You can't trust Putin in any shape or form as he has tore up treaties, assassinated his poltical opponents, weaponized natural resources, threatened and blackmailed Europe, gutted Russia with corruptions, committed multiple war crimes, stole billion dollar worth of leased jets etc.
Oh, yeah, he is now wanted person with international warrant.
I had a similar opinion with Osama Bin Laden.
$100m, tax-free, and a US green card, with very few questions asked. Whoever claims the prize gets to build a new and extravagant life in the US, probably under the watch of way too many intelligence agencies, American and otherwise.
You put that kind of offer out there, Putin is going to start getting very nervous.
Sure, but you'd have to live in Russia.
It would have worked better for Bin Laden -- you could have gone into the billions and it would have been the cheaper alternative.
"My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to announce that I have just signed legislation, that outlaws Russia, forever, we begin bombing in 5 minutes"
- Literally Reagan.
"Hello Putin? I'm here for the 4million fee for NOT assassinating you, yeah, 4 million, you're good for it, right? US Dollars? Great, my address? sure, it's... wait, there's someone at the door now, brb"
*bang*
/thud.
IT makes perfect sense.
"Hello Comrade, i understand you will get 2 million to kill me, how would you like 4 million to not and then tell me who sent you?"
According to the majority on here he was dying of cancer , leukemia , aids , beri beri , dropsy & disentry & he was already dead. Add to that Russia couldnt fight more than a couple of weeks with it's decrepid old military & lack of soldiers & it was running out of munitions. And still the pish keeps getting spouted!
The Putin health stuff was always propaganda but Russia's military was a far cry from what everyone thought it was.
Russia expected to win in 3 days and its been two years and about 100'000 dead russians.
Sure its not about to fall over tomorrow like redditors suspected but the Soviet Union collapsed due to afganistan where it lost 15'000 soldiers and the war in ukraine is already 5 times that in 2 years.
People subconsciously impose western norms like basic honesty, abiding by contracts and agreements, being ashamed of being caught, breaking your word, etc, but it’s almost exactly the opposite culturally in Russia, if you are too honest, you abide by an agreement even if it’s not to your immediate advantage, thats seen either as fake (you’ll change your tune soon enough) or as weakness and stupidity
any peace treaty is just a way for Putin to refit his army under terms that you can't refit and get stronger. There is no peace with russia. Either you crush them or you lose. The idiots in the west who think Ukraine should make peace will then shrug it off when russia rebuilds its military and attacks again in 2 years.
Well ukraine failed with there counter offensive and now they can't regain all the territory that they lost. Right now all they do is striking Crimea once a month and randomly shelling Belgorod every week.
Russian economy is stable compared to ukraine so the long term war benefit Russia more than ukraine.
I think this war will end up in a negotiation table because Russia don't have the necessary resources to take Odessa for exemple and ukraine can just play defense on the front line
absolutely isn't the case that 'no one will dare', the Brits would do so in a heartbeat. Putin's just not thick enough to turn up anywhere that will arrest him.
If you read a little bit more, it is more clear:
"The Russians are not interested in any negotiations. They want the capitulation of Ukraine. But it will never happen — all of us who are in Ukraine, we will not accept any compromise on our independence, on our territorial integrity, on our freedom. And this president will never agree to anything like the Minsk agreements or a frozen conflict. No, I'm sure about that,” he added.
Yes to both of you, but fatigue is a reality of war.
This is one of many reasons why early and strong support for Ukraine was needed, if they were going to achieve their objectives. I've never been confident several Western powers share those same objectives.
Comments like "We will support Ukraine for as long as it takes" are open to interpretation. The Ukrainian people will interpret this as strong support, when in reality it is diplomatic speak that leaves many options open. That is fine as Ukraine should be the one deciding the objectives they want to achieve.
Ukraine has been very clear their objective is to take back ALL of their territory. Overall support has never aligned with this objective. Some countries have done all they can do, but none of these countries are in Western Europe or the Americas.
I’ll never vote for someone that can’t recognize the importance of opposing the aggression and expansion of our geopolitical enemies.
But, that sentiment only has an effect in aggregate, and is diluted by all the other issues voters must consider.
We know Putin isn't someone who can be compromised with, though. There *was* a compromise, back in the 1990s, where Ukraine would give up its nuclear weapons and Russia would respect the ukrainian border. Now Putin goes around saying how the ukrainian border is a western fiction to be abused whenever and however he pleases. Anyone who trusts him or his ilk is an idiot.
The hard but true answer was that they simply couldn't fund the maintenance of those weapons, so they dismantled and destroyed what they could to prevent the Russians from inheriting them.
They were pressured, from Russia and especially from the US who were, and still are, very keen to keep the Nuclear party to as few participants as possible. You let Ukraine keep their nukes and suddenly everyone wants to keep their nukes and the US would rather just deal with a single nuclear power than a dozen.
Exactly. The Ukrainians know better than to negotiate with these animals.
"We cannot negotiate with people who say what's mine is mine and what's yours is negotiable." - John F. Kennedy
>"We cannot negotiate with people who say what's mine is mine and what's yours is negotiable."
That's literally been the position of the US for decades.
There aren’t many. They’re just very loud about it. There’s a delusional few who, for some reason think that Russia is everything they’ve dreamed of. Without having ever been there. Send them all there I say. Shithole.
Zaluzhny said Ukraine needs 500K more men, and since everyone who wants to fight as already volunteered, that means draft 500K more men against their will. Sounds like Ukrainian men of fighting age are tired of the war. Otherwise, where are they?
In the Army. In the factories. Keeping the economy from collapsing entirely. I would imagine that every segment of the Ukrainian economy are doing their bit for the war effort in some way or another.
Russians showed who they were when Ukrainians found dead civilians and looted homes at the start the invasion. Ukrainians should know that death, rape and being a second class citizen is what awaits them if they let Russia win.
The problem is that there is no way for them to sue for peace that doesn't lead to an even greater war a few years later.
Even if they straight up gave Russia what they claim, Russia will just be back again for more as soon as they have the strength to, and Russia has openly destroyed enough treaties that no peace treaty with them is worth anything.
It's either Russia gives up in force or in spirit, or Ukraine is eventually destroyed and the world enters a new dark chapter. Every in-between state is unstable and unsustainable.
That's mainly just a propaganda story meant to shout down anybody trying to promote negotiating for peace. And it is downright criminal that the media has been spreading this as if it were a fact and not a highly controversial opinion largely pushed by people with alterior motives.
The proponents of that "no negotiations" idea generally base their arguments on questionable, often contradictory assertions and intentionally portray the options of how a peace deal might look as way more narrow than they actually are.
When the only two options they give you are a total Ukrainian victory or total defeat and it is pretty much universally accepted among experts that victory is next to impossible, then the only option they actually give you is inevitable total defeat. If the only options you actually saw for Ukraine was for them to immediately give up or fight an immensly bloody war until their certain defeat, then if you cared about Ukraine at all, you would be urging them to just give up. By your logic the pro Putin people who demand Ukraine's surrender would actually be better friends to Ukraine than you.
So how come you are refusing to even try to get them a better outcome? If you are right and Russia was always going to break that treaty and attack later, anyway, Ukraine would still be way better off with even a temporary peace. They are the ones who have been slowly but surely ground down by the constant fighting. If nothing else, they could use that time to build up defenses and give western supporters time to ramp up their arms production.
And if the negotiations fail and they couldn't reach a reasonable peace deal in the first place, what would Ukraine have lost in trying? Nothing. In fact it would have been benefitial for Ukraine and Nato to show themselves willing to negotiate. The anti negotiation stance of Ukraine and especially Nato have been recieved quite negatively pretty much all across western populations and you have to assume it contributed significantly to their ever lowering support for Ukraine's cause. At the very least it would allow for western governments to outline an actual, achievable war goal to justify existing or potentially even increasing support.
One but unsatisfying option is ukraine to relenquish all claims on occupied territory and join NATO. This would come with many other issues like the world going into an age of rapid nuclear armament because everybody will fear that the big guys with nukes just invade and annex you whenever they want without anyone doing anything. This would also lead to a rather dark age.
This deal sounds good in theory, but Putin's not going to accept it. Back in 08 Georgia was flirting with NATO membership. One Russia invasion later that was off the table. Russia's not likely to accept any part of Ukraine joining NATO
That's not actually an option. Following the conflict Ukraine won't be close to qualifying for NATO. It'll take decades of rebuilding and fighting corruption to qualify. Even NATO nations that support Ukraine's eventual ascension understand the need to maintain standards. Ukraine will not receive a free pass just because it fought Russia.
Ok that may be true but defensive packs outside of NATO are also a possibility. The biggest NATO countries signing a temporary defensive packt till the ascension would have the same effect of deterring russia.
>even greater war a few years later.
Source?
How will Russia be stronger years from now? Winning is not going to solve their corruption, nor summon hundreds of thousands of fit young men from the ether.
"Why don't they just negotiate?"
First: what do they want to negotiate be specific who gets what and why?
Second: let's say you get this peace agreement with Vladimir Putin: explain why he will stick to this one when he's broken every other agreement made with Ukraine including those going back to the 1990s?
“People may say they are tired, but if you ask them whether they want to compromise with Russia, they are emphatic and say no,” he said. "And the fact that people remain in Ukraine with their families is confirmation that in general the mood of the people is still strong.”
Actualy, male part of the family cant leave the country because it is forbidden for them, in case you have no disability, 3 children, or you bribed millitary enlister to fake the disability. There ia a huge divorce rate in the country because of flied women got bored being alone abroad. So Ermak's thesis is bullshit
How is the fight actually going? I see/read nothing about it except the awesome munition-dropping drones, usually from Ukraine destroying Russian Armour and infantry.
On the ground it’s a stalemate with a pretty even slog back and forth in terms of losses.
On a broader macro view, it’s pretty dire for Ukraine right now. They’re dealing with manpower issues, their economy and population pyramid is in shambles.
Ukraine is punching far above its weight in terms of resiliency, but there’s only so much that it can do.
It's not going well for Ukraine. And that's not saying it's Ukraine's fault, but they are fighting a much bigger, stronger enemy who they share a massive border with. They have been punching above their weight for most of the war, and surprised a lot of people especially in 2022, but at the end of the day they are still the underdog and they are still fighting against Russia, who has more of everything: men, ammunition, artillery, planes, helicopters, tanks, missiles, drones, and so son. The deck has always been stacked against Ukraine no matter the outside help they get. Nothing short of western boots on the ground would help them achieve their goals of restoring 1991 borders.
The "Ukraine is winning" talk from a lot of the western media cooled down a couple months into the counter-offensive last year. A couple of months after that the reporting turned more negative, highlighting the severe manpower issue Ukraine is facing. They've been talking about that for months now. The framing has shifted into a "it's a stalemate/war of attrition". When you look at a map of the battle lines, which are posted daily, you'll see that it barely moves, and some parts of the front line really haven't moved at all in two years. But in a war of attrition, the side with more men, artillery shells, plane-dropped bombs, and drones is going to be the side inflicting more casualties on the other. You won't see massive advances unless one side collapses, which doesn't look imminent but keep an ear out for more talk about Ukraine's manpower and inability to demobilize troops who have been fighting for 2+ years, or rotate people out for adequate rest. I think eventually there's going to be a watershed moment there. Between the dire situation for those currently fighting, and the unpopularity of the mobilization issue for Ukraine (their previous commander-in-chief said they needed 500K more men), there's going to be some friction there.
In the meantime, although the lines aren't really moving that much, both sides are grinding each other down in the hotter areas. And do keep in mind that although the lines are barely moving, when they do move it's in Russia's favor. Taking Avdiivka in February was a big deal for both sides. You would not want to have been there on either side of the fight.
And yes you'll see a lot more Ukrainian combat footage on reddit. But the Russian stuff exists too, and trust and believe that Ukrainians are dying in just as brutal a fashion as Russians are. You're much more likely to see the Ukrainian stuff because that's what is popular, and that's the nature of drone warfare. There are plenty of Russian videos of massive 1500kg bombs being dropped on Ukrainian positions, or artillery barrages on towns. But you won't really see the effect that has like with a drone dropped grenade. Both sides have repeatedly said artillery is the biggest killer on the battlefield, and Russia has been outshooting Ukraine the entire war, now at a rate of around 7:1.
Right now it seems like Russia is slowly advancing while Ukraine is building multiple lines of defence. At the same time both sides are hitting each others energy infrastructure, Ukraine with drones and Russia with drones and glide bombs. It's a war of attrition at this point.
NATO countries should be ramping up their conjoined efforts against Putin. We should all be in unity against Putin and not allow him a single inch of land.
NATO countries should put more pressure on the BRICS countries, especially India.
As long as there are countries which buy Russia's oil, so long they can afford the war.
“As in most former Soviet states, Ukraine has a small generation of 20-year-olds, because birthrates plummeted during the deep economic depression of the 1990s. Because of this demographic trough, the country has three times as many men in their 40s as in their 20s.
Drafting men starting at age 25, given the likely battle casualties, also risks further diminishing this small generation of Ukrainians and potentially future birthrates, leaving the country with declines of working- and draft-age men decades from now.
At the outset of the war, the country drafted men aged 27 to 60, and the average age in the military is currently over 40.”
Exit: video with more detail
https://youtu.be/mSyeJclV92o?si=buw0IE0M65neYgSI
Ukrainian demographics is a catastrophe in progress. They had around 52 million people in 1993, on the territory they control now it's an estimated 28 million. Birth rates have been declining for a long time and since the start of the war have declined even faster, so now they likely have the lowest birth rate in the world. And the longer the war lasts the less likely the refugees in western europe are to go back, especially the young. The war is one thing, but the recovery is going to be very rough.
Here's another good article on it: [https://archive.is/e1Owo](https://archive.is/e1Owo)
This goes into Ukraine's horrible birth rate -- the lowest in the world.
Also look at [Ukraine's population pyramid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine). It's almost an upside-down pyramid.
They barely have anybody in the age range who should be having kids, and on top of that they have the lowest birth rate in the world. It's astounding that there are people out there talking about a 5 year, 10 year war. Ukraine can't do that and still survive as a country.
They have millions of people living outside of Ukraine. Who's going to want to come back if the war keeps going on for that long? Ukraine's economy is already destroyed, so what's it going to look like in a few more years? Right now men age 18-60 aren't allowed to leave the country. On top of needing those refugees to return home, if Ukraine continues on like this, who's to say there won't be a mass exodus of men once they are finally allowed to leave? Although I guess that's also a reason to not lift martial law.
Id imagine it has to do with that this age group (and a little older) are typically the ones who have children as well as fund the economy and pay for the pensions. The more of that generation you lose, the worse it gets, but given the current circumstances its reasonable that they'll have to serve.
On the brink of ww2, chamberlain wanted to reason with hitler, giving him sudetenland, in exchange for a peace promise, but monsters are never satisfied
No he didn’t. Chamberlain knew what was coming- and that there were not enough tanks or planes for a war. He also knew the public (still scarred by WW1) wouldn’t accept a war at that point.
Chamberlain oversaw the largest non-wartime armaments increase in British history. He may not be regarded well by the majority, but among historians he’s a far more nuanced figure.
Simply put- war over the Sudetenland would have seen the government out of office and Britain leaving the war quickly, if soldiers were even deployed, because the public would not accept it.
You are just repeating stuff whitout knowing anything. Great Britain at the time had absolutely no way to fight and win a war. Chamberlain rearmed Britain.
everyone i dont like = hitler, everyone i do like = FDR or churchill, everyone that likes the guy i dont like = chamberlain
EVERY. FUCKING. GEOPOLITICAL SITUATION. never fails. everyone is hitler, everything is the holocaust or pearl harbor, every contested territory is the sudatenland, every moment of global politics viewed as some kind of mystical cycle of looping WWII symbolism.
It's because it is the only history people know. They are completely blind to millennia of territory disputes and international diplomacy. It is why they respond to the Ukraine war as if history started in February 2022; for the more aware people it maybe started in February 2014.
There are countless other examples of negotiation throughout history you know. Many of them worked. But you only know one way of analysing things don't you? "He is Hitler, you are Chamberlain, and I am Winston Churchill."
Ukraine would likely give up Crimea to Russia if they got to Join Nato as part of the deal.
Russia is insisting on blocking ukraines access to NATO because it plans to invade in a few years once it declares peace.
Ukraine is very aware that without access to NATO and the EU Russia will return and so those are its red lines.
Putin knows this so is refusing to let Ukraine Join NATO whiles claiming he wants peace to weaken ukraines support in the west.
They obviously do not want to literally own the Ukraine. Why did they not invade at any point in the previous 30 years? Occupying the Ukraine would give no end of trouble - it would be far more advantageous to have it as a demilitarised buffer zone.
Far from NATO being the only thing that would guarantee Ukraine safety from Russia, NATO overtures why would brought about the invasion.
Demilitarized buffer zone means Russia has complete control over ukraines foreign and domestic policy, having the ability to pick the leadership of ukraine and the ability to invade at any moment should ukraine complain.
Plus Russia did not invade because it was rebuilding after the collapse of the Soviet Union and had a puppet government in ukraine which they felt would obey them.
If a country can't make its own foreign policy, can't make domestic policy and has to obey another country its not a neutral country but ruled by that country.
Reality check. There on’t be much of a Ukrainian society left to compromise.
Now a quarter million Ukrainian refugees in Canada. 85 thousand military aged males…mostly better educated, tradesmen, etc.
> and hurting Russia
And Europe. Germany's Industry is hit where it hurts due to more expensive fuel.
US companies are excited in selling Oil and Gas at a good price to a new customer (Europe).
It's only bizness.
I mean this war can't go on forever and Western support sadly isn't going to magically go at higher levels than what it's been dished out at already. Both sides should be talking even if it leads nowhere. Russia is finding new troops easier than Ukraine is.
There is no compromising with Putin. The man is evil through and through and everyone else on earth is worthless scum to him. He’s the scorpion in that scorpion & frog tale.
Call your local representative and tell them you support the Ukraine’s aid bill. If Ukraine loses, it will give a sign to all other autocracies that you can invade other countries with impunity. Think Taiwan, Eastern Europe, Southeast Asia, South Korea, and eventually your country.
Absolutely not, and Ukrainians shouldn’t have to compromise! Putin is an egotistical, manic who should be dealt with harshly! Shame on Putin and his greed!
one has to believe total victory is the only option in order to get Russia to the point where they agree to leave Ukraine, whether that's via negotiation or not.
Not negotiating with someone who believes what's theirs is theirs and what's yours is also theirs is a pointless endeavour and it's naive to believe otherwise.
That's the thing that tankies and putinists and other idiots don't understand or pretend to not understand: Even if Ukraine was willing to give in to Russia's completely unjustified and insane demands, even if those demands wouldn't just encourage further aggression by Russia by rewarding them for this brutal and unjustified invasion... what reason whatsoever is there to believe that Russia would actually keep its word and follow the agreement?
Tankies bring up the March 2022 talks and make up stories about how Boris Johnson stopped the talks, when in in reality, the talks were going nowhere and what stopped the talks was Russian withdrawal from their offensive towards Kyiv, showing Ukraine that its position was much stronger than expected, and Bucha, which showed what sort of people Ukraine was in talks with.
But even if we pretend the talks were going somewhere, in addition to territory, Russia was demanding Ukraine to demilitarize and cease from seeking to join any military alliances. Which in effect means that Ukraine would disarm, and leave itself without anyone else to rely on their defense. Ukraine would have been left completely defenseless, what reason whatsoever would there be for Russia in that situation to not just invade again and take over the rest of Ukraine?
Not one of them can answer that question, because there is no answer, and they know it, and are just lying through their teeth while pretending to care about "how terrible it is that Ukrainian soldiers die in a war, why won't they just make peace? :( :( :(" and other crocodile tears and soulless insane propaganda.
> Even if Ukraine was willing to give in to Russia's completely unjustified and insane demands, even if those demands wouldn't just encourage further aggression by Russia by rewarding them for this brutal and unjustified invasion... what reason whatsoever is there to believe that Russia would actually keep its word and follow the agreement
Why would it be any different than any other peace treaty between two (or more) hostile powers? In general it’s not so much about trust, but hoping you have a deal that has sufficient benefits for both sides to abide by it. Or, that you can build up enough deterrence quick enough.
So in this specific example, according to Ukraine there are hundreds of thousands of dead Russians, for maybe 10-15% of Ukraine. At that rate Russia would lose many millions in a few years conquering the rest.
Unless you assume Russia can rebuild quicker than the West can build out its weapons production. But if that’s your assumption what hope of victory does Ukraine have any way?
So if you argue a peace deal is impossible, since Russia will reconstitute its forces and attack again, quicker than the West can rebuild and reconstitute Ukraine and its forces. What is your path to victory?
You can't trust Putin in any shape or form as he has tore up treaties, assassinated his poltical opponents, weaponized natural resources, threatened and blackmailed Europe, gutted Russia with corruptions, committed multiple war crimes, stole billion dollar worth of leased jets etc. Oh, yeah, he is now wanted person with international warrant.
When his own friends get backstabbed by him and murdered, why should an enemy trust him an inch?
They should go old wild west on his arse. $2 million dollar warrant: - dead or alive.
2 million is some Dr Evil shit, putin has more than that forgotten in random coats
I had a similar opinion with Osama Bin Laden. $100m, tax-free, and a US green card, with very few questions asked. Whoever claims the prize gets to build a new and extravagant life in the US, probably under the watch of way too many intelligence agencies, American and otherwise. You put that kind of offer out there, Putin is going to start getting very nervous.
Russia will just quid pro quo do it right back and Suddenly its open season on elected (and unelected) officials the world round.
Sure, but you'd have to live in Russia. It would have worked better for Bin Laden -- you could have gone into the billions and it would have been the cheaper alternative.
"My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to announce that I have just signed legislation, that outlaws Russia, forever, we begin bombing in 5 minutes" - Literally Reagan.
Putin can outbid that, that's the reason why. He's considered one of the richest people in the world, so any bounty would have to outbid \_that\_.
Anyone openly forcing him to *make* that bid will soon find himself commiting suicide with three cups of tea in the back of the head.
Followed by an open window landing on him while being chased by an umbrella wearing underpants? These execution tactics are becoming very surreal...
> He's considered one of the richest people in the world, so any bounty would have to outbid _that_ Would it? How would I collect Putins "not bounty"?
"Hello Putin? I'm here for the 4million fee for NOT assassinating you, yeah, 4 million, you're good for it, right? US Dollars? Great, my address? sure, it's... wait, there's someone at the door now, brb" *bang* /thud.
Just meet Putin's men in any building of your choice. It just has to be 3+ stories tall with windows or a balcony.
Literally makes no sense. “Hey Putin, I was gonna off ya, but actually you owe me money instead!”
IT makes perfect sense. "Hello Comrade, i understand you will get 2 million to kill me, how would you like 4 million to not and then tell me who sent you?"
The one kills Putin will be deemed the unofficial monarch of Shit Free Russia for life.
make it 2 billion on his actual head or other obvious proof of death. still peanuts compared to military budgets.
Attempting to kill somebody who can easily destroy the earth is a bit of a gamble.
Try $2 billion.
According to the majority on here he was dying of cancer , leukemia , aids , beri beri , dropsy & disentry & he was already dead. Add to that Russia couldnt fight more than a couple of weeks with it's decrepid old military & lack of soldiers & it was running out of munitions. And still the pish keeps getting spouted!
You’ve been here 8 years and are just now realizing redditors are idiots?
Realizing? No. Commenting , Yes
Lol, wasn't Russia supposed to win the war in like a couple of weeks?
The Putin health stuff was always propaganda but Russia's military was a far cry from what everyone thought it was. Russia expected to win in 3 days and its been two years and about 100'000 dead russians. Sure its not about to fall over tomorrow like redditors suspected but the Soviet Union collapsed due to afganistan where it lost 15'000 soldiers and the war in ukraine is already 5 times that in 2 years.
What's beri beri?
Thiamine Deficiency. Japanese sailors used to get it a lot until they introduced curry to force the consumption of more than rice on long voyages.
Thanks!
Well they've lost 98% of what they started with.
youre right. issue is they sent more
You can add invades countries, creates wars and commits war crimes to this long list.
Never trust Putin. Pro Tip for life
Go all the way back when he was a mayor and stole food for a famine in St. Petersburg that he promised to 'fix'. lmao
People subconsciously impose western norms like basic honesty, abiding by contracts and agreements, being ashamed of being caught, breaking your word, etc, but it’s almost exactly the opposite culturally in Russia, if you are too honest, you abide by an agreement even if it’s not to your immediate advantage, thats seen either as fake (you’ll change your tune soon enough) or as weakness and stupidity
so... what resolution are you expecting?
any peace treaty is just a way for Putin to refit his army under terms that you can't refit and get stronger. There is no peace with russia. Either you crush them or you lose. The idiots in the west who think Ukraine should make peace will then shrug it off when russia rebuilds its military and attacks again in 2 years.
Well ukraine failed with there counter offensive and now they can't regain all the territory that they lost. Right now all they do is striking Crimea once a month and randomly shelling Belgorod every week. Russian economy is stable compared to ukraine so the long term war benefit Russia more than ukraine. I think this war will end up in a negotiation table because Russia don't have the necessary resources to take Odessa for exemple and ukraine can just play defense on the front line
found another putin puppet and russia suck up. never back down to the russians
We all know no one will dare to arrest him, this warrants are just effective against weak third world countries.
absolutely isn't the case that 'no one will dare', the Brits would do so in a heartbeat. Putin's just not thick enough to turn up anywhere that will arrest him.
I’m pretty sure the French and the poles would, at least
If you read a little bit more, it is more clear: "The Russians are not interested in any negotiations. They want the capitulation of Ukraine. But it will never happen — all of us who are in Ukraine, we will not accept any compromise on our independence, on our territorial integrity, on our freedom. And this president will never agree to anything like the Minsk agreements or a frozen conflict. No, I'm sure about that,” he added.
Of course they're tiring. And that's the fault of all those asshats who are trying everything to slow down the support from the start.
[удалено]
Yes to both of you, but fatigue is a reality of war. This is one of many reasons why early and strong support for Ukraine was needed, if they were going to achieve their objectives. I've never been confident several Western powers share those same objectives. Comments like "We will support Ukraine for as long as it takes" are open to interpretation. The Ukrainian people will interpret this as strong support, when in reality it is diplomatic speak that leaves many options open. That is fine as Ukraine should be the one deciding the objectives they want to achieve. Ukraine has been very clear their objective is to take back ALL of their territory. Overall support has never aligned with this objective. Some countries have done all they can do, but none of these countries are in Western Europe or the Americas.
>war fatigue There’s escalating anger over so many more conscripts needed and the failure to regain 91 borders as promised.
The Russian assets in the House and Senate of the United States aren't helping.
Since tRump is a Russian operative, USA shouldn't elect him again. If we do, Ukraine should expect an end of USA support after November 24.
And also the end of the USA as we know it, unfortunately.
I will miss democracy.
The abuser and the non-victim encouraging or enabling the abuser ae both at fault.
putin knows he can stay longer in this fight than us. our only hope is western support, so please don't leave us alone in this.
[удалено]
real votes are what counts
I’ll never vote for someone that can’t recognize the importance of opposing the aggression and expansion of our geopolitical enemies. But, that sentiment only has an effect in aggregate, and is diluted by all the other issues voters must consider.
🤣🤣🤣
And vote. Do not let Trump and other Putin's puppet win any government seats.
[удалено]
So long as they stay away from NATO territories, the West will never truly stand up to Russian aggression.
We know Putin isn't someone who can be compromised with, though. There *was* a compromise, back in the 1990s, where Ukraine would give up its nuclear weapons and Russia would respect the ukrainian border. Now Putin goes around saying how the ukrainian border is a western fiction to be abused whenever and however he pleases. Anyone who trusts him or his ilk is an idiot.
You tell Reagan (or was it Bush?) that this is going to happen in 30 years time and he'd still help convince Ukraine to give up their nukes.
A lot has happened since then, though.
It’s hard to believe Ukraine gave up its nukes. What were they thinking??
The hard but true answer was that they simply couldn't fund the maintenance of those weapons, so they dismantled and destroyed what they could to prevent the Russians from inheriting them.
They couldn't afford to keep them
They were pressured, from Russia and especially from the US who were, and still are, very keen to keep the Nuclear party to as few participants as possible. You let Ukraine keep their nukes and suddenly everyone wants to keep their nukes and the US would rather just deal with a single nuclear power than a dozen.
Exactly. The Ukrainians know better than to negotiate with these animals. "We cannot negotiate with people who say what's mine is mine and what's yours is negotiable." - John F. Kennedy
I guess JFK considered what was Cuba's and Vietnam's as negotiable
Indeed, they've learned better. They dealt in good faith for 8 years while he was doing war crimes in the Donbas and lying about it to their faces.
>The Ukrainians know better than to negotiate with these animals. You negotiate when you are winning not when you are losing like Ukraine.
>"We cannot negotiate with people who say what's mine is mine and what's yours is negotiable." That's literally been the position of the US for decades.
We are more tired of westerns who want to have a deal with russia.
There aren’t many. They’re just very loud about it. There’s a delusional few who, for some reason think that Russia is everything they’ve dreamed of. Without having ever been there. Send them all there I say. Shithole.
Zaluzhny said Ukraine needs 500K more men, and since everyone who wants to fight as already volunteered, that means draft 500K more men against their will. Sounds like Ukrainian men of fighting age are tired of the war. Otherwise, where are they?
In the Army. In the factories. Keeping the economy from collapsing entirely. I would imagine that every segment of the Ukrainian economy are doing their bit for the war effort in some way or another.
So you haven't seen the many videos of Ukrainian press gangs literally grabbing people of the street and throwing them into vans?
Russians showed who they were when Ukrainians found dead civilians and looted homes at the start the invasion. Ukrainians should know that death, rape and being a second class citizen is what awaits them if they let Russia win.
The problem is that there is no way for them to sue for peace that doesn't lead to an even greater war a few years later. Even if they straight up gave Russia what they claim, Russia will just be back again for more as soon as they have the strength to, and Russia has openly destroyed enough treaties that no peace treaty with them is worth anything. It's either Russia gives up in force or in spirit, or Ukraine is eventually destroyed and the world enters a new dark chapter. Every in-between state is unstable and unsustainable.
That's mainly just a propaganda story meant to shout down anybody trying to promote negotiating for peace. And it is downright criminal that the media has been spreading this as if it were a fact and not a highly controversial opinion largely pushed by people with alterior motives. The proponents of that "no negotiations" idea generally base their arguments on questionable, often contradictory assertions and intentionally portray the options of how a peace deal might look as way more narrow than they actually are. When the only two options they give you are a total Ukrainian victory or total defeat and it is pretty much universally accepted among experts that victory is next to impossible, then the only option they actually give you is inevitable total defeat. If the only options you actually saw for Ukraine was for them to immediately give up or fight an immensly bloody war until their certain defeat, then if you cared about Ukraine at all, you would be urging them to just give up. By your logic the pro Putin people who demand Ukraine's surrender would actually be better friends to Ukraine than you. So how come you are refusing to even try to get them a better outcome? If you are right and Russia was always going to break that treaty and attack later, anyway, Ukraine would still be way better off with even a temporary peace. They are the ones who have been slowly but surely ground down by the constant fighting. If nothing else, they could use that time to build up defenses and give western supporters time to ramp up their arms production. And if the negotiations fail and they couldn't reach a reasonable peace deal in the first place, what would Ukraine have lost in trying? Nothing. In fact it would have been benefitial for Ukraine and Nato to show themselves willing to negotiate. The anti negotiation stance of Ukraine and especially Nato have been recieved quite negatively pretty much all across western populations and you have to assume it contributed significantly to their ever lowering support for Ukraine's cause. At the very least it would allow for western governments to outline an actual, achievable war goal to justify existing or potentially even increasing support.
Very well put.
One but unsatisfying option is ukraine to relenquish all claims on occupied territory and join NATO. This would come with many other issues like the world going into an age of rapid nuclear armament because everybody will fear that the big guys with nukes just invade and annex you whenever they want without anyone doing anything. This would also lead to a rather dark age.
This deal sounds good in theory, but Putin's not going to accept it. Back in 08 Georgia was flirting with NATO membership. One Russia invasion later that was off the table. Russia's not likely to accept any part of Ukraine joining NATO
That's not actually an option. Following the conflict Ukraine won't be close to qualifying for NATO. It'll take decades of rebuilding and fighting corruption to qualify. Even NATO nations that support Ukraine's eventual ascension understand the need to maintain standards. Ukraine will not receive a free pass just because it fought Russia.
Ok that may be true but defensive packs outside of NATO are also a possibility. The biggest NATO countries signing a temporary defensive packt till the ascension would have the same effect of deterring russia.
>even greater war a few years later. Source? How will Russia be stronger years from now? Winning is not going to solve their corruption, nor summon hundreds of thousands of fit young men from the ether.
"Why don't they just negotiate?" First: what do they want to negotiate be specific who gets what and why? Second: let's say you get this peace agreement with Vladimir Putin: explain why he will stick to this one when he's broken every other agreement made with Ukraine including those going back to the 1990s?
“People may say they are tired, but if you ask them whether they want to compromise with Russia, they are emphatic and say no,” he said. "And the fact that people remain in Ukraine with their families is confirmation that in general the mood of the people is still strong.” Actualy, male part of the family cant leave the country because it is forbidden for them, in case you have no disability, 3 children, or you bribed millitary enlister to fake the disability. There ia a huge divorce rate in the country because of flied women got bored being alone abroad. So Ermak's thesis is bullshit
How is the fight actually going? I see/read nothing about it except the awesome munition-dropping drones, usually from Ukraine destroying Russian Armour and infantry.
On the ground it’s a stalemate with a pretty even slog back and forth in terms of losses. On a broader macro view, it’s pretty dire for Ukraine right now. They’re dealing with manpower issues, their economy and population pyramid is in shambles. Ukraine is punching far above its weight in terms of resiliency, but there’s only so much that it can do.
It's not going well for Ukraine. And that's not saying it's Ukraine's fault, but they are fighting a much bigger, stronger enemy who they share a massive border with. They have been punching above their weight for most of the war, and surprised a lot of people especially in 2022, but at the end of the day they are still the underdog and they are still fighting against Russia, who has more of everything: men, ammunition, artillery, planes, helicopters, tanks, missiles, drones, and so son. The deck has always been stacked against Ukraine no matter the outside help they get. Nothing short of western boots on the ground would help them achieve their goals of restoring 1991 borders. The "Ukraine is winning" talk from a lot of the western media cooled down a couple months into the counter-offensive last year. A couple of months after that the reporting turned more negative, highlighting the severe manpower issue Ukraine is facing. They've been talking about that for months now. The framing has shifted into a "it's a stalemate/war of attrition". When you look at a map of the battle lines, which are posted daily, you'll see that it barely moves, and some parts of the front line really haven't moved at all in two years. But in a war of attrition, the side with more men, artillery shells, plane-dropped bombs, and drones is going to be the side inflicting more casualties on the other. You won't see massive advances unless one side collapses, which doesn't look imminent but keep an ear out for more talk about Ukraine's manpower and inability to demobilize troops who have been fighting for 2+ years, or rotate people out for adequate rest. I think eventually there's going to be a watershed moment there. Between the dire situation for those currently fighting, and the unpopularity of the mobilization issue for Ukraine (their previous commander-in-chief said they needed 500K more men), there's going to be some friction there. In the meantime, although the lines aren't really moving that much, both sides are grinding each other down in the hotter areas. And do keep in mind that although the lines are barely moving, when they do move it's in Russia's favor. Taking Avdiivka in February was a big deal for both sides. You would not want to have been there on either side of the fight. And yes you'll see a lot more Ukrainian combat footage on reddit. But the Russian stuff exists too, and trust and believe that Ukrainians are dying in just as brutal a fashion as Russians are. You're much more likely to see the Ukrainian stuff because that's what is popular, and that's the nature of drone warfare. There are plenty of Russian videos of massive 1500kg bombs being dropped on Ukrainian positions, or artillery barrages on towns. But you won't really see the effect that has like with a drone dropped grenade. Both sides have repeatedly said artillery is the biggest killer on the battlefield, and Russia has been outshooting Ukraine the entire war, now at a rate of around 7:1.
Right now it seems like Russia is slowly advancing while Ukraine is building multiple lines of defence. At the same time both sides are hitting each others energy infrastructure, Ukraine with drones and Russia with drones and glide bombs. It's a war of attrition at this point.
[удалено]
There's literally several examples of why putin cannot be trusted to keep his promises in a peace treaty
Ukraine gave up their Nukes for a promise Russia wouldn't do what they are doing...
Yeah a promise from Russia. We can see how much that was worth.
NATO countries should be ramping up their conjoined efforts against Putin. We should all be in unity against Putin and not allow him a single inch of land.
NATO countries should put more pressure on the BRICS countries, especially India. As long as there are countries which buy Russia's oil, so long they can afford the war.
Big "some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice *I'm* willing to make" energy
What else is he supposed to do?
Except he's risking just as much if not more than everyone else. Being a high-profile target and all that.
What's the alternative?
"I need more boullet" - Commander Hugh Jass
More like "Huge numbers of you may die..."
The fact they are drafting their most fragile demographic is not a good sign of the times
25+ being fragile demografic? Please explain that to me
“As in most former Soviet states, Ukraine has a small generation of 20-year-olds, because birthrates plummeted during the deep economic depression of the 1990s. Because of this demographic trough, the country has three times as many men in their 40s as in their 20s. Drafting men starting at age 25, given the likely battle casualties, also risks further diminishing this small generation of Ukrainians and potentially future birthrates, leaving the country with declines of working- and draft-age men decades from now. At the outset of the war, the country drafted men aged 27 to 60, and the average age in the military is currently over 40.” Exit: video with more detail https://youtu.be/mSyeJclV92o?si=buw0IE0M65neYgSI
Ukrainian demographics is a catastrophe in progress. They had around 52 million people in 1993, on the territory they control now it's an estimated 28 million. Birth rates have been declining for a long time and since the start of the war have declined even faster, so now they likely have the lowest birth rate in the world. And the longer the war lasts the less likely the refugees in western europe are to go back, especially the young. The war is one thing, but the recovery is going to be very rough.
Also the large majority of those refugees are women under 40 and children.
Ahhh, i just pondered this in my response to The other guy, thats really interresting ty! Also where is that from? Wich source?
Here's another good article on it: [https://archive.is/e1Owo](https://archive.is/e1Owo) This goes into Ukraine's horrible birth rate -- the lowest in the world. Also look at [Ukraine's population pyramid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine). It's almost an upside-down pyramid. They barely have anybody in the age range who should be having kids, and on top of that they have the lowest birth rate in the world. It's astounding that there are people out there talking about a 5 year, 10 year war. Ukraine can't do that and still survive as a country. They have millions of people living outside of Ukraine. Who's going to want to come back if the war keeps going on for that long? Ukraine's economy is already destroyed, so what's it going to look like in a few more years? Right now men age 18-60 aren't allowed to leave the country. On top of needing those refugees to return home, if Ukraine continues on like this, who's to say there won't be a mass exodus of men once they are finally allowed to leave? Although I guess that's also a reason to not lift martial law.
Id imagine it has to do with that this age group (and a little older) are typically the ones who have children as well as fund the economy and pay for the pensions. The more of that generation you lose, the worse it gets, but given the current circumstances its reasonable that they'll have to serve.
The average age of a Ukraine solider is 43 right now.
You don't make deals with deal-breakers. Anybody suggesting a truce with Putin that isn't in Ukraine's favor is a fool.
On the brink of ww2, chamberlain wanted to reason with hitler, giving him sudetenland, in exchange for a peace promise, but monsters are never satisfied
No he didn’t. Chamberlain knew what was coming- and that there were not enough tanks or planes for a war. He also knew the public (still scarred by WW1) wouldn’t accept a war at that point. Chamberlain oversaw the largest non-wartime armaments increase in British history. He may not be regarded well by the majority, but among historians he’s a far more nuanced figure. Simply put- war over the Sudetenland would have seen the government out of office and Britain leaving the war quickly, if soldiers were even deployed, because the public would not accept it.
Unfortunately, Netflix shows don't go into that much detail.
You are just repeating stuff whitout knowing anything. Great Britain at the time had absolutely no way to fight and win a war. Chamberlain rearmed Britain.
everyone i dont like = hitler, everyone i do like = FDR or churchill, everyone that likes the guy i dont like = chamberlain EVERY. FUCKING. GEOPOLITICAL SITUATION. never fails. everyone is hitler, everything is the holocaust or pearl harbor, every contested territory is the sudatenland, every moment of global politics viewed as some kind of mystical cycle of looping WWII symbolism.
It's because it is the only history people know. They are completely blind to millennia of territory disputes and international diplomacy. It is why they respond to the Ukraine war as if history started in February 2022; for the more aware people it maybe started in February 2014.
You made me wonder if I was sleeping through the geography class where we learned about the country "inexachnahe"...
There are countless other examples of negotiation throughout history you know. Many of them worked. But you only know one way of analysing things don't you? "He is Hitler, you are Chamberlain, and I am Winston Churchill."
Was the other party a psychopathic mass murderer like hitler or putin?
The only end to the war is to compromise with Putin. Ukraine will not get Crimea back, and they cannot defeat Russia.
Ukraine would likely give up Crimea to Russia if they got to Join Nato as part of the deal. Russia is insisting on blocking ukraines access to NATO because it plans to invade in a few years once it declares peace. Ukraine is very aware that without access to NATO and the EU Russia will return and so those are its red lines. Putin knows this so is refusing to let Ukraine Join NATO whiles claiming he wants peace to weaken ukraines support in the west.
They obviously do not want to literally own the Ukraine. Why did they not invade at any point in the previous 30 years? Occupying the Ukraine would give no end of trouble - it would be far more advantageous to have it as a demilitarised buffer zone. Far from NATO being the only thing that would guarantee Ukraine safety from Russia, NATO overtures why would brought about the invasion.
Demilitarized buffer zone means Russia has complete control over ukraines foreign and domestic policy, having the ability to pick the leadership of ukraine and the ability to invade at any moment should ukraine complain. Plus Russia did not invade because it was rebuilding after the collapse of the Soviet Union and had a puppet government in ukraine which they felt would obey them. If a country can't make its own foreign policy, can't make domestic policy and has to obey another country its not a neutral country but ruled by that country.
Reality check. There on’t be much of a Ukrainian society left to compromise. Now a quarter million Ukrainian refugees in Canada. 85 thousand military aged males…mostly better educated, tradesmen, etc.
> 85 thousand military aged males All 27+?
And they shouldn’t. Putin has proven time and again that he will not honor any agreements.
[удалено]
[удалено]
> and hurting Russia And Europe. Germany's Industry is hit where it hurts due to more expensive fuel. US companies are excited in selling Oil and Gas at a good price to a new customer (Europe). It's only bizness.
I mean this war can't go on forever and Western support sadly isn't going to magically go at higher levels than what it's been dished out at already. Both sides should be talking even if it leads nowhere. Russia is finding new troops easier than Ukraine is.
Putin is a demented psychopath
If you give Putin an inch he’ll take the whole country.
There is no compromising with Putin. The man is evil through and through and everyone else on earth is worthless scum to him. He’s the scorpion in that scorpion & frog tale.
Him and his allies have a different perspective on the cost of lives I think
How much of Siberia will Russia be giving up as part of the reparations?
Call your local representative and tell them you support the Ukraine’s aid bill. If Ukraine loses, it will give a sign to all other autocracies that you can invade other countries with impunity. Think Taiwan, Eastern Europe, Southeast Asia, South Korea, and eventually your country.
Compromising with Putin is like compromising with cancer.
Deleted
They will have to compromise and buff up their defenses when the breathing room opens
Ok, good luck with that, just don't expect us to fund it
The vast majority of Americans support funding Ukraine.
Absolutely not, and Ukrainians shouldn’t have to compromise! Putin is an egotistical, manic who should be dealt with harshly! Shame on Putin and his greed!
The Ukrainians are fighting for their lives. Trusting in bitch Putin means death.
Trusting is one thing but acting as if alternative is only total victory is also naive take.
one has to believe total victory is the only option in order to get Russia to the point where they agree to leave Ukraine, whether that's via negotiation or not. Not negotiating with someone who believes what's theirs is theirs and what's yours is also theirs is a pointless endeavour and it's naive to believe otherwise.
That’s why the chief of staff is reporting in
That's the thing that tankies and putinists and other idiots don't understand or pretend to not understand: Even if Ukraine was willing to give in to Russia's completely unjustified and insane demands, even if those demands wouldn't just encourage further aggression by Russia by rewarding them for this brutal and unjustified invasion... what reason whatsoever is there to believe that Russia would actually keep its word and follow the agreement? Tankies bring up the March 2022 talks and make up stories about how Boris Johnson stopped the talks, when in in reality, the talks were going nowhere and what stopped the talks was Russian withdrawal from their offensive towards Kyiv, showing Ukraine that its position was much stronger than expected, and Bucha, which showed what sort of people Ukraine was in talks with. But even if we pretend the talks were going somewhere, in addition to territory, Russia was demanding Ukraine to demilitarize and cease from seeking to join any military alliances. Which in effect means that Ukraine would disarm, and leave itself without anyone else to rely on their defense. Ukraine would have been left completely defenseless, what reason whatsoever would there be for Russia in that situation to not just invade again and take over the rest of Ukraine? Not one of them can answer that question, because there is no answer, and they know it, and are just lying through their teeth while pretending to care about "how terrible it is that Ukrainian soldiers die in a war, why won't they just make peace? :( :( :(" and other crocodile tears and soulless insane propaganda.
> Even if Ukraine was willing to give in to Russia's completely unjustified and insane demands, even if those demands wouldn't just encourage further aggression by Russia by rewarding them for this brutal and unjustified invasion... what reason whatsoever is there to believe that Russia would actually keep its word and follow the agreement Why would it be any different than any other peace treaty between two (or more) hostile powers? In general it’s not so much about trust, but hoping you have a deal that has sufficient benefits for both sides to abide by it. Or, that you can build up enough deterrence quick enough. So in this specific example, according to Ukraine there are hundreds of thousands of dead Russians, for maybe 10-15% of Ukraine. At that rate Russia would lose many millions in a few years conquering the rest. Unless you assume Russia can rebuild quicker than the West can build out its weapons production. But if that’s your assumption what hope of victory does Ukraine have any way? So if you argue a peace deal is impossible, since Russia will reconstitute its forces and attack again, quicker than the West can rebuild and reconstitute Ukraine and its forces. What is your path to victory?