• bl4kers@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I listened to an interview recently, I believe on BBC, where the interviewee said the biggest issue with peace talks is that the international community isn’t able to trust Putin to keep his word on whatever is agreed upon. I hadn’t considered that, but it makes a lot of sense and I’m not sure how that could change

    • Lad@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Russia won’t be trustworthy until Putin and his fascist United Russia party are gone.

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      it makes a lot of sense and I’m not sure how that could change

      It will change when the cancer finally kills that bastard.

    • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      You draw new borders and stop shooting, that’s a start. You then keep the agreement by having enough military for a new invasion to be undesirable. Simple game theory. Trust and promises only work for societies that mutually respect each other.

    • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

      The same argument can be used in favor of Russia. NATO has invaded plenty of countries under false pretenses in the past. Both Russia and NATO do not have a reputation for keeping their promises.

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Unironically yes, NATO members have invaded a lot of places, often in coalition with other member states.

          • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            That’s like saying Canada is responsible for something Mexico did because they’re both on the same continent…

            NATO is purely a defense agreement.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              It is more like saying the axis is known to invade nations because its member states invade nations. Okay, sure, Germany and Italy invaded the soviet union but Japan didn’t, you can’t say they’re not a defensive alliance /s