It is called Pascha(in greek/latin). It is only called Easter in english and german, but Pascha is the OG term. Pascha is used in the majority of european languages, including germanic ones like swedish, danish and norwegian.

One state solution isnt viable. We cant even get one state in Cyprus, where there is less bad blood, basically 0% chance of anyone killing anyone and no “religious prophecies” about who owns the place.

Belgium is without a government 50% of the time. Yugoslavia is no longer a thing.

One state solutions are hard to work even at the best of times. How do you balance the power? Just through democratic votes? Then the majority can easily suppress the minority. If you give the minority extra benefits(ie veto), then why would the majority even agree to be part of that and give away their power?

It is genocidal when either side uses it, since it implies that the other side does not exist. It is a catchy phrase though, which is why both sides use it.

https://archive.is/ezs2C

I mean ultimately, thats how wars are.

The existence of your people or not in an area should not be relevant. If it is relevant, that only leads to genocide and ethnic cleansing. Because noone would want to have a potential casus belli in their land, so they would eliminate all those that would enable something like that.

There are 2 kinds of countries in the world. Those who are satisfied with the current status quo and those who arent. The US, EU, etc are satisfied with the current status quo. Russia, China, Turkey, Venezuela, etc arent. They have issues and they think the current status quo is unfair. And they have irredentist views.

Why would you “freeze” the borders as they are now and not as they were 20 years ago, or 100 years ago or 500 years ago. What i am saying is that India is part of Greece, as per Indo-Greek kingdom of 2000 years ago.

This war is totally different, it’s a country fighting for it’s land.

You could make the same claim for the Russia, that it is considers that land its own and it is fighting for it. Ultimately, yes, this is a different war but my point is that kill ratio isnt always indicative of who is winning.

Ukraine could lose all their territory and Russia will still lose this war. They already have.

Maybe but 500 years from now, who would remember what happened. Eventually things become “it is what it is” and people move on. Borders can last for a long time, especially if one side(the EU) isnt willing to go on the offensive. Strongmen like Putin think of this as weakness, people in the West think of it as “learning from the past”.

I agree with what you are saying but you have to realize that this is partially copium. The Americans had great kill ratio in Vietnam but they still lost.

What happened in the past is in the past. Atm Russia has the initiative and seemingly the will and means to continue. Ukraine’s means largely depend on the West.

In EU you have the typical bureaucracy and relactancy of reducing the peace dividends by investing in military equipment production. And thats on top of Hungary sabotaging everything and other major economic issues, like agricultural ukranian products and their effect in EU.

In the US, the republicans are blocking everything and Trump is ahead in the polls.

So it is only natural that with all this uncertainty, Ukraine is reluctant in risking an offensive. If the war ends now, Russia has still gained territory, even if it suffered losses, setbacks and failed to achieve its minimum stated goals(securing Donbass). Though at least they have a landbridge to Crimea so thats something.

I mean atm, Russia is on the offensive and has gotten some actual results. They conquered Marinka, a 10k population village(before war), which defined the line of conflict, and Avdiivka, a major fortress town that has been holding through the entire war, since 2014, is being threatened with encirclement. Zaluzhnyi even said that they might be forced to abandon it within the next couple months. This would be a significant win for the russians if it happens, much more important than Bakhmut.

It is important to note that this government was the party that prevented the previous leftist government from making gay marriage legal(they could only get gay civil union passed). So there is no actual political opposition, they are the opposition but decided that making gay marriage legal deprives a strong weapon from the opposition.