4 ms·

Please explain how Trump stops the war short of allowing a Russian genocide of the Ukrainian people.

by scott_w 2y ago

userbinator 2y ago
Please explain how Harris stops the war.
- scott_w 2y ago
  That’s not how this works. You made a statement, now back it up.
- fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
  Eventually the Russian economy would've caved in. The ruble was in a free fall up until Trump decided to betray the free world.
  - pclmulqdq 2y ago
    The Russian economy still can cave in. The war isn't over.
    - fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
      Sure, but at this point it seems like Trump will soon start to actively support the Russian economy.
- Renaud 2y ago
  Why is it the responsibility of the US to single handedly stop the war? We don’t know what Harris would or wouldn’t have done. But we know that what Trump is doing is not going to end up well for Ukraine. Dealing directly with Russia as if it was up to the US to decide for everyone else isn’t just callous, it’s extremely dangerous.
- CogitoCogito 2y ago
  You are aware that Trump has _not_ stopped this war right? He has floated certain some possible agreements with Ukraine, but his terms have not been agreeable to the Ukrainians. If Trump actually wants Ukraine to come to an agreement with the US, he'll have to come up with a deal that is acceptable to them. So yeah up until now Trump has done _nothing_ to stop this war. He's really only proved to all the US' supposed allies, that the US is not trustworthy. At this point, Trump should just shut up and stop pretending like he's trying to reach some peace agreement. He should just stop sending funds to Ukraine as he obviously wants to do and just leave the discussion because he's really no longer relevant.
jbm 2y ago
I don't think Trump will bring peace to Ukraine and he seems to be operating on an "America-First, forget about Europe" policy. However, if by "genociding Ukrainian people" you mean eradicating the population of Ukraine that considers itself distinct from Russia, Trump could conceivably stop the war by letting Russia hold onto territories it owns, while having the rest of Ukraine as a protectorate of various European powers that may eventually bring it into the EU. This might result in a populatin exchange as Russian speakers get sent to the Russian-held parts of Ukraine and vice-versa. This would not be good but it would not be a genocide either. You can also look at the Indian partition for an example of how this could go horribly wrong.
- ViewTrick1002 2y ago
  That is not a possible outcome. Russia does not care the slightest about the territory, it is purely a war about ideology and influence. The only acceptable outcome from a Russian perspective is a Russia aligned government in Kiev, or a peace deal where they will rebuild their army and end up stronger than Ukraine followed by restarting the war.
- somerandomqaguy 2y ago
  Problem is I don't think Russia is ever going to agree to to the point of Ukraine becoming a protectorate of the EU without having legal authority to veto EU military intervention in Ukraine. And I severely doubt Ukraine's is going to agree to give up to give up those lands without a security guarantee that Russia can't veto. Sides, Russia's got nukes. It's nuke's are the whole reason why the US and Europe has been reluctant to intervene. If, in this scenario, Russia invades Ukraine again and then simple say that it will launch it's warheads at any nation that attempts to intervene, what then?
- scott_w 2y ago
  > Trump could conceivably stop the war by letting Russia hold onto territories it owns So, only ethnically cleanse the areas they already started on. Genocide in a limited and specific way is still genocde.
imcritic 2y ago
[flagged]
- fetzu 2y ago
  I really, really, hope you dropped this: “/s”.
- saagarjha 2y ago
  Liberates them from…what, exactly?
  - imcritic3 2y ago
    [flagged]
- henrikschroder 2y ago
  > Zelensky isn't just a dumb clown, he got tricked into starting a war How do you have a political discussion with someone whose reality is completely upside-down to your own? With someone whose grasp of reality is also factually wrong?
  - mathfailure 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - henrikschroder 2y ago
      > Facts are usually universal and rarely disputed. The parent poster claimed that Zelensky started the war. How do you even begin having a conversation with someone who disputes the main fact on how this war started: Vladimir Putin, the dictator of Russia, invaded the neighbouring sovereign nation of Ukraine.
      - mathfailure 2y ago
        Crimea was a disputed region. Russia had claims for it right after the Soviet Union got dissolved, as Crimea was always a Russian territory, not Ukrainian. But secretary general of Soviet Union acting as an individual, without any referendums or something alike decided to just give Crimea as a present to Ukraine. That even happened in the times when it didn't mean much: Russia and Ukraine were the save country - Soviet Union, that's why no one bothered to correct him then and there. It was more of just a gesture. And how can it not be? There was a Russian military base on that peninsula! Who lives on that peninsula? like >90% are Russian nationals. It was Russian de-facto, but just not de-jure. Granted by United Nations - every nation has a right for self-determination, so Russia did some not-so-legal actions by holding a referendum there, just so that the people of Crimea could exercise their right for self-determination. Which they then successfully did and overwhelming majority voted for being with Russia, rather than with Ukraine. These were just the facts, not opinions. Now there is the place for some opinions: you think (as far as I understand) that this is when Russia started a war. And I say I don't see these events as Russia starting war, since the annexation of Crimea was voluntary and happened without a single shot. I don't know of any examples of wars happening without a single shot. I think the consequential actions of Ukraine (that got mad by the fact that it just lost some part of their country due to separatism) is when the war started. That's when a few other regions claimed they'd like to join Russia as well and that's when Ukraine attacked them.

Please explain how Trump stops the war short of allowing a Russian genocide of the Ukrainian people.

userbinator 2y ago

Please explain how Harris stops the war.

scott_w 2y ago
That’s not how this works. You made a statement, now back it up.
fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
Eventually the Russian economy would've caved in. The ruble was in a free fall up until Trump decided to betray the free world.
- pclmulqdq 2y ago
  The Russian economy still can cave in. The war isn't over.
  - fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
    Sure, but at this point it seems like Trump will soon start to actively support the Russian economy.
Renaud 2y ago
Why is it the responsibility of the US to single handedly stop the war? We don’t know what Harris would or wouldn’t have done. But we know that what Trump is doing is not going to end up well for Ukraine. Dealing directly with Russia as if it was up to the US to decide for everyone else isn’t just callous, it’s extremely dangerous.
CogitoCogito 2y ago
You are aware that Trump has _not_ stopped this war right? He has floated certain some possible agreements with Ukraine, but his terms have not been agreeable to the Ukrainians. If Trump actually wants Ukraine to come to an agreement with the US, he'll have to come up with a deal that is acceptable to them. So yeah up until now Trump has done _nothing_ to stop this war. He's really only proved to all the US' supposed allies, that the US is not trustworthy. At this point, Trump should just shut up and stop pretending like he's trying to reach some peace agreement. He should just stop sending funds to Ukraine as he obviously wants to do and just leave the discussion because he's really no longer relevant.

jbm 2y ago

I don't think Trump will bring peace to Ukraine and he seems to be operating on an "America-First, forget about Europe" policy. However, if by "genociding Ukrainian people" you mean eradicating the population of Ukraine that considers itself distinct from Russia, Trump could conceivably stop the war by letting Russia hold onto territories it owns, while having the rest of Ukraine as a protectorate of various European powers that may eventually bring it into the EU. This might result in a populatin exchange as Russian speakers get sent to the Russian-held parts of Ukraine and vice-versa. This would not be good but it would not be a genocide either. You can also look at the Indian partition for an example of how this could go horribly wrong.

ViewTrick1002 2y ago
That is not a possible outcome. Russia does not care the slightest about the territory, it is purely a war about ideology and influence. The only acceptable outcome from a Russian perspective is a Russia aligned government in Kiev, or a peace deal where they will rebuild their army and end up stronger than Ukraine followed by restarting the war.
somerandomqaguy 2y ago
Problem is I don't think Russia is ever going to agree to to the point of Ukraine becoming a protectorate of the EU without having legal authority to veto EU military intervention in Ukraine. And I severely doubt Ukraine's is going to agree to give up to give up those lands without a security guarantee that Russia can't veto. Sides, Russia's got nukes. It's nuke's are the whole reason why the US and Europe has been reluctant to intervene. If, in this scenario, Russia invades Ukraine again and then simple say that it will launch it's warheads at any nation that attempts to intervene, what then?
scott_w 2y ago
> Trump could conceivably stop the war by letting Russia hold onto territories it owns So, only ethnically cleanse the areas they already started on. Genocide in a limited and specific way is still genocde.

imcritic 2y ago

[flagged]

fetzu 2y ago
I really, really, hope you dropped this: “/s”.
saagarjha 2y ago
Liberates them from…what, exactly?
- imcritic3 2y ago
  [flagged]
henrikschroder 2y ago
> Zelensky isn't just a dumb clown, he got tricked into starting a war How do you have a political discussion with someone whose reality is completely upside-down to your own? With someone whose grasp of reality is also factually wrong?
- mathfailure 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - henrikschroder 2y ago
    > Facts are usually universal and rarely disputed. The parent poster claimed that Zelensky started the war. How do you even begin having a conversation with someone who disputes the main fact on how this war started: Vladimir Putin, the dictator of Russia, invaded the neighbouring sovereign nation of Ukraine.
    - mathfailure 2y ago
      Crimea was a disputed region. Russia had claims for it right after the Soviet Union got dissolved, as Crimea was always a Russian territory, not Ukrainian. But secretary general of Soviet Union acting as an individual, without any referendums or something alike decided to just give Crimea as a present to Ukraine. That even happened in the times when it didn't mean much: Russia and Ukraine were the save country - Soviet Union, that's why no one bothered to correct him then and there. It was more of just a gesture. And how can it not be? There was a Russian military base on that peninsula! Who lives on that peninsula? like >90% are Russian nationals. It was Russian de-facto, but just not de-jure. Granted by United Nations - every nation has a right for self-determination, so Russia did some not-so-legal actions by holding a referendum there, just so that the people of Crimea could exercise their right for self-determination. Which they then successfully did and overwhelming majority voted for being with Russia, rather than with Ukraine. These were just the facts, not opinions. Now there is the place for some opinions: you think (as far as I understand) that this is when Russia started a war. And I say I don't see these events as Russia starting war, since the annexation of Crimea was voluntary and happened without a single shot. I don't know of any examples of wars happening without a single shot. I think the consequential actions of Ukraine (that got mad by the fact that it just lost some part of their country due to separatism) is when the war started. That's when a few other regions claimed they'd like to join Russia as well and that's when Ukraine attacked them.