| In other good news 11:47 - Mar 16 with 3095 views | Guthrum |
Both sides reporting significant movement on Russia-Ukraine peace talks. Mention of international security guarantees to prevent future attack. |  |
| |  |
| In other good news on 14:04 - Mar 16 with 439 views | Wacko |
| In other good news on 13:10 - Mar 16 by Guthrum |
Rather than offer any concessions, the Russians ramped up their demands over the following three weeks from when that article was written. Adding in recognition of the breakaway areas in the Donbas and finally demanding regime change in Kyiv. That's not the way anyone negotiates towards peace. |
I've left a couple of your posts hanging - but they seem to be along similar lines, so I'll just respond to this.
The question of this whole debate is what Putin wanted before the war: A) to be a war monger and take over Ukraine (and possibly more) or B) ensure Ukraine neutrality only. You're in the A camp, I'm the B camp. By my logic, Ukraine neutrality was never on the table, but now it is - and it seems like this confirms that this is Putin's ultimate aim (but of course it may not be). Surely if Russia was weakened / affected by the war / sanctions, then they would accept the West's initial, pre-war demands?
And I apologise, you indeed never said negotiation was a bad idea, true. You implied it was unlikely under someone like Putin, which is a fair opinion. I shouldn't have conflated your argument with the comments from others, under one umbrella :) |  |
| |
| In other good news on 14:11 - Mar 16 with 427 views | Wacko |
| In other good news on 13:47 - Mar 16 by BanksterDebtSlave |
From what I remember of the thread, many of the twtd massive did indeed add 2 and 2 to make 5 and accuse you of being a Putin apologist. Filling in the blanks to make others appear to be saying that which they are not to make discussions binary is a recurring theme.
Anyway, on to Finland then! |
Yeah thanks for sticking up for me - you did that last time too.
Particularly galling as I'm staunchly pro-EU, anti-fascist and about to offer my home up to Ukrainian refugees | |
| |
| In other good news on 14:40 - Mar 16 with 400 views | Guthrum |
| In other good news on 13:53 - Mar 16 by HighgateBlue |
But we already have that. It's called the Budapest Memorandum of December 1994. I for one am not overjoyed at the Russians pressing pause on a deal they've already signed, bombing the s*** out of another country, and then getting out of it by simply saying they'll honour commitments identical to those that they have had for decades and only just flagrantly breached. |
Not the same. The Budapest Memorandum merely pledged to respect Ukraine's borders and its economy. If I'm reading it right, this will be something far more active, a commitment by other parties to come to the country's assistance if attacked.
Budapest was clearly breached by Russia, but that was back in 2014 when they first took Crimea and intervened in the Donbas.
This ultimately comes down to Ukraine's decision on what price they are prepared to pay for peace. That's their decision and we have to respect it, given they are the ones being killed and their property destroyed. | |
| |
| In other good news on 14:45 - Mar 16 with 391 views | Wacko |
| In other good news on 13:45 - Mar 16 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
I hope they are paying you overtime for all this work you are doing in Volgograd. Time for you to smooth things over for Putin and package this as a win.
Despite what you said at the outset of the invasion you are still wrong. This was never about NATO. Russia’s aim was always to conquer Ukraine and instal a puppet regime.
As others have pointed out to you this went terribly wrong and now they need an out. Guarantees of them not joining NATO is just a tiny concession to let Putin save face.
Let’s hope it can be agreed (with some security reassurances for Ukraine) 🤞🻠|
"Guarantees of them not joining NATO is just a tiny concession to let Putin save face"
Thanks for agreeing with me, Comrade! | |
| |
| In other good news on 15:08 - Mar 16 with 377 views | Guthrum |
| In other good news on 14:04 - Mar 16 by Wacko |
I've left a couple of your posts hanging - but they seem to be along similar lines, so I'll just respond to this.
The question of this whole debate is what Putin wanted before the war: A) to be a war monger and take over Ukraine (and possibly more) or B) ensure Ukraine neutrality only. You're in the A camp, I'm the B camp. By my logic, Ukraine neutrality was never on the table, but now it is - and it seems like this confirms that this is Putin's ultimate aim (but of course it may not be). Surely if Russia was weakened / affected by the war / sanctions, then they would accept the West's initial, pre-war demands?
And I apologise, you indeed never said negotiation was a bad idea, true. You implied it was unlikely under someone like Putin, which is a fair opinion. I shouldn't have conflated your argument with the comments from others, under one umbrella :) |
No prob, very easy for threads to become fragmented like this.
The West didn't have any pre-war demands, as such. Joining NATO was a request from the Kyiv side, not something pushed from the other end. Indeed, it was repeatedly stated that it would certainly not happen soon, or at all if the ongoing territorial dispute with Russia was not resolved first. No defensive alliance (which NATO essentially is) would take on a partner already in conflict with someone else as that would automatically risk widening the fighting.
If Ukraine is now prepared to give up its (always distant) ambitions of NATO membership in exchange for alternative, concrete security arrangements, then they have arguably got more out of this specific issue than the Russians. They had nothing like that before, hence putting out feelers to NATO, but now look to be getting some more active protection from future aggression.
All subject, of course, to what any agreement actually looks like.
By most accounts, Putin thinks in terms of great powers, having "spheres of influence". His great concern was over Ukraine slipping away from what he perceived to be Russia's and into someone else's. Actions he took in 2014 actually worked to push them further in that direction. Public opinion went from evenly divided to predominantly anti-Moscow, the military was reformed, strenghtened and rearmed, feelers were put out to the EU and NATO.
Bear in mind that Zelensky was seen as a candidate more sympathetic to Russia than his predecessor Poroshenko when he won the election in 2019, being himself a Russian-speaker from the south-east of the country. | |
| |
| In other good news on 15:48 - Mar 16 with 342 views | factual_blue |
| In other good news on 13:47 - Mar 16 by Guthrum |
A lot depends upon what an eventual peace deal looks like.
If Russia annexes large areas of fresh territory (e.g. Kherson), than they may well continue to some extent. If Moscow only takes Crimea and Donetsk/Luhansk (up to the pre-invasion control line) remain semi- or fully independent, with full withdrawal otherwise, there may be significant reduction.
Sanctions, after all, will hurt Europe as well as Russia, particularly in the area of energy prices.
But some things may never go back to a pre-war status - at least while the current Russian government persists. |
Presumably Zelensky will tell the Russians that he has no say over the sanctions, and putain will have to talk to the various countries about them being lifted.
I would imagine there'll be some horse-trading over them, with the West wanting guarantees over Russia's future behaviour.
Or alternatively putain could just go for N Korea pariah status. |  |
| |
| In other good news on 15:58 - Mar 16 with 325 views | Guthrum |
| In other good news on 15:48 - Mar 16 by factual_blue |
Presumably Zelensky will tell the Russians that he has no say over the sanctions, and putain will have to talk to the various countries about them being lifted.
I would imagine there'll be some horse-trading over them, with the West wanting guarantees over Russia's future behaviour.
Or alternatively putain could just go for N Korea pariah status. |
Zelensky can ask for sanctions to be lifted, but he has no direct control over them. Even if Russia withdraws, they have done severe damage to Ukraine. It would be reasonable to continue some curbs for that.
Doubt Russia wants to end up as reliant on China as North Korea are. Which might be the case if the isolation continues.
The pun made me smile, BTW. | |
| |
| In other good news on 16:06 - Mar 16 with 323 views | EdwardStone |
I think this is an interesting angle from The Atlantic
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/editorpicks/vladimir-putin-has-fallen-into-the-di
If you couple it with the realisation that Putain has a pathological hatred of the West, something that has only recent showed itself, then we have the tinderbox awaiting a spark.
Interesting point....
Power has gone to Putain's head, posits the article from Atlantic. Is that why his head has actually changed shape? |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
