I was thinking of that situation as well, and I remember there was some foul play around that plan. The gist might have been that the Russian envoy did appear at the location but wouldn't negotiate. Time will tell if we ever find out the truth.
Not a controversial stance for an European nation but the joint statement is interesting. Could this be a part of a deal for China to flip on Russia. Does China choose to stay with an ideological reactionary ally or move towards collaborations
The headline is a bit misleading. The article elaborates some, for example:
In other remarks, Crosetto said that if Russian troops were to occupy Kyiv, it would "inevitably lead to a clash with other nations, which would not accept Russian tanks on their borders."
European nations have been voicing the need of peace from the beginning, it's just that the negotiating third parties can't get Russia to participate in a dialogue. Which leads to desperate stuff like France asking for China to do their part (desperate because they'd need some unlikely deal incentive to flip).
They kinda pretend to play both sides, kinda not. Left hand says peace talks (without action and on Russia's terms), right hand helps Russia with resources.
So was Russia and it was supposed to be untouchable. Now they're in a war economy and losing resources
Is this meant to be to some other thread? I don't think anyone mentioned lynchings but yeah they lynch us, we know, I know. If you create a side against there, the side is the black lynching despicable settler overseer side.
The oligarchs really push the division agenda, but it's only artificial and doesn't stand inspection
I'm sorry you see me as an enemy and act reactively. I see we the people as one and am not related to the image you need to attack.
Edit: and after all the compassion that horrible projection of a reply is what we see
@tiredturtle
@lemmy.ml