Zelensky dismisses compromise with Putin, pointing to Prigozhin’s death
Zelensky dismisses compromise with Putin, pointing to Prigozhin’s death
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has said the death of Yevgeny Prigozhin – the Russian mercenary leader whose plane crashed weeks after he led a mutiny against Moscow’s military leadership – shows what happens when people make deals with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has said the death of Yevgeny Prigozhin – the Russian mercenary leader whose plane crashed weeks after he led a mutiny against Moscow’s military leadership – shows what happens when people make deals with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
As Ukraine’s counteroffensive moves into a fourth month, with only modest gains to show so far, Zelensky told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria he rejected suggestions it was time to negotiate peace with the Kremlin.
“When you want to have a compromise or a dialogue with somebody, you cannot do it with a liar,” Volodymyr Zelensky said.
You're viewing a single thread.
If there isn’t going to be any peace discussions from Ukraine … how does this ever end?
With Russia leaving. They started this war. Fuck off with your “If there isn’t going to be any peace discussions from Ukraine … how does this ever end?”
Ukraine, and only Ukraine can be the one to talk about any negotiations. I’ll back their decisions whether it’s to fight to the bitter end, or stop and give up. Their people control their destiny. Russia on the other hand is the one that could simply bring an end to this by leaving. They could have brought peace in fact by simply never killing others. You’re victim blaming. Fuck off.
With Russia packing up their shit and going back to the pre 2014 borders.
So you think it’s all or nothing for Ukraine?
If someone invades your country and kills your countrymen you don't negotiate with them. You tell them to get the fuck out or we'll kill every one of you motherfuckers that decides to continue being on our land. Why? You going to advocate being like Chamberlain? Or Quisling? What do you suggest someone does if their country is invaded?
So we're fighting to the last Ukrainian then?
They are, mate. You act like the West is standing behind Ukraine threatening to shoot anyone that retreats. We're sending em guns and money, if they wanted to stop fighting they could make that decision tomorrow.
You haven't seen the video of the Ukrainian lieutenant throwing a grenade into the trench of the Ukrainian soldiers who disobeyed an order to charge the front. Or the daylight kidnappings of Ukrainian citizens by the recruitment officers.
I sure haven't
How do you show you've never heard of the war of the triple alliance or of Paraguay, without saying war of the triple alliance or Paraguay.
Weirdly specific
Sorry, I was on a long canoe trip without internet access.
It is specific for a reason.
It feels good to say that you will support a country that wishes to fight to its last inhabitants. It sounds good. It sounds macho. Very few people actually think about the actual consequences to a policy like that.
But, we have a real life example, and it is horrible beyond description. Sometimes, if you can make people see the horror and blood of a macho pithy saying, maybe you can get them to see the actual cost of that macho pithy saying.
Sometimes, sadly, giving up is the right thing to do.
Sometimes, sadly, giving up is the right thing to do.
I get it, but if you are just trying to make the point that, if a country thinks they'll eventually lose, it's better for everyone if they give up quickly ... then this historical example doesn't seem relevant.
Given that Ukraine already gave up quickly once (in Crimea) and that Russia simply waited until it was convenient to invade them again, I'm sure you can understand why Ukrainians think it's necessary to fight this one out.
Now, the war of the Triple Alliance is often held up as an example of how a minority of belligerents can create massive devastation by continuing a guerilla war after losing the conventional war; if Ukraine seems in danger of losing the conventional war, I'll admit it's a relevant parallel, otherwise it isn't terribly relevant.
Do you think Russia will unconditionally surrender and stop fighting when Ukraine reaches the Russian border?
Do you think Ukraine is going to invade Russia after they push them to the border?
I don't think Ukraine is about to conquer Russia or capture Moscow, even if they wanted to or if we want them to.
Do you think Russia will unconditionally surrender and stop fighting when Ukraine reaches the Russian border?
I have no idea. Even if they don't, Ukraine just has to defend their territory, which they have proven more than capable of.
The only one party that can end this conflict is the aggressor.
The only thing they've proven is that the West really wanted to get rid of their old weapon stock.
First of all, you Russia shills said kyiv would fall in days or weeks. They held the line with just rifles and AT before any real aid started arriving. Not to mention the logistics nightmare that Russia inflicted on itself.
Cope and seethe. Day 564 out of 3. Does it hurt to know that cold war era equipment is trashing the "modern" russian military?
A safety buffer zone of a few kilometers, on the Russian side, past the Ukrainian country, sounds reasonable. Depending on how far they still keep shooting.
More likely there will simply be no peace and they'll technically stay at war, with a huge minefield in between the two countries, until one of them runs out of money.
You don't negotiate with terrorists.
The UK negotiated with the IRA.
The US negotiated with the Japanese.
The allies negotiated with the Nazis.
I'm fine with the Japanese solution, which Russian cities should we delete?
The German solution seems awfully similar.
I really don't like how often I see people ok with the idea of nuclear war. I like Fallout as much as the next person but I don't think it's an accurate representation of nuclear apocalypse.
I hope the ghosts of hundreds of thousands of murdered Japanese civilians haunt you for the rest of your life. thank fuck even the post-1945 US government isn't as bloodthirsty for war crimes as you are
They didn't surrender, they wouldn't surrender, the alternative of murdering them slowly by starvation wasn't magically better.
Sometimes you just have to explain how hopeless things are.
what if we had records of contemporary US top military leaders saying the exact opposite, would you stop cheerleading for mass slaughter then?
because, in an amazing coincidence...
While a majority of Americans may not be familiar with this history, the National Museum of the U.S. Navy in Washington, D.C., states unambiguously on a plaque with its atomic bomb exhibit: “The vast destruction wreaked by the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the loss of 135,000 people made little impact on the Japanese military. However, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria … changed their minds.”...
Seven of the United States’ eight five-star Army and Navy officers in 1945 agreed with the Navy’s vitriolic assessment. Generals Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur and Henry “Hap” Arnold and Admirals William Leahy, Chester Nimitz, Ernest King, and William Halsey are on record stating that the atomic bombs were either militarily unnecessary, morally reprehensible, or both.
No one was more impassioned in his condemnation than Leahy, Truman’s chief of staff. He wrote in his memoir “that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender …. In being the first to use it we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages.”
MacArthur thought the use of atomic bombs was inexcusable. He later wrote to former President Hoover that if Truman had followed Hoover’s “wise and statesmanlike” advice to modify its surrender terms and tell the Japanese they could keep their emperor, “the Japanese would have accepted it and gladly I have no doubt.”
Before the bombings, Eisenhower had urged at Potsdam, “the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.”
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-08-05/hiroshima-anniversary-japan-atomic-bombs
You're really ignorant and it's sad to think people like you still exist.
I'm fine with winning the lottery. That isn't likely either.
Ukraine doesn't have nukes, so the Japanese solution is off the table.
Ukraine isn't about to conquer Moscow, so the German solution isn't feasible either.
North Korea has nukes, you're honestly telling me ukraine, the ones who figured it out in the soviet union, can't figure it out too?
Ukraine is the smart remnant of the soviet union, Russia needs to surrender out of sheer terror.
No, but the US does. I, for one, as an SSBN sailor, am ready and willing to set condition 1SQ for Strategic nuclear launch at any time. Slava Ukraini, HOOYAH AMERICA. Kill the Bear!
I’m pretty sure the negotiations consisted on total surrender and heavy controls of power in the three cases, which Zelenskyy agrees on. Just giving more territories to Russia is not what they want. That would only mean a new offensive in a few years.
In other words, even Zelensky knows there'll have to be negotiations somewhere down the line.
It's just a question of when and under which circumstances.
It's in Ukraine and Europe's interests, that these negotiations occur when Russia has been pushed back to the border. Otherwise they'll have been rewarded for their military adventurism.
And obviously Russia can't be trusted, so the moment a cease fire is signed, it's imperative that Ukraine gets defacto NATO membership (or something approaching it) and is armed to the teeth.
They had been open to negotiations in the past, and surely are open now, but the first step is for Russia to get the fuck off Ukraine and stop the aggression. It's not a negotiation of your have a knife to your neck.
The US negotiated with the Japanese.
The allies negotiated with the Nazis.
You know both these groups surrendered unconditionally, right?
Yes. The terms were harsh, but ultimately both parties agreed to them. A negotiated settlement.
Note also how the reality is slightly more nuanced. For example, Hirohito remained in power and all members of the Imperial House were spared criminal prosecution. That was an unfortunate but necessary compromise. If the world was fair, they'd have hanged them all, just like much of the Nazi establishment.
This also why at one point Japanese officials, basing themselves on the Potsdam Declaration, argued to MacArthur that Japan's surrender had in fact been contractual and conditional. Obviously he told them to go fuck themselves, and because the country was by now occupied, there wasn't exactly much they could do about it.
It's unfortunate, but this is almost certainly what will happen with Russia. A ceasefire will be agreed under conditions both parties accept. The better Ukraine does, the worse the conditions will be that Russia is forced to accept. With a bit of luck, the conditions will be so bad that Putin falls out of a window and is replaced with someone slightly more sane.
Once the ink is dry, the west will hopefully arm Ukraine to the gills, perhaps institute a no fly zone, give them NATO membership or something approaching it, etc. etc.
But before that happens there will still need to agree to a ceasefire, hence all wars end with a negotiated settlement, unless you engage in genocide.
That worked out really well lol
Either you give them land from which they can prepare their next attack or you show them that they're unable to take and hold land. So yeah. Pretty much.
Literally yes. If they capitulate it's only a matter of time before Putin tries again, either by fomenting a revolution and installing another pro-Russia dictator, or restarting the war. This is a fight for the very survival of Ukraine.
Survival of human beings 👎
Survival of the nation 👍
Putin is trying to kill both. Those human beings deserve to live and they deserve a country too -- the country they are dying to defend.
I think them conscripts would rather do something other dying for their country. I know I would.
Have you ever read Catch-22? Yossarian likes to go on about how everybody is trying to kill him. If you're a Ukrainian soldier it's not just Putin who's out to kill you. It's your own government too, and apparently the average western lib on this very internet forum.
If you believe this why are you not advocating for the Russian conscripts who are forced to fight a madman’s war of aggression and territorial expansion? Like sympathizing for the Ukrainian troops forced to fight is fine but I think you fail to realize the alternative for them is to die at the hands of the Russian military.
Only one side here is engaged in a purely optional war of territorial expansion. And it isn’t “the west” or Ukraine.
Oh I do consider the Russian soldiers victims that should be helped to escape their situation.
madman
No need to figure out how or why this war broke out, Putin is simply mad. It follows from that also that you can't reason with the guy. Do you think this is a children's cartoon?
alternative for them is to die at the hands of the Russian military
You gotta explain this. Last time I checked, the civilians casualties in this war weren't that high, and civilians can and do usually stay clear of the front lines. They might even leave the country if the men were allowed to. So if they weren't soldiers, they almost certainly wouldn't die at the hands of the Russian military.
The war broke out because Putin covets Ukraine and always has. He is a kleptocrat and dictator with no interest in his own people’s happiness or their rights; he seeks personal enrichment and power and that is his goal here as well. I think “madman” is a perfectly acceptable way to describe him, and we haven’t even begun to discuss his army’s conduct in the war.
Russia is targeting Ukrainian civilians specifically. It is even targeting children.
Given this, why do you believe if the Ukrainians lay down their arms Russia wouldn’t continue doing exactly what it has been doing — trying to kill their civilian population and deport their children?
There’s absolutely no evidence Russia would let anyone leave and quite a lot of evidence they would continue committing war crimes against them.
Edit: and this article literally just got published today: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/10/world/europe/russian-ukraine-torture.html
The war broke out because Putin covets Ukraine and always has.
Always has? They didn't start talking about annexation till well into the invasion. In the Minsk agreement he wanted the Donbas to remain part of Ukraine, didn't even recognize the DPR/LPR right until the start of the invasion. Maybe, just maybe, they actually feel threatened by NATO encirclement, like they've been saying since basically forever, and which even prominent US politicians and foreign policy experts have been warning about. But I guess you prefer pseudo-psychological explanations to realpolitik ones. Fuck reality we got vibes!
Given this, why do you believe if the Ukrainians lay down their arms Russia wouldn’t continue doing exactly what it has been doing — trying to kill their civilian population and deport their children?
Why would they? "His army's conduct" is about par for the course. You should read about how much civilian targets the US hit during the Iraq invasion. Of course the civilians will be a lot safer once the fighting stops. The goal of this invasion is not to kill as many civilians as possible, that would look way different. The Nazis had extermination squads trailing the front just committing one huge massacre after another. They had death camps. This is not what's going on in Ukraine. Fighting age civilian men get imprisoned and "filtrated", but are usually released after a while and then allowed to get Russian passports. "Harmless" old people and women and so on aren't even filtrated. Ukrainian children are returned to their parents if/when they show up. This isn't some extermination campaign.
Ukrainians would disagree; they're the ones to want to fight and if their government tried to give up, they'd throw them out and find someone willing to keep going
If they all want to fight so bad, why are the men not allowed to leave the country? Why has Zelensky recently announced a crackdown on draft dodging? Why are there so many videos of men getting dragged kicking and screaming into vans by military
recruiterskidnappers?Why is Putin waging a war of territorial ambition and spending innocent Russian blood to do it?
Your perspective here is backwards. One side could end this war immediately by calling back their armies and forfeiting their territorial ambitions. And it is not Ukraine.
Is this a serious question? The existence of exceptions doesn't negate the trend. The crackdown on draft dodging is part of Zelenskyy's anti corruption measures to bring Ukraine in line with EU and NATO standards. Do you think about your questions at all before asking them?
I mean at the current pace it's just all or all, nothing doesn't seem possible anymore unless something big happens.
white peace is NOT an option. neither for Ukraine nor for Putin.
So it doesn't end?
Edit: barring NATO rolling in and starting WW3 that's clearly not gonna happen. So what's next?
Why are you arguing for Ukraine to forgive and forget the rapes and murders and to give up parts off their country to the perpetrators rather than arguing for Russia to go back to Russia?
Clearly Russia isn't going to do that, no matter how much a bunch of nobodies argue for it online.
Which actually realistic path leads to less dead people?
Putin being killed by his own people for leading them to this catastrophe.
Negotiations don't exist for Russia, they are known for breaking all agreements anyways. Russia is not trustworthy in the slightest, they have never missed to prove that. You don't push the trigger on a loaded gun and hope for it to not fire. If you believe otherwise you desperately need to get out of you bubble and drink less Vodka.
Russian people killing Putin is the only way to end this sooner.
Putin-fanboys love to say “Ukraine needs to negotiate an end to this war” but like to forget that this war started because RuZZia shat on a treaty ensuring the sovereignty of Ukraine in exchange for their nuclear arms.
Why do liberals always like to forget the Minsk agreements? Like they are always being taken out of the conversation.
The first agreement collapsed due to the seperatist taking over an airport in Donetsk and saying they won't follow it anymore.
The second Minsk agreement basically said "Stop fighting and Ukraine gets full control of the seperatist areas after elections and a special territory status for the areas". After offering them the special status the seperatists just said no.
It doesn't matter that Russia's word can't be trusted.
Push Russia back to the border so that their invasion isn't rewarded, negotiate a ceasefire, then almost immediately make Ukraine a (defacto) NATO member, protect their airspace, no fly zone, arm them to the teeth.
The Russians are far better at keeping their word, when they know that they are weak, and that it benefits them.
Clearly this bully isn't going to stop trying to take your lunch money. If you continue trying to defend yourself it's just going to lead to more fights and you getting hurt more. If you just give up your lunch money peacefully then it'll be better for everybody!
You can't just boil geopolitics down like that.
The longer this goes the more people die. We can't seem to stop Russia without plunging the world into more war....
The longer you keep fighting back, the more you will keep being hit. We can't seem to stop the bully without you getting hurt more, so just be a good little boy and hand over your lunch money peacefully. And when the bully demands the contents of your backpack, hand that over to avoid more bloodshed. And when he demands your hat, hand that over too. You don't want to keep getting hurt, do you?
Really happy you're not in a position of power because you'd be a dangerous useful idiot.
No u!
Then russia suffers until they learn (so probably forever).
Ukraine has the will and the west has the means to make this a very painful lesson, maybe even Russians can learn this time.
By every account Russia has the manpower to outlast Ukraine in this. I'm sure whoever is left in Ukraine once NATO is done teaching Russia this "lesson" will be so glad to have been a part of this.
If you lay off the Kremlin propaganda for a minute you'll realize what a laughing stock they are to the real militaries in the world.
Ok so, assuming the Russian army is the laughing stock of the world, then why isn't the Ukrainian Army an even bigger laughing stock?
For a long time I heard one thing after another about how incompetent the Russian army is. For 1 and a half years, the most incompetent, laughing stock of the world, army has been... losing?
Because ukraine is a smaller country, and has been handing russia its ass.
This is exactly like if the US attacked canada and got its ass handed to it.
No, Canada is actually competent, this is much worse.
The counteroffensive has been an utter disaster, they've reclaimed almost no land in months and it has severely cost them in lost men and equipment. Ukraine is anything but competent as they are hugely struggling in the heavily mined territories also covered by artillery and air support.
Awesome how proud you are at an invader mining civilian territory.
or 1 and a half years, the most incompetent, laughing stock of the world, army has been… losing
yes? try to keep up (with reality, not your provided opinions)
By every account Russia has the manpower to outlast Ukraine in this.
Wars don't end because you kill everyone on the other side. The American revolutionaries didn't murder every single English citizen on the face of the earth. Yet, they still won.
The point is to last long enough and inflict enough losses that the other side does not want to continue the war. In Clausewitzian terms, even if you can't win the Trial of Strength, you can still win the Battle of Wills.
I'm sure whoever is left in Ukraine once NATO is done teaching Russia this "lesson" will be so glad to have been a part of this.
Ukraine is an independent country that is completely capable of deciding for themselves whether, and at what cost, they want to keep fighting off a foreign invader occupying their territory. This is also part of the "Battle of Wills".
I'm not saying that NATO and its members don't have an interest in the conflict, but the tell-tale sign that you're regurgitating Russian propaganda is that in your arguments Ukraine has no agency.
Wow.. you're delusional.
Bro, hand me some of that copium you’re having, seems like the strong kind!
You really been huffing that Russian propaganda, huh? It'll turn your brain to mush, you should really stop.
So what’s next?
who knows, but maybe some progress will be made when more modern weapons can be fired from western F16's. It likely won't have a huge impact, but every little bit helps
Why is it that country A starts occupying parts of country B, and some people start expecting country B to have peace discussions (ie, give land to country A)? There should be calls to country A to stop occupying country B's land, and that's it.
That’s how they have decided to spin this: co-opt the language of peace and dialogue to justify aggression.
Too bad it’s so obviously transparent.
I suppose your definition of being "pro-peace" involves sending billions in weapons?
Yup. Russia doesn't understand diplomacy. Only force. It's sad that russia acts this way, so, unfortunately, beating them is the only way to have lasting peace.
That or leadership change but I don't think putler fears anything more than losing power and the people are either weak or live in a propaganda bubble.
Peace through Superior firepower.
There can be no peace if one side wants to wipe your very existence out.
I suppose you think the Russians have a right to invade, kill and rape Ukraine?
Well technically, considering historical precedent, anyone who feels they have more might than their neighbours has the right to do whatever they want to do to them. Historically, that was mostly conquest. Other’s use that might for what can generally be construed as the common good. (EG. Team America world police)
Ultimately the one who decides what is right and wrong is the collective, and honestly, the world is much less unified in its opinion than it probably should be.
Great, then let's give ukraine f15es, fleets of predators and more, give them them much more might than their neighbor and let them solve this solution.
I'm fine with ukraine demonstrating that might means right.
Thank you for demonstrating exactly what I referring to.
if only your heros had billions* in weapons to use lol
- in USD, not rubles. Watching the red army collapse has been one of the few joys of the past few years
Yeah, unironically it does in this instance.
It's not like country B wasn't ethnic cleansing near its borders with country A while conspiring with hostile to country A: country D. But let's just rehash everything as a marvel film for the yankkks.
Exactly. It's not like that. That would just be regurgitating Russian propaganda in an attempt to justify an invasion of a sovereign nation , wouldn't it?
Russia doesn't need to ask permission to leave, they just leave.
Seems like a lot fewer Russians and Ukrainians will die if the Russians left ukraine.
It ends the second russia withdraws its troops or they are beaten out of Ukraine.
with all invaders dead, captured or back where they came from
Showing your math, how do you think that happens?
By making the invasion so untenable that they fuck off.
Which is what is happening.
in a sentence, tell me why I shouldn't add you to my long and growing block list full of tankies
You should; they are.
Because there is no faster way to turn off critical thinking then to self-enforce an echo-chamber?
But whatever, you do you. I don't actually give a shit if you block me. Like, holy fuck, "In a sentence, tell me why you deserve to be my friend." God, I wish I had that sort of self-confidence. That may be why you want to live in an echo chamber, though.
It takes two to make peace. And how can there's be peace after the mass murder, torture and kidnapping of children, destruction and death wrought upon Ukraine.
If Canada did that to the USA, how keen for peace would you be exactly?
There can only be peace if there is justice.
Oh, so, war?
Korea ended in peace. Vietnam ended in peace. Iraq ended in peace. Afghanistan ended in peace. Hell, even China-Taiwan ended in what, by any means, could be defined as peace.
War and peace are intricately tied together and compromises are often made to save lives. Did the KMT never trade with the CCP again after literally getting booted out of their own country? Did China never trade with Japan again despite millions of people dead, raped, and experimented on?
Good question, every war ends in some kind of negotiation, even for surrender. I think when Russia loses, Putin is unlikely to keep power, and some sort of agreement will happen without him.
Russia can, very straightforwardly, retreat to Russia. Boom, peace!
Hey... stop making sense! All the bots and teenagers here think you're stupid!
Peace? Are you crazy??? You keep that kinda smart talk to yourself! We don't use the P word here! Here we just want to be angry all the time and blame some imaginary enemy for all our problems.
I agree, let’s have peace! Russians should go the fuck home