this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
114 points (96.7% liked)
World News
32301 readers
335 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I listened to an interview recently, I believe on BBC, where the interviewee said the biggest issue with peace talks is that the international community isn't able to trust Putin to keep his word on whatever is agreed upon. I hadn't considered that, but it makes a lot of sense and I'm not sure how that could change
Russia won't be trustworthy until Putin and his fascist United Russia party are gone.
The international community being G7 countries accounting for 15% of world population. Nobody gives a fuck what the west thinks at this point.
Who was the interviewee?
It will change when the cancer finally kills that bastard.
You draw new borders and stop shooting, that's a start. You then keep the agreement by having enough military for a new invasion to be undesirable. Simple game theory. Trust and promises only work for societies that mutually respect each other.
The same argument can be used in favor of Russia. NATO has invaded plenty of countries under false pretenses in the past. Both Russia and NATO do not have a reputation for keeping their promises.
"plenty"
Unironically yes, NATO members have invaded a lot of places, often in coalition with other member states.
That's like saying Canada is responsible for something Mexico did because they're both on the same continent...
NATO is purely a defense agreement.
.
It is more like saying the axis is known to invade nations because its member states invade nations. Okay, sure, Germany and Italy invaded the soviet union but Japan didn't, you can't say they're not a defensive alliance /s
Tell that to Libya.
Or Belgrade/the former Yugoslavia.