28
Zelensky rejects Trump’s peace terms
(www.rt.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2025
28 points (57.4% liked)
World News
37316 readers
499 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
Why should he accept them?
What, practically speaking, is a viable alternative?
May I introduce you to the concept of "to the last Ukrainian"? :)
Hey you haven't forgotten that there are people dying over this, have you?
Putin could stop the war at any second. If the terms are as bad as they are dictated by trump, you should definitely not accept them.
And leave the separatists to be genocided? The ukronazis have turned off the water supply to the separatist parts a while ago, the oppression they'd do if russia didn't fight them is documented between 2014 and 2022.
Are they worse than the terms you're going to get in another 6 months?
Has your position gotten better in the last 6 months?
They are worse than the terms they got after Trump met with EU Heads. So yes, you should not accept the terms Trump shat out his ass directly after talking to Putin.
One of the main points is to get a ceasefire first.
Ukraine's bargaining position gets worse the longer the war drags on. Unless there's genuine reason to believe the tides will change in a lasting way, Ukraine's best time to bargain is today, and every day following will be worse. Russia will not stop until they have the 4 oblasts, Ukraine stops oppressing ethnic Russians in their territory, and Russia has certification of Ukraine's neutrality to NATO. These are the terms they have regularly re-affirmed, Ukraine can either continue to push an increasingly unpopular war until this happens anyways, try to bargain now so as to force concessions, or hope for a miracle and a changing of the tides.
Refusing some terms and proposing others is the definition of bargaining.
These terms would give Ukraine no assurance in the future of not being invaded. They gave up their nukes once for that promise, now they will have to give up territory. How much, that is part of the negotiations.
Ukraine isn't in a position to repeatedly turn down all of Russia's demands. Russia has the means to continue pursuing its goals, Ukraine does not. Ukraine broke both Minsk agreements and admitted to never intending on following them, Russia did not.
The reality of the situation is that Russia doesn't have a reason to invade Ukraine in the future if their terms are met, namely the 4 oblasts, NATO neutrality, and cessation of Kiev's oppressing ethnic Russians. People don't go to war without reason, and unless Ukraine has an ace up their sleeves, every day is more dead Ukrainians, Russians, and more favorable conditions for Russia.
Zelensky could end it at any second too
End the war or something idk
Yeah, if he did, it might be necessary to hold elections even. And that would just be terrible!
Self preservation would be one motivation. .
The 2019 RAND report gameplan for this conflict makes it clear that, if the worst case scenario happens and Russia gets stronger over the course of the conflict rather than being depleted as intended, an offramp should be found immediately to minimize Russian gains. Ukraine is losing the war, and supplies are now limited to a dripfeed. Their suzerain is stating pretty clearly that they expect compliance. -- Logically, in line with US think-tanks, the next step is to assassinate Zelensky and find someone more conciliatory.
Well they called it peace, so it's totally different from surrender. There's no way Russia would ignore the treaty, amass forces at the border, and attempt a push straight for the capitol... again.
Why would they do that? Wouldn't it be better to amass forces on the eastern border, travel over the bering strait, use the highways, and push for the white house?