Donald Trump: I’d have let Putin annex part of Ukraine to end the war

The Telegraph ^ | March 9, 2023 | Nick Allen

[familyop]

The former president told Sean Hannity’s radio show:...Mr Trump added: “That’s without even negotiating a deal. I could have negotiated. At worst, I could have made a deal to take over something, you know, there are certain areas that are Russian speaking areas, right, like, but you could have worked a deal. And now Ukraine is just being blown to smithereens.”

[Petrosius]

McGruff: Ukraine has been killing ethnic Russians in the Donbas region since 2014.

Georgia Girl 2: Correct. Donbas has endured shelling from the Ukraine Nazi militias for 8 years.

Incorrect. There has been no indiscriminate shelling of the civilian population in Donbas, as is often claimed by Russian apologists. Rather, there was an exchange of fire between Ukrainian government forces and Russian surrogate militias. Most of the civilian casualties have been from abandoned minefields and unexploded ordinance. The claim of Ukrainian genocide against ethnic Russians in Donbas is a lie.

Georgia Girl 2: They are mostly Russian and want to join Russia anyway.

Again false. The majority of the population in Donbas are ethnic Ukrainians. The split between Ukrainians and Russians is approximately 60/40.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Yes, I’m sure all the people who have been interviewed there are just lying. 😏

[Petrosius]

Yes, I’m sure all the people who have been interviewed there are just lying.

Now you are catching on. The myth of a Ukrainian genocide against the civilian population is Russian propaganda. Even the casualty figures published by the two so-called Donbas republics do not support the claim.

[Kazan]

If you have problem with that, you’re the wrong place and should join the Democrat party.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Its not a myth. The Neo Nazis have been routinely shelling the Donbass for 8 years. The people are sick of it.

[Petrosius]

Its not a myth. The Neo Nazis have been routinely shelling the Donbass for 8 years.

Documentation, please. First, the Ukrainian artillery used at the time had a limited range. They could not strike beyond this if they had wanted. Second, they also had limited ammunition supplies. What benefit would the Ukrainians have gained in diverting their artillery from shelling Russian militia positions to shelling a civilian population that they wanted to reintegrate into Ukraine? Third, as I said above, even the casualty reports from the so-called Donbas republics do not support the claim of massive civilian casualties. Just repeating these claims does not make them true.

[BJ1]

To be fair it wasn’t Russia that flooded these areas with Russians. It was the USSR. Russia isn’t the Soviet Union. Listen to Vladimir Putin and you will soon realize that. Russia is trying to regain it’s Christian morality for example. Vlad complains of the immorality of the west too. This is not the old Soviet state which sought to destroy the family, destroy religion, destroy capitalism all so the state could have complete power and control of it’s citizens lives.

I’m ranting because I detect on this site that ppl are treating Russia like it’s the old Soviet Union. It is not.

[McGruff]

More than 2,600 civilians killed, 5,500 others wounded in Donbass over past 8 years - IC

https://tass.com/society/1408947

It was one of main reasons Russia intervened.

[sarge83]

And it should be the Ukrainians decision, not BiteMe or NATO’s.

[Sacajaweau]

https://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2014/03/understanding-the-constitutional-situation-in-crimea/

[Sacajaweau]

Do you really think the people of Ukraine have any say?? At least 8 million have left....about 20% of the population.

They have no weapons...city after city has been totally destroyed...

[kabar]

From the first link you provided:

But Kiev’s insistence that the law should come into force only when elections are held in the eastern territories under Ukrainian jurisdiction drew immediate criticism from Russia, whose forces Kiev says are arming and backing the rebels.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking in Moscow, said the law was a “sharp departure from the Minsk agreements” because it tied “special status” to elections in which the self-declared rebel leaders would not take part.

Separatist leaders also criticized the law. “All the questions which the Kiev parliament considered today completely contradict the Minsk agreements,” a separatist official, Alexei Karyakin, was quoted as saying by the Russian news agency RIA Novosti. He said Kiev planned “new bloodshed”.

[Petrosius]

Yes, the Russians objected because the vote would not take place under Russian military occupation. The main point, the law would have gone into effect if the Russians left and a vote were allowed to take place under proper Ukrainian jurisdiction. N.B., all that was required was an election, not a favorable result in that election.

[familyop]

"Annexations and realignments should not be the reason for war, as changes made today could be changed back later. This does not mean that I believe Russia should have invaded Ukraine, but rather a negotiated settlement should have been reached."

We'll bear that in mind when we're occupied ("annexations") and denied all of our current freedoms ("realignments") by a much more expanded Russia-China-Iran-North-Korea axis. We can then begin negotiating while being pillaged, murdered, raped, exterminated, etc. Because, hey, they'll nuke us, if we get in their way.

Encouraging foreign enemies to take over half of the world to turn it into a military machine against you, brainwash your population, launch nukes on your country and invade it: the libertarian way.

Stop funding special civilian interests. Triple military funding.

[familyop]

"Do you really think the people of Ukraine have any say?? At least 8 million have left....about 20% of the population. They have no weapons...city after city has been totally destroyed..."

https://youtu.be/DUpofocMX_4

[familyop]

On the political side of the issue, any intention by a leading campaigner to abandon the Ukrainians will split the Republican vote. Pro-defense Republicans are generally quieter but will stand fast on that, especially after the waves of insults and false accusations in social media.

[familyop]

"If you have problem with that, you’re the wrong place and should join the Democrat party."

Many millions of sane Republicans are well aware that Russian, Chinese, Iranian and North Korean dictators and their few, noisy, drug-addled, brainwashed conspiracy theory zombies on the Net want us to leave the Republican Party and vote Democrat. You want the Democrats to win. You want us to fight with our own countrymen.

If you can get an anti-American, pro-Russia candidate in the lead with your propaganda campaign, then we'll stay away from the polls and drop the vote. But you still won't be allowed to destroy and pillage the U.S.A.

I voted for Donald Trump in 2020, but I did not see him as a pro-Russia, anti-NATO candidate at the time.

If you want Russia to be allowed to continue conquering, then you'll see a third world war end with nothing left of Russia or its allies. Our presidents and members of Congress can possibly delay defense decisions, but their control doesn't go as far as you think it does. We'll only get back into the fight more directly, harder and with much more intensity.

So far, it appears that Russia is cursed.

[Right_Wing_Madman]

Resisting an armed invasion and large-scale land seizure is not "provocation" or "escalation."

In late March 2022, Turkey had negotiated a tentative peace deal between Ukraine and Russia to end the war that was only a month old, but Blinken and Boris Johnson told Ukraine they could not provide guarantee security guarantees under its terms. This was a terrible response from the US and UK , has led to the destruction of Ukraine, and certainly qualifies as "escalation."

[Petrosius]

More than 2,600 civilians killed, 5,500 others wounded in Donbass over past 8 years - IC

Those numbers reflect casualties on both sides and from all causes, for a period of eight years. Let's look at the numbers more closely, as given by a report from the United Nations (2022) The total number of civilian deaths, by year, from 2014 to 2021:

• 2014: 2084
• 2015: 955
• 2016: 112
• 2017: 117
• 2018: 58
• 2019: 27
• 2020: 26
• 2021: 25

So 2/3 of the deaths occurred at the outbreak of the conflict in 2014, with 98% occurring in the first two years. Since then, the numbers of deaths has come down drastically. In 2020 and 2021 — the only years included in the report that I referenced — the majority of casualties were caused by mines, unexploded munitions, and other causes other than artillery and small-arms. Of those caused by active hostilities, the report does not distinguish between artillery and small-arms fire. It should also be pointed out that some of the casualties were caused by the Russians.

None of this suggests that there was a deliberate targeting of the civilian population rather than unintended collateral damage. Russian propagandists, however, use this to justify an invasion that has so far claimed 21,793 civilian casualties (8,173 killed and 13,620 injured) in one year alone. The UN believes that the actual number are considerably higher, with particular concern for Mariupol, Lysychansk, Popasna, and Sieverdonetsk. The Russians have destroyed whole cities. Where is any sense of proportionality?

[BiteYourSelf]

Exactly.🤨