Russo-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 840

On August 19 2025 20:50 Luolis wrote:

We know Russia is an aggressive imperialist country that wants to return to it's perceived "former glory". If they get what they want in Ukraine, they will absolutely continue on their way. It's true that the EU and US should immediately have put boots on ground for Ukraine and we're still not helping enough. However, capitulating to Russia's demands (especially considering Ukraine, the sovereign country defending itself, sure doesnt want that) is just letting Russia take a breather before testing the ice again.

Speaking of the frontline question, who knows, if we go with what you think is reasonable, yeah that time could come for me in the future (though i dont think our military has uses for me, other than being a human minesweeper).

On August 19 2025 18:35 Manit0u wrote:


What do you mean by "stop the US from pulling out"? US has provided no aid to Ukraine under Trump. As far as EU and UA are concerned the US pulled out half a year ago. If anything they want to pull US back in but sadly Trump seems to be siding with Russia.

On August 19 2025 13:41 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Trump has previously said he's not sending any troops to Ukraine.
Obviously Europe is not doing this without guarantees that the US enter the war if Russia breaks the peace.
That means either NATO for Ukraine (ruled out) or US tripwire troops on the ground.
I don't think anyone will settle for words on a paper unless it's a constitutional amendment.
So going public with no German troops makes sense.
It's like with the tanks, Trump can sell it as he had to send a few troops to get the europeans to step up.

On August 20 2025 00:54 RvB wrote:

This peace deal is clearly the worst of the bad options Ukraine has. It's giving away a heavily fortified region and logistical hub that would take Russia years to take at a very heavy cost in men and material. Furthermore it would leave the rest of Ukraine wide open for further invasion. The deal is Putin trying to get at the negotiating table what he cannot take militarily. Everyone involved knows this except Trump apparently. Any acceptable deal will likely mostly freeze the current frontlines.

On August 20 2025 07:51 ETisME wrote:

Is it still bad in an exchange for a security guarantee?

On August 19 2025 16:26 ETisME wrote:

"I think in the past two weeks, we've probably had more progress in ending this war than we have in the past three-and-a-half years."
Great slogan but also very true.

Which nation really pushed hard for talks?
Some gave proposals and then ended it there, like China.
EU and Biden were more about giving arms and sleep walked into an endless pit and not knowing how to stop.

It's unfortunate how long it took to get them accept reality that Ukraine isn't going to recapture all the lost land, Russia isn't collapsing as predicted, or crying "justice" "existential crisis" ain't enough

On August 20 2025 08:57 KwarK wrote:

They already have a security guarantee. Why would they need 2?

On August 20 2025 09:03 Billyboy wrote:

Out of curiosity, why do you trust the Trump narrative on this? Like it could be correct, it is not like he is wrong 100% of the time. But he is the least truth public person in the world. Even in this conflict, he was going to solve it in a day, then a month, then there was a cease fire, then another, then big sanctions unless Putin stopped, the times on that changed multiple times, and now we have this. Like sure actual long lasting peace would be great, even at a fairly high cost. But why act like Trump is telling the truth before anything actually happens?

And I do not even need to go into how egregiously untruthful he is in personal life (cheating on women, at golf, lying about weight and height, taking covid shots, the list goes on. Or in his policy (changing maps with sharpies, wall is needed and Mexico will pay, Epstein files, TACO,) I mean the list of things he has boasted about not coming true is certainly WAY longer than what has.

Why not wait and see? I think there is a much greater chance of nothing coming from this than what Trump suggests and if something does come from it, it will almost certainly be different than what Trump has said.

On August 20 2025 09:58 ETisME wrote:


How likely is Ukraine going to recapture the lost terrain?
Did Ukraine lose out more territories year after year?
Who has been pushing for negotiations, than just non stop arms supplies and thinking Ukraine will sort it all out.

These are actual facts.

If we look at European leaders (who you probably view them much better), did they do anything to bring the whole thing closer to an end? Or just sustain what is happening (which is what politically easiest for them to do)

That's the problem I have with people who just judge the person.
Looking at these flaws are just silly, people can be controversial and still be effective.

Like Elon false promises, missed timeline, inheritance etc
You'd hope we want to have more people reshaping industries, than looking for a saint and treating it like afternoon tabloid.

On August 20 2025 10:05 Billyboy wrote:

Those are questions not facts, and I can easily ask some that change the narrative in the same way you tried to. There are a whole bunch of facts at play.

I'm in the camp of the Ukrainians should have agency on what happens. Given that they are a democracy who was illegally invaded strong arming them into submission seems like both an awful and bitch move. If they want fight, support that, if they want to make peace support that.

But it is crazy to take what Trump says at face value, it is almost never the truth.

On August 20 2025 11:34 KwarK wrote:
There’s no alternative but to kill Russians until they stop. We all wish there was but there isn’t. The difference between us isn’t that we don’t want an alternative and you do, it’s that we know more than you.

On August 20 2025 11:48 ETisME wrote:

Again going back to the early beginning of the war, they were closed to signing a ceasefire etc.
So no, there's an alternative, some of you are just too committed to the sank cost and betting everything on it now wishing you were right.

On August 20 2025 13:10 KwarK wrote:

No, they were never close to signing a ceasefire. That’s a myth, the positions were incredibly far apart throughout that negotiation with irreconcilable differences. During that negotiation Russia demanded complete disarmament of Ukraine and control over Ukraine’s foreign policy including a Russian veto on Ukraine asking for assistance in the event of Russia invading Ukraine for a third time. There was 0% chance of a ceasefire early.

This is why talking with people like you is frustrating. You literally don’t know the first damn thing about the subject but you still want to be involved.

Again, we know more than you. That’s why you can’t understand the conflict and we all can. Your beliefs and assumptions about the conflict and the causes don’t mesh with reality, you can’t understand why Ukraine fights because you believe they have an alternative. That leaves you sitting in the corner going “this doesn’t make sense, why don’t they just X, everyone involved must be irrational”. It’s not that everyone involved is irrational and you’re the only rational person in the world, it’s not that you and only you see the benefits to an end to the fighting. It’s that you’re ignorant.

On August 20 2025 15:02 KwarK wrote:
You need to go back and read what was actually discussed in those negotiations and what the non negotiable demands of Russia were. Until you make the effort to educate yourself you're just wasting your time here.

On August 19 2025 21:45 ETisME wrote:

If Russia is a never-ending aggressor, then your only option is for it to collapse then? If you think there's no stop then you should be on the front line now.
Because you have to come to terms chanting "justice" etc, and then losing more and more land, is just giving Russia even more victory (unless it somehow loses), and encourage it for a third round then.