I have to believe the actual poll and report aren’t as glaringly stupid as that headline. If you ask nearly anyone, “do you want peace?” They are going to respond with “yes.” The devil is always in the details though. Ask them, “should the war in Ukraine be ended by the Ukrainian Government capitulating to all Russian demands to secure an immediate peace?” And, you might find a lot of folks are suddenly less peaceful. This reminds me of the old saw:
There’s lies, damned lines and then there is statistics.With a crafted question and a bit of p-hacking you can get a lot of results you want out of people.
If you ask nearly anyone, “do you want peace?” They are going to respond with “yes.”
They didn’t ask them that though.
What You Need To Know A majority of Americans and Europeans support ending the war in Ukraine and favor a negotiated settlement through NATO
Their main reason for wanting the war to end is the loss of life and casualties
Great now Putin will simply publish made up numbers again next time. So much investment and just like to destroy everything…
Being anti-war is easy, it’s the particulars on which people will meaningfully differ. How do you build a lasting peace in either of these places?
Same issue with being pro-war though isn’t it?
Easy. As soon as the war ends, grant Ukraine NATO membership.
Grant NATO membership to what? The charred remains of Lviv?
Yes.
But this isn’t going to be a solution Russia can abide willingly, which is how we end up not being “anti-war” so much as hoping one side wins. Fine distinction.
Reporter: [REDACTED]
Reason: is there are global source not ny randomReporter, it’s not the mods’ or admins’ job to Google shit for you, but here’s the actual report nonetheless, and another analysis.
I’m for ending the war through a unilateral surrender of Russian forces and the trial of Mr Putin for crimes against humanity. However, my opinion doesn’t have a lot of influence over whether that happens.
Similarly, I’m for ending the war in Gaza through the voluntary disarmament of Hamas, the repudiation of terrorism as a way of life, the handover of illegal settlements to displaced Palestinian Arab civilians, and the prosecution of Netanyahu for treason and war crimes. But I don’t expect to get to make that decision either.
through the voluntary disarmament of Hamas, the repudiation of terrorism as a way of life,
And it’s a very good thing you don’t make any decisions with such an ignorant understanding of the situation.
Like people decide to be terrorists as “a way of life”.
Removed by mod
The Putin Propaganda machine has been churning out some top tier bullshit today.
The results seem not to be very helpful: Sure I’m also for a negotiated peace in Ukraine as long as the pre 2014 borders are restored and reparations are paid. But how would you differentiate that from a Putin apologist?
Too bad Russia hasn’t bled enough to consider a real negotiation.
Russia and Ukraine tried to negotiate a settlement in early 2022, but the US sent Boris Johnson in to scuttle them. https://www.thenation.com/article/world/ukraine-russia-war-peace-diplomacy/
Do you think a peace deal that cedes Crimea and parts of Donbas to Russia, while also keeping Ukraine out of any defense pacts, to be a lasting prospect? It is hard to imagine that the story would end there.
All I can say for certain is there is no scenario where the story ends. If the Republicans gets into office next year, the new administration may wrap things up as quickly as possible in order to focus their belligerence on China, which in the grand scheme of things is no better, but it might stabilize things in eastern Europe for the short- and maybe even medium-term. Starting a hot war with China still seems years away, which leaves the possibility of it never happening 🤞 But I don’t mean this as any sort of endorsement for the Republicans in general or Trump in particular. Maybe Biden’s administration will make similar moves after the election, should they win it.
You’re getting downvoted but you make a great point. That /is/ what it would take for Putin and his cronies to come to a reasonable negotiation.
This seems so astroturfed. The news website, the “Institute for global affairs”. It’s like AI spat it out… because of course it is. The article is leading, and the supposed report is just a wall of text with a lot of supposition and no sourcing what so ever. Oh sure, there are references, that lead to more gobbledygook.
Is it time to vet news platform? I know that sounds incredibly dangerous, what with the fifth estate and all, but I think federated platforms should probably whitelist some of its news sourcings, because this is getting ridiculous.
Am I wrong here?
