Really, it’s Ukraine’s decision. Arm them so they can get the best deal possible.
The idea that Putin is going to nuke the US or any NATO territory is crap, never going to happen. The supposed fear of that is what Putin counts on and gives cowards a reason to argue into giving Putin what he wants.
Equating calling Putin a war criminal (which is unambiguously is) with the idea that the US will demand Russia be conquered is also bs. Not remotely the same thing.
I have never understood what goes on in the mind of mass shooters/murderers/cults. I mean, what state of mind do you have to be in to want to take everyone out with you?
Every time I hear of a mass shooting I think:
Do humanity a favor and take yourself out 1st.
The ironic thing is that Putin himself is very much responsible for much of the recent evaporation. But I’m not sure he knows this.
A bubble can be a terrible thing to get stuck in.
-Especially if you are responsible for millions of lives.
So, what are you willing to concede to prevent WWIII?
And even if Putin’s demands aren’t, “everything,” what makes you believe he won’t change his mind?
nevemind - didn’t see the mod note until after I posted.
Yes, that is sort of the crux of the problem. Based on Putin’s speeches over the past year he regards anything that has ever been part of any sort of Russian Empire as still belonging to Russia.
This is incompatible with a world in which Poland, Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Ukraine, etc, etc, are independent, sovereign nations. Also incompatible with territory such as Alaska being part of independent, sovereign nations that aren’t Russia.
There isn’t really a middle ground here. Putin wants it all. He feels it is his already and anyone trying to deny that is trying to steal his stuff.
Also, while Putin seems to regard the land of Ukraine as Russia land it’s definitely questionable as to whether or not he considers the people on that land as Russians and/or deserving of life.
Why should we care if a defeated Putin remains in power or not? Why is his life more important and more worthy of consideration than any of the tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of lives Putin’s decision have already destroyed?
The difference here is that after the 1953 armistice North Korea has not since attempted to nibble away at anyone else’s territory. They really have stopped at the 1953 borders.
Putin, on the other hand, has a habit of stopping after after a negotiated “peace” only for a few years before going after another bite of someone else’s country. Based on past history, if an end to this war was negotiated even with the 2021 borders Putin will still be back in a few more years to try to get more land, or he’ll be going after someone else.
Proposals to negotiate a “peace” that allows Putin to keep even a sliver of Ukraine do not acknowledge this pattern of ceasefire/re-arm/try again. That, to my mind, is the biggest problem of any proposal that allows Putin to keep anything - it fails to recognize that such appeasement does not work in this case.
If Putin really did want to start WW3 over this mess he had a perfect opportunity to do so on February 20 when the US informed the Kremlin that Biden was in Kyiv. The fact this did not occur reassures me that while Putin very much wants to own Ukraine he doesn’t want an actual global war over the matter. I suspect this is because Putin very, very much wants to live, and he knows he will not survive that sort of war.
Who cares about “unconditional surrender”? We just want Russia to get out of Ukraine. Once they’re out, and Ukraine is integrated into the EU and NATO, then we don’t need to keep giving them weapons. And Putin can claim anything he likes, to foreign and domestic audiences, to try and stay in power – hell, he can say that Ukraine and NATO surrendered to him. Doesn’t matter once Russian forces are out of Ukraine.
So long as that person is only bad to the Russians, that’s an improvement over Putin.
Anyone with the resources and will to overthrow Putin will likely also know that this war is slowly destroying Russia. Even if they might want to continue the war, they know that’s a bad idea. They’ll most likely have some sort of a plan to get themselves out of the war, and pin all the blame on Putin, personally.
If Russia is ever going to regain their reputation as a nation to be feared, they need to end this war, end corruption in their military, and spend a decade or more re-arming. If this war continues, even under a new leader, they’ll just keep sliding into obscurity.
That’s because the U.S. military is sitting on the 1953 border, and that’s why the war in Ukraine won’t really end until the U.S. military is sitting on whatever border exists between Russia and Ukraine.
Modnote: We have a long standing policy of not changing quotes of posters. That includes things like bolding them. Find a better way to indicate what you are replying to.
Please do not do this again.
ETA to say nevermind and I apologize. Sorry about that @FlikTheBlue, I was wrong.
I think Ukraine in NATO would accomplish the same thing (presuming Russian forces have left or been expelled).
I have no doubt that there will be some kind of negotiated end to the fighting, since that’s how most wars end. The “unconditional surrender” of WWII was a major exception, and due to Russia having nukes, is pretty much off the table. There’s no realistic plan in which Russia itself is invaded beyond a token border incursion, and so there’s no realistic way in which to force a total surrender.
So, we’ll negotiate. The real question is if it’s with Putin or Putin’s successor. I’m hoping for the latter, but at this point, we have no idea who will be in charge when it gets to this stage.
But, I also expect that Ukraine will not take that negotiated peace or cease fire any more seriously than they absolutely have to, to keep Russia from trying this again. Any cease-fire will only be used to reinforce Ukraine against a future resumption of hostilities. While this war has been Putin’s baby all along, it’s clear that there are a lot of other people in Russia who would be happy to try this again, if they think they have a shot at it. And Russia has proven that they cannot be trusted to honor the terms of a deal.
So we’ll get some kind of deal, and then Ukraine spends whatever it has to spend to secure whatever border is agreed upon, and spends the next decade or two building up its domestic forces, and sources of supply, for the inevitable re-match. If they build up enough, maybe Russia holds off long enough that someone who isn’t a power mad conqueror takes over in Russia.
If what’s going on in Ukraine isn’t war crimes, what is? I do agree with @Sam_Stone that we dont want to back Putin into a corner, but I also don’t think he can be trusted to cut any deal. OTOH two can play at untrustworthiness: offer Putin that Ukraine wont join NATO and the EU after all if Russia goes back to the 2021 borders and helps pay to rebuild Ukraine, maybe even giving some of his buddies construction contracts. It will take about a decade to rebuild the country. Putin has what, maybe another 10 years of natural life, unless something “unexpected” happens to him, and after he’s gone we welcome a rebuilt Ukraine to NATO and the EU.
IMHO we should be working to isolate Putin from his allies and use them to apply more pressure to what is already being applied. For example, we should probably take a less aggressive posture with China and get them to help end this war. Same with India. Offer China and India something so they will pressure Putin to the negotiating table.
At the very bare minimum, I would say Russia must be forced to withdraw to the pre-Feb-24-2022 borders.
Ideally, I’d go further than that and want to see Ukraine retake Crimea and the entire Donbass and go all the way back to the pre-2014 borders.
Russia completely withdraws with the understanding that Ukraine is going to join NATO and will henceforth be under NATO’s protective umbrella. Nothing less!
I see this again and again - who is offering this deal? If it is anyone other than the Ukrainians then it’s not viable.
Part of Putin’s rationale is that Ukraine is not a country. If the UN or NATO or anyone else starts making decisions about whether or not Ukraine can or can’t do this or that then it validates Putin’s position - that Ukraine is not a country.
ONLY the Ukrainians can set the terms for their side. ONLY the Ukrainians can make a decision about whether or not to join the EU or NATO.
It is not in Ukraine’s interests to make such a concession - it is in their interests to join either the EU or NATO or both.
It worked the last time we did this,
And I’m more than willing to give Putin Canada in addition to Ukraine if that’s what it takes.
Yes, Ukraine offers this deal, but countries have to sit down face-to-face to end conflicts. Who provides the forum for that? Who helps facilitate a deal to end this? It’s not Ukraine all by itself.
Preventing NATO from bordering Russia is one of the reasons Putin invaded.