I mean, Putin won’t either, the negotiations are just for gaslighting and propaganda. Basically it’s about not negotiating with terrorists, America has plenty other wars going on and even without Ukraine intends to increase military spending. They don’t need it, but it’s not up to them if it ends.

Basically it’s about not negotiating with terrorists, America has plenty other wars going on

This level of double think is really amazing. Within one sentence, “US has plenty of wars” -> good guys, Putin has one war -> terrorist, literally Hitler.

I’m not condoning Putin btw. It’s just baffling all the excuses that are made for US aggression vs Russian aggression. Can you imagine if China put their weapons into Mexico? They’d be stupid to do that. But that’s what Ukraine wants. In the end it’s Ukraine, Russia and the tax payer that looses.

If America was actively attempting to annex Sonora I’d be happy to make the same arguments defending China if it armed Mexico

It’s not about moral arguments or right or wrong. No matter the reason or circumstance, the US would never allow it. Any president not being aggressive about “Chinese weapons on our doorstep” would be ousted. My point is that a decision was made which was a red line for Russia. But we only ever talk about Russia not the deliberate crossing of the red line.

It’s not about moral arguments or right or wrong.

It’s just baffling all the excuses that are made for US aggression vs Russian aggression

It can’t be both. Which is it? Because the point here is that America giving Ukraine weapons is more justified specifically because of Russia’s aggression.

Neither. Both can be wrong. Russia protested and warned about NATO eastward expansion for decades. So what do you do?

What pretty clearly happened is that certain elements pushed for NATO inclusion and (mostly exclusive!) EU trade well before 2008. Russia pushed for a more Russia friendly regime. Both sides interfered until the result became a devastating war.

So every sensible person should protest in favor of peace negotiations. But that doesn’t happen. The western media portrays any peace negotiations as useless or as a ploy. I mean read the article.

Russia protested and warned about NATO eastward expansion for decades.

As if NATO is an entity that expands by itself huh.

Countries. Decide. To join NATO. Recent inclusions only prove that Putin’s struggle is not about NATO at all but about Ukraine. Or, more specifically, about repeating a big win in a small war that would get him whatever his ill brain imagined.

So what do you do?

Russia could stop making all of its neighbours feel like they need protection from it, perhaps.

(mostly exclusive!) EU trade

Alright, please explain to me step-by-step how you expect Ukraine to join two separate and incompatible free trade areas. Because that’s what the argument at the time was about: which FTA to join, the EU-led DCFTA or the Russia-led CISFTA

Russia pushed for a more Russia friendly regime

“The EU wanted a trade deal with Ukraine and Russia wanted to choose Ukraine’s government.” Why are you acting like these are equivalent?

But that doesn’t happen

I don’t think it’s my place to tell Ukrainians to submit to subjugation

it’s 100% about moral arguments of right and wrong. just because the US’s wars are evil 99% of the time isn’t a reason to reject the one good one

US literally occupies a larger percentage of Syria at this very moment than Russia is of Ukraine.

Can you imagine if China put their weapons into Mexico? They’d be stupid to do that. But that’s what Ukraine wants.

You’re clueless. Ukraine was precisely correct in its desire for additional protection from aggression.

News from around the world!

Rules:

Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

U.S. Rejects Putin’s Latest Call for Ukraine Negotiations(www.nytimes.com)

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Rules:

Community stats

Community moderators