The alternative is fight a battle you have no chance of winning, all the while the area gets completely fucked up pretty much permanently.
There was opportunity for a peaceful resolution and they turned it down because they thought they could win, then the west (which had been egging them on up to that point) suddenly fucked off to do a genocide in the middle east leaving them high and dry.
At that point you would have no choice but to admit you fucked up and would have to accept worse peace terms. This isn’t a video game where winning is the only thing that matters; people’s lives are on the line. The longer you fight the more people that die, and for what?
Do you really think that’s a realistic scenario worth considering…?
Of course not, he’s trying to make the point that it’s easy to tell someone to surrender and give their enemy everything if it’s not your thing.
Would you surrender half your country to Russia?
The alternative is fight a battle you have no chance of winning, all the while the area gets completely fucked up pretty much permanently.
There was opportunity for a peaceful resolution and they turned it down because they thought they could win, then the west (which had been egging them on up to that point) suddenly fucked off to do a genocide in the middle east leaving them high and dry.
At that point you would have no choice but to admit you fucked up and would have to accept worse peace terms. This isn’t a video game where winning is the only thing that matters; people’s lives are on the line. The longer you fight the more people that die, and for what?
Removed by mod
I think you need to work on your media literacy skills.