Ukrainian victory over Russia is inevitable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:7 out of 10 Americans view Russia as a top enemy. The 3 of the 10 that do not agree are addicted to porn. Since Russia has cornered the on line market it makes sense.

The west is split on why we fund Ukraine- half want to keep Ukraine free and the other half just like watching Russian people and stuff getting blown up.

It really is a 1+ 1 = 3 taxpayer investment.
Cannot wait for some more modern aircraft and better weapons to get to Ukraine and permitting them to use in Russia.

It seems Russia is content to slug it out with no urgency to end the conflict. Like NATO, it thinks its coming out ahead in the proxy war. NATO pumps Ukraine full of equipment that Ukrainians barely know how to use. Russia then gets to blow up/capture all that NATO equipment more easily than if they faced actual NATO troops.

Its a recipe for a long conflict.

No, they aren't. They already lost more in less than 2 years than they did in all 20 years of Afghanistan. This war is not sustainable for Russia. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves.

You post as if Ukraine was fighting a country that actually cared about people.
Russia (and to some point Russians) are not wired like Europeans. They really do not care about life/lives of anyone other than (maybe) themselves or immediate family (that is debatable).
No, Russia can go on for a long time. This war is not that expensive for them and as previously stated; not until you hit maybe the 5m KIA would they even notice.

Putin Will probably die (of natural causes or whatever) before this war ends; and then a new fuhrer will step in; maybe end the war, maybe not. Then repeat the cycle in 15 years after Russia rebuilds its military again.

Really? Then why did they get out of Afghanistan?

They didn't have as much money then. US aid was bringing down one aircraft a day.
Since then Europe has cut its energy development, giving Russia more money for military adventures.

Meanwhile the Russian Federation is even weaker than the Soviet Union was. And Europe cutting energy development is a LOSS for Russia.
You seem to have absolutely everything upside-down in your head.

No - that is only in the 6-8 months that Russia has seen the hit to their oil (crude) sales. Europe got lucky with mild winter; quick pivots to other sources for energy. It could not have gone better for Europe or worse for Russia economically. Russia is forced to sell their crude on black market for maybe making $15 bucks a barrel.

Russia also has like 300b in cash frozen in western banks.

So they will have to choose to subsidize/pay their pensions and food prices - or pay for the war. Russia will choose war over feeding its people 7 days a week and twice on Sunday.

They are basic barbarians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

You are completely nuts! Tell me which cities in Russia have been completely destroyed like Mariupol, Sievierodonetsk, Maryinka, or Bakhmut have been in Ukraine? Just stop with your "both sides" nonsense!

Russia will stop bombing Ukraine when its military capability to do so has been eliminated.

https://visitukraine.today/blog/1874/ukrainian-cities-completely-destroyed-by-the-russian-army

Then why is it not eliminated still? Seems all the Russian threats aren’t really valid. Why not do it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

Neither side? Ukraine is fighting for its survival. Russia on the other hand is just on a violent drunken expansionist binge. Huge difference.

Ok why is Russia not being defeated? Seems like their threats are just for show? Why is all this allowed to go on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

You are completely nuts! Tell me which cities in Russia have been completely destroyed like Mariupol, Sievierodonetsk, Maryinka, or Bakhmut have been in Ukraine? Just stop with your "both sides" nonsense!

Russia will stop bombing Ukraine when its military capability to do so has been eliminated.

https://visitukraine.today/blog/1874/ukrainian-cities-completely-destroyed-by-the-russian-army

Well, now we may start to see Russian cities in Belgorod, Bryansk and other oblasts getting wrecked, and it will be done by fellow Russians. And as I understand it, with the anti-Putin Russian Legion's incursions they have been returning home with Russian T-72s, BMPs and other captured equipment, so they are using Russia's own weapons against Russia as well. And again Putin only has himself to blame for creating a legion of disgruntled Russians in the first place.

Will this bring victory for Ukraine closer? Or just more civilians dying?

[Anonymous]

If Russia's threats are empty why doesn’t nato just join the war and get it over with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Russia's threats are empty why doesn’t nato just join the war and get it over with?

Because you don’t want to get it over too quickly

That’s strategically a bad choice when there is a once in millennium opportunity to finish russia

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

Neither side? Ukraine is fighting for its survival. Russia on the other hand is just on a violent drunken expansionist binge. Huge difference.

Ok why is Russia not being defeated? Seems like their threats are just for show? Why is all this allowed to go on?

Russia's already lost more than half of its operational military capability. They are already struggling to contain invasions into their own territory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

You are completely nuts! Tell me which cities in Russia have been completely destroyed like Mariupol, Sievierodonetsk, Maryinka, or Bakhmut have been in Ukraine? Just stop with your "both sides" nonsense!

Russia will stop bombing Ukraine when its military capability to do so has been eliminated.

https://visitukraine.today/blog/1874/ukrainian-cities-completely-destroyed-by-the-russian-army

Well, now we may start to see Russian cities in Belgorod, Bryansk and other oblasts getting wrecked, and it will be done by fellow Russians. And as I understand it, with the anti-Putin Russian Legion's incursions they have been returning home with Russian T-72s, BMPs and other captured equipment, so they are using Russia's own weapons against Russia as well. And again Putin only has himself to blame for creating a legion of disgruntled Russians in the first place.

Will this bring victory for Ukraine closer? Or just more civilians dying?

It's more likely going to bring regime change in Russia. That's entirely separate from kicking Russia out of Ukraine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Russia's threats are empty why doesn’t nato just join the war and get it over with?

Because you don’t want to get it over too quickly

That’s strategically a bad choice when there is a once in millennium opportunity to finish russia

I wonder if the Russobot obsessed poster agrees

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

Neither side? Ukraine is fighting for its survival. Russia on the other hand is just on a violent drunken expansionist binge. Huge difference.

Ok why is Russia not being defeated? Seems like their threats are just for show? Why is all this allowed to go on?

Russia's already lost more than half of its operational military capability. They are already struggling to contain invasions into their own territory.

And yet...Ukraine needs more and more and more and more money and materiel to fight this depleted, struggling army. Go figure, huh. Should have been a slam dunk, if these reports are to be believed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

Neither side? Ukraine is fighting for its survival. Russia on the other hand is just on a violent drunken expansionist binge. Huge difference.

Ok why is Russia not being defeated? Seems like their threats are just for show? Why is all this allowed to go on?

Russia's already lost more than half of its operational military capability. They are already struggling to contain invasions into their own territory.

I get it, but it’s been a year. Why is it still going on? There was fear of the nukes at the beginning but it seems like it’s all bluff? Why not just invade the kremlin or whatever

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

You are completely nuts! Tell me which cities in Russia have been completely destroyed like Mariupol, Sievierodonetsk, Maryinka, or Bakhmut have been in Ukraine? Just stop with your "both sides" nonsense!

Russia will stop bombing Ukraine when its military capability to do so has been eliminated.

https://visitukraine.today/blog/1874/ukrainian-cities-completely-destroyed-by-the-russian-army

Well, now we may start to see Russian cities in Belgorod, Bryansk and other oblasts getting wrecked, and it will be done by fellow Russians. And as I understand it, with the anti-Putin Russian Legion's incursions they have been returning home with Russian T-72s, BMPs and other captured equipment, so they are using Russia's own weapons against Russia as well. And again Putin only has himself to blame for creating a legion of disgruntled Russians in the first place.

Will this bring victory for Ukraine closer? Or just more civilians dying?

It's more likely going to bring regime change in Russia. That's entirely separate from kicking Russia out of Ukraine.

I think what the west doesn’t understand is that Russians will NOT have a maidan. They don’t think there is a viable alternative to what they have now. They are disillusioned.
The only way for a regime change is either by external force or natural causes like when Raul is less combative than Fidel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

Neither side? Ukraine is fighting for its survival. Russia on the other hand is just on a violent drunken expansionist binge. Huge difference.

Ok why is Russia not being defeated? Seems like their threats are just for show? Why is all this allowed to go on?

Russia's already lost more than half of its operational military capability. They are already struggling to contain invasions into their own territory.

And yet...Ukraine needs more and more and more and more money and materiel to fight this depleted, struggling army. Go figure, huh. Should have been a slam dunk, if these reports are to be believed.

No, this is understandable. What’s not understandable is why (if Russia is bluffing) does nato not become direct party to conflict?
The only explanation I can think of is they want to grind Russia down as much as possible, wear it out, and who cares how many Russians and Ukrainians die

[Anonymous]

The only way for Russia to have a chance is for 2-3m mobilization.

That will force Russian population to decide if they want to see 3,000,000 go to war; poorly armed with maybe 1/3 coming back in tact.

They may, or may not; win.

It is absolutely feasible to assume Russia will go this direction.

They are realizing they have to go all in; or they will lose a war of attrition against NATO.

This is the easiest war the west has not fought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know ordinary people are just pawns but what is the best way to stop civilian casualties on both sides? Seems like Russia can’t be stopped from bombing Ukraine. Seems like Ukraine is getting better and better at bombing Russia too. Both sides are saying it’s strictly strategic and military objects but it’s not so.
What is the way to stop the war while minimizing civilian casualties? Russia isn’t puling out. Ukraine isn’t giving in.
There needs to be someone who actually cares about civilians. Neither side does.
I am probably completely naive but it’s so sad.

Neither side? Ukraine is fighting for its survival. Russia on the other hand is just on a violent drunken expansionist binge. Huge difference.

Ok why is Russia not being defeated? Seems like their threats are just for show? Why is all this allowed to go on?

Russia's already lost more than half of its operational military capability. They are already struggling to contain invasions into their own territory.

And yet...Ukraine needs more and more and more and more money and materiel to fight this depleted, struggling army. Go figure, huh. Should have been a slam dunk, if these reports are to be believed.

No, this is understandable. What’s not understandable is why (if Russia is bluffing) does nato not become direct party to conflict?
The only explanation I can think of is they want to grind Russia down as much as possible, wear it out, and who cares how many Russians and Ukrainians die

It's about protecting Ukrainian sovereignty. Russia getting ground down in the process is entirely Russia's problem.