• Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 months ago

    Zelenskyy has stated that he is not willing to negotiate with Putin as well as that they will not settle for less than getting back all the occupied territories including Crimea. There is no peace deal to be made with these terms as the starting point.

  • Gobbel2000@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    The article only summarizes it shortly, but the parallels to the Munich Agreement from 1938 are really scary.

    Hitler’s aim was to take over all of Czechoslovakia by breaking it apart. The subject of the Munich Agreement was the Sudetenland, the region bordering Germany. Before there were some votes and local political forces expressing the wish of the German minority in the Sudetenland to create an independent state (See the parallels with DNR, LNR and Crimea). This was used by Hitler to justify taking over the region. Suddenly it wasn’t about independence anymore, but about inclusion into Germany.

    The Czechoslovakian government in Prague obviously hated the idea, but they were not invited to the talks in Munich. Only afterwards were they made aware of the decision that would be imposed on their nation. Who was invited was fellow fascist Mussolini from Italy, as well as France and UK, who gave in and signed this agreement, giving international support to Germany just taking over parts of neighboring nations.

    Their reasoning was, if they were to disagree, Hitler would assert his will by force and take Czechoslovakia militarily, starting a large European war (that is also the reason Prague was forced to accept the decision: the alternative was a war they could never win, they could not count on any outside help). This was the so-called appeasement policy by the UK. They bought “peace” in exchange for territories they didn’t own but felt the right to decide over. We all know how this heavily-priced peace turned out. At most it gave the allied forces one more year to prepare for WWII.

    • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      The Donetsk & Luhansk republics would violently resist any attempt by Kyiv to absorb them back into Ukraine.

      LOL

      You know that whole rebellion thing was created by Russia right?

  • Bloomcole@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    They are not in charge, the US/NATO is. They are merely only doing the fighting and dying.

    As it was written decades ago by what people call a philanthropist for some reason:

    the combination of manpower from Eastern Europe with the technical capabilities of NATO would greatly enhance the military potential of the Partnership because it would reduce the risk of body bags for NATO countries, which is the main constraint on their willingness to act.

    • Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Your claim that Ukrainians are merely “doing the fighting and dying” under US and NATO direction, citing George Soros’s 1993 essay, is both a misinterpretation and a profound insult to the bravery and autonomy of the Ukrainian people.

      In the essay, Soros discussed the potential for integrating Eastern European manpower with NATO’s technical capabilities to enhance collective security. This proposal aimed to create a more balanced and cooperative defense structure in the post-Cold War era, not to relegate Eastern Europeans to the role of expendable forces. Soros emphasized the importance of political and economic collaboration to support emerging democracies, with military considerations being just one facet of a comprehensive strategy.

      Since Russia’s unprovoked invasion in February 2022, Ukraine has demonstrated remarkable resilience and independence in defending its sovereignty. The Ukrainian government and armed forces have made strategic decisions, leading successful counteroffensives and reclaiming occupied territories. Their determination has not only defied global expectations but has also galvanized international support.

      Your remarks diminish the profound sacrifices made by Ukrainian soldiers and civilians. The resilience of Ukrainians is evident not only on the battlefield but also in their daily lives. Civilians have engaged in acts of defiance, from producing essential military supplies to maintaining cultural institutions under siege. To reduce their struggle to mere pawns in a geopolitical game is an affront to their courage and agency.

      It is imperative to approach discussions about such critical matters with a well-informed perspective. Recognizing the agency and bravery of the Ukrainian people is not only a matter of accuracy but also of respect. Mischaracterizations not only distort the truth but also unjustly belittle the experiences of those enduring the hardships of war.

      All those who defend a free world should acknowledge the undeniable evidence of Ukraine’s sovereign efforts and the extraordinary bravery of its people. Let us honor their sacrifices by portraying their struggle with the dignity and respect it unequivocally deserves.

      • Bloomcole@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        thanks chat GTP I hope your AI isn’t conscious and won’t be offended when I don’t read your BS essay

        • Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          I took the time to look up the Soros essay, identify the quote to gather context, and craft a thoughtful response. GPTs are a tool—some use them to replace thinking, but the wise use them to enhance it. I stand by every word I wrote.

          Your response, on the other hand, dismisses an argument you didn’t even bother to engage with. Instead of refuting my points, you crafted a strawman to wave away the discussion entirely. That speaks volumes—not about AI, but about you.

          I didn’t use any AI to write this reply. But something tells me that doesn’t matter to you in the slightest.

          • Bloomcole@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            ChatGTP is shit.
            It is wildly unreliable at best and often straight up lying and giving misinformation.
            The irony that you call yourself wise for using it. LOL
            I did waste precious seconds reading the first lines before I noticed your cheap trickery.
            If I recall it mentioned context, as you do this time.

            A little story about ‘context’ and factcheckers.
            Probably ShitGPT got the mustard there.
            I almost didn’t believe the appauling Soros quote the first time it got mentioned to me so I factchecked, since I’m wise.
            One of the results was from one of those respectable, totally unbiased don’t fall for Ruzzia propaganda! factcheckers.

            Title:“Did Soros say this? Answer: no”
            When you read the rest of this garbage they mention in fact that he did literally say this but “we have to look at the context and then we have to say he didn’t”.
            Which is sometimes a valid argument.
            Only problem, there was zero context to misunderstand or interpret this. So basically another lie to cover their first lie.
            But anyway enough about this quote. There’s plenty of evidence for decades the US wanted this to happen. But something tells me that doesn’t matter to you in the slightest.

            • Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Ah, the classic approach: dismiss, insult, deflect, and avoid any actual debate. Instead of engaging with the content, you ridicule the tool I used to refine my response—conveniently ignoring that I did my own research before ever consulting it. You also claim to value context while simultaneously insisting that a single sentence in a decades-old essay should be taken as gospel without any consideration for its broader meaning or intent."

              “Your ‘fact-checker anecdote’ is particularly amusing, since it ironically proves my point. Context is precisely what separates informed discussion from cherry-picked outrage. But of course, why wrestle with complexity when you can just claim ‘there’s plenty of evidence’ without citing a single source? That’s not wisdom—it’s just lazy.”

              "And yes, something does tell me that none of this will matter to you in the slightest. But at least I have the courtesy of engaging with ideas instead of hiding behind sneering dismissals. Enjoy the illusion of superiority—it’s the only argument you seem interested in making.

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Ukraine wasn’t invited to the decision to fight a proxy war either, or have its government overthrown in the Maidan Coup. And when they attempted peace talks before, their western handlers ordered them to keep fighting.

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ukrainians: Fight to defend their country from Russian attack

      Western countries who don’t like what Russia is doing help Ukrainians

      Some silly person online: YOU’RE FIGHTING AN AMERICAN PROXY WAR

      They’re just trying to defend their country.

      And when they attempted peace talks before, their western handlers ordered them to keep fighting.

      What’s this referring to?

        • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Ahh. The old hasbara strategy of pretending nothing happened before that. Nice.

          I don’t know what that means tbh.

          Link

          The article and the relevant section from Wikipedia both describe how the talks failed on multiple issues, with one part being the refusal of giving security guarantees.

          Speaking further and explaining Kyiv’s refusal to accept the proposal, Arakhamia said that it would require a constitutional change, given that Ukraine’s Constitution states its intention to become a NATO member.

          Additionally, he emphasized a lack of trust in the Russian position.

          “There is no, and there was no, trust in the Russians that they would do it. That could only be done if there were security guarantees.”

          Arahamiya clarified that signing such an agreement without guarantees would have left Ukraine vulnerable to a second incursion.

          The idea that a Boris Johnson (of all people) saying “shouldn’t sign anything with them at all – and let’s just fight” was their “Western handlers ordering them to fight” is pretty funny.

          • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            So you believe the Ukrainian officials confirming this are lying?

            The Wikipedia entries are maintained by western propagandists. I wouldn’t put much faith in the credibility.

            • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              I don’t know who Ukrainian official you mean, other than that I quoted same person as your article did (Arahamiya/Arakhamia). In those links he isn’t confirming your take that “Boris Johnson (of all people) saying “shouldn’t sign anything with them at all – and let’s just fight” was their “Western handlers ordering them to fight””.

              The Wikipedia article has links to their sources (news articles) who come back to the same things said in your linked article (from The European Conservative). It’s just that the article you linked gives a lot more weight (an outright claim of being forced) to the Boris episode than many other sources or from what I’ve seen, Arahamiya/Arakhamia (their source) does himself. He doesn’t seem to have said what the title of your article (about being forced) claims. Or if he did, they didn’t quote that part.

              • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                The Wikipedia entry referencing news articles doesn’t mean much if the articles themselves are pushing western propaganda. Especially considering how many news agencies are (or were) on the payroll of USAID, I wouldn’t expect to see them challenge the NATO narrative.

                Giving more weight to Wikipedia articles than Ukrainian officials is definitely… an interesting choice.

                • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  They’re all referencing the same interview and the same quotes from the same person… None of them seems to disagree on what he said as such. He just literally doesn’t in any of the quoted parts in any of the articles linked claim or confirm what your news article claimed it confirms, they’re just making a claim of their own on the meaning of his words and their own opinion. That’s the difference.

                  Hell, you linked to The European Conservative which is an outright even in the name politically biased news source. But it’s the same quotes on all of them, so that part doesn’t matter since the actual interview is there.

                  Giving more weight to Wikipedia articles than Ukrainian officials is definitely… an interesting choice.

                  It’s the same exact official that’s being quoted in all of the news articles. How are you not getting this… The official being quoted just doesn’t say what you claimed he did. You saw Wikipedia and thought that’s your way out of your claim but missed the whole thing of it being literally the same person with everyone referencing literally the same interview lol.

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Ukraine already made peace when they gave up their nuclear weapons in exchange for Russia’s promise that they would respect Ukraine’s sovereignty in the Belarus Memorandum in 1994. A promise which Russia broke repeatedly.

      Russia has demonstrated over and over again that it will not abide by its own peace agreements. Russia cannot be trusted to honor any treaty. There can be no peace so long as Russia is a duplicitous kleptocracy.

      • fallowseed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        "In 2014, after a well-prepared[3] US-sponsored anti-Russian coup in Kyiv, Ukrainian ultranationalists banned the official use of Russian and other minority languages in their country and, at the same time, affirmed Ukraine’s intention to become part of NATO. Among other consequences, Ukrainian membership in NATO would place Russia’s 250-year-old naval base in the Crimean city of Sebastopol under NATO and hence U.S. control. Crimea was Russian-speaking and had several times voted not to be part of Ukraine. So, citing the precedent of NATO’S violent intervention to separate Kosovo from Serbia, Russia organized a referendum in Crimea that endorsed its reincorporation in the Russian Federation. The results were consistent with previous votes on the issue.

        Meanwhile, in response to Ukraine’s banning of the use of Russian in government offices and education, predominantly Russian-speaking areas in the country’s Donbas region attempted to secede. Kyiv sent forces to suppress the rebellion. Moscow responded by backing Ukrainian Russian speakers’ demands for the minority rights guaranteed to them by both the pre-coup Ukrainian constitution and the principles of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). NATO backed Kyiv against Moscow. An escalating civil war among Ukrainians ensued. This soon evolved into an intensifying proxy war in Ukraine between the United States, NATO, and Russia."

        from former ambassador chas freeman. you know what came after this ? a brokered peace agreement by osce france and germany in which various terms were settled which neither france, nor germany, nor ukraine were intending to uphold. this is the minsk agreement.

        there’s a lot you like to leave out, and i’m sure you’ll deign to forget this history, too.

        edit: to the one user who upvoted me: i see you, bless your heart and open mind- more than makes up for the dozens upon dozens of salty idealogues

            • Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Nah, posts like an American who started with good intentions but has taken America bad to mean that places that oppose the US therefore must be good/better.

              The speech by the former US diplomat they like to post is worth a read, as despite some odd dubious or cherry picked data the conclusions are bang on the money, and it is right about it all being a very real politik, not actually good for Ukraine, approach by the US and NATO.

              It also has the former diplomat state that Europe (that famously single and unanimous entity), as well as Zelensky (at least before 2024) and Ukraine want peace, and the US and Russia are both more involved in prolonging war to better their own outcomes.

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I could believe that of any major country directly profiting from this. But what’s your reliable source for all that, especially Zelenskyy?

      • fallowseed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        i consider chas freeman to be my most reliable western source, but i’m sure there are others.

            • Lemminary@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              And which one would you say touches the heart of the matter of what you say? My time is limited. I think a direct quote would be a great place to start.

              • fallowseed@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                i guess the many lessons one is a good start and broad edit: again someone is cycling through alt accounts and downvoting everything i’ve posted… lol, let’s hope its a bot and someone isn’t wasting their actual time to totally own me with downvotes.

      • fallowseed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        okay now that i’ve given you what you asked for and its been subsequently downvoted, maybe you’d like to share some of your wonderful and trustworthy sources?

        edit: lol, second time some weirdo has gone through my entire comment history and downvoted everything i’ve posted in the last days. stay classy!

        • Lemminary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Uh, no. I literally just read your reply right now. But you can be confidently wrong about all that.

          • fallowseed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            i said ‘some weirdo’ sorry if you feel that i’m implicating you. still waiting on your sources though.

            • Lemminary@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              That can absolutely be me, but you were wrong, so by circumstance doesn’t apply this time. The intent was there nonetheless.

              And I’m still waiting on yours.