320 points
*

Shitty headline. That is ONLY if Russia gets to keep the annexed territories:

However, if ending the war would include Russia returning the territories that it has occupied and annexed throughout the conflict, only a third (34 percent) of respondents said they would support that decision.

permalink
report
reply
107 points

LOL if the question is like that (“would you stop the war as a winner keeping all the lands and cease the sanctions”) then what the other 30% of people is thinking?

“Keep fighting because I enjoy watching it on the news?”

permalink
report
parent
reply
70 points

I would wager 100% of people surveyed would not want to go to jail for giving the wrong answer too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Jail or the front lines.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

So why did 34% respond otherwise?

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Keep going until all of Ukraine is annexed?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I think it’s clear to everyone that that is not going to happen.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

I don’t think the war will end until Putin dies. Whether that be next week or in 20 years.

There’s no way for Putin to retreat and save face. The world can’t afford to allow Russia to win. It will be a horrible stalemate of slaughter until Putin dies and can be blamed by both sides, to be able to negotiate a way out.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I don’t think that scenario has such an optimistic outlook in store. The people in the best position to inherit the seats of power in the Russian state are Putin’s closest clique, who are, for the most part, ultranationalists, who would not only see their newfound power deligitimazed if they immediately signed peace, but would also be acting against their own ideology. Even if there are powerful people in Russia who would prefer to transition towards a different kind of country, they don’t have a clear route to reach power.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’m worried about Putin getting old and still in power in charge of the warfare.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points
*

And also it states that

70 percent of Russians would support Putin should he decide to end the conflict this week.

It doesn’t necessarily mean that they want to end the war, only that they would support Putin’s decision…

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

You cannot ask direct questions like: Do you want to overthrow the dictator? And expect a realistic answer in a dictatorship.

You also cannot ask a question like: Should Russia keep it’s territories? Because if you are in a dictatorship, you can go to prison for the wrong answer.

You can lose your job if what you say can be taken from the wrong context.

Merely the fear that such reprisal exists, means that the overwhelming population cannot answer truthfully, even if they wanted to.

So I would take these polls with a grain of salt.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Russians have become masters of knowing how to lie in such a way as their answer tells the real truth.

You plow his British people can be very polite and they mean “fuck you”. A bit like that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

lol I knew I saw the exact opposite headline somewhere. “Majority of russians dont want an end to ukraine war if needed to release territories” or something like that

permalink
report
parent
reply
83 points

Stop up voting Newsweek. They are not a reputable publication.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Without being condescending, can you give sauce? And for reference, what you consider reputable publications?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Newsweek isn’t terrible (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsweek), but sources like reuters or associated press are usually more reliable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Seems reasonable. I’ve tried improvethenews.org, which is an AI attempt at balanced reporting. But I’ve found it to put too much equal representation of the extreme right viewpoints, which are not on planet earth so I have to filter/ignore all the pro Trump gibberish.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The fact check link posted by the other user is good.

Newsweek tends to take some news fact, often not even fact but a possible outcome of some developing story, and write a full opinion piece on a tangent.

We get a lot of Salon articles here doing the same thing.

As far as reputable, I would say apnews, Reuters, politico, CNN, BBC off the top of my head.

I know CNN will be contested. They have an annoying amount of opinion in their stories, but I do find that they clearly separate what’s objective fact and what’s editorial opinion.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Those are what I use. I’ve tried improvethenews.org, which is based upon AI trying to give balanced articles, but when one side of the political spectrum is so extreme it’s not “balanced” to have equal representation so I have to filter/ignore the pro Trump BS.

permalink
report
parent
reply
66 points

I’m kinda guessing they’ve never wanted that war to happen in the first place, they probably simply can’t express that without being arrested or something.

Those who support the war are probably brainwashed by propaganda.

permalink
report
reply
34 points
*

There are actually Russians who I’ve heard say things like “Crimea is ours anyway,” and “Ukraine is supposed to be a part of Russia.” And I’m talking about Russian emigres in America who are not looking over their shoulders.

It’s not everyone. Mostly blowhard assholes but they do exist. The Russian people aren’t all sitting there thinking the right things but keeping their lips sealed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points
*

The second sentence of this article is stating that only 30% of Russians want to end the war if they have to give back annexed regions of Ukraine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Yes but there’s a lot of speculation in this thread that they are all just saying what they feel they have to because the KGB is watching. I’m sure that’s true for some but for others the sentiment is genuine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Every country has a lot of idiotic nationalists, especially those which have an glorified, imperialist past. What matters is how much suffering are they willing to impose upon themselves to satisfy the demands of their collective narcissism, and Russians who live abroad aren’t going to be the ones suffering it the most.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

And those who’ve left the motherland are probably not the most nationalist, so there you go.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Oh

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

If Ukraine stops fighting, they lose their country. If Russia stops fighting, the war ends.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

Good start, but they’ll need to stop imagining they can keep Crimea.

permalink
report
reply
-69 points
*

Even before the annexation, crimea was mostly pro-russian. If anything there should be another referendum, but this time with guarantees.

Edit: I know the right to self-determination is controversial, you may not like what others decide for themselves, that’s your business; but please don’t bother if you just want to talk nonsense, misrepresent or putting words in my mouth. Thanks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
60 points
*

Do you mean the referendum that was held after Russian forces had annexed it? The one that they claimed received a 97% vote for the integration? That referendum?

Yeah, I’m sure that was legit.

The last time they were polled about this, 66% was for joining, and the trend for that number was going down. Some other figures were much lower to begin with. I do agree with you that it would be interesting to know now where that number would actually, truthfully be.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

“Guarantees” LOL like what? Super pinky swear?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

deleted by creator

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

However, if ending the war would include Russia returning the territories that it has occupied and annexed throughout the conflict, only a third (34 percent) of respondents said they would support that decision.

Russia has maintained that any peace deal must include “the entry of four [Ukrainian] regions into Russia,” something that Kyiv is unlikely to budge on.

Lmao why does it sounds so familiar

permalink
report
reply
-5 points
*

Lmao why does it sounds so familiar

Hard to compare these conflicts. Ultimately Russia is aggressively trying to annex land and gain sea access through conventional warfare, Israel is trying to keep their people safe from guerilla attacks, having defeated their aggressor in conventional warfare multiple times long ago. Ukraine is the underdog in their conflict and it appears they are winning, Palestine is the underdog in their conflict and they have no viable path to military victory.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Nah, there’s similarity between Russia and Israel. Israel want to annex Gaza, West Bank, and Jerusalem, but ultimately withdraw from Gaza due to both demographic issue and constant Hamas attack. But now they seems to reignite the plan, seeing that over the year they keep expanding their West Bank illegal settlement, and the current plan for Gaza’s ethnic cleansing. One could even argue that “keeping people safe” is just a farce, considering having peace within the region is the best way to keep their people safe, yet the current administration is moving away from that, causing the tension to raise within the region.

The similarity extend to the country, down to the citizen’s opinion. The aggressor(Russia/Israel) want to keep the land and won’t give back, the underdog(Ukraine/Palestine Authority, not Hamas) want their land back and won’t compromise.

Too bad the similarity end there, as Palestine Authority does not have much authority, as they’re not and will not recognized as a state by Israel, even though they demand Palestine to recognize their state.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

One could even argue that “keeping people safe” is just a farce, considering having peace within the region is the best way to keep their people safe, yet the current administration is moving away from that, causing the tension to raise within the region.

Clearly Hamas was responsible for breaking the peace in this most recent outbreak of hostilities. Not punching back is a losing move in terms of game theory.


Gaza’s ethnic cleansing.

That is a popular take, but it seems obvious to me that this is about creating distance from belligerent forces in Gaza who are unwilling to pacify themselves rather than ethnic cleansing. 20% of Israel’s citizens are Arab/Palestinian with full rights, and they are not being driven away. Gaza, the West Bank, and Arab citizens of Israel are the same ethnic group but are each treated very differently due to the different threat levels they pose. It’s clear to me this is about something else other than ethnicity.

Many people aren’t aware, but when the shoe was on the other foot, when Arab league Palestinian ally, Jordan, annexed the west bank and Jerusalem, they were not shy about ethnic cleansing. They immediately set about driving out every Jew, destroying their structures with mortar fire, and denying them Jordanian citizenship.

“For the first time in 1,000 years not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter. Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews’ return here impossible”

“The operations of calculated destruction were set in motion. I Knew that the Jewish Quarter was densely populated with Jewish populations who caused their fighters a good deal of interference and difficulty. I embarked, therefore on shelling of the quarter with mortars creating harassment and destruction. Only for days after our entry into Jerusalem, the Jewish Quarter become their graveyard. Death and destruction reigned over it. As the down of May 28th was about to break, the Jewish Quarter emerged in convulsive cloud-a cloud of death and agony” -Abdullah el Tell, a commander of the Arab Legion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamization_of_Jerusalem#Islamization_of_Jerusalem_under_Jordanian_rule

Today there are no Jewish citizens of Jordan.


The aggressor(Russia/Israel)

Israel may be on the advantageous side of asymmetrical warfare, but they are not the aggressors, at least not this time. They didn’t start this conflict but I suspect they will end it, (as this is a long conflict there’s plenty of examples of cassis belli for both sides, but if you look at the initial causes of this conflict, the earliest massacres in mandate Palestine, declaration of war on Israel over the 1948 UN borders, or the most recent flare-ups of violence, they were caused by Palestinian aggression.)


the underdog(Ukraine/Palestine Authority, not Hamas) want their land back and won’t compromise.

Ukraine has a viable path to military victory. Palestine does not, (Hamas, Fatah, PA, take your pick…) Ukraine is well aware of their realpolitik situation and has been handling itself very well accordingly. It makes sense for them to be uncompromising regarding annexed territories. Palestinian forces are ignoring their realpolitik situation, poking a bear they cannot defeat for the last century. Being uncompromising has led to their situation today and will likely be their downfall.


Palestine Authority does not have much authority, as they’re not and will not recognized as a state by Israel, even though they demand Palestine to recognize their state.

They don’t have a lot of leverage but I suspect this is something they could include in a peace treaty if they are willing to pacify themselves and make viable concessions.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

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 !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 12K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 261K

    Comments