I listened to an interview recently, I believe on BBC, where the interviewee said the biggest issue with peace talks is that the international community isn’t able to trust Putin to keep his word on whatever is agreed upon. I hadn’t considered that, but it makes a lot of sense and I’m not sure how that could change
Russia won’t be trustworthy until Putin and his fascist United Russia party are gone.
Who was the interviewee?
it makes a lot of sense and I’m not sure how that could change
It will change when the cancer finally kills that bastard.
You draw new borders and stop shooting, that’s a start. You then keep the agreement by having enough military for a new invasion to be undesirable. Simple game theory. Trust and promises only work for societies that mutually respect each other.
The same argument can be used in favor of Russia. NATO has invaded plenty of countries under false pretenses in the past. Both Russia and NATO do not have a reputation for keeping their promises.
“plenty”
Unironically yes, NATO members have invaded a lot of places, often in coalition with other member states.
That’s like saying Canada is responsible for something Mexico did because they’re both on the same continent…
NATO is purely a defense agreement.
It is more like saying the axis is known to invade nations because its member states invade nations. Okay, sure, Germany and Italy invaded the soviet union but Japan didn’t, you can’t say they’re not a defensive alliance /s
- The Intercept, 2021: Meet NATO, the Dangerous “Defensive” Alliance Trying to Run the World
- CounterPunch, 2022: NATO is Not a Defensive Alliance
- Noam Chomsky, 2023: NATO “most violent, aggressive alliance in the world”
- Thomas Fazi, 2024: NATO: 75 years of war, unprovoked aggressions and state-sponsored terrorism
- Jeffrey Sachs, 2024: The 2024 NATO Declaration The Deadly Strategy of Neoconservatism
.
Tell that to Libya.
Step up military aid to Ukraine significantly. That is the only way to peace. Giving in to russian demands would only lead to a short cease fire, before they launch their next attack.
That so many Germans have bought into russian propaganda is a major hurdle.
I was wondering why this had so many downvotes until I noticed the instance this is on.
It’s more positive than I expected. 😁
real easy to say for someone not in a warzone
Tell us all about it then, colonel
Warzone are not, Ukraine got invaded by the rest of the world pussyfooting around, which to dictators only smells like weakness
Given the requests for more military aid comes from people in ukraine.
Seems. Your the one arguing against them from a position of safty.
Ill add. My now passed grandfather raised me.
He was a pacifist durimg the second world war. He and many were forced to mine resorces. As they refused to fight. As he was an engineer he was eventually reasigned to other work. Aircraft instrament manufacture at smiths.
But at no point did he think the UK should just allow germany to take over.
He just knew he was not able to fight himself. This was a commonf feeling among those conscripted during the second world war. And will always be a risk whe. A mation needs to defend itself from agressors.
Not all of a nations people are best suited to fight.
Ask the Ukrainians what they think. It’ll be amusing to see how they flounce you.
Giving in to tyranny is voluntary slavery.
peace is when more war harder
the more war harder you war, the less putin you propaganda
The primary problem is that for negotiations to even begin is that Ukraine itself has a law that forbids anybody to negotiate with Putin before Ukraine has regained all it’s lands, even Zelensky himself would technically speaking commit treason by agreeing to talk on peace terms before this law is repealed. That is unless Scholz speaks of the “Zelensky peace plan” that is basically Russia gives up all the pre 2014 territories and then Kiev will negotiate with Moscow. Which is equally nonsensical and impossible situation.
I don’t know if what if any Scholz is trying to do here. All talk most likely for domestic audience, because the opposition won big in regional elections in Germany lately on “no more money to Ukraine” platform.
Ukraine’s government can change that law if they want to, of course. And if things keep going as they have been, they will have to choose between doing that and losing even more territory.
Attempts at maximum escalation have not produced good results for the Ukrainian people. I would like fewer of them to die given the realistic options available.
Re: Scholz I think the higher-ups in Western Europe are aware that their “support for Ukraine” is more about trying to hurt Russia than help the Ukrainian people. I would expect more to jump ship as the possibility of anything other than a full rout starts to vanish. These countries aren’t going to actually sacrifice anything they value in order to actually help common Ukrainian people. At the moment their “aid” is mostly weapons and ammunition whose main purpose is to prop up military contractors.
Or NATO just allows them to destroy airfields Russia is launching rockets from.
So our choice is to give the purse to the thief that wants more land in the future, or slap the knife out of his hand
Russia has far more military capacity than Ukraine. Every escalation runs the risk of Russia adopting NATO’s scorched earth tactics. Russia clearly sees value in the slow grind approach, which they explain as a de facto demilitarization of Ukraine, but if they ever stop seeing value in that…
Don’t forget what NATO member countries do to their military targets and what the outcomes are. Every population center in North Korea bombed out. Agent orange, napalm, mass bombing campaigns in Laos and Vietnam. Reckless and depraved mass killings in Algeria. Two invasions of Iraq and interceding sanctions that killed millions of children, with a heavy focus on the destruction of civilian infrastructure.
Hoping for escalation can only mean hoping fot mass death for Ukrainians. This is not a movie or an idle fantasy where we get to play pretend about knocking a knife out if the bad guys hands. This is the real world with actual troop deployments and bombing campaigns and industrial bases and drones that pick people off while they sleep and a country that still functions but can be made to not with about a week of bombings.
Removed by mod
How many people died in Iraq between 1989 and 2007 as a result of NATO member war and sanctions?
PS the primary targeting of civilians in Ukraine is done by far right cadres against Donbas civilians.
Removed by mod
And how many people in Iran and Kuwait died from Saddam’s bullshit?
I’ll wait for you to answer my question first. You seem to be forgetting what we are talking about. Take as much time as you need.
You’d be much more effective with these arguments if you weren’t defending war criminals.
Please try to engage in good faith and not put words in my mouth.
Cute fantasy.
It sounds like you are unfamiliar with the civil war in Ukraine from 2014 and on. 4X longer and constant shelling. Union halls burned down with people locked inside.
Allow me to retort, but WITH FACTS, because you have NONE to support your laughable assertions: [a list of articles you just Googled]
Feel free to state your point and what meaning you would like to share from your list of links. Take as much time as you need to formulate your thesis or counterargument.
How fucking evil do you have to be to bomb a children’s hospital?
Yes, bombing civilian infrastructure is horrific. The NATO countries I mentioned systematically target it. Rather than one hospital, imagine it was 80% of them. No clean water. Medical personnel routinely targeted. No imports of medicine, limited food. Disruption and control over electricity. Israel is doing this right now in Gaza. You can see with your own eyes what the difference is.
How evil are the countries that do this on a much larger scale and systematically?
And you say Ukraine is targeting civilians
Of course, that is what the shelling of Donbas has been for a decade. UA has continued to bombard civilian areas of the city of Donetsk this whole time.
It’s a petty, evil, deliberate distortion of the truth.
Have you no shame? not an ounce?
I have listed basic fact. Please allow yourself to process this information that is new to you rather than lashing out and making things up.
Endless escalation is impossible. Russia has nukes.
Even assuming Ukraine starts winning the conventional war against all odds, If the situation ever looks too dire Ukraine does not have the required MAD deterrence to prevent Russia from nuking them.
Russia has nukes.
At this point their nukes are likely in the same sorry state as their dictator: old, frail, failing
This fairy tale of Russia being flat broke and out of weapons wasted its credibility years ago. If it was true Ukraine would have won by now.
This fairy tale of Russia being flat broke and out of weapons
Uh hu and where did I make that claim? Straw man much? :]
Edit: looks like a well equiped force tho lmao https://sopuli.xyz/post/16837255
I believe it must be seen as a meagre attempt to appeal to the rising numbers of supporters of the AfD and BSW. Both political parties have won significant ground in the latest state elections and both can be considered Putin-friendly, to say the least.
In the past, Schulz has followed closely the position and decisions of the USA and I cannot see this changing in the foreseeable future.
I am the most inexpert of laypeople on this subject, but I’ve wondered whether the incursion into Russian territory has been to give Ukraine a better position to negotiate on a mutual return of territory in talks, if they come about.
We have to speculate about it, but it is a reckless maneuver that has led to the nee, rapid losses on the main front. I would expect that it is reckless ideologues trying to push it.
Ukraine has seen some high-profile resignations just before and during this, so it is possible that the early resignations was people opposed to invading a sliver of Kursk and the later ones might be people that wanted to invade.
But this is just guessing.
Sooo they can bend the law and postpone holding elections, but they cannot bend it to hold peace talks? It’s just an excuse.
Essentially yes because both holding elections or negotiating would spell doom to many Kiev politicians and very likely not just their political careers.
Quite the irony; somehow not doing anything and getting people killed needlessly and destroying your own nation is an okay path forward, but trying to find a compromise that stops that would cost you your career… I mean, it’s not surprising, but also really sad.
Sooo they can bend the law and postpone holding elections
No, Ukraine was attacked, so parliament and president declared martial law. Ukraine is constitutionally prohibited from holding elections until it is over.
It’s incredibly funny that the level from which we’d be ‘stepping up’ is holding a 70 nation conference for peace that the country winning the war was not invited to
Considering their idea of peace is the total capitulation of their opponent and systematic erasure of its population, I dont see what tangible benefit inviting them would be.
systematic erasure of its population
You sound like a raving lunatic
[Citation needed]
NYT: Ukraine-Russia Peace Is as Elusive as Ever. But in 2022 They Were Talking.
“Systematic eradication of a population” is just bullshit projection of the decade before this war started.
- BBC, 2014: Ukraine underplays role of far right in conflict
- Human Rights Watch, 2014: Ukraine: Unguided Rockets Killing Civilians
- The Hill, 2017: The reality of neo-Nazis in Ukraine is far from Kremlin propaganda
- The Guardian, 2017: ‘I want to bring up a warrior’: Ukraine’s far-right children’s camp – video
- WaPo, 2018: The war in Ukraine is more devastating than you know
- Reuters, 2018: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem
- The Nation, 2019: Neo-Nazis and the Far Right Are On the March in Ukraine
- openDemocracy, 2019: Why Ukraine’s new language law will have long-term consequences
- Jacobin, 2022: A US-Backed, Far Right–Led Revolution in Ukraine Helped Bring Us to the Brink of War
- Al Jazeera, 2022: Why did Ukraine suspend 11 ‘pro-Russia’ parties?
- History of Fascism in Ukraine: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV
Removed by mod
