this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
1292 points (98.7% liked)

World News

39356 readers
2483 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy asserted that no world leader has the right to negotiate with Russian President Vladimir Putin on behalf of Ukraine.

Speaking to Le Parisien readers, Zelenskyy emphasized that Ukraine alone determines its future and any dialogue with Russia must follow a peace plan based on strength and international support.

He warned against negotiating without clear guarantees of security, highlighting the risks of Putin resuming aggression after a ceasefire.

Zelenskyy called for a strategy ensuring Ukraine's long-term stability and security, beyond NATO or EU membership timelines.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tired_n_bored@lemmy.world 115 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (7 children)

I am so sad by how Ukraine has been handled.

The West should have been an overwhelming power against Russian imperialism. Ukraine should have been given everything from the beginning, no strings attached, with no self-imposed red lines.

They will swallow another democracy in 10-20 years and the cycle repeats.

[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 3 points 1 day ago

Yep. It was a sad excuse not to intervene in 2014, but now? Pathetic.

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 27 points 2 days ago

And that would likely have ended the war sooner, causing less people to die, and making Putin less likely to try something like it in the future.

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Tactically, the plan is to make Russia bleed to death rather than temporarily paralyse it.

Maximizing the loss of russian life and draining the russian economy to the point that the population won't tolerate any further war is the goal. It's unfortunate that this is at the cost of ongoing war in Ukraine.

[–] GuitarSon2024@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is a solid take, but the other side of the issue is the question of how long will it take the brainwashed Russian population to realize the economy has passed a point of no return? Outside of major cities much of Russia lives in 3rd world poverty. Will they even notice if the ruble falls to zero?

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Some might not notice a change in the economy, but they will notice that their sons are being taken and that they are not coming back.

Approximately 1 in 1000 Russian males have now been killed. How many more will have to die for the average Russian to say "no more" is a tough question.

[–] frozenpopsicle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That statistic sounds off. 1 in 100?

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I used a population of 143,000,000 divided by an estimated death toll in Ukraine of 70,000 and assumed half of the russian population is female.

1 in 100 might be correct if you only consider men of a fighting age.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Holy shit, I haven't looked at the numbers in a while, but

  • Russian population: 140 000 000
  • Male population: 70 000 000
  • Male fighting age population (18 - 60 years): Very approximately 50 000 000 (I honestly just made up a number a bit smaller than 70)
  • Documented KIA: 85 000
  • Projected actual KIA: 170 000 (Note: Prigozin claimed 120 000 KIA in June 2023)
  • Projected number of severely wounded: Roughly 500 000

Result:

  • Roughly 0.34 % fighting age men killed
  • Roughly 1 % of fighting age men severely wounded

This has to be getting close to a point where most Russians know someone personally that has been killed or severely wounded in the war...

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I heard a while ago that a very well connected person (the sort of person that doesn't need to work and could spend all their free time maintaining family relations and friendships) would really only be able to maintain family relations and friendships with about two hundred people. The sort of people that say "I have 1000 friends on Facebook" are talking complete bollocks, there's a huge difference between a relationship/friendship and an acquaintance that you haven't talked to for fifteen years. The average person truly knows many less people than this, usually in the low dozens.

Using your figures and assuming that these relationships are 50/50 male/female, even these very well connected people would statistically still know less than one injured soldier and have less than a 1/3 chance of personally knowing someone that was killed.

I know this comment assumes and extrapolates quite a bit and the idea is somewhat of a tangent from the original comment, but I think it's quite interesting.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

True, I did a quick calculation and the probability of knowing someone killed or severely injured is

  • 12.5% if you know 10 people
  • 23.5% if you know 20 people
  • 33.5% if you know 30 people
  • 41.5% if you know 40 people
  • 49% if you know 50 people

So around ⅓ Russians know at least one person that's been killed or wounded, and around 10-20% of Russians have someone in their inner circle of friends and family (10-20 closest) that have been killed for wounded.

For this last number to reach 50%, the number of killed+wounded needs to reach about 5% of the fighting age population (≈2.5 million).

Of course, the above assumes that casualties are randomly distributed in the population. In reality it's likely that fewer people know someone killed or wounded, and that those that know someone likely know more, because of the casualties being disproportionately effecting more rural regions of the country.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 13 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Turns out neither the west or russia gives a shit about Ukraine.

[–] deczzz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Please be more concrete. Who is the west? Because in Denmark we throw resources at Ukraine to support their efforts.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago

Do you throw danish people?

[–] DicJacobus@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago

they'll give a shit once all other options have been exhausted, and people realize the next step is actual shooting war, with the bombs falling on Warsaw, Helsinki, Berlin, etc. When they realize they're on their last legs before the big one, then they'll take it seriously.

America is a write off, Regulatory captured by the Russian Federation / Russian Mob, Same thing At the very least until 2026 midterms. Europe is still in denial that its time to switch from butter, to guns. Literally

[–] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

everything keeps pointing to time being a circle, the same things will continue to happen every 20-30 years. like the show Dark.

[–] caboose2006@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Maybe no civilian targets. But other than that totally agree. We should have put lend lease circa 1940s to shame

[–] bufalo1973@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Or not helping Boris Yeltsin against Gorbachev.

[–] caboose2006@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Or maybe the US should have stopped Catherine the great from annexing Crimea. Jesus you people.

[–] bufalo1973@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Oh, right, I didn't remember I wasn't allowed to set the time frame. Only you have that power, right? 🤦‍♂️

Edit: and it was YOU the one talking about 1940s.

[–] caboose2006@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago

And he's intentionally obtuse. What a winner.