Good leaders are those that care about their people. This guy refused to make an easy deal when he had a chance and wasted countless numbers of lives. He’s a goner after this. That’s why he refuses to hold elections - personal self preservation
The demands of Russia were that Ukraine would basically be demilitarized, security would be monitored by Russia and China through the UN, and Ukraine would be prohibited from formally or informally being a part of NATO, and the prior existing Mink Accords would be followed.
If you want to claim that Russia can’t be trusted, etc, that’s a different argument. But the deal that was put forward, over a million lives ago, wasn’t about land captured.
“Security would be monitred by Russia and China” means that it would be monitored by the country who’s just invaded you and its ally which means capitulation.
That is arguably a far far far far worse deal, asking a country to demilitarize after being attacked in a war of pure aggression and greed, by a country that couldn’t give a shit about international law is insane. The only deal Ukraine should accept is all of their land back with unconditional surrender of the Russian military in every square inch of Ukrainian land.
As I said, that’s a different argument. But claiming that Russia was demanding land is just not the case.
in a war of pure aggression and greed
I don’t support Russia or Putin. But their aim has been blatantly to not have NATO on their border here, and to have a series of buffer states.
The only deal Ukraine should accept
Given neither one of us is fighting in the trenches, I don’t think either of us should be telling Ukrainian conscripts what they should or shouldn’t accept. It’s pretty morally repugnant to me to demand someone else fights and dies for something I won’t.
You do get, if they accepted that deal, that would effectively be the end of Ukraine the moment Russia regroups for another attack. What country would accept a deal that effectively hands all power to their enemy. That isn’t actually a deal, it’s another act of aggression. Sure, it’s not for us to decide. But you’re even more delusional if you think Ukrainians want to hand additional power to Russia. It seems like you’re accepting Russian propaganda as reality.
We usually have things called elections to find out what people want to do.
How many democratic countries in defensive wars (ones where they have skin in the game) have held elections mid-war? Nobody doubts Britain’s a democracy, but they suspended elections in WW2. And it’s not like Churchill became PM fresh off an election campaign himself.
so a worse deal than the talks I recall, okay. ill let you simmer on why demilitarizing while you are being invaded is a bad idea because I’m not explaining that to you
I don’t need you explaining anything to me? You’re claiming it was a land grab, and it wasn’t. Seems you should get a better idea of the subject before deciding you need to lecture others.
yeah and I was apparently wrong, so given your new information I have concluded that it is worse than my expectations.
do you really think that Ukraine not taking a deal that leaves them a complete sitting duck to a known greedy and aggressive country is the wrong play, or are you just trolling? regardless I’ll leave you to think on this, or just continue spreading your nonsense. get a grip
It has the option to not in the state of emergency. That “rule” was passed as war was imminent. They are not prohibited from holding elections.
And regardless of if you think that’s a good idea or not, it’s not “democratic”. Because words have meaning.
And all this because the largest country in the world wanted more land
That’s . . . . not true? What Russia demanded was Ukranian neutrality as regards NATO, etc, along with concessions in the Donbass. They were supposedly making peace with that in Istanbul, when Johnson in particular moved to stop it.
Again, you can say that isn’t true, nobody should trust Putin, or that Russia has no right to demand that. But to claim that it’s a land grab as if it’s a fact isn’t correct.
The “rule” is in the constitution. It even explicitly extends the term for parliament of ukraine by 5 years, and by their constitutional law it would be illegal for election to take place. Not to mention that you’re missing the point about what is an election. It’s not enough to put a ballot in the box. You must also provide the possibility to cast it for each citizen without external pressure, otherwise you can’t trust the result. (Imagine if Russian soldiers were sent to collect the ballots with machine guns on their arms whether you’d like to join the Empire)
Ukrainian civilians are bombed daily. It’s not exactly safe for them to vote. Not to mention the other 2 points, before.
NATO neutrality
I’m saying how it is, not what imaginative casus belli they are going for directed to the western audience. There was no way for Ukraine to join NATO due to ongoing conflict that started in 2014, so it never actually mattered for the neutrality question. Otherwise accepting Ukraine would also imply declaring war on Russia or at very least, freeze the conflict at Donbas with Crimea going to Russia.
When I’m talking about a land grab, I mean the idea to restore greater glory of the old russian empire or CCCP. It’s not even hidden by now. Most high level (including Putin) politicians causally talks about it.
The country is rotten to the core. The one positive I heard is that reports about violence against women is actually handled by the police now. Mostly to fill in the vatnik quotas to send to the front.
Oh cool. 2008 action plan to join NATO. 2014 War with Russia started. Sure the argument could stand there.
But riddle me this, why the invasion? The War never ended, so the argument that Ukraine can’t join NATO stands.
I mean I completely understand why they would like to join NATO, considering how Russia Georgia war started 2008
Vatnik is how I call Russians that support the war by their action/inaction. It’s pejorative. The true origin was a meme if I recall. Although the more I learn about Russia the more I hate the every day Russian
Although the more I learn about Russia the more I hate the every day Russian
Meh, if we’re going to blame the citizens for the country, my ire goes first to the US. Who’s populous doesn’t even have the excuses of WWII and the horrors of the 90s in Russia for their embrace of monsters.
Putin is a war criminal and should hang - but what he claims as precedents (illegal NATO unilateral bombing of Yugoslavia, illegal invasion of Iraq, etc) isn’t made up either. The West is pretty ridiculous in yelling about warmongering when George W Bush is still a respected former President making pictures after killing a million people and most Americans can’t even tell you what countries the US is bombing this week.
US and it’s imperialistic crimes are nothing to sneeze at. Not gonna come close to try and justify what they have done (banana wars for ex.) / are doing (terror campaign against it’s citizens for ex.)
A country that elected it’s leaders and now fights for it’s survival is not a democracy? Lolwut
Good leaders are those that care about their people. This guy refused to make an easy deal when he had a chance and wasted countless numbers of lives. He’s a goner after this. That’s why he refuses to hold elections - personal self preservation
the deal was to give up land captured by the aggressor of the war, and we have seen how much russia respects their deals
Just one more appeasement bro
That wasn’t the deal.
https://www.understandingwar.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Fact20Sheet20Istanbul20Protocol20Draft20Agreement20of20April20152C2020222028129.pdf
The demands of Russia were that Ukraine would basically be demilitarized, security would be monitored by Russia and China through the UN, and Ukraine would be prohibited from formally or informally being a part of NATO, and the prior existing Mink Accords would be followed.
If you want to claim that Russia can’t be trusted, etc, that’s a different argument. But the deal that was put forward, over a million lives ago, wasn’t about land captured.
“Security would be monitred by Russia and China” means that it would be monitored by the country who’s just invaded you and its ally which means capitulation.
Again, if you want to say it’s a bad deal,it’s a different argument. Russia wasn’t demanding territory,and that’s what the poster was claiming.
That is arguably a far far far far worse deal, asking a country to demilitarize after being attacked in a war of pure aggression and greed, by a country that couldn’t give a shit about international law is insane. The only deal Ukraine should accept is all of their land back with unconditional surrender of the Russian military in every square inch of Ukrainian land.
As I said, that’s a different argument. But claiming that Russia was demanding land is just not the case.
I don’t support Russia or Putin. But their aim has been blatantly to not have NATO on their border here, and to have a series of buffer states.
Given neither one of us is fighting in the trenches, I don’t think either of us should be telling Ukrainian conscripts what they should or shouldn’t accept. It’s pretty morally repugnant to me to demand someone else fights and dies for something I won’t.
You do get, if they accepted that deal, that would effectively be the end of Ukraine the moment Russia regroups for another attack. What country would accept a deal that effectively hands all power to their enemy. That isn’t actually a deal, it’s another act of aggression. Sure, it’s not for us to decide. But you’re even more delusional if you think Ukrainians want to hand additional power to Russia. It seems like you’re accepting Russian propaganda as reality.
We usually have things called elections to find out what people want to do.
No, again, I just don’t call for wars I don’t fight in.
How many democratic countries in defensive wars (ones where they have skin in the game) have held elections mid-war? Nobody doubts Britain’s a democracy, but they suspended elections in WW2. And it’s not like Churchill became PM fresh off an election campaign himself.
so a worse deal than the talks I recall, okay. ill let you simmer on why demilitarizing while you are being invaded is a bad idea because I’m not explaining that to you
I don’t need you explaining anything to me? You’re claiming it was a land grab, and it wasn’t. Seems you should get a better idea of the subject before deciding you need to lecture others.
yeah and I was apparently wrong, so given your new information I have concluded that it is worse than my expectations.
do you really think that Ukraine not taking a deal that leaves them a complete sitting duck to a known greedy and aggressive country is the wrong play, or are you just trolling? regardless I’ll leave you to think on this, or just continue spreading your nonsense. get a grip
Must be nice to decide that Ukraine has to keep fighting when you’re not one of the conscripts dying.
Considering Ukraine has a rule about not holding an election during crisis (Invasion by Russia), can’t say the country is Undemocratic, mate.
Not to mention that shitload of citizens are all over the world, and another shitton under Russian occupation.
Unless you see those people undeserving of a vote, there is no seriously possible way to hold an election.
Not to mention, that no good leader would allow it’s people to live under the rule of Putin. Life is bloody insane for your average Russian. 40% spent on food alone. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russians-spending-food-doubles-following-ukraine-war-un-food-agency-2022-04-08/
And all this because the largest country in the world wanted more land. They have all the resources they would ever need.
It has the option to not in the state of emergency. That “rule” was passed as war was imminent. They are not prohibited from holding elections.
And regardless of if you think that’s a good idea or not, it’s not “democratic”. Because words have meaning.
That’s . . . . not true? What Russia demanded was Ukranian neutrality as regards NATO, etc, along with concessions in the Donbass. They were supposedly making peace with that in Istanbul, when Johnson in particular moved to stop it.
Again, you can say that isn’t true, nobody should trust Putin, or that Russia has no right to demand that. But to claim that it’s a land grab as if it’s a fact isn’t correct.
The “rule” is in the constitution. It even explicitly extends the term for parliament of ukraine by 5 years, and by their constitutional law it would be illegal for election to take place. Not to mention that you’re missing the point about what is an election. It’s not enough to put a ballot in the box. You must also provide the possibility to cast it for each citizen without external pressure, otherwise you can’t trust the result. (Imagine if Russian soldiers were sent to collect the ballots with machine guns on their arms whether you’d like to join the Empire)
Ukrainian civilians are bombed daily. It’s not exactly safe for them to vote. Not to mention the other 2 points, before.
I’m saying how it is, not what imaginative casus belli they are going for directed to the western audience. There was no way for Ukraine to join NATO due to ongoing conflict that started in 2014, so it never actually mattered for the neutrality question. Otherwise accepting Ukraine would also imply declaring war on Russia or at very least, freeze the conflict at Donbas with Crimea going to Russia.
When I’m talking about a land grab, I mean the idea to restore greater glory of the old russian empire or CCCP. It’s not even hidden by now. Most high level (including Putin) politicians causally talks about it.
The country is rotten to the core. The one positive I heard is that reports about violence against women is actually handled by the police now. Mostly to fill in the vatnik quotas to send to the front.
It’s not. It says elections can be delayed in time of war, not that they must be. Please go read it yourself, to dispel this frequent myth.
And regardless if it’s constitutional, not holding elections is not democratic. Because that’s what the word means.
That actually IS in the amended constitution. And the MAP was submitted in 2008i. https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/833852.html
Do you even know what that word means?
Oh cool. 2008 action plan to join NATO. 2014 War with Russia started. Sure the argument could stand there.
But riddle me this, why the invasion? The War never ended, so the argument that Ukraine can’t join NATO stands.
I mean I completely understand why they would like to join NATO, considering how Russia Georgia war started 2008
Vatnik is how I call Russians that support the war by their action/inaction. It’s pejorative. The true origin was a meme if I recall. Although the more I learn about Russia the more I hate the every day Russian
Meh, if we’re going to blame the citizens for the country, my ire goes first to the US. Who’s populous doesn’t even have the excuses of WWII and the horrors of the 90s in Russia for their embrace of monsters.
Putin is a war criminal and should hang - but what he claims as precedents (illegal NATO unilateral bombing of Yugoslavia, illegal invasion of Iraq, etc) isn’t made up either. The West is pretty ridiculous in yelling about warmongering when George W Bush is still a respected former President making pictures after killing a million people and most Americans can’t even tell you what countries the US is bombing this week.
US and it’s imperialistic crimes are nothing to sneeze at. Not gonna come close to try and justify what they have done (banana wars for ex.) / are doing (terror campaign against it’s citizens for ex.)
Why the fuck would they take that shitty deal? Are you stupid?
Russians and Ukraine are brother nations . It’s is truly sad what zelenskiy did
Because the war is killing millions of people?
Well if russia doesn’t want millions of dead russians they should have not invaded.
Sorry, what part of the trenches you serving in again?
i thought russia was done with actually hiring real people and used clankers instead