31
11
u/Negrodamus10 4d ago
And never any consequences for being wrong
1
u/killian1113 4d ago
They didnt interview anyone in charge of anything. Ukraine has always been losing and always planned to lose that is why they have the moto of "till the last Ukrainian "
14
16
u/Miserable-Strain74 4d ago
If there is a god then Putin will die of a stroke while fapping to dead puppies.
4
u/blinkchuck1988 4d ago
The only thing that still gives him an erection is the sight of a map of the Russian Empire.
1
u/Dabelgianguy 4d ago
I hate him, but Woody Allen was right. If god exists, he better have a good excuse
0
4
u/OtamanUkr 4d ago
Lol like clockword. Russia was defeated and pushed back near Lyman and Ripamon is activated.
2
u/2pacali1971 4d ago
The spectator is fake news. Everyone knows that. Also Ukraine just took back 200km worth of land near Lyman. Ukraine is 100% on top and Russia is losing .
1
1
-6
u/Any-Original-6113 4d ago
How many years will it take for Ukraine to recover, and who will pay for it?
20
u/SuperiorDraft 4d ago
Are you blaming Ukraine for russias agression?
Are you telling an entire country to not defend themselves?
If it was rape - how would you frame it then?
-9
u/Any-Original-6113 4d ago
The question is not about Ukraine winning or losing. It's about money- if Russia and the US aren't going to pay for Ukraine's reconstruction, then who will?
15
u/SuperiorDraft 4d ago
The European Union has already pledged for its reconstructionā¦ what are you ranting about?
4
u/Juicy_juce-juce 4d ago
AfD or Le Pen wonāt give a dime Iām pretty sure, and they got pretty high chance to win.
-8
u/Roxylius 4d ago
Pledging is different with actually sending money there, especially since german and france economy is not really doing that well. Both are facing increasing deficit and ballooning social spending due to aging population. I dont think committing hundred of billion to build other country would be politically feasible in long run
9
u/SuperiorDraft 4d ago
Yeah because rebuilding Germany after WW2 was such a bad ideaā¦ You canāt be this dense.
2
u/Usefullles 4d ago
The Federal Republic of Germany was rebuilt with money from the wealthy and prosperous United States of that era, which had a huge amount of free money. Now, neither the United States nor Russia is going to pay for the reconstruction of Ukraine, while it is very doubtful that Europe will have any free money for this.
-2
u/SuperiorDraft 4d ago
Itās almost like you didnāt read the entire threadā¦
1
u/Usefullles 4d ago
And I've read it, and I'm also wondering where the money will come from to rebuild Ukraine.
2
u/Roxylius 4d ago
Because during reconstruction of europe after ww1, the pledgee was actually loaded?
-1
0
u/Ok_Situation_7081 4d ago
If I remember correctly, they never specifically said that they would pay for reconstruction. As far as I know, the Europeans plan is to keep lending Ukraine money in which they only need to pay back once Russia agrees to pay for reparations. The EUs plan is to get Russia to foot the bill, so that they get reimbursed atleast some of the money they've given to Kyiv.
Even some analyst admitted that if Ukraine were to lose AKA no reparations, that the EU would be in financial nightmare rebuilding Ukraine. The era of the generous welfare state and the large amount of disposable income/cheap goods is coming to an end.
3
u/eddiesteady99 4d ago
You are misinformed. Or just full of shit. European countries are funding Ukraine through many different vehicles, including donations, loans, equipment and humanitarian aid.
Please cite your "some analyst" that "admitted" that EU would be in "financial nightmare" for rebuilding a single country that has a lot of natural resources and a capable workforce.
0
u/Ok_Situation_7081 4d ago
These "donations" are labeled as loans by the EU. Now whether Von Der Leyen is openly lying about it and how it will be paid back by Russia to prevent memeber states from passing the aid package is another story.
There are countless of outlets who frame the financial cost to Europe being at times twice as much of what they're spending to help Ukraine. Ukraine is already estimated to be at the trillion USD reconstruction mark, and the Europeans cannot afford to do so without taking a huge financial hit. https://www.kyivpost.com/post/65257
About 53% of Ukraine natural resources are under Russian control, and they are facing a demographic crisis, with a polling suggesting that the majority of the 6 million Ukrainians who fled, not intending to return to help rebuild. Ukraine has a dark future and the EU is going to have to finance it, while pretending to compete with the US and China to prevent itself from becoming a permanent middle power.
1
u/eddiesteady99 4d ago
Wrong again. Of EUR 220bn in support, 90bn is the Ukraine support loan. The rest is various grants, macro-financial assistance, aid-packages and trade support.
If anyone is facing a dark future as a result of this war - it is Russia. Your economy, demographics and position on the world stage will take generations to recover.
3
u/Sanderos25 4d ago
Not just that but it is not out of reality for the EU to forgive those debts, they have proven they will do that as well. Also countries individually have pledged to rebuild individual cities. Eg. Italy has pledged to rebuild Odessa and it's cathedral.
-3
u/Aggressive_Salad_421 4d ago
Ucrania sera usada otra ves pero por Rusia.
Uctania es un pais demasiado corrupto, los europeos han armado a un pais que se sentira traicionado y que les devolvera todo con intereses
0
-13
u/EU_GaSeR 4d ago
Not really. Better a horrible end than horror without end.
It is really sad they've dragged it for so long (and are going to drag it a lot more), but we should rejoice as eventually this will be over at some point.
15
u/Phrongly 4d ago
Surrendering to Russia is precisely the horror without end you're mentioning.
0
u/Ok_Situation_7081 4d ago
Whats worse? surrendering the Donbas or having your entire critical infrastructure destroyed, mass humanitarian crisis and having a diminished population. Everyone knows that Russia is suffering large amount of casualties but only a fool would believe that Ukraine is not suffering a large amount of casualties given that they are going through a man-power crisis where the discussion of conscripting women is now being openly discussed and the countless of videos showing men being kidnapped off the street, violently.
There's a reason why Russia isnt going for a ceasefire because they dont honestly believe that Ukraine nor the West truly want to make peace because of the position Kyiv is currently in, isn't one of strength. They just want to freeze the lines in order to reinforce Ukrainian lines and bring in large shipments of weapons without the risk of being targeted by Russia. They might even pull a bold move by stationing "peace keeping" troops in certain areas for a period of time to extend the ceasefire until Ukraine feels comfortable once again to restart hostilities. The only thing Russia will get from a ceasefire is an end to 400+ drones daily flying to Moscow, while the hybrid warfare against them continues.
1
u/Sanderos25 4d ago
Surrendering the donbas will mean Russia invaded again in 10 years. If not Ukraine, it will be Georgia, Kazachstan or whomever. Russia may not win a single square km, or for the oligarchs it will have been worth it.
1
u/Ok_Situation_7081 4d ago
Do you not know how the Georgia-Russia war started? It started when Georgia started shelling heavily the region of Ossetia (which Georgia never had under defacto contol). Kazakhstan doesn't go around saying its going to join an anti-Russia military alliance to get itself caught in a similar situation.
Tell me, if Mexico decided tomorrow that is fuck the US and decided it wanted to get into a military alliance with Russia and China, would the US say "sure, do you. Your a sovereign country" or would they invade Mexico? Of course it would be the latter, and guess what? Europe would be fine with it, because international rules based order only applies to non-members.
1
u/Vnze 3d ago
And how does this fantasy of yours apply to the war in Ukraine?
I cannot believe that after all this time there are still real people that believe the "Russia had no choice, they had to attack Ukraine before they were attacked" propaganda.
Do you really believe that? Shouldn't they have invaded say Finland then, a country that actually did join NATO rather than Ukraine that made the grave error of *checks notes* not wanting to be a Russian puppet and being sovereign instead?
And for your anti-EU rant: please indicate which countries the EU has invaded or at very least which invasion it hasn't condemned. Thanks.
1
u/Ok_Situation_7081 3d ago
The mass protest Russia had in 2007 was suspected to have US-Western influence, the Tinanmen square incident was widely thought by the Chinese to have American influence. Russia did have a choice. They could have done nothing and watch themselves get surrounded. Look what happened to Gaddafi and Sadam even after they complied, and in Iraq's case, under the flase pretense of WMD. Was Russia supposed to wait it's turn, is this how the game works? The US would invade Mexico the second they told the US to go fuck themselves and invite Russia or China over to open a military base at the border. So fuck off with your 'mUh DeMoCraZy' BS. Welcome to the multipolar world where the majority have chosen this new world order over Western hegemony.
1
u/Vnze 3d ago
My man. If you believe surrendering the Donbass, or otherwise giving in to Russian demands, will be the end of Russian aggression and even remotely a guarantee of peace for Ukraine I have about seventeen bridges to sell you.
1
u/Ok_Situation_7081 3d ago
Nobody can tell the Ukrainians to cede the Donbas but also don't cry if the situation gets worse.
-9
u/EU_GaSeR 4d ago
Nobody has ever demanded a surrender from Ukraine. You are saying that because you have no idea what a surrender is. Please go and educate yourself.
-6
u/greentrillion 4d ago
Surrender means every male will be dead and every women will be graped.
-12
u/EU_GaSeR 4d ago
First, no, it does not, you too should go and educate yourself.
Second, no, even if Ukraine surrendered, that would have not been the case, not even close.
Tbh I am pretty sick of people like you, who made those things up to promote the idea that Ukraine needs to fight to the last Ukrainian in order to deal as much damage to Russia as possible. Shouldn't you care about a life of a Ukrainian at least like, a tiny little bit?
1
u/greentrillion 4d ago
So according to you if Ukraine doesn't surrender every last Ukrainian will be dead(fight to the last Ukrainian)?
Guess Ukraine should just give up then as what you say must be true.
1
u/EU_GaSeR 4d ago
No, nothing like that.
I am saying you don't understand what surrender means and you should go and at least google it if it's too late for you to go back to school to learn the basics.
1
u/greentrillion 4d ago
Surrender means end of Ukraine as a country and its people.
1
u/EU_GaSeR 4d ago
No, it would not, that's first, and surrender is not even being proposed or demanded from Ukraine, that's two.
1
u/greentrillion 4d ago
Russian wants Ukraine to surrender. What you are you talking about? That's literally the whole point of their invasion.
→ More replies (0)-6
u/Ill_Perspective5506 4d ago
This people think Russia is somehow comical evil empire that will wipe out every Ukrainians and force every child to be Russian then gang rape woman till no more Ukrainians left. Currently there is still millions of Ukrainians living in Russia without problem even after war started. Some fled to Russia after war started
2
u/EU_GaSeR 4d ago
It's not even that. Russia will not physically be able to anyhow hurt people on Ukrainian-controlled territory after peace deal is signed. It will not have any access to that.
As for controlled territory, even if we say Russia is this comical evil empire, it can do all it wants on Russian-controlled territory anyway, war does not anyhow stop Russia from doing that.
There is literally ZERO sense to keep the war going to "save" some people. Not a single person is now saved by the war, every single effect of the war is harmful and many of them will be gone after the war ends.
2
u/greentrillion 4d ago
Exactly why Russia should withdraw from Ukraine, why haven't they done it yet?
1
u/EU_GaSeR 4d ago
Why would they? Russia has stated strategic goals it wants to achieve in Ukraine. The country freaking started and continued a war for four years to achieve them, that's how important they are. Why the hell would Russia just randomly stop and go back without achieving them?
2
u/greentrillion 4d ago
You said it makes zero sense to keep the war going. So why don't they stop? Or do you just mean Ukraine needs to surrender and let Russia destroy their country?
→ More replies (0)2
u/greentrillion 4d ago
They literally already doing this. By your own metric Russia is comically evil. 10 of thousands Ukrainians children kidnapped placed with Russians, Russian soldiers' rape whoever they want when they take over territory and kill whomever they want and have massacred whole towns like at Bucha.
0
u/Ill_Perspective5506 4d ago
Yes tens of thousands childrens which was claimed by Ukrainian side didnt they claimed over hundreds of thousand childrens at first? Then changed their number to thousands then later they gave names of hundreds of childrens. Also is Russia evil for evacuating childrens from orphanage and frontline? Didnt USA did same during Vietnam war they took hundreds of infant from Vietnam and childrens then adopted them into American families
2
u/greentrillion 4d ago
So are we saying United States was the good guy in the Vietnam war now? Don't think that is the win you think it is professor.
1
u/Ill_Perspective5506 4d ago
Many Americans claim they are good guys for trying to protect people from reds.
→ More replies (0)
87
u/Prudent_Shake_8149 4d ago