The media won’t give me great answers to this question and I think this I trust this community more, thus I want to know from you. Also, I have heard reports that Russia was winning the war, if that’s true, did the west miscalculate the situation by allowing diplomacy to take a backseat and allowing Ukraine to a large plethora of military resources?
PS: I realize there are many casualties on both sides and I am not trying to downplay the suffering, but I am curious as to how it is going for Ukraine. Right now I am hearing ever louder calls of Russia winning, those have existed forever, but they seem to have grown louder now, so I was wondering what you thought about it. Also, I am somewhat concerned of allowing a dictatorship to just erase at it’s convenience a free and democratic country.
Arms dealers.
Reminds me of the starting scene in Lord of War
Unlike everyone here, I have no idea.
At the moment Ukraine is winning.
When Trump is crowned GEOTUS, after the Repubs win 2024 ( the economic rug-pull in 2024 will remove the Dems, through backlash-vote ) then the tide will turn, as the gutted remains of NATO/OTAN try to understand how to endure as the TOTAL global geopolitcs table got thrown, violently, on its side, scattering all the playing-pieces, all the indicators, EVERYthing gets flipped, then.
GEOTUS Trump will back Russia & Saudi Arabia, both.
Possibly China, as well ( he does have investments in China ).
The remains of the Western-cultures’ alliance are then on their own.
US Civil War Part2 will probably destroy about a quarter billion lives in North America within 14y,
and ww3 begins a mere 7y after Trump’s crowning ( +/- 1 year ).
Things are going to be VERY tough in Eastern Europe, with the US pouring its support into exterminating the former Soviet Bloc countries who oppose Putin/Russia, with the US backing Russia.
Wait & see.
It’s going to be hell, on Earth, for almost-all of this century.
The drastically quicker-than-simulated sea-level-rise isn’t going to help, particularly since Greenland’s meltwater will drown the North Atlantic coasts ( it takes 1000 years for it to redistribute to near Australia. The 1st few centuries it’ll be predominantly drowning the West ), and when you add enough water to raise the PLANET’s sea-level by 1 metre, but you put it ALL in the North Atlantic…
it may well be 3m around the North Atlantic, this century.
( there is a powerlaw underlying planetary heating, current atmospheric CO2 requires the planet to equilize at more than +5C.
When you add-in the anthrogenic methane, as CO2 equivalent, the planetary equalization temperature is more than +8C.
All the “+1.5C” and “+2C” are baseless delusions, contradicted by historical data of the last couple million years. )
Anyways, eyes-open, calibrate, prepare, & earn making oneself competent for what is guaranteed to come, right?
_ /\ _
arms manufacturers
Right now I am hearing ever louder calls of Russia winning
Winning was taking over the county at first. Then it was kherson, and donbass, crimea, and a few others. Now it’s just like 3 areas. If you’re hearing anything about winning it’s because the goal posts are moving.
Youtuber Perun had some good high level takes on the war. It all boils down to Western support will win. As long as support keeps coming from the rest of the world, eventually Russia will run out of material. WW2 was won (not wholly, but in large part) due to the larger economy being on the allies side.
Do provide us with sources where Russians stated these were the goals. Seems like it’s western propagandists who’ve been making up goals for Russia and then moving the goal posts.
Do I need sources for the failed invasion of Kyiv?
Everyone knows about it.
Yeah, I need sources for the fantastical claim that Russia was trying to take Kyiv with 100k troops. It’s a particularly interesting claim given that they allocated 40k troops to take Mariupol which is an order of magnitude smaller city. A far more plausible scenario is that Russia used 100k troops to fix a chunk of Ukrainian army around Kyiv while Russians took large parts of Ukrainian territory in the east which they still hold today.
The paratroopers in Kyiv’s airport were just taking in the scenery. Really unfortunate that they were shot. And that 50 km tank column headed for Kyiv really was just lost on its way to Mariupol. Yep, exactly, that’s what happened.
Lmao what a lame-ass trolling attempt, you have mush for brains if you think this is either effective propaganda or… funny?
The only one with mush for brains is the guy who thinks Russia would be trying to take Kyiv with 100k troops. The fact that you don’t even understand why that’s absurd makes it all the more hilarious.
The absurd claims of Russia’s goals are all from western propaganda. This is from the day of the invasion: https://www.rt.com/russia/550466-putin-ukraine-opeartion-goals/ What are their goals?
- Demilitarise Ukraine – This is a huge task, but they’re making fast progress.
- Denazify Ukraine – They’re failing this task, but it’s something that can’t be done until after the war anyway.
- Create a buffer between a NATO-member-Ukraine and Russia – Incorporating Donbas might satisfy this goal.
- Stop the sieges on Donetsk and Lugansk – This goal has been met.
And then they clarify, denazification is optional. A general occupation of Ukraine is not their plan.
If there is more land they want to occupy, then occupying and holding it now doesn’t actually further that goal. The only thing holding it now is good for is protecting the civilians or using it strategically, either industrially or for staging. Because if the country is successfully demilitarised, Ukraine won’t be able to resist occupation, so that land can be taken later for cheaper. But they haven’t outlined a goal of taking additional land. Crimea was already incorporated at the time, so that’s an extra implied goal – Don’t lose Russian land.
I don’t think either side will be able to decisively beat the other, but that’s not how these things usually end anyway.
Actually, I think it’s pretty funny in a sad sort of way that Americans don’t get how this is going to go. It’s really obvious that Ukraine doesn’t need to win, they just need to keep fighting until Russia goes home. Western aid isn’t even really making much of a difference in the eventual outcome of the war, it’s just reducing the damage that Russia is doing to Ukraine and bring that inevitable end closer faster. We’ve seen over, and over, and over again that once a group of people actually make up their minds to resist, there is nothing that can stop them. Even if the aggressor can bring overwhelming military superiority they will eventually give up and go home, and Russia can’t even do that.
The question isn’t who will win. The question is how many war crimes will Putin commit before admitting he lost this war in the second week.
Right now I am hearing ever louder calls of Russia winning, those have existed forever, but they seem to have grown louder now, so I was wondering what you thought about it.
Where are you hearing that? I have not heard that Russia is taking a pounding and so is Ukraine.
Right now, it’s a stalemate.
It is a war of attrition at this point and if it drags out long enough, Russia wins because they have more people to throw at the war.
I do not think the F-16 is going to make a large difference in the war. People who never served are the ones thinking it’ll change the war.
The question is how long can the Russian soldiers hold out? I do believe once Ukraine breaks through the lines will collapse quickly but they’ve yet to break through.
I do think NATO has done a disservice in training the Ukrainian military to fight a combined arms fight but then not supplying them with the weapons to fight a combined arms fight.
I personally think Ukraine will win but it is going to be a long fight.
