- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Monday that Ukraine would have to make concessions over land that Russia had taken since 2014 as part of any agreement to end the war.
Mr. Rubio spoke as he was flying to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, for talks with senior Ukrainian officials, and 10 days after a contentious White House meeting between President Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky. The Trump administration halted military aid to Ukraine after the blowup, which centered on Mr. Trump’s refusal to include any security guarantees in a proposed deal involving Ukraine’s natural resources.
You must log in or register to comment.
Rubio is a Russian asset
lmao so the US coup’ed the USSR in the 90ies by sponsoring fascists, but somehow the US becoming fascist is because of russia?
The mental gymnastic of the jingoists I swear
So basically they (putin and trump) want more than 2022 borders. And let me guess, they also want sanctions eased and elections to install a pro-putin government? Ukraine should not make any deals with the US. The US admin is the enemy within and the enemy of democracy.
The ceasefire is just a step to get to the sanctions and elections demands. And once they have a “reason” to force those things then russia is set to continue their forever-war.The only territory that Ukraine has to cede is Kursk
They I think almost kicked out of there.
Who?
No, it must not. If someone breaks into your house, is he allowed to keep the loot?
De facto yes, but not in law they don’t - no
We don’t negotiate with terrorists my ass
Imagine a hypothetical scenario in which Mexico invades the United States, takes complete control over the state of New Mexico, and right in the middle of the conflict Great Britain says “the war needs to end”, drafts a ceasefire proposal that allows them take control of half of the country’s natural resources, and offers no security guarantees in the event that Mexico decides to attack again. If you refuse, the British will stop sending military aid to help you continue fighting. Oh, and Mexico gets to keep New Mexico.
Who in their right fucking mind thinks that this is a good deal? Any sensible person would rather continue fighting than give up their advantage for some flimsy ceasefire that won’t stand up to an invader hellbent on conquest.
Mexico would have all the right to take back “New mexico” you hypocritical idiot. The US stole it in the first place?
I’m sure if you go far enough back in time you could say that anyone in control of any particular swathe of land stole it from somebody else. Past wrongs committed are not a valid casus belli for modern wars of aggression or land grabs.
Regardless, your contrarianism doesn’t change the fact that Mexico surrendered that territory to us after the Mexican-American war. Legally, it belongs to the United States after the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which redrew the border based on the path of the Rio Grande.
That’s not a good example, the US does not rely on the UK to defend itself.
And that’s after Mexico violated a non-aggression pact and conquered Arizona.
His mom must cede territory in any piece deal
I don’t see any peace deal unless there is security guarantees, it is not peace without guarantees.
This just embolden russia to rape Ukraine again for more lands. Marco Rubio is promoting a forever war.
Why do you put stock in security guarantees now?
Ukraine had security “guarantees” when Russia invaded because they gave up their nukes that Western nation have not followed through on.
Memorandum was not really a guarantee. NATO is more of a guarantee, nukes are more of a guarantee. Guarantee means NATO and/or Nukes.
NATO membership is off the table, virtually no NATO country wants Ukraine to join.
Almost all of the NATO countries want Ukraine to join except for Russia’s lapdogs, ergo: Hungary, Slovakia, and the US.
Not really, even France & Germany are not so keen on Ukraine joining NATO now.
Now you’re just parroting talking points from the Kreml.
NATO is not a guarantee anymore. Trump openly said that if specific European NATO countries will get attacked by Russia then there will be no response.
Yes, the ones who don’t meet the defense spending targets.
NATO is more than the US
NATO is pretty much dead now.
Dang. Anything for you guys to believe “this time!” will work.
I miss the good old ‘we don’t negotiate with terrorists’ US.
If someone breaks into your house, kicks your dog and rapes your wife, you don’t negotiate to let them keep your TV. You shoot that fucker between the eyes. That’s what we need to be doing.
‘we don’t negotiate with terrorists’ US.
That US never existed.
id probably just try to suck their dick or something
Thanks nutsack
don’t rob my house I’m serious
I miss the good old ‘we don’t negotiate with terrorists’ US.
Pretty sure that was only a thing in movies.
We negotiate with terrorists all the time.
Negotiate? You mean “hire, radicalize and elect president”
US literally funds terrorists, gives them weapons, and gives them CIA training to do terrorism. It’s like all these terrorist leaders went to the same school, of Americas.
Without security guarantees, this isn’t a “peace” deal, it’s a capitulation and an invitation for future aggression from Russia.
What about the security “guarantees” Ukraine already had?
I guess it’s only a guarantee if it’s guaranteed at least twice? Lol.
What guarantees are those? And why are you putting them between the quote marks?
I hope Ukraine doesn’t cede anything at all.
That’s not realistic unfortunately
I think it’s more likely that Ukraine forfeits USA support and it’s probably for the best at this point. I hope CANZUK and Europe are willing and able to step up to pick up the slack.
Cede 1 acre of swampland between Crimea and the mainland, somewhere in the middle of it.
Why would Ukraine be negotiating with another adversary? That’s like a boxer going to the wrong corner after the round, that guy also wants you to get your ass kicked.
Because they’re losing and a part of losing in a war is making concessions to the winner.
If Ukraine didn’t make concessions for a peace deal, Russia will just continue winning the war and Ukrainians will have even less.
Sorry to all the new people in this world that fell for the propaganda machine. Hopefully this can be a learning experience for you all (it won’t.)
You don’t get it though, Russia bad. Therefore, throwing your male population through forced conscription into the meat grinder with no expectation of winning is based and cool and patriotic.
Which is what Russia is doing.
Because they’re losing and a part of losing in a war is making concessions to the winner.
I’ve been hearing the line that Ukraine is losing for three years now. Pretty sure if Russia could win this conflict, they would have done so already.
I’ve been hearing the line that Ukraine is losing for three years now
And how have the frontlines moved over said 3 years?
With Ukraine failing to take back their occupied territory, but striking at Russian soil and taking some for themselves to use as a bargaining chip. I’d say it’s a dead stalemate right now,
I’d say it’s a dead stalemate right now
Well then you’ve bought into the western propaganda. Don’t be surprised in some months when a very unfavourable peace agreement is signed.
When did they lose the war though?
Just look at Kursk, Velyka Novosilka and Chasiv Yar and ponder for a bit if they are winning or losing.
How much of their territory is under occupation vs. a month ago? By your logic, the USSR should have capitulated in 1942.
This war has so far been a series of quick UA gains slowly recaptured by Russia before more quick UA gains. Russia has held more of UA before. What changed since the siege of Kyiv that makes it make sense to capitulate? That was a worse situation, yet here we are, years later and Kyiv is still Ukrainian, and the VDV has still not recovered.
