Ukraine war - which side is winning?

[Anonymous]

Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

[Anonymous]

Are any new commitments expected from the West? If not, when will Zelensky accept that? If yes, what are the commitments and how will they change the situation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are any new commitments expected from the West? If not, when will Zelensky accept that? If yes, what are the commitments and how will they change the situation?

I think the current bet is that when all committed weapons are delivered and deployed, that Ukraine will make some gains and possibly get some of the territory back. Then, the thinking goes, they will be more inclined to negotiate. Or maybe they'll get more. I don't think there are any public commitments at this time other than "get them more stuff that shoots".

It is a most excellent wonderful fabulous plan, and nothing at all can go wrong with it.

See you in this thread in September.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are any new commitments expected from the West? If not, when will Zelensky accept that? If yes, what are the commitments and how will they change the situation?

I think the current bet is that when all committed weapons are delivered and deployed, that Ukraine will make some gains and possibly get some of the territory back. Then, the thinking goes, they will be more inclined to negotiate. Or maybe they'll get more. I don't think there are any public commitments at this time other than "get them more stuff that shoots".

It is a most excellent wonderful fabulous plan, and nothing at all can go wrong with it.

See you in this thread in September.

I just want all this to be over

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

Ok I’m Putin, play this out. What can you offer me that is better than me taking the entire north Black Sea ports, all of the wheat and energy resources in eastern Ukraine and reduce “ukr” to a rump state around Lviv and Kyiv?

Remember. You’ve already put sanctions. Are you prepared to drop every sanction and in return I keep all of donbas?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

Ok I’m Putin, play this out. What can you offer me that is better than me taking the entire north Black Sea ports, all of the wheat and energy resources in eastern Ukraine and reduce “ukr” to a rump state around Lviv and Kyiv?

Remember. You’ve already put sanctions. Are you prepared to drop every sanction and in return I keep all of donbas?

The West isn't going to end this war directly.

It will end the same way the Cold War did. Or it won't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

Ok I’m Putin, play this out. What can you offer me that is better than me taking the entire north Black Sea ports, all of the wheat and energy resources in eastern Ukraine and reduce “ukr” to a rump state around Lviv and Kyiv?

Remember. You’ve already put sanctions. Are you prepared to drop every sanction and in return I keep all of donbas?

The West isn't going to end this war directly.

It will end the same way the Cold War did. Or it won't.

Right - meanwhile I get to slowly grind Ukrainians into dust for decade+ and all it costs me is artillery shells and poor conscripts while the west is in the throes of inflation, instability and social discord

I don’t particularly care for Russia but As someone who has worked in foreign affairs and as a trader, I absolutely hate the use of sanctions policy.

It was so short sided. Usa played into Putin and xi hands.

And it was so cringe people cheering over some Russian tanks getting blown up by javs thinking wars end in 90 days

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

Ok I’m Putin, play this out. What can you offer me that is better than me taking the entire north Black Sea ports, all of the wheat and energy resources in eastern Ukraine and reduce “ukr” to a rump state around Lviv and Kyiv?

Remember. You’ve already put sanctions. Are you prepared to drop every sanction and in return I keep all of donbas?

The West isn't going to end this war directly.

It will end the same way the Cold War did. Or it won't.

Right - meanwhile I get to slowly grind Ukrainians into dust for decade+ and all it costs me is artillery shells and poor conscripts while the west is in the throes of inflation, instability and social discord

I don’t particularly care for Russia but As someone who has worked in foreign affairs and as a trader, I absolutely hate the use of sanctions policy.

It was so short sided. Usa played into Putin and xi hands.

And it was so cringe people cheering over some Russian tanks getting blown up by javs thinking wars end in 90 days

I mean, Putin thought this war would end in less than a week.

Playing into Putin's hands? Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

Ok I’m Putin, play this out. What can you offer me that is better than me taking the entire north Black Sea ports, all of the wheat and energy resources in eastern Ukraine and reduce “ukr” to a rump state around Lviv and Kyiv?

Remember. You’ve already put sanctions. Are you prepared to drop every sanction and in return I keep all of donbas?

The West isn't going to end this war directly.

It will end the same way the Cold War did. Or it won't.

Right - meanwhile I get to slowly grind Ukrainians into dust for decade+ and all it costs me is artillery shells and poor conscripts while the west is in the throes of inflation, instability and social discord

I don’t particularly care for Russia but As someone who has worked in foreign affairs and as a trader, I absolutely hate the use of sanctions policy.

It was so short sided. Usa played into Putin and xi hands.

And it was so cringe people cheering over some Russian tanks getting blown up by javs thinking wars end in 90 days

I mean, Putin thought this war would end in less than a week.

Playing into Putin's hands? Nope.

The difference is Putin changes as info and conditions change. He and his successors are willing to grind for a decade

Western populations will not put up with this in 12 months time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

Ok I’m Putin, play this out. What can you offer me that is better than me taking the entire north Black Sea ports, all of the wheat and energy resources in eastern Ukraine and reduce “ukr” to a rump state around Lviv and Kyiv?

Remember. You’ve already put sanctions. Are you prepared to drop every sanction and in return I keep all of donbas?

Read David Pyne peace plan and let me know what you think.

[Anonymous]

It’s sad that those in Russia who would like to do business with the west or just have normal relationships are now deprived of this opportunity. I wish I could say Putin is to blame, but it’s not all on him.
I remember the high hopes of Perestroika and on, and it’s sad we are back to square 1 if not negative one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

Pp here. You’ve got too narrow an aperture and recommend you consider more than Ukraine. I’m talking geopolitical defeat. Everything I cited is factual. Russia’s adversary is the United States and NATO and I hope you’ll agree we are considerably stronger and more competent. And, of course, China will have taken note. Big undefended border there. So, Russia’s future is bleak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

Pp here. You’ve got too narrow an aperture and recommend you consider more than Ukraine. I’m talking geopolitical defeat. Everything I cited is factual. Russia’s adversary is the United States and NATO and I hope you’ll agree we are considerably stronger and more competent. And, of course, China will have taken note. Big undefended border there. So, Russia’s future is bleak.

The US decided to see Russia as an adversary for its own internal political aims. And now it is using Ukraine as a bullet stopper in the same game. But I'm sure Ukrainians are super pleased to become casualties in the conflict you decided the US and NATO simply had to have with Russia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putin has suffered a massive geopolitical defeat.

NATO is expanding even further and, with Finland, will share a very long border with Russia; Ukraine is an EU member state candidate; and, most damningly, Russia has been exposed as a weak military power. Whatever land Putin takes in the near future cannot be held by Russia. Finally, Russia already had demographic problems: now it has lost thousands in this war, thousands have left the country thereby crippling its economic future, and people are not going to be having babies in these conditions.

Clearly, invading was a very bad idea, and a criminal one, but most of what you're saying is talking points with no basis in fact.

Ask Turkey how awesome it is to be an EU candidate.

Russia doesn't have to be the strongest army in the world, it just has to be stronger than its adversary. In this context, "Russia is a weak military power" and "Ukraine needs kazillions billions of dollars in military aid to fight Russia" statements cannot both be true.

In that same vein, Russia's demographics may not be awesome but they are definitely better than Ukraine's. Ukraine has lost millions as refugees, and it's an open secret that not all of them left under duress; some have simply opted to live in Europe once this option has become available, which means they may not be keen to return once the war ends.

With regard to holding territory, Russia has been holding and metabolizing Crimea with no special problems, and it looks poised to hold on to it forever. It may or may not metabolize parts of Donbass that are populated largely by ethnic Russians who were decidedly NOT supportive of the Maidan coup and felt marginalized by the current Ukrainian government. If Russia captures and holds the Black Sea coastal areas, that will be the end of Ukraine's economy. Which is why it is critical that the parties sit down to talk now, because things aren't looking up, and typically, whenever the parties sit down to negotiate, the state of things at the time will be their starting point.

Pp here. You’ve got too narrow an aperture and recommend you consider more than Ukraine. I’m talking geopolitical defeat. Everything I cited is factual. Russia’s adversary is the United States and NATO and I hope you’ll agree we are considerably stronger and more competent. And, of course, China will have taken note. Big undefended border there. So, Russia’s future is bleak.

The US decided to see Russia as an adversary for its own internal political aims. And now it is using Ukraine as a bullet stopper in the same game. But I'm sure Ukrainians are super pleased to become casualties in the conflict you decided the US and NATO simply had to have with Russia.

Ukrainians are too dim to know any better. It’s a Slavic thing.

Give a few weapons, stoke some bitterness, and you can sit back and watch Slavs beat each other up.