Is it possible to believe all of the following? - Russia was the aggressor. - Zelensky heroically defended his country and unexpectedly held on to Kyiv and much else. - But the war cannot be "won" by Ukraine so a negotiated peace is needed. - Zelensky needs to accept that. -
1K
649
7K
Replies
@mattwridley They're logically consistent but some are false. One can see which by applying them to Churchill 1940. What would he have "needed to accept"? (This BTW is why there's a growing insistence that Churchill was bad—It erases distinctions between right and wrong, agency and despair.)
107
54
1K
@mattwridley The only one I'd take issue with is the idea that the war cannot be won by Ukraine. Russia has exhausted itself to grab a pretty dismal amount of land, and it's petering out (see pic). Ukraine is now retaking some areas like Toretsk. There's the likelihood of retaking swathes of
33
6
122
@mattwridley Let me stop you at point 1. "Belief" in Russia being the aggressor isn't a problem for those who oppose this war. The question you want to slide by, as many others do, is what provoked Russia to action? True lunatics want to pretend Russia is just feral and evil and their war
5
9
96
@mattwridley Trump and Vance reacted with controlled anger, which was righteous, justified and salutary for all to see. The slaughter could have been easily avoided. Those who prevented such avoidance should be held in contempt and consigned to the ash heap of history, joining Biden there.
2
0
92
@mattwridley correction: Trump and Vance behaved APPROPRIATELY. even Biden lost his temper with Zelensky back in 2022. 🤦🏻♂️
2
6
65
@mattwridley Ask yourself if Russia is winning the war right now. With the right information, you will figure out it isn't and it won't, short of extremely dumb western politics. Then if Russia can't win the war either, why put the pressure to make peace on Ukraine when you could also put it
5
6
42
@mattwridley Does Zelenskyy "need to accept" that hundreds and thousands of abducted Ukrainian children have been adopted by new Russian parents and dispersed throughout the vast country? Would the UK accept the loss of so many of its children to a hostile power? Should Ukraine accept
53
27
200
@mattwridley I’d suggest that point four is incorrect. Zel’s national security policy isn’t to retake all of the territory. Rather the focus is on a security guarantee that is strong enough to ensure his country isn’t attacked again. Russia is fighting that and Trump trusts Putin’s word. That
7
0
43
@mattwridley Everyone seems to forget who actually caused that war. It was Vicky Nuland showing up with cookies and five billion Soros-bucks. It was one of those 'colour revolutions' they're so known for, and even still gloat about on their websites: https://t.co/NvaJY2mgXh
3
4
34
@mattwridley Yes, if you only care for consistency rather than historical accuracy, otherwise I would rather rely on the work of John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs than on what some general said on CNN.
0
1
33
@mattwridley The war can be lost by Russia, the same way they lost against Afghanistan or USA against Vietnam. It is an invasion, so it does not matter if you want it or not. "It is not liberal to want invasion" sounds magical thinking. You can not say "ok, im tired, I dont want to be
0
4
17
@mattwridley Does he 'need' to accept it? “If this long island story of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground”. (Winston Churchill, 1940).
1
1
20
@mattwridley Any peace deal needs to 1) return the children Russia took, 2) allow any Ukrainians to choose whether to live in occupied territories or to leave, with their property, to western Ukraine. (There are 3.5m at the moment). 3) obv return pows, 4) provide security for Ukraine that
0
2
12
@mattwridley I'd add one more. Putin won't accept an end that means "he's lost". Because autocrats don't for the reason that those that do rapidly become ex-autocrats hanging from a petrol station. Which rather boxes in the potential solutions.
3
1
14
@mattwridley No one in Ukraine wants war. They want it to end as soon as possible — but capitulating to Russia won't bring peace. As a Russian, I can assure you of that. Also, Ukraine doesn't have to win, only Russia has to lose. And it's not going to take much longer at this rate.
0
1
11
@mattwridley We should also not ignore inconvenient facts: How & why Zelensky won the elections, based on promises to the ethnic Russians in East Ukraine, which he broke. Role of the USA & UK in Ukraine since WW2 & since 2010 in terms of subversion. Russian concerns about NATO expansion.
2
0
10
@mattwridley Yes, it's possible to believe all of those things - except the part where Ukraine "cannot win" and should accept a negotiated peace. Russia was clearly the aggressor, and Zelensky's leadership in defending Ukraine was heroic. European nations do bear responsibility for years of
0
0
7
@mattwridley As long as “negotiated peace” isn’t a euphemism for capitulation which is how the current administration is using the term
0
0
5
@mattwridley Add in a bullet about NATO expansion playing a part too and i'd say that is a good assessment.
0
0
3
@mattwridley It’s also possible to believe Ukraine needs someone other that Putin to guarantee their security. And that without guarantees, they have to keep fighting even if that means defeat. Worth remembering that George Washington was badly losing the war for Independence.
0
0
2
@mattwridley Sure, but way forward is the issue. One sided ceasefire with no security guarantees while you agree a minerals deal and are asked to think better of Putin is not it. Add that to the list and I’m with you
0
0
1
@mattwridley - I can believe that Putin has never honored a peace deal and won't without threat of force. - I can believe that many Americans participating in the commentary on Zelenskyy/Ukraine can't even point Ukraine out on a map.
0
0
0
