Yes, and that's not in the best interest of Ukraine. So Ukraine doesn't want to lose all of that territory, but Russia wants to gain it, and Ukraine thinks it is capable of defending it's territory, while Russia thinks that it's capable of defeating them.
That's how you get a war. To get peace negotiations you need one of, or both of the nations to decide that they've had enough casualties or other loses, and that they're ready to settle down for less. Neither of them have decided that.
First of all do you have a source for the shelling claim never heard of it, but the other claim of unfair treatment and prosecution of Russians in Donetsk and Luhansk means that Russia wants to at least take control of those areas. And the claims that Ukraine is run by neo-nazis means that Russia may want to take control of Ukraine as a whole.
They love China, love Russia, and all of their past, current and yet to be supreme leaders. They like the taste of military boot leather. Some are trolls some are a little more "leftist" than the rest of Lemmy, but most are tankies.
I know that Hamas doesn't exclusively target civilians. Hamas as the government of Gaza probably wouldn't risk their public image by instructing it's militants to target civilians, but their militants did cause civilian casualties and some of them looked like they were out for vengeance.
The rockets that Hamas fires are primitive and cannot be guided, and sometimes wind or other factors cause them to miss their targets. They have been targeting nearby civilian areas after giving warnings (lol), and while they are not as much of a terrorist organization as the IDF, they still have committed acts of terrorism on multiple occasions.
The soldiers probably made it all worst, but Hamas 100% caused civilian casualties. Even if Hamas members didn't cause them, remember that Hamas asked anyone who had a weapon and was willing to storm the border with them to go in. There are videos of them dragging around wounded civilians and soldiers.
Nope, I thought @Rapidcreek meant that even if the US stops supporting the occupation it would survive, but it turns out he actually meant Biden, as in only Biden being against the occupation.
First of all you're taking the word of the IDF for what's going on in the invasion, which Is great, they've shown their reliability time and time again.
Anyways, as the president of the US you don't talk to an IDF "general" who probably doesn't have control over his own ass. If you want to do any kind of talking you direct it to the big clown.
If that doesn't work start by pulling your troops from there, then start pulling the dandy stuff you've been sending as intimidation, and let things flow for a while.
Bruh, he could slip while taking the stairs and there will be a ceasefire. If he intentionally waved his hand he could end the occupation.
Maybe you're betting that this is beyond the president (as it has always been in the US), and that may be true. But if you think that the occupation government can stand by itself without US intervention and aid for every second, then no, that is just not true.
Yes, and that's not in the best interest of Ukraine. So Ukraine doesn't want to lose all of that territory, but Russia wants to gain it, and Ukraine thinks it is capable of defending it's territory, while Russia thinks that it's capable of defeating them.
That's how you get a war. To get peace negotiations you need one of, or both of the nations to decide that they've had enough casualties or other loses, and that they're ready to settle down for less. Neither of them have decided that.