Yeah it’s tough to find a compromise when Russia seems to go for the total victory or at least a settlement of gains and Ukraine hopes for a stalemate without border changes.
The West has given Ukraine more per year than Russia spends on its entire military, and Russia isn’t using its entire military in this conflict. Russia also hasn’t invaded Ukraine the way the US has invaded each of its failed quagmires. Russia is staying at the border. It’s a well known problem that Ukraine consists of vast wide open fields which are great for farming and impossible to defend. Russia has clearly demonstrated they have no intention of trying, so no one thinks Russia is going to suffer the same kind of defeat as the USA has. That’s just copium based on your refusal to research and understand the situation beyond news headlines.
The West has given Ukraine most of the good shit at this point. Name some wonder weapons that Ukraine doesn’t have.
Seriously. You can show them objective facts from multiple sources from around the world with completely disparate editorial incentives and they’ll just troll you. Then years later you can show them THEIR OWN SIDE admitting that very same thing and even then they’ll just continue as they were with the same profoundly unserious, trite attitude towards the subject. Lol.
The difference, geographically, between “liberating” and “occupying” can be found in the the decade-long civil war after the US-backed 2014 coup and the Minsk Accords. Kit Klarenberg: Civil War in Donbass 10 Years On
Russia has literally never intended to take and hold the whole of Ukraine. USA military intelligence has stated that this has been true since the beginning of the SMO. Your understanding of the world is inaccurate.
You deliberately misinterpreted the person who brought up total victory. The side insisting on total victory is Ukraine and the West. They are insisting that negotiations for peace can only occur after Russia is fully defeated and pushed out of Ukrainian territory. Some have gone so far as to say negotiations won’t start until Ukraine pushes Russia out of Crimea.
That’s a big leap you have there. It’s not wise to assume alternate intentions to what I wrote as such an evaluation is not accurate. I don’t think Ukraine is attempting to reach Moscow for a total victory and I’d never make such a claim either.
Ok troll. You assumed the total victory spoken of by the commenter to whom you were replying was being attributed to Russia when it was actually being applied to Ukraine. Total victory for Ukraine would be a full and complete repulsion of the Russian, not an invasion of Russia.
It looked a lot like a feint to anyone analyzing the facts after it failed: an ultrathin column, soldier given 3 days worth of supplies, zero follow up, zero contingency. It looks like a classic feint to me.
Yeah it’s tough to find a compromise when Russia seems to go for the total victory or at least a settlement of gains and Ukraine hopes for a stalemate without border changes.
Ukraine hopes for total retreat from all claimed Ukrainian territory, not a mere stalemate. That’s hardly compromise.
That’s right and as long as US and western allies keep up with deliveries there is a chance for Ukraine to achieve its objectives.
Ideally leading to Russian collapse.
Before you get bent out of shape about it is in possible…
Recent history does demonstrate that invading country that faces a determined opposition will generally have to go home with their dicks tucked.
How long can Russia spin this shot at home esp as Ukraine is striking critical assets deep within Russia.
And the west hasn’t even given Ukraine the best shit and permission to use it as needed.
The West has given Ukraine more per year than Russia spends on its entire military, and Russia isn’t using its entire military in this conflict. Russia also hasn’t invaded Ukraine the way the US has invaded each of its failed quagmires. Russia is staying at the border. It’s a well known problem that Ukraine consists of vast wide open fields which are great for farming and impossible to defend. Russia has clearly demonstrated they have no intention of trying, so no one thinks Russia is going to suffer the same kind of defeat as the USA has. That’s just copium based on your refusal to research and understand the situation beyond news headlines.
The West has given Ukraine most of the good shit at this point. Name some wonder weapons that Ukraine doesn’t have.
Rockets that can reach Moscow 🐸 and keep them coming.
200 f16
Big boy drones
There is a lot we can give Ukraine to make Russian life very uncomfortable for a very long time. There is a lack of will.
Let’s be real most of that money gets wasted on middle man corruption.
Price of javlins magically quadrupled once us started buying rockets to send to Ukraine lol
Name the rocket models you’re referencing
Cool so you want a nuclear war.
Okay Brzezinski. Russia hardly faces a determined opposition: it faces a dwindling supply of forced conscripts.
Well you got nothing to worry about then. Kyiv by winter?
Again, USA intelligence has stated Russia has no intention of taking Kyiv.
I don’t think they even want Kyiv. Western Ukraine is rife of neo-Nazis, making it impossible to occupy long-term.
Somebody is coping here haha
deleted by creator
Seriously. You can show them objective facts from multiple sources from around the world with completely disparate editorial incentives and they’ll just troll you. Then years later you can show them THEIR OWN SIDE admitting that very same thing and even then they’ll just continue as they were with the same profoundly unserious, trite attitude towards the subject. Lol.
I thought they were liberating rather than occupying?
The difference, geographically, between “liberating” and “occupying” can be found in the the decade-long civil war after the US-backed 2014 coup and the Minsk Accords. Kit Klarenberg: Civil War in Donbass 10 Years On
Russia has literally never intended to take and hold the whole of Ukraine. USA military intelligence has stated that this has been true since the beginning of the SMO. Your understanding of the world is inaccurate.
I wasn’t the one bringing up total victory. I don’t know what level of invasion is their true intention, nor claim to know.
You deliberately misinterpreted the person who brought up total victory. The side insisting on total victory is Ukraine and the West. They are insisting that negotiations for peace can only occur after Russia is fully defeated and pushed out of Ukrainian territory. Some have gone so far as to say negotiations won’t start until Ukraine pushes Russia out of Crimea.
That’s a big leap you have there. It’s not wise to assume alternate intentions to what I wrote as such an evaluation is not accurate. I don’t think Ukraine is attempting to reach Moscow for a total victory and I’d never make such a claim either.
Ok troll. You assumed the total victory spoken of by the commenter to whom you were replying was being attributed to Russia when it was actually being applied to Ukraine. Total victory for Ukraine would be a full and complete repulsion of the Russian, not an invasion of Russia.
What was the Kyiv offensive about then?
It looked a lot like a feint to anyone analyzing the facts after it failed: an ultrathin column, soldier given 3 days worth of supplies, zero follow up, zero contingency. It looks like a classic feint to me.