this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
1984 points (97.7% liked)

me_irl

5194 readers
2817 users here now

All posts need to have the same title: me_irl it is allowed to use an emoji instead of the underscore _

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bytemeister 44 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

The deal should be... All Russian troops get pulled out of Ukraine. Ukraine gets a lump sum of all seized Russian assets in foreign nations, Russia agrees not to move troops within 100 miles of Ukraine's border without Ukraine's consent. Ukraine agrees to allow and even assist civillain Russian services with locating and returning living and deceased Russians.

The alternative is we take the limits off of what targets can be attacked within Russia, and enable Ukraine to enforce the conditions as proposed.

I'd also like to add that Russia and the US give up their UN "super veto" power. I don't think anything good and effective can come from the UN when a single country can just "nope" any UN proposals.

[–] pressanykeynow 13 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Veto power in the UN is a short for "we will use nukes if you do this". The UN is not world government, it's the organisation which task(among many less important things) is to prevent nuclear war.

[–] Bytemeister 17 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Ah, that explains why India and North Korea have veto power.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

As good as this comment is, neither has the range or targeting capability that the US does or that the USSR did.

The security council veto was designed to keep the US and the USSR at the negotiating table and off the battlefield.

[–] Bytemeister 4 points 16 hours ago

Then why are all those other nations on the security council? Just seems like we only need the memembers with veto power at this point.

[–] ZMoney 5 points 16 hours ago

We would have a much more effective UN if only Pakistan stopped vetoing everything!