5 ms·

what is Ukraine's path to victory and why do you think war is better than peace or even a ceasefire?

by mjfl 2y ago

lm28469 2y ago
Coming from the people who spent $2.5 trillion fighting goat herders with ak47s for over 20 years, and lost, that's a good one... Either way it's not a reason to publicly humiliate Zelensky, to announce he's a dictator, to repeat Russian propaganda talking points, &c. If your version of peace is to unconditionally accept all of the aggressor's demands, shit on the country being invaded and steal their resources don't be surprised if people don't clap
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
HumblyTossed 2y ago
Ukraine’s path to victory should be the rest of the world telling Putin to fuck off or else.
rfrey 2y ago
Why do you think complete surrender is better than continuing to struggle?
- mjfl 2y ago
  That is a false premise. No one is negotiating complete surrender.
  - Hammershaft 2y ago
    The entire point that Zelensky was making to Vance is that every instance of diplomacy Ukraine has had with Russia has been discarded when it's convenient by Russia. Trump wants what looks good on TV, which is a peace deal, but without any plan or security assurances Russia will simply invade again when they rebuild their army.
    - mjfl 2y ago
      Ukraine needs to rebuild its army too, and would benefit more relative to Russia from a ceasefire, even if Russia reinvaded. You people are so wildly irrational.
      - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
        That depends on what sanctions Russia remains under. If same as today, then Ukraine might benefit, otherwise probably not.
      - Hammershaft 2y ago
        That's just not true, Russia is short on tanks, Ukraine is reaching artillery parity, and Ukraine has a permenant manpower crisis whereas Russia has deep reserves it can pull from for training if given time. Western countries would stop aid flows to Ukraine during a ceasefire while Russia would be free to rearm. A temp. ceasefire would not help Ukraine. Moreover, why would Ukraine want to negotiate a temp ceasefire? If they can snag security guarantees they have better odds of a long term peace.
        Mentlo 2y ago
        Fair and I agree with you, but do you agree that the only ways out of stalemate are ceasefire or west entering the conflict? Are you advocating for the west to enter the conflict?
        Hammershaft 2y ago
        No, I think the US should negotiate a ceasefire, signal more weapons aid to increase leverage on the peace deal terms, and then find a way to get Europe or the US to signal they will guarantee Ukraine's security. I don't think a transactional deal like the mineral deal is a bad idea, because it gives the US a stake and increases the credibility of their security deal, but Trump does not seem to care about actual lasting peace here.
regularjack 2y ago
A good start would be to not have the president of the world's most powerful state do the oppressor's bidding.
- mjfl 2y ago
  What is Ukraine’s path to victory??
  - quink 2y ago
    I think the question most others in Europe are concerned about is "How far west does Russia stop?", and given that they held Berlin only about 35 years ago, and they're openly talking about Paris on state TV, the answer is "they don't, unless we stop them in Ukraine already". That whole perspective makes that question somewhat redundant and too narrow in scope given all the context around it.
    - mjfl 2y ago
      This is insanity. You have lost your mind. Europe is covered by a nuclear umbrella and is thus in no danger from Russian invasion. And you still haven't answered the question, which indicates that you don't see any Ukrainian path to victory - rather your intention is to throw all of Ukraine into the meat grinder in order to make yourself slightly safer from a completely hypothetical Russian invasion, which is profoundly unethical.
      - quink 2y ago
        Your premise and any assumptions that build on that are invalid. The Soviet Union and China had a war. When they both had a nuclear umbrella, the Soviet Union having twice as many nuclear weapons as they do now. What else... India and Pakistan? The Korean war? mjfl, here's some news... did you know there's _two_ Koreas? Russia is in other European states right now - Moldova, Georgia. Never mind the hybrid warfare, I feel at best the need to only vaguely point in that direction. Just as much as I'll vaguely point out that that nuclear umbrella just shrunk to a quarter of its previous size. And how can you say "Europe is covered by a nuclear umbrella" when the largest nation by area entirely in Europe is not covered by it. Can you do us a favour and at least make a list of Wikipedia articles or historical events or entire nations we're supposed to pretend don't exist, including, paradoxically, Russia?

what is Ukraine's path to victory and why do you think war is better than peace or even a ceasefire?

by mjfl 2y ago

what is Ukraine's path to victory and why do you think war is better than peace or even a ceasefire?

Coming from the people who spent $2.5 trillion fighting goat herders with ak47s for over 20 years, and lost, that's a good one... Either way it's not a reason to publicly humiliate Zelensky, to announce he's a dictator, to repeat Russian propaganda talking points, &c. If your version of peace is to unconditionally accept all of the aggressor's demands, shit on the country being invaded and steal their resources don't be surprised if people don't clap

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

HumblyTossed 2y ago

Ukraine’s path to victory should be the rest of the world telling Putin to fuck off or else.

rfrey 2y ago

Why do you think complete surrender is better than continuing to struggle?

mjfl 2y ago
That is a false premise. No one is negotiating complete surrender.
- Hammershaft 2y ago
  The entire point that Zelensky was making to Vance is that every instance of diplomacy Ukraine has had with Russia has been discarded when it's convenient by Russia. Trump wants what looks good on TV, which is a peace deal, but without any plan or security assurances Russia will simply invade again when they rebuild their army.
  - mjfl 2y ago
    Ukraine needs to rebuild its army too, and would benefit more relative to Russia from a ceasefire, even if Russia reinvaded. You people are so wildly irrational.
    - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
      That depends on what sanctions Russia remains under. If same as today, then Ukraine might benefit, otherwise probably not.
    - Hammershaft 2y ago
      That's just not true, Russia is short on tanks, Ukraine is reaching artillery parity, and Ukraine has a permenant manpower crisis whereas Russia has deep reserves it can pull from for training if given time. Western countries would stop aid flows to Ukraine during a ceasefire while Russia would be free to rearm. A temp. ceasefire would not help Ukraine. Moreover, why would Ukraine want to negotiate a temp ceasefire? If they can snag security guarantees they have better odds of a long term peace.
      - Mentlo 2y ago
        Fair and I agree with you, but do you agree that the only ways out of stalemate are ceasefire or west entering the conflict? Are you advocating for the west to enter the conflict?
        Hammershaft 2y ago
        No, I think the US should negotiate a ceasefire, signal more weapons aid to increase leverage on the peace deal terms, and then find a way to get Europe or the US to signal they will guarantee Ukraine's security. I don't think a transactional deal like the mineral deal is a bad idea, because it gives the US a stake and increases the credibility of their security deal, but Trump does not seem to care about actual lasting peace here.

regularjack 2y ago

A good start would be to not have the president of the world's most powerful state do the oppressor's bidding.

mjfl 2y ago
What is Ukraine’s path to victory??
- quink 2y ago
  I think the question most others in Europe are concerned about is "How far west does Russia stop?", and given that they held Berlin only about 35 years ago, and they're openly talking about Paris on state TV, the answer is "they don't, unless we stop them in Ukraine already". That whole perspective makes that question somewhat redundant and too narrow in scope given all the context around it.
  - mjfl 2y ago
    This is insanity. You have lost your mind. Europe is covered by a nuclear umbrella and is thus in no danger from Russian invasion. And you still haven't answered the question, which indicates that you don't see any Ukrainian path to victory - rather your intention is to throw all of Ukraine into the meat grinder in order to make yourself slightly safer from a completely hypothetical Russian invasion, which is profoundly unethical.
    - quink 2y ago
      Your premise and any assumptions that build on that are invalid. The Soviet Union and China had a war. When they both had a nuclear umbrella, the Soviet Union having twice as many nuclear weapons as they do now. What else... India and Pakistan? The Korean war? mjfl, here's some news... did you know there's _two_ Koreas? Russia is in other European states right now - Moldova, Georgia. Never mind the hybrid warfare, I feel at best the need to only vaguely point in that direction. Just as much as I'll vaguely point out that that nuclear umbrella just shrunk to a quarter of its previous size. And how can you say "Europe is covered by a nuclear umbrella" when the largest nation by area entirely in Europe is not covered by it. Can you do us a favour and at least make a list of Wikipedia articles or historical events or entire nations we're supposed to pretend don't exist, including, paradoxically, Russia?