Just because we didn't quite fill enough buckets with arguing about the Budapest memorandum, the first time around
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2025
314 points (98.8% liked)
UnlockThread
54 readers
386 users here now
Not a fan of locked threads? Crosspost locked threads here to comment on them and continue the conversation.
(If the thread you were interested in got locked due to going wildly offtopic, this is the place for you)
founded 1 week ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why is the peace deal put in quotes? Last time I checked when a war ends peace comes. Even if there's a price to pay.
Because it's a razing of the country, with the should going to the aggressor and their puppet admin in a former ally. The country getting stolen from already had a treaty with the aggressor country, which was broken multiple times. That's not peace. That's a mugging
Coincidentally, this is the thought process of a rapist as well.
"Stop resisting, it will end quicker"
Dude, wtf?! That is a shitty analogy. Country's territories can be brought back in the future. Tens of thousands dead— can not. This economy cannot sustain the pressure of war and a demographic pit and it could use even a temporary truce. Agitating to keep grinding everything down in the hope that some day Russia might fall (it haven't for 3 years already and doesn't seem to be on the verge of that anywhere soon) is the analogy to what a rapist does to a human.
If you think a country is just it's territory, you don't know what the word 'country' means.
'Just let it happen' mentality, for real.
Jesus, westerners are something else. What else would be lost from a truce other than territory temporarily?
This is the 3rd(?) time Russia has broken a treaty and stolen territory from Ukraine "temporarily" since that treat was signed.
"Westerners" - I live by the border to russia. I've lived in the Soviet Union. I'd put my life do make sure my children don't have to live "temporarily" in russia.
By your childish, naive logic, every ovuntry that fought to leave Soviet Union should've remained, because it costed lives.
By your simplistic view, anyone who fought Nazi Germany, should've surrendered for "temporary" territory loss.
You are either a useful idiot for russia's terrorism, or a child.
All those lives you care about can be saved by russians going back to home. For some reason, I don't see you trying to convince people that's the best course of action.
Edit: Actually, even more telling: One of Russia's key demands, apparently, is that it is ABSOLUTELY OFF THE TABLE that Ukraine get security guarantees from anyone, now or ever in the future. In the mode of abusers everywhere, the one thing that is an absolute atrocity which will cause them to go ballistic is if they are threatened with consequences if they don't adhere to the terms of the deal. The deal they are swearing they will, of course, how could you even think otherwise, adhere to.
I think the reason it's a "peace deal" is that it's quite obviously a surrender agreement that the surrendering party doesn't accept and wasn't consulted on. And even if it doesn't eliminate Ukraine fully, it doesn't ensure peace at all, hence the point about their previous peace deal being a mistake.
Should anyone have nukes or use them? No.
If Ukraine re-nuclearized during this conflict and sent Russia back to the stone age, would we weep for Russia? The Russian people, we would mourn, but the country's leadership? I hope they suffer an agonizing death, that they're in just the right proximity to the blast zone to be able to survive for a few days while their burnt flesh falls off their body. How's that for a "peace deal"?
Losing a war is a peace deal, apparently.
It is. Treaty of Versailles is considered a peace treaty. What's the problem?