Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Kyiv would like to end the war with Russia next year through “diplomatic means” as both countries prepare for President-elect Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

In an interview with the Ukrainian media outlet Suspilne, Zelenskyy said he is certain that the war will end “sooner” than it otherwise would have once Mr. Trump becomes president.

The prospect of Trump returning to power in the United States next year has raised questions about the future of the conflict, as the Republican has been critical of U.S. military aid to Kyiv.

Zelenskyy said that Ukraine “must do everything so that this war ends next year, ends through diplomatic means.”

Archive link

  • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    All I can say to this bizarre reply is that the whitewashed version of history (never mind current events, since some of those conflicts are still ongoing, violently, today) you were taught at school, or hear about in the msm isn’t the reality, and that none of those conflicts were fucking peaceful, or came to a conclusion because those in power just decided to give it up.

    Pick up a fucking book (or watch a video, or listen to a podcast, however you take information in, go and do that, but only if you can cope with challenging your bias, otherwise it becomes a completely pointless exercise)

    E: Like, honestly, do you seriously believe there is any point in talking to Putin? Do you think an open and proud totalitarian known for throwing his opponents out of windows is a trustworthy person who will have good faith and stay true to his word? Do you fucking hear yourself???

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Ah yes, peaceful, if you erase the Gwang-ju Massacre and other atrocities committed by “The Butcher” Chun Doo-Hwan.

        The rights enjoyed by South Koreans were fought for with the blood of workers and students spilled by their own government and Capitalists. Don’t erase them.

        • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 days ago

          Nice try but you don’t get to argue that a protest over 7 years ago and is unrelated caused the peaceful transfer.

          I mean you might as well argue that the blood of Americans were spilled for their freedoms in BLM, Kansas State Massacre, the Chicago fire. Oh wait, those protests massacres happened AFTER USA was a democracy. It’s almost like they’re not related to being a democracy or not and the June protests weren’t part of that massacre because it’s a 7 YEAR gap.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            The Gwang-Ju protests were a pro-democracy protest against the dictator Chun Doo-Hwan. You have no idea what you’re talking about and are erasing the very real historical impact of the massacre.

            • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              And those protests were like the American protests didn’t get anything done. It wasn’t until 7 years later when they simply asked nicely. If anything, you’re proving violence doesn’t work and the best option is to literally simply ask nicely.

              Thus, my point about the violent protest being unrelated. It did NOT cause the regime change. I’m not talking about what it’s about, I’m talking about what actually switches the government.

              I never said nations don’t have problem. My list of violent massacres in USA proves that. I’m saying violent protests does not lead to regime change as often as a peaceful transition. Your Korean argument proves that as the violent protest did nothing, vs the peaceful one.

              *Edit: To be clear, if we study history we find peaceful regime change far more likely than violent ones. BUT people like YOU keep creating violent situations that do not help the situation. If people like YOU stop being violent, maybe we could work towards actually beneficial transitions.

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 days ago

                They had already asked peacefully, and were slaughtered for doing so. The change was a cumulative effort with deep contextual history, and didn’t happen in a vacuum.

                You have *no idea" what you’re talking about.

                • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  The Koreans were not slaughtered in 1987 and they transitioned peacefully. You don’t know what you are talking about you violent war monger.

                  • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    5 days ago

                    Like I said, you have no concept of time, everything is a static event for you, devoid of context. 1987 wasn’t the first time South Koreans fought against a dictatorship, and had been slaughtered for peaceful protests. Just because eventually the government conceded doesn’t mean it wasn’t paid for in civilian blood.

                    You have no idea what you’re talking about, and insult the Korean people who gave their lives, and insult the families of those who died.