this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
26 points (88.2% liked)

Ukraine

8208 readers
629 users here now

News and discussion related to Ukraine

*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.

*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.

*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title

*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW


Donate to support Ukraine's Defense

Donate to support Humanitarian Aid


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ukraine “deserves respect” Zelenskiy said

Clickbaity headline.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, I read another article by different news and there was also comment that another (unnamed) "representative from Central Europe" said that Ukraine went over the line with this.

Why can't they just straight say that it was a representative from Hungary?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Clickbaity headline

It’s not though - is it?

Literally the first line of the article expands on it:

  • “Volodymyr Zelenskiy has accused Nato leaders of showing disrespect to Ukraine by refusing to offer it a timetable for when it will be invited to join the military alliance”*
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

That's also a pretty vague take. The article phrases it weirdly too. The actual quote is far less adversarial.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Saying "Ukraine deserves respect" is not an accusation, the clickbaity article is just continuing on from the clickbaity headline

Giving a timeline would just give Putin a timeline to work to

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The president of ukraine is saying Ukraine needs a timeline. I think the president of ukraine knows better about the threat to their country. .

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The threat to his country is a separate matter to a timeline to join NATO.

Avoiding world war three seems advisable.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Best way to do that is to push for peace talks.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Once Russia have been pushed back sure, otherwise Ukraine is conceding territory and Putin wins. Which means he'll probably roll into another ex Soviet state for reasons

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If* they are pushed back. The counteroffensive results have been underwhelming to say the least and it’s not looking likely that ukraine will take any territory back. Hence why peace talks should be pursued to stop thousands of russians and Ukrainians dying.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Underwhelming to fans of Hollywood movies perhaps. The Russians have laid millions of mines and entrenched. But, they don't have the troops to man a 600 mile front line and if Ukraine had better air support with F16s or Gripens, they'd be making better progress.

The main battle hasn't even begun yet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Underwhelming to nato and america - the ones who fund ukraine

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Honestly, I have to side with what Biden said on this issue a couple days ago. Ukraine can't join until the war is concluded, regardless of the outcome., Allowing them to join NATO right now would obligate all member states to escalate the conflict with Russia because all of NATO must defend all member states. That would be a dangerous precedent, as it would essentially be an implicit declaration of war by NATO against Russia and prove Putin's propaganda blustering true, giving him even more diplomatic ammunition to attack the legitimacy of NATO, and accuse NATO of being an offense organization rather than an defense organization.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't think anyone was expecting a vote to ratify Ukraine today, just a solid plan with a timeline. Everyone agrees Ukraine should join when the war ends, what is "the end" of the war; when Russia leaves, or after Russia stops launching attacks from its borders? What steps will Ukraine need to take at that point that it hasn't already? How long will the process take? Is it more like Finland, more like Sweden, or more like...2014? I think those were the details Zelenskyy was looking for, and while Stoltenberg says one thing, Biden and Scholz say another, Sunak's talking out of both corners of his mouth, the Baltics want Ukraine on their flank ASAP, Western Europe doesn't want to provoke Putin still (I think China is running a lot of interference on their behalf diplomatically).

Ukraine is okay not receiving an invitation to join today, but they at least want a Save the Date and NATO can't agree on a wedding date yet.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Because, using your analogy, the “court case” from the divorce of the previous marriage hasn’t been concluded yet.

There’s literally no upside to NATO giving a timetable besides “when the war is concluded” because nothing can be done until then anyway.

What kind of other timetable would you suggest?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

NATO should escalate the conflict

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Should they, though? You do realize that results in the entirety of Europe being pitted against Putin's Russia, who is still a nuclear power run by a despot despite their decaying conventional military. The potential mobilization could begin to snowball very, very rapidly. Russia also still has the BRICS alliance behind them to feed them resources, although the cohesiveness of their pacts has yet to be tested. It could turn into a horrifying bloody mess ten times the scale of Ukraine overnight.

NATO actively escalating the situation also plays into Putin's propaganda machine. He has long painted NATO as the aggressor, as NATO being the one who encroached upon Russia's borders. It's effective to drum up nationalistic sentiment. Proving him right would galvanize Russia's population, increase his support, and only further cement his slowly-crumbling political power both domestically and internationally.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Prigz literally marched to moscow with no resistance the combined forces of NATO would take russia in a week lol. Shit we wouldnt even need to get all of NATO involved. Just let Poland go nuts.

The BRICS alliance is not even a real alliance, its nothing more than a cute outdated acronym.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Not even giving ukraine a roadmap or a solid timeline is absolutely disgraceful and just shows where NATO’s priorities lie.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I agree. Weakness in 2014 led to the full scale invasion. Now, we are showing it again. Putin is trying to drag this out till the US 2024 election hoping trump or another friendly R gets in power and stops the support. Why are we doing this now...? I suppose the US is playing the "we don't want a war" card and trying to balance between support and not wanting direct conflict but Zelensky is right on this one.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Its just what is expected from Zelensky. He knows Nato's constitution forbids allying with a warfaring nation, but the news and headlines brings more support to ukraine. As it should IMO

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I wonder if part of the reticence to give Ukraine a firm commitment for joining NATO is they expect it to be a negotiating chip with Russia in future peace talks. Pausing Ukraine's NATO membership bid might be the way to give Russia an out without territory concessions...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was wondering the same, does not apply to UK journalism style apparently

Use all capitals if an abbreviation is pronounced as the individual letters (an initialism): BBC, CEO, US, VAT, etc; if it is an acronym (pronounced as a word) spell out with initial capital, eg Nasa, Nato, Unicef

https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-a

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Interesting, thanks for sharing.

load more comments
view more: next ›