Alcune delle frasi della “proposta di pace” degli Stati Uniti sembrano essere state originariamente scritte in russo. In molti posti la lingua funzionerebbe in russo ma sembra decisamente strana in inglese. Fonte.
https://i.redd.it/mvh9mwmk4n2g1.png
di logecasks
14 commenti
The whole thing makes me sick.
Two disgusting perverted old men dictating insane terms.
No shit…
I can’t believe Steve Witkoff gets to stay but Kellogg is going. Not good.
That’s how I’ve detected a few russian shills in UK subs on Reddit.
“I went down at the basement on 8am”
was one of their many comments with obviously incorrect preposition no native speaker would ever make.
– and they were allegedly born in the UK and at 2:1 University level – they said I was “elitest” for calling it out.
What a coincidence their post history was about how innocent russia was forced to invade Ukraine.
That’s why I call them RusPublicans.
Dmitrev probably wrote it while Witkoff blew him
We all know it’s Putin sending it to agent Kraznov
Make Russia great again!
Time for EU to step up and let the shit hit the fan. We should not let Ukraine accept to these kind of terms without having an option to say one word. This is utter bullshit. If this needs to end with an all out war between EU and Russia then so be it. This RU tyrant can not get his will.
History sure does rime…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact
“It is expected” is an English phrase which implies it might happen but we prefer it didn’t.
“It is expected” is clunky but it’s actually pretty normal contract BS legalese. It’s a way to avoid making an actual promise.
Like if a client asks for a timeline to be included, we might put in “It is expected that lab results will be available to us in two weeks and that reporting could be completed two weeks after receipt of that data”. That gives an idea of what we expect, but if we don’t meet it there isn’t any actual promise that we are violating.
As much as it is obvious that the terms of the “deal” were written by russia, and as bad as that is; frankly, as a native English speaker, those phrases aren’t that odd. I think the article is kinda missing the point, focusing on semantics when the actual substance of the agreement is the problem.
It’s already obvious that russia had a hand in writing it, as the terms are favorable to russia and detrimental to Ukraine. Why pretend “to enshrine” and “ambiguities” are awkward translations from Russian phrases? They’re honestly pretty ordinary, and it would be damaging to create this mentality that anyone who uses them is a russian stooge.
That being said, fuck russia. And fuck the russian stooges trump and witkoff. Just not because of their diction.
Questions? Wasn’t it clear from the moment when it appeared for first time?