Now, Russia has put out another peace deal based on the realities on the ground today. The west immediately rejected it again. Yet, it turns out that it’s Putin who is willing to kill millions instead of using basic diplomacy. Interesting logic you’ve got going there.
I guess we have to disagree then. To me making an offer you know does not stand a chance is not basic diplomacy. Threatening to murder the person you “want” to negotiate with is also not basic diplomacy IMHO.
But I guess I could try the Russian school of diplomacy the next time I want to ask for a raise. I’m not sure taking a shit in front of my boss’ office and loudly proclaim I will beat him until I get a 1000% raise will be a great way to start the negotiations, but you’ve actually convinced me to give it a try.
It’s pretty clear that Ukraine was close to taking the original offer before Bojo was rushed in to sabotage it. It’s also clear that the only reason war is continuing is because of the west.
The question you should ask yourself at the end of all this is what the west managed to achieve. Russia will win the war, Ukraine will be forced to accept far worse terms than are currently on the table. In that time many more people will die and have their lives ruined. I guess people like you think this a good outcome.
The war is continuing because Putin is continuing it. He could stop it tomorrow. He does not. Because he does not care how many million Russians or Ukrainians die. He simply does not care.
Anything else is just victim blaming and treating Ukrainians like little children who could not possibly have an opinion of their own.
Now that I think of it, is it maybe some kind of projection? Russians can’t go to the toilet without first being told by the glorious leader what he thinks about it, so clearly Ukrainians must be the same?
Overthrowing a democratically elected government in a country to install a fascist regime that sacrifices the country for western interests is definitely a good analogy for rape.
To the Ukrainians’ dismay, there was a crucial departure from what Ukrainian negotiators said was discussed in Istanbul. Russia inserted a clause saying that all guarantor states, including Russia, had to approve the response if Ukraine were attacked. In effect, Moscow could invade Ukraine again and then veto any military intervention on Ukraine’s behalf — a seemingly absurd condition that Kyiv quickly identified as a dealbreaker. Russia tried to secure a veto on Ukraine’s security guarantees by inserting a clause requiring unanimous consent.
With that change, a member of the Ukrainian negotiating team said, “we had no interest in continuing the talks.”
Maybe find an article that says that then. The one you linked says that yes, they were close to an agreement, but at the last minute Russia inserted a clause that was a dealbreaker
That is a very strange article. The headline is “How Boris Johnson Sabotaged Ukraine Russia Peace Deal In April” and the bulk of it is about how a former US National Security Council officer didn’t say that.
Frankly the NYT one seems a lot more convincing to me. That addition to the security guarantee clause is obviously completely unworkable.
Obviously things you want to hear seem more convincing to you. There are however statements from Ukrainian negotiators where they confirm the change of direction in negotiations after western interventions. I’ve done enough looking things up for you here, but feel free to look them up on your own.
Putin is using basic diplomacy, and has been trying to do that for 8 whole years before the war started. That’s what Minsk agreements were about. Then two months into the war Russia almost had a deal with Ukraine that the west tanked. Even NYT has publicly admitted to this https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/06/15/world/europe/ukraine-russia-ceasefire-deal.html
Now, Russia has put out another peace deal based on the realities on the ground today. The west immediately rejected it again. Yet, it turns out that it’s Putin who is willing to kill millions instead of using basic diplomacy. Interesting logic you’ve got going there.
I guess we have to disagree then. To me making an offer you know does not stand a chance is not basic diplomacy. Threatening to murder the person you “want” to negotiate with is also not basic diplomacy IMHO.
But I guess I could try the Russian school of diplomacy the next time I want to ask for a raise. I’m not sure taking a shit in front of my boss’ office and loudly proclaim I will beat him until I get a 1000% raise will be a great way to start the negotiations, but you’ve actually convinced me to give it a try.
It’s pretty clear that Ukraine was close to taking the original offer before Bojo was rushed in to sabotage it. It’s also clear that the only reason war is continuing is because of the west.
The question you should ask yourself at the end of all this is what the west managed to achieve. Russia will win the war, Ukraine will be forced to accept far worse terms than are currently on the table. In that time many more people will die and have their lives ruined. I guess people like you think this a good outcome.
The war is continuing because Putin is continuing it. He could stop it tomorrow. He does not. Because he does not care how many million Russians or Ukrainians die. He simply does not care.
Anything else is just victim blaming and treating Ukrainians like little children who could not possibly have an opinion of their own.
Now that I think of it, is it maybe some kind of projection? Russians can’t go to the toilet without first being told by the glorious leader what he thinks about it, so clearly Ukrainians must be the same?
You can keep repeating this as much as you like, but that won’t change reality.
Of course it does not change reality. Why would you even think that?
Do you often have the feeling that writing changes reality?
Putin chooses the death of millions of Russians and Ukrainians regardless of what you or I write.
Takes two to tango, but I guess this is too complex of a concept for you to wrap your head around.
Takes two to tango, but only one to rape.
Overthrowing a democratically elected government in a country to install a fascist regime that sacrifices the country for western interests is definitely a good analogy for rape.
What that link actually says:
Except Ukraine has already admitted that they were close to having a deal before Bojo visit. Then the stance changed to the quote you’re giving.
Maybe find an article that says that then. The one you linked says that yes, they were close to an agreement, but at the last minute Russia inserted a clause that was a dealbreaker
https://greatgameindia.com/ukraine-russia-peace-deal/
That is a very strange article. The headline is “How Boris Johnson Sabotaged Ukraine Russia Peace Deal In April” and the bulk of it is about how a former US National Security Council officer didn’t say that.
Frankly the NYT one seems a lot more convincing to me. That addition to the security guarantee clause is obviously completely unworkable.
Obviously things you want to hear seem more convincing to you. There are however statements from Ukrainian negotiators where they confirm the change of direction in negotiations after western interventions. I’ve done enough looking things up for you here, but feel free to look them up on your own.