Quite possibly the best answer to the Putin talking point (and therefore, Trump’s talking point) that he’s a dictator.
A dictator would never offer to step down. I hope the people see it for what it is. We all know Putin will be unfazed and continue anyway.
I hope the people see it for what it is.
A loser petulantly asking for something he isn’t going to get, in exchange for something that’s going to happen any way.
Like Hitler won his war right?
He’s not getting peace, ever? Or what are you insinuating?
It’s obvious to anybody with even a minimally functional brain that Ukraine won’t join NATO and will be divided between US and Russia now.
He’s implying that he will lose power anyway and is trying to use that as a bargaining chip by offering to step down. (I don’t agree, I’m just interpreting)
The man can get his country into NATO, I’d say he has earned his retirement.
This is standard dictator behavior, giving up power for the benefit of their people.
I think you’re being downvoted because you’re missing the
/sIf this needs to add /s then the downvotes have room temperature IQ.
They’re getting downvoted because the average Lemmy user is terminally incapable of reading the room.
To be fair, sarcasm doesn’t really convey through text
This has been known since the dawn of the internet
Funny time to do it, once he’s lost the war, had Ukrainians kidnapped straight onto the frontlines, and once negotiations are taking place without him (which might end with him in front of a jury). Not to mention member states have already taken it off the table which means “I’m not going at all”. Might as well have said his only demand is to marry the tooth fairy.
But sure, y’all just keep fetishizing yet another western puppet who called off elections but did it “for the right reasons.”
huh?
Zelensky offers to give up something he’s about to lose anyways in order to gain something that isn’t going to happen.
I think he’s trying to gain not dying of sudden lead poisoning.
Brave and powerful 😭
Article with no aggressive paywalls
Is NATO membership still a valid goal to pursue?
Obviously not since the agreement amongst existing members has to be unanimous.
“Valid” as in feasible? No. The war was started to keep Ukraine out of NATO, and Ukraine wasn’t fully backed by NATO in the war because it isn’t willing to go to war with Russia just for Ukraine.
The whole war was started because the Russians consider Ukraine in nato to be their red line, and the war was lost by Ukraine because the NATO leadership never seriously considered putting Ukraine in NATO if that meant direct war with Russia.
So no, it isn’t a realistic goal at all. The war ends only when either
- The Ukrainian state collapses
- A deal is made in which Ukraine does not join NATO
- Ukraine pushes back Russian forces so much that they collapse the Russian government.
Scenario 2 seems to be the most likely outcome.
I’m not an expert, but have read a decent amount on this. Others may have more and better info.
With that said, even if an Article 5 invocation won’t bring the US into your fight, it provides a hefty infrastructure of value to countries in it. From basing, to logistics, to intelligence, to aid, it is valuable. Now the politics of it are complicated and the US can hinder some of that value, but it still means that in Europe if Russia provides an Article 5 reason, other countries in NATO can choose to help in various forms. That’s not nothing. It’s also faster and less arduous then negotiating individual defense treaties with neighbors and others.
So yes, overall probably still worth it. Even if just as an entree into other alliances.
i think the thread starter question is more about if nato is even about to continue existing
Until the Russian government gives up on imperial conquest of other nations, yes.
