What does that even mean? As much as you post about the war in Ukraine I would think you'd be better informed or at least not let your personal political bias effect your reasoning. Guess not...
Sometimes I wonder if people understand what war involves. What do you expect the russians to do? Sell the grain and give the money to the Ukrainians?
I expected them to bake muffins for the Ukrainians they liberated in the peacekeeping/denazifying mission Putin told us about in February.
In a war of attrition for the Donbas Russia does have the advantage. Even if they still make tactical mistakes they can resupply quickly and grind it out. Other than if the Russian people get tired of continuing casualties and being a global pariah time is in the Russians side for at least holding what they currently have. I doubt though they will be capable of taking the rest of Ukraine as they thought back in March.
This is actually super common in trade (I just finished a course on import/export control). Whats funny is if this deal were to go through any US company involved would get fined but theres little the US can do to stop the problem. Enforcement of embargos/sanctions is hard.
which honestly means this is a policy failure for Putin. Fighting a costly war that galvanized NATO/the EU, but ending up back to antebellum status?
This is why the Ukraine should be moved to NATO immediately after the settlement agreement - I personally believe that we and NATO should have gone in and bloodied Russia's nose all the way back to their own territory, but that ship has sailed. DD
Yeah, this just seems to fit under the "war is ugly" category. Pretty sure when we entered Iraq and Afghanistan, we likely took stuff for ourselves as well.
Sorry to the Republicans here like @basso, @tinman @Commodore @MojoMan etc - but Russia is still losing its Special Military Action and it's not even close. Daily Kos of all places actually has good coverage of this. Markos himself apparently formerly crewed MLRS systems in the Army so he has some knowledge here slightly above podcast listening divorce dads, things like "number of weapons systems doesn't matter if you can't reasonably crew and supply those weapons systems" - next level stuff.
I don't understand why if you have to leave that you'd leave anything of value behind. Scorched earth. That's what you get when you arrive so bring the fire trucks.
They've made it a better fight than anyone would have thought. The problem is people now. Ukraine is losing 200+ soldiers per day. How long can they keep that up before they are too weak to protect the rest of the country. I'm afraid their fate is the same. They just won't see that for a year or more instead of a few weeks.
you obviously haven't been reading this thread, nor the many, many explainers herein detailing similar issues with weapons system supplied by the west, as well as problems on the Russian side. no need for kosplay- it's all right here.
Yes they are losing a lot but so are the Russians. The Russians are vastly numerically superior but they were on March 1st also. Their ability to try to take the whole country is very suspect. At the sametime it the Ukrainians might not be willing to bleed themselves dry to retake the Donbas.
Good comprehensive article from the Quincy Institute laying out many of the possible outcomes https://quincyinst.org/report/avoiding-the-dangers-of-a-protracted-conflict-in-ukraine/ From the executive summary: The current path toward a protracted war in Ukraine is highly undesirable and is laden with grave risks to the interests of the United States, Ukraine, and the international community. Such risks include: • a high cost in Ukrainian lives and suffering and the destruction of Ukraine — its infrastructure, institutions, and social fabric; • radicalization of Ukrainian society and a consequent civil war; • escalation to a great-power war, potentially involving nuclear weapons and pitting NATO against Russia, thereby threatening U.S. national security; • a weakening of NATO’s cohesion; • a prolonged global recession that strikes the U.S. as hard as it will any other nation. The United States and its allies should avoid these destructive outcomes by prioritizing support for the Ukrainian government to achieve a diplomatic settlement. Such a settlement will result in a more secure outcome for Ukraine, the United States, the European allies, and the rest of the world. While the details of such a settlement lie beyond this brief’s scope, the progress of Ukrainian–Russian talks indicates that a settlement providing for meaningful sovereignty and independence for Ukraine is possible. Avoiding a protracted conflict also implies that the United States should not adopt maximalist objectives, such as regime change in Moscow or the complete and decisive defeat of Russia. It should instead deploy sanctions to build up Ukraine’s negotiating leverage.
