d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Russia / Ukraine
Prev1474547464747474847495001Next
Closed New Topic New Poll
Views: 382075Replies: 50000Track Topic
Member
Posts: 34,836
Joined: May 16 2024
Gold: 0.00
#47461
Feb 25 2025 06:58am
Quote (Goomshill @ Feb 25 2025 01:55pm)
American democracy matters to me, sure. Ukrainian democracy is a Ukrainian problem. Democracy is premised on a shared civic spirit, to resolve disputes with all abiding by the vote, and the post war period has shown how that can't be forced on a population. Its not an ethos natural to european nations or asia or africa. You give a bunch of muslims true representation and they form a caliphate. Give the gazans and west bank the right to vote in the knesset and the jews would all be dead in a couple months. And right now the krauts are still arguing whether to ban the AfD or just try to stifle the will of the people by continuing to blockade the 2nd biggest party from all branches of power. Most of european history was ruled by aristocracies and monarchies, I don't blame them.

But I guess the difference here is: Zelensky never held any vote including east Ukraine. The last time all Ukrainians east and west voted together, they elected Yanukovych. Now Zelensky doesn't even hold elections in the west lmao. The referendums in east Ukraine just reflected the obvious and overwhelming sentiment of a people who were already in open warfare against the west. Ethnic Russians who were being shelled by the west voted to secede from the west, and eventually to willingly join Russia. All of which makes perfect sense for their self-interest.

So tell me what is the legitimacy of a dictator in a failed west Ukrainian junta claiming sovereignty over the eastern oblasts that his regime has never held for a day. He failed to take them by force, they were violently disenfranchised by the revolution. Putin publicly tried to negotiate a diplomatic solution prior to the invasion that would have given the DPR/LPR a degree of autonomy while still formally remaining within Ukraine's borders, which is sure a hell of a better deal than we're negotiating with him right now. Macron held a phone call in which he dismissed Russia's premise and declared separatists can't dictate terms and the west held the sole sovereign claim to all the borders (that it didn't control). Now Macron is off sulking and trying to vie for a seat at the table while the grownups slice up the country. Maybe he should have sent brigitte




whats the point of spreading false information if it can be proven wrong within seconds though lol
Member
Posts: 50,778
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,846.00
#47462
Feb 25 2025 07:27am
Quote (Fnall @ Feb 25 2025 06:58am)
https://i.imgur.com/ws9qUQA.jpeg

whats the point of spreading false information if it can be proven wrong within seconds though lol




The majority of Ukraine pre-civil war was populated in the east in that map, the same oblasts that didn't vote in the 2019 election because they were in a civil war.
You know, as is literally shown on the map you posted, those are the DPR, LPR & Crimea. In an election in 2019 in which the party of regions was banned and the people in the east not allowed to vote for their own candidates, not that they were voting anyways.
Do you understand that Ukrainians voted democratically for Viktor Yanukovych in the last election held with a unified country, and the more populous eastern oblasts were disenfranchised by the Maidan, and then given no representation in the following 'elections' even though Zelensky claims dominion over them.

This isn't a subtle distinction and its a kind of important one. If Zelensky was just saying western ukraine should be a sovereign republic that holds the lands west of the dnipro and maybe some strip between it and the dpr/lpr/crimea, he wouldn't be laying claim to a hostile people who have been fighting a civil war against him. Nor would there be any need for a war, because Ukrainians could live in peace as their own western nation while the separatist regions are absorbed into Russia- as they've already been. And at this point, the war is wrapping up and we're just left seeing whether the left can absorb the facts of reality and recognize what has happened
Member
Posts: 54,111
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
#47463
Feb 25 2025 09:22am
Quote (Goomshill @ 25 Feb 2025 14:27)
If Zelensky was just saying western ukraine should be a sovereign republic that holds the lands west of the dnipro and maybe some strip between it and the dpr/lpr/crimea, he wouldn't be laying claim to a hostile people who have been fighting a civil war against him. Nor would there be any need for a war, because Ukrainians could live in peace as their own western nation while the separatist regions are absorbed into Russia- as they've already been.


In this alternate reality in which the post-Maidan government in Kyiv quickly goes for an "amicable national divorce" and lets Russia absorb Crimea and the Donbas without fighting back - would Western Ukraine have been allowed to join NATO? Just asking for a friend. B)


On a side note: the separatist oblasts made up only around 20% of Ukraine's population; a majority of the country's population lived to the West of the Dnipro river (the natural divide if one wants to partition Ukraine). And Kharkiv (geographically in the east) isn't automatically switching to the Russian side either in such a scenario.
Member
Posts: 45,718
Joined: Aug 25 2008
Gold: 40,130.00
#47464
Feb 25 2025 09:27am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ 25 Feb 2025 23:22)
In this alternate reality in which the post-Maidan government in Kyiv quickly goes for an "amicable national divorce" and lets Russia absorb Crimea and the Donbas without fighting back - would Western Ukraine have been allowed to join NATO? Just asking for a friend. B)


On a side note: the separatist oblasts made up only around 20% of Ukraine's population; a majority of the country's population lived to the West of the Dnipro river (the natural divide if one wants to partition Ukraine). And Kharkiv (geographically in the east) isn't automatically switching to the Russian side either in such a scenario.


That's like asking , will USA leave China alone and allow the Chinese to take Taiwan if the Chinese give Xinjiang which have gas deposits, rare earths and Uranium for free to the United States and allow them to have a nice military base there.

The answer is Yes. USA will leave the Chinese alone and flip the bird to the Taiwanese.
Member
Posts: 54,111
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
#47465
Feb 25 2025 09:32am
Quote (Hamsterbaby @ 25 Feb 2025 16:27)
That's like asking , will USA leave China alone and allow the Chinese to take Taiwan if the Chinese give Xinjiang which have gas deposits, rare earths and Uranium for free to the United States and allow them to have a nice military base there.

The answer is Yes. USA will leave the Chinese alone and flip the bird to the Taiwanese.


I'm not trying to troll or willfully obtuse. The central talking point in this thread is that the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO was THE predominant casus belli which triggered Russia's full-scale invasion, so it is a glaring contradiction when Goom now claims that Kyiv's campaign against the separatist regions was the only reason there couldn't be peace all along.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Feb 25 2025 10:01am
Member
Posts: 19,309
Joined: Feb 24 2018
Gold: 9,765.50
#47466
Feb 25 2025 09:52am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Feb 25 2025 04:32pm)
I'm not trying to troll or be willfully obtuse. The central talking point in this thread is that the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO was THE predominant casus belli which triggered Russia's full-scale invasion, so it is a glaring contradiction when Goom now claims that Kyiv's campaign against the separatist regions was the only reason there couldn't be peace all along.

I'll be frank: look at the map. Eastern Ukraine looks like a dick thrusted into Russia's vagina. You can't defend a full scale attack from there. It isn't just NATO, but NATO troops in Ukraine which is geographically like in the heart of Russia.
Member
Posts: 54,111
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
#47467
Feb 25 2025 10:02am
Quote (babun1024 @ 25 Feb 2025 16:52)
I'll be frank: look at the map. Eastern Ukraine looks like a dick thrusted into Russia's vagina. You can't defend a full scale attack from there. It isn't just NATO, but NATO troops in Ukraine which is geographically like in the heart of Russia.


A full scale attack against a country with thousands of nukes, yeah, that sounds like a very realistic threat scenario.
Member
Posts: 28,875
Joined: Aug 11 2013
Gold: 10,712.00
#47468
Feb 25 2025 10:07am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Feb 25 2025 11:02am)
A full scale attack against a country with thousands of nukes, yeah, that sounds like a very realistic threat scenario.


Only full scale attack would evoke that type of response. The strategy with Russia was always small paper cuts to lead them to implode. i.e. CIA funding Chechen separatists. Have all these peripherals start challenging, which would never elicit a response such as a nuke. But you add enough of these conflicts together and it exhausts the bear, possibly leading to regime change. Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, many of these are just a long string of these. Even a place like Kazakhstan has become a tug of war with the west wanting to push out pro-Russian influence.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Feb 25 2025 10:10am
Member
Posts: 50,778
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,846.00
#47469
Feb 25 2025 10:27am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Feb 25 2025 09:22am)
In this alternate reality in which the post-Maidan government in Kyiv quickly goes for an "amicable national divorce" and lets Russia absorb Crimea and the Donbas without fighting back - would Western Ukraine have been allowed to join NATO? Just asking for a friend.


That was very much a sticking point in the negotiations in the leadup to the war wasn't it? First we had the Minsk Protocols, with Minsk II being an explicit response to NATO proposals to arm Ukraine. They were attempts, ineffective as they were, to avoid the issue of NATO encroachment. In the year leading up to the invasion, Russia was drafting treaty proposals for Ukraine that would including legally binding terms to not join NATO and to reduce existing NATO troops and material stationed there. And as late as Putin's last diplomatic overtures before the invasion, NATO presence and aspirations were at stake. Joe Biden rejected a plan that would keep Ukraine out of NATO in January 2022 just weeks prior to the invasion, but then pussy footed on it and switched to offering Ukraine being locked out of NATO as a condition for Russia to back away from an invasion after they had started massing troops on the border.

If Ukraine's NATO ambitions are the reason we couldn't have peace all along, its the same obstacle to overcome in peace negotiations today as it would have been in 2015 or 2021. They just have a whole lot more reality set in. Will they revisit plans like 'No NATO for 20 years', or seek binding permanent buffer zones? That's up to the negotiations now, as it would have been back then. And we had plenty of opportunity from 2015-2022 where Ukraine could have negotiated a peace by giving autonomy to the separatist regions or surrendering them entirely and accepted the same kind of 'security guarantees' that Russia is going to condition a peace deal on today. You know what the difference is? About a million dead and wounded
Member
Posts: 56,356
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 581,199.86
#47470
Feb 25 2025 10:56am
So we still have a few nutters talking about the "3 weeks". Here is a rebuke:

The claim that Russia 'failed' because it didn’t end the war in 3 weeks completely ignores what actually happened as a consequence of rejecting a negotiated peace. In March-April 2022, Russia and Ukraine held peace talks in Istanbul, with Ukraine reportedly willing to accept neutrality in exchange for stopping the war. But instead of taking the deal, the US and UK encouraged Ukraine to keep fighting, promising long-term Western support and predicting a Ukrainian victory.

Two years later, what’s the result?

Ukraine has lost 20% of its land, including key industrial and agricultural regions.
Over 500,000-1,000,000 Ukrainians are dead or wounded, a demographic catastrophe.
Millions have fled the country, many permanently.
Ukraine’s counteroffensive failed, and they are running out of manpower
The economy is destroyed, surviving only on Western aid and loans.
Western corporations (BlackRock, JPMorgan, Cargill, Monsanto) are buying up Ukraine’s resources and land.

So, instead of a negotiated settlement in 2022—where Ukraine would have remained a sovereign nation with far fewer losses—Ukraine is now a devastated country, heavily in debt, with no clear path to victory.

If Russia 'failed' in 3 weeks, then what do you call this outcome for Ukraine? A success?
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1474547464747474847495001Next
Closed New Topic New Poll

© 2003-2026 d2jsp  Contact