“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.

  • soulless@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I am a bit worried that you’re not arguing in good faith, since I struggle to see how anyone can believe that Ukraine was the one to break the various points agreed upon in Minsk II. In fact a major blockage has been Russia’s insistence that they’re not even a party, so how Ukraine could have somehow broken an agreement towards a country who by their own words aren’t a party demands some leaps in logic that I struggle to follow.

    Since I don’t see us agreeing on even basic facts, I’d just like to thank you for the discussion and leave it at that.

    • soulless@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s hard for me to discuss something when it seems like we can’t even agree on basic facts.

      Ukraine being the aggressor due to breaking the Minsk agreement is just so far from what I perceive as reality that I’m not even sure what kinds of mental gymnastics I would have to perform to even understand your basic assumptions.

      Did not Russia deny even being a party to the agreement, which in turn was a major blockage for its success? How can someone who by their own words are not even a party be wronged or have their hands forced into action? And if they’re a outside third party to the conflict, how is Russia interfering any different from say France interfering or even the US?

      I think we’re so far apart not only in what we see as facts, but also our reasons for engaging in discussion that I think I’ll just leave it at that. Thank you for the discussion, and have a pleasant evening.

        • soulless@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          A signitory yes, but not a party to the conflict. Russia denied being that, and under point 10 they denied having any forces inside Ukraine so could not be asked to withdraw.

          Schrödinger’s party if you will; not there for any responsibility, there to claim foul play when the other guys refuse to play along with your charade.

          At best you could argue that none of the parties adhered to the agreement, but regardless the full scale invasion of a neighbouring country, the rape and wanton murder perpetrated by the VDV/capitalist murder brigades under Prigozhin, the kidnapping and forced relocation of the Ukrainian children in occupied territories and let’s not forget threats of all out nuclear war is so far beyond any perceived slight under the Minsk agreement that any reference to it is just comical at this point.