4 ms·

This reminds me of American voting on Gaza resolutions in UN. Apparently I have not condemned Putin enough and must be helping him, just because I say that furt

This reminds me of American voting on Gaza resolutions in UN. Apparently I have not condemned Putin enough and must be helping him, just because I say that further military escalation leads nowhere. What a nonsense. But if you wish so, I do fully agree that Russia was wrong to start this war and Russia is wrong to continue this war. As for resolve, time will tell. I don’t see a lot of resolve now in practice. > There is no way that you can legitimize the Russian aggression against Ukraine I did not legitimize the Russian aggression. Understanding the logic and legitimizing are not synonymous. Whether the reasons were legal or not, it doesn’t change the fact that they serve as a basis for starting negotiating position. > I'm trying to get you to understand that the Russian point-of-view in this whole discussion is utterly irrelevant If it’s irrelevant to you, this is fine. It’s absolutely relevant to EU foreign policy and the negotiations and as such worth talking about, because it may actually save lives. I understand the direction of this conversation, so maybe it doesn’t make sense to continue. We are looking at it from very different angles and while agreeing in principle that the war is bad, have very different perspectives on the future of it. Time will tell who is right.

jacquesm 1y ago
> just because I say that further military escalation leads nowhere. Yes, but only the russian side is escalating. And seems to want to escalate much further still. > But if you wish so, I do fully agree that Russia was wrong to start this war and Russia is wrong to continue this war. Good. Thank you for clearing that up. > As for resolve, time will tell. I don’t see a lot of resolve now in practice. There are a lot of Ukrainians dying every day and it is certainly not their fault that this is so. Only russia can stop this war, the alternatives that Ukraine has are to capitulate, be roped into russia's armed forces and to see their people further murdered and used, just like what russia is doing to the other parties that they've roped into this fight. So if you want the EU and Ukraine to stop this you are barking up the wrong tree, they do not have agency other than to give up and that isn't going to happen. > I did not legitimize the Russian aggression. Understanding the logic and legitimizing are not synonymous. Whether the reasons were legal or not, it doesn’t change the fact that they serve as a basis for starting negotiating position. No, they do not. A negotiation position is only believable if the parties in the negotiations have previously shown that they can be trusted. Russia has proven beyond a shadow of doubt that they can not be trusted and that if there is any kind of peace agreement it will just be used to re-arm and try again from a stronger position. > If it’s irrelevant to you, this is fine. It’s absolutely relevant to EU foreign policy and the negotiations and as such worth talking about, because it may actually save lives. It won't save lives in the longer term. The only thing that will save lives in the longer term is the ultimate defeat of russia a-la Germany and to take away their nuclear toys. Then they can figure out at what point they want to re-join the developed world, it is clear that as long as they can hide behind their nukes that they will keep trying to expand their territory at the expense of their neighbors. > I understand the direction of this conversation, so maybe it doesn’t make sense to continue. We are looking at it from very different angles and while agreeing in principle that the war is bad, have very different perspectives on the future of it. Time will tell who is right. The idea that there is a 'right' here in itself is one that I disagree with, and if you are truthful in that you believe that this war should have never started then you already know the answer to what really is right. But that's not a future that I think is viable with the current russian leadership, they've decided that their own wealth is more important than the lives of their citizenry. It will take a sea change for that to no longer be the case and I don't have much hope that the tide will turn. But maybe it will.

jacquesm 1y ago

> just because I say that further military escalation leads nowhere. Yes, but only the russian side is escalating. And seems to want to escalate much further still. > But if you wish so, I do fully agree that Russia was wrong to start this war and Russia is wrong to continue this war. Good. Thank you for clearing that up. > As for resolve, time will tell. I don’t see a lot of resolve now in practice. There are a lot of Ukrainians dying every day and it is certainly not their fault that this is so. Only russia can stop this war, the alternatives that Ukraine has are to capitulate, be roped into russia's armed forces and to see their people further murdered and used, just like what russia is doing to the other parties that they've roped into this fight. So if you want the EU and Ukraine to stop this you are barking up the wrong tree, they do not have agency other than to give up and that isn't going to happen. > I did not legitimize the Russian aggression. Understanding the logic and legitimizing are not synonymous. Whether the reasons were legal or not, it doesn’t change the fact that they serve as a basis for starting negotiating position. No, they do not. A negotiation position is only believable if the parties in the negotiations have previously shown that they can be trusted. Russia has proven beyond a shadow of doubt that they can not be trusted and that if there is any kind of peace agreement it will just be used to re-arm and try again from a stronger position. > If it’s irrelevant to you, this is fine. It’s absolutely relevant to EU foreign policy and the negotiations and as such worth talking about, because it may actually save lives. It won't save lives in the longer term. The only thing that will save lives in the longer term is the ultimate defeat of russia a-la Germany and to take away their nuclear toys. Then they can figure out at what point they want to re-join the developed world, it is clear that as long as they can hide behind their nukes that they will keep trying to expand their territory at the expense of their neighbors. > I understand the direction of this conversation, so maybe it doesn’t make sense to continue. We are looking at it from very different angles and while agreeing in principle that the war is bad, have very different perspectives on the future of it. Time will tell who is right. The idea that there is a 'right' here in itself is one that I disagree with, and if you are truthful in that you believe that this war should have never started then you already know the answer to what really is right. But that's not a future that I think is viable with the current russian leadership, they've decided that their own wealth is more important than the lives of their citizenry. It will take a sea change for that to no longer be the case and I don't have much hope that the tide will turn. But maybe it will.