Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Rajma said:
Because previous negotiations with Russia have led to exactly this? Every time the price will go up. By no one I mean Ukrainian people. Curious question would you agree to give up Slovenian sovereignty to Russia for peace?
Click to expand...
Maagge said:
There's been no indication that Russia is willing to give back the territory they've annexed so negotiations are a non-starter from a Ukrainian perspective.

Edit: And a deal with Russia isn't worth anything as we've seen.
Click to expand...
dove said:
We should know by now that negotiating with Russia is a waste of time as it's been proven time and time again during the history of mankind. Right now it only suits them, that's why they are talking louder and louder about it and I bet Ukraine will be forced to negotiate again because the last treaty between Russia and Ukraine worked really well...... There is simply no possibility of "de-escalating political tension" as long as Putin rules Russia, and most likely even after that.
Click to expand...
RedDevilQuebecois said:
Because the Kremlin has shown time and time again that they are nothing but two-faced snakes. Have you seen what they did regarding the grain deal just the other day? How can anyone sane trust anything coming out of Putin or his minions whey they show zero respect for any deal? Russia ain't going to give back annexed lands unless they face into a situation similar to Germany's at the end of 1918 - a total collapse of the government.
Click to expand...
Well there is already speculation by all of you that x and y will happen/been demanded.
My opinion is that if there is opportunity for negotiations it should be used and if there is no possiblity for good deal for both sides then of course don't accept the offer.
For example if the reports are truthful Ukraine is doing better and better and that gives them stronger base for negotiations which definitely should be used.
 
Jerch said:
Well there is already speculation by all of you that x and y will happen/been demanded.
My opinion is that if there is opportunity for negotiations it should be used and if there is no possiblity for good deal for both sides then of course don't accept the offer.
For example if the reports are truthful Ukraine is doing better and better and that gives them stronger base for negotiations which definitely should be used.
Click to expand...
I agree with you... recent history has shown, that Russia is extremely untrustworthy. Nonetheless I don't think that no negotiations should happen - but this time the world needs to make sure that Russia can't break the deal. So it has to be something like allowing Russia to orderly retreat from (whole of) Ukraine, creating a path to station NATO troops at the border (and then take Ukraine as a full member, but that's not that urgent in such a case) and open a path for Russia back into the fold of world politics and economy if they take responsibility for destruction and atrocities (meaning paying for the damage done and sending responsible people to Den Haag).

Basically every deal that's not secured by overwhelming firepower is about to be broken by Russia.

Something like this would be the only kind of deal I imagine would be acceptable for Ukraine and I can't imagine Putin agreeing to it.
 
stefan92 said:
I agree with you... recent history has shown, that Russia is extremely untrustworthy. Nonetheless I don't think that no negotiations should happen - but this time the world needs to make sure that Russia can't break the deal. So it has to be something like allowing Russia to orderly retreat from (whole of) Ukraine, creating a path to station NATO troops at the border (and then take Ukraine as a full member, but that's not that urgent in such a case) and open a path for Russia back into the fold of world politics and economy if they take responsibility for destruction and atrocities (meaning paying for the damage done and sending responsible people to Den Haag).

Basically every deal that's not secured by overwhelming firepower is about to be broken by Russia.

Something like this would be the only kind of deal I imagine would be acceptable for Ukraine and I can't imagine Putin agreeing to it.
Click to expand...

Agreed that even though Russia have proven time and time again to be untrustworthy I think it's important that Ukraine and NATO keep diplomatic channels open with Russia.

Unfortunately the bit in bold can't happen if Putin remains in power because he is the number one responsible for what has happened. If Putin gets removed or killed then the prudent thing would be to give Russia a way to return to it's position before the invasion as long as they adhered to strict rules with hefty punishments if they broke them.
 
Jerch said:
Well there is already speculation by all of you that x and y will happen/been demanded.
My opinion is that if there is opportunity for negotiations it should be used and if there is no possiblity for good deal for both sides then of course don't accept the offer.
For example if the reports are truthful Ukraine is doing better and better and that gives them stronger base for negotiations which definitely should be used.
Click to expand...
But there clearly isn't any opportunity at the moment. It is not like Russia and Ukraine are not stating their pre-consitions to negotiations and they are clearly incompatible at the moment. So it is not "speculation".

Russia is saying that the precondition is the recognition of its sovereignty over all annexed regions, significant part of which it does not even control, so Ukraine would have to cede territory which is a non-starter while they are controlling part of it and are on front foot. And the overwhelming majority of Ukraininans are strictly against.

Ukraine is saying that the pre-condition is Russia withdrawing its troops from all Ukrainian territory, non starter for Russia while Putin is in power/they haven't suffered a catastrophic military collapse. So no basis for negotiations until one of the sides weakens significantly .
 
Jerch said:
Im curious why in your opinion negotiating would be bad.

Imagine having an opportunity to stop killing 1000+ people per day and de-escalating political tension that could lead to MAD and saying no we will not do that.
Click to expand...

There’s no such thing as negotiating with Putin, as any attempt to do so only allows him to regroup and reload for the next offensive. His regime has to be destroyed from within by way of a decisive Ukrainian victory - otherwise we will be at this every few years for the next couple of decades.
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
There’s no such thing as negotiating with Putin, as any attempt to do so only allows him to regroup and reload for the next offensive. His regime has to be destroyed from within by way of a decisive Ukrainian victory- otherwise we will be at this every few years for the next couple of decades.
Click to expand...
This. Can we now stop all rubbish on here about negotiations with the Russians?
 
utdalltheway said:
This. Can we now stop all rubbish on here about negotiations with the Russians?
Click to expand...

The US seems to think that the stance taken by Ukraine and most of this thread right now, of saying that negotiations are a non-starter no matter what as long as Putin is still in power, is a tactical mistake that might be costly. Seems pretty relevant if you want Ukraine to win.
 
NotThatSoph said:
The US seems to think that the stance taken by Ukraine and most of this thread right now, of saying that negotiations are a non-starter no matter what as long as Putin is still in power, is a tactical mistake that might be costly. Seems pretty relevant if you want Ukraine to win.
Click to expand...

They do?
 
Simbo said:
They do?
Click to expand...

Yes. That's the report that started all this discussion. They say that Zelensky's hardline stance has generated concerns around the world, and risks eroding public support and future assistance.
 
stefan92 said:
I agree with you... recent history has shown, that Russia is extremely untrustworthy. Nonetheless I don't think that no negotiations should happen - but this time the world needs to make sure that Russia can't break the deal. So it has to be something like allowing Russia to orderly retreat from (whole of) Ukraine, creating a path to station NATO troops at the border (and then take Ukraine as a full member, but that's not that urgent in such a case) and open a path for Russia back into the fold of world politics and economy if they take responsibility for destruction and atrocities (meaning paying for the damage done and sending responsible people to Den Haag).

Basically every deal that's not secured by overwhelming firepower is about to be broken by Russia.

Something like this would be the only kind of deal I imagine would be acceptable for Ukraine and I can't imagine Putin agreeing to it.
Click to expand...

How does the world ensure that Russia can't break the deal?

They can't.

So therefore negotiation is pointless.
 
matherto said:
How does the world ensure that Russia can't break the deal?

They can't.

So therefore negotiation is pointless.
Click to expand...

Indeed. From Budapest to Minsk - Putin has repeatedly demonstrated treaties are pointless. Its no different than attempting to negotiate with Hitler. He has to be taken down, then actual negotiations can begin.
 
NotThatSoph said:
The US seems to think that the stance taken by Ukraine and most of this thread right now, of saying that negotiations are a non-starter no matter what as long as Putin is still in power, is a tactical mistake that might be costly. Seems pretty relevant if you want Ukraine to win.
Click to expand...

The Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc were not particularly bothered when they made massive investments into North Vietnam for the sake of making sure the United States' prestige would suffer greatly to the point where they would be forced to yield and then leave South Vietnam open for a downfall. This is a test where the West must show that they can be as resolute as the communists were during the Vietnam War.

Either Putin will be forced to yield (power or Ukraine or both) or he will hungry for more if the West chooses to blink first.
 
NotThatSoph said:
Yes. That's the report that started all this discussion. They say that Zelensky's hardline stance has generated concerns around the world, and risks eroding public support and future assistance.
Click to expand...
Yep.

But just to clarify, from what I've read, the US aren't asking Ukraine to make compromises and are not expecting anything to come out of the negotiations. They just want Ukraine to keep holding the door open to negotiations in their public messaging, to avoid a situation where a Ukrainian public hardline stance leads to an erosion of public and political support in Europe when energy prices lead to issues in winter.
 
Cheimoon said:
Yep.

But just to clarify, from what I've read, the US aren't asking Ukraine to make compromises and are not expecting anything to come out of the negotiations. They just want Ukraine to keep holding the door open to negotiations in their public messaging, to avoid a situation where a Ukrainian public hardline stance leads to an erosion of public and political support in Europe when energy prices lead to issues in winter.
Click to expand...

True. That's what I meant by hardline stance, but it probably wasn't too clear.
 
NotThatSoph said:
True. That's what I meant by hardline stance, but it probably wasn't too clear.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's what I thought. I just thought I'd spell it out in a bit more detail for those who haven't read about this outside your posts.

(Am I mansplaining? Damn... :nervous: )
 
NotThatSoph said:
Yes. That's the report that started all this discussion. They say that Zelensky's hardline stance has generated concerns around the world, and risks eroding public support and future assistance.
Click to expand...

Oh, you believed that.
 
There appear to have been some major Russian assaults recently in a few locations. It will be interesting to see if UKR can hold the line.
 
Simbo said:
Oh, you believed that.
Click to expand...

Is what's going on here that you pretended to ask a question while knowing perfectly well what I was referring to, just so you could set up a snarky reply saying that you believe either that the Washington Post or their sources are lying? If so, feel free to don't do that next time, or at least jump straight to the snark. Saves time.
 
The always reliable Def Mon illustrating why SW of Donetsk is one of the most critical sectors of the war. UA is not so far away from being in range of the not-so-robust rail infrastructure vital to Russia after the Kerch bridge bombing.

 

To be honest he has been betting on it his entire career and every time he was proven right up until now, it’s up to us to show that western values can withstand it.
 
Just seen a video of Russian soldiers giving a warm welcome to one of their mobilized in the Donetsk direction by collectively raping him. Sick sick country.
 
Rajma said:
Just seen a video of Russian soldiers giving a warm welcome to one of their mobilized in the Donetsk direction by collectively raping him. Sick sick country.
Click to expand...

That's seriously fecked up but on the list of fecked up things from Russian soldiers during the invasion it's pretty far down the list :(
 
Red Rash said:
That's seriously fecked up but on the list of fecked up things from Russian soldiers during the invasion it's pretty far down the list :(
Click to expand...
As far as I understand it used to be/ is a common practice in their army where victims normally are those undergoing compulsory military service.
 
Rajma said:

To be honest he has been betting on it his entire career and every time he was proven right up until now, it’s up to us to show that western values can withstand it.
Click to expand...


Not in jest, but what are those?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.