3 ms·
>Specifically which of Ukraine's regions are you willing to hand over (in terms of granting permanent recognized sovereignty) to Russia in order to make that ha
by coldtea 2y ago
>Specifically which of Ukraine's regions are you willing to hand over (in terms of granting permanent recognized sovereignty) to Russia in order to make that happen?
When you lose a war or the toll is too high to continue it, you make consessions. That has been true throughout history, and it's how such wars usually end. Establishing a neutral zone in the southern parts would be the best option at this point.
Even better to not have fuelled the start of war in the first place. Of course who'd thought not respecting decades of promises, expanding a Cold-War-era coalition eastwards right to the neighbors borders, having an orange revolution to topple the government and bring one fueling nationalism instead of promoting co-operation and understanding between the two ethnic population groups in the country, would ever have caused all this? It only ever worked like that in every place imperialism/colonialism passed from.
- racional 2y agoA list of regions, was the ask of the question. If you can't provide a straight answer -- then the fate of the people living there is obviously of no particular concern to you. Establishing a neutral zone in the southern parts would be the best option at this point. Permanent recognized sovereignty is Putin's demand -- not a "neutral zone".
- coldtea 2y ago>A list of regions, was the ask of the question. Perhaps, but others in a conversation can have their own idea of how to respond. How about that? >If you can't provide a straight answer -- then the fate of the people living there is obviously of no particular concern to you. The fate of the people dying there is what should be the concern. And ending the whole shitshow. As for the specific regions, that's for the peace negotiations to define, I'm pretty sure it wont be based on HN suggestions. >Permanent recognized sovereignty is Putin's demand -- not a "neutral zone" Didn't you start by accepting that when you're losing a war, you make concessions? As far as concessions go, a sovereign buffer zone is a pretty low bar. The populations of Russian ethnic origin in those weren't exactly in love with Kiev either, to begin with.
- racional 2y agoSounds like you basically haven't thought too much about the matter, then.
- coldtea 2y agoYou'd be surprised. Nor is the question "which specific new borders / regions to give up" any sign of deep thinking of the matter. Tracking the history, politics, and geoplitics behind the issue over time, for the past decades at least, is what requires the actual deep thinking.
- mistermann 2y agoIsn't it interesting how thinking capabilities of Humans change depending on the topic? I mean, it is right in front of our faces in high resolution, all day everyday, both dumb people and "smart" people. It's weird that this gets so little attention since it likely is a massive driver of war and other negative things in the system. It's almost like there's some sort of force that prevents us from thinking about such things. But what could that force(s) be? Also: is it a hard limitation, or only a lack of discovery?
- racional 2y agoAnd yet you still couldn't come up with a straight answer.
- mistermann 2y agoIf you expect perfect gameplay from others, demonstrate it yourself first please. Also: please do not make up rules and assert them as mandatory. Also: which is worse, an imperfect answer, or a refusal to answer?
- protomolecule 2y ago[flagged]