This graphic and title were published by The New York Times in two articles separated by eight days.
Ukraine’s Counteroffensive Has Made Progress. But It Has Much Farther to Go (2023-09-20)
How the Front Line Has Barely Moved in Ukraine this Year (2023-09-28)
spoiler
This javascript bs sure makes for shitty snapshots, but I refuse to link directly to the NYT. 
Removed by mod
Ukraine itself is a little stuck though. NATO wants this war to keep going as a way to further encircle Russia. Military expenditures are up. So Ukraine can’t stop because they’re a NATO puppet at this point.
And even if Zelenskyy offered to cede territory he’d get assassinated by one of the Ukrainian Nazi groups and there’d be a subsequent coup. It’s just a huge pointless mess.
Removed by mod
The point is to cash out using your own country
I wonder if Zelenskyyy could defect to Russia lmao, seems like they’d take anybody
Yeah something like that would be pouring jet fuel onto Ukraine’s Nazis. They’d be organizing around the idea of the Jewish backstabber Zelenskyy for decades.
I can only imagine those fascist scum barely tolerate him to begin with
Removed by mod
If I remember correctly he already owns a multi-million dollar mansion in Florida lol
Mar-A-Lensky
Excuse you sweaty, that’s Mar-A-Lenskyyy
I did not have sexual relations with that mansion
I believe it was Florence, but I’m not sure either
okay sorry to bust out the calipers, but i’ve seen the phrase “ethnic russians” a lot and i can’t help but suspect that it’s westerners collapsing history into a single racial identity which we understand as separate from designated “minorities,” not unlike the phrase “han chinese.” understanding that all racial and ethnic identities are socially constructed, what exactly is the historical basis for the idea that russians and ukrainians are different peoples?
It’s just a bullshit phrase we kinda are stuck with using.
‘Ethnic russians’ sort of implies ‘not really ukrainian’. In my experience ethnic groups is something that people like to bring up more often when talking about non-western countries for like weird balkanization fantasies. Obviously there are and were differences between people who spoke ukrainian and people who spoke russian in ukraine. The biggest observable difference was in politics, you can very clearly see voting patterns between the regions with large amounts of russian speakers and ukranian speakers and I think there is something to the idea that people who speak a common language will become more alike even across borders and how those commonalities affect stuff like politics. But currently it’s just this sort of liberal knife to make weird seperations.
But we wouldn’t really talk about ‘ethnic french’ in a country like canada or the USA you wouldn’t really talk about the ethnic britons in france or the ethnic swabians in germany because well it’s silly even though I’m sure you could make them into an ‘ethnic group’ based on voting patterns and values etc. As far as I’m concerned ethnic xyz is often employed as a dividing tool not as model we can use to understand countries and people.