IMPORTANT NOTE: You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.
It really is vital that Governments and Politicians stopped obeying media simplification and allowed depth of thought.
Those areas of Ukraine had a substantial minority of citizens who wanted to be Russian not Ukrainian. Why else has there been 8 years of fighting? So - does Russia have a point?
Answer - yes they do but it's not enough to justify invasion.
We should bear that in mind when negotiating a peace deal.
This post is for Zelensky. There MUST be a way to secede a smaller amount of land (which any pro-Russian citizens can move to - even supporting them financially).
Putin is in a position to win this. He declares that the United Nations can hold a referendum in the disputed territories and, for the moment, will declare a cease fire to enable an immediate fair referendum. If the UN Referendum says RUSSIA - Ukraine should agree and leave whichever disputed territories. If any of the 4 say Ukraine, Russia should agree to withdraw. End of story.
JK2006 wrote: Putin is in a position to win this. He declares that the United Nations can hold a referendum in the disputed territories and, for the moment, will declare a cease fire to enable an immediate fair referendum. If the UN Referendum says RUSSIA - Ukraine should agree and leave whichever disputed territories. If any of the 4 say Ukraine, Russia should agree to withdraw. End of story.
It goes down to the New World Order if Russia wins or not.
Good and logical points JK.
The problem now is the invasion has changed many minds in the east about wanting to join with Russia. Had this been negotiated earlier, especially around 2014 with the ejection of Yanakovich it would have worked.
Now we play a game of bluff,and yet we need to create a sustainable peace not a temporary cease fire
So many have said to me "But Putin will never agree...."
Why anticipate failure?
He might agree; it's a great face saving way.
Or "Zelenskyyyy will never agree...."
Why not? It looks like thousands of Ukrainians WANT to move out of these 4 areas.
And Ukraine must surely be happy to see some damaged areas allowed to be Russian responsibility.
Gester wrote: JK2006 wrote: Ukraine must surely be happy to see some damaged areas allowed to be Russian responsibility.
National pride won't allow for specific areas to be moved; nor will Ukraine's citizens or leaders.
Significant today is the country's fast track application to become members of NATO. Expanding the players.
Application is one thing, NATO rules of entry are another.
Ukraine is upping the ante,to match recent Russian political developments.
Jonathan King is correct about a territorial compromise as the most acceptable peace deal.
A trerritorial solution will be the end game, yes. With face-saving, compromises and winners' rhetoric - although there'll be no victor. Just a land exchange.
NATO members can include a new member state, if they wish. Membership of NATO for Ukraine would simply formalise the assistance already being afforded.
Green Man wrote: Wyot wrote: We have to give Putin a way to save face. Otherwise, nuclear weapons will be used in Europe if his own people don't prevent him.
You think that will be a bad thing, the world is fucked anyway. Maybe we should put it out of its misery.
Then there will be a huge Great Reset and Build Back Better plan which has been on the table for the last few years.
There will be sweet f-all to rebuild GM...The few unlucky survivors will eek out a few years killing one another for food (and to eat one another) before dying, untreated in agony, of cancer...If you hear the nukes are coming - drive up as quick as you can towards London, stop off at the Surrey-London border; I'll take you in for 300 seconds mate...