Do you want the Ukrainian War to end today?

[Estro Felino]

Here is the EU stance
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-response-ukraine-invasion/#invasion
The EU and its member states strongly condemn Russia's brutal war of aggression against Ukraine and the illegal annexation of Ukraine's Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions. They also condemn Belarus' involvement in Russia's military aggression.

Since February 2022, the European Council and the Council of the European Union have been meeting regularly to discuss the situation in Ukraine from different perspectives.


EU leaders demanded on several occasions that Russia immediately cease its military actions, unconditionally withdraw all forces and military equipment from Ukraine and fully respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence.

They emphasized the right of Ukraine to choose its own destiny and commended the people of Ukraine for their courage in defending their country.


So...no. You do not speak for the EU at all.

That's what I said.
The EU condemns Russia's "special operation" as they call it because it's an act of aggression that is against our principles and our European constitution.
The difference is that we use sanctions and diplomacy to try to stop them.
While the US want war, war, war.

 

[sayak83]

That's what I said.
The EU condemns Russia's "special operation" as they call it because it's an act of aggression that is against our principles and our European constitution.
The difference is that we use sanctions and diplomacy to try to stop them.
While the US want war, war, war.

EU has demanded that Russia withdraw from those 4 territories and has said will continue to support Ukraine in her war till Russia does so. This support include millitary and logistical aid
About EU Military Assistance Mission in support of Ukraine (EUMAM Ukraine) | EEAS
Nothing at all similar to what you said that Ukraine should give up those territories and give in to this criminal aggression of Russia.

 

[Estro Felino]

EU has demanded that Russia withdraw from those 4 territories and has said will continue to support Ukraine in her war till Russia does so. This support include millitary and logistical aid
About EU Military Assistance Mission in support of Ukraine (EUMAM Ukraine) | EEAS
Nothing at all similar to what you said that Ukraine should give up those territories and give in to this criminal aggression of Russia.

The EU institutions are sick and tired of this war.
They are too polite to say it openly (I am crass and outspoken, so I say it openly) and they want both parties to stop fighting and to negotiate peace.
But both are too intransigent.
So even if they staunchly and fully support Ukraine , they don't approve of the intransigent and warlike approach of its government.

Big mistakes were made. Very big mistakes that made us lose trust on Ukraine.
- The gas pipelines Nordstream 1 and 2 were blown up. Who did that?
- An Ukrainian missile killed a Polish person in Poland. Why did they do that?

When you answer these two questions, we can go on discussing.

 

[sayak83]

The EU institutions are sick and tired of this war.
They are too polite to say it openly (I am crass and outspoken, so I say it openly) and they want both parties to stop fighting and to negotiate peace.
But both are too intransigent.
So even if they staunchly and fully support Ukraine , they don't approve of the intransigent and warlike approach of its government.

Big mistakes were made. Very big mistakes that made us lose trust on Ukraine.
- The gas pipelines Nordstream 1 and 2 were blown up. Who did that?
- An Ukrainian missile killed a Polish person in Poland. Why did they do that?

When you answer these two questions, we can go on discussing.

I have no interest on conversing with someone who claims to speak for the Europeans and the EU without any shred of evidence for the same and multiple evidence to the contrary.

 

[Stevicus]

The EU institutions are sick and tired of this war.
They are too polite to say it openly (I am crass and outspoken, so I say it openly) and they want both parties to stop fighting and to negotiate peace.
But both are too intransigent.
So even if they staunchly and fully support Ukraine , they don't approve of the intransigent and warlike approach of its government.

Big mistakes were made. Very big mistakes that made us lose trust on Ukraine.
- The gas pipelines Nordstream 1 and 2 were blown up. Who did that?
- An Ukrainian missile killed a Polish person in Poland. Why did they do that?

When you answer these two questions, we can go on discussing.

Regarding public opinion about the war, I found this article: United West, divided from the rest: Global public opinion one year into Russia’s war on Ukraine

It's about six months old, but still relevant. It shows that the West is more or less unified on this issue, although Western opinions are at sharp variance with the rest of the world, particularly China and India.

Summary​

• A new poll suggests that Russia’s war on Ukraine has consolidated ‘the West;’ European and American citizens hold many views in common about major global questions.
• Europeans and Americans agree they should help Ukraine to win, that Russia is their avowed adversary, and that the coming global order will most likely be defined by two blocs led respectively by the US and China.
• In contrast, citizens in China, India, and Turkiye prefer a quick end to the war even if Ukraine has to concede territory.
• People in these non-Western countries, and in Russia, also consider the emergence of a multipolar world order to be more probable than a bipolar arrangement.
• Western decision-makers should take into account that the consolidation of the West is taking place in an increasingly divided post-Western world; and that emerging powers such as India and Turkiye will act on their own terms and resist being caught in a battle between America and China.

Only 36% of Americans actually believe that the U.S. is supporting Ukraine to defend democracy, and that's the highest percentage on this list.

This other site has more recent polls: Most Americans Still Support Ukraine War Effort

The latest data are from a Gallup web survey conducted June 1-20, just before the failed rebellion led by Wagner Group owner Yevgeny Prigozhin ended in an about-face after a short-lived march on Moscow. It is unclear how much the recent dramatic events in Russia have affected people’s views on the war. Prior to that event, just over a third of Americans said they would like to see the U.S. end the war as quickly as possible, even if that would result in Moscow keeping the territory it has captured.

When asked about the United States’ role in the war, 43% of Americans, a new high, say the U.S. is doing the “right amount” to help Ukraine. Meanwhile, there has been a 12-percentage-point decline to 26% since August 2022 in the percentage saying the U.S. isn’t doing enough to assist Ukraine -- as well as a slight increase in the percentage saying the U.S. is doing too much, now 29%.

The U.S. has supplied weapons and military aid to Ukraine since the conflict began.

Opinions also vary between Republicans and Democrats:

Republicans have generally been split on the U.S. backing a protracted conflict between Ukraine and Russia. But their preference for a quick end to the war -- even if that would allow Russia to keep territory -- and their position that the U.S. is doing too much to help Ukraine strengthened in the latest reading.

• Republicans are more likely now (50%) than when the war began (43%) to say the U.S. is doing too much to support Ukraine.
• Republicans are also more likely today (49%) than in January 2023 (41%) to prefer ending the conflict quickly, even if it allows Russia to keep captured territory.
• Independents have been supportive of Ukraine during the conflict, but their views have also shifted in a similar direction to those of Republicans.
• Independents are more likely now (43%) than last summer (34%) to prefer ending the war quickly.
• Independents were more supportive last August (64%) of Ukraine fighting in a prolonged conflict than they are today (55%), although a majority still hold that view.

Democrats have been the most supportive of U.S. military support for Ukraine. They have overwhelmingly and consistently favored a longer war in which Ukraine attempts to regain lost land. However, their views on the United States' efforts have shifted from saying the U.S. is not doing enough for Ukraine to saying it is doing the right amount.

 

[Estro Felino]

Regarding public opinion about the war, I found this article: United West, divided from the rest: Global public opinion one year into Russia’s war on Ukraine

It's about six months old, but still relevant. It shows that the West is more or less unified on this issue, although Western opinions are at sharp variance with the rest of the world, particularly China and India.

View attachment 82160

Only 36% of Americans actually believe that the U.S. is supporting Ukraine to defend democracy, and that's the highest percentage on this list.

View attachment 82161

This other site has more recent polls: Most Americans Still Support Ukraine War Effort

View attachment 82162



Opinions also vary between Republicans and Democrats:

I admit it, We are the most Russophile country in the West.

Italy must negotiate with Russia 69
Italy must oppose Russia 21
Don't know, won't tell 10

But have you ever wondered why?
Because Russia defends the Christian roots of Europe?
What about the United States? Do they defend them?

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

It's a very sensible consideration.
Nevertheless, two years or nearly have passed since the beginning of this war and too many people died.
So I guess coming to terms with Russia is very urgent, if we want that no more people die.

After all, Russia asks for very few things. Just four regions. If they are the price to pay, I think Ukraine should pay it.

So, give in to the bully! Appeasement NOW! Then everything will be alright...

That'll work...

Until the bully decides he wants just a little piece of the Baltics, or Poland...or more of Ukraine, or any of the other now independent former soviet republics...breathing room, you know...needed security buffers between Mother Russia and the rest of the world...It's only a little bit of land, and a few people...just let him have them because that's better than a major war...

 

[F1fan]

The Ukrainian army is running out of soldiers.

Are they? Yet they are still pushing Russians out of Ukraine.

It's a very sensible consideration.
Nevertheless, two years or nearly have passed since the beginning of this war and too many people died.

Russia needs to stop firing missles at civilians. putin is classified as a war criminal.

So I guess coming to terms with Russia is very urgent, if we want that no more people die.

Russia is the invader and needs to withdraw, and they pay for the damage it caused.

After all, Russia asks for very few things. Just four regions.

They wanted all of Ukraine. But since the Russian army is so bad they failed, numerous times. They stole the Crimea and need to withdraw. Russia needs to withdraw from all Ukraine, it's not their territory.

If they are the price to pay, I think Ukraine should pay it.

Why, are you a war criminal too? Do you think war is just a game nations play?

I am speaking of EU countries who have a specific stance on the war.
In France there are anti-NATO protests every other day. So they are against this war.

Citizens in free countries have protests about most everything. That's why we don't see any more protests in Russia against the war, Vutin is a dictator, and not a nation of freedoms.

In my country people have a precise stance, and even if we support Ukraine, we have made it clear that this war is supposed to end, and can't last forever, also considering that Ukraine should focus on joining the EU.

Russia started the war, and all outcomes point directly to putin and his decisions. If there are negative effects on Europe it is putin's fault.

Germans are very angry, after someone undid their gas pipelines.

putin decided to invade Ukraine and that has resulted in disruption in energy. The EU needs to find other sources of energy, and let Russia suffer.

UK has always had a stance which is very close to that of the US.

As has most all EU nations.

Sooner or later the Ukrainian soldiers will run out.
They are so desperate that they are trying to force the Ukrainian refugees who found a home in Poland or in Germany to return to Ukraine to fight.
They are so delusional and desperate.

When Ukrainian soldiers run out, what will Kiev do?

What makes you think they are running out of men to defend their nation? Russia has had a bigger problem with getting soldiers, they don't want to fight a war they are destined to lose.

 

[Soandso]

It's a very sensible consideration.
Nevertheless, two years or nearly have passed since the beginning of this war and too many people died.
So I guess coming to terms with Russia is very urgent, if we want that no more people die.

After all, Russia asks for very few things. Just four regions. If they are the price to pay, I think Ukraine should pay it.

Yahhh... No. Remember when the Ukraine gave Russia their nukes with the agreement that Russia would leave them alone? They took Crimea, and that wasn't enough so they tried to take the rest too. Putin has shown that he has no real interest in making peace. He only wants war. He can leave any time he likes

If you think Putin would stop with "just four regions," you are sorely mistaken

 

[Stevicus]

I admit it, We are the most Russophile country in the West.

I think we probably would have been wiser to reach some sort of true understanding with the Russians at the time we were negotiating with them over the reunification of East and West Germany. That was the golden moment when we could have forged a lasting peace. We could have restarted our relationship with a completely blank slate and moved forward. It just goes to show the drawbacks of having a government run by ignorant mobsters instead of genuine statesmen.

Italy must negotiate with Russia 69
Italy must oppose Russia 21
Don't know, won't tell 10

But have you ever wondered why?
Because Russia defends the Christian roots of Europe?
What about the United States? Do they defend them?

I think we've discussed the thesis about Moscow being considered the Third Rome. It's an interesting position to take, and it also fits in with the Russians' longstanding goal of reclaiming Constantinople for Orthodoxy. In terms of the Christian roots of Europe, both Russia and Ukraine are Orthodox. From a Pan-Slavic point of view, one might expect them to embrace each other as brothers, not fight like this. I don't know if that's particularly relevant in this day and age, though it seems there are quite a few people out there with a kind of "holy war" mentality, similar to the increasing nationalistic mindset one can discern around the world. In the U.S., they have this thing called "Christian Nationalism," which has become more noticeable. One can find similar viewpoints throughout the world, whether it's tribalism, nationalism, religious zealotry - violence is the usual result.

As I see it, underlying most of the surface-level causes and ideologies we see is the ever-present and constant battle between the haves and the have-nots.

Both countries are being bled dry. In the end, regardless of who wins, Ukraine will be devastated, while Russia will be severely crippled. That's the bottom line here. Ukraine will most likely get aid from the West to help rebuild, and Russia might have to depend more and more on China.

In terms of the balance of power in the world, NATO might get a new member in Ukraine, but it would strengthen ties between Russia and China even more than they are already. Turkey also appears to be another wild card which could go either way. They seem to be the "odd man out" in the NATO family. Iran could also forge closer ties with Russia, which could escalate tensions in the Persian Gulf. India is another question mark, as they seem to be neutral on this, though they've historically had fairly good relations with Russia. Africa and Latin America will also once again be in play, as both factions will compete for dominance and hegemony, as was the case during the Cold War.

 

[Estro Felino]

So, give in to the bully! Appeasement NOW! Then everything will be alright...

That'll work...

Until the bully decides he wants just a little piece of the Baltics, or Poland...or more of Ukraine, or any of the other now independent former soviet republics...breathing room, you know...needed security buffers between Mother Russia and the rest of the world...It's only a little bit of land, and a few people...just let him have them because that's better than a major war...

Surely.
There may be another interpretation of the NATO's weird behavior.
I could suspect that the NATO is using paranoiac conjectures (that Russia wants to invade Eastern Europe) to justify an aggressive and warlike approach to the relations with the Russian Federation.

After all, Putin has come many times to Rome, he turned out to be a gentleman with a very modern and open-minded vision of politics and economics.
So this narrative that Putin is as dangerous as the worst dictator ever...is not that credible. It has never been.


You know... Putin is not interested in countries where Russian isn't spoken. He just conquered those four regions because it's where most people speak Russian as first language.

 

[Estro Felino]

Yahhh... No. Remember when the Ukraine gave Russia their nukes with the agreement that Russia would leave them alone? They took Crimea, and that wasn't enough so they tried to take the rest too. Putin has shown that he has no real interest in making peace. He only wants war. He can leave any time he likes

If you think Putin would stop with "just four regions," you are sorely mistaken

I am not mistaken, because there are negotiations behind the scenes with some important diplomats and it turns out that he would sign immediately, if we renounced those four regions, plus Crimea of course.

 

[Soandso]

I am not mistaken, because there are negotiations behind the scenes with some important diplomats and it turns out that he would sign immediately, if we renounced those four regions, plus Crimea of course.

I'm sure he would sign anything. He wouldn't honor those papers just like he didn't honor invading them in the first place when they agreed to give Russia their nukes. That's the point. He's an opportunistic liar

 

[Estro Felino]

I'm sure he would sign anything. He wouldn't honor those papers just like he didn't honor invading them in the first place when they agreed to give Russia their nukes. That's the point. He's an opportunistic liar

Putin invaded because Ukraine refused to comply with the Minsk agreements.
So it's Ukraine who doesn't respect agreements. Not Russia.

Please: it's all documented. Macron even went to Kiev in February 2022 to try to convince Zelenskyy to honor the Minsk agreements. He accepted, then he took it back.

Let's not sanctify Ukraine...please.

 

[Soandso]

Putin invaded because Ukraine refused to comply with the Minsk agreements.
So it's Ukraine who doesn't respect agreements. Not Russia.

Please: it's all documented. Macron even went to Kiev in February 2022 to try to convince Zelenskyy to honor the Minsk agreements. He accepted, then he took it back.

Let's not sanctify Ukraine...please.

Those agreements happened after Putin took Crimea, which means he's the one who violated the initial agreement first. You could say it was the separatists, but that was all Putin in reality

Like I said, he's an opportunist. It's wild to me that you think that it's valid that Russia invaded the Ukraine. Very telling

 

[Estro Felino]

I think we've discussed the thesis about Moscow being considered the Third Rome. It's an interesting position to take, and it also fits in with the Russians' longstanding goal of reclaiming Constantinople for Orthodoxy. In terms of the Christian roots of Europe, both Russia and Ukraine are Orthodox. From a Pan-Slavic point of view, one might expect them to embrace each other as brothers, not fight like this.

Exactly. It's unnatural they fight.
They are almost the same people. But if I look back in history, Italians had to fight against fellow Italians to take Rome from the Pope, in 1870.
Of course there were very few casualties, in comparison. It's not even comparable.

I don't know if that's particularly relevant in this day and age, though it seems there are quite a few people out there with a kind of "holy war" mentality, similar to the increasing nationalistic mindset one can discern around the world. In the U.S., they have this thing called "Christian Nationalism," which has become more noticeable. One can find similar viewpoints throughout the world, whether it's tribalism, nationalism, religious zealotry - violence is the usual result.
As I see it, underlying most of the surface-level causes and ideologies we see is the ever-present and constant battle between the haves and the have-nots.

In the US, saying that the West has Christian roots has become something only racists would say.
If Trump said something like that, they would skin him alive.

In terms of the balance of power in the world, NATO might get a new member in Ukraine, but it would strengthen ties between Russia and China even more than they are already.

This war has become perfectly useless. Because now Ukraine is under the protection of EU and the NATO...
so they have nothing to fear.
So I think this Ukrainian president has a too warlike approach. And fortunately, in 2024 there are new elections.

Turkey also appears to be another wild card which could go either way. They seem to be the "odd man out" in the NATO family. Iran could also forge closer ties with Russia, which could escalate tensions in the Persian Gulf. India is another question mark, as they seem to be neutral on this, though they've historically had fairly good relations with Russia.

Turkey should be a Russian ally. Not a NATO member, indeed, because their geopolitical interests coincide with those of Russia.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Surely.
There may be another interpretation of the NATO's weird behavior.
I could suspect that the NATO is using paranoiac conjectures (that Russia wants to invade Eastern Europe) to justify an aggressive and warlike approach to the relations with the Russian Federation.

After all, Putin has come many times to Rome, he turned out to be a gentleman with a very modern and open-minded vision of politics and economics.
So this narrative that Putin is as dangerous as the worst dictator ever...is not that credible. It has never been.

You know... Putin is not interested in countries where Russian isn't spoken. He just conquered those four regions because it's where most people speak Russian as first language.

Yep, poor old Putin! He's such a good and strong leader that he's easily manipulated into invading another country by the Evil Western Hegemony to make him look bad...

oh, yes, he has acted civil on a few occasions...publicly...but then off-camera he's had dozens if not more killed and imprisioned...he's just a Russian mob kingpin...

again, just like Hitler...trying to unite the Master Race of Mother Russia by annexing territory in the interest of protecting the purity of his nation...because it's a well-accepted international principle of law that if the people of a territory speak the same language as the people of a large nation, the large nation gets to absorb that territory...

He also denies that Ukrainian is a separate language, so really all of Ukraine should be Russian...

 

[Estro Felino]

Those agreements happened after Putin took Crimea, which means he's the one who violated the initial agreement first. You could say it was the separatists, but that was all Putin in reality

Like I said, he's an opportunist. It's wild to me that you think that it's valid that Russia invaded the Ukraine. Very telling

Those agreements are meant to give Donbas autonomy.

Kiev didn't comply, but they targeted the Russian-speaking people of Donbas.

Let's not turn the perpetrators into victims, please.

 

[Soandso]

Those agreements are meant to give Donbas autonomy.

...after Putin orchestrated, brought troops in, and perpetuated the split. It never would have happened had Putin not made it happen

He's the one that broke the initial agreement. He's just an opportunistic and skeevy lair

 

[Estro Felino]

...after Putin orchestrated, brought troops in, and perpetuated the split. It never would have happened had Putin not made it happen

He's the one that broke the initial agreement. He's just an opportunistic and skeevy lair

It's Poroshenko who prevented them from speaking Russian.
Are you denying historical facts, by chance?