Are you serious? — Tzeentch
Why this is so hard to fathom is curious to me as this should be evident. A belligerent wants a peace deal only if a) the belligerent has gained it's objectives (won the war) or b) if the objectives cannot be reached AND continuing the war leads to a worse situation.If standing up to them is "the abyss" (as in "not to be done"), then think about what you've forfeit. ssu mentioned deterrence having gone out the window, and it goes further than so, as history indeed tells us.
People can figure such stuff out on their own, without somehow having been tricked by the US. — jorndoe
So you are whining over about spilled milk. — ssu
The problem for you is that unless you want to deny the goings-on surrounding the negotiations, they directly contradict pretty much your entire narrative. — Tzeentch
Everything here will depend not so much on Helsinki, which has largely lost its independence in making decisions on foreign policy, but rather on the general policy course being pursued by Washington and Brussels toward Russia. — Kuznetsov
Kuznetsov blamed senior Finnish politicians for almost completely dismantling cooperation with Russia. — TASS
there will be no return to the previous format of cooperation now that Finland has joined the aggressive military bloc [of NATO] — Kuznetsov
As regards the situation around Ukraine, Finland has clearly joined `the party of war against Russia until they win’ here. Of course, we cannot but respond to potential decisions by the Finnish government in this sphere. Specific steps will be developed depending on real threats that these actions will pose to our security. The Finns cannot but realize that such a major provocation will not be left without a Russian response. — Kuznetsov
can all defense be narrated as offense, can all defensive measures be cast as threats? — Apr 8, 2024
Surely you must understand the Kremlin has legitimate concerns about NATO troops in its historical sphere of influence?
Albania: Hardly
Bulgaria: Hardly
Czechia: Hardly
Estonia: Hardly
(East) Germany: Hardly
Hungary: Hardly ?
Latvia: Hardly
Lithuania: Hardly
Poland: Hardly
Romania: Hardly
Slovakia: Hardly ?
Moldova: Help
Ukraine: Help
Finland: Hey
Sweden: Hey
(Euronews, 12th April 2024) A draft Russia-Ukraine agreement negotiated in 2022 could serve as a starting point for prospective talks to end the fighting in Ukraine, the Kremlin said on Friday.
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that the draft document that was discussed in Istanbul in March 2022 could be “the basis for starting negotiations.” At the same time, he noted that the possible future talks would need to take into account the “new realities.”
“There have been many changes since then, new entities have been included in our constitution,” Peskov said in a conference call with reporters.
Russia has dismissed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s peace formula calling for Moscow to withdraw troops, pay compensation to Ukraine and face an international tribunal for its action.
Wee! :grin:Seems to me that "lost its independence in [...]" is a wee bit exaggerated, — jorndoe
Russia proposed to give back all the territory they conquered during the invasion in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality. It's the West who blocked that deal. The Ukrainian delegation put its signature under it, whether you like it or not.
The "Russian territorial greed" narrative is swept off the table, and so is the narrative that the West is preoccupied in any way with the well-being of Ukraine. — Tzeentch
I don't recall hearing this. But please give an actual reference on it. And what happened to the "denazification"?Russia proposed to give back all the territory they conquered during the invasion in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality. — Tzeentch
I don't recall hearing this. But please give an actual reference on it. — ssu
a good pretext for fighting a proxy war it wanted all along — Mikie
Ukrainian people being caught up in this proxy war — Mikie
It’s a proxy war between the US and Russia — Mikie
It is a proxy war between the US and Russia — Mikie
this proxy war — Mikie
That's it? What the Ukrainians wanted has nothing to do with it? — jorndoe
really don’t have a clue about what’s happening — Mikie
Neomac, notice what @Tzeentch argued:This is claimed to be part of the 10 points of Instambul Communque:
Proposal 1: Ukraine proclaims itself a neutral state, promising to remain nonaligned with any blocs and refrain from developing nuclear weapons — in exchange for international legal guarantees. Possible guarantor states include Russia, Great Britain, China, the United States, France, Turkey, Germany, Canada, Italy, Poland, and Israel, and other states would also be welcome to join the treaty.
https://faridaily.substack.com/p/ukraines-10-point-plan — neomac
Russia proposed to give back all the territory they conquered during the invasion in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality. — Tzeentch
If there would be NO assistance, perhaps an arms embargo on Ukraine ...for some reason, then I guessUkraine wouldn’t have lasted a month without US involvement. — Mikie
(Kiel Institue, 7.9.2023) Europe has clearly overtaken the United States in promised aid to Ukraine, with total European commitments now being twice as large. A main reason is the EU’s new €50 billion “Ukraine Facility,” but also other European countries have upped their support with new multi-year packages. For the first time since the start of the war, the US is now clearly lagging behind.
Because their agency matters. It's not just the US fighting a war through it's proxy. It's really about the proxy itself. The biggest mistake is that Americans don't care a shit about what their proxies are fighting for. They are interested to fight "the Cold War". Or fight the "War on Terrorism". They have little or no interest on what the actual people are fighting for.I’m sure the Greek communists didn’t think so either. Or the Vietnamese. So what? — Mikie
But do notice that Europe combined has actually given more than the US. — ssu
Well, we aren't giving enough support.So Ukraine should be doing just fine without American weaponry. — Mikie
That's easy to admit!Come on— let’s at least admit that without US support, Ukraine wouldn’t have lasted too long. — Mikie
Neomac, notice what Tzeentch argued:
Russia proposed to give back all the territory they conquered during the invasion in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality. — Tzeentch
Where is this kind of argument was my question. Please read what I say. — ssu
And they have here the agency. We are just giving them support. What's so wrong with that.On the ground, it seems much different— it’s Ukrainians fighting for their country against an illegal invasion. No one doubts that. — Mikie
OK! Thank you. :up:Russia would withdraw to its position on February 23, when it controlled part of the Donbas region and all of Crimea, and in exchange, Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries. — neomac
So what's your point? — ssu
So what?That is the point: without US support, Ukraine, Korea, Vietnam, the Iraqi government, Israel, etc., wouldn’t have lasted too long. US support is crucial. Okay, then we ask: so what? Given this fact, the further question is: Why Korea and Ukraine and Israel or Nicaragua, but not Sudan or East Timor or Nigeria or Haiti? — Mikie
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.