- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why isn't a peace agreement an option with Ukraine
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:02 am to Indefatigable
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:02 am to Indefatigable
quote:It's just funny for the OP to ask why won't Ukraine give everything to Russia that Russia wants, while simultaneously trying to make fun of "bootlickers" or whatever, like he's not clearly Pro Russia with that kind of an OP/question.
Right. Asking why there isn't a peace agreement is akin to just going ahead and asking why Ukraine won't cede the eastern third of its country to Russia.
1
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:05 am to shel311
Well, we had security concerns with Russian missles in Cuba back in 62.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:14 am to Marquesa
quote:Except, Ukraine was ready to concede territory in peace talks. The US and UK scuttled those discussions.
Well if it were the US someone took a chunk of, peace would not be an option for me. As for Ukraine, they can choose to fight, we can choose to not be involved.
Boris Johnson put it succinctly to Zelinsky. The west is not interested in ending the war. We (the US and UK) believe we (Ukraine blood, Western Funding) can wear Putin down.
A peace agreement is not an option because we want this proxy war fought to the last Ukrainian.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:14 am to shel311
Thats a pretty retarded characterization of the OP. Both sides want to negotiate peace. This has been widely reported. Why wont the West aid in this diplomacy?
And if they only acceptable terms are for Russia to give up everything they've gained, but the West wont mobilize to enforce those terms on behalf of Ukraine, why would Russia budge?
The West wants a proxy war. Its that simple.
And if they only acceptable terms are for Russia to give up everything they've gained, but the West wont mobilize to enforce those terms on behalf of Ukraine, why would Russia budge?
The West wants a proxy war. Its that simple.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:27 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:What?
Thats a pretty retarded characterization of the OP.
quote:Now, you can say it was just an honest question about why on Ukraine's side there's no peace agreement, but once you read the rest of his comments, it's pretty obvious it was done so to point a finger and blame Ukraine.
- Why isn't a peace agreement an option with Ukraine
- I know this would displease all the OT Raytheon bootlickers
- And even though the OT bootlickers think it would be really cool to totally own Vlad
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:28 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:Indeed!
The West wants a proxy war. Its that simple.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:30 am to NC_Tigah
quote:Can you link me to this so I can read up and learn more about it?
Ukraine was ready to concede territory in peace talks. The US and UK scuttled those discussions.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:35 am to shel311
quote:Diplomacy Watch: Did Boris Johnson help stop a peace deal in Ukraine?
Can you link me to this so I can read up and learn more about it?
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:36 am to NC_Tigah
Thanks!
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:37 am to shel311
I don't know that they would do that now. But, this was supposedly their position earlier. There are some links in the text in the article.
LINK
quote:
The US rejection of diplomacy around Ukraine has been newly substantiated by former White House Russia expert Fiona Hill. Citing “multiple former senior U.S. officials,” Hill reports that in April of this year “Russian and Ukrainian negotiators appeared to have tentatively agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement.” Under this framework, Russia would withdraw to its pre-invasion position, while Ukraine would pledge not to join NATO “and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries.”
In confirming that US officials were aware of this tentative agreement, Hill bolsters previous news that Washington’s junior partner in London was enlisted to thwart it. As Ukrainian media reported, citing sources close to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson traveled to Kiev in April and relayed the message that Russia "should be pressured, not negotiated with." Johnson also informed Zelensky that “even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on [security] guarantees with Putin,” his Western patrons “are not.” The talks promptly collapsed.
LINK
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:37 am to shel311
He's pretty clearly blaming the west and its lust for proxy Wars. Is Raytheon the "Ukraine"? Has Ukraine ever stated that peace wasnt an option? No.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:40 am to burger bearcat
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
The real losers are the front line pawns and those of us forced to fund the war.
Taxation without being represented???
The real losers are the front line pawns and those of us forced to fund the war.
Taxation without being represented???
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:25 pm to crimsonuatide
n this case peace is not an option,Russia has an objective,to clean out underground bases,biolabs tunnels weapons stores adrenochrome labs,nazis and human trafficers.lots of Ukranian citizens fled to Russia,many were executed at the border by their own army.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:36 pm to IT_Dawg
quote:
You think someone who attacked a country unprovoked, so he could bring back the USSR and is now getting his arse handed to him would agree to a peace agreement?
No, the Russian supporters are doing all they can to make us believe Ukraine us the bad guy here.
First, they were all Nazis. Then they told us Ukraine was corrupt as if Russia wasn’t. Then they were making bio weapons and Putin was going to stop them. Then they blamed NATO.
Look at recent history. Ukraine isn’t the First Nation Russia invaded. They have invaded several others. Putin is a power hungry maniac. He can’t be trusted.
Ukraine stopped a major Russian thrust when the war began. Then they slowed Russian gains in the east. Just recently Ukrsine gas counter attacked with some major successes.
Now the Russian defenders want you to think Ukraine could gave peace if only they negotiated. But it takes two to make a deal. Do you think Putin wants a deal? No, he wants Ukraine as a satellite.
No deal is eminent.
This post was edited on 9/22/22 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:43 pm to doubleb
quote:
Look at recent history. Ukraine isn’t the First Nation Russia invaded. They have invaded several others. Putin is a power hungry maniac. He can’t be trusted.
If invading other nations makes one a power hungry maniac, I'm afraid the U.S. doesn't come out looking as good as you may think.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:50 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
If invading other nations makes one a power hungry maniac, I'm afraid the U.S. doesn't come out looking as good as you may think.
The US made mistakes by going after Iraq a second time, by getting deep in the Vietnam mess and by not getting in and out of Afghanistan.
However, in recent history we never invaded a country to take over as Putin and Russia have.
And we don’t have a leader who threatens nuclear war as if nukes were toys.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 5:32 pm to burger bearcat
There could be but Putin thinks he’s Peter the Great so his ego won’t allow him to sit down and talk. This could all be over if Russia just stops. If Ukraine stops they cease to exist.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 8:01 pm to LSUPilot07
Send in potato Joe for peace talks.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 8:03 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
If invading other nations makes one a power hungry maniac, I'm afraid the U.S. doesn't come out looking as good as you may think.
How many countries have we invaded for the purposes of annexing them into the United States or making them puppet states who are independent in name only?
Posted on 9/22/22 at 8:10 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
How many countries have we invaded for the purposes of annexing them into the United States or making them puppet states who are independent in name only?
Well, it's been about 175 years since we did so in order to annex them, but we're a little unique in the way that we're situated. As far as making puppet states, well, we've just recently failed to do so with Iraq and Afghanistan, but it wasn't for a lack of trying. As an imperial power though, we often use soft power and subterfuge to get our puppet states. Ukraine is one of those. Iran was another for almost 30 years until the Ayatollah kicked out our puppet.
Lord, I haven't even touched Latin America yet, but I can do so if you'd like.
Page 4 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News