Russia-Ukraine War (continuing)

Ukraine could have had it all for relatively next to nothing. Just forget about Crimea which was never going anywhere else anyway and no NATO membership. But no 'we' wanted to 'show Russia'. Look where we are now and what it cost the Ukraine.

No this is precisely the position the US rejected pre Feb 2022. Short memory?

It's a really poor state of affairs that we're in right now where the threadbans were removed. No clue why that was seen as a good idea.

😂 dont worry I wont bother you for long

You said "Ukraine could have had it all" if they "Forgot Crimea" and left aside NATO membership. This was exactly the position they were in right before Putin invaded in Feb 2022.

And then Putin invaded them. So Im not sure what on earth "having it all" meant. They were not in a position to get Crimea back and NATO wasn't anywhere near on the cards. You're making literally no sense at all.

What this shows is putin will invade if it sees or feels it has an advantage. Ukr is full of natural resourses and has a plentyful food production, thats what putin wants.

Its not the position they were in and it is a Russian lie to pretend that was the extent if it. Russia demanded far more than that and basically would have undermined Ukraine into statelets who they could then pick off and a partitioned Ukraine without NATO help could not resist.

Further the claim the US rejected it implies Ukraine wanted to accept it... more nonsense without foundation.

Your claims have no credibility.

Yeah cool. Thanks for the facts. I'll promptly add them to my little binder of Kremlin talking points.

Although I suspect they'll be redundant entries.

You did imply it, or why did you lead with the US rejecting it? It denies autonomy to Ukraine. The US could not give a commitment to say that Ukraine could never join NATO so of course that would be an answer that they give. This is all documented on wiki.

Thats not the extent of what Russian demanded nor is it the situation Ukraine was in in 2022, with Russian forces undermining Ukraine in Donbas. Your claims are false.

Anything Russia demanded was to allow it to continue undermining Ukraine to the point it could not resist Russian domination.

Ukraine and Russia already were party to multiple agreements such as Budapest and NATO Russia Founding Act. Russia broke those agreements and demanding Crimea and Ukraine out of NATO and interfering in Donbas are all violations of that.

So why would they trust any Russian promises after that?

Thats why Ukraine rejected bad faith Russian demands.

And these are the demands... this would leave Ukraine unable to resist Russian domination:

Russia's demands at the start of the invasion included recognition of Russia's annexation of Crimea, recognition of the Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic as independent states, as well as "demilitarization" and "denazification" of Ukraine but did not clearly specify meaning of these postulates.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_negotiations_in_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

You did imply it, or why did you lead with the US rejecting it? It denies autonomy to Ukraine.

Whether I implied it or not is interpretation. I lead with it because thats what happened. The US rejected it. The reply did not come from the Ukraine.

And to be honest so what if I did? Not exactly a 'gotcha'. Even if the stance of the Ukraine was rejection, too, it was only with the US at their back anyway. There never was any autonomy in this. So this is really a moot point.

Thats not the extent of what Russian demanded nor is it the situation Ukraine was in in 2022, with Russian forces undermining Ukraine in Donbas. Your claims are false.

It's the just of it.

Well whatever. Like I said it's the just of it and the reply came from the US. When you say its the only reply the US could have given then I say I dont believe you believe that yourself.

The point I was making originally is that the US never wanted a direct conflict with Russia and they still dont. It would be madness obviously. They wanted to say 'check'. And for that they sacrificed the Ukraine and now they are edging the Ukraine to sacrifice their kids too. Things obviously not going great for the Ukraine. Cynics might say they going OK enough for the US.

I think it's the new talking point to take the focus away from Putin going to North Korean for cannon fodder to die for his disastrous war.

You have not given an accurate account of what happened in the negotiations and your claim about what I believe has the same credibility. Its obvious you have been entirely duped by selective Russian propaganda, building on a pre existing anti US worldview.

The US dont want a direct conflict with Russia understandably. That does not mean they 'sacrificed' Ukraine because it implies they wanted a war out of all the options.

It is Russia who is sacrificing Ukraine in its illegal imperialist war of plunder and atrocity but you never hold them to account. So the option for the US and NATO is to leave Ukraine to tyrannical Russian occupation or help it resist.

Would things be "going great" for Ukraine under Russian domination and occupation? The extent of your concern for the people of Ukraine appears to go only as far as you can try to blame it on the US.

And the name of the country is Ukraine. It is Russian propaganda that tries to diminish it as 'the Ukraine' and predictably you follow their lead.

Do you accept Ukraine is a sovereign country and therefore has the right not to be subject to Russian domination?

Under the NATO Russia Founding Act Russia has no right to demand Ukraine be kept out, and Ukraine can join NATO as long as the provisions of that treaty wrt stationing of forces and weapons systems.

Do you think Russia could have been trusted to abide by any deal that left Ukraine unable to resist future Russia demands?

Because I dont know any credible authority who does and the evidence of their track record of such agreements is they would not.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Ukraine

The US dont want a direct conflict with Russia understandably. That does not mean they 'sacrificed' Ukraine because it implies they wanted a war out of all the options.

Maybe the US didnt want a war but the risk of one was a sacrifice they were willing to make. They said 'check' and leaned back with a smirk on their face, metaphorically.

And the name of the country is Ukraine. It is Russian propaganda that tries to diminish it as 'the Ukraine' and predictably you follw their lead.

Well actually thats fair enough. You may not believe that but I didnt consciously do that. Will call it Ukraine so.

Under the NATO Russia Founding Act Russia has no right to demand Ukraine be kept out, and Ukraine can join NATO as long as the provisions of that treaty wrt stationing of forces and weapons systems.

And how did that work out for Ukraine?

What about The Russia's Empire historical borders?

A smirk? A sacrifice they were willing to make? It is obvious your view of this conflict bears no relation to its reality and is just viewed through anti US prism.

Russia illegally invades Ukraine in a war of plunder and atrocity...

And your posts ignore all that to try to dig up some angle you can use to bash the US with nonsense about smirks.

If the US stood by and didnt help Ukraine, no doubt you would be here wringing your hands about how the US sacrificed Ukraine to a brutal Russian occupation. And again no doubt all your criticism would be directed against the US not the Russian scum carrying out the atrocities, war crimes, rapes and pillaging.

You cant even get the name of the country or its leader correct. Your claim about the conflict have no credibility on any level.

Sending NK troops to Europe is being seen as an escalation of the war.