#####
######
####
> # [Zelensky Says Preparing 'Plan' To End War With Russia](https://www.barrons.com/news/640)
>
>
>
> - - - - - -
>
> By AFP - Agence France Presse
>
> June 28, 2024
>
>
>
> - Order Reprints
> - Print Article
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Text size
>
> Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday said he was drawing up a "comprehensive plan" for how Kyiv believes the war with Russia should end.
>
> There are no public talks ongoing between Ukraine and Russia and based on public statements by Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the two sides appear as far apart as ever when it comes to the terms of a potential peace settlement.
>
> Zelensky hosted a major international summit in Switzerland earlier this month -- to which Russia was not invited -- to rally support for Ukraine's position.
>
> "It is very important for us to show a plan to end the war that will be supported by the majority of the world," Zelensky said on Friday.
>
> "This is the diplomatic route we are working on," he said at a press conference in Kyiv alongside Slovenian President Natasa Pirc Musar.
>
> More than 90 countries sent leaders and senior officials to the two-day summit with Zelensky in Switzerland.
>
> The vast majority of whom agreed to a final communique that stressed the need for Ukraine's "territorial integrity" to be respected in any settlement.
>
> But some key countries that attended, like India, did not agree and others, like Russia's ally China, boycotted the summit in protest at Moscow not being invited.
>
> Ukraine has repeatedly said Russia must pull its troops out of its internationally recognised territory, including the peninsula of Crimea that Moscow annexed in 2014, before peace talks can start.
>
> Meanwhile Putin, who launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, is demanding Ukraine effectively capitulate by evacuating even more territory across its east and south.
>
> In Brussels on Thursday, Zelensky said he would put forward a "detailed plan" in a matter of months.
>
> "We don't have too much time," he said, pointing to the high casualty rate amongst soldiers and civilians.
>
> Russia's troops are slowly advancing on the battlefield, claiming to have seized another small frontline village on Friday.
>
> They currently occupy around a fifth of Ukraine and in 2022 claimed to have annexed four more regions, none of which they fully controlled.
>
> Ukraine relies on Western financial and military aid to push back the invading Russian forces, but its troops are outgunned, outmanned and exhausted after more than two years of fighting.
>
> bur-jc/bc
- - - - - -
[Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot)
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
The most realistic scenario is that Ukraine gives up territory such as those in the eastern part where russia currently controls it in exchange for peace similar to when Palestinians recognised the 1967 border with Israel and were allowed to have a state of their own in exchange the isrealis had full security control of the west bank and gaza.
Ukraine will eventually live in peace with russia
/S
This worked horribly for Palestine though. The difference is that this time Ukraine could have US support while in the other scenario it's Israel who had the Americans
Hah, most likely.
I don't care about Biden as an individual as much as stopping the opposition. Biden isn't trying to rule America like a king and he isn't fostering some kind of cult. I'm not voting for Biden as much as I am voting against Trump, MAGA, and Project 2025.
Ask the RNC and the DNC. They do this to us.
It's a good thing to be upset about, but not until after November. As long as every 4 years we've got to beat Trump, we'll never be able to focus on systemic changes
The rules for the primary elections were followed. The 2016 and 2020 nominees both won solid majorities among primary voters. Should the DNC have defied the will of the voters and nominated somebody else instead?
And I'm just asking about it. The "two party system" is a dogmatic concept, not a legal one. There is a tactic to overcome the spoiler effect of your system of waiting to hear who you are supposed to vote for, so you do it mindlessly every time without question is my impression, like your democratic job is to drop a vote in a box for "your side" instead of the job being figuring out who to vote for in the first place. If you could explain if there is a threshold of how absurd candidates can get before a perpetual protest vote for the opposite party is considered a failing strategy, that would be great.
Because the country just doesn't trust a "young guy" to do an old man's job unfortunately (they'll claim the young guy is inexperienced) and everyone thinks a 3rd party is a joke/waste of a vote so it always boils down to a turd vs a shit
>Because the country just doesn't trust a "young guy" to do an old man's job unfortunately (they'll claim the young guy is inexperienced) and everyone thinks a 3rd party is a joke/waste of a vote so it always boils down to a turd vs a shit
party apparatuses pick candidates, not the public. americans choose from two prevetted choices that promise to keep things the same.
If they best they could come up with is the oldest president in US history Vs the (would be) second-oldest president in US history and first with a criminal conviction, it's time for revolution...
The Republican insiders definitely did not want Trump in 2016. 2008 Republican primary was pretty open. The 2008 Democratic race was pretty split between DNC superdelegates.
Sure the DNC/RNC picks are usually the options, but their job is to find an electable candidate.
You can become a member of a party to influence it and vote on candidates, or you can even vote on whoever you want on election day, not just Biden or Trump, this is the election probably maximum people will vote for other candidates, it's a golden opportunity.
It's not that people believe 3rd party is a joke it is a joke the way the electoral system is set up the best a 3rd party can hope for is to play spoiler effect
It doesn't help that our third parties are generally grifters (except the libertarians, they're true believers). Biden is the only one running that isn't a grifter, it's an easy choice.
The Republicans had several candidates like Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley who were far younger than Donald and given these options, the voters picked Donald.
Because people vote for them. That's the truth of the matter.
Americans were the ones to enact a 2-party system based on mock "battles" and shit. And to not have age limits for presidents. And to even focus so much on the office of the president.
Because a ton of people only vote while Federal elections are happening.
They skip stuff like primaries, local, and state elections.
A lot of parties in the states have open primaries , but like only Dems/Republicans really show up still. In those open primaries, independents could have moved the needle away from the current candidates.
Which is funny, because it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Of course no young person votes, as the youngest politicians are still 1-2 generations older than them, they have absolutely fuck all connection to politics.
And that's how the establishment likes it. They want young people as far removed from politics as possible. They love it when people say "both sides" or "there's no point in voting anyway because they're all the same", etc. All of that nonsense benefits the establishment. They want young people apathetic and feeling helpless because if they realized the power they actually have they could change everything.
It was curious to see how the right's rise and now the EU elections were enough to spur a **lot** of 20-30 year old people I know to vote.
Quite a few asked me (I'm a bit over 40) for input on parties and what political terms mean, as they have absolutely no idea about any of that, never once looked at it.
So maybe there's some hope yet. At least this poked a few more into caring for it. Now of course, what we actually need is more 25y and younger go **go into politics**, but that's a different beast sadly.
Which also is the only sensible of all candidates or possible condidates I've seen so far. It's ridiculous. It's like the Labour guy in the UK, he's not even special or noteworthy, but by virtue of **not** being a dickhead, unfit or a raging lunatic or all three, he automatically becomes the by-far-best.
Putin specifically mentions demilitarization and neutrality of Ukraine in every peace deal conditions. Russians won't accept taking territories if it means that Ukraine would be able to keep independant external politics. I think one of the main goals of Putin is to keep Ukraine under Russian influence, he would be ok to just give all territories back to them if that means they would be pro Russian
Palestine never controlled Palestine, the only laid out and internationally agreed borders for a sovereign Palestinian state were 1948. And contrary to Reddit belief the US wasn't funding Israel at the start.
A better example would be the plan the EU and US offered for the reunification of Cyprus which effectively created a separate Islamic state, demanded a change of the constitution, national anthem and flag (designed by a turk in the first place) as well as allowing near perpetual stationing of Turkish troops to protect northern Cyprus.
Oh and no reparations, no return of land lost either.
Oddly Cyprus rejected this.
The deal for the west bank was with Jordan and the deal for Gaza was with Egypt, and considering both countries are currently at peace with Israel, and how the only neighbour currently helping Jordan with it's water issues is Israel, I'd say this deal worked well. Neither the Egyptians or Jordanians offered the Palestinains their own state to negotiate with, so you can't compare this to Ukraine as Ukraine exists as a sovereign state, and Palestinian leadership have rejected state offers since the 1930s. A more apt deal may be camp David, where Israel agreed to leave Gaza, remove all settlers, and Gazans immediately voted in Hamas, who went to war with Fatah, then started firing rockets at Israel. This deal worked out quite poorly for the Israelis and I'd say worse for the Palestinians as when the same arguments are made for the west bank one can simply point at Gaza and say the appeasements don't work.
Wouldn’t work out. Because Russia is also demanding among other things Ukraine to demilitarize. And they promise in exchange to never invade again. Now the last time Russia made a similar deal was when Ukraine gave up its Soviet nukes. And you can see how that turned out.
I would take that deal if I was Ukraine. The Austrians did something similar after ww1 and they live in peace. If this war continues Ukraine will end up rubble with decimated population in a geopolitical struggle not of their making. The Russians in Donbass and Lugansk didn't want to be part of nationalistic ukraine anyway just let them go and try to rebuild.
Ukraine is a US/NATO client state there is nothing they are doing that hasn't been approved and funded by the pentagon. Pretty sure US would never fund nuke development in Ukraine and if Russians got a wind of that they would blow it all up.
Then what would be the point of such deal? To stop immediate bloodshed only to make things worse in the near future? Or you think anyone would believe Russia won't invade again?
Well if you believe Putin he initially only wanted neutrality and some rights for the Russian speakers. Given that the puppets in Kiev declined to negotiate on that we will never know if he was serious.
So too was most of Europe regardless if they had an army or not. I don't think singling out Austria makes the point you'd like to make here.
In the end, having an army or not having an army resulted in the same occupation and annexation in the 1940's.
Not really.
Having an army meant the difference between a fighting chance and an endless occupation.
The Soviets and the British would have fallen too if they'd remained unarmed
Japan did the same and now they are militarizing again. And so is this Europe who many say has been asleep on the threat of Russia.
Not saying it's the right or wrong choice and I do not necessarily agree or not with solutions that assume the certainty of more deaths. Fact is, militarizing, or alliancing, does leepnyour options open by giving you more leverage in negotiations.
Negotiating is always best done under a position of advantage.
Ukraine ALWAYS lived in peace with Russia, until Russia decided to invade because their puppet president got pushed out with street protests. Unlike Israel, Russia has too much land for itself to handle and Ukrainians don't hate Russians on religious grounds as their religion is the same and very similar. Also Ukraine already has a 1991 agreement with Russia and any terms Russia accepts are temporary pause before more aggression and expansion.
Wonderful parallel to Palestine. As we can see how the story ends... The issue is, that the Kremlin is always playing a diplomatic maximalism. Note, how they started the invasion with no coherent goal. This is not a mistake, it's deliberate. This way they could always ask for more.
Russia had 8 years to propose taking Crimea in exchange for Ukrainian EU alignment free-pass. But they didn't. And they won't agree to leave Ukraine be in exchange for Donbas now.
It is existential for Russia. They are a revanchist empire.
this is the long game to take surrounding countries 'peace by peace' pun intended. Russia could have taken kiev in 2014, but they chose to create confusion by creating an FSB warlord republic and then blame their invasion on 'separatists' whom they brainwashed, created, filtered, forced, fooled, etc.
this is the long game to take surrounding countries 'peace by peace' pun intended. Russia could have taken kiev in 2014, but they chose to create confusion by creating an FSB warlord republic and then blame their invasion on 'separatists' whom they brainwashed, created, filtered, forced, fooled, etc.
Well after the presidential debate he has Trump to look forward to giving all of Ukraine to Russia and NATO.
Maybe AOC could run. Don't think Putin would like her. /s
So if I took a chunk out of your home, and then offered you the rest, would you accept that deal? Would you even believe my deal to be an honest one?
I love how people like you think you have a right to judge the Palestinians for not accepting a two-faced deal, as if you would ever accept such a deal yourselves.
Also, they *are* comparable. Because thats exactly what Russia offered Ukraine in exchange for surrender of certain weapons in the 2010s. Surrender to us, and we promise we won't attack.
Once you start infringing on someone else's home, you're the aggressor. It doesn't matter what the other side did, you committed the greater crime.
Exactly, Russia has negative credibility. Their agreements and peace plans are more harm than good. The lie is that Russia does not NEED an agreement for peace. They just have to want it, and agreement will not make them want it.
MIC
Oil industry
Real estate
Insurance
Vehicles
I mean there are a lot of industries which will gain if trump is in power. Biden was more hush hush about it but he will be more outspoken on these local industries. People always like someone who publicly announces they will support local industries no matter what.
Here's the thing. If you want to believe that Trump has dementia, you are more than welcome to. Everyone that watched the debate saw everything they need to see about his mental state. He rambles, and lies, and refuses to answer questions but isn't fundamentally different from how he was 8 years ago. At least during this debate he wasn't.
If you asked the average viewer to tell you who seems like they are more with it mentally, we both know who everyone is going to pick. The sooner we stop playing these games and get a new democrat candidate the better.
The 2020 election was a recognizable name with a strong political background vs. Trump. This election Biden has none of the goodwill and the Dems are trying to run him always. They should have gone with a far more Centrist president and bit the bullet for four years to keep Trump out of the White House again.
A felon convicted in one of the obviously politically motivated trials in recent history. When the judge has to remind the jury they don't have to think Trump is guilty to convict him, and none of the other politicians *who all do the same shit Trump was convicted of* don't get a second glance, forgive me if I don't give two shits about his conviction.
To be clear, he is one of the worst presidents we've ever had and I hope he and Biden both kick it before the election so we can have some actual choices.
This statement was made before the debate. Also Zelensky hasn't really changed his peace proposal. Both sides minimum demands are still incredibly far apart.
Despite all the rhetoric, you're really voting for a political party rather than an individual. Nearly all of the actual work gets delegated, and the decisions that get made are straight down party lines.
Why do shitty journalists write that the plan is to "end the war" to click bait but then the plan is to "how Zelensky believes the war should end". It is not the fucking same.
He lost significant support from the US for a while because of Trump recently when he wasn’t even president. That would be a totally reasonable assumption on his part
Frankly, and unfortunately, it’s how news is being consumed on every media platform from TV to Reddit to Radio to Articles: its headlines only ! Enough people aren’t making the effort to look beyond the headline and they’re getting exactly what they deserve because of it; zero effort = poorly informed decisions = declined quality of life.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr said it best on twitter:
> So crazy that Ukraine could have made a much better peace deal if we had let them do it a couple weeks after the war started, when Russia was ready to fall back to pre-invasion lines in exchange for Ukraine not joining NATO. We pressured Zelensky (who originally ran on a peace platform) to reject the offer. Now Ukraine stands to lose far more territory after hundreds of billions of dollars and tens of thousands of unnecessarily lost lives. Thanks Tony Blinken.
>
https://x.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1806407054459883935
And it’s also crazy that Russia could’ve chosen to pursue this ‘peace deal’ seriously by not invading in the first place. Like come on, they launch the largest invasion in Europe since WW2, massacre Ukrainians all over the country like at Bucha, then one month into it present a pre drafted peace plan that would neuter the entire country to essentially not be able to act without Russias approval and act surprised when Ukraine rejects it. Russia could’ve dealt with their concerns diplomatically, the bloodshed could have been completely avoided, but they didn’t.
But sure let’s keep blaming the evil west for controlling and forcing Russia to choose, against all other options, to invade and murder their neighbours again and again and again like the paranoid, murderous fucks always do.
Seems like you are ignorantly or intentionally forgetting that the West has continued to push their sphere of influence closer and closer to Russia's border despite being explicitly told Russia would retaliate. Yeah, fuck Putin and he is responsible for his own action, but the West and America in particular is absolutely responsible for a large part of the current situation.
Dude, the US is literally supporting Israel and using that very line of reasoning as one of the justifications for Israel right to occupy Palestine.
But excluding that point, You're sayig it's ok to invade, as long as you admit that you are invading because you don't want a geopolitical rival on your borders? I noticed you didn't say the US would be fine with it and totally allow Mexico to make their own military alliances.
That's not what I said at all.
US probably would actually *not* invade at all, and most likely there would not be any action taken, other than some diplomatic tensions.
If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you.
The US has invaded countries and toppled governments for much less. It is still embargoing Cuba for daring to ally with the Soviets and host Soviet weapons systems, not to mention directly launching covert invasions against the country, and currently occupying a part of the country when they have been repeatedly told to leave.
The US ABSOLUTELY would invade Mexico if they were planning on hosting a Chinese military base so close to the US.
I don't believe that. The USA would have a whole load to lose and nothing to gain from invading Mexico over just a Chinese military base.
As a side note, there were and are no American military bases in Ukraine, so this whole donkey bridge is pointless anyway. Fact of the matter remains that Russia is a genocidal, fascistic, imperial state, the same as it has always been, and European security depends on giving the nazis a bloody nose.
One of the conditions was to allow the DPR/LPR to have veto rights over anything the Ukrainain parliament passed, or government wanted to do. Consider that by all indications the rulers of the DPR/LPR are appointed by survival of the fittest sanctioned by the Kremlin.
In other words, the puppets of another country have control of your legislative and executive branches. Such a fair peace, no?
It was already taken a nosedive behind the scenes. Countries were already quietly pulling support as they needed to focus on domestic issues, but trump winning will be pouring gasoline on the fire.
Yes, that's why EU is ramping up military production, setting up factories inside Ukraine, considering various programs to take over the burden of the non-combat UA military, etc. A sure sign of lessening support lmao.
That seems to be the most realistic, base case scenario for Ukraine. They'd have to give up the territory Russia has already invaded because Ukraine lacks the strength to push Russia back. So Russia gets to keep what it has troops on.
This means Ukraine shrinks by about 20%, however the remaining 80% of Ukraine then gets fast tracked to NATO membership to protect the rest of it. That seems to be about as good as Ukraine could hope for, barring Putin having a sudden change of heart and deciding to return the land out of his own good nature.
If NATO fast tracks membership for the rest of Ukraine then Russia accepting it or not won't be relevant.
By ceding the already occupied land, Ukraine would no longer be at war with Russia. There would no longer be any territorial disputes. Then if NATO is smart it has membership on standby but hidden, and the moment Russia agrees to the peace terms in taking the roughly 20% of the country its already occupied, NATO then accepts the rest of Ukraine and deploys NATO troops on the new border.
Putin won't attack. He'll be furious, but he's smart enough not to start a direct war with NATO.
NATO membership is contingent on all NATO members being on board. Do you really think that countries like Turkiye or Hungary are going to be happy with essentially a bait-and-switch? Also, NATO is still just a treaty, and if member countries right now wanted to, they could send a NATO force into Ukraine.
The chance of Ukraine being accepted into NATO in the near future is almost nil, and certainly nil when being accepted behind closed doors without Russia finding out.
>This means Ukraine shrinks by about 20%, however the remaining 80% of Ukraine then gets fast tracked to NATO membership to protect the rest of it.
nonstarter
I have noticed that a lot of people seem to lack the ability to differentiate what someone wants to happen vs what someone believes is likely to happen.
Just because you say something is likely to happen doesn't mean thats your personal desired outcome, except for on Reddit where people seem to confuse those concepts.
Either that, or a Disney story view of the world where good and morality and justice will always prevail against the evil villain, and that villains never win. In real life, historically, the villain usually does win.
Ukraine isn't doing very well right now. Russian lines are slowly advancing along the entire front. Unless something drastically changes in the fortunes of war, it appears Russia will continue to advance slowly but steadily.
Maybe next year Russia has occupied 25% of the country. The year after, 30%. The year after that, 35%.
Maybe they should have negotiated when the losses were only 20%. Its like chopping off an arm to save the rest of the patient. Wait too long and you lose the entire patient.
>Ukraine isn't doing very well right now.
i thought the ukraine was winning
>Maybe next year Russia has occupied 25% of the country. The year after, 30%. The year after that, 35%.
too many russians have died for them to freeze the conflict now, they're going to finish the fight like master chief
That's means the debate is a draw when the octogenarian proves the other can't be trusted to tell the truth.
I'm voting for the old man over the liar and convicted felon who doesn't respect elections
Just look everywhere. Nobody is talking about trump, they are all focusing on Biden, even the most shill Biden supporter and trump hating media is only talking about how bad Biden did in the debates. Trump won because Biden was so bad.
Seriously, Redditors still think "Trump bad" is enough to end the entire election. It is insane how oblivious Gen X and Millenial hardcore liberals are to the way undecided voters *actually* think.
We *already* know Trump is shit. No new information is gonna' change that. But Biden is the one who's really being put the test here.
The debate wasn't about who's right, its about public presentation. And Biden floundered hard....
reddit lefties are dumber than their media and are still in denial or saying "both side were bad and it was a draw".
even CNN and MSNBC have more brains than these redditors.
Like 30 million people LESS watched the debates than the ones in 2020, we didn't learn anything new and weren't going to. Name something that you learned in th me debate you didn't know before it started
>Name something that you learned in th me debate you didn't know before it started
That Biden's mental condition has massively degraded recently. He mumbled nearly the entire time, he stared off blankly into space with his mouth open, he couldn't coherently finish thoughts, and he was too incapacitated to capitalize on Trump's numerous vulnerabilities.
When Trump started talking about abortion, Biden changed the topic from abortion to immigrants murdering Americans, which isn't a point in Biden's favor.
Oh, and he beat medicare.
Meanwhile, Trump is Trump. He's unchanged. The same wildly exaggerating loudmouth who can't keep his story straight even after only 30 seconds. Trump is the known quantity. Its Biden who's performance was so remarkable, in all of the worst ways.
Did you watch the same debate as everyone else? Being cognizant enough to be able to lie is a million times better than barely knowing you are on a stage and need to be talking to an undecided voter. This debate wasn't about convincing people who already know how they were going to vote, and Biden lost so badly even his supporters are saying he did a bad job.
Trump isn't getting anyone to vote for him with his performance either. He said he never had sex with a porn star.....34 felony counts say otherwise. Did he finally show everyone his evidence that the election was rigged 🤔 nope, he sure didn't. He's a buffoon. No one watched this debate to learn anything. Trump certainly didn't do anything to earn anyone's respect
That would make sense if Trump wasn't Trump. Anyone else would look more adept and intelligent, but Trump said the same bafflingly stupid things he always says.
Trump: consistently stupid and still lies as much as he does on the campaign trail
Biden: has a bad night, possibly from a cold, which is different from his many rallies and speeches throughout his campaign and presidency.
You: Biden lost the debate!
I got the preview of his "plan":
Recover all the lands
Putin stands trial
Repayment for the war
NATO an EU membership included
No actions included but neither are negotations allowed unless all points are fulfilled
Most realistic outcome is this ends like the continuation wars. Ukraine cedes a bunch of land, an entire generation is lost and the returning soldiers have no support and the west MIGHT assist with rebuilding.
Quoting the article :
>But some key countries that attended, like India, did not agree and others, like Russia's ally China, boycotted the summit in protest at Moscow not being invited
Moscow wasn't invited to invade Ukraine, either. Yet here we are.
Seems everyone is reading the tea leaves after last nights debate that Trump will be the next president and the money train is going to end soon and I expect other countries to bail not long after. So now they suddenly want to end the war. However, they need to give up on the idea that Russia will give up any land it has taken, that is just not going to happen. Ukraine is in a far weaker position politically than it was at the beginning of the war and it was dumb of them to drag this out to this point.
This was unfortunately a meaningless summit where the other belligerent wasn’t invited and only Ukraine’s allies showed up. You can’t make peace with only one side agreeing to the terms.
> "We don't have too much time," he said, pointing to the high casualty rate amongst soldiers and civilians.
Ukraine is running out of men willing to fight and NATO "allies" won't send their soldiers to die in a trench. Macron is the only one who though about it but it got shut down quickly.
You think so? IMHO Trump is leading the polls right now, and if he wins the US will likly withdraw support for Ukraine, which would lead to Ukraine losing the war completely.
It's possible Zelensky could be considering that consequence, and would rather sign a treaty now before that happens, so at least the Ukraine government can keep some territory rather can lose it all to Russia later in the future.
Is he actually leading by far though? Genuinely asking. Everyone thinks that because of the debate, but I’ve only seen one or two sources over the past few hours that had some focus groups as data and Biden was actually more popular after the debate somehow.
>Is he actually leading by far though?
There is something to understanding how Republicans and Democrats win elections differently.
Most of the nation's population is liberal but in many small population states, the small population is significantly republican that they will always give republican electors in every election cycle.
So for Republicans to win, they don't need popular support, since they already have certain states that will always vote for them. They just need enough support in the other, non-republican states, and that combine with the 'republican' states enable them to win the election.
For democrats, they don't just need to be more popular than the Repbulicans, but significantly more popular than the Republicans to win the elections, because the democrats are handicapped by the states that always vote republican.
Currently Trump is leading the popular vote, and he's running as a republican candidate. This mean he's got a significant lead over Biden. Unless something radical happens, like the democracts switch to a different more popular canidate, or Trump screws up badly, he's almost guaranteed to win this election.
Cranking up the dial on nuclear war, global instability. Bringing Russia and China closer together. Russia counterbalancing with North Korea and Iran. Draining our weapons stockpile. Flushing hundreds of billions down the toilet. Seems awesome.
And, we care about bleeding Russia why? They were fast asleep for 30 years with defence spending mostly around 3% of GDP with a rotting MIC, and a rusted army.
Now they are hell-bent on a bigger army than they started with, have shaken off the rust, and are reforming not only their MIC but their entire system to prosecute the war more effectively.
Now we are in Cold War junior with them no matter what happens and will waste resources in Eastern Europe that we would not have to otherwise for maybe generation.
While they team up with China to try to challenge American global firepower not only militarily but also economically. And, just for fun maybe North Korea gets ICMBs that can blow up New York.
For the privilege of all this we flushed 200 billion and counting down the toilet and cleaned out our weapons stockpiles in many vital areas.
In the words of NATO Supreme Commander Christopher Cavoli "Regardless of the outcome of the war in Ukraine, Russia will be larger, more lethal, and angrier with the West than when it invaded."
> Now they are hell-bent on a bigger army than they started with, have shaken off the rust, and are reforming not only their MIC but their entire system to prosecute the war more effectively.
A bunch of Americans who buys the propaganda that we're "weaken Russia" doesn't understand this.
> Now we are in Cold War junior with them no matter what happens and will waste resources in Eastern Europe that we would not have to otherwise for maybe generation.
I don't think it will be Cold war Junior. I think it will be bigger.
>While they team up with China to try to challenge American global firepower not only militarily but also economically
This is the reason why. IMHO Russia+China will be a much better adversary for the US than the USSR ever use. China is both a military and economic powerhouse, and unlike the USSR, is well run, make plans for decades into the future & already surpass the US in GDP-PPP.
Also I don't think China wants to challanage American global firepower, rather China wants to go it's own way, but will fight the US if the US attempts to stop the hegemony China is building.
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah he’s preparing to end the war because he’s lost over a million men in combat plus millions left as refugees lol he’s getting spanked and about to surrender
Ton of people crying over debate, who look a lot to me like russian bots.
The plan was stated from day one:
Independent Democratic Ukraine within borders agreed upon in 1991. All who disagree - laying cold in the ground. 🫡
##### ###### #### > # [Zelensky Says Preparing 'Plan' To End War With Russia](https://www.barrons.com/news/640) > > > > - - - - - - > > By AFP - Agence France Presse > > June 28, 2024 > > > > - Order Reprints > - Print Article > > > > > > > > Text size > > Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday said he was drawing up a "comprehensive plan" for how Kyiv believes the war with Russia should end. > > There are no public talks ongoing between Ukraine and Russia and based on public statements by Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the two sides appear as far apart as ever when it comes to the terms of a potential peace settlement. > > Zelensky hosted a major international summit in Switzerland earlier this month -- to which Russia was not invited -- to rally support for Ukraine's position. > > "It is very important for us to show a plan to end the war that will be supported by the majority of the world," Zelensky said on Friday. > > "This is the diplomatic route we are working on," he said at a press conference in Kyiv alongside Slovenian President Natasa Pirc Musar. > > More than 90 countries sent leaders and senior officials to the two-day summit with Zelensky in Switzerland. > > The vast majority of whom agreed to a final communique that stressed the need for Ukraine's "territorial integrity" to be respected in any settlement. > > But some key countries that attended, like India, did not agree and others, like Russia's ally China, boycotted the summit in protest at Moscow not being invited. > > Ukraine has repeatedly said Russia must pull its troops out of its internationally recognised territory, including the peninsula of Crimea that Moscow annexed in 2014, before peace talks can start. > > Meanwhile Putin, who launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, is demanding Ukraine effectively capitulate by evacuating even more territory across its east and south. > > In Brussels on Thursday, Zelensky said he would put forward a "detailed plan" in a matter of months. > > "We don't have too much time," he said, pointing to the high casualty rate amongst soldiers and civilians. > > Russia's troops are slowly advancing on the battlefield, claiming to have seized another small frontline village on Friday. > > They currently occupy around a fifth of Ukraine and in 2022 claimed to have annexed four more regions, none of which they fully controlled. > > Ukraine relies on Western financial and military aid to push back the invading Russian forces, but its troops are outgunned, outmanned and exhausted after more than two years of fighting. > > bur-jc/bc - - - - - - [Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot) Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
The most realistic scenario is that Ukraine gives up territory such as those in the eastern part where russia currently controls it in exchange for peace similar to when Palestinians recognised the 1967 border with Israel and were allowed to have a state of their own in exchange the isrealis had full security control of the west bank and gaza. Ukraine will eventually live in peace with russia /S
This worked horribly for Palestine though. The difference is that this time Ukraine could have US support while in the other scenario it's Israel who had the Americans
If Trump wins the election then Ukraine won't have the Americans. In fact Europe is unlikely to either. Fuck, Americans won't even have the Americans.
If Biden wins, I congratulate you in advance for the first woman president in the history of the USA!
Hah, most likely. I don't care about Biden as an individual as much as stopping the opposition. Biden isn't trying to rule America like a king and he isn't fostering some kind of cult. I'm not voting for Biden as much as I am voting against Trump, MAGA, and Project 2025.
Why are those two the only options? Why only senile options? Why not someone in their 30s/40s/50s or even 60s?
Ask the RNC and the DNC. They do this to us. It's a good thing to be upset about, but not until after November. As long as every 4 years we've got to beat Trump, we'll never be able to focus on systemic changes
It’s the voters. There were plenty of good democratic candidates in the 2016 and 2020 primaries. The voters chose what we got.
https://ivn.us/posts/dnc-to-court-we-are-a-private-corporation-with-no-obligation-to-follow-our-rules The DNC chooses the nominee, not the voters.
The rules for the primary elections were followed. The 2016 and 2020 nominees both won solid majorities among primary voters. Should the DNC have defied the will of the voters and nominated somebody else instead?
And both times the DNC chosen candidate won. That's not a coincidence
The DNC doesn’t control how millions of people vote. Maybe the DNC just backed the winning horse.
Why didn't you vote for Andrew Yang?
Wow, this is a blast from the past. I'm not defending the two party system, buddy. I'm explaining it to you.
And I'm just asking about it. The "two party system" is a dogmatic concept, not a legal one. There is a tactic to overcome the spoiler effect of your system of waiting to hear who you are supposed to vote for, so you do it mindlessly every time without question is my impression, like your democratic job is to drop a vote in a box for "your side" instead of the job being figuring out who to vote for in the first place. If you could explain if there is a threshold of how absurd candidates can get before a perpetual protest vote for the opposite party is considered a failing strategy, that would be great.
What about other candidates running on election reform?
Because the country just doesn't trust a "young guy" to do an old man's job unfortunately (they'll claim the young guy is inexperienced) and everyone thinks a 3rd party is a joke/waste of a vote so it always boils down to a turd vs a shit
>Because the country just doesn't trust a "young guy" to do an old man's job unfortunately (they'll claim the young guy is inexperienced) and everyone thinks a 3rd party is a joke/waste of a vote so it always boils down to a turd vs a shit party apparatuses pick candidates, not the public. americans choose from two prevetted choices that promise to keep things the same.
If they best they could come up with is the oldest president in US history Vs the (would be) second-oldest president in US history and first with a criminal conviction, it's time for revolution...
The Republican insiders definitely did not want Trump in 2016. 2008 Republican primary was pretty open. The 2008 Democratic race was pretty split between DNC superdelegates. Sure the DNC/RNC picks are usually the options, but their job is to find an electable candidate.
You can become a member of a party to influence it and vote on candidates, or you can even vote on whoever you want on election day, not just Biden or Trump, this is the election probably maximum people will vote for other candidates, it's a golden opportunity.
It's not that people believe 3rd party is a joke it is a joke the way the electoral system is set up the best a 3rd party can hope for is to play spoiler effect
It doesn't help that our third parties are generally grifters (except the libertarians, they're true believers). Biden is the only one running that isn't a grifter, it's an easy choice.
The Republicans had several candidates like Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley who were far younger than Donald and given these options, the voters picked Donald.
Because people vote for them. That's the truth of the matter. Americans were the ones to enact a 2-party system based on mock "battles" and shit. And to not have age limits for presidents. And to even focus so much on the office of the president.
Because a ton of people only vote while Federal elections are happening. They skip stuff like primaries, local, and state elections. A lot of parties in the states have open primaries , but like only Dems/Republicans really show up still. In those open primaries, independents could have moved the needle away from the current candidates.
Because young voters don't get out and vote. So they don't try to appeal to them.
Which is funny, because it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Of course no young person votes, as the youngest politicians are still 1-2 generations older than them, they have absolutely fuck all connection to politics.
And that's how the establishment likes it. They want young people as far removed from politics as possible. They love it when people say "both sides" or "there's no point in voting anyway because they're all the same", etc. All of that nonsense benefits the establishment. They want young people apathetic and feeling helpless because if they realized the power they actually have they could change everything.
It was curious to see how the right's rise and now the EU elections were enough to spur a **lot** of 20-30 year old people I know to vote. Quite a few asked me (I'm a bit over 40) for input on parties and what political terms mean, as they have absolutely no idea about any of that, never once looked at it. So maybe there's some hope yet. At least this poked a few more into caring for it. Now of course, what we actually need is more 25y and younger go **go into politics**, but that's a different beast sadly.
They didn't present themselves for the primaries...
Which also is the only sensible of all candidates or possible condidates I've seen so far. It's ridiculous. It's like the Labour guy in the UK, he's not even special or noteworthy, but by virtue of **not** being a dickhead, unfit or a raging lunatic or all three, he automatically becomes the by-far-best.
With how unliked she is I'm shocked that Biden (or his party) hasn't chosen a new VP for his second term.
Surely you mean *HERRAAAAUNNNGGHHH*, Chewie?
Vote for me or I'll rip your arms off is what I meant to say.
Yes, sir.
I think kundoleeza rice would be preferable to the smug b
If T wins, the US may have troops in Ukraine and in Gaza. Fighting Ukrainians and Palestinians.
That's why the user put the /s (for denoting their sarcasm)
Putin specifically mentions demilitarization and neutrality of Ukraine in every peace deal conditions. Russians won't accept taking territories if it means that Ukraine would be able to keep independant external politics. I think one of the main goals of Putin is to keep Ukraine under Russian influence, he would be ok to just give all territories back to them if that means they would be pro Russian
Palestine never controlled Palestine, the only laid out and internationally agreed borders for a sovereign Palestinian state were 1948. And contrary to Reddit belief the US wasn't funding Israel at the start. A better example would be the plan the EU and US offered for the reunification of Cyprus which effectively created a separate Islamic state, demanded a change of the constitution, national anthem and flag (designed by a turk in the first place) as well as allowing near perpetual stationing of Turkish troops to protect northern Cyprus. Oh and no reparations, no return of land lost either. Oddly Cyprus rejected this.
The deal for the west bank was with Jordan and the deal for Gaza was with Egypt, and considering both countries are currently at peace with Israel, and how the only neighbour currently helping Jordan with it's water issues is Israel, I'd say this deal worked well. Neither the Egyptians or Jordanians offered the Palestinains their own state to negotiate with, so you can't compare this to Ukraine as Ukraine exists as a sovereign state, and Palestinian leadership have rejected state offers since the 1930s. A more apt deal may be camp David, where Israel agreed to leave Gaza, remove all settlers, and Gazans immediately voted in Hamas, who went to war with Fatah, then started firing rockets at Israel. This deal worked out quite poorly for the Israelis and I'd say worse for the Palestinians as when the same arguments are made for the west bank one can simply point at Gaza and say the appeasements don't work.
Wouldn’t work out. Because Russia is also demanding among other things Ukraine to demilitarize. And they promise in exchange to never invade again. Now the last time Russia made a similar deal was when Ukraine gave up its Soviet nukes. And you can see how that turned out.
Exactly
I would take that deal if I was Ukraine. The Austrians did something similar after ww1 and they live in peace. If this war continues Ukraine will end up rubble with decimated population in a geopolitical struggle not of their making. The Russians in Donbass and Lugansk didn't want to be part of nationalistic ukraine anyway just let them go and try to rebuild.
The only way I see Ukraine accepting that deal is if Ukraine is already working on nuclear weapons
Ukraine is a US/NATO client state there is nothing they are doing that hasn't been approved and funded by the pentagon. Pretty sure US would never fund nuke development in Ukraine and if Russians got a wind of that they would blow it all up.
Then what would be the point of such deal? To stop immediate bloodshed only to make things worse in the near future? Or you think anyone would believe Russia won't invade again?
Well if you believe Putin he initially only wanted neutrality and some rights for the Russian speakers. Given that the puppets in Kiev declined to negotiate on that we will never know if he was serious.
>The Austrians did something similar after ww1 and they live in peace They were annexed by Germany within two decades.
So too was most of Europe regardless if they had an army or not. I don't think singling out Austria makes the point you'd like to make here. In the end, having an army or not having an army resulted in the same occupation and annexation in the 1940's.
Not really. Having an army meant the difference between a fighting chance and an endless occupation. The Soviets and the British would have fallen too if they'd remained unarmed
Japan did the same and now they are militarizing again. And so is this Europe who many say has been asleep on the threat of Russia. Not saying it's the right or wrong choice and I do not necessarily agree or not with solutions that assume the certainty of more deaths. Fact is, militarizing, or alliancing, does leepnyour options open by giving you more leverage in negotiations. Negotiating is always best done under a position of advantage.
Except there is no 'deal' - it is a fake, just like Russian elections
Finland did something like this too
Ukraine ALWAYS lived in peace with Russia, until Russia decided to invade because their puppet president got pushed out with street protests. Unlike Israel, Russia has too much land for itself to handle and Ukrainians don't hate Russians on religious grounds as their religion is the same and very similar. Also Ukraine already has a 1991 agreement with Russia and any terms Russia accepts are temporary pause before more aggression and expansion.
You had me in the first half
Wonderful parallel to Palestine. As we can see how the story ends... The issue is, that the Kremlin is always playing a diplomatic maximalism. Note, how they started the invasion with no coherent goal. This is not a mistake, it's deliberate. This way they could always ask for more. Russia had 8 years to propose taking Crimea in exchange for Ukrainian EU alignment free-pass. But they didn't. And they won't agree to leave Ukraine be in exchange for Donbas now. It is existential for Russia. They are a revanchist empire.
this is the long game to take surrounding countries 'peace by peace' pun intended. Russia could have taken kiev in 2014, but they chose to create confusion by creating an FSB warlord republic and then blame their invasion on 'separatists' whom they brainwashed, created, filtered, forced, fooled, etc.
this is the long game to take surrounding countries 'peace by peace' pun intended. Russia could have taken kiev in 2014, but they chose to create confusion by creating an FSB warlord republic and then blame their invasion on 'separatists' whom they brainwashed, created, filtered, forced, fooled, etc.
Totally different scenarios. Islam and jihad and antisemitism make things impossible over there.. Just look at the polls...
Well after the presidential debate he has Trump to look forward to giving all of Ukraine to Russia and NATO. Maybe AOC could run. Don't think Putin would like her. /s
Palestine was offered a state and rejected it. The situations are not comparable.
So if I took a chunk out of your home, and then offered you the rest, would you accept that deal? Would you even believe my deal to be an honest one? I love how people like you think you have a right to judge the Palestinians for not accepting a two-faced deal, as if you would ever accept such a deal yourselves. Also, they *are* comparable. Because thats exactly what Russia offered Ukraine in exchange for surrender of certain weapons in the 2010s. Surrender to us, and we promise we won't attack. Once you start infringing on someone else's home, you're the aggressor. It doesn't matter what the other side did, you committed the greater crime.
Exactly, Russia has negative credibility. Their agreements and peace plans are more harm than good. The lie is that Russia does not NEED an agreement for peace. They just have to want it, and agreement will not make them want it.
The same may happen to Ukraine where they are offered terms but reject it and russia continues to annex land.... I guess it is not comparable /S
Im really tired of hearing this. Past negotiation failures is not an excuse to never try again. Thats ridiculous.
Damn, even Zelensky lost hope in Biden after that debate. It’s truly joever.
The bigger issue is the loss of faith in America where so many are willing to vote for an open traitor and convicted felon.
Convicted felon or old man with dementia. The most qualified candidate for president right now is an anti vaxxer extremely obvious industry plant.
>anti vaxxer extremely obvious industry plant. That's contradictory.
There is more than one industry
And? So what industry then?
Idk I’m not the guy who said it
MIC Oil industry Real estate Insurance Vehicles I mean there are a lot of industries which will gain if trump is in power. Biden was more hush hush about it but he will be more outspoken on these local industries. People always like someone who publicly announces they will support local industries no matter what.
They both have dementia and Trump's is far worse. Or should I bring up the multiple speeches where he just rambles about nothing
Here's the thing. If you want to believe that Trump has dementia, you are more than welcome to. Everyone that watched the debate saw everything they need to see about his mental state. He rambles, and lies, and refuses to answer questions but isn't fundamentally different from how he was 8 years ago. At least during this debate he wasn't. If you asked the average viewer to tell you who seems like they are more with it mentally, we both know who everyone is going to pick. The sooner we stop playing these games and get a new democrat candidate the better.
The 2020 election was a recognizable name with a strong political background vs. Trump. This election Biden has none of the goodwill and the Dems are trying to run him always. They should have gone with a far more Centrist president and bit the bullet for four years to keep Trump out of the White House again.
A felon convicted in one of the obviously politically motivated trials in recent history. When the judge has to remind the jury they don't have to think Trump is guilty to convict him, and none of the other politicians *who all do the same shit Trump was convicted of* don't get a second glance, forgive me if I don't give two shits about his conviction. To be clear, he is one of the worst presidents we've ever had and I hope he and Biden both kick it before the election so we can have some actual choices.
Biden promised Ukrainians that Americans will stand by them for as long as it takes. This turned out to mean less than 1 presidential term.
This statement was made before the debate. Also Zelensky hasn't really changed his peace proposal. Both sides minimum demands are still incredibly far apart.
Despite all the rhetoric, you're really voting for a political party rather than an individual. Nearly all of the actual work gets delegated, and the decisions that get made are straight down party lines.
He saw the truth.
Is "joever" a typo or an actual word? I can't figure out what you meant.
Why do shitty journalists write that the plan is to "end the war" to click bait but then the plan is to "how Zelensky believes the war should end". It is not the fucking same.
Indeed. The actual contents of the article doesn't indicate at all Zelensky is considering a treaty with Russia to end the war.
Thank you. Jesus Christ, he’s not surrendering. Of course he’s planning for all eventualities. This is basic shit, calm down.
Journalists love clickbait
well they wouldn't be shitty journalists otherwise would they
coincidence that this comes the day after Biden's debate debacle?
Probably not, if Trump wins Zelensky assumes he’ll lose support from the US
He lost significant support from the US for a while because of Trump recently when he wasn’t even president. That would be a totally reasonable assumption on his part
Which I hardly doubt lol He isn't crazy to pull off all the support instantly, maybe lessen it part by part, but not remove 100% on the first year.
I don't think this change much the outcome of the situation
Not only Ukraine it seems: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/28/trump-biden-debate-diplomats-reaction-00165674
It was that bad.
It came out before actually.
He looked like he had a hangover
The article isn’t talking about him considering a peace deal, just what his options are.
I think only one, maybe two people here read the article before commenting.
Such is the curse of news subs on Reddit
That's the truth right there.
Frankly, and unfortunately, it’s how news is being consumed on every media platform from TV to Reddit to Radio to Articles: its headlines only ! Enough people aren’t making the effort to look beyond the headline and they’re getting exactly what they deserve because of it; zero effort = poorly informed decisions = declined quality of life.
97th time he will ask Russia to leave Ukraine, Crimea, hand over Putin to the ICC and pay $500b in reperations, surely the 97th time is the charm.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr said it best on twitter: > So crazy that Ukraine could have made a much better peace deal if we had let them do it a couple weeks after the war started, when Russia was ready to fall back to pre-invasion lines in exchange for Ukraine not joining NATO. We pressured Zelensky (who originally ran on a peace platform) to reject the offer. Now Ukraine stands to lose far more territory after hundreds of billions of dollars and tens of thousands of unnecessarily lost lives. Thanks Tony Blinken. > https://x.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1806407054459883935
And it’s also crazy that Russia could’ve chosen to pursue this ‘peace deal’ seriously by not invading in the first place. Like come on, they launch the largest invasion in Europe since WW2, massacre Ukrainians all over the country like at Bucha, then one month into it present a pre drafted peace plan that would neuter the entire country to essentially not be able to act without Russias approval and act surprised when Ukraine rejects it. Russia could’ve dealt with their concerns diplomatically, the bloodshed could have been completely avoided, but they didn’t. But sure let’s keep blaming the evil west for controlling and forcing Russia to choose, against all other options, to invade and murder their neighbours again and again and again like the paranoid, murderous fucks always do.
Seems like you are ignorantly or intentionally forgetting that the West has continued to push their sphere of influence closer and closer to Russia's border despite being explicitly told Russia would retaliate. Yeah, fuck Putin and he is responsible for his own action, but the West and America in particular is absolutely responsible for a large part of the current situation.
Nonsense.
What do you think would happen if Mexico allies with China and plans to start deploying a Chinese naval base in Tijuana?
USA most likely wouldnt decide that "Actually, Mexico never existed" and launch a campaign to genocide the people and destroy the very culture.
Dude, the US is literally supporting Israel and using that very line of reasoning as one of the justifications for Israel right to occupy Palestine. But excluding that point, You're sayig it's ok to invade, as long as you admit that you are invading because you don't want a geopolitical rival on your borders? I noticed you didn't say the US would be fine with it and totally allow Mexico to make their own military alliances.
That's not what I said at all. US probably would actually *not* invade at all, and most likely there would not be any action taken, other than some diplomatic tensions.
If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you. The US has invaded countries and toppled governments for much less. It is still embargoing Cuba for daring to ally with the Soviets and host Soviet weapons systems, not to mention directly launching covert invasions against the country, and currently occupying a part of the country when they have been repeatedly told to leave. The US ABSOLUTELY would invade Mexico if they were planning on hosting a Chinese military base so close to the US.
I don't believe that. The USA would have a whole load to lose and nothing to gain from invading Mexico over just a Chinese military base. As a side note, there were and are no American military bases in Ukraine, so this whole donkey bridge is pointless anyway. Fact of the matter remains that Russia is a genocidal, fascistic, imperial state, the same as it has always been, and European security depends on giving the nazis a bloody nose.
One of the conditions was to allow the DPR/LPR to have veto rights over anything the Ukrainain parliament passed, or government wanted to do. Consider that by all indications the rulers of the DPR/LPR are appointed by survival of the fittest sanctioned by the Kremlin. In other words, the puppets of another country have control of your legislative and executive branches. Such a fair peace, no?
This is the guy who says he has literal brain worms right?
Seems like even people with brain worms could have predicated Ukraine will lose the war and cede territory to Putin.
If you say so. Personally I think it's nice that you've found your peers.
He s under pressure The threat of trump winning means that International support might take a nosedive
It was already taken a nosedive behind the scenes. Countries were already quietly pulling support as they needed to focus on domestic issues, but trump winning will be pouring gasoline on the fire.
Yes, that's why EU is ramping up military production, setting up factories inside Ukraine, considering various programs to take over the burden of the non-combat UA military, etc. A sure sign of lessening support lmao.
I can see them conceding territory. Will be more interesting to see if there's any condition on NATO and EU membership.
NATO neutrality is more important for Russia than territory. EU they offered back in Istanbul so that is probably still on the table.
Putin said absolutely no to NATO and required demilitarizion but ok to EU
I must have missed the part where Putin is the ruler of Ukraine who gets to decide how sovereign countries act.
Yeah I think Americans call that national interest
That seems to be the most realistic, base case scenario for Ukraine. They'd have to give up the territory Russia has already invaded because Ukraine lacks the strength to push Russia back. So Russia gets to keep what it has troops on. This means Ukraine shrinks by about 20%, however the remaining 80% of Ukraine then gets fast tracked to NATO membership to protect the rest of it. That seems to be about as good as Ukraine could hope for, barring Putin having a sudden change of heart and deciding to return the land out of his own good nature.
Would Russia accept that though? They could just keep the war going to take more territory and keep Ukraine out of NATO.
That is how I see it, I just cannot see Russia allowing Ukraine to join NATO.
If NATO fast tracks membership for the rest of Ukraine then Russia accepting it or not won't be relevant. By ceding the already occupied land, Ukraine would no longer be at war with Russia. There would no longer be any territorial disputes. Then if NATO is smart it has membership on standby but hidden, and the moment Russia agrees to the peace terms in taking the roughly 20% of the country its already occupied, NATO then accepts the rest of Ukraine and deploys NATO troops on the new border. Putin won't attack. He'll be furious, but he's smart enough not to start a direct war with NATO.
NATO membership is contingent on all NATO members being on board. Do you really think that countries like Turkiye or Hungary are going to be happy with essentially a bait-and-switch? Also, NATO is still just a treaty, and if member countries right now wanted to, they could send a NATO force into Ukraine. The chance of Ukraine being accepted into NATO in the near future is almost nil, and certainly nil when being accepted behind closed doors without Russia finding out.
I cannot see Russia allowing Ukraine to join Nato, that will be part of the agreement or Russia will keep fighting.
>This means Ukraine shrinks by about 20%, however the remaining 80% of Ukraine then gets fast tracked to NATO membership to protect the rest of it. nonstarter
Why does this crowd never consider the possibility Ukraine might lose, or their situation is worse in a year?
because they suffer from marvelbrain
I have noticed that a lot of people seem to lack the ability to differentiate what someone wants to happen vs what someone believes is likely to happen. Just because you say something is likely to happen doesn't mean thats your personal desired outcome, except for on Reddit where people seem to confuse those concepts. Either that, or a Disney story view of the world where good and morality and justice will always prevail against the evil villain, and that villains never win. In real life, historically, the villain usually does win.
Ukraine isn't doing very well right now. Russian lines are slowly advancing along the entire front. Unless something drastically changes in the fortunes of war, it appears Russia will continue to advance slowly but steadily. Maybe next year Russia has occupied 25% of the country. The year after, 30%. The year after that, 35%. Maybe they should have negotiated when the losses were only 20%. Its like chopping off an arm to save the rest of the patient. Wait too long and you lose the entire patient.
>Ukraine isn't doing very well right now. i thought the ukraine was winning >Maybe next year Russia has occupied 25% of the country. The year after, 30%. The year after that, 35%. too many russians have died for them to freeze the conflict now, they're going to finish the fight like master chief
Joe lost the debate so badly it reverberated through time and space and spooked the Europeans about the now almost inevitable Trump win
Lol
So lying doesn't lose the debate for Trump??
When his opponent can't convince Americans that he should not be in a nursing home. No.
That's means the debate is a draw when the octogenarian proves the other can't be trusted to tell the truth. I'm voting for the old man over the liar and convicted felon who doesn't respect elections
I suspect the argument I’ll vote for Biden even if he looks mostly dead won’t be as persuasive as you hope. Last night was a disaster for Biden.
I watched Jan 6 riots live. I care more about democracy than I do about Biden
But do most Americans care tho?
More cared in 2020. I pray for the future of our Republic
They got disillusioned by four years of Biden and the death nail that happened last night in the debates.
You mean recovering from a pandemic, negative oil prices and 14% unemployment?
I'm shocked that most Americans doesn't care about the insurection and the 2025 plan. Your country is fucked. God save America, for no one else can
Some people here will trade all their freedoms away just so they don't have to interact with people different from them.
Not arguing who should win
no lol
People enjoy a show. Trump gave them what they want.
Just look everywhere. Nobody is talking about trump, they are all focusing on Biden, even the most shill Biden supporter and trump hating media is only talking about how bad Biden did in the debates. Trump won because Biden was so bad.
Seriously, Redditors still think "Trump bad" is enough to end the entire election. It is insane how oblivious Gen X and Millenial hardcore liberals are to the way undecided voters *actually* think. We *already* know Trump is shit. No new information is gonna' change that. But Biden is the one who's really being put the test here. The debate wasn't about who's right, its about public presentation. And Biden floundered hard....
reddit lefties are dumber than their media and are still in denial or saying "both side were bad and it was a draw". even CNN and MSNBC have more brains than these redditors.
Like 30 million people LESS watched the debates than the ones in 2020, we didn't learn anything new and weren't going to. Name something that you learned in th me debate you didn't know before it started
>Name something that you learned in th me debate you didn't know before it started That Biden's mental condition has massively degraded recently. He mumbled nearly the entire time, he stared off blankly into space with his mouth open, he couldn't coherently finish thoughts, and he was too incapacitated to capitalize on Trump's numerous vulnerabilities. When Trump started talking about abortion, Biden changed the topic from abortion to immigrants murdering Americans, which isn't a point in Biden's favor. Oh, and he beat medicare. Meanwhile, Trump is Trump. He's unchanged. The same wildly exaggerating loudmouth who can't keep his story straight even after only 30 seconds. Trump is the known quantity. Its Biden who's performance was so remarkable, in all of the worst ways.
You didn't know Biden was old before the debates started?
Did you watch the same debate as everyone else? Being cognizant enough to be able to lie is a million times better than barely knowing you are on a stage and need to be talking to an undecided voter. This debate wasn't about convincing people who already know how they were going to vote, and Biden lost so badly even his supporters are saying he did a bad job.
Trump isn't getting anyone to vote for him with his performance either. He said he never had sex with a porn star.....34 felony counts say otherwise. Did he finally show everyone his evidence that the election was rigged 🤔 nope, he sure didn't. He's a buffoon. No one watched this debate to learn anything. Trump certainly didn't do anything to earn anyone's respect
My point is that he didn't need to *do* anything because Biden's showing was so incredibly weak.
That would make sense if Trump wasn't Trump. Anyone else would look more adept and intelligent, but Trump said the same bafflingly stupid things he always says. Trump: consistently stupid and still lies as much as he does on the campaign trail Biden: has a bad night, possibly from a cold, which is different from his many rallies and speeches throughout his campaign and presidency. You: Biden lost the debate!
I got the preview of his "plan": Recover all the lands Putin stands trial Repayment for the war NATO an EU membership included No actions included but neither are negotations allowed unless all points are fulfilled
Return of all kidnapped children. Won't sack Moscow.
Most realistic outcome is this ends like the continuation wars. Ukraine cedes a bunch of land, an entire generation is lost and the returning soldiers have no support and the west MIGHT assist with rebuilding.
If the West pulls out of Ukraine just because of Trump winning, how much credibility will the west lose? A lot or just business as usual?
it's just business as usual. look how they abandoned their allies in south Vietnam, Kurds in middle east and Afghanistan.
Zelenskys plan: Russias unconditional surrender
Quoting the article : >But some key countries that attended, like India, did not agree and others, like Russia's ally China, boycotted the summit in protest at Moscow not being invited Moscow wasn't invited to invade Ukraine, either. Yet here we are.
Seems everyone is reading the tea leaves after last nights debate that Trump will be the next president and the money train is going to end soon and I expect other countries to bail not long after. So now they suddenly want to end the war. However, they need to give up on the idea that Russia will give up any land it has taken, that is just not going to happen. Ukraine is in a far weaker position politically than it was at the beginning of the war and it was dumb of them to drag this out to this point.
This was unfortunately a meaningless summit where the other belligerent wasn’t invited and only Ukraine’s allies showed up. You can’t make peace with only one side agreeing to the terms.
zelensky preparing for ENDSIEG
He just needs another $60 billion to do it ?
It will be as silly as the Russian “proposal” - this war has a few years’ legs in it.
> "We don't have too much time," he said, pointing to the high casualty rate amongst soldiers and civilians. Ukraine is running out of men willing to fight and NATO "allies" won't send their soldiers to die in a trench. Macron is the only one who though about it but it got shut down quickly.
When it comes to war, willing is always optional
You think so? IMHO Trump is leading the polls right now, and if he wins the US will likly withdraw support for Ukraine, which would lead to Ukraine losing the war completely. It's possible Zelensky could be considering that consequence, and would rather sign a treaty now before that happens, so at least the Ukraine government can keep some territory rather can lose it all to Russia later in the future.
Is he actually leading by far though? Genuinely asking. Everyone thinks that because of the debate, but I’ve only seen one or two sources over the past few hours that had some focus groups as data and Biden was actually more popular after the debate somehow.
>Is he actually leading by far though? There is something to understanding how Republicans and Democrats win elections differently. Most of the nation's population is liberal but in many small population states, the small population is significantly republican that they will always give republican electors in every election cycle. So for Republicans to win, they don't need popular support, since they already have certain states that will always vote for them. They just need enough support in the other, non-republican states, and that combine with the 'republican' states enable them to win the election. For democrats, they don't just need to be more popular than the Repbulicans, but significantly more popular than the Republicans to win the elections, because the democrats are handicapped by the states that always vote republican. Currently Trump is leading the popular vote, and he's running as a republican candidate. This mean he's got a significant lead over Biden. Unless something radical happens, like the democracts switch to a different more popular canidate, or Trump screws up badly, he's almost guaranteed to win this election.
This war is good for the US, and if Trump wins, all of this will be explained to him.
Cranking up the dial on nuclear war, global instability. Bringing Russia and China closer together. Russia counterbalancing with North Korea and Iran. Draining our weapons stockpile. Flushing hundreds of billions down the toilet. Seems awesome.
It bleeds Russia, hurts euros, and our vassals are back to doing what they’re fucking told. By and large this war is a massive win for us.
And, we care about bleeding Russia why? They were fast asleep for 30 years with defence spending mostly around 3% of GDP with a rotting MIC, and a rusted army. Now they are hell-bent on a bigger army than they started with, have shaken off the rust, and are reforming not only their MIC but their entire system to prosecute the war more effectively. Now we are in Cold War junior with them no matter what happens and will waste resources in Eastern Europe that we would not have to otherwise for maybe generation. While they team up with China to try to challenge American global firepower not only militarily but also economically. And, just for fun maybe North Korea gets ICMBs that can blow up New York. For the privilege of all this we flushed 200 billion and counting down the toilet and cleaned out our weapons stockpiles in many vital areas. In the words of NATO Supreme Commander Christopher Cavoli "Regardless of the outcome of the war in Ukraine, Russia will be larger, more lethal, and angrier with the West than when it invaded."
> Now they are hell-bent on a bigger army than they started with, have shaken off the rust, and are reforming not only their MIC but their entire system to prosecute the war more effectively. A bunch of Americans who buys the propaganda that we're "weaken Russia" doesn't understand this. > Now we are in Cold War junior with them no matter what happens and will waste resources in Eastern Europe that we would not have to otherwise for maybe generation. I don't think it will be Cold war Junior. I think it will be bigger. >While they team up with China to try to challenge American global firepower not only militarily but also economically This is the reason why. IMHO Russia+China will be a much better adversary for the US than the USSR ever use. China is both a military and economic powerhouse, and unlike the USSR, is well run, make plans for decades into the future & already surpass the US in GDP-PPP. Also I don't think China wants to challanage American global firepower, rather China wants to go it's own way, but will fight the US if the US attempts to stop the hegemony China is building.
lol, lmao even
I think he knows Trump is going to win.
This article is misleading. Just another day in the cesspool that is 21st century‘journalism’….
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Didn't Trump say that when he wins, he'll negotiate peace before he even takes office? Promises made, promises kept.
Trump's negotiation: "Sign Putin's peace agreement or we will cut off all your funding and will not evacuate you to Florida"
Yeah and what can Ukraine do? Without US help they are doomed, Russia will steamroll them.
>I'm finally getting optimistic... an assassination attempt has been made on ~~Hitler's~~ Putin's life.
Yeah he’s preparing to end the war because he’s lost over a million men in combat plus millions left as refugees lol he’s getting spanked and about to surrender
Ton of people crying over debate, who look a lot to me like russian bots. The plan was stated from day one: Independent Democratic Ukraine within borders agreed upon in 1991. All who disagree - laying cold in the ground. 🫡