Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So glad we sent all that money over there to Ukraine and for what? Put that money into our cities that need it most. Start cleaning our own sht up.
That money is bleeding and hurting Russia.
Money week spent.
Meaning you don't really care about helping Ukraine?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So glad we sent all that money over there to Ukraine and for what? Put that money into our cities that need it most. Start cleaning our own sht up.
That money is bleeding and hurting Russia.
Money week spent.
Meaning you don't really care about helping Ukraine?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So glad we sent all that money over there to Ukraine and for what? Put that money into our cities that need it most. Start cleaning our own sht up.
That money is bleeding and hurting Russia.
Money week spent.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Russia is making very slow gains, at huge cost, this is a fact. But what are they gaining? The cities are completely bombed out and worthless. They are 80% depopulated. Can they actually even hold them long term, maybe some but unlikely all of the region.
This isn’t about resources. A few hundred years ago war was for land because of its value. Today value is in people, war is a huge negative economically. Russia will likely end up with some bombed out land, but at an extreme cost that weakens them long term.
LOL right value is not in the land. That must be the reason why Israel keeps swallowing the West Bank.
Anonymous wrote:So glad we sent all that money over there to Ukraine and for what? Put that money into our cities that need it most. Start cleaning our own sht up.
Anonymous wrote:Did you feel this way about Afghanistan, Yemen, or heck,
let’s be honest, Venezuela?
Anonymous wrote:in the long run, Russia has lost. Even if Ukraine is worn down, destroyed, and forced into a stalemate after a long war, Russia has lost. Even if Russia walks away from this with the Donbas, Russia has lost.
Their economy is ruined for decades. They're at the mercy of ambitious countries like China and India, which will both exploit Russia for their own agendas (witness how India recently bought Russian oil at below-market prices).
Will it be tough for western Europe to adjust to life without Russian gas? Maybe. But we're overdue to end the use of fossil fuels and switch to renewable energy sources, so it's going to work out in the long run.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m a citizen of both Ukraine and Russia, and to me both countries are losing from day 1. Putin is flushing both countries down the toilet. I hope that NATO gets tired of this soon and plants one bomb directly on Putin’s head, and then the war will be over.
The war will not be over then.
Anonymous wrote:Russia is making very slow gains, at huge cost, this is a fact. But what are they gaining? The cities are completely bombed out and worthless. They are 80% depopulated. Can they actually even hold them long term, maybe some but unlikely all of the region.
This isn’t about resources. A few hundred years ago war was for land because of its value. Today value is in people, war is a huge negative economically. Russia will likely end up with some bombed out land, but at an extreme cost that weakens them long term.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How weak must Russia be? Wouldn't the US have won by now?
Russia can barely manage a few kilometers of front against Ukraine and is burning through much of its troops, officers and equipment at a staggering rate.
Going toe to toe against the US, Russia would absolutely lose.
There is no credible data on the losses on either Russian or Ukrainian side.
The US would have won by now but then the US never invades strong countries.