reuters.com
www.reuters.com
  • Russia’s demands similar to earlier terms presented to US, say sources
  • Demands include no NATO membership for Kyiv, no foreign troops in Ukraine
  • Unclear if Putin will engage seriously in peace talks
  • Biden administration discussed demands prior to Ukraine invasion
  • seeigel@feddit.orgEnglish
    110·
    1 day ago

    This would require to accept that Putin is stupid. I don’t see that.

    • luciferofastora@feddit.orgEnglish
      6·
      1 day ago

      Imperialism doesn’t imply stupidity.

      A state’s sovereignty is contingent on others recognising and respecting it. If Putin claims Ukraine isn’t a sovereign state, that’s not a mistake so much as his opinion – a dangerous opinion, make no mistake, because he uses it to justify his actions to his own people and is putting a lot of effort into trying to convince everyone else to accept his opinion. If we do, Ukraine effectively loses its sovereignty, because that is itself a product of other states’ opinions.

      • seeigel@feddit.orgEnglish
        14·
        1 day ago

        Which strategic advantage lies in conquering Ukraine? Russia doesn’t need land. The future center of civilisation lies in Eastasia. Why waste resources in the west?

        Conquering Kyiv for nostalgic reasons is stupid. I don’t think that Putin thinks like that.

        • troed@fedia.io
          5·
          24 hours ago

          Ukraine is the “bread basket” of Europe. There are multiple resource reasons for why Russia would like to make sure to include Ukraine.

          You come off as a Putin apologist.

          • seeigel@feddit.orgEnglish
            13·
            23 hours ago

            Yes, I know that it’s not socially advantagious to have these arguments. The good thing about lemmy is that it is nevertheless possible to have them.

            I only know of one reason for imperial conquest: that there is gas at the Krim and Ukraine would threaten the Russian monopoly on energy supply for Europe.

            To me, that is not motivation enough for the war.

            • troed@fedia.io
              3·
              23 hours ago

              This was what you wrote:

              Russia is fighting this war to prevent troops in Ukraine. There is nothing unclear.

              The only way to believe the above is if your only source of information comes straight from the Russian troll factories and you never actively seek out opposing view points.

              I just told you Ukraine is the bread basket of Europe. Did you check that up? How much grain has Russia stolen so far from Ukraine?

              I told you about Putin’s ambition to recreate a Russian empire. That’s his legacy. The invasion of Georgia in 2008 is as much part of that as the start of the Ukraine war in 2014.

              I’ve pointed out that Nato has had troops stationed as close to Moscow as Ukraine is for decades. Did you know?

              So, no. Russia hasn’t invaded Ukraine over no “western expansion”, or “Ukrainian nazi regime”. It’s a straight up land grab, including erasing of the Ukrainian national identity (feel free to look up what has been done in the occupied areas on that).

              So, are you discussing here in good fate or not?

    • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
      4·
      23 hours ago

      He’s rational. He’s also operating within an ideological fever dream, KGB reality distortion. Those two things are not mutually exclusive.

      • seeigel@feddit.orgEnglish
        12·
        1 day ago

        That’s very interesting. I didn’t know this text, just a smilar one.

        This doesn’t convince me that Putin is a history fanatic. For sure, there is some myth building, and Russia is not good at it. But it seems to be a tool to support the war, and not the other way round.

        Why has Putin waited so long? Russia is not using new weapons. They could have conquered Ukraine more easily twenty years ago.