• Brainsploosh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    135
    ·
    7 days ago

    Fool me once, shame on me, fool me 20 times and I should sign away half my country’s mineral wealth for no guarantees and no gains…

      • Soup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 days ago

        I dunno, there are a tonne of incredibly stupid and uncreative people who conservatives believe every day for years. The part about loki seems to be a statisical outlier not just “best case scenario”, ya know?

      • caboose2006@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        ·
        7 days ago

        Give Ukraine everything they need to kick the Russians off their soil. Tomahawks, F35s, a million artillery shells a week, etc… lift all usage restrictions with the exception of civilian targets and infrastructure. Once every square inch of Ukraine is back in Ukrainian hands full NATO membership and a Marshall like recovery plan.

        Or assassinate Putin. As long as Putin lives Ukraine is under threat.

        • computerscientistII@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          7 days ago

          and infrastructure.

          No. That has to go. The war will end a lot sooner, if there aren’t any bridges and rails left, the Russkies can use to ship ammo and cannon fodder.

          • caboose2006@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            I meant civilian infrastructure. So like power stations or shipping centers that handle civilian goods or subways etc… If it carries a single artillery round it’s fair game.

        • thetemerian@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 days ago

          That’s unsustainable, brainless and unrealistic, who is going to pay and fight if the war continues for 5 more years, what about 10 more years?

          • caboose2006@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            ·
            7 days ago

            Russia is importing North Koreans to fight. You think if Ukraine gets unlimited weapons the war will last 5 more years? What day of the 3 day invasion are we on now?

            The only reason the war has lasted this long is because of the drip feeding of weapons. which was probably a ploy to extend the war and make defense contractors more rich. So yeah, end it quickly by giving Ukraine what it needs to win.

            So, what’s your "totally realistic"TM solution?

            • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              7 days ago

              Theory that more weapons wins is based on Russia being overextended and not outproducing west by itself. Your point on “endless war being perfect US policy” is the right one. Wining a war is always terrible. It means an end to war, and just look at how sad everyone around here is about that prospect. That Ukraine could suffer far more destruction, as retaliation for the special weapons it uses for terrorism inside Russia, is far more likely, as is striking western nations as punishment for “breaking the script of a slow war of attrition with eventual Russian victory”.

              ATCMS got Ukraine electricity sector destroyed, instead of winning. US can produce 60 per year.

            • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              7 days ago

              Weapons don’t win wars, people do, and Ukraine has a severe troops shortage right now that will only get worse as the war goes on. You can give them all the weapons in the world, if there’s no one there to fire them, they’ll still lose

              • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                7 days ago

                That is fundementally wrong. Firepower absolutely makes up for numbers disadvantage.

                if a hundred Russians, Norks and other Mercenaries and their vehicles get smoked in a battle by a single cluster bomb. Rinse and repeat

              • caboose2006@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                6 days ago

                Guess India just lacked the manpower to kick out the Brits. Same with the Japanese and *checks notes, 4 American ships.

                Weapons absolutely matter.

                • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 days ago

                  I never said weapons don’t matter, I said people do matter, and if the war goes on long enough then ukraine won’t have any to fight the war.

                  The weapon difference between colonial India and Britain is nowhere near that between Russia and Ukraine. This has become a war of artillery and drones, both sides have them and can produce them at scale. This isn’t some colonial era imperial war where one side has machine guns and the other has a couple muskets and swords.

                  Why don’t you look to more modern examples where overwhelming firepower and technological superiority was supposed to win a war, like Vietnam or Afghanistan. Hell look at Korea, China was able to force the Americans to a draw after it’s economy was in ruins after a decade of Japanese occupation and civil war while the u.s. had half the worlds production capacity. The Russian economy is leagues better then China was in the early 50s, and the u.s. isnt nearly as dominant.

              • thetemerian@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 days ago

                These people are delusional, the liberation of Ukraine can only happen if NATO troops land on the battlefield. And we all know that means nuclear war.

                • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 days ago

                  It only means Nuclear War if Putin decides he’s ready to die.

                  its not a gaurantee he flips a switch and decides to unleash fire the second NATO starts shooting at him, good chance he scuffles off and cuts his losses, if the fighting is contained to Ukraine and the border, its not a given that he’d condemn himself and his empire to death over the wasteland that is the Donbas

            • thetemerian@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 days ago

              And if you’re wrong and the war can indeed go on for 10 more years are you prepared to deal with the consequences of the destruction of Ukraine, potentially nuclear war and destabilization of Europe?

              • caboose2006@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                6 days ago

                So you don’t actually want to talk solutions. I asked what is your solution? I will answer no more questions until you answer mine.

          • LeFantome@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            7 days ago

            Russia does not have the capacity to fight 5 or 10 more years (unless the US backstops them). Ukraine does not need the resources to go 10 years. They need the resources to outlast the Russians. That is probably more like 18 to 24 months. It could be less.

            In my view, that is not only affordable but quite inexpensive given the benefits.

            Europe and the US have contributed about $250 billion collectively over the last 3 years (Europe has contributed more). That is a small amount of money for either of them. Most of the $120 billion the US counts as Ukraine aid has been spent on new weapons systems for the United States for the US military. The US builds themselves new weapons, sends Ukraine old ones, and counts the value of the old weapons as Ukraine aid. The thing is, most of these weapons would have been decommissioned in a few years without being used (assuming the US does not enter any major wars). So, the “real” cost to the US is actually far less.

            Both the US and Europe not only can sustain their current commitment. They could easily increase it without breaking a sweat. I lay no claim to it but Norway alone has a $1.7 trillion dollar pile of cash.

            In my view, the real question is who is going to pay for the aftermath of Russia’s continued aggression if they are allowed to invade Ukraine?

            Was it cheaper to have World War II or to stop Germany in Poland or Czechoslovakia? What would we have done in 1945 if given the chance to do it again?

            Perhaps you are right that it is unrealistic. That is more an opinion than a demonstrable fact and my opinion is no better than yours.

            I am not sure I can agree that it is brainless. While that is also an opinion, there are lots to facts to counter that argument.

            Supporting Ukraine no matter what it takes seems like the clear and obvious choice. I guess that is why it is what every country that matters is doing (except the US—now).

            Do you have a better argument?

            • thetemerian@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 days ago

              Looks like we’ll meet again here in a few years, after thousands more will die and more territory will be lost to argue again about how this war can hypothetically end, just because Zelensky’s ego was too big.

      • NotLemming@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        Give Ukraine back their own nuclear defense. Suddenly Russia can tolerate a neighbour who isn’t a vassal state and can make their own determinations about which pacts they want to enter into with other countries. Ukraine joins NATO and the EU. Putin burns in hell. AKA Happy ending.

          • threeganzi@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            Your point hasn’t been proven. OPs point was that Putin promises can’t be trusted. And without US putting force behind that promise, Ukraine is wise to be worried about such a deal.

            Just because one alternative realized doesn’t mean there weren’t other options, better or worse.

            Edit: plus, a peace deal is far from done, regardless which side you root for.

          • LeFantome@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            History teaches us that Russia cease fire agreements mean that fewer die immediately but that lasts a far shorter time than you hope for. In the end, even more people die than before when Russia resumes their aggression.

            This is not a prediction or an opinion. That are literally dozens of historical events to draw this information from.

            • thetemerian@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              According to what you’re saying, the only solution is NATO troops fighting in Ukraine because we cannot trust Russia in any way, shape or form.

              When are you willing to enroll to go to the front?

              • caboose2006@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                6 days ago

                You have textbook RT talking points. It’s so fucking obvious you’re a russian asset at the very keast

                • thetemerian@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  Yeah bro, everyone who doesn’t have your specific world view is a russian asset. What, are you 12?

  • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    117
    ·
    7 days ago

    What is there to negotiate? If all the russians leave ukraine, ukranians will probably stop shooting them…

    • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 days ago

      Russia has always firmly opposed expansion of NATO, including the missiles and NATO troops that were lined up at their border with Ukraine’s participation.

      • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        47
        ·
        7 days ago

        All those countries that joined NATO, Their sovereignty doesn’t end where hurt russian fee-fees begin

        if Russia doesnt like it, then maybe they should reflect on how they acted like savage barbarians to those people throughout history. Maybe they should reflect that they aren’t entiteld to an “Empire” or a “Sphere of Influence” or whatever they want to call it. Reflect on the fact that Eastern and Central europe are not pawns and slaves to a larger power. but nations with agency, hopes, dreams and goals.

        but they wont, Imperialism, Warmongering, and Genocide are married to the current excuse of “Russian Culture”

        • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 days ago

          Yeah like, instead of taking a hard look into the mirror why countries kept wanting to join NATO, or why the russian-bloc equivalent failed so much, LULZ WE JUST GONNA WALTZ IN NO NATO PLOX.

          Ah, nevermind, they did discover why so many countries wanted to join NATO. 😂

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          If it was about their sovereignty, it’s weird that you don’t mind NATO attacking their sovereignty to install pro-western politicians through corruption or straight up coups. “Sovereignty” only seems to matter when it’s anti-Russian.

          It’s not about feelings. There were many agreements for NATO not to expand. They did it anyway. There are consequences for that.

          • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            28
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            Please educate me. Which countries had pro-western politicians “Installed”

            And if you’re already typing Ukraine, boy do I have a bridge to sell you.

            With maybe the exception of Serbia, Russia has been antagonistic and Imperialistic towards Europe for CENTURIES. Theres a reason Russia finds itself fighting against most/all of Europe every century. You need only ask the butchered populations of Eastern Europe who found themselves as Russian subjects at any point in history. The only reason they were ever friendly with Serbia, was because the Serbs are like a microchasm of the same thing the Russians did. Mini-mes, if you will.

            you want to scream America bad, NATO bad, fine. but remove both of them from the equation, it wouldnt change the fact that the continent distrusts Russia for a reason.

              • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                30
                ·
                7 days ago

                Oh boy

                So if they installed pro-western politicians in Ukraine, Why was the president of Ukraine at the time of Euromaidan checks notes Viktor Yanukovitch? the Pro-Russian fraudster who was once removed from the presidency after having cheated in the elections. and even afterward, managed to ratfuck his way into a term later on in 2010. Only to get Impeached and removed from power By his own government after he ordered the Berkut and Internal Troops to use lethal force against protestors.

                this tired argument of western coups against these ex soviet countries always forgets to address the fact that a couple of suspicious phonecalls in embassies doesn’t hold the same power as millions of people taking to the streets over a government doing something that is widely unpopular.

                if the CIA and all these other groups people accuse of toppling governments were as competent as fiction made them out to be, Joe Biden would still be President, Putin would be dead, Russia would be a balkanized state, and the Ukraine war would probably never have happened, and if it did, it would have been over by now with a Ukrainian victory.

                • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 days ago

                  No, you’re describing the Maidan Coup, which was backed by the US to install a far-right puppet regime because they opposed Yanukovitch maintaining neutrality with Russia, and not bowing to US demands to block a lease on a Crimean naval base.

          • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 days ago

            There were many agreements for NATO not to expand.

            Oh were there?

            That’s interesting, considering how controversial it still is whether oral agreements ever existed in the first place. What isn’t controversial is of course that being oral-only, they can hardly be binding or transactionary. That is to say, the failure was to never transfer these agreements - if they even existed - into writing, bilaterally as that’s how you’d have to do it.

      • Empricorn@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        7 days ago

        “The United States should invade a country that might in the future join an alliance to help prevent the US from invading other countries as we have in the past.” Do you realize how fucking stupid your nAtO eXpAnSiOn propaganda sounds!?

            • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 days ago

              Facts don’t stop being facts when a Russian says them. If they’re factually stating the sequence of events, it doesn’t change anything.

              • Empricorn@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                16
                ·
                6 days ago

                Lies don’t become true just because you keep saying “facts”. The Russian propaganda (that you’re parroting) is the untrue part, not the events themselves. Ukraine defending itself against Russia before and during their violent, illegal invasion is not an “expansion” and has nothing to do with NATO. Full stop.

                • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  14
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  I would go one further. Ukraine trying to join NATO is not a valid reason for an invasion. In fact, I can’t think of any valid reason for an invasion. Invading a country is wrong.

                  Maybe Ukraine wants to join NATO because they share a border with a gigantic country that wants to conquer them.

          • uienia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            6 days ago

            You are doing nothing of the sort, you are literally just regurgitating Putin propaganda.

      • ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        7 days ago

        Except Ukraine was on their border and not part of NATO and other countries on their border are. NATO Then Russia invaded and took the Crimean peninsula unprovoked. Not a surprise that Ukraine wants NATO membership, and now Finland joined NATO because of Russia’s attack on Ukraine, doubling the NATO/Russia border.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          Incorrect. The Crimea invasion followed a soft coup of Ukraine by the US, wherein they installed a far-right puppet regime. The following years, Ukraine allowed a torrent of NATO & US troops and missile deployments to be installed at their border with Russia.

      • Tattorack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        NATO hasn’t “expanded” in a long time, until recently when Sweden and Finland decided to join. A decision that was made based on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. So through Russia’s actions, two countries have decided to join an organisation that was made to opposed Russia.

        Before that, no new members were accepted into NATO, even if they wanted to join, because NATO members weren’t really seeing the point of NATO anymore, and they didn’t see a reason to provoke Russia. That changed in 2014 when Russia invaded Ukraine for the first time, and annexed Crimea.

        Last but not least; NATO doesn’t expand. It’s not a nation with borders that grow through conquest or subjugation. It is a defensive pact that the peolpe of a nation must vote on to join. And then the members of NATO must unanimously vote on letting the new country join. It is voluntary and democratic.

        So instead of shoutong “NATO IS EXPANDING, GRRR!!”, why not ask yourself “why would Russia’s neighbouring countries want to join NATO?”

      • NotLemming@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        6 days ago

        I’ve always plainly stated that if anyone comes within 2 metres of me, I’m going to stab them. What do you mean, I’m going to prison??!! You knew my rule. I’ve been telling everyone my rule for 20 years.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          The primary mission of NATO is aggression with the Soviet Union/Russia. That’s the only reason it exists.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          I’m pretty sure every country on earth would respond to a hostile force amassing troops & missiles at their border.

          • TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            The fundamental difference here is between a sovereign nation pursuing defensive alliances versus an aggressive invasion violating international law. Ukraine wasn’t “amassing troops & missiles” at Russia’s border as an hostile threat - it was seeking security guarantees after Russia had already annexed Crimea in 2014 and fomented separatist movements in eastern Ukraine. National sovereignty means countries get to determine their own security arrangements, and Russia’s “security concerns” don’t justify violating Ukraine’s territorial integrity or dictating its foreign policy choices.

            • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              It’s not a sovereign nation. The US installed a far-right puppet regime in the 2014 Maidan Coup, which triggered the Crimea invasion.

              Funny that folks who claim to support Ukrainian sovereignty don’t give a shit about them being under a western thumb.

            • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              No, I was just alive at the time. Even in the states, they were covering the Maidan Coup at the time. They just rewrote the whole thing later.

              I’m not gonna be peer pressured into forgetting history I witnessed. 🙄

  • Valmond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    7 days ago

    Lots of propaganda today, seems like someone doesn’t like Zelenskyy or a strong Ukraine.

    Slava Ukraine!

  • ben_dover@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    6 days ago

    i don’t know who needs to hear this, who in their right minds would see Ukraine as the aggressor in this war

  • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    the amount of Fascist, Jingoistic shitposting that favors either Republican or Russian propaganda on social media is STAGGERING. The people arguing for it are more concerned about bathroom gender signs, DEI, wokism, and a bunch of other made up stuff, and not only are they oblivious that their country is being taken over by a foreign aggressor, THEY ARE PROUD OF IT. Because “at least the Russians kill the gays”

    We are in this position we are today, because Russia has been waging an information war against NATO countries for 15-20 years. and the seeds they planted during the days of Georgia and Crimea, are blooming into fruit now.

    The free world is AT WAR with Russia, and for the time being, America has been conquered. Victory from the jaws of Defeat, for the Russian mafia

      • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        6 days ago

        They dont need to invade to conquer. They already control the president. he just ended aid to Ukraine. He literally will not say anything bad about Russia. he is bought, paid for, and owned.

        America is currentley, and indefinetely, an enemy of the free world.

      • uienia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        6 days ago

        Putin has succeeded in stopping US aid to Ukraine, splintering NATO and isolating US from all its previous allies. That is very much Russian victory over the US.

        • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          do you remember what they said? By the time I looked at the reply, the account was banned

          edit - I dont think I need to know, was able to trace some of their comments on another instance, dude is shreiking about free speech. one of those people who wants to spit vicious hateful bile but be protected from consequences.

          people like that are lucky they have keyboards, they generally get punched / stabbed / shot for that kind of behaivor in the real world.

          • Valmond@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 days ago

            They, “justexit” spewed this crap:

            So we must just support your piece of shit Ukraine because you feel its the right thing to do? fucking delusion using every single buzzword, that just shows how fucking insane you are dumb clown doesnt even know the definition of a fascist, clown world

            Seems like they are losing (russia losing) after all.

            Slava Ukraine!

            • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 days ago

              they screeched and slurred their way into a ban from the platform, like I said, people like that talk tough behind a keyboard, because they’d face consequences in real life for saying that. ranging from a punch in the face to a slug in the brainpan.

      • JargonWagon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        I think you’ve called people “clown” at least five separate times in this post’s conments alone. I probably wouldn’t have noticed you if it wasn’t for the absolutely weird insult that you keep repeating. No one will take what you’re saying seriously if you don’t change it up a little. Go ask your boss at the Russian troll farm for tips on how to troll better online.

        Stop clowning around.

  • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    7 days ago

    The deal should be… All Russian troops get pulled out of Ukraine. Ukraine gets a lump sum of all seized Russian assets in foreign nations, Russia agrees not to move troops within 100 miles of Ukraine’s border without Ukraine’s consent. Ukraine agrees to allow and even assist civillain Russian services with locating and returning living and deceased Russians.

    The alternative is we take the limits off of what targets can be attacked within Russia, and enable Ukraine to enforce the conditions as proposed.

    I’d also like to add that Russia and the US give up their UN “super veto” power. I don’t think anything good and effective can come from the UN when a single country can just “nope” any UN proposals.

    • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      7 days ago

      Veto power in the UN is a short for “we will use nukes if you do this”. The UN is not world government, it’s the organisation which task(among many less important things) is to prevent nuclear war.

        • LeFantome@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 days ago

          As good as this comment is, neither has the range or targeting capability that the US does or that the USSR did.

          The security council veto was designed to keep the US and the USSR at the negotiating table and off the battlefield.

          • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            Then why are all those other nations on the security council? Just seems like we only need the members with veto power at this point.

  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    7 days ago

    The US won the physical war but lost the soft war to Russia.

    The US is being couped, and we need to dethrone them before it’s too late.

  • chaitae3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    7 days ago

    You can absolutely want peace and even agree to concessions to Russia to reach a sustainable peace, but this point is absolutely valid: there must be security guarantees, otherwise Putin will just use the armistice to rebuild its strength and attack again.

    • rockerface 🇺🇦@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      7 days ago

      Oh, absolutely. We want peace more than anyone else, but giving putin a chance to regroup, pull more support together and attack again is not peace, it’s surrender

        • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          7 days ago

          Why surrender and let the invader murder with impunity, when you can still make him fight for every inch.

          thats where we’re at. Thats been the score since Bucha. Because Ukraine resisted, both sides hate each other like Israel and Palestine now. every time Russia gets into a city, they rape and pillage, murder civilians on the street, torture and castrate POWs before murdering them, and flatten cities to the ground.

          you dont surrender to that. you fight to the death. you have no choice.

        • rockerface 🇺🇦@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          7 days ago

          Oh. And after I went to trouble of typing all that big wall of text in response to your other comment, giving you the benefit of the doubt of arguing in good faith.

    • teamevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Like all the guarantees before it, trusting the scorpion will only get the frog drowned.

      As a disgusted American… SLAVA UKRAINE!

      I’m sorry my country is acting so poorly

    • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 days ago

      Security guarantees are nice but only if there believable. If the last 3 years have shown anything it’s that the west will not go to all out war with Russia over Ukraine. It may make putin more hesitant but if he calls our bluff a piece of paper isn’t going to change the fact that Americans and western Europeans aren’t willing to die for Ukraine.

    • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      There are already were security guarantees, and then the US and their puppet in Ukraine violated their agreements.

  • Arghblarg@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    6 days ago

    This ^^^ so much

    Do not trust Russia, and do not trust the US under current administration, or while the GOP still exists. We in the rest of the world are ON OUR OWN and must band together against this push of fascism across the world. This is not a drill, this is not a joke. Fascism is again on the rise, as it was in the 1930s. We all know where that led, so don’t let it do so again!

  • socsa@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    6 days ago

    Oh bother, you’ve upset the tankies, who totally haven’t just been Russian trolls the entire time.

  • Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    5 days ago

    It is time that the world recognized that the USA is just like Russia and China. Never, ever to be trusted. All the pretense has fallen away under Trump but the real America, supported by 70% of its population, is showing its true colours. They’ve bullied their “Allies” for 70 years to be their friends, but they’ve never been a friend back. It’s all been a guise to get whatever they wanted and steal all the riches a country could produce or make other country’s industry beholden to American corporations. While previous American Administrations may have believed in the soft power their approach yielded and understood how it made the USA rich, Trump does not.

  • Mee@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    7 days ago

    Reminder: Russia violated all of these uninformed.

    Also, why is this posted here? This is not a meme.

  • helloworld55@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    7 days ago

    Negotiations without security assurances*

    This is the prime stickler with the USA-Ukraine deal that has been discussed on the news