hundreds of Russians and few of them support the war. Most of them are afraid to voice their opinions though.
And then you tell me with absolute confidence I'm delusional if I think it's 30-40%, not 70-80%.
I might be wrong because nobody knows the actual %, but I have my arguments for it.
It's funny to hear "pathetic" from you of all people. Why am I even trying to argue with you..?
|
On August 18 2024 22:54 ZeroByte13 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2024 22:51 maybenexttime wrote:
By the way, your deflections and whataboutism are truly pathetic. You're talking to someone who knows personally hundreds of Russians and few of them support the war. Most of them are afraid to voice their opinions though. And then you tell me with absolute confidence I'm delusional if I think it's 30-40%, not 70-80%. I might be wrong because nobody knows the actual %, but I have my arguments for it. It's funny to hear "pathetic" from you of all people. Why I even trying to argue with you..?
Yup, I would confirm with my Russian friends that the % is the same. Don't underestimate Russians. It's really sad this whole thing is happening but even if it takes 200 years, one day, things will be normal.
|
On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world.
Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people.
Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets.
This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories?
|
Very cute :>
On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:
First, you [...] aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea.
First  What coup? Are you talking about the referendum on first of dec 1991? Please elaborate.
Second I'm not aware of any treaty in which ukraine garantuees on it's neutrality. It's neither part of the Budapest Memorandum nor of the 2 plus 4 talks. Please elaborate.
Third What "spring camapaign" are you talking about and what territory? You are not seriously making the argument that now it's cool the robber takes your whole farm since he just gave you back the cow he stole whilst shooting your husband, are you?
On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:
mild requirements
That is your opinion. I disagree.
What about the other requirements though? You can cherry pick from these demands but it doesn't help your point. If you can explain why all of these demands were "mild" and one could have easily accepted please do so.
On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:
Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons
First Propagandist? How so :> They are super transparent and as I stated if - and it seems like it's a big big if in your case - you're really interested in double checking her facts there are many many more sources conforming her statements.
Second I didn't quote anybody. I was giving a source. So you can check my statements and don't have to rely on my words in good faith only. This is fairly standard and prudent because it makes statements verifiable. If you ever work in science you'll see that giving reliable sources is super basic and makes much much sense.
On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:
Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy.. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world.
First I did not choose these terms at random, nor did the author of the sources given, but they are quotes from the Russian side.
Second just because for some it's possible doesn't mean it's possible for all. That is basic logic. I'm confident in ur abilities to realize your flaw in logic by taking a look at - let's say - the ukraine; or the rest of europe over millenia :>
Have a nice day :>
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories?
-the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence
On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level
|
United States43401 Posts
On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories?
Doesn’t go far enough, we also need the complete denazification of the Rusnazi regime.
|
As I mentioned the possibility of yesterday it seems New York is now completely under the control of Russian forces. Earlier today news came in from all side of Ukrainian troop abandoning the pocket north east of the town:
![[image loading]](https://i.postimg.cc/y8WX3csV/GVQsbn5-WMAAj-JJ.jpg)
With fresh news from Ukrainian sources that the battles have reached Nelepovka to the north of the settlement:
![[image loading]](https://i.postimg.cc/ZKwCNQ5N/GVQsbn5-WMAAj-J32321-J.jpg)
New York as per DPR Law reverts to its pre-Maidan name of Novgorodskoye. The town bordering Gorlovka had a pre-war population of close to 10k and was one of the founding settlements of the Donetsk Peoples Republic. The New York - Toretsk line had been incredibly formidable since 2014 and held up well against local and Russian forces but with troops stationed there being siphoned off to deal with the Kharkov incursion and more recently for the Kursk attack the forces there were not enough to stop the collapse of these lines.
With the news of the terricons south of Toretsk (pre-Maidan name Dzerzinsk) being captured over the last two days and Russian forces entering the first high rise area within the locality the battle for Toretsk, whose pre-war population numbered over 30k might be over quicker than expected.
Very significant changes in the Pokrovsk (pre-Maidan name Krasnoarmeysk) direction too. Will see if I can do a short write up tomorrow, or maybe even this evening. Things are moving along quickly
|
On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence -don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level
Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that?
|
On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 02:03 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that?
No, this is not it. My answer is related to the position, which have several times been stated here, "the west needs to put a little more effort/supplies/own troops to win", which indicates a complete misunderstanding of the current balance of power.
In regards of might makes right I have the same position as you; regretfully you don't want to take seriously my arguments on the reasons and timeline of the war.
On August 19 2024 02:13 Jones313 wrote:
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
-get yourself educated a bit; you don't bring any value to the discussion
|
On August 19 2024 01:38 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? Doesn’t go far enough, we also need the complete denazification of the Rusnazi regime.
That, and in my incredibly generous peace proposal I even fucked over the people of Karjala (Karelia), occupied parts of Georgia, Königsberg, Chechnya, Manchuria...
|
On August 19 2024 02:13 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 02:03 Excludos wrote:On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that? No, this is not it. My answer is related to the position, which have several times been stated here, "the west needs to put a little more effort/supplies/own troops to win", which indicates a complete misunderstanding of the current balance of power. In regards of might makes right I have the same position as you; regretfully you don't want to take seriously my arguments on the reasons and timeline of the war. Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 02:13 Jones313 wrote:
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
-get yourself educated a bit; you don't bring any value to the discussion
"I'm educated, you're not". Handy catch-all to default to every time your arguments blow up in your face. Alas, I've grown up lacking opportunities to get the Russian education you've had.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 02:24 Jones313 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 02:13 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:03 Excludos wrote:On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that? No, this is not it. My answer is related to the position, which have several times been stated here, "the west needs to put a little more effort/supplies/own troops to win", which indicates a complete misunderstanding of the current balance of power. In regards of might makes right I have the same position as you; regretfully you don't want to take seriously my arguments on the reasons and timeline of the war. On August 19 2024 02:13 Jones313 wrote:
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
-get yourself educated a bit; you don't bring any value to the discussion "I'm educated, you're not". Handy catch-all to default to every time your arguments blow up in your face. Alas, I've grown up lacking opportunities to get the Russian education you've had.
-but you literally have brought zero meaningful arguments. All that you post here is either a Ukrainian PR slogans (Kursk National Rebublic! Bilhorod!) or your own wet dreams of Karelia and Kaliningrad. Good thing the web format keeps you from throwing a Roman salute here.
ed: omg, I shouldnt have drank tea while re-reading you; the phrase "every time your arguments blow up in your face" combined with your battle grunt made me almost choke from laughter.
|
On August 19 2024 02:42 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 02:24 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:13 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:03 Excludos wrote:On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that? No, this is not it. My answer is related to the position, which have several times been stated here, "the west needs to put a little more effort/supplies/own troops to win", which indicates a complete misunderstanding of the current balance of power. In regards of might makes right I have the same position as you; regretfully you don't want to take seriously my arguments on the reasons and timeline of the war. On August 19 2024 02:13 Jones313 wrote:
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
-get yourself educated a bit; you don't bring any value to the discussion "I'm educated, you're not". Handy catch-all to default to every time your arguments blow up in your face. Alas, I've grown up lacking opportunities to get the Russian education you've had. -but you literally have brought zero meaningful arguments. All that you post here is either a Ukrainian PR slogans (Kursk National Rebublic! Bilhorod!) or your own wet dreams of Karelia and Kaliningrad. Good thing the web format keeps you from throwing a Roman salute here. ed: omg, I shouldnt have drank tea while re-reading you; the phrase "every time your arguments blow up in your face" combined with your battle grunt made me almost choke from laughter.
I bet it did. I bet you're just rolling on the floor laughing as they say.
I don't know what battle grunts you're talking about, I'm on the side of peace. I proposed a simple question: why is it that Russia will not dismantle their army, withdraw from Ukraine and grant independence to the people of Kursk and Bilhorod in order to secure peace and get some of their frozen assets back, but insists on having thousands more of your fellow Russians killed? I've already provided my arguments for why this should be done. For a lasting peace, these requirements are mild. So far I've not received an answer.
|
United States43401 Posts
On August 19 2024 02:20 Jones313 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 01:38 KwarK wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? Doesn’t go far enough, we also need the complete denazification of the Rusnazi regime. That, and in my incredibly generous peace proposal I even fucked over the people of Karjala (Karelia), occupied parts of Georgia, Königsberg, Chechnya, Manchuria...
The Japanese islands too.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 19 2024 03:12 Jones313 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2024 02:42 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:24 Jones313 wrote:On August 19 2024 02:13 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 02:03 Excludos wrote:On August 19 2024 00:57 a_ch wrote:On August 19 2024 00:40 Jones313 wrote:On August 18 2024 20:16 a_ch wrote:On August 18 2024 18:34 jodljodl wrote:To the proponents of negotiations with Putin Russia: From 2014 until February 24, 2022, negotiations took place almost continuously in various formats. Shortly before Putin Russia launched the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine in response to and in the midst of negotiations, there were intensive negotiations between Russia, the USA and NATO, which were apparently intended by Russia to remain without agreement. This was because Russia consistently insisted on its maximum demands, which were virtually impossible for the “Western” side to accept. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, these diplomatic negotiations were implicitly ended unilaterally by the Russian side. On the other hand, at the same time as the attack on Ukraine, Russia put forward a proposal for a diplomatic “solution”: A de facto subjugation of Ukraine under Russian rule: The Russian Demands on Ukraine: - Ukraine laying down its arms - Abandonment of any ambitions to join NATO - Permanent neutral status - Introduction of Russian as the official state language - Recognition of Crimea as Russian - Recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics as independent - “denazification” and ‘demilitarization’ of Ukraine; in other words, Ukraine must install a regime at Russia's mercy. Anyone who, after listing these facts, is still of the opinion that diplomatic negotiations with Putin Russia are a way to create peace and security in Europe should now know better. After a decade of war and a multitude of diplomatic attempts to find some kind of amicable solution for peace, it is obvious that Putin Russia is seeking goals other than peace and solutions acceptable to all sides. Sources: www.swp-berlin.org, www.swp-berlin.organd many many more you can easily find, have access to and confirm everything stated in the above sources. First, you (actually, the propagandist that you quote) aptly conceal here, that in return for these mild requirements (most of these terms like neutrality, language issue, army size - is how Ukraine used to be before the coups, with neutrality being a key condition of its formation in 1991 in the first place) Ukraine would get back 90 thousand sq km of territories, lost in the spring campaign, which is close to the size of South Korea. Second, it is generally a bad taste to quote one of the main propaganda centers instead of giving your own reasons Third, your sentence on “denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" smells of racism, because its "denazification" part implies that Ukraine cannot be self-sufficient without reliance on paramilitary nazi groups like Azov in its internal\external policy. I skip here the demilitarization part, because there is enough evidence that countries with limited armies can live well in this world. Ukraine and her western allies would be more than willing to end the war. All it would take is the withdrawal of Russian troops from the sovereign territory of Ukraine and the recognition of Bilhorod and Kursk People's Republics (both have sizable Ukrainian-speaking populations) as independent states. These people have had to suffer under the Moscow regime for decades, their rights and culture slowly being eradicated. God forbid you even try to speak Ukrainian or fly the BPR flag (horizontal bicolor of black and yellow) in public anymore. Also good luck trying to find a Ukrainian school there, let alone a political party that represents these people. Complete demilitarization of the Russian armed forces would of course also be necessary to ensure security of the Russia-BPR/KPR border and Ukrainian-speaking citizens in the region. In return, some of the sanctions against Russia would be lifted and Russia would be given back some of its frozen assets. This would mean - more or less - going back to how things used to be. The people of BPR/KPR don't want anything to do with the Moscow regime, which is why there's no resistance to Ukraine's Special Military Operation and local forces are surrendering by the thousands to join their Ukrainian brothers. Why is the Moscow regime the only party against peace and these very mild requirements, choosing instead to keep sacrificing thousands of reluctant Russian kids in a desperate attempt to maintain their oppression of these pro-Ukrainian territories? -the difference is, Ukraine has no power to bring this to life, and among its allies only US has enough power to make a war with Russia a draw, but I bet you would not like it. So the rest of this is you self-indulgence On August 19 2024 00:41 jodljodl wrote:
Very cute :>
-don't push yourself if you have nothing substantial. If you look through this thread you'll realize that what you write here has been said to me at least a hundred times, I couldn't care less of another one clowning around - this just shows me your level Are you making the argument that what Russia is doing is ok because you believe they have/had the power to do it? Or am I misunderstanding something? Might makes right and all that? No, this is not it. My answer is related to the position, which have several times been stated here, "the west needs to put a little more effort/supplies/own troops to win", which indicates a complete misunderstanding of the current balance of power. In regards of might makes right I have the same position as you; regretfully you don't want to take seriously my arguments on the reasons and timeline of the war. On August 19 2024 02:13 Jones313 wrote:
What this is is holding up a mirror to your bullshit. I wasn't kidding about Ukrainian schools or representation, though.
And there it is. Beneath all the "Russian culture being removed" and LDPR nonsense is "because we can". That would be the only difference. Straight up might makes right. This from someone who insists on not being a fascist and calls other posters unserious. Just don't try to get on a high horse about people wishing harm on Russians again.
-get yourself educated a bit; you don't bring any value to the discussion "I'm educated, you're not". Handy catch-all to default to every time your arguments blow up in your face. Alas, I've grown up lacking opportunities to get the Russian education you've had. -but you literally have brought zero meaningful arguments. All that you post here is either a Ukrainian PR slogans (Kursk National Rebublic! Bilhorod!) or your own wet dreams of Karelia and Kaliningrad. Good thing the web format keeps you from throwing a Roman salute here. ed: omg, I shouldnt have drank tea while re-reading you; the phrase "every time your arguments blow up in your face" combined with your battle grunt made me almost choke from laughter. I bet it did. I bet you're just rolling on the floor laughing as they say. I don't know what battle grunts you're talking about, I'm on the side of peace. I proposed a simple question: why is it that Russia will not dismantle their army, withdraw from Ukraine and grant independence to the people of Kursk and Bilhorod in order to secure peace and get some of their frozen assets back, but insists on having thousands more of your fellow Russians killed? I've already provided my arguments for why this should be done. For a lasting peace, these requirements are mild. So far I've not received an answer.
Because you're like a 6 year kid, who takes each word at face value. The reality is Donetsk/Luhansk people had a will to fight against Ukraine on their own; mustered an army of tens of thousand people, of which ~10 thousand had been killed later, while the whole armed opposition in Russia is the RDK and LFR which together make up less than 1000 men, so the mirroring argument doesn't work at all.
The frozen asset case is damaging to the both sides of the conflict, as it exposes the European financial system making it less appealing to the rest of the world. The asset sum is big, but not even comparable to the stakes taken.
Ukraine has agreed to be the tool in "inflicting a strategic defeat to Russia", so apparently the Russian government believes this to be a serious threat, and wants to get rid of it once and for all - and many people here agrees with it, and dont mind to risk their life for that goal.
ed:
>>don't know what battle grunts you're talking about
this is a local meme, боевой нахрюк, basically what a warpig does - which has been attributed to agressive pro-Ukrainian propaganda, since there's a lot of it in many Russian-speaking forums
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
