On the whole, do you support or oppose the terms included in the US-backed proposal to end the Russia-Ukraine war?

Support (23%) – "I think the topic is very serious and challenging to put a pin on. The idea that war is going on is always hard to endure or think about as someone who has never seen war. I voted that I agreed with the president because of the dangers of another war with Russia that would most likely extend to a world war, possibly nuclear and EMP. I think the idea of pleading for a peace deal, keeping them out of NATO(Inducting them right now I think would immediately provoke Russia towards other countries or it would be multiple countries responsibility to attack russia), and just staying out of it entirely would keep Americans safe along with hundreds of thousands of people."

• "Killing stops, Ukraine can go on with life, United States can work mineral deal to be repaid money spent on war."

Oppose (58%) – "The US deal, basically gives Russia everything and the Ukraine just has to give up those parts of their country. That is rewarding Russia for invading a country just because they can. A true compromise, if that is what they US was proposing is for both countries to give up something. Again, I see the Trump administration favoring Russia."

• "Russia invaded Ukraine. The only thing that should end the war would be the complete pull out of Russian troops from Ukraine, including Crimea. Putin thought it would be over fast, Ukraine stood up to him, to the benefit of every other countries Putin wanted to get his hands on, including the US"

"There's no teeth in the deal against Russia. The deal is just shy of requiring Zelensky to step down and for Ukraine to install a Russian puppet. That's obviously not going to work for Ukraine. If Russia isn't willing to give up some things as well, then there isn't a point to a peace deal. For such a great deal maker, it's an incredibly weak proposal."

• "How would Mr. Trump feel if another country, say China, annexed a large area of the US, say Alaska. And suppose China began bombing areas and occupying them, say the Pacific Northwest and California. Would hMr. Trump say China can just claim them? No! He would not acquiesce; we would defend our country and take back what was stolen from us. And suppose the EU came and said China could claim the occupied areas as theirs and the areas were frozen and could not be returned to the US. That’s how Mr. Zelenskyy must be feeling. He should rightfully do all he can to defend his country."

"The terms are extremely favorable to Russia, the clear aggressor in the war, and would just enable them to rebuild their forces rapidly so they can finish what they started. Russia will never be a friend to the US under their current leadership and it continues to be damningly suspect that our administration views them so favorably."

Unsure/other (19%) – "I don’t think we should cave to murdering strongmen like Putin, who seems to be taking notes from Stalin. On the other hand, war is waste, of lives and resources. On the third hand, I also support stepping back from the role of World Policeman. We have been taken advantage of by NATO (other nations not paying their share), and as long as we have homeless vets and hungry children, we should be focusing on our own problems, not sending money overseas. Nobody else is sending us aid."

• "I mostly agree with the US backed proposal. Unfortunately, unless one or the other side succeeds in completely defeating the other, Ukraine and Russia will HAVE to make concessions. And, frankly, Ukraine is going to have to make more concessions than Russia. It does, however, still feel a little heavy to me for Ukrainian concessions. Crimea feels like a lost cause to me, but leaving current battle lines under Russian control AND keeping them from NATO feels unrealistic for Ukraine to accept. I'd be interested in hearing more about what makes each of these decisions feel realistic to the Trump administration."