• Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sorry, but as if. Russia is a UN veto power. And Russia would never accept UN troops sent by the West to oversee anything. And african nations won’t want to piss off Putin by agreeing to this. Putin wants his anti-NATO back and this war will only end with Putin thuroughly defeated.
    Not to mention that such a vote would be a farce anyway. Russia has had enough time to kill, torture, intimidate or disappear enough people that such a vote could never be fair.
    And as for the money spent on Ukraine, it’s but a cheap talking point to suggest that supporting Ukraine and supporting your own population are mutually exclusive. Not to mention believing that if the money wouldn’t have been spent on Ukraine, that your own people would’ve seen that money is pretty delusional. For starters, most of the support sent by the US is hardware. And the given value for that support is the replacement cost for the kit sent. However, most of the kit sent was due to be replaced anyways, so the actual cost for the US is much lower than the figure being thrown around.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Russia having UN veto power is why a UN monitored vote could actually be trusted by both sides, what the hell are you talking about?

      And no one is “supporting” Ukraine. They’re ensuring the war never ends, there will never be enough support to actually end the war.

      • Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Make it make sense then. Russia invaded Ukraine, Russia wants to annex as much of Ukraine as it can, why would Russia agree to hold a fair vote that could see Russia lose all its captured territory?