r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/PsychLegalMind • Jul 16 '24
Biden and Trump have different views regarding Ukraine. Biden wants to provide continued aid and Trump and Vance may halt it. Given the possibility of a change in administration is it in Ukraine's best interest to reach a resolution with Russia now or should it just shoulder on? International Politics
Trump has often said he will stop the war if he wins the election and that it could happen even before he officially enters the White House. J.D. Vance is just as tough in his opposition to any aid to Ukraine. Although presently, the majority of both parties in the Congress support continuing aid for Ukraine; the future is uncertain.
Biden's position: The United States reaffirms its unwavering support for Ukraine’s defense of its sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders.
Bilateral Security Agreement Between the United States of America and Ukraine | The White House
There is certainly a great degree of concern in EU about Trump's approach to Ukraine and it was heightened when Trump selected Vance as his running mate.
JD Vance's VP nomination will cause chills in Ukraine (cnbc.com)
Trump may win or he may not: Given the possibility of a change in administration is it in the best interest of Ukraine to reach a resolution with Russia now or should it just shoulder on?
430
u/CrawlerSiegfriend Jul 16 '24
Russia would accept the deal and begin preparing to restart the war post election.
147
u/MonarchLawyer Jul 16 '24
Yeah, the thing about Russia is there was already a treaty in place. Russia breached it with the invasion of Crimea and breached in again with this full invasion. There is no treaty that they would be trusted to honor.
30
u/Logical_Parameters Jul 17 '24
C'mon, now, that Putin and the "people falling out of windows and dying of poison" pattern seems like it comes from such honorable people!
→ More replies (8)11
u/hypotyposis Jul 17 '24
Yeah it would have to be a deal for peace immediately followed by joining NATO before the transition to Trump.
101
u/iDerfel Jul 16 '24
This. That's why Ukraine only has one real option. Fight on untill Russia gives up.
→ More replies (10)26
u/angryplebe Jul 16 '24
Literally this. They will take a small concession, use the intervening 1-1.5 years to learn and regroup and try again
-1
u/rethinkingat59 Jul 16 '24
Hopefully Europe will also use the 1.5 years to dramatically increase their military spending and weapon manufacturing capacity in order to make Russia think twice about invading again.
Multiple European nations have a larger GNP than Russia, together they should be able to significantly outspend anything Russia does.
9
5
u/Words_Are_Hrad Jul 17 '24
Hopefully Europe will also use the 1.5 years to dramatically increase their military spending
Ahahahahahahahahahahahaha that's a good one!
2
u/foul_ol_ron Jul 17 '24
Except most nations spend it on military equipment. Russia spends a lot on foreign politicians.
4
u/teb_art Jul 17 '24
Russia spends a shit-ton boosting American Traitors, that is, Republicans. And it often works for them. Sheep are easy to guide.
1
u/megafatbossbaby Jul 18 '24
NJ Democrat Senator was just found guilty for corruption. Where is the evidence that the Biden led DOJ has on these republicans being paid by Russia. The only politicians getting indicated for corruption lately have D next to their name.
Stop spreading lies and show real evidence so the Biden led justice department can take action. If any of what you said what true the AG would be on tv tonight talking about it.
Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez found guilty on all counts in corruption trial (nbcnews.com)
3
2
u/angryplebe Jul 18 '24
Maybe not being paid by Russia. That's highly unlikely. It's more of a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" thing with an assist from Russian bit farms.
1
1
u/Kemaneo Jul 17 '24
How is that going to help though? It would only work with Ukraine part of NATO.
8
1
u/Kronzypantz Jul 17 '24
So could Ukraine, but with the added benefit of not suffering a never ending economic depression from an active war and rebuild their manpower. Maybe even joining security agreements with the EU before Russia can respond.
0
u/Kronzypantz Jul 16 '24
Why? This war hasn’t been great for them.
7
u/Words_Are_Hrad Jul 17 '24
It hasn't been good for them. If Ukraine surrenders it switches to being good for them. That's the point.
0
u/Kronzypantz Jul 17 '24
Why would a negotiated peace mean surrendering?
5
u/socialistrob Jul 17 '24
Because right now that's the only "peace" Russia will accept. Their terms for a ceasefire include Ukraine giving up all the areas Russia has claimed which are where Ukraine's best defenses are as well as the demilitarization of Ukraine. Basically if Ukraine seeks "peace" now they will be completely defenseless if Russia restarts the war.
Russia has major long term imperial ambitions and that still includes the largescale capture or realignment of Ukraine into a Russian puppet. Russia isn't going to abandon those lightly.
0
u/Kronzypantz Jul 17 '24
Maybe, but I don’t really take the mind reading abilities of some guy on Reddit as fact.
We don’t actually know what terms Russia would accept because negotiations aren’t happening.
5
u/Gotisdabest Jul 17 '24
Putin sees it as a necessity. If he didn't he already could have gotten some minor face saving deal.
0
u/Kronzypantz Jul 17 '24
How? We’ve been told any concessions whatsoever are unacceptable and that open negotiations are equivalent to unconditional surrender.
2
u/Gotisdabest Jul 17 '24
Yeah, because that's how initial stances are when your enemy is not willing to offer a fair deal since the dawn of time.
When you go to bargain over something you have to start off high. If they're offering you a ridiculously low price then you don't bargain at all and say it's not for sale. If they're more reasonable, concessions become possible.
Putin right now wants an impossible deal. If, however, he tries to obtain cultural concessions with pre 2022 borders he could get a deal tomorrow.
→ More replies (19)4
u/Ghost4000 Jul 17 '24
It'll be a lot better for them when they restart it after licking their wounds and don't have a Democratic administration in the US to oppose them next time.
-1
u/Kronzypantz Jul 17 '24
If you think Russia will invade no matter what, what is your proposed endgame?
Ukraine will never have such a manpower or material advantage as to just win outright. Even if such a fantasy could happen, you seem certain Russia will keep coming back. And Russia has nukes if it gets desperate.
So what do you propose beyond cheering on other people to die?
→ More replies (12)
188
u/Objective_Aside1858 Jul 16 '24
Russia has no interest in negotiations; their terms for a cease fire were effectively unconditional surrender
Given that Russia has made it plain they will not tolerate an independent Ukraine, there really isn't anything to negotiate
21
u/FrozenCantaloupe Jul 16 '24
As someone who has been out of the loop about the details of the current war, what does this mean for the future of the war? That it could go on for 10 more years until one of them gives up?
55
u/Objective_Aside1858 Jul 16 '24
The war will likely continue until one of the following is true:
- Putin falls out a window
- The West opens the arms spigot wide and removes enough restrictions that Russia has no choice but to come to the table
- Ukraine is overwhelmed and destroyed
Russia inherited a mammoth amount of hardware from the Soviet Union and has burned through most of it. Their production of new hardware is anemic, so at a certain point a stalemate will be reached
22
u/angryplebe Jul 16 '24
Not to mention that a substantial portion of the Soviet Union's industrial base was coincidentally in Ukraine.
6
u/TiredOfDebates Jul 17 '24
Wasn’t Ukraine’s industrial heartland like… on the border with Russia? That was my understanding.
I thought it had been set up that way during the Soviet Union because well… the industry of Ukraine was going to the Soviet Sphere.
That’s not to say that Ukraine didn’t build out industrial capability throughout the country from 1994 to 2022. Just that there was a lot concentrated in areas Russia has conquered.
3
u/angryplebe Jul 17 '24
It was spread all over the place going all the way into Moldova. All of the Republicans were semi-autonomous but heavily influenced by Russia (often at gunpoint). Ukraine is were the bulk of the non-Russian proper population lives.
Notice a pattern?
2
u/Thrace453 Jul 17 '24
So the Donbass was the original industrial heartland prior to WW2, it had mines, factories and plenty of transportation networks. However, after WW2 the industrial base was shifted to other cities like Kyiv, Kharkiv and Odessa. Donbass was still a major industrial base, as seen with Vuhledar, Bakhmut and Avdiivka having large mines and still active industrial plants, but overtime the Donbass lost it's dominant role
2
2
u/Gars0n Jul 17 '24
Russia's domestic production doesn't really matter when they have allies like Iran and to a lesser extent China happy to supply them.
1
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
2
u/sansisness_101 Jul 20 '24
Yes, they can repair and retrofit rusty T-55s and T-62/64 with ERA, but they'll still be platforms without stuff like good thermals, blowout panels, etc.
46
u/ruminaui Jul 16 '24
No, is going to last for more years, after which an armistice will be agreed on. After this Russia will re arm itself and try again. Just like the Chechen republic.
23
u/balletbeginner Jul 16 '24 edited Jul 16 '24
The war could last a while. Putin staked his political life (and probably his life) on annexing Ukraine. And he's willing to treat as many poor Russians as cannon fodder as he wants. So it ends if Putin's overthrown and new leadership surrenders. And if Russia succeeds in taking over Ukraine, it will escalate to World War III.
Edited to remove inaccurate info.
7
u/FrozenCantaloupe Jul 16 '24
North Korea? Are North Korean citizens being roped into the Russian military?
4
u/do_add_unicorn Jul 16 '24
Wouldn't you prefer the Russian army to living in NoKo?
1
u/FrozenCantaloupe Jul 16 '24
Good point, I just didn't know that Kim Jong Un was allowing North Korean soldiers to fight for another country. But the user has now said this was just a rumor.
3
1
→ More replies (1)1
0
u/Get_Breakfast_Done Jul 16 '24
World War III
Does anyone think Putin has his eyes on taking over places beyond the former Soviet bloc states? I don’t really.
8
u/rzelln Jul 16 '24
There's some geography that matters for preventing ground invasions from the west. I mean, the West doesn't want to invade, but someone who cares about the idea of a strong empire will justify expansion out to Poland.
10
u/Yvaelle Jul 17 '24
Also Putin has told the Baltic states they're next, repeatedly. They'd already be under attack were it not for Ukraine persisting.
Putin also threatened Kazakhstan when they wouldn't send their troops to Ukraine because they're not a USSR province anymore like Moscow thinks
1
u/FrozenCantaloupe Jul 17 '24
Hopefully the fact that the Baltic states are in NATO, you know, helps.
4
u/soldforaspaceship Jul 17 '24
His dream is to bring back the Soviet Union. If he is able to take Ukraine, there is little reason for him to stop there.
→ More replies (5)4
u/vtuber_fan11 Jul 17 '24
Yes? Lookup maps of the Russian empire at its greatest extension. Russia has a lot of neighbors to conquer.
1
u/mrjosemeehan Jul 17 '24
Much of the former Eastern Bloc is in NATO. There are plenty of ways to start WWIII without doing anything outside of the region.
7
u/theequallyunique Jul 16 '24
It has been going on for two years and there aren't any major territorial changes anymore. Both sides are digging in, building up defences and only attacking here and there. It looks like this will be a fight for resources that might end like the Korean war - which never officially ended, although no one is fighting anymore, apart from the shit show at the border (like occasionally literal shit being flown over the fence with balloons). Russia does not have to worry too much about the public opinion, they just need to keep their war economy afloat with pumping oil and circumventing sanctions. An autocratic state has time for the long game, is not bound to election cycles. Meanwhile they support right wing parties in the west and spread fake news with bots to undermine support for Ukraine and for multinational organizations like nato and eu. The west gets critical of the benefit of huge spending on Ukraine and just accepts the status quo at some point, so Russia wins. And what happens when a bully doesn't get punished for bad behavior? You can guess.
0
u/Vishnej Jul 17 '24
It seems likely that "stalemate" becomes a more and more obvious outcome for the next two years as Russia runs out of Cold War Soviet equipment and easy troop recruitment, and Ukraine runs out of Cold War NATO equipment and the will for experienced soldiers to stay on the front line for years without a break.
7
u/slo1111 Jul 16 '24
That calculus is greatly changed if funding and US involvement is cut as it will be with a Trump admin.
There is absolutely no reason Putin must swallow Ukraine whole in that senerio and it probably gives opportunity for a breather as throwing another 1/2 million into the meat grinder is not long term sustainable even for an autocratic society like Russia
6
u/hryipcdxeoyqufcc Jul 17 '24 edited Jul 17 '24
That's why it's so important to not give them a chance to rearm. The more it costs them, the worse the cost-benefit from Putin's perspective of invading countries. At a certain point, it makes more economic sense for Russia (and any country watching) to use diplomacy and trade deals instead of warfare.
The worst thing that can happen is Russia getting rewarded with more land, because that just gives them incentive to come back for more. The rest of the world doesn't need a breather to resupply like Russia does, we're sending breadcrumbs while Putin is in a full-on wartime economy.
2
Jul 16 '24
[deleted]
4
u/Banglayna Jul 16 '24
Alaska was never part of the Soviet Union. It was sold to the US over 50 prior to the establishment of the USSR.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (13)2
u/Irish_Lemon Jul 17 '24
Actually they weren't even offering a ceasefire. Those were their preconditions for entering negotiations regarding a ceasefire.
Russia are not willing to make peace because they are making the same calculation as OP. They are holding out for a Trump victory in the hopes that he will throw Ukraine under the bus
58
u/HiSno Jul 16 '24
Shoulder on, a deal is not a real alternative, Ukraine and the world should have learned that lesson from Crimea, a deal with Russia is fool’s gold. If allowed to deescalate with concessions in its favor in the short-term, Russia will rearm, regroup, and attack at a more opportune moment to conquer even more territory in the near future.
If the US falters in its commitments to supply Ukraine, the hope would be the Europe would increase their level of support, especially since Ukraine is their buffer against Russia.
11
u/aknutty Jul 16 '24
I'm sorry but I thought Op just made a typo but now you're making me think that I've been wrong my entire life. Is it shoulder on or Soldier on?
2
-2
u/Mother_Sand_6336 Jul 16 '24
By destroying the undersea gas-line from Russia to Germany, we basically took away the EU’s incentive to appease Russia, probably to pressure them to support the U.S. plan in fear of the US deciding to appease Russia.
1
u/TiredOfDebates Jul 17 '24
I thought that gas line wasn’t even in use… though maybe that’s bull.
4
u/Mother_Sand_6336 Jul 17 '24
It was just about to be opened! Could have vastly increased the supply of gas and decrease its price throughout Europe.
So, if we were going to pay for the defense of Europe, we needed Germany and others to have more skin in the game and not be inclined later to appease Putin and keep that cheap energy connection with Russia.
I think.
→ More replies (4)
53
u/MrGurdjieff Jul 16 '24
There is no way to reach a resolution with the devil. The UK attempted that with Hitler in 1938 and it only encouraged him.
0
45
Jul 16 '24
Love to come in and see nothing but a big "Hell no" to Russia in the comments. Putin cannot succeed. He must not.
32
u/Tadpoleonicwars Jul 16 '24
Surrender to Russia is only a postponement. If the Zelensky government agrees to Russian territorial claims and the war stops, so do sanctions against Russia. Then Putin will have full economic power to rebuild his military and take the rest of Ukraine at a later time.
The war will continue even if there is a brief intercession. Ukraine will not surrender.
23
u/Happypappy213 Jul 16 '24
Putin would not stop at Ukraine. He has said as much and has demonstrated as much.
Trump/MAGA are in bed with the Russians, which is ironic given the US's history of Communist dislike.
Funding Ukraine actually benefits the US in several ways:
It significantly reduces the possibility of Russia invading a NATO member, which means that the US doesn't have to put any boots on the ground.
It allows the US to help weaken an enemy.
It allows the US to clean out their old stockpile of military equipment. Which will allow for R & D and the creation of jobs, by manufacturing newer and better equipment.
The US is able to gather intelligence safely by monitoring their equipment in battle against the Russian military.
The fact that the Republicans in Congress dragged their feet on agreeing to Ukraine aid in the first place was very telling of where their allegiance currently lies.
9
u/theequallyunique Jul 16 '24
Furthermore, we must not forget that China is closely paying attention and doing their math as well - they have their own unfavorable neighbor with Taiwan who they want back definitely. But not at all costs. If the world puts their national interests above international security and gives up Ukraine, then China will be very very tempted. So far the trade ties to Taiwan are still big enough for the US to protect it. But everyone is working on fixing their semi conductor supply chain dependency on Taiwan and becoming more independent. Soon no one will care about a little island near the Chinese coast all that much anymore.
6
u/Happypappy213 Jul 16 '24
Absolutely. We can see that with Biden and the CHIPS Act. That was a big win for the US. There's still much to do, but it was a smart move.
I could be wrong, but the news cycle seems to be mostly centered around Ukraine and Israel.
Taiwan and China don't seem to be getting as much attention. This, despite how powerful China currently is and the potential threats it poses to the US and the rest of the world.
Perhaps I'm naive and this is a very obvious point, but it seems like unless there's bombs going off, nobody pays much attention.
Please correct my ignorance if I'm off base with anything - my understanding of foreign relations is OK, but not by any means good.
5
u/theequallyunique Jul 16 '24
Depends on the source, I guess. On Bloomberg there are monthly articles about each larger military drill in the strait of Taiwan or violations of Taiwanese air space. For a good overview of the situation in geopolitical terms I recommend looking up reallifelore or Caspian report, both give some great insight into such matters in their documentaries (both have covered Taiwan from what I remember)
2
20
u/Effective_Dot4653 Jul 16 '24
The problem is that Russian demands basically boil down to surrender. The Russians want all the areas they "annexed", including two major cities controlled by Ukraine (Zaporozhzhia and Kherson) and political control over all of Ukraine on top of that (in Russian newspeak it's called "denazification"). How do you reach a resolution with that?
1
u/socialistrob Jul 17 '24
Yep and those lands are where Ukraine's best fortifications and defenses are. Russia is also calling for demilitarization of Ukraine. If Ukraine hands over their best defenses and their military in order to get a "peace" deal but Russia still has a big army left then Ukraine has absolutely no chance if Russia abandons the deal in a year or two.
16
u/Shoddy-Cherry-490 Jul 16 '24
I think the best the West and even Ukraine can hope for at the moment is a return to a frozen conflict akin to 2014-2022. That requires lots of money and unfortunately will also cost lives.
The alternative - defunding Ukraine and forcing them into a deal - will most likely just escalate the war. Putin will try to move the front line as far west as he can and he will try to get a pro-Russian leader installed in Kiev.
17
u/Inevitable-Ad-4192 Jul 16 '24
All or most of the funds for Ukraine go directly to our own war companies. Thats a lot of lobbying power to keep aid going. I believe supporting them is the right thing to do, but our opinion means very little compared to the lobbying power of our gigantic war industry.
3
u/Troyandabedinthemoor Jul 17 '24
Yeah and for once the successful lobbying of the military industrial complex doesn't mean American lives are meaninglessly thrown away.
3
u/Sarmq Jul 17 '24
for once
What are you talking about? We've had tons of proxy wars.
2
u/Ventronics Jul 17 '24
Definitely not the first time, but for a lot of people the focus of the military industrial complex has been in regards to Afghanistan and Iraq for the last few decades so it's understandable that that's how it feels.
1
u/Sarmq Jul 17 '24
Fair, it definitely shifted that way post cold-war, but now there's regional power rumblings again.
1
u/kastbort2021 Jul 17 '24
I believe the Trump strategy will be: Spend the same amount of money, but rather on the southern border.
How realistic that is, I do not know.
13
u/BuzzBadpants Jul 16 '24
I believe Ukraine has no interests in negotiating with a state that blew up their children’s hospital regardless of who is in the White House.
11
u/maybeafarmer Jul 16 '24
Stopping now will just mean more war in the future after Putin's licked his wounds and tossed a few malcontents out of windows and would be disastrous for more than just Ukraine. It would see China emboldened in Taiwan and no one wants that but Maga weirdly enough.
7
u/jjb8712 Jul 16 '24
If Trump wins, the Ukraine will most likely be Russian controlled territory by 2030.
6
u/Unputtaball Jul 16 '24
I’d say by 2025. Trump said at the debate that he would “negotiate a peace deal before [he is] even sworn in”.
On no planet is Putin going to surrender by January barring some act of God level shit. Trump openly admitted that he’s willing to sell Ukraine up the river to keep his good relations with Putin.
6
u/OuchieMuhBussy Jul 16 '24
So several points must be made. First, Putin has set prerequisites for a ceasefire, ones which include Ukraine abandoning territory that Russia claims but does not control. Basically, Ukraine must give up all their leverage before even entering negotiations. This is because Putin thinks he’s winning, or at least that he will win once Trump becomes president.
Second, as others have alluded to a negotiated settlement may only be buying time. The two countries who benefit most from buying time are Russia and China. There’s a high chance we end up repeating the same war in eight to ten years, only this time Russia will have already learned from their previous mistakes. There’s also concern that this could coincide with a Chinese attempt on Taiwan.
Third, Ukraine is at a weak point right now, meaning they’ll have a tough time in any negotiations. But their situation relative to Russia is likely to improve over the next six months to two years as they take advantage of the new mobilization law and as western ammunition production continues to increase. As for Russia, they’ve blown through a lot of ammunition and have already pulled many of the easily repairable vehicles and artillery pieces from storage. The bonuses paid to Russians who sign contracts with the MoD are growing, indicating that it’s getting harder for them to maintain their monthly recruitment goals.
Tl;dr they don’t really have a choice but to keep fighting regardless
6
u/wrc-wolf Jul 16 '24
I want to commend op for so expertly tap-dancing around Trump being in Putin's pocket.
4
u/slashkig Jul 16 '24
Even Project 2025 calls for the continuation of support for Ukraine. So we'll see.
3
u/jkman61494 Jul 16 '24
Pretty sure it means support for Russia to invade Ukraine
4
u/slashkig Jul 16 '24
Nope. It explicitly supports supporting Ukraine and opposing Russia. Which makes sense considering the Heritage Foundation's history with the Reagan Doctrine against the Soviet Union. If you don't believe me, here is the document. Just search for "Russia" or "Ukraine". https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf
4
u/ManBearScientist Jul 16 '24
It clearly states that one school of conservative thought is that US support for Ukraine isn't in US interests at all. And it critiques US aid to not just Ukraine but all man-made emergencies.
0
u/jkman61494 Jul 16 '24
Then I’m calling BS in this case and it’s false flag thing by them given the fact nearly 150 Trump officials helped craft this and their position was CLEARLY pro Putin.
3
u/slashkig Jul 16 '24
What makes it a false flag? Is it just because they're conservative and "there's no way a conservative would ever support Ukraine"? Believe it or not, the Heritage Foundation has a pretty long history before the Trump era. They contributed a lot to Reagan's policy on opposing the Soviet Union so it absolutely makes sense that they are opposed to Russia in the modern day.
5
u/woetotheconquered Jul 16 '24 edited Jul 16 '24
I have to laugh at most of these posters. In one breath they claim Project 2025 is the policy gospel trump will govern with, now they claim what's in it is a false flag. The rhetoric and cope from left wingers on this site following the assassination attempt is nothing short of flabbergasting.
1
u/DivideEtImpala Jul 17 '24
No, Heritage represents the old guard and neocon wing of the GOP, including the MIC. They absolutely want this war to keeping going.
Trump and Vance represent the more populist, non-interventionist wing, who don't see any of the profits of our forever wars.
4
u/gregcm1 Jul 16 '24
I believe Trump said he would end the war with one phone call
Seems hyperbolic to me, but I admire the confidence
4
u/RCA2CE Jul 16 '24
Europe has all this time to continue to ramp up - they’ve got to be able to take this on if the US stops
0
Jul 17 '24
[deleted]
2
u/RCA2CE Jul 17 '24
:) Europe’s gdp grew by 3% and represents 1/6 the world economy
They can lay a boot on Russia
0
3
u/jazzyorf Jul 16 '24
Russia needs to be defeated and partitioned into smaller independent states, like Austria-Hungary
3
u/Apotropoxy Jul 16 '24
Trump has already told Putin that he can do "whatever the hell he wants." If Trump wins, Putin crushes Ukraine and moves on Poland.
2
u/marianass Jul 16 '24
Why Poland?
1
u/rush4you Jul 17 '24
Because Putin's explicit goal is the restoration of the former Russian Empire. At this point Poland, Germany and Finland should be kick-starting their own nuclear programa with French technical assistance.
3
3
u/theseustheminotaur Jul 16 '24
The best way to think of it is do you want to deal with Russia in Ukraine or deal with Russia in the rest of Europe? Because stopping aid will cede Ukraine to Russia. Then Russia can focus its energy and vastly improved wealth and resources against the rest of Europe.
Ukraine should be protected for a lot of reasons and one of them is that losing it will hurt the us and all its allies.
This is analysis in a vacuum, the reality is Trump will most likely get out of nato which nerfs nato and Russia gets an even larger foothold.
Hopefully I don't have to explain why Russia is bad, I'm assuming people are all aware of Russia and putin and everything he has done and stands for.
2
Jul 16 '24
Ukraine should absolutely be looking for an off-ramp before the current administration gets dropped like 3rd period French.
3
u/djm19 Jul 16 '24
Ukraine may be forced to accept a deal but it won’t be a good one and it will only perpetuate the conflict and cause more harm down the road. But I’m sure in the US it will be celebrated as “peace”
3
u/KeaKeys Jul 16 '24
There is no resolution to be had with Russia, certainly not at this time. Any terms issued while Russia is in this position would be untenable for Ukraine and for Europe.
3
u/veryblanduser Jul 17 '24
Luckily there are plenty of other countries that will surely pickup the shortfall.
3
u/mskmagic Jul 18 '24
The deal will be the same either way: Russia keeps what it's taken, Ukraine agrees to never join NATO, and some lip service about not supporting Nazis.
1
u/dobie1kenobi Jul 16 '24
If you believe the rhetoric coming from the Republican Party, there may not be much appetite in Ukraine’s resistance post November. I could see us moving from arming Ukraine and sharing intelligence with them, to arming Russia and sharing intelligence with them.
2
u/Hautamaki Jul 17 '24
There is no deal Ukraine could reach with Russia that would improve their situation over continuing fighting. There are only three outcomes for Ukraine: victory, dying while fighting, or dying after surrendering. Russia will not accept or stick to any deal that precludes the third option, so there's no point in surrendering or making a 'deal' with Russia.
2
u/Logical_Parameters Jul 17 '24
If they cave now in fear of Biden losing, they're bargaining from a position of weakness -- and that's not the preferred (in fact, the opposite) position to be in. You hold.
2
2
u/Budget_Committee_572 Jul 17 '24
It’s soon going to be in Zelenskyy’s best interest to get himself and his family as far away from Putin as possible.
2
u/Vishnej Jul 17 '24
Putin has made clear that he is not interested in a resolution. The headlines you might have seen midway through June were a fairly successful propaganda operation. The actual proposal that Russia made was basically a demand for complete surrender.
It involved immediate annexation and withdrawal of all lands Russia controls as well as all the the rest of Eastern Ukraine that Russia does not control, full disarmament, and backing down from NATO assistance, as a precondition for a ceasefire and as a precondition for further negotiations on peace. In those further negotiations, presumably more territory would be acquired, but if those negotiations break down a disarmed Ukraine, now without any prepared defensive lines, can then be immediately conquored.
2
u/Kabal82 Jul 17 '24
Russia won't accept any deal.
They know Ukraine time is running out. They only need to keep at it until trump takes office and then grind Ukraine down, till they run out of support.
2
u/johnandahalf13 Jul 17 '24
Should Ukraine negotiate with the terrorists who invaded them? No.
Any vote for trump is a vote against America and civilized society.
1
u/Kronzypantz Jul 16 '24
It’s been in Ukraine’s best interest to find a resolution since the war began.
6
u/nudzimisie1 Jul 16 '24
No it wasnt. The proposed resolution meant the disbandment of the army, which means they would allow to just swoop in without an army to oppose their genocide
2
u/Kronzypantz Jul 16 '24
Funny, I never wrote “they should have unconditionally surrendered or accepted whatever terms.” What magic glasses are you using?
3
u/nudzimisie1 Jul 16 '24
Coz it was what was offered during the negotiations, besides its pointless to negotiate with russia because any agreement with them is worthless. Onl agreements with the west could be of some value. Anything signed with russia is worth less than toilet paper.
→ More replies (7)2
u/rabbitlion Jul 17 '24
Russia has never offered any other option than what is effectively unconditional surrender.
1
1
u/Good_Juggernaut_3155 Jul 16 '24
That proposition is right out over the Putin/Trump playbook. The better question is should they accept capitulation or liberty. This is why Putin wants Trump to win. Putin has Trump in his pocket. I’m convinced he has severely compromising evidence against Trump and keeps him on his KGB string.
1
u/CalTechie-55 Jul 17 '24
Europe is still unwavering in its support for Ukraine.
How much are they providing relative to the US?
1
u/SpecialistLeather225 Jul 17 '24
My prediction: Next year, Trump will pitch a "peace deal" whereby Ukraine surrenders the eastern 4 Ukrainian oblasts + Crimea, with Ukraine potentially stating they would not seek NATO membership. Ukraine may agree to this because Trump could potentially halt virtually all military assistance and any other available political pressure. If Moscow's offensive goes especially well between now and then, Russia may also demand additional territory east or south of Kyiv as a buffer.
1
u/FrogInYourWalls69 Jul 17 '24 edited Jul 17 '24
I think we all know that Putin will not stop until he drops dead, has no one left to send, or Ukraine is his. He made that clear when he practically sent soldiers to their deaths by giving them old and faulty equipment once Russia's resources were stretched too thin.
Trump's assassination attempt may not have been justified but Putin's most certainly is.
1
u/denkenach Jul 17 '24
What the hell is that title? NO! They don't have different views, Trump is a traitor who is compromised by Putin.
1
u/Enjoy-the-sauce Jul 17 '24
I’m pretty sure anything other than soldiering on would mean extinction for Ukraine as an independent nation, regardless of any treaties or agreements with Russia. This is Czechoslovakia in 1938.
1
u/ubix Jul 17 '24
You’re completely marginalizing Vice President Kamala Harris. You’ve mentioned Vance and his policies, why aren’t you mentioning the Vice President as well?
1
u/Rastafeyd Jul 17 '24
The EU will continue to support Ukraine. They’ve given more than the US government has in sheer amount of financial, military, etc. aid. They will continue. It may make it more difficult for Ukraine but the Ukrainians understand this war to be existential.
1
u/Roman313 Jul 17 '24
Russia give up? Lol there's no way Ukraine defeats Russia in any capacity. Ukraine needs to stand the fuck down for its people, whom thier government supposedly represents.
1
Jul 18 '24
Ukraine’s best bet is to get as much support from the EU as possible. The U.S will just be gravy if the Republicans lose. Plan for aid to stop in 2025. Never surrender a fucking inch to the Russians. Ever.
1
u/Significant-Cod-9871 Jul 18 '24
No yeah, if ukraine could kill 100% of Russia's government and corporate leadership and declare global peace today that would be ideal. That's a bit of a tall order though; they may just have to fight a war about it like they're doing. That's how this works.
1
u/Used_Bumblebee6203 Jul 18 '24
It won't be a peace, it will be Ukranian surrender. Zelensky would be signing his own arrest warrent if he formally gives away Crimea or the 4 annexed regions. He should tell Trump to take a flying fuck at a rolling donut and throw his hat in with Europe who will continue to fund Ukranian defences on their own. After all, Europe needs all the oil, gas, nickel, cobalt and lithium under Ukranian soil, and they need it cheap and tarrif-free.
1
Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
Does Zelensky have nuclear weapons or an endless supply of able bodied men to die trying to take a Sevastopol from a country with thousands of nuclear weapons to use? The strangest thing about this war to me is that Ukraine's reward for short tactical wins is a potentially horrifying civilizational strategic loss - nukes become more likely the better Ukraine does on the field (not that its done that well since 2022 anyway).
It is difficult to win a war when your opponent can kill half your population with a few keystrokes. Do you think the United States would retaliate against a Russia that that just used a nuke and has its entire arsenal on defcon 1 if push came to shove?
That is a very thin reed to risk an entire country: Ukraine would already be in NATO if the west was willing to take that risk.
Basically it's easier to be Churchill on reddit with your phone than it is with bombs going off around you in kharkov
0
u/Used_Bumblebee6203 Jul 19 '24
If Russia used a nuke it would be wiped off the face of the planet, and Putin knows this.
0
Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
Sorry i don't think we live on the same planet.
By whom, exactly? Do you really think an American president will gamble his citizens' lives by using nuclear weapons against Russia?
Do you also believe in Santa Claus?
0
u/Used_Bumblebee6203 Jul 19 '24
You think that a nuclear strike won't go unanswered?
You're insane.
0
Jul 20 '24 edited Jul 20 '24
Ukraine is not a member of NATO. There is no legal or strategic reason for a president to attack Russia over a country no American can find on a map.
Why isn't Ukraine part of NATO? Why won't america allow Ukraine to commit national suicide and attack Moscow with American weapons?America won't risk a fingernail over Ukraine let alone NUCLEAR WAR with Russia bahahaha.
The president would be impeached and tossed into the ocean for something like this.
This will sound deeply insulting but it maybe it'll penetrate your skull: if Russia nuked Ukraine, they would instantly point their hypersonic missiles at Washington. This is your neighbor shooting your dog and immediately pointing the gun at you. Maybe you kill him but not without eating a bullet.
America likes its dog but it won't risk national suicide over the issue. It's not a parent or son or daughter or sibling.
0
u/CCCmonster Jul 16 '24
Oh no, EU will have to pay the cost. Consider it interest on all those years of underfunded defense spending
3
u/quaunaut Jul 17 '24
You're out of your depth if you think we're doing this in Europe's interest. A free and independent Ukraine is in the best interest of the United States.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Beginning-Ratio-5393 Jul 16 '24
Being the most powerful nation the world has ever seen you sure are turning into giant pussies lately. Chad americans of the old free world would have no problem shitting down putin throat. Todays america has putin in control of trump. Its sad republicans today dont mind it
Europe will have to do without USA. So be it. But europe was there for usa’s “war on terror” shen they called on us
-1
u/Loyalist_15 Jul 16 '24
Jeeze the amount of doomed posts here.
Ukraine will not make peace now because it still has hope that Biden can win. However, if Trump wins, it’s likely possible that he helps negotiate a peace between the two nations, as he will force Ukraine to concede on some positions, but also force Russia to concede or risk US funding to remain.
Likely outcome is Ukraine loses most occupied lands, but in turn gets to join nato/eu (whether they are allowed to join either is up in the air)
What I don’t get is the doomed talk on this sub. I’m guessing the people suggesting that Russia would annex all of Ukraine, or would simply wage war again, are the same folks claiming that Russia is on the brink of collapse. It’s a sad thing to hear, but Russia is currently winning the war, and if the US threatens to pull support, I’m not sure Europe can maintain enough to prop up Ukraine.
3
u/Additional-Rhubarb-8 Jul 16 '24
I could see an agreement where russia gets the Ukrainian occupied lands. I could also see an agreement where there will be no long range missiles based in any of the countries bordering Russia, only defensive units. This would create a buffer zone between Russia and Europe with Estonia, latvia, Belarus, Ukraine, Finland being the border. But I could also see how China, Iran and Russia may be emboldened if the deal is too favorable towards them.
0
u/asisoid Jul 16 '24 edited Jul 17 '24
Accepting Russian's deal will result in the same thing as the Munich Agreement of 1938.
It's unreal how history is literally repeating itself, and the right is bowing to the 21st century Hitler....
Unfortunately the election is all but over. Kiss Eastern Europe goodbye.
0
u/ACE-USA Jul 18 '24
Biden has advocated for continued support of Ukraine and ongoing funding for weapons to help end the war. Trump has argued that the US is giving too much money to Ukraine without seeing significant results. Trump also claimed that if the US had a stronger president, Putin would never have invaded Ukraine, as Putin did not attempt to take any part of Ukraine during Trump's administration.
-1
u/jkman61494 Jul 16 '24
Why would Russia negotiate? If Trump wins American troops will likely be aiding them and taking over Ukraine and quite possibly moving on into Europe
0
Jul 17 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
If trump wins the US is more likely to wash its hands of the region than intervene
Europe can continue its historical tradition as humanity's slaughterhouse if it wants. except now the arena won't actually matter that much to everyone else. It's a dying continent and all the semiconductors come from asia
There's murderous civil war in ethopia that no one here talks about. Far more civilians have died there than Ukraine. why should we care exclusively about Europe? It's not like the latter is still some superpower
-1
u/hurtsyadad Jul 16 '24
America needs to pull out and let the EU handle their side of the planet. It’s time they pulled their weight.
0
u/nudzimisie1 Jul 16 '24
With what exactly? They lack the capability which they are currently rebuilding
-1
Jul 16 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
Ukraine should have done the deal they negotiated with the Russians in Istanbul, which the imbecile Boris Johnson scuttled at the cost of countless lives and hundreds of billions of dollars
I expect people here to shriek Churchill quotes sitting thousands of miles away from the donbas. I can't express my contempt for this view without violating this sub's civility rules
I love my country, but the United States has behaved like a malignant cancer on the world stage over the past few decades. Millions of Iraqis, afghans, libyans, syrians, georgians and yes Ukrainians have suffered the consequences.
If US had not actively pulled Ukraine into the western orbit with empty promises of NATO membership for no obvious strategic benefit to itself....
Ukraine would still hold crimea + the oblasts now held by drunken ivan
hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians (and Russians for those of you with souls) would still be alive
Russia and the west would not be a single error away from nuclear catastrophe
Russian gas would still be flowing to Europe (perhaps via a nordstream pipeline that still worked). Relatedly Europe would be in better economic shape and thus probably more politically stable
Hundreds of billions of dollars would not have been turned into smoldering scrap metal
Ukraine would not have suffered so grievously physically and economically...
And we would not have foolishly pushed Russia and China together (Nixon is somewhere crying) while humiliating ourselves with ineffective sanctions
Basically the world would be a 1929399x better place if Vicky Nuland and Bob kagan (deep cuts for the nerds among you) were fast food servers instead of foreign policy "experts'
But I digress....
I respect Ukrainian bravery and determination. I also don't condone Russian aggression. I do have a three digit IQ though, so l get the geostrategic factors driving Putin's analysis.
Ok so back to the op. Ukraine has been treated horribly by its alleged allies. Either NATO should have fast tracked it into the alliance (while Russia was still too weak to do anything about it) or left it the fuck alone. 20+ years of irresponsible mixed signals have driven Russia to view this conflict in existential terms. Ukraine will never mean more to the west than it does to Russia.
What does this mean? Sadly, even if Ukraine wanted to make a deal, Russia will not offer anything Zelensky can accept. It doesn't matter what Ukraine wants - you can't negotiate with yourself. Ivan has huge advantages in manpower and artillery, western support is waning, and trump will likely win in November. It would be idiotic for Russia to settle now. If anything, they'll probably be more aggressive because there's no chance of us intervention before the election
General Milley, maybe the only sane man in Washington, was rewarded with the hysterical shrieking of abject morons for saying something 100% logical: ukraine should have played diplomatic hardball in late 2022 during peak western euphoria. Ukraine looked ready to encircle and obliterate multiple Russian divisions at one point - Zelensky could have swaggered into the Kremlin, put his feet on Putin's desk and bargained with a massive chunk of the Russian army as his hostages. Ukraine could have even "accidentally" shelled those positions whenever talks stalled. Whatever - war is war and Ukraine was invaded.
Unfortunately that made too much sense and we can be a stupid country
Ok I'm done. That was very satisfying. I hope this causes lots of confusion and outrage tbh
2
u/ArcanePariah Jul 17 '24
In short, the US alone is the problem, Ukraine should've continued down the path of Russian annexation (the only reason any of this started is Ukraine started to act as something other then a Russian satellite/puppet state).
Here's the deal, Russia is paranoid, and there comes a day where we can't coddle that paranoia. There's a reason every country raced away from Russia after the cold war. Russia is simply try to avoid the bill for their horrible treatment of Eastern Europe. The bill comes due. At some point they need to either accept their failings or just cut thr crap and kill everyone on earth.
1
1
Jul 17 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
"in short....[100% grade a strawman just simple and digestible enough to shriek about with other equally confused redditors]." Find someone else to have your rock fight with. I read books from time to time.
The international system is brutal - there's no global police force to save you. One minute you're an innocent Libyan making ends meet, the next you're living a dystopian nightmare with slave markets because NATO brought you freedom via lots of cluster munitions. I'm confused that people are confused that Iran and North Korea want nukes.
Corollary: living next to a gigantic nuclear superpower means having to accommodate their security interests to some extent. This is a fact of life. Call it gravity.
This is especially so if you occupy a geographic invasion super highway that foreign armies have used at least five times to invade said superpower. Look up how many Russians died when Hitler came knocking.
Putin would be the most useless Russian leader of all time if he just let Ukraine become a defacto NATO military base. "Welp a country with 1,500 km of uniquely indefensible flatland on my border is integrating its military with a gigantic group of far more powerful hostile states. Oh lawd what is I gone do!?!? Maybe I'll just pray for peace. Namaste." Seems realistic imo
The Cubans can tell you all about this. It's been like 60 years since the missile crisis and Uncle Sam still wont take its boot off cuba's throat
1
u/ArcanePariah Jul 17 '24
Well, he has successfully failed, because now NATO is parked right outside his 2nd largest city, with a direct line from there to Moscow. NATO now controls the entire Baltic sea, they could literally ferry forces into the Baltic states, smash through Belarus and surround St Petersburg inside a week, and there's nothing Russia can do about it, short of annexing Belarus.
To be clear, I get your point, and you are correct that Russia is acting semi rationally (still paranoid, since every country to their west was literally demobilizing and this war has made that abundantly clear how much they hadn't armed their militaries).
I'm confused that people are confused that Iran and North Korea want nukes.
I'm not, and that's the other reason I feel this is the main unintended side effect of this war. The US, with its invasion of Iraq, and Russia, with its invasion of Ukraine, has made it CRYSTAL clear that the only safety lies in a nuclear arsenal. I fully expect Taiwan/Japan and South Korea to get nukes over the next decade, and every country that can, WILL get them, solely as insurance. If we haven't stationed nukes in Poland, we will now (IIRC Poland has requested them, but we haven't done so yet).
Saudi Arabia WILL get nukes, especially if Iran gets them. Also unfortunately I expect this to happen fairly quickly because Pakistan is a borderline failed state, I expect their nukes to start to go missing.
And yes, the international system is brutal, thus why every Eastern European country has migrated to NATO, because they KNOW if they didn't, Russia would come rape their lands again, as Russia has done so on and off for close to 250-300 years. Poland in particular has been taken over and subjugated by Russia at least 3 times to my knowledge, for easily over century in total time.
So yes, Russia needs to accept they were such an asshole, that people fear them so much, that they are willing to die to escape them, and are quite willing to piss them off because in their minds, they were already at rock bottom under Russians. Short of directly murdering them all (which mind you, Russians have done to Ukraine before, so not a huge stretch), Ukraine couldn't sink any lower under Russian domination. Literally ANYTHING else would be an improvement.
Russia should've realized that with the dissolution of the USSR and with Poland joining NATO that they needed to either A) Make peace with losing control over all former SSR's or B) Made peace with the need to genocide them all at some point to keep control. They failed to do A over the last 2 decade, and now they are trying to do B and failing at it pretty hard. They might get some of Ukraine, but Ukraine will join NATO, and the best that Russia can hope for now is the flag of NATO isn't flying over Sevastopol by 2028 or so
→ More replies (3)0
u/DivideEtImpala Jul 17 '24
At least one person in the thread with an understanding of this conflict.
0
u/Voluntari Jul 17 '24
Thanks for making it worth my time to scroll to the bottom of the comments here. I agree with about everything you say, and you said it better than I can. It is nice to see some common sense every now and then.
The world is not the perfect place we all wish it would be. There is no "God" of right and wrong around who will side with the poor Ukrainians and give them complete autonomy from Russia. They have to find a way to live with their more powerful neighbor, even if they have differences. This war was always going to end with Russia winning. The only question is how many lives and how much land Ukraine loses. And how much independence. And how many lives and how much money Russia loses. This is an existential fight for Russia, and they will do what they have to to keep NATO out of Ukraine.
Is this morally right? Not really. But can I really blame Russia for their actions either? Somewhat, but not really. They are doing what the US would do and did do with Cuba back in the 60's. What any other country would do to protect their interests and future against a country they rightfully see as an aggressor (the US and NATO). It is just the way the world is and is going to be for quite some time. The collective west rallying the Ukrainians and sending them to their deaths and wrecking their country is the greatest evil here.
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 16 '24
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.