How dare the german government not tell us, that there is a Nato agreement not to deliver certain kinds of tanks to Ukraine!? We f*cking played the public for suckers for three months to the f*cking point, where anyone asking about if offensive weapons (as per Nato designation, thats a Nato term, that also never was explained to the public, but I f*cking digress) was seen as a moral offense, and now the german government DARES to put out, that there is such an agreement in a public statement!?
Not with this media at the helm! Nobody knows whats what anymore! The media laments. Thats the fault of the government!
I mean we just whipped the public up to demand everything it could, faster, to reach an outcome that it didnt understand, because of a hero, and now you say there are Nato agreements on this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFJsInqHgho
Not while Theo Kroll is in a commenting role!
And all you need to contextualize this news item is a snarky comment, really… Who the f*ck cares, why this agreement was put in place? Not the media, while Theo Kroll is still in a commenting role!
Sorry --- what? Henry Kissinger stated at Davos, that the Ukraine may have to concede some territory to russia in order to bring about lasting peace?
Lets go to our expert for everything and everyone - quickly.
Quote: “Well, the, tho optsh.., it’s ahm, nnn, I hesitate to quarrel with Henry Kissinger, but nevertheless, ..” let me double down on whatever position I’ve put out into the public for the past three months which is, that we, as the UK arent for regime change, but only for endless sanctions, that cant be relaxed unless there is regime change, and that the goal here is to humiliate russia so severely, that it never forgets that it can never have back Crimea for three generations at least, which then is obviously true, after the Ukraine has won the war, because Nato enlargement will prevent Russia from doing so.
So the fundraising effort for a ukrainian Marshall Plan is coming along well in Davos I hear? Look, Børge Brende was almost seen as having humanist tendencies, for the first time ever. Some say - even human tendencies, for the first time ever, …
But then the title of the Davos initiative surfaced… “CEOs for Ukraine.” Not that the Spiegel would comment on that these days - this is a classic news item you copy from asa/dpa and then move on to the next one.
“And it follows news earlier today, that president Selenskyj will not agree to a seize fire deal, that involves giving up any territory.”
YOUDONTSAY?!
News “earlier today” right?
Not for anyone actually following his speeches over the past three months. Like no f*cking journalist out there.
So lets summarize. We have a fixed public political position of “deliver the Ukraine the most bestest offensive attack weapons it could want”, while the country has just extended martial law to the end of august, and that includes a general draft policy (NYT “Ukraine’s Draft Dodgers Face Guilt, Shame and Reproach”). We have outsourced all of Europes decision making to “the Ukrainians have to decide when they want to stop on their own”. We’ve f*cking played the public for a sucker with CONSTANT “no, they just want the pre 24.02. position back”, until this very week. We’ve made a f*cking mockery out of people saying anything against heavy weapon shipments, because we didnt educate anyone, that this was an Atlantic council demand at first, which the Ukraine then copied, pre Butscha - or what supplying offensive weapons means for the development of the f*cking war. We’ve hardly gotten out there, that the US administration is HEAVILY involved in the daily operations of running this war, and went on a public stall out against the ukranian government, when they flirted with “independence of parts of their country” as a way to resolve the conflict - for even a week.
We have canaries in both the CFR and on the media front, that confirm, that the US might have done far too little not to escalate in the beginning (not letting the Ukraine become a part of Nato was never acceptable as a part of negotiations on their part), we have a public that is not educated, that you cant ask for Nato membership (they have no open door policy
European countries that wish to join NATO are initially invited to begin an Intensified Dialogue with the Alliance about their aspirations and related reforms. Aspirants may then be invited to join the Membership Action Plan, a programme which helps nations prepare for possible future membership. Participation does not guarantee membership, but is a key preparation mechanism.
src: click
The NATO, as a defense union is invitation based.), but that talks about it are “extended to you as an invite”, we have it on record, that those discussions in december concerning Nato extension never included european interests, and were unilateraly ended by the US - that month, while diplomatic venues were open until the end of february, but a change in positions was out of the question. On the media front, we have people like Nina Chruschtschowa on Democracy Now confirming that US generals she talks to are now telling her that the scenario they are aiming for now, is to produce a second Afghanistan for the Russian leadership, while the same generals dont say jack sh*t about that to media.
Media in general f*cked the public by telling it bullshit about Selenskyjs position in general and over time - up to and until this very week, and not just media, we have EU advisers to Josep Borrell putting out fake “what the Ukraine wants to contemplate an end of this war is the the borders of 23. 02. back” messaging this f*cking week. (Fake, because that was never the position of the Ukraine. Isn’t now, never was in the past.) Because they f*cking get “informed” through the same transatlantic friendship initiative channels, that dominate their public position.
No one fucking corrects this. No one fucking factchecks any part of it.
Now the media pivots towards “this (retaining the borders of Feburary 23rd would make it possible to engage in seize fire talks is not the defining position) is news from yesterday”, which just simply isnt true, it was inferred by the usual guests in the usual media channels, but it was never declared that way, at one time it was simply stated to be one of the prerequisites (edit: 25. 05.: die Wiener Zeitung schafft es ENDLICH nach drei Monaten in denen es übergangen wurde, die komplette Position Selenskyjs zu bestätigen. Wer den Teil warum Selenskyj sich unbedingt mit Putin treffen muss braucht, findet ihn, vor zwei Monaten, bei Zakaria.) -- but only in a configuration, where Selenskyj would then be able to talk to Putin and dictate to him a peace, where Putin would have all russian military leave the Ukraine and give up Crimea, to be molded into a self governed zone, as part of the Ukraine, for some time - while Selenskyj actively thinks about how to reintegrate the brainwashed people (his words on CNN, not mine)) and just a way to get the public back on track to anything resembling something close to reality -- after all the political positions are now fixed on the national and EU level…
And to summarize this in one paragraph, you only need to know, that the entire german speaking media system f*cking eat up the cool aid from transatlantic thinktank initiatives, for three months in a row, the ECFR pitched positions for a f*cking month that never were in the european interest longterm as “the future concepts for the european union”, and provided the f*cking “the public needs to be brought in line to be in favor of a prolonged war” agenda setting in f*cking headline articles their CEO wrote, which the f*cking newsmedia copied verbatim, without as much as leaving a f*cking word of comment on what they were publishing at a time. Which as part of their job ethics they arent allowed to. This is going agains journalistic best practices. You dont simply let someone else promote agenda setting items for an entire society at large, while giving them a platform, and not commenting in the least. And they did.
Or even shorter, if the US isnt running this war, and the entirety of EU decision makers, and much more the entire german and austrian media system didnt curl themselves up and into a corner and started to put out their emotional storytelling and propaganda for three months straight, failing to even listen to Selenskyj speeches in full -- it would be a f*cking monumental coincidence leading to the same outcome, that took place over the past three months.
Using US friendship initiatives as central incubators for now dominant narratives and positions on the topic, that were invented by other US thinktanks months prior.
Until the f*cking goal of “everyone who wanted to argue for a compromise - is publicly ridiculed and pacifists get hanged for being “oldfashioned” and crazy” and all the decision aspects got delegated to a ukrainian government (that got the “cut all the insane parts out of the speeches they are holding” treatment from the entire media system since the war started), was fulfilled --
and then, after the f*cking G7 meeting, and after you had every german official state in public, that the Ukraine itself has to choose every aspect, of when and how it wants to enter into peace talks, with a public still not noticing that the US is pumping in 12x the funds into a military solution of this war, than the EU, germany and france combined, the curtain drops.
Now Ukraine is “more outspoken, because they now think, they have everything they need to win!”.
Now you’ve gotten what you wanted all along. And everyone even taking the word “seize fire” in their mouth is a F*CKINGPARIA, thanks to german and austrian media.
Because, thats not what the Ukraine wants.
And winning, really is the only way out of it.
Thank you for fulfilling your democratic duty, media system, truly the institutional fourth pillar of democracy.
Diese Gesellschaft ist das Letzte. Das nächste Mal, wenn ihr die Gesellschaft für drei Monate verarschen wollt, setzt euch wenigstens ne lustige Kappe auf, dann hab auch ich dabei meinen Spass…
edit: Oh sorry, I f*cking forgot, the f*cking journalistic questions after f*cking bilateral press conferences between germany and the ukraine (held by Habeck, because - well, he isnt foreign minister, so of course you use him to pump the f*cking messaging on bilateral talks with Kuleba into the german public), that simply got dropped and not answered, when they dared to ask anything about this matter - two weeks ago… I guess some journalistic outlets did try. Its just that the public at large didnt notice, that that might be important work, so who the fuck cares, right?
SLEEPTIGHT! Don’t let the bedbugs bite! HOWMUCHDIDITTAKEFORYOUAS A JOURNALISTTOSWALLOWTHISINDIVIDUALLY? 2000 Euro? 1000 Euro? A dinner with transatlantic friends?
Wir sind mittlerweile auf dem Niveau von du verarscht jetzt einfach nur noch vollkommen die Bevölkerung mit Erzählungen die du dir aus dem Arsch gezogen hat.
Butscha, war für Selenskyj der Grund die Friedensverhandlungen abzubrechen und schwere Waffen zu fordern… weil er Angst hat, dass das in anderen temporär besetzten Gebieten auch so passiert!
Holy FUCKING shit. Borrell Beraterin. Die EU weiß nicht mehr was vor sich geht.
Aber was bei Lanz jetzt vier gegen eine behaupten ist, dass Selenskyj nach Butscha ein “Change of Mind” hatte, weil er ja gesehen habe wie grausam die russischen Soldaten in Butscha agieren, und dann beschlossen hat, nein - also, mit so jemandem kann man nicht verhandeln, der tötet mir zu viele Menschen wahllos in den temporär besetzten Gebieten.
Selenskyj Aussagen zu dem Zeitpunkt waren: Butscha sei ja noch nicht mal sonderlich schlimm, da gäbe es noch deutlich schlimmere Kriegsverbrechen, mit mehr Opfern, Butscha sei ja nur ein Ort von Kriegsverbrechen (und Genozid, aber das haut der einfach mal so raus.. auch vor der Knesset in Israel) unter mehreren (und ich habe nicht den Hauch einer Idee, warum er relativiert hat). Dann ist der Selenskyj an die Öffentlichkeit gegangen, und hat Theorien verbreitet wonach die Russen jetzt Massaker produzieren würden um sie den Ukrainern in die Schuhe zu schieben, so richtig schlimm, mit falsch präparierten Leichen, die von anders wo geholt werden wurden, da habe er Gerüchte gehört.
(Siehe der ganz normale Wahnsinn eines Selenskyj in öffentlichen Ansprachen: click)
Und dann hat er laut EU Kommissionsberaterin bei Lanz seine Meinung geändert. Zu der Meinung die er immer schon vertreten hat (Firedensverhandlungen nur bei vollständiger territorialer Integrität der Ukraine, man könne keine einzige Stadt aufgeben, Waffensstillstandsverhandlungen erst bei russischem Truppenrückzug an die Grenzen des 23.2.). Weil er von Butscha emototional so geschockt war, dass er gewusst hat, das kann er keiner anderen Region in der Ukraine zumuten.
Während er bereits vor Butscha seine Meinung von “Neutralität ist eine Option” zu “Neutralität ist keine Option” geändert hatte (also immer der Chronologie öffentlicher Interviews zur folge), aber Butscha ist da sicher der Grund.
Dass es jetzt keine Friedensverhandlungen mehr gibt.
Übrigens, bei Lanz wieder, erneut, regelmäßig - Selenskyj wolle doch nur die russischen Truppen hinter die Linien des 23.2. zurückdrängen. JA, für Waffenstillstandsverhandlungen, die Bedingungen für Friedensverhandlung sind wieder die vollständige territoriale Integrität der Ukraine, Aufgabe der Krim, …
Und der Bild Reporter spricht von vielen Zeugen mit denen er in Butscha gesprochen hat. Komisch -- meines Wissens gibt es nur drei, von denen medial berichtet wurde, dass sie Säuberungen und Völkermord gesehen haben.
Den einen (ersten) im türkischen Expat Fernsehen in Weißrussland (der Erschießungen nicht direkt gesehen hat, aber wie Männer aus Schutzbunkern hinausgeführt wurden, und der später ihre Leichen auf AP Fotos identifizieren konnte (Hinter einem Haus)). Eine Frau die eine Hinrichtung miterlebt hat. (ca. fünf Tage darauf war die in einer Blinken Rede der komplette emotionale Unterbau, den Vater aus dem Haus vor dem ein Radfahrer getötet wurde, der davon berichtet hat, dass ihm Soldaten gesagt hätten, sein Sohn würde die Probleme (Streitigkeiten) jetzt nicht mehr lösen, der käme nicht mehr wieder -- und eventuell eine Passant der zu Protokoll gegeben hat, russisches Militär hätte in Butscha wahllos auf Gebäude und Autos geschossen, mit Raketenwerfern.
Laut Belingcat Datenbank, hab es einen protokolierten Fall in dem eine ukrainische Familie in einem Auto komplett verbrannt ist, allerdings nicht in Butscha. (Nördlich von Kiew stimmt.))
Für Kriegsverbrechen (Terror, nur Frauen dürften auf die Straßen, Männer würden erschossen, …) gibt es Belege noch und nöcher, für Säuberungen, Völkermord und Vergewaltigungen gibt es genau drei Augenzeugenberichte - in der kompletten medialen Berichterstattung über Butscha.
Wenn der Bildreporter mit noch mehr gesprochen hat, dann hat er medial nicht über sie berichtet.
Now hang me.
edit: Die NYT hat am 11. April noch mehr Berichte veröffentlicht: click
Nochmal, Butscha sei der Grund gewesen, dass das Atlantic Council am 31.3. erstmals schwere Waffen für die Ukraine gefordert hat. Und die ukrainische Regierung (Regierungssprecher) den Wortlaut am 2.4. Übernommen hat, mit dem Spin, die Waffen nicht mehr für Verteidigung, sondern für die Befreiung der temporär besetzten Gebiete zu benötigen. Butscha wurde am 3.4. bekannt.
Und am 11.05 spricht Amnesty International noch von keinen Belegen, dass es Befehle für strukturellen Völkermord gegeben habe: click
Das ist jetzt aber das wovor Selenskyj Angst habe. Also spätestens seit dem 23.03 - siehe click - deswegen existieren jetzt keine Friedensverhandlungen mehr.
23. FUCKING 03.:
By being united, we can stop any aggressor. In this moment, this is why I believe in my meeting with the president of the russian federation. In any format! I’ll repeat it again, and I’ve repeated it and proposed it for several years. I know only one thing. Our future will not forgive us for the loss of our population. Our state will not forgive us for the loss of our people. Our future generations will not forgive us for the loss of our territories. They will ask us - what where we fighting for? I want to know exactly where we are. Who are our friends? And who doubts us? I’m not saying we have enemies in the west. No, there are people who are ready for anything on our behalf, but there are those who are not ready. That is all. Therefore, it is important, when we talk about certain compromises. I said, when I became the president, that we cannot give up any part of our land, because we must do everything for Donbas and Crimea to return. This is not a platitude, all our people believe and think so. The question now is, when can we stop this war? There is no need for russia to shout harsh rhetoric, we have an ultimatum, it will not lead to anything. We have an ultimatum, here are the points, you will fulfill them, and then we will end the war.
[Question from the reporter, not translated.]
This is incorrect, it will lead nowhere. The question doesnt concern only me. This question concerns the fact, that the people in government are united, we are not all going to be able to do that. You cant do that with ultimatums [give in, I suppose]. Ultimatums will not be fulfilled by Ukraine, we just can not comply with it physically. We’ve lost people, our people. How can we do it? All of us will be destroyed. Then their ultimatum will be automatically fulfilled. For example. Give us Charkiw, for example, give us Mariupol, give us Kyiv. Neither Charkiw, or Mariupol or Kyiv residents, nor the president will be able to do this. And we even see it in the occupied cities, in Melitopol in Berdyansk. When they enter, people will notify each other. They raise the flag and people take it down. They killed a man, so people hid and came at night and removed the flag, well - what do you want? To destroy everyone? That is why I said, we will fulfill and ultimatum only when we do not exist. You can automatically capture the city, but you will live there, by yourself. You will work there by yourself. People will either leave the city, or those who cannot leave, will fight to the end. Therefore an ultimatum is a bad thing. Because it will lead to genocide, and the destruction of the ukrainian people. We are so energized right now! Therefore it comes down to the dialog. We are for peace! I repeat it again. Even no matter how difficult it is, it is better than war, and even though we hate these troops, that are out there. The right word is negotiation. Negotiate however you can. But negotiate. Do not execute ultimatums. This is an important point. A compromise can be found in dialog. For me any compromise is irrelevant, because, as you know this hatred will be for every word. For every word. For every demand. For every course. For every guarantor of security. For everyone. You understand, right? Time must pass. Therefore, if they want to end the war, they must agree one seize fire, withdraw troops, then presidents meet, agree, that troops are withdrawn, and that there are certain security guarantors. Here you can find compromise. There are certain guarantors of our security. They must say tomorrow, that they are accepting Ukraine into Nato, and not being unclear anymore. Or say, we are not accepting it now. That is true. And they themselves understand, that they dont want to go with russia. So they do not accept us. The answer is very simple. We already understand everything. “We’re not accepting it” - because they are afraid of russia, thats all. And we need to calm down and say that. [Reaction was caused by the journalist initially asking the question nodding affirmatively, when Zelenskyy went into the “So they do not accept us” part.] Say - we need other security guarantees. There are Nato member states that want to be the guarantors of our security, which unfortunately cant provide us full membership in the alliance. But are ready to do everything that the alliance would have to do, if we were members of the alliance. And I think, thats a normal compromise. Its a compromise for everyone. For the west which does not know what to do with us in the Nato issue, for Ukraine which wants security guarantees, and for russia, which does not want to let nato expand further, and says it has had such agreements with Nato countries, with the west. And so, a compromise must be found in this. Because, this will be the end of the war. For Russia, this is not the end. There is this public letter. I dont know by whom, I dont remember, by the minister of foreign affairs, or by the president of russia. Stop talking to us with phrases like denazification etc. - we immediately said, that this sounds like an ultimatum - and we do not tolerate this. Because as soon as we are accused of nazism, by people, who follow in the footsteps of nazism, then we will not be able to tolerate it. Therefore public rhetoric can be anything, its the business of every state in this world - but this will not be binding rhetoric.
Next question:
Mr. President - a clarification, where are Crimea and Donbas in this?
They will come later, thats why I’m talking about approaches. I’ll finish now. I think, this is a very difficult narrative for everyone. Both crimea and donbas. It will be hard to digest for everyone. And to find a way out we need to take this first step. Which is, as I’ve said, security guarantees. The end of the war. At the same time, we should also agree, that we are resolving the issue of temporary occupied territories. We have to resolve it. But after the end of the war! Why? Because everything is very hot, as I’ve said. Very hot. And so [?!] this blockade will end. And after this blockade, please, lets talk. At the first meeting, with the president of russia - I am ready to raise these issues. They are relevant. For us the occupied territories are important. But I’m sure that this decision will not arise in this meeting, because there is, if we are frank, we’ll have to talk about constitutional changes. Changes in Ukrainian legislation, when it comes to security guarantees. And if we talk about it, it will - in any case be decided, not only by the president, but as it is quite a long process, by both the parliament, and the people of Ukraine […]
edit: Noch mehr FUCKING Lügen der selben Machart bei Illner. FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgiiJRp7VQE
Muss es nicht nochmal ausführen, selbes Schema. Exakt selbes Schema.
“Der Präsident der Ukraine hat seine Ziele anders formuliert, noch vor Istanbul hat er sich verhandlungsbereiter gezeigt, und wäre sogar über Minsk 2 hinausgegangen, weil er auch über die Krim und die gesamten zwei Oblaste verhandeln wollte, also Donezk und Lugansk - und jetzt formuliert er, dass er die Russen raus haben möchte aus der Ukrainie, sehen sie einen Unterschied, zwischen dem was der Ukrainische Präsident, auch sein Außenminister, die Amerikaner und die Briten sagen, und dem wie die Westeuropäischen Staatschefs formulieren - also London und Washington vs. Berlin und Paris.”
Das ganze Setup, der gesamte erste Teil ist komplett erlogen. “Man müsse über Donezk, Lugansk und die Krim verhandeln” (bei Selenskyj immer “die temporär besetzten Gebiete”), wurde IMMER (bis auf eine Woche in der sich Selenskyj öffentich über eine Neutralität der Ukraine Gedanken gemacht hat - OHNE zu erwähnen, wie sich das auf diese Gebiete niederschlägt) in folgendem Kontext erwähnt. Diese Gebiete bräuchten einen “Eigenständigkeit” (Selbstverwaltung), allerdings als Teil der Ukraine. Es gab durch die Bank Weg, nicht ein Interview mit Selenskyj, dass nicht auf die “Eigenständigkeit der temporär besetzten Gebiete” abgestellt hat, dass gleichzeitig vergessen hätte die “Unabdingbarkeit der territorialen Integrität der Ukraine” anzusprechen. Die Logik, die ebenfalls formuliert wurde, und das lange, laaaaaange vor Butscha, war - “Selenskyj möchte mit Putin direkt verhandeln, da es um das schwierige Problem der temporär besetzten Gebiete gehe. In diesen seien die Leute gehirngewaschen, desshalb sei das so schwierig. Da wolle man zuerst einmal ihre Eigenständigkeit ausverhandeln, allerdings IMMER nur, nachdem eine oder mehrere Nationen Friedenssicherung in der gesamten Ukraine betreiben, und der letzte russische Soldat das Staatsgebiet der Ukraine verlasen hätte, und immer nur in der Form, dass alle “temporär besetzten Gebiete” immer Teil des ukrainischen Territoriums werden - aber dann mit eigenständigen Parlamenten. Am Anfang. Und nach der Phase wo sich Selenskyj überlegt hat “wie er mit den gehirngewaschenen Leuten dort umgeht” (sein Zitat, nicht meins -) gäbe es dann wieder das Ziel einer politischen Eingliederung, nach Volksabstimmungen.
Ihr verfickten FUCKING Schweine. So stiehlt man sich als Leitmedium nicht aus der Verantwortung.
Zuerst jeden Kontext aus den Selenskyj Interviews wegschneiden, und danach behaupten - er habe halt später seine Meinung geändert, nein hat er nicht. komplette inhaltliche Kongruenz seit dem ersten “Selenskyj will Friedensverhandlungen mit Putin” Interview. Mit Ausnahme der einen Woche in der Selenskyj auch über Neutralität nachgegrübelt hat, und die US dann via WP und CNN ausrichten haben lassen, dass sie die Position der Ukraine nicht mehr verstünden.
Wenn ich als deutschsprachige Medienlandschaft einfach mal komplett versage - kommentier ich das doch einfach im Halbsatz vor einer Frage bei Illner weg - die dann eh nicht mehr aufgegriffen wird.
Der Selenskyj wollte ja sogar mehr hergeben als Minsk 2! EINENSCHEISSDRECKWOLLTEER. Es gibt keine Quelle aus der das ableitbar wäre. Zum Glück gibts eh keinen Faktencheck im Meinungsfersehen.
Moskau und Kiew setzen Verhandlungen im Ukraine-Krieg aus
Die Ukraine und Russland haben die Verhandlungen zur Beendigung des Krieges vorerst ausgesetzt. Die Ukraine wendet sich dabei vor allem gegen einen Diktatfrieden vonseiten Russlands. “Der Verhandlungsprozess hängt davon ab, wie die Ereignisse in der Ukraine verlaufen”, sagte Kiews Unterhändler Mychajlo Podoljak am Dienstag im Fernsehen. Zuvor hatte bereits Russland das vorläufige Ende von Gesprächen bestätigt.
Kontext aus dem Chatham House Interview, vor einer Woche, bei 58:40 in (mehr Kontext ab min 56):
CH: “We have both the United States administration, the Biden administration and the british government in particular talking about victory. Victory must involve the defeat of Vladimir Putin, even that it must involve all russian forces leaving all of territorial Ukraine, so my question to you Mr. President - is it helpful, to have some of your key backers, diplomatically and militarily - setting that war aim, publicly, at this time? Is that helpful to you as president of the Ukraine, or not?”
Selenskyj: “Well, its a very complicated question. I’m not afraid of such blunt statements, I think the more direct, the better, the easier for Ukraine and the european society and the russia society for that matter - for them to understand that if we dont stop this -- lets come back to the allegorical situation - then all the bridges will be burnt [referring to the right now there are still open venues for talks]. So we have to be open discussing that. If there is… Bilaterally [meaning within the western backer infrastructure] we can discuss this without allegories, we diplomatically can only discuss the specific steps. So what victory is for us the notion, for the european union, that is for the UK, for the US [trying to broaden the question to be able to give a more general answer] - for some people it may be Putins defeat - and in our society, there is a big portion of people, thinking exactly that. But for me the victory, … I dont care what happens to some leaders, where they will end up, for me what matters is Ukraines victory. And by Ukraines victory we mean “something that belongs to us” - this is our territory and our people -- for me victory is not to loose 11 million people. Five milion people who have left Ukraine, they have to come back - thats my victory. And I’m thinking about it, because for me victory is at least, bringing the country back economically, at least to the situation when it all started, as a good beginning - but also for the western world to have complete awareness, what is happening here and what the pain is like, they should feel our pain, that will unite them [in pain], and that will never be effected by russian propaganda, and they will help us all the way. And for us, for me, victory is - admission to accession to the European Union, with all the pros and cons, and when we discuss that - and thats the will of the ukrainian people, and this all started in the Maidan , we’ve had revolutions to that effect, and this war is also about, that this can not be in vain, so Ukraine in the EU is not the principle, the major victory, but we can not just disregard the people, who sacrificed their lives for that, so its the dream, its the will, and the steps that we made, and thats what we intend to do, as a nation And if someone from europe, even now, they have already received our refugees, they’ve seen all the footage in the world, they’ve listened to me, to us, they are listening now, they realize what is happening here. In Mariupol people are dying in thousands, but there are still some persons who want to get some oxygen without even attempting to breath, and they want to strike the balance, they want to be in the grey area, stay in the shadow, while some people say its a walk inbetween the drops of rain. And… This is not a rain! It never rains, it pours! as the saying goes, and this is the war of what - there are no drops anymore, we are all wet, by now. Soaking wet. And - this is cynicism, this is the lack of adequacy, in some leaders, in some developed countries. And the adequacy of world [cohesion, doing all that we’d as you to do to be adequate], is also victory for Ukraine. That will influence us, it does influence us, really. And what will happen to some individuals in russia, you know - why should I think about the oder side - the military, their leaders, their president, and what will happen to them - they should be punished for what they did, that is the most important thing, in my book. According to the international law. But if they come here, and even fail to collect their debt, and they dont care about a quick - why should I care? Its them. I have to think about my people, my citizens.”
Alles klar? Und das ist der Grund, weshalb wir Verhandlungen über ein Ende des Krieges vorerst ausgesetzt haben.
Natürlich “Moskau und Kiew” im wording des Standard.
To victory and beyond.
Diese Gesellschaft ist das Letzte.
Achja, und die Standard Zensur in Aktion:
Hier gab es kein Vorgeplenkel. Das war mein erstes posting heute am Tag. Eine Überprüfung der Entscheidung einzuleiten ist mir nicht möglich. Diese Gesellschaft ist das Letzte.
Diese Webseite verwendet Cookies um die Nutzungserfahrung für seine Besucher zu verbessern. Bitte informiere dich bei Gelegenheit darüber wie sich Cookies auf deine Privatsphäre im Web auswirken.
