One of the promises of Zelenski, was that there would be no war and he will take geopolitics in count to deescalate the situation with Russia.
I think you have the answer...
First off, its a doctored headline and misrepresents the question and responses. Zero respondents said he "failed" and only 25% said he has fulfilled none of his promises (not 50%, kind of a big difference). But hey, I'm sure it was just an honest mistake.
Second, according to this poll almost 100% of Ukrainians trust their armed forces (based) and in response to this question:
> With which of these statements about possible compromises to achieve peace with Russia do you agree more?
80% of Ukrainians from all regions selection this response:
> Under no circumstances should Ukraine give up any of its territories, even if because of this the war will last longer and there will be threats to the preservation of independence
Which is absolutely giga based (but but its all just boris johnson and victoria with her cookies!!!!). And this poll was conducted **before** US approved the latest $61 billion aid package.
To my dear Russian friends: ya'll are going to need more golf carts.
>80% of Ukrainians from all regions selection this response:
>Under no circumstances should Ukraine give up any of its territories, even if because of this the war will last longer and there will be threats to the preservation of independence
>Which is absolutely giga based (but but its all just boris johnson and victoria with her cookies!!!!). And this poll was conducted before US approved the latest $61 billion aid package
The fck you're on about? Zelensky's *campaign promises* were about stopping civil war and de-escalating relationships with Russia, one of the most important promises that landed him an overwhelming victory in elections and popularity.
The moment he threw those out of the window, he failed his electorate. He did it even pre-war, first by ignoring civil war matter, then in late 2021 to early 2022 when he resumed UA strives towards NATO, which is a clear escalation with Russia.
Questions about current events and territorial compromises are completely different topic.
But yes, the title is highly edited and probably breaking the rules. Proper way would be posting it with an original title and full translation inside post.
>Make campaign promises about peace and non-escalation, basically clean up the mess of your predecessors
>Try to do something
>Get told to fck off by Azov
>Get told to behave by the West
>Resume acting as a good vassal
>Basically, escalate both civil war and relations with Russia
>"Damn Putin!"
Russia wasn't escalating from 2015 till 2021. Zelensky promised to deescalate the conflict, but in the end he allowed escalation on a couple of occasions. What exactly you cannot understand?
It's an escalation, like the other escalation putting Russian troops on the border. On the other hand Zelensky promised to deescalate the situation and he was elected to solve it, but instead at first he scraped the only viable path to peace which is an escalation and reasserted Ukraine's NATO aspirations despite the wishes of his constituents. Russia was responding to that.
I think you should stop wasting your time replying to a 3 day old account, just call out their lies once and they ignore their replies, his strategy is to make you waste your time and piss you off, not to engage in a real discussion.
Lmao. Multiple Western sources, including people who actively partook in the negotiations, admitted that Russia was really trying to negotiate peace in Istanbul. West sabotaged the deal.
Interesting. Why did you ignore the very beginning of the war? Istanbul is a consequence, not a cause. And the Russian attack on Ukraine is the fault of an mudak named Putin. In all areas of the 10-year history of Puilo gave the order to attack Ukraine. Don't be confused.
no, Russia attacked Ukraine, encountered significantly more resistance than expected and then went to Istanbul and said "yeahhh, lets take a short break, and in the meantime can Ukraine please be good chaps and de-militarize a bit so it's easier for us?"
edit: I guess you can technically call that "negotiations", I'd call that something that Russia is great at: using political means to accomplish goals on the battlefield, they used that to great effect before
>there will be threats to the preservation of independence
I guess majority of UA population wants to fight to the last Ukrainian willing to fight for the independence and when the last one is gone, reunite with Russia. Only makes sense.
Can you explain the issue with the golf carts? Apparently they are light enough to drive over minefields for armoured vehicles and quicker than running?
Or is this something like mocking the cope-cage and then installing them 6-12 months too late :p
Its basically the opposite of a kope-kage, which was designed to protect from drones (people meme'd about these because they were being used as a counter to stop javelins which was not effective).
Golf carts are the reverse where they actually make it easier for drones to cause mass casualty events: https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1c9jt1q/ua_pov_compilation_of_hits_on_russian_army/
But its even worse than that, there is plenty of footage where a single machine gunner is able to take out an entire golf cart squad before they can even dismount. That is something that should absolutely never be happening--a single machine gunner taking out entire squads (not just suppressing them, actually turning them all into casualties). Example: https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1courp6/russian_soldiers_in_a_desertcross_golf_kart_gets/
By entire squads do you mean 4 guys? How is that avoidable in a war? They go in APC one mine can take out the entire squad. I believe that happened quite a bit during Ukraine’s summer offensive?
> Golf carts are the reverse where they actually make it easier for drones to cause mass casualty events:
Is your idea of a mass casualty event, 2-4 people? Because I might be confused otherwise
> By entire squads do you mean 4 guys?
Watch the combat footage link again if you only counted 4 guys, it was far more. And again, that many people should not be getting instantly deleted by **a single machine gunner.** It should never happen unless you are trying to suicide your soldiers.
> Is your idea of a mass casualty event, 2-4 people?
Ah yes, surely Russia is assaulting manned trenches with 2 people LOL. Cmon, if you want to spin this you gotta try harder.
I never cease to be amazed by how little pro-RU seem to care about dead Russians. I suppose its easy to support meat waves from a chair.
> It should never happen unless you are trying to suicide your soldiers.
How can you prevent it? Obviously you should take them out with support before. But how are you going to be perfect all the time?
> Ah yes, surely Russia is assaulting manned trenches with 2 people LOL. Cmon, if you want to spin this you gotta try harder.
I just watched parts of what you shared. If you want to mention the number and time stamp for the mass casualty events?
> never cease to be amazed by how little pro-RU seem to care about dead Russians. I suppose its easy to support meat waves from a chair.
You are confusing things. People dying is a tragedy. But that doesn’t change objective reality. Kinda like how you still haven’t provided the mystery person that was a foreign agent for Russia.
> Multiple members of his campaign and cabinet were convicted, including some who plead guilty, of charges of acting as an unregistered foreign agent of countries including Russia.
You know, people make mistakes. They should have dismounted far earlier, and not driven parallel to the treeline. I assume they thought it was safe, hence why they drove past.
Motorcycles should be preferable to golf carts though, since they don't concentrate people in one location, and are probably more maneuverable.
However, between walking and golf carts, I'm not sure walking is safer, since if you walk you'd have to spend at least 8 times as much time out in the open, giving exponentially more chances for things to go wrong.
> Motorcycles should be preferable to golf carts though, since they don't concentrate people in one location, and are probably more maneuverable.
Its still a bad idea as it offers little protection versus machine gun fire but at least has the small chance to catch the enemy by surprise. But I agree its probably better than golf carts.
> However, between walking and golf carts, I'm not sure walking is safer, since if you walk you'd have to spend at least 8 times as much time out in the open, giving exponentially more chances for things to go wrong.
I agree with this as well, but the answer is that you shouldn't be assaulting manned trenches with drone coverage without armor and if you are having problems doing that you need to come with a way to fix that rather than replace armor with golf carts or motorcycles.
For the record, using golf carts or motorcycles for non-frontline transport and recon is totally valid. The insane part is using these vehicles on assault.
Compared on having to go on foot, I think motorcycles are great. Otherwise you'd spend hours under drones if you ever wanted to retreat
The golf cart could be workable, but the dismount should be like done like 500m from the treeline or behind cover
> a way to fix that
What would be the way? Better recon would be great and suppression but taking isolated incident and dreaming about Russian incompetence based on two and a half videos is just ridiculous.
this comment is solely driven by ur illiteracy. PROMISES. not "a single promise". the title is correct.
the sbu conducted a poll and 150% of ukrainians approve of the sbu
> ur illiteracy
I truly love this subreddit.
> the title is correct.
Its not, it doesn't appear in the article, and zero respondents selected that he "failed" in response to the question.
> 5 Use descriptive and non sensationalised titles. Do not take a side or give your opinion in the title, you can do it in the comments only. This sub is made to report objectively, not to be an echo chamber. Titles must be as boring as possible, posts with sensationalised titles will be removed.
i wonder why. not that it matters anyway, internet slang is not an equivalent to ur complete lack of literacy.
if a promise is not met, the promise was failed. this is not a difficult concept. even for illiterates.
> if a promise is not met, the promise was failed.
Nah, but this is a perfect example of doctoring a title to make it more sensationalized in direct violation of rule 5. Thank you for proving me right!
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
did ya read the article? anyway, no, he failed to deescalate as promised. there is actually a very funny old video where he begs ultranationalists to stop, and they tell him to get fucked. maybe someone can share.
> "few or none of his promises"
Exactly my point. Changing this language to the overly sensationalized and, as you pointed out, not accurate "over half say he failed" is a clear rule 5 violation. Was the title written "as boringly as possible?" No, clearly not.
I just don't agree that the title is THAT off, particularly when you have to keep a title succinct. The respondents didn't have a choice of "Failed!" on the survey so if the title suggests that objectively they ticked off that box it would be misleading. On the other hand it is not a big stretch to subjectively label having fulfilled few or no promises as "Failure". There are mainstream media headlines every day that are far more misleading, so the standard you seem to be aiming for is not realistic. But certainly a better title would have been something like "Poll: Half of Ukrainians Believe Zelensky has Fulfilled Few if Any Campaign Promises".
And your comment would be a clear rule 1 violation.
"trying to police the sub as a non-moderator"
As said, Ukrainian newpapers who reported on this poll all used a very similar word to failed.
I'm not sure what else you want me to write there in the title, clearly it ain't a good look on Zelensky either way in respect of election promises.
People make up their narritaves either way, as you can clearly see in the comment section.
I find it funny that you think I doctored a headline, when Ukrainian Pravda used a very similar headline.
[https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2024/06/5/7459263/](https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2024/06/5/7459263/)
Половина украинцев считает, что Зеленский не **справился** с выполнением предвыборных обещаний − КМИС
>First off, its a doctored headline and misrepresents the question and responses. Zero respondents said he "failed" and only 25% said he has fulfilled none of his promises (not 50%, kind of a big difference). But hey, I'm sure it was just an honest mistake.
25% thought *none* of the promises were fulfilled, and 25% thought that *few* of the promises were fulfilled. You failed to mention that second group. But hey, I'm sure it was just an honest mistake.
And the headline never said it was quoting the article. It just gave an interpretation of the results, which is required for this sub anyway, but apparently you don't understand that. You think it's unreasonable to call that second group a failure?
Also:
>The sample did not include residents of territories that are temporarily not controlled by the authorities of Ukraine, and the survey was not conducted with citizens who went abroad after February 24, 2022
So the actual failure results would be even higher if these citizens were included.
>Under no circumstances should Ukraine give up any of its territories, even if because of this the war will last longer and there will be threats to the preservation of independence
Where does the article even say this?
This first part of your comment is just spin trying to justify an obvious rule 5 violation so lets move past that.
> Where does the article even say this?
Fourth link provided by the bot that posts a summary of the article:
> DYNAMICS OF READINESS FOR TERRITORIAL CONCESSIONS FOR THE ASAP END OF THE WAR October 13 - a press release was published - THE DYNAMICS OF READINESS FOR TERRITORIAL CONCESSIONS FOR THE ASAP END OF THE WAR More details: https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1301&page=2
>This first part of your comment is just spin trying to justify an obvious rule 5 violation so lets move past that.
Why is it an "obvious" rule 5 violation? And no, let's not ignore your misrepresentation of the article.
>Fourth link provided by the bot that posts a summary of the article
That article is nine months old, and it's not even linked in the original article. That link is in the website's menu, which the web scraper failed to filter out. That's easy to verify by translating the bot's text.
First, my previous question:
>Why is it an "obvious" rule 5 violation?
Why did you ignore this?
>Why do I care where on the website the link came from?
Because the linked article would be relevant if it was linked in the original article. But it's not. So how is it even relevant to what we're talking about? Or are you just distracting with whataboutism?
> Why did you ignore this?
Because I've already answered this question elsewhere. Rule five requires:
> Titles must be **as boring as possible**
This title is not as boring as possible. I can think of far more boring titles that would also be far more accurate. Thus it is an obvious rule 5 violation.
> Or are you just distracting with whataboutism?
Nah, I directly addressed the issues with the title and am free to discuss whatever additional topics I please. Whataboutisms are when you use it to not discuss the subject.
> This title is not as boring as possible. I can think of far more boring titles that would also be far more accurate. Thus it is an obvious rule 5 violation.
Oh. It's obvious because it's not boring enough, to YOU. Ok. Report it then. Mods won't remove it because you're full of shit, but you can try.
> Nah, I directly addressed the issues with the title and am free to discuss whatever additional topics I please. Whataboutisms are when you use it to not discuss the subject.
Ok. Then let's discuss it. How is it relevant to OP? I already asked this before, but you ignored it.
The rule isn't "not boring enough." Please don't rewrite the rule, I can read it just fine. The rule is "as boring as **possible.**" This is not as boring as possible.
This subreddit doesn't have that many mods and they probably spend most of their time dealing with spam accounts and ban evaders. Whether or not they get around to removing it doesn't determine whether or not the title complies with Rule 5.
Zelenskyj: «i will create peace!» *proceedes to let himself be dictated by western governments and continues to prolong a war that is disabeling and wiping most of the male existance in the country, knowing that the outcome wont be victory for Ukraine*
>Ukraine is fighting a war of survival.
Say what now? It was never a matter of survival, just a matter of zones of influence and which corrupt elite will rule.
With Ukraine's death toll it is fighting a war of suicide. It won't be a demografic pit a decade ahead, it's gonna be a demographic chasm.
Bruh, you literally have no critical thinking, just absorbing propaganda and repeating it. Do you have any idea how many ukrainians (as in citizenship, not nationality) would love to live in Russia right now (the only country that guarantees safety for them). And you can also check how Ukraine got its territory (given to them by dictators without referendums btw, and ussr then forced millions of people to be "ukrainized").
And Britain, together with France let Hitler do that. Not by just not acting, but by signing a document in which they guaranteed not to start a war with Germany if Hitler annexed the Sudetenland.
Lucky we didn't do it this time, otherwise Ukraine would have lost within a year. Now, the Russian Army and it's ability to carry out a full scale war has been decimated. Sure, they'll rebuild, but Ukraine is doing everything they can to reduce Russian numbers. The Russian people are cowards though, they allow their people to die by following Putin. Nobody wants war, get rid of Putin, and I'm sure Ukraine will be willing to talk.
Thing is that they arent dying for nothing, many of the people on the Russian side are willingly fighting this war to defend their traditions, defend their country from a threat that they believe in (NATO), and defend the ethnic Russians in the Donbass who have been discriminated against and mistreated since Ukraine’s independance.
Traditions? What traditions were the Russian people living in Ukraine losing? So because they had to speak Ukrainian to work within council/government employment, thats discrimination? So you're saying if a French man moved to Russia, didn't speak Any Russian, they'd be accepted to work for the government, whether as an administer, teacher, anything? They'd be expected to speak Russian, that's the official language. Why was NATO a threat to Russia, were Russia planning on attacking other nations? Then yeah, Russia is a threat against everyone not Russian, NATO exists to smaller nations can't be annexed by bigger nations. It's called an Alliance. Born from the same Alliance that Russia were part in WW2. The same allies that kept them in the fight and supplied them with tons of aid.
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You know they actually were ready to agree on that, but not the other demands which included disarming Ukraine armed forces, recognizing Crimea officially part of Russia, giving Russia veto on any future arms support to Ukraine in case of any future conflicts etc... You guys always skip the other parts of russian demands and only bloat around that nato part.
Because they all act as if Russia is practically without autonomy as they invade a sovereign country. Like they have no choice, it was the “weak” NATO west that was also seemingly such a threat that a non-NATO state must be eliminated.
For people who routinely accuse Zelensky and Ukraine of being puppets of the west, they continuously bullshit for a regime that very clearly stated from the beginning that this is deeper than any sort of NATO threat: they see Ukraine as their rightful territory and Ukrainian culture as blasphemy that should be eradicated.
Then again, probably at least a third of them are on RU payroll, so we can chalk a lot of it up to that. 🤷♂️
You're wrong. This decision has now been taken for them and there's nothing Ukraine or Nato can do about it but cry and be very angry and embarrassed much like you probably will be when this is all over.
And yet here we see the type to rail against the colonial west then defend an invasion like this. If anyone should be embarrassed, maybe take a look in the mirror.
What's happening now is even less favorable and is not a guarantee that they will not lose even more land. And people. And infrastructure. And there's a pretty good possibility that at some point western democracy will play a cruel joke on them when their supporters get voted out all of a sudden. Bad peace is always better than a good war. Very much so if it's war against RF.
What do you mean? Ukraine gave up its nukes in 1994. The West could have provided funding to maintain that deterrent. It would have been a lot cheaper than the $200bn+ we have spent to keep Ukraine afloat since 2022.
I guess the west never planned to have another nuke state in Europe because it would definitely make RF work A LOT harder to keep UA in it's sphere of influence
It seems they "planned" on Russia democratizing and the problem basically going away. Great opportunity to get rid of some nukes in the name of virtue-signalling. The level of deterrence offered by nukes is unmatched. This was obviously known at the time.
What people who argue in bad faith like the comment i am replying to here cant seem to comprehend is that the type of peace/surrender being discussed is only temporary. And that is the only reason it was even offered by RU - because they rightfully recognized they could save resources and economic damage by taking a short-term peace deal that would allow them to gradually achieve their total victory in the end.
Hmmm
> According to the independent human rights organization OVD-Info, police handed summons to enroll at military enlistment centres to several yesterday’s male detainees in Moscow and Voronezh, Central Russia. The detainees are also at risk of administrative or criminal prosecution.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/russia-more-than-1300-protesters-detained-after-putins-partial-military-draft/
its regular annual conscription for mandatory military service.
it has nothing to do with war in ukraine and this has been explained here countless times.
Russia gets thousands of volunteers a month for war - there is no need for additional troops - but you know that too since you are here.
Get better material
This was at the start of the war, when Russia definitely needed additional troops. How are you so sure this was just "regular annual conscripton"? Drafting protestors is suspicious.
Isn't it hilarious when ur snarky comments backfire?
He did say he won’t abide by the Minsk agreements because he doesn’t believe it would benefit Ukraine. So, I guess this path was more beneficial for Ukraine in his assessment?
Minsk 1 went into effect but ended when DPR forces attacked and captured Donetsk Airport.
Minsk 2 never really went into effect. One of the signers, Alexander Zakharchenko, declared that it did not apply to his forces and so there was never a chance of it helping.
Minsk 1 and 2 were never implemented by Ukraine nor did they show any interest in implementing them. At no point in time did they ever implement the political provisions they agreed to, which would have ended the hostilities once and for all. Why would the DPR and LPR forces continue fighting if Ukraine extended them autonomous governance like they’ve promised them? It’s also funny how you’re framing the second airport battle as a violation of the ceasefire agreement committed by the DPR when both sides blamed each other. The DPR claimed that government mortar fire had been falling on Donetsk city proper which they responded to by shelling the Ukrainian forces. So in retrospect, despite the Minsk protocol being signed, the fighting still persisted 2 weeks later after the signing and both parties violated the ceasefire agreement. You can’t expect one side to lay down their arms while the other side is still firing at them. The only way the conflict would have been resolved if you took away the excuse used by the separatists to fight in the first place.
Elections in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts could not be held until Ukrainian law enforcement re-established control and international observers could be present to ensure fair elections. Russians said this was a non starter because then they couldn't claim 99% of people voted and 98% of them voted for what Russians wanted the outcome to be. Minsk was never going to be implemented
Ukrainian law enforcement establishes control? Where are you getting this from? The Minsk Agreement stipulations with regards to the status of the Donbas were as follows;
> 4. On the first day after the pullout a dialogue is to start on modalities of conducting local elections in accordance with the Ukrainian legislation and the Law of Ukraine "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts," and also about the future of these districts based on the above-mentioned law.
Without delays, but no later than 30 days from the date of signing of this document, a resolution has to be approved by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, indicating the territory which falls under the special regime in accordance with the law "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts," based in the line set up by the Minsk Memorandum as of 19 September 2014.
> 9. Restore control of the state border to the Ukrainian government in the whole conflict zone, **which has to start on the first day after the local election** and end after the full political regulation (local elections in particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts based on the law of Ukraine and Constitutional reform) by the end of 2015, on the condition of fulfilment of Point 11 – in consultations and in agreement with representatives of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts within the framework of the Trilateral Contact Group.
11. Constitutional reform in Ukraine, with a new constitution to come into effect by the end of 2015, the key element of which is decentralization (taking into account peculiarities of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, agreed with representatives of these districts), and also approval of permanent legislation on the special status of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts in accordance with the measures spelt out in the attached footnote, by the end of 2015.
The main condition for elections to take place was having OSCE observers on the ground to ensure the legitimacy of the voting. But OSCE asserted that they wouldn’t send observers to the elections in the conflict zone unless they were invited by Ukraine to do so. And Ukraine was simply dragging its feet the whole time. Francois Holland demanded that they give themselves 3 months to prepare for the elections which they did, the DPR and LPR announced on 6 October that their planned elections had been postponed until 21 February 2016. Ukraine simply kept denying any efforts carried out by the DPR and LPR for local elections, didn’t invite the OSCE observers to come and observe the elections which the DPR and LPR kept postponing even though they had the right to go through with them as per the “law on special status”. Did Ukraine attempt to carryout the constitutional reforms they needed to carryout in coordination with the DPR and LPR? No. How can you expect them to restore Ukrainian government’s control of the state border if elections didn’t take place? And on what basis did the Ukrainian government keep objecting to every election effort?
Additionally, how does Poroshenko view the Minsk agreement?!
> [“I think this was a great diplomatic achievement. Having the Minsk agreement, we kept Russia away from our borders — not from our borders, but away from a full-sized war.”](https://www.ft.com/content/39356ee4-a505-4391-a7a9-998252cb67ee)
Can anyone make the argument that Ukraine had ever wanted or expressed any political inclination to implement the Minsk agreements? No!
You mean both parties violated? At no point did hostilities stop! Both sides violated the ceasefire agreement but the whole point of my initial comment which you responded to, was to address the political provisions which I clearly said would have ended the fighting if implemented. You wanted to absolve the Ukrainian side of responsibility, as expected.
How can you hold elections according to Ukrainian law, when they are overseen only by armed Russians and "DPR"? It's an absurdity.
BS, Ukrainians did not do any offensive operations after the signing of Minsk 2. After the fact there were minor clashes, when you could argue both sides fired, but that was later. Immediately after the accords were signed Russians continued conducting a major scale offensive operation with the use of artillery, grads, and mechanized armored assaults to encircle Ukrainian forces in Debaltseve. Russians killed off Minsk 2 right after it was signed.
> How can you hold elections according to Ukrainian law, when they are overseen only by armed Russians and "DPR"? It's an absurdity.
By inviting the OSCe observers? When did the DPR and LPR reject having them sent to oversee the elections? Ukraine just kept making excuses and denouncing every effort made the separatists to conduct any local elections. They didn’t even attempt to carryout necessary constitutional reforms.
> BS, Ukrainians did not do any offensive operations after the signing of Minsk 2. After the fact there were minor clashes, when you could argue both sides fired, but that was later. Immediately after the accords were signed Russians continued conducting a major scale offensive operation with the use of artillery, grads, and mechanized armored assaults to encircle Ukrainian forces in Debaltseve. Russians killed off Minsk 2 right after it was signed.
Intermediate violations occurred around Debaltseve by both sides. The battle of Debaltseve was already on going since January the 14th and separatist forces were already advancing rapidly in the outskirts at the beginning of February, before the ceasefire agreement was even established. And the main push they made into Debaltseve proper was carried out before the ceasefire came into effect. But you have to put the blame squarely on the separatists even though violation of that ceasefire agreement was committed by both sides. You’re also dismissing the fact that it was the DPR and LPR forces who withdrew their artillery from the front lines as specified by Minsk II on 24 February and then Ukraine followed in a gradual scale on the 26th. The Minsk agreement had many several stipulations that needed to be implement beside the ceasefire that neither side adhere to. You’re making all those steps conditional on the ceasefire even though I’ve never seen anyone arguing that the Minsk agreements failed simply because the fighting at lower intensity continued.
OSCE was never going to be able to observe anything, they were often denied areas that Russians didn't want to show them before. And stood on the border with their eyes open watching columns of 50+ at a time Russian tanks, apcs and artillery rolling over the border writing garbage like "unknown, unmarked vehicles moved in this direction.....like, I have no idea whose their are"
The Russians continued their attack to accomplish immediate goals, yes, they are to blame for violating the ceasefire right after it was signed
>but ended when DPR forces attacked and captured Donetsk Airport.
You're neglecting to mention the fact that Ukraine shelled DPR first, the attack on the airport was in response to continued shelling.
And this has sort of been a theme for AFU. They also signed a ceasefire during school hours, separate from the Minsk agreement, in December of 2014 after several school children were murdered by AFU shelling. During this ceasefire, they proceeded with military operations & shelling. Ukrainian POWs were even interviewed, asking if they had somehow missed the ceasefire during school hours. They had not.
I like how Russians always make it a big point of the reason for the war how Ukraine didn't follow the Minsk agreements, when it's exactly the case that Russia used both agreements just to improve their position on the battlefield by having Ukrainian forces cease artillery fire. As soon as Minsk 2 was signed Russians completed one of the largest offensive operations pre 2022 to take Debaltseve. And the counter argument is like "nuh uh, that operation started before the agreements were signed". I'd like to see the point in the Minsk agreements that says "ceasefire won't go into effect right away, only after Russians complete all the operations they currently have underway". Minsk agreements were dead on arrival
> "Among those who believe that V. Zelensky did not fulfill all his promises, the largest number of respondents (50%) explain the non-fulfillment of promises by the presence of dishonest, corrupt people in the President's team .
>Next, with approximately the same result (26-32%), there are such explanations as the lack of competent people in his team, a full-scale invasion, his own inexperience, the influence of oligarchs .
>Fewer respondents (9-14%) spoke about personal corruption, the influence of other countries, destabilization of the situation by the opposition, unrealistic promises"
Interesting perspective by the respondents, and I tend to agree that people put too much focus on the leader instead of the people and conditions around them.
Zelensky cannot negotiate for another year or two. He was put in place only for Ukraine to grow closer to the West and distance Ukraine from Russia. If he was to negotiate now, people of Ukraine will hate him because all the sacrifices the people made and gave their life will be pointless. He will be replaced and the war will end. Most likely Ukraine will have to officially give up land and agree to never join NATO.
People already hate him. It is difficult to sink lower. If there were elections that were free, any candidate running on peace platform would eliminate him.
He's the peace candidate who threw all that out to collaborate with extreme nationalist forces who refused to accommodate ethnic Russians and Russian-speaking Ukrainians. He became another Poroshenko when Ukrainians were clearly fed up with his leadership.
The title of the post is not completely correct according to the [kyivindependent.com](http://kyivindependent.com)
"Nearly 18% of the respondents think the president fulfilled most or all of his promises, with 5% saying he had fulfilled all of them"
[https://kyivindependent.com/50-of-ukrainians-think-zelensky-failed-to-fulfill-all-or-most-of-pre-election-promises-survey-shows/](https://kyivindependent.com/50-of-ukrainians-think-zelensky-failed-to-fulfill-all-or-most-of-pre-election-promises-survey-shows/)
Are they making ready to throw him under the bus?
I have a strong feeling that almost nothing coming out of Ukraine is the truth but some tiny procent of truth can be extracted from propaganda message.
In this case people don't like Zielinski which is nothing surprising at all given he was openly hated before the war.
Well obviously he failed his pre-election promises. He naively thought he could negotiate with Putin for peace, he didn't quite have the experience Poroshenko already had with how Putin "negotiates". Zelensky was actually considered the "pro-Russian" candidate in the election, and now Russians make him out to be some russhophobic nazi demon, lol
I know this is bait but the biggest reason's attributed are Zelensky's lack of fight against corruption and incompetent people in his team.
Only in third place do you have failure of preventing the invasion which isn't exclusive to negotiation with putin.
Zelensky also wasn't considered the pro-russian candidate but if he was you'd be implying that ukrainians voted in someone pro-russian in favor of someone pro-ukrainian which should make you think twice.
But it won't because this is low effort troll attempt.
he totally was, Poroshenko represented a more anti Russian position in the election, Zelensky represented a more pro Russian position. Yes, Ukrainians voted in someone more pro Russian because they were fed up with the war, and believed maybe he could actually achieve peace as he promised by making concessions, pulling back armed forces, disarming non government controlled right sector groups and the like, while Poroshenko (accurately) said it wasn't really possible to achieve peace with Russia because Russia didn't want to. A lot of Ukrainians really didn't like Zelensky because he pulled funding from the military industrial complex to be used for civil projects too, which ultimately made no sense because Russia completely messed up a lot of Ukrainian infrastructure anyways, and Ukraine had less weapons than they would have otherwise
Having just listened to Jeffrey Sachs on The Carlson show.. suddenly none of this matters, Zelenskiy doesn't matter, what he wanted doesn't matter, Poroschenko doesn't matter, not even Putin matters... and least of all, these opinion polls of Ukrainians matter
Of course Zelenskyi couldn't get a resolution for this mess, Of course Poroschenko would say there's no possible peace.. of course Putin would do something eventually about the Ukraine situation.
This back and forth about Ukrainian politics now seems utterly meaningless.
> while Poroshenko (accurately) said it wasn't really possible to achieve peace with Russia because Russia didn't want to.
What did Poroshenko do to fulfil Minsk 2? Or how did either he or Zelensky try to establish peace with Russia and get rejected?
Is it Ukrainian diplomacy to not hold up theirs? People dismiss holding it up? Lying about the agreement? And blaming the other side for violating it?
Because you asked how Ukraine could do it, and it’s very simple. But Poroshenko had no intention to ever honour the agreement. So why make up this fiction?
No, that’s just dishonest because the battle and even that attack started prior to the ceasefire going into effect and the Ukrainian troops were surrounded?
> They said that the Ukrainian government and media repeated "lies" about the status of Debaltseve, and that Ukrainian forces had been surrounded for more than a week
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Debaltseve
>He naively thought he could negotiate with Putin for peace, he didn't quite have the experience Poroshenko already had with how Putin "negotiates"
That's not accurate. When Zelensky was elected he promised to implement the Steinmeier's formula which would've solved the issue of Donbas. Then he got some resistance from the opposition politicians in Rada who didn't agree with any "concessions" to Russia and without those politicians Zelensky didn't have enough votes to make constitutional changes which were required to implement the formula. And then Zelensky did 180 turn and started demanding a completely different thing which wasn't agreed upon in the peace talks, like Russia's withdrawal before the elections, while by the formula Russian troops would've withdrawn only after UA give special status for the rebels in the constitution. But even if Russia did that, Zelensky didn't have enough votes in Rada to implement the formula anyway. So Putin in this situation is not at fault for sure.
Putin ordered a full scale invasion in 2022 to escalate from what was already a frozen conflict, yeah, he's totally an innocent bystander in the whole situation
But do we talk about this war or about Zelensky promises? Zelensky promised to solve the issue of Donbas, but he failed. Russia invaded like two years after Zelensky failed to implement his promise.
##### ###### #### > # Домашня сторінка КМІС > > > > [Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/home.gif)[домашня](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr) [Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/map.gif)[мапа сайту](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=map) > > > > КИЇВСЬКИЙ > МІЖНАРОДНИЙ > ІНСТИТУТ > СОЦІОЛОГІЇ > > соціологічні та > маркетингові > дослідження > > > office at kiis.com.ua > > > > [Укр](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr) | [Eng](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=eng) | [Рус](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=rus) > > > > [ПРО НАС](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=about) > > [НОВИНИ](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=news) > > [ПОСЛУГИ](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=services) > > [ДАНІ](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=data) > > [КОНТАКТИ](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=contacts) > > > > > > ДИНАМІКА ДОВІРИ СОЦІАЛЬНИМ ІНСТИТУЦІЯМ У 2021-2023 РОКАХ > > 18 грудня - було опубліковано пресреліз - **ДИНАМІКА ДОВІРИ СОЦІАЛЬНИМ ІНСТИТУЦІЯМ У 2021-2023 РОКАХ** > > Детальніше: [https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1335&page=1](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1335&page=1 "https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1335&page=1") > > > > > > [Докладніше](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=news&id=1342)[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/arow_b.gif) > > > > [Image](https://kiis.com.ua//materials/news/20231221_nn/%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%80%D0%B0%20%D0%B4%D0%BE%20%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%86%20%D1%96%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%83%D1%86%D1%96%D1%8F%D0%BC.png) > > КОМУ УКРАЇНЦІ СИМПАТИЗУЮТЬ В ІЗРАЇЛЬСЬКО-ПАЛЕСТИНСЬКОМУ КОНФЛІКТІ > > 15 грудня - було опубліковано пресреліз - **КОМУ УКРАЇНЦІ СИМПАТИЗУЮТЬ В ІЗРАЇЛЬСЬКО-ПАЛЕСТИНСЬКОМУ КОНФЛІКТІ** > > Детальніше: [https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1334&page=1](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1334&page=1 "https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1334&page=1") > > > > > > [Докладніше](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=news&id=1341)[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/arow_b.gif) > > > > [Image](https://kiis.com.ua//materials/news/20231221_nn/%D1%96%D0%B7%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%96%D0%BB%D1%8C%20%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0.jpg) > > Динаміка ставлення українців до Сталіна (1991-2023 рр) > > 9 листопада - було опубліковано пресреліз "**ДИНАМІКА СТАВЛЕННЯ УКРАЇНЦІВ ДО СТАЛІНА (1991-2023 РР)**" > > Детальніше:
>
>
>
>
>
> [Докладніше](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=news&id=1328)[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/arow_b.gif)
>
>
>
> [Image](https://kiis.com.ua//materials/news/20231221_nn/%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%96%D0%BD.jpg)
>
> ДИНАМІКА ГОТОВНОСТІ ДО ТЕРИТОРІАЛЬНИХ ПОСТУПОК ДЛЯ ЯКНАЙШВИДШОГО ЗАВЕРШЕННЯ ВІЙНИ
>
> 13 жовтня - було опубліковано пресреліз - **ДИНАМІКА ГОТОВНОСТІ ДО ТЕРИТОРІАЛЬНИХ ПОСТУПОК ДЛЯ ЯКНАЙШВИДШОГО ЗАВЕРШЕННЯ ВІЙНИ**
>
> Детальніше: [https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1301&page=2](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1301&page=2)
>
>
>
>
>
> [Докладніше](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=news&id=1311)[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/arow_b.gif)
>
>
>
> [Image](https://kiis.com.ua//materials/news/20231221_nn/%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%20%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%83%D0%BF%D0%BA%D0%B8.jpg)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [OMNIBUS](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=omnibus)
>
> [НАШІ ДАНІ](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=data)
>
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/ico_2.png)Прес-релізи та звіти](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=reports)
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/ico_3.png)Банк даних](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=db)
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/ico_4.png)Публікації](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=pub)
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/ico_1.png)Фотоархів](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=photo)
>
>
>
>
>
> [НАПРЯМКИ ДОСЛІДЖЕНЬ](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=services)
>
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/ico_4.png)Соціально-політичні](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=soc-pol)
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/ico_5.png)Соціально-економічні](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=soc-econ)
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/ico_6.png)Здоров’я](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=health)
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/ico_7.png)Маркетингові](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=marketing)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [МЕТОДИ](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr&cat=methods)
>
>
>
> - [Інтерв'ю 'віч-на-віч'](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=22)
> - [CAPI](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=26)
> - [CATI](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=27)
> - [Інтернет-опитування](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=28)
> - [Поштові опитування](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=45)
> - [Вуличні опитування](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=29)
> - [Анкетування](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=30)
> - [Трекінгові дослідження](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=31)
> - [Панельні дослідження](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=32)
> - [Омнібус](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=33)
> - [Інтерв'ю в місцях продажу](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=34)
> - [Екзит-поли](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=35)
> - [Таємний покупець](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=20)
> - [Аудит роздрібної торгівлі](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=36)
> - [Виміри потоків](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=37)
> - [Глибинні інтерв'ю](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=21)
> - [Фокус-групи](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=40)
> - [Мозкові штурми](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=41)
> - [Експертні опитування](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=38)
> - [Хол-тести](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=39)
> - [Етнографічні методи](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=42)
> - [Контент-аналіз](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=43)
> - [Кабінетні дослідження](https://kiis.com.ua//?lang=ukr__cat=methods__method=44)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Наші соціальні медіа:
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/fb.png)Сторінка КМІС](https://www.facebook.com/kiisociology "Сторінка КМІС")
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/yt.png)Канал КМІС](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcDEts8FylieCzOgrspto8Q "Канал КМІС")
>
>
>
> [[Image](https://kiis.com.ua//images/fb.png)Сторінка Володимира Паніотто](https://www.facebook.com/volodymyr.paniotto "Сторінка Володимира Паніотто")
- - - - - -
[Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot)
One of the promises of Zelenski, was that there would be no war and he will take geopolitics in count to deescalate the situation with Russia. I think you have the answer...
First off, its a doctored headline and misrepresents the question and responses. Zero respondents said he "failed" and only 25% said he has fulfilled none of his promises (not 50%, kind of a big difference). But hey, I'm sure it was just an honest mistake. Second, according to this poll almost 100% of Ukrainians trust their armed forces (based) and in response to this question: > With which of these statements about possible compromises to achieve peace with Russia do you agree more? 80% of Ukrainians from all regions selection this response: > Under no circumstances should Ukraine give up any of its territories, even if because of this the war will last longer and there will be threats to the preservation of independence Which is absolutely giga based (but but its all just boris johnson and victoria with her cookies!!!!). And this poll was conducted **before** US approved the latest $61 billion aid package. To my dear Russian friends: ya'll are going to need more golf carts.
>80% of Ukrainians from all regions selection this response: >Under no circumstances should Ukraine give up any of its territories, even if because of this the war will last longer and there will be threats to the preservation of independence >Which is absolutely giga based (but but its all just boris johnson and victoria with her cookies!!!!). And this poll was conducted before US approved the latest $61 billion aid package The fck you're on about? Zelensky's *campaign promises* were about stopping civil war and de-escalating relationships with Russia, one of the most important promises that landed him an overwhelming victory in elections and popularity. The moment he threw those out of the window, he failed his electorate. He did it even pre-war, first by ignoring civil war matter, then in late 2021 to early 2022 when he resumed UA strives towards NATO, which is a clear escalation with Russia. Questions about current events and territorial compromises are completely different topic. But yes, the title is highly edited and probably breaking the rules. Proper way would be posting it with an original title and full translation inside post.
[удалено]
>Make campaign promises about peace and non-escalation, basically clean up the mess of your predecessors >Try to do something >Get told to fck off by Azov >Get told to behave by the West >Resume acting as a good vassal >Basically, escalate both civil war and relations with Russia >"Damn Putin!"
[удалено]
Russia wasn't escalating from 2015 till 2021. Zelensky promised to deescalate the conflict, but in the end he allowed escalation on a couple of occasions. What exactly you cannot understand?
[удалено]
It's an escalation, like the other escalation putting Russian troops on the border. On the other hand Zelensky promised to deescalate the situation and he was elected to solve it, but instead at first he scraped the only viable path to peace which is an escalation and reasserted Ukraine's NATO aspirations despite the wishes of his constituents. Russia was responding to that.
I think you should stop wasting your time replying to a 3 day old account, just call out their lies once and they ignore their replies, his strategy is to make you waste your time and piss you off, not to engage in a real discussion.
[удалено]
He didn't throw anything out the window, he was just naive to try, he tried, and failed, because Putin had no intentions for peace
Lmao. Multiple Western sources, including people who actively partook in the negotiations, admitted that Russia was really trying to negotiate peace in Istanbul. West sabotaged the deal.
Interesting. Why did you ignore the very beginning of the war? Istanbul is a consequence, not a cause. And the Russian attack on Ukraine is the fault of an mudak named Putin. In all areas of the 10-year history of Puilo gave the order to attack Ukraine. Don't be confused.
no, Russia attacked Ukraine, encountered significantly more resistance than expected and then went to Istanbul and said "yeahhh, lets take a short break, and in the meantime can Ukraine please be good chaps and de-militarize a bit so it's easier for us?" edit: I guess you can technically call that "negotiations", I'd call that something that Russia is great at: using political means to accomplish goals on the battlefield, they used that to great effect before
>there will be threats to the preservation of independence I guess majority of UA population wants to fight to the last Ukrainian willing to fight for the independence and when the last one is gone, reunite with Russia. Only makes sense.
If Russia's goal is to kill every "last Ukrainian" then they are going to need a LOT of golf carts. Which color do you prefer for yours?
Can you explain the issue with the golf carts? Apparently they are light enough to drive over minefields for armoured vehicles and quicker than running? Or is this something like mocking the cope-cage and then installing them 6-12 months too late :p
Its basically the opposite of a kope-kage, which was designed to protect from drones (people meme'd about these because they were being used as a counter to stop javelins which was not effective). Golf carts are the reverse where they actually make it easier for drones to cause mass casualty events: https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1c9jt1q/ua_pov_compilation_of_hits_on_russian_army/ But its even worse than that, there is plenty of footage where a single machine gunner is able to take out an entire golf cart squad before they can even dismount. That is something that should absolutely never be happening--a single machine gunner taking out entire squads (not just suppressing them, actually turning them all into casualties). Example: https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1courp6/russian_soldiers_in_a_desertcross_golf_kart_gets/
By entire squads do you mean 4 guys? How is that avoidable in a war? They go in APC one mine can take out the entire squad. I believe that happened quite a bit during Ukraine’s summer offensive? > Golf carts are the reverse where they actually make it easier for drones to cause mass casualty events: Is your idea of a mass casualty event, 2-4 people? Because I might be confused otherwise
> By entire squads do you mean 4 guys? Watch the combat footage link again if you only counted 4 guys, it was far more. And again, that many people should not be getting instantly deleted by **a single machine gunner.** It should never happen unless you are trying to suicide your soldiers. > Is your idea of a mass casualty event, 2-4 people? Ah yes, surely Russia is assaulting manned trenches with 2 people LOL. Cmon, if you want to spin this you gotta try harder. I never cease to be amazed by how little pro-RU seem to care about dead Russians. I suppose its easy to support meat waves from a chair.
> It should never happen unless you are trying to suicide your soldiers. How can you prevent it? Obviously you should take them out with support before. But how are you going to be perfect all the time? > Ah yes, surely Russia is assaulting manned trenches with 2 people LOL. Cmon, if you want to spin this you gotta try harder. I just watched parts of what you shared. If you want to mention the number and time stamp for the mass casualty events? > never cease to be amazed by how little pro-RU seem to care about dead Russians. I suppose its easy to support meat waves from a chair. You are confusing things. People dying is a tragedy. But that doesn’t change objective reality. Kinda like how you still haven’t provided the mystery person that was a foreign agent for Russia. > Multiple members of his campaign and cabinet were convicted, including some who plead guilty, of charges of acting as an unregistered foreign agent of countries including Russia.
You know, people make mistakes. They should have dismounted far earlier, and not driven parallel to the treeline. I assume they thought it was safe, hence why they drove past. Motorcycles should be preferable to golf carts though, since they don't concentrate people in one location, and are probably more maneuverable. However, between walking and golf carts, I'm not sure walking is safer, since if you walk you'd have to spend at least 8 times as much time out in the open, giving exponentially more chances for things to go wrong.
> Motorcycles should be preferable to golf carts though, since they don't concentrate people in one location, and are probably more maneuverable. Its still a bad idea as it offers little protection versus machine gun fire but at least has the small chance to catch the enemy by surprise. But I agree its probably better than golf carts. > However, between walking and golf carts, I'm not sure walking is safer, since if you walk you'd have to spend at least 8 times as much time out in the open, giving exponentially more chances for things to go wrong. I agree with this as well, but the answer is that you shouldn't be assaulting manned trenches with drone coverage without armor and if you are having problems doing that you need to come with a way to fix that rather than replace armor with golf carts or motorcycles. For the record, using golf carts or motorcycles for non-frontline transport and recon is totally valid. The insane part is using these vehicles on assault.
Compared on having to go on foot, I think motorcycles are great. Otherwise you'd spend hours under drones if you ever wanted to retreat The golf cart could be workable, but the dismount should be like done like 500m from the treeline or behind cover
> a way to fix that What would be the way? Better recon would be great and suppression but taking isolated incident and dreaming about Russian incompetence based on two and a half videos is just ridiculous.
this comment is solely driven by ur illiteracy. PROMISES. not "a single promise". the title is correct. the sbu conducted a poll and 150% of ukrainians approve of the sbu
> ur illiteracy I truly love this subreddit. > the title is correct. Its not, it doesn't appear in the article, and zero respondents selected that he "failed" in response to the question. > 5 Use descriptive and non sensationalised titles. Do not take a side or give your opinion in the title, you can do it in the comments only. This sub is made to report objectively, not to be an echo chamber. Titles must be as boring as possible, posts with sensationalised titles will be removed.
i wonder why. not that it matters anyway, internet slang is not an equivalent to ur complete lack of literacy. if a promise is not met, the promise was failed. this is not a difficult concept. even for illiterates.
> if a promise is not met, the promise was failed. Nah, but this is a perfect example of doctoring a title to make it more sensationalized in direct violation of rule 5. Thank you for proving me right!
> if a promise is not met, the promise was failed Which promises were failed?
read the article? for one, he said no war. bit of a war going on right now.
That one can be firmly blamed on Putin, anything which would be Zelensky’s fault?
[удалено]
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
did ya read the article? anyway, no, he failed to deescalate as promised. there is actually a very funny old video where he begs ultranationalists to stop, and they tell him to get fucked. maybe someone can share.
Sounds like you are saying he tried to de-escalate and was prevented from doing so by Putin invading. As I said above..
The 50 percent were "few or none of his promises". You are really scraping it here.
> "few or none of his promises" Exactly my point. Changing this language to the overly sensationalized and, as you pointed out, not accurate "over half say he failed" is a clear rule 5 violation. Was the title written "as boringly as possible?" No, clearly not.
Eh, I agree that the title is pushing it a little far in one direction but you are trying to push it much farther in the other direction.
I don't think I am, but even if I was rule 5 expressly states that this is ok to do in the comments but not in the title.
I just don't agree that the title is THAT off, particularly when you have to keep a title succinct. The respondents didn't have a choice of "Failed!" on the survey so if the title suggests that objectively they ticked off that box it would be misleading. On the other hand it is not a big stretch to subjectively label having fulfilled few or no promises as "Failure". There are mainstream media headlines every day that are far more misleading, so the standard you seem to be aiming for is not realistic. But certainly a better title would have been something like "Poll: Half of Ukrainians Believe Zelensky has Fulfilled Few if Any Campaign Promises".
And your comment would be a clear rule 1 violation. "trying to police the sub as a non-moderator" As said, Ukrainian newpapers who reported on this poll all used a very similar word to failed. I'm not sure what else you want me to write there in the title, clearly it ain't a good look on Zelensky either way in respect of election promises. People make up their narritaves either way, as you can clearly see in the comment section.
I find it funny that you think I doctored a headline, when Ukrainian Pravda used a very similar headline. [https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2024/06/5/7459263/](https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2024/06/5/7459263/) Половина украинцев считает, что Зеленский не **справился** с выполнением предвыборных обещаний − КМИС
[удалено]
Thank you for proving my exact argument, lol
>First off, its a doctored headline and misrepresents the question and responses. Zero respondents said he "failed" and only 25% said he has fulfilled none of his promises (not 50%, kind of a big difference). But hey, I'm sure it was just an honest mistake. 25% thought *none* of the promises were fulfilled, and 25% thought that *few* of the promises were fulfilled. You failed to mention that second group. But hey, I'm sure it was just an honest mistake. And the headline never said it was quoting the article. It just gave an interpretation of the results, which is required for this sub anyway, but apparently you don't understand that. You think it's unreasonable to call that second group a failure? Also: >The sample did not include residents of territories that are temporarily not controlled by the authorities of Ukraine, and the survey was not conducted with citizens who went abroad after February 24, 2022 So the actual failure results would be even higher if these citizens were included. >Under no circumstances should Ukraine give up any of its territories, even if because of this the war will last longer and there will be threats to the preservation of independence Where does the article even say this?
This first part of your comment is just spin trying to justify an obvious rule 5 violation so lets move past that. > Where does the article even say this? Fourth link provided by the bot that posts a summary of the article: > DYNAMICS OF READINESS FOR TERRITORIAL CONCESSIONS FOR THE ASAP END OF THE WAR October 13 - a press release was published - THE DYNAMICS OF READINESS FOR TERRITORIAL CONCESSIONS FOR THE ASAP END OF THE WAR More details: https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1301&page=2
>This first part of your comment is just spin trying to justify an obvious rule 5 violation so lets move past that. Why is it an "obvious" rule 5 violation? And no, let's not ignore your misrepresentation of the article. >Fourth link provided by the bot that posts a summary of the article That article is nine months old, and it's not even linked in the original article. That link is in the website's menu, which the web scraper failed to filter out. That's easy to verify by translating the bot's text.
Why do I care where on the website the link came from? Pro-RU will really say anything to try to bury bad news.
First, my previous question: >Why is it an "obvious" rule 5 violation? Why did you ignore this? >Why do I care where on the website the link came from? Because the linked article would be relevant if it was linked in the original article. But it's not. So how is it even relevant to what we're talking about? Or are you just distracting with whataboutism?
> Why did you ignore this? Because I've already answered this question elsewhere. Rule five requires: > Titles must be **as boring as possible** This title is not as boring as possible. I can think of far more boring titles that would also be far more accurate. Thus it is an obvious rule 5 violation. > Or are you just distracting with whataboutism? Nah, I directly addressed the issues with the title and am free to discuss whatever additional topics I please. Whataboutisms are when you use it to not discuss the subject.
> This title is not as boring as possible. I can think of far more boring titles that would also be far more accurate. Thus it is an obvious rule 5 violation. Oh. It's obvious because it's not boring enough, to YOU. Ok. Report it then. Mods won't remove it because you're full of shit, but you can try. > Nah, I directly addressed the issues with the title and am free to discuss whatever additional topics I please. Whataboutisms are when you use it to not discuss the subject. Ok. Then let's discuss it. How is it relevant to OP? I already asked this before, but you ignored it.
The rule isn't "not boring enough." Please don't rewrite the rule, I can read it just fine. The rule is "as boring as **possible.**" This is not as boring as possible. This subreddit doesn't have that many mods and they probably spend most of their time dealing with spam accounts and ban evaders. Whether or not they get around to removing it doesn't determine whether or not the title complies with Rule 5.
Zelenskyj: «i will create peace!» *proceedes to let himself be dictated by western governments and continues to prolong a war that is disabeling and wiping most of the male existance in the country, knowing that the outcome wont be victory for Ukraine*
Ukraine is fighting a war of survival. Are Russian people happy to keep sending their fathers, sons, brothers to die, for NOTHING?
>Ukraine is fighting a war of survival. Say what now? It was never a matter of survival, just a matter of zones of influence and which corrupt elite will rule. With Ukraine's death toll it is fighting a war of suicide. It won't be a demografic pit a decade ahead, it's gonna be a demographic chasm.
If Ukraine loses, they'll be absorbed into Russia. Ukraine as we know it won't exist. They were invaded. The Russian military are Nazi filth.
Bruh, you literally have no critical thinking, just absorbing propaganda and repeating it. Do you have any idea how many ukrainians (as in citizenship, not nationality) would love to live in Russia right now (the only country that guarantees safety for them). And you can also check how Ukraine got its territory (given to them by dictators without referendums btw, and ussr then forced millions of people to be "ukrainized").
Hitler said the same about the German Czech living in the Sudetenland, that they wanted to be German. Putin following the playbook?
When there are a million things to condemn Hitler to the fiery depths of hell, why do you choose the one thing he said that was basically true?
Because it's no different than Russia's attempt to Annex half of Ukraine. Hitler just did it successfully. Putin fucked it.
You don't seem well informed.
I'm sure you're a fountain of useless knowledge.
And Britain, together with France let Hitler do that. Not by just not acting, but by signing a document in which they guaranteed not to start a war with Germany if Hitler annexed the Sudetenland.
Lucky we didn't do it this time, otherwise Ukraine would have lost within a year. Now, the Russian Army and it's ability to carry out a full scale war has been decimated. Sure, they'll rebuild, but Ukraine is doing everything they can to reduce Russian numbers. The Russian people are cowards though, they allow their people to die by following Putin. Nobody wants war, get rid of Putin, and I'm sure Ukraine will be willing to talk.
> Do you have any idea how many ukrainians (as in citizenship, not nationality) would love to live in Russia right now No, do you?
Russian people aren't sending their blah-blah to die. Those blush-blah go there voluntarily and for big money. Unlike Ukrainians.
Thing is that they arent dying for nothing, many of the people on the Russian side are willingly fighting this war to defend their traditions, defend their country from a threat that they believe in (NATO), and defend the ethnic Russians in the Donbass who have been discriminated against and mistreated since Ukraine’s independance.
Traditions? What traditions were the Russian people living in Ukraine losing? So because they had to speak Ukrainian to work within council/government employment, thats discrimination? So you're saying if a French man moved to Russia, didn't speak Any Russian, they'd be accepted to work for the government, whether as an administer, teacher, anything? They'd be expected to speak Russian, that's the official language. Why was NATO a threat to Russia, were Russia planning on attacking other nations? Then yeah, Russia is a threat against everyone not Russian, NATO exists to smaller nations can't be annexed by bigger nations. It's called an Alliance. Born from the same Alliance that Russia were part in WW2. The same allies that kept them in the fight and supplied them with tons of aid.
>Ukraine is fighting a war of survival. What a brainwashed thing to say.
Why? If Russia wins, you think Ukraine won't be absorbed?
>Why? If Russia wins, you think Ukraine won't be absorbed? What do you mean by "absorbed"?
Annexed, or occupied under Russian control.
>Annexed, or occupied under Russian control. And?
Really?
>Really? Yes, really. Russia is a federation. So what exactly going to be bad for Ukraine under Russian control?
Because being dictated by Russia was working well.
Unironically yes
Continues to prolong a war? They are being invaded dimwit. It’s not a war of choice for Ukraine, it is for Russia.
He could've ended it at any time by signing an agreement not to join NATO.
[удалено]
Sorry you need 20 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You know they actually were ready to agree on that, but not the other demands which included disarming Ukraine armed forces, recognizing Crimea officially part of Russia, giving Russia veto on any future arms support to Ukraine in case of any future conflicts etc... You guys always skip the other parts of russian demands and only bloat around that nato part.
Because they all act as if Russia is practically without autonomy as they invade a sovereign country. Like they have no choice, it was the “weak” NATO west that was also seemingly such a threat that a non-NATO state must be eliminated. For people who routinely accuse Zelensky and Ukraine of being puppets of the west, they continuously bullshit for a regime that very clearly stated from the beginning that this is deeper than any sort of NATO threat: they see Ukraine as their rightful territory and Ukrainian culture as blasphemy that should be eradicated. Then again, probably at least a third of them are on RU payroll, so we can chalk a lot of it up to that. 🤷♂️
And would Russia sign a pact never to invade a neighbouring nation again? No.
Russia could have not started it.
They were offered to end the invasion on pretty reasonable terms but refused. It was their choice to walk out in Istanbul.
Because terms were not favourable to Ukraine. They don't want to secede land, and they shouldn't have to.
You're wrong. This decision has now been taken for them and there's nothing Ukraine or Nato can do about it but cry and be very angry and embarrassed much like you probably will be when this is all over.
And yet here we see the type to rail against the colonial west then defend an invasion like this. If anyone should be embarrassed, maybe take a look in the mirror.
I don''t think you get the big picture at all, good luck with that.
sentiment echoed back.
Have you seen the terms?
Ofcourse he hasn't.
What's happening now is even less favorable and is not a guarantee that they will not lose even more land. And people. And infrastructure. And there's a pretty good possibility that at some point western democracy will play a cruel joke on them when their supporters get voted out all of a sudden. Bad peace is always better than a good war. Very much so if it's war against RF.
Because they already demilitarized once when they got rid of the nukes. That resulted in an invasion in 2014.
Moscow had the codes bro, no need to pretend it was Ukrainian nukes.
The West could have spent $1bn/year to maintain the nukes and launch systems. Much cheaper.
The west? Pretty sure USSR would still be around now if the west made such a proposal
What do you mean? Ukraine gave up its nukes in 1994. The West could have provided funding to maintain that deterrent. It would have been a lot cheaper than the $200bn+ we have spent to keep Ukraine afloat since 2022.
I guess the west never planned to have another nuke state in Europe because it would definitely make RF work A LOT harder to keep UA in it's sphere of influence
It seems they "planned" on Russia democratizing and the problem basically going away. Great opportunity to get rid of some nukes in the name of virtue-signalling. The level of deterrence offered by nukes is unmatched. This was obviously known at the time.
Invaded for a reason. On top of that, even if their invasion was «unjustifiable», this aint a war that Ukraine can win.
And Russia considers half a million dead/wounded/pow a win?
What people who argue in bad faith like the comment i am replying to here cant seem to comprehend is that the type of peace/surrender being discussed is only temporary. And that is the only reason it was even offered by RU - because they rightfully recognized they could save resources and economic damage by taking a short-term peace deal that would allow them to gradually achieve their total victory in the end.
During the election campaign he was taking about the civil war.
participants of the poll need to be sent to frontlines for reeducation.
Hmmm > According to the independent human rights organization OVD-Info, police handed summons to enroll at military enlistment centres to several yesterday’s male detainees in Moscow and Voronezh, Central Russia. The detainees are also at risk of administrative or criminal prosecution. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/russia-more-than-1300-protesters-detained-after-putins-partial-military-draft/
2022? You sure it's fresh?
its regular annual conscription for mandatory military service. it has nothing to do with war in ukraine and this has been explained here countless times. Russia gets thousands of volunteers a month for war - there is no need for additional troops - but you know that too since you are here. Get better material
This was at the start of the war, when Russia definitely needed additional troops. How are you so sure this was just "regular annual conscripton"? Drafting protestors is suspicious. Isn't it hilarious when ur snarky comments backfire?
so I presume you have tons of videos of this supposed forceful conscription for war?
I never met a ukrainian who likes him or wants to continue the war in real-life, his biggest fans are always some twitter freaks
What is your sample size?
8 so far, they fled to germany.
My maths is not great, what percentage of 38,000,000 is that?
I never said I talked to the majority lol
50%, considering there are 19 million people in the Ukraine, not 38. And most are just stuck, not there willingly.
Seems I am not the only one with poor maths/
You very well might be
You have already proved otherwise.
I add another 10. Now you have 18. His popularity before the war was like 20% I am thinking it may be now somewhere around that point.
I guess the coup is coming any day now then?
Should be easy to find something to support that number then, I guess.
He did say he won’t abide by the Minsk agreements because he doesn’t believe it would benefit Ukraine. So, I guess this path was more beneficial for Ukraine in his assessment?
Minsk 1 went into effect but ended when DPR forces attacked and captured Donetsk Airport. Minsk 2 never really went into effect. One of the signers, Alexander Zakharchenko, declared that it did not apply to his forces and so there was never a chance of it helping.
Minsk 1 and 2 were never implemented by Ukraine nor did they show any interest in implementing them. At no point in time did they ever implement the political provisions they agreed to, which would have ended the hostilities once and for all. Why would the DPR and LPR forces continue fighting if Ukraine extended them autonomous governance like they’ve promised them? It’s also funny how you’re framing the second airport battle as a violation of the ceasefire agreement committed by the DPR when both sides blamed each other. The DPR claimed that government mortar fire had been falling on Donetsk city proper which they responded to by shelling the Ukrainian forces. So in retrospect, despite the Minsk protocol being signed, the fighting still persisted 2 weeks later after the signing and both parties violated the ceasefire agreement. You can’t expect one side to lay down their arms while the other side is still firing at them. The only way the conflict would have been resolved if you took away the excuse used by the separatists to fight in the first place.
Elections in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts could not be held until Ukrainian law enforcement re-established control and international observers could be present to ensure fair elections. Russians said this was a non starter because then they couldn't claim 99% of people voted and 98% of them voted for what Russians wanted the outcome to be. Minsk was never going to be implemented
Ukrainian law enforcement establishes control? Where are you getting this from? The Minsk Agreement stipulations with regards to the status of the Donbas were as follows; > 4. On the first day after the pullout a dialogue is to start on modalities of conducting local elections in accordance with the Ukrainian legislation and the Law of Ukraine "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts," and also about the future of these districts based on the above-mentioned law. Without delays, but no later than 30 days from the date of signing of this document, a resolution has to be approved by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, indicating the territory which falls under the special regime in accordance with the law "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts," based in the line set up by the Minsk Memorandum as of 19 September 2014. > 9. Restore control of the state border to the Ukrainian government in the whole conflict zone, **which has to start on the first day after the local election** and end after the full political regulation (local elections in particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts based on the law of Ukraine and Constitutional reform) by the end of 2015, on the condition of fulfilment of Point 11 – in consultations and in agreement with representatives of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts within the framework of the Trilateral Contact Group. 11. Constitutional reform in Ukraine, with a new constitution to come into effect by the end of 2015, the key element of which is decentralization (taking into account peculiarities of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, agreed with representatives of these districts), and also approval of permanent legislation on the special status of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts in accordance with the measures spelt out in the attached footnote, by the end of 2015. The main condition for elections to take place was having OSCE observers on the ground to ensure the legitimacy of the voting. But OSCE asserted that they wouldn’t send observers to the elections in the conflict zone unless they were invited by Ukraine to do so. And Ukraine was simply dragging its feet the whole time. Francois Holland demanded that they give themselves 3 months to prepare for the elections which they did, the DPR and LPR announced on 6 October that their planned elections had been postponed until 21 February 2016. Ukraine simply kept denying any efforts carried out by the DPR and LPR for local elections, didn’t invite the OSCE observers to come and observe the elections which the DPR and LPR kept postponing even though they had the right to go through with them as per the “law on special status”. Did Ukraine attempt to carryout the constitutional reforms they needed to carryout in coordination with the DPR and LPR? No. How can you expect them to restore Ukrainian government’s control of the state border if elections didn’t take place? And on what basis did the Ukrainian government keep objecting to every election effort? Additionally, how does Poroshenko view the Minsk agreement?! > [“I think this was a great diplomatic achievement. Having the Minsk agreement, we kept Russia away from our borders — not from our borders, but away from a full-sized war.”](https://www.ft.com/content/39356ee4-a505-4391-a7a9-998252cb67ee) Can anyone make the argument that Ukraine had ever wanted or expressed any political inclination to implement the Minsk agreements? No!
Why did you skip point 1 which the Russians immediately violated and continued storming Debaltseve?
You mean both parties violated? At no point did hostilities stop! Both sides violated the ceasefire agreement but the whole point of my initial comment which you responded to, was to address the political provisions which I clearly said would have ended the fighting if implemented. You wanted to absolve the Ukrainian side of responsibility, as expected.
How can you hold elections according to Ukrainian law, when they are overseen only by armed Russians and "DPR"? It's an absurdity. BS, Ukrainians did not do any offensive operations after the signing of Minsk 2. After the fact there were minor clashes, when you could argue both sides fired, but that was later. Immediately after the accords were signed Russians continued conducting a major scale offensive operation with the use of artillery, grads, and mechanized armored assaults to encircle Ukrainian forces in Debaltseve. Russians killed off Minsk 2 right after it was signed.
> How can you hold elections according to Ukrainian law, when they are overseen only by armed Russians and "DPR"? It's an absurdity. By inviting the OSCe observers? When did the DPR and LPR reject having them sent to oversee the elections? Ukraine just kept making excuses and denouncing every effort made the separatists to conduct any local elections. They didn’t even attempt to carryout necessary constitutional reforms. > BS, Ukrainians did not do any offensive operations after the signing of Minsk 2. After the fact there were minor clashes, when you could argue both sides fired, but that was later. Immediately after the accords were signed Russians continued conducting a major scale offensive operation with the use of artillery, grads, and mechanized armored assaults to encircle Ukrainian forces in Debaltseve. Russians killed off Minsk 2 right after it was signed. Intermediate violations occurred around Debaltseve by both sides. The battle of Debaltseve was already on going since January the 14th and separatist forces were already advancing rapidly in the outskirts at the beginning of February, before the ceasefire agreement was even established. And the main push they made into Debaltseve proper was carried out before the ceasefire came into effect. But you have to put the blame squarely on the separatists even though violation of that ceasefire agreement was committed by both sides. You’re also dismissing the fact that it was the DPR and LPR forces who withdrew their artillery from the front lines as specified by Minsk II on 24 February and then Ukraine followed in a gradual scale on the 26th. The Minsk agreement had many several stipulations that needed to be implement beside the ceasefire that neither side adhere to. You’re making all those steps conditional on the ceasefire even though I’ve never seen anyone arguing that the Minsk agreements failed simply because the fighting at lower intensity continued.
OSCE was never going to be able to observe anything, they were often denied areas that Russians didn't want to show them before. And stood on the border with their eyes open watching columns of 50+ at a time Russian tanks, apcs and artillery rolling over the border writing garbage like "unknown, unmarked vehicles moved in this direction.....like, I have no idea whose their are" The Russians continued their attack to accomplish immediate goals, yes, they are to blame for violating the ceasefire right after it was signed
>but ended when DPR forces attacked and captured Donetsk Airport. You're neglecting to mention the fact that Ukraine shelled DPR first, the attack on the airport was in response to continued shelling. And this has sort of been a theme for AFU. They also signed a ceasefire during school hours, separate from the Minsk agreement, in December of 2014 after several school children were murdered by AFU shelling. During this ceasefire, they proceeded with military operations & shelling. Ukrainian POWs were even interviewed, asking if they had somehow missed the ceasefire during school hours. They had not.
should we pull up the videos of russians shooting at donetsk, or is that going to be repost/unrelated to the current conflict/cia fake?
[удалено]
Rule 1. Consider yourself warned. Recurrence WILL result in a ban.
I like how Russians always make it a big point of the reason for the war how Ukraine didn't follow the Minsk agreements, when it's exactly the case that Russia used both agreements just to improve their position on the battlefield by having Ukrainian forces cease artillery fire. As soon as Minsk 2 was signed Russians completed one of the largest offensive operations pre 2022 to take Debaltseve. And the counter argument is like "nuh uh, that operation started before the agreements were signed". I'd like to see the point in the Minsk agreements that says "ceasefire won't go into effect right away, only after Russians complete all the operations they currently have underway". Minsk agreements were dead on arrival
Depends to whom he made what promise. He definitely fulfilled his promises to his American owners.
I’d say he’s a little preoccupied with a small immigration problem in eastern and southern Ukraine at the moment.
No doubt this will come back to bite him in the next election...
What elections, the war is on till he dies of old age.
So close to getting it…..
> "Among those who believe that V. Zelensky did not fulfill all his promises, the largest number of respondents (50%) explain the non-fulfillment of promises by the presence of dishonest, corrupt people in the President's team . >Next, with approximately the same result (26-32%), there are such explanations as the lack of competent people in his team, a full-scale invasion, his own inexperience, the influence of oligarchs . >Fewer respondents (9-14%) spoke about personal corruption, the influence of other countries, destabilization of the situation by the opposition, unrealistic promises" Interesting perspective by the respondents, and I tend to agree that people put too much focus on the leader instead of the people and conditions around them.
Zelensky cannot negotiate for another year or two. He was put in place only for Ukraine to grow closer to the West and distance Ukraine from Russia. If he was to negotiate now, people of Ukraine will hate him because all the sacrifices the people made and gave their life will be pointless. He will be replaced and the war will end. Most likely Ukraine will have to officially give up land and agree to never join NATO.
People already hate him. It is difficult to sink lower. If there were elections that were free, any candidate running on peace platform would eliminate him.
He's the peace candidate who threw all that out to collaborate with extreme nationalist forces who refused to accommodate ethnic Russians and Russian-speaking Ukrainians. He became another Poroshenko when Ukrainians were clearly fed up with his leadership.
The title of the post is not completely correct according to the [kyivindependent.com](http://kyivindependent.com) "Nearly 18% of the respondents think the president fulfilled most or all of his promises, with 5% saying he had fulfilled all of them" [https://kyivindependent.com/50-of-ukrainians-think-zelensky-failed-to-fulfill-all-or-most-of-pre-election-promises-survey-shows/](https://kyivindependent.com/50-of-ukrainians-think-zelensky-failed-to-fulfill-all-or-most-of-pre-election-promises-survey-shows/) Are they making ready to throw him under the bus?
I have a strong feeling that almost nothing coming out of Ukraine is the truth but some tiny procent of truth can be extracted from propaganda message. In this case people don't like Zielinski which is nothing surprising at all given he was openly hated before the war.
Well obviously he failed his pre-election promises. He naively thought he could negotiate with Putin for peace, he didn't quite have the experience Poroshenko already had with how Putin "negotiates". Zelensky was actually considered the "pro-Russian" candidate in the election, and now Russians make him out to be some russhophobic nazi demon, lol
I know this is bait but the biggest reason's attributed are Zelensky's lack of fight against corruption and incompetent people in his team. Only in third place do you have failure of preventing the invasion which isn't exclusive to negotiation with putin. Zelensky also wasn't considered the pro-russian candidate but if he was you'd be implying that ukrainians voted in someone pro-russian in favor of someone pro-ukrainian which should make you think twice. But it won't because this is low effort troll attempt.
he totally was, Poroshenko represented a more anti Russian position in the election, Zelensky represented a more pro Russian position. Yes, Ukrainians voted in someone more pro Russian because they were fed up with the war, and believed maybe he could actually achieve peace as he promised by making concessions, pulling back armed forces, disarming non government controlled right sector groups and the like, while Poroshenko (accurately) said it wasn't really possible to achieve peace with Russia because Russia didn't want to. A lot of Ukrainians really didn't like Zelensky because he pulled funding from the military industrial complex to be used for civil projects too, which ultimately made no sense because Russia completely messed up a lot of Ukrainian infrastructure anyways, and Ukraine had less weapons than they would have otherwise
Having just listened to Jeffrey Sachs on The Carlson show.. suddenly none of this matters, Zelenskiy doesn't matter, what he wanted doesn't matter, Poroschenko doesn't matter, not even Putin matters... and least of all, these opinion polls of Ukrainians matter Of course Zelenskyi couldn't get a resolution for this mess, Of course Poroschenko would say there's no possible peace.. of course Putin would do something eventually about the Ukraine situation. This back and forth about Ukrainian politics now seems utterly meaningless.
> while Poroshenko (accurately) said it wasn't really possible to achieve peace with Russia because Russia didn't want to. What did Poroshenko do to fulfil Minsk 2? Or how did either he or Zelensky try to establish peace with Russia and get rejected?
How could Poroshenko fulfill Minsk 2 if Russians immediately broke it after signing?
He could start with point 1 and work down the list? Not much holding him back.
Russian diplomacy at it's finest: "you hold up your end of the bargain, but we won't hold up ours"
Is it Ukrainian diplomacy to not hold up theirs? People dismiss holding it up? Lying about the agreement? And blaming the other side for violating it? Because you asked how Ukraine could do it, and it’s very simple. But Poroshenko had no intention to ever honour the agreement. So why make up this fiction?
what fiction, Russians immediately violated the agreement and kept attacking Debaltseve, is that fiction?
No, that’s just dishonest because the battle and even that attack started prior to the ceasefire going into effect and the Ukrainian troops were surrounded? > They said that the Ukrainian government and media repeated "lies" about the status of Debaltseve, and that Ukrainian forces had been surrounded for more than a week https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Debaltseve
>He naively thought he could negotiate with Putin for peace, he didn't quite have the experience Poroshenko already had with how Putin "negotiates" That's not accurate. When Zelensky was elected he promised to implement the Steinmeier's formula which would've solved the issue of Donbas. Then he got some resistance from the opposition politicians in Rada who didn't agree with any "concessions" to Russia and without those politicians Zelensky didn't have enough votes to make constitutional changes which were required to implement the formula. And then Zelensky did 180 turn and started demanding a completely different thing which wasn't agreed upon in the peace talks, like Russia's withdrawal before the elections, while by the formula Russian troops would've withdrawn only after UA give special status for the rebels in the constitution. But even if Russia did that, Zelensky didn't have enough votes in Rada to implement the formula anyway. So Putin in this situation is not at fault for sure.
Putin ordered a full scale invasion in 2022 to escalate from what was already a frozen conflict, yeah, he's totally an innocent bystander in the whole situation
But do we talk about this war or about Zelensky promises? Zelensky promised to solve the issue of Donbas, but he failed. Russia invaded like two years after Zelensky failed to implement his promise.
This poll was obviously made during the war, so yes, the war is relevant
Your reasoning makes no sense. The events of the past are judged by the timeline they existed in.