this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
612 points (94.2% liked)

World News

36822 readers
500 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Project_Straylight@lemmy.villa-straylight.social 1 points 2 years ago (8 children)

"They could have won by surrendering so many times"

[–] ThereRisesARedStar@hexbear.net 52 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Neither of these things he describes are surrendering:

It could have given the Donbass some independence referenda and just let them go. It could have actually tried to adhere to the numerous Minsk Agreements to deescalate and prevent war.

In fact both of them would have prevented Russia from annexing donbass. They would be independent territories that would act as a buffer state between the two countries.

[–] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 41 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I was coming at it from the sense of both outcomes being the same (Ukraine losing Donbas) but in one scenario Ukraine "wins" because it doesn't get bombed and lose hundreds of thousands of people, but you raise a great point. There was a chance that letting Donbas go in 2014 would have resulted in a fairly neutral buffer with Russia.

There was a point where the DPR and LPR were just seeking autonomy within Ukraine to speak Russian and decide local issues but the hardliners in Kiev decided to sic Nazis on them instead.

[–] hoi_polloi@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

Hundred of thousands is sp much higher than any source I can find. On both sides of the conflict.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)