this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
1038 points (100.0% liked)

World News

46888 readers
3655 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 [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


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

Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff, in a CNN interview with Jake Tapper, failed to specify any Russian concessions in a potential Ukraine peace deal despite detailing demands on Ukraine.

After claiming a "friendship" with Putin, Witkoff spoke vaguely about "territorial" and "economic" concessions from both sides. He also claimed a U.S.-Ukraine deal on raw earth minerals would be signed soon.

When confronted with Russian state TV footage suggesting Trump’s stance aligns with Putin’s, Witkoff insisted diplomacy requires communication.

His remarks fueled concerns over Trump’s approach to Russia and Ukraine.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Well Palestinians were involved with negotiating the Oslo accords, and that gave rise to Hamas anyway. Palestine is a fascist society and as you say there isn't much point in having an agreement with fascists unless there's some kind of military force to ensure they follow it. At this point Palestine is just a proxy in Iran's "Axis of Resistance" and it doesn't seem like Iranians much care how many Arabs die so long as it hurts their enemies. It makes sense for Arab countries to work together with Israel against their common adversary of Iran. Trying to keep normalized relations between Iran's adversaries as some kind of motivator in a vain hope that Iran's proxies will suddenly make a peace agreement separate from the country that's funding them is a little naive.

With Ukraine it's the opposite way. It's Russia that's the fascist society and yeah, there needs to be military guarantees that they won't do as Hamas does and just build up their forces and strike when it suits them while ignoring any agreement made.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The point I was making is that you can't make lasting peace through flimsy one-sided negotiations, but the trump brand of peacemaking is about quick "results" with single-presidential-term durability that solves very little on the long run, just pushes the problems to the next presidential term (which may be his own this time...).

Your comparison of Hamas and Russia doesn't only lack nuance but blatantly ignores crucial geopolitical differences in worldwide influence, military might, and general motivations, which are all totally beside the point of the present discussion.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Uhh... you brought up how it's similar to the Abraham accords without any kind of nuance. I added a small amount of additional detail. But instead of accepting your initial comparison lacked nuance, you're trying to play the uno reverse card which is an immature (and dishonest) style of discussion.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

If someone ignores all the cues about the discussion's context (trumpian peace) let it be implied (thread's topic; my first post), or explicit ("the point I was making" and beside the point of the present discussion), they shouldn't complain about the discussion's style either.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Oh, man, the white colonialist invader's propaganda never ceases to be an entertaining parroting of the "it's the natives whose land we stole and whose children we murdered who are violent barbarians and the real baddies" same line as used way back in the 19th century against Indian tribes in America and the natives of the territories occupied by the British Empire.

"They're the real Fascists for not laying down and taking it whilst we as a self proclaimed 'people chosen by ' rape them!!!"

Trully, Zionists have Western Values - specifically, the Western Values from two centuries ago.