I trust Trump about as far as I can throw him, and at the end of the day it’s really the Pentagon calling the shots here not the POTUS.
But dudes clearly speaking to a public sentiment here.
I trust Trump about as far as I can throw him, and at the end of the day it’s really the Pentagon calling the shots here not the POTUS.
But dudes clearly speaking to a public sentiment here.
Any settlement Russia will take is one that will be favorable to Russia, because Russia is winning. They’ve been winning for a while and there’s no likely way that will change. Ukraine will lose some now or lose more later.
Insisting on even a neutral settlement (much less one that will punish Russia, which is Zelensky’s stance) is not a serious negotiating position. It’d be like Germany in 1917 insisting on a favorable outcome; if you lose a war you don’t get to win the peace.
The Western/UA policy always read to me like the highly evolved philosophical and political understanding you’d see in a second-grade classroom.
It doesn’t matter how impractical it might be, or how much long term resentment it stokes: we have to punish
TimmyPutin forstealing Steven’s toy truckreclaiming the Donbass and Crimea becausebullyingterritorial realignment is Inherently Wrong.I suspect any non-military attempt to move the line would have been equally rebuffed; any vote to secede would be “rigged”, any buyout offer rejected.
The West seems to be profoundly terrified of moving lines on the map in the modern era. Look how long it took to deliver South Sudan, and how Somaliland struggles for legitimacy. Their ability to arbitrate the borders is a symbol of their dominance; once they no longer call the shots, everything is on the table, like fixing an Africa and Middle East full of arbitrary caprice, or finally telling the pipsqueaks in Taipei to stuff it.