I'm not from Ukraine so I feel I shouldn't say too much, but demanding disarmament feels so much dystopic as demanding to keep territory already lost in battle. I guess Ukraine would be better of with a permanent cease-fire instead of a peace agreement with all these kinds of concession.

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Honestly. It worked for the Korean war.

[–] TrojanRoomCoffeePot@lemmy.world 21 points 3 weeks ago

Good on them for standing their ground, the Polish wouldn't be asked to tolerate the annexation of Lubin or Rzeszow, nor would the Belarusians be asked to tolerate the loss of Brest, Pinsk, Luninets, Mazyr, Homiel, nor the Russians to lose Kursk, Belgorod or Rostov. The entirety of the Crimean Peninsula should be surrendered by the Russian Federation, under duress of force of arms if necessary - no one who steals, robs and kills will simply stop after being told without being over-mustered and made to do it. The complete return of seized territories and compensatory remuneration for destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure and loss of life should be the base demands before any peace treaty is accepted/signed.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

80% is not enough, let the war continue until Russia ceases to exist.

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world -4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

It's always... let's say interesting to see how eager people are to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Well last time Russia controlled Ukraine they carried out a genocide anyway so I'd say Putin is the one eager to fight to the last Ukranian.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Wasn't it a Georgian who ordered it?

[–] Aqarius@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I'm sure they're aware the Soviet Union is not the same thing as Russia, they must be thinking of Catherine II's dissolution of the Hetmanate, or the policy of de-Tatarisation of Crimea, or ah who am I kidding...

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Longterm it is the path to minimal suffering. As the US Revolutionaries put it "give us liberty or give us death."

[+] Aqarius@lemmy.world -6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Is it? Are you really unable to imagine a better longterm path than "keep the war going until the enemy is destroyed"?

Liberty is all fine and good, but it has to be "give me", not "give them". I dislike the idea of people getting killed for chickenhawk fantasies.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There is no alternative, really. Lots of Ukrainians will die under Russian rulership and live as second and third class citizens. That, and Ukrainians won't fight to the last Ukrainian because Russia has demonstrated it doesn't have the power to win this war, they're just throwing a finite supply of meat into a grinder.

[–] OvertonDoors@infosec.exchange 1 points 2 weeks ago

@Aqarius @finitebanjo
Nobody asked you what you like. Why? Because it's immaterial to the question of will Ukraine capitulate. It will not. Not for Trump, not for putin. Not for weapons or promises or treaties. You can't promise Putin his own people will not execute him, so the coward has no choice but to throw away a life for every acre of territory that cannot be kept.

Ruzzia is already a Chinese vassal state, so in a real sense it's already lost the war no matter what happens next.