EPTRusso-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 896
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17792 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35173 Posts
On November 26 2025 18:14 Excludos wrote: To the surprise of no one with eyes and brain cells to rub together Edit: confirmed by Trump himself, who now is just casually normalizing treason.. https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/11/26/8009009/ Is it treason if Trump signs off on it? | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8270 Posts
Yes | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5838 Posts
He's not a king, merely a government official. Witkoff was advising Russia on how to play Trump to do their bidding. I would say that's clear treason. | ||
|
ETisME
12764 Posts
On November 26 2025 15:41 KwarK wrote: It’s not meaningless rhetoric. Russia explicitly refuses to negotiate with Ukraine for the reasons explained. Zelenskyy offers frequently but Russia always backs out of talks if he’ll be there. Instead they take turns because Russia will only negotiate with what they view as the powers behind the fake Ukrainian regime. Russia’s long standing, repeatedly tested, continually demonstrated policy of refusing to talk to Ukraine is going to be a roadblock to your theory that they’ll talk this out. Nope according to your theory, all negotiations are pointless, because thats what Russia is, they will always invade Ukraine because of the list of reasons. Negotiations don't need to be start off directly between Ukraine and Russia because of multiple stakeholders. Why do you think mediators exist? You are the one who refused to think any negotiations including the earliest one with Ukraine and russian that sat together very early in the war | ||
|
ETisME
12764 Posts
On November 26 2025 17:36 0x64 wrote: Don't know where you copied this, but you do realize that they ahve used AI to write that? I used perplexity to get the list, every quote has a source directly referencing them. Do you need the source for all the quotes? | ||
KwarK
United States44191 Posts
On November 27 2025 08:36 ETisME wrote: Nope according to your theory, all negotiations are pointless, because thats what Russia is, they will always invade Ukraine because of the list of reasons. Negotiations don't need to be start off directly between Ukraine and Russia because of multiple stakeholders. Why do you think mediators exist? You are the one who refused to think any negotiations including the earliest one with Ukraine and russian that sat together very early in the war Every day I’m proven right and every day you’re proven wrong. To some people that would be cause to reconsider your assumptions. To you, apparently not. My theory that Russia will invade Ukraine is looking pretty sound. | ||
|
ETisME
12764 Posts
On November 27 2025 08:45 KwarK wrote: Every day I’m proven right and every day you’re proven wrong. To some people that would be cause to reconsider your assumptions. To you, apparently not. My theory that Russia will invade Ukraine is looking pretty sound. Proven right? There has been multiple negotiations with different mediators. Negotiations is happening, it's a process. So no, you are being proven wrong over and over and over again. It's not even a theory or assumptions. | ||
|
KwarK
United States44191 Posts
| ||
|
ETisME
12764 Posts
On November 27 2025 09:26 KwarK wrote: You simply have no understanding. Or you refusing to acknowledge there can be both battle happening and negotiations happening. It's not mutually exclusive, nor do deal have to be signed to make negotiations meaningful. Wake up Negotiations are happening, whether you acknowledge it or how much you value it, or how sincere you think it i, simply dont matter. Get it out of your ego | ||
|
KwarK
United States44191 Posts
On November 27 2025 09:35 ETisME wrote: Or you refusing to acknowledge there can be both battle happening and negotiations happening. It's not mutually exclusive, nor do deal have to be signed to make negotiations meaningful. Wake up Negotiations are happening, whether you acknowledge it or how much you value it, or how sincere you think it i, simply dont matter. Get it out of your ego My theory is that Russia’s absolute refusal to negotiate with Ukraine will lead to a war and prevent a negotiated settlement. Your theory is that a literal refusal to talk to Ukraine and maximalist Russian demands that amount to the destruction of Ukrainian sovereignty are no barrier to a negotiated peace. In 3 months the war will be entering its fifth year. Your “there are no obstacles to negotiated peace” theory has a lot of war to explain. My “there are many obstacles to negotiated peace” theory does not. In 12 months Russia will still be refusing to talk to Ukraine you’ll still be insisting that there is no obstacle to negotiated peace between them. Every day the war continues I am proven right and you are proven wrong. There comes a point where “I’m not wrong, I’m just not right yet” becomes a joke and in your case that point was a great many posts ago. | ||
|
ETisME
12764 Posts
On November 27 2025 09:40 KwarK wrote: My theory is that Russia’s absolute refusal to negotiate with Ukraine will lead to a war and prevent a negotiated settlement. Your theory is that a literal refusal to talk to Ukraine and maximalist Russian demands that amount to the destruction of Ukrainian sovereignty are no barrier to a negotiated peace. In 3 months the war will be entering its fifth year. Your “there are no obstacles to negotiated peace” theory has a lot of war to explain. My “there are many obstacles to negotiated peace” theory does not. In 12 months Russia will still be refusing to talk to Ukraine you’ll still be insisting that there is no obstacle to negotiated peace between them. Doesn't matter what you think and how everything fit into your theory Reality is: Multiple negotiations Multiple mediators Multiple conditions have been raised by multiple parties Cope wit it however you want. It's happening and had been so. You setting a pre condition that Russia needs to talk to Ukraine direct, makes for what you define as negotiations, is your own special definition. Mediators are and have always been crucial to many negotiations at this scale Can you quote me where I said "there are no obstacles to negotiated peace" That's absurd, if that was true we would have ended the entire thing with one single negotiations. The fact that I specifically told you they had multiple ones, including one that had Ukraine and Russia on same table, should tell you more than enough you are making up random assumptions that you think I held. | ||
|
KwarK
United States44191 Posts
| ||
|
ETisME
12764 Posts
On November 27 2025 09:47 KwarK wrote: Assuming no massive battlefield reversals, after how many more months of war will you concede that you’re an idiot? Again. Negotiation is a process. This is happening and have been happening many times. I can't be wrong. A deal being signed or not, doesn't mean negotiations were pointless, nor that they even happened. Are we clear now? Because I am not subscribing to your special little definition of negotiation. | ||
|
KwarK
United States44191 Posts
On November 27 2025 09:59 ETisME wrote: Again. Negotiation is a process. This is happening and have been happening many times. I can't be wrong. A deal being signed or not, doesn't mean negotiations were pointless, nor that they even happened. Are we clear now? Because I am not subscribing to your special little definition of negotiation. Got it. You’re saying that no amount of failed negotiation will convince you of the failure of the negotiations. “I can’t be wrong”, your literal quote. Well, the good news is we don’t have to wait months for you to openly let us know that you’re an idiot. Edit: I have two more devastating arguments in my arsenal. A. You might not have found my argument convincing but actually the failure to convince you doesn't have any relevance to how convincing my argument is. I have simply failed to convince you yet which actually means I will have convinced you. No matter what happens I will either have convinced you or will have convinced you. B. Actually, I checked and it turns out I can't be wrong. Sorry. Guess you'll have to take the L here. Because I can't. Because I can't be wrong. | ||
|
ETisME
12764 Posts
On November 27 2025 10:06 KwarK wrote: Got it. You’re saying that no amount of failed negotiation will convince you of the failure of the negotiations. “I can’t be wrong”, your literal quote. Well, the good news is we don’t have to wait months for you to openly let us know that you’re an idiot. Thank you for acknowledging negotiations are an essential part of war. Great on you finally accepting negotiations are happening as well and move on from your special definition. You are doing great 👍 Also if Ukraine (more like when) loses, hopefully that doesn't mean all the lives, support and aids were pointless if we were to go by your logic. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17792 Posts
Because right now we're 4 years into the conflict, Russia has lost over a million men and unfathomable sums in military equipment and all it managed to do was capture 1% of Ukraine. So, if anything, Ukraine is currently winning. | ||
|
ETisME
12764 Posts
On November 27 2025 12:57 Manit0u wrote: The same goes for Russia. If (more like when) it loses then all of the sacrifices, ruined economy and everything were pointless by your logic. Because right now we're 4 years into the conflict, Russia has lost over a million men and unfathomable sums in military equipment and all it managed to do was capture 1% of Ukraine. So, if anything, Ukraine is currently winning. That's not my logic. That's kwark. I don't judge whether something is valuable based on solely the outcome. Yes even failed negotiation attempts are valuable. Yes even failed offensive attempts are valuable. Yes even if ukraine or russia lost the war, these weren't meaningless or dismissive. | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7187 Posts
On November 25 2025 23:07 ETisME wrote: P.s. no, buddy. I am Hong Kongnese, learn the distinction. 😀 And I love your confidence! Why are you offended about being called Chinese? You want Ukrainian territory to be called Russian. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8270 Posts
| ||
| ||
