this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
1331 points (100.0% liked)

World News

44758 readers
5576 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

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
[–] [email protected] 70 points 3 months ago (4 children)

You'd think this would be a fairly cut and dry issue - the countries helping Ukraine wouldn't like it either if another country started negotiating terms on their behalf (especially not with a monster like Putin).

Ukraine and its people should be the ones to decide their own fate.

I swear people who think otherwise must've read David vs. Goliath and sided with the Goliath.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 3 months ago (2 children)

must’ve read David vs. Goliath and sided with the Goliath.

Bold of you to assume that they can read, or that they have read the Bible.

In my experience not even "devout Christians" do that last one.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago (2 children)

easiest way to become an atheist is to read scripture.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago

100%. Reading the Bible cover to cover + learning about the history of how Judaism was born out of the polytheistic Yahwism and the resulting merge between Yahweh and the chief Canaanite god El was the way I just kept pulling the thread until it all came apart. The inconsistencies between an omnibenevolent god (El) and violent massacring war god (Yahweh) make a lot more sense once you know they used to be two separate gods.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Alright, that didn't work. What's next?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I dunno, if you believe in a global flood and the tower of babel I'm not sure I can help

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Honestly I'm not qualified enough to make educated guesses what type of texts those are. As in, are they written in a form that insinuates to be literal stories. The teachings of those stories are pretty understandable, though.

Some say that the oldest stories are reverse prophecies. And we know how accurate prophecies are considered in general.

The Bible is not a science book, but one of relationship between God and man.

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

It's interesting that that relationship changes, isn't it? Like, early on God is the sort of deity to turn you into salt or flood the world if He's displeased. And over time, He does that sort of spiteful intervention less and less. It's hard not to see it as Him getting wiser and more compassionate. But... if He's all powerful and all knowing to begin with, why does His approach to people change?

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

It's not only interesting, it's difficult to understand, and Old Testament contains a lot of stuff that makes you doubt. But if you look at it from a theological view, God's judgement does not disappear anywhere in New Testament. It's just diverted into one person: his own son, who he abandons to be crucified, even though he is innocent.

Christianity is really a horrifying religion. The core of it is disgusting and offensive.

But it doesn't end there.

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

I can't say I disagree. The tendency to outright dismiss christianity online is understandable, but a little frustrating. Even with that horrifying core, a lot of people find solace in it. For many, it's the only semblence of community that's lasted into the 21st century.

On another level, it's just plain interesting the sorts of stories people felt needed to be preserved. It speaks to how they lived and what they valued. A lot has changed, and a lot hasn't. That kind of narrative window into the past is valuable, and I'm glad I grew up with it, even if I don't consider myself Christian anymore.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

The stories in the Bible are kind of comforting, in a way. It's basically a chain of generations after generations fucking everything up and doing every horrible thing mankind does. Yet through all that the message is that God is always the same and always waiting for his people to stop running away from him.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

It has different messages if you hold it upside down.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

Hey Goliath was clearly in the right. David brought a gun to a fist fight, bastard never should have been allowed to walk free after that level of cheating.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

What about the country sending the most aid to Ukraine, without which Ukraine could not continue the war, being the one at the negotiating table?

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

Ukraine can 100% continue fighting their invaders without the US. Also, Europe supplies more aid to Ukraine than the US.

https://www.euronews.com/2023/07/28/how-much-has-the-eu-given-to-ukraine-compared-to-the-us

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Then why is Ukraine constantly upset US isn't giving enough aid?

Also, Europe supplies more aid to Ukraine than the US.

You might not realize this, but you're comparing a continent to a country. US is still "the country sending the most aid to Ukraine," which I said in my previous comment.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Because the US could do a whole lot more?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, but according to the other commenter Ukraine "doesn't need it" and he doesn't want Ukraine to be reliant on the US.

So... they both do and don't need aid from the US? Lol.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago

It's not that hard. They don't need aid to continue to fight, but they do need aid to be able to win.

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

I see what you're trying to say and I agree but this isn't the right echo chamber to be talking like that.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No, that country can fuck off back across the ocean, thanks.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And take their aid along with them?

What if this means Ukraine is no longer able to defend itself?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Then they can fuck off across the ocean with their aid. Ukraine isn't the US's puppet.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Alright well, I guess it can be Russia's puppet then.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

Uh huh, it would be less a russian puppet than the US negotiating another countries' fate.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

to paraphrase an old Polish quote, (on dealing with Russians) "The Rubble is preferable to Russian Dominion"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Maybe it's just me, but life in Ukraine didn't look all that different from life in Russia before the invasion.

Both nations are far behind the civilized world when it comes to social issues. Corruption was cited as a major reason for denying Ukraine entrance into NATO.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago

the difference beforehand was that prior to the shooting (big shooting at least). One was a flawed democracy that was trying to improve, and trying to do to itself what Poland did to itself after 20-30 years in NATO and EU.

the other was an authoritarian mob state. going from one to the other, was evidently worth fighting to the death over, I am inclined to agree.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Maybe it’s just me, but life in Ukraine didn’t look all that different from life in Russia before the invasion.

You mean apart from all the dead Ukrainians and the ethnic cleansing and the kidnapped children and such?

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

before the invasion.

I swear, everytime you reply to me it's in bad faith.

You need to brush up on your reading comprehension and take a class on persuasive writing.

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

Yeah, I read what you wrote. Unless you meant before the invasion of Crimea, and I don't think you did, I stand by what I said.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Would the US like it if another country tried to push it to the side and negotiate on its behalf on literally any issue, not even war-related?

Do you think the US would accept the outcome of such negotiations willingly?

I suspect it wouldn't, so expecting another country to do so is pure hypocrisy.