They did capture ~2% of the Kursk region and lost much more in Donbass. They keep loosing everyday.
That's right, and imagine Putin giving up land - it's not going to happen. If Ukraine wants any of their own land back, they have to hold on to the Russian land. Personally I think for the sake of survival they should consider giving up on the land they've lost but join NATO and have our nukes stationed there for their protection from further attacks.
Do you really hope that Russia will "exchange" tens of thousands of km2 to hundreds of km2?
does nobody think this will risk nuclear war? Is this really a place we want to risk it? I'm amazed at the comments section here
I think it reduces the risk of a nuclear war. The thing to understand about Russia is that all their "red lines" are empty talk, and what they really respect is force. Ukraine appeared weak to Putin, and that's why he invaded. Only way to peacefully coexist with Russia is by either becoming their puppet, or having enough strength to make an invasion seem obviously bad idea. IMO the best way to prevent a nuclear war w…
>Only way to peacefully coexist with Russia is by either becoming their puppet
Finland has been peacefully coexisting with USSR and Russia for almost 80 years after the WW2.
>would be supplying all its neighbours with big pile of nuclear weapons
Russia could do that too. Starting with Cuba, for example. Think of every country the US ever invaded or bombed having nukes and the means to deliver them to the US.
That's right, and imagine Putin giving up land - it's not going to happen. If Ukraine wants any of their own land back, they have to hold on to the Russian land. Personally I think for the sake of survival they should consider giving up on the land they've lost but join NATO and have our nukes stationed there for their protection from further attacks.
Do you really hope that Russia will "exchange" tens of thousands of km2 to hundreds of km2?
no, I know that Putin will not give up any land - he's too proud for that.
does nobody think this will risk nuclear war? Is this really a place we want to risk it? I'm amazed at the comments section here
'National security' as a political question has at some point been taken over by emotional lunatics. I don't know what to say really.
The US's national security interests in supporting Ukraine are pretty blindingly obvious. Turning isolationist and emboldening Russia helps no-one but Russia.
They did capture ~2% of the Kursk region and lost much more in Donbass. They keep loosing everyday.
That's right, and imagine Putin giving up land - it's not going to happen. If Ukraine wants any of their own land back, they have to hold on to the Russian land. Personally I think for the sake of survival they should consider giving up on the land they've lost but join NATO and have our nukes stationed there for their protection from further attacks.
From what I understand, that is actually a reasonably strong prevailing opinion in Ukraine. They're not keen on relinquishing their claim on any part of their land, but they would consider leaving it under Russian control in a peace deal, and what's not at all optional is some form of security guarantee that meaningfully deters Russia from trying again (but than NATO hasn't actually offered, and it seems like they think they can leave that question until after peace has happened, which conflicts with Ukraine's view that it's a 100% prerequisite for peace).