U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says the United States and its allies should not support a cease-fire or peace talks to end the war in Ukraine until Kyiv gains strength and can negotiate on its own terms. Blinken said in Finland on Friday that heeding calls from Russia and others for negotiations now would result in a false “Potemkin peace” that wouldn’t secure Ukraine’s sovereignty and or enhance European security. He argued that a cease-fire allowing Russian President Vladimir Putin “to consolidate control over the territory he has seized, and rest, rearm, and re-attack" would not bring "a just and lasting peace.” Kyiv has given confusing signals about whether a counteroffensive is coming or already underway.
“We believe the prerequisite for meaningful diplomacy and real peace is a stronger Ukraine, capable of deterring and defending against any future aggression,” Blinken said in a speech in Finland, which recently became NATO’s newest member and shares a long border with Russia.
Agreed. This situation is far more complicated than the western mainstream media wants to convince people it is. This wasn’t a conflict that was born at the outset of war. There’s a reason why there’s ‘zero’ mention of things like the Minsk Accords or any considerations given to Eurasian security arrangements. Here’s an excellent primer on the background involved. I’m not at all trying to say what Russia did was justified, but they’ve got far more of a moral plateau to stand on than the US does.
Dude, do you honestly think Putin is trying to militarily annihilate Ukraine? Especially when he considers Russians and Ukrainians to share the same cultural lineage and history. He made numerous overtures to try and ‘avoid’ a conflict from breaking out. Why was the west so adamantly against laying the framework for a security arrangement that made sense for all the parties involved?
He made numerous overtures to try and ‘avoid’ a conflict from breaking out.
Putin: “If you allow this country to have protection from me invading it, I’m going to invade it.”
U.S.: “Yeah… we’re going to consider allowing them protection from you.”
Putin: “Oh no… somebody stop me from invading this other country…! Here I go, I’m gonna invaaaade…”
U.S.: “Okay.” [Putin invades Ukraine, begins murdering Ukrainians]
U.S., months later: “Alright that’s enough, we’re going to help these Ukranians to keep you from murdering them.”
Putin and his sheep: “tHe U.S. iS wArMoNgErInG!!!1!!”
Non-binding treaties negotiated under duress that all fell apart the moment the ink was put to paper, through which Russia tried to control Ukrainian internal affairs?
I honestly don’t give a shit. Russia is the aggressor who invaded and massacred untold Ukrainians along the way. They now should be opposed and driven back until they come to their senses and leave, or are beaten into the dust so that they can no longer pose a threat.
If you want to debate the entire history of the region, take it to someone who does give a shit.
Quick question, how can Russia be the agressor, when they were not the party to break the previous treaty? How could Russia be the agressor when they only entered after their allies, the LPR and DPR, newly formed after a vote of the people due to the violation of the aformentioned Minsk Accords, asked for help from their ally. Russia never took the first step, and its quite hard to be the agressor when, you where not the one agressing
As a belgian and therefore european, I disagree. US is making war by proxy here and WE are paying the price.
I am not for war but I have nothing to justify an irreducible support to Ukraine and interference with Russia.
NOPE
Agreed. This situation is far more complicated than the western mainstream media wants to convince people it is. This wasn’t a conflict that was born at the outset of war. There’s a reason why there’s ‘zero’ mention of things like the Minsk Accords or any considerations given to Eurasian security arrangements. Here’s an excellent primer on the background involved. I’m not at all trying to say what Russia did was justified, but they’ve got far more of a moral plateau to stand on than the US does.
Then you are morally okay with Ukraine being wiped off the map and the murder of as many of its citizen as Putin’s army can manage.
Dude, do you honestly think Putin is trying to militarily annihilate Ukraine? Especially when he considers Russians and Ukrainians to share the same cultural lineage and history. He made numerous overtures to try and ‘avoid’ a conflict from breaking out. Why was the west so adamantly against laying the framework for a security arrangement that made sense for all the parties involved?
Putin: “If you allow this country to have protection from me invading it, I’m going to invade it.”
U.S.: “Yeah… we’re going to consider allowing them protection from you.”
Putin: “Oh no… somebody stop me from invading this other country…! Here I go, I’m gonna invaaaade…”
U.S.: “Okay.”
[Putin invades Ukraine, begins murdering Ukrainians]
U.S., months later: “Alright that’s enough, we’re going to help these Ukranians to keep you from murdering them.”
Putin and his sheep: “tHe U.S. iS wArMoNgErInG!!!1!!”
What do you think the Minsk Accords were?
Non-binding treaties negotiated under duress that all fell apart the moment the ink was put to paper, through which Russia tried to control Ukrainian internal affairs?
Further acquiescence to a terrorist country’s demands?
Is that what we arw calling a peace treaty Ukraine violated that garanteed the righta of the Russian speaking minority of Ukrainians in donbas?
I honestly don’t give a shit. Russia is the aggressor who invaded and massacred untold Ukrainians along the way. They now should be opposed and driven back until they come to their senses and leave, or are beaten into the dust so that they can no longer pose a threat.
If you want to debate the entire history of the region, take it to someone who does give a shit.
“I have strong opinions about something I don’t know shit about!”
Quick question, how can Russia be the agressor, when they were not the party to break the previous treaty? How could Russia be the agressor when they only entered after their allies, the LPR and DPR, newly formed after a vote of the people due to the violation of the aformentioned Minsk Accords, asked for help from their ally. Russia never took the first step, and its quite hard to be the agressor when, you where not the one agressing