Accession to NATO is a prerequisite for peace. If Russia is ok with it, I don't see Hungary holding it up. If Russia is not ok with it, then peace is off the table and war will need to continue for the foreseeable future.

Nothing is changing; its a stalemate. And that's why the debate isn't over Ukraine being willing to make territorial concessions to end the war, its a matter of them recognizing the reality of territorial control and dropping their claims to lands they don't hold.

It will turn into a Rump state with a 38th Parallel sort of arrangement dividing NATO West and Russia China East in future. But the stalemate wouldn't last long.
Peace Treaty will be signed and after at best 10 years, things will be broken by either side and things will start to burn again.

do you genuinely not realise that you're not even trying to find a fair / impartial / objective compromise, but that you're strictly defending russia's position and demands? you ARE aware that crimea and donbas are, in fact, ukrainian territories - as acknowledged by countless international agreements and treaties, many of which signed by pootin's russia, specifically guaranteeing ukraine's territorial integrity and political independence, right?

by dodging my question and framing what YOU would consider a "fair deal" exclusively with "what can russia be militarily forced to concede at this very moment" in mind, you're not suggesting a "peace deal", but simply terms of ukraine's surrender. which, to be fair, very much seems to be russia's current position on the issue.
so unless ukraine surrenders unconditionally (for which there is currently no indication), there simply is no peace to be had with russia. meaning pootins troops will continue to murder, rape, torture, loot, and destroy - or "liberate", as you would probably call it, until one side simply can't keep this insanity going...

man, tucker has really done a number on you guys... no wonder he's a hero in russia...

This post was edited by fender on Sep 17 2023 09:29pm

Does the same also apply to Russia? Will they need to drop their claims to the parts of the Donezk, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia which they don't control? Will the Russians need to stop their missile attacks on Ukrainian cities in return for Ukraine ceding Crimea and large parts of the Donbass to them?



I disagree. Ukraine gaining the upper hand on the battlefield, to the point that further Ukrainian gains look significantly more likely than further Russian gains, would imho do the trick and bring the Russian to the negotiating table in good faith. Since this is an unrealistic scenario, the only way forward that I see is both sides getting exhausted by the stalemate and hostilities gradually tailing off, until the conflict becomes frozen again like it was before Feb22.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Sep 17 2023 09:29pm

This definitely seems to be the case. In addition, Ukraine has the additional problem of the constant missiles strikes from Russia - the longer they refuse to sue for peace, Russia continues to bombard them. Which is dirty, but is unfortunately the reality of what Russia is doing. Ukraine seems to be hitting back a bit with drone strikes, but they are entirely ineffective and the marginal utility isn't there.

The only thing that could ever benefit Ukraine is for Russia to back down. But it's just delusional at this point to believe that could ever happen - they're still doing fine. Every other scenario doesn't work out well for Ukraine. The other option is for the US to formally enter to war, which begins the first nuclear war in history, which any sane person wouldn't touch.

They're not Ukrainian territories, though, and I say that in the realest sense there is; they're not controlled by Ukraine, they are controlled by Russia, and the only country with a modicum of influence on the subject wants Russia to win.

I have provided a situation where Ukraine does not unconditionally surrender and yet obtains peace and security. I won't post it again, so feel free to go back and read it.

You've refused to answer the question. If Ukraine lacks the means to force Russia to pay reparations, and lacks the means to force Russia off the occupied and disputed territories (southern Ukraine and Crimea respectively), then what is Ukraine actually giving up in a peace compromise?

It certainly sounds like that is the bargaining position Russia is angling for, yes. The status quo favors them. There could be some nitty gritty treaty of westphalia diplomacy to hammer out a DMZ or whatever

At no point since the US aligned revolutionary government took power by force has it held any valid claim to the seperatist regions. Tell me, how long has Taiwan been part of Communist China? The government in Kiev right now has never held any jurisdiction over Crimea or most of the DPR/LPR. They only took control of the west and Odessa. And despite ten years of slow burning siege against Putins little green men and a 1.75 years of open war, the Zelensky regime hasn't been able to plant a flag over regions which are now formally Russia oblasts.

Possession is nine tenths of the law. Russia possesses those territories, Zelensky never has. And we're marching towards the inevitability of status quo being locked in. This won't be an "I told you so" from Goomshill, this will be a "I told you before it started, every step of the way as it went downhill and on loop as it fell apart".

It's a comparison of air forces of Russia and Ukraine as of 2023, by type

Looks like you can't handle that kind of information, nothing new here SMH