Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[stefan92]

I appreciate your comment and I can understand that.
However, if Ukraine had to give up those areas to Russia, wouldn't Russia see that as victory and encourage them to make further attacks in the future?

Yes. Which is why the Ukrainians I know would accept that territorial loss, but want robust security guarantees in return. Which means NATO/EU troops and treaties about that in Ukraine that Russia wouldn't dare to attack.

They don't care if that means NATO or EU membership or somwthing separate at this point, only that they can align with the west and ensure that they are protected.

 

[Buster15]

The problem is that those are needed to carry nuclear weapons as part of a deal with the USA. Germany will receive F-35 to replace them, but until then they will be kept operational.

Thank you. Yes I understand that some of the GAF Tornado are nuclear capable. But some are either the IDS or ECR versions. The IDS versions are attack bombers and the ECR versions are designed to detect and attack ground radar installations.

 

[Zehner]

When i said that "i am not going to discuss military details..." i reaized that i left out the sentence "...with you that know much more than me"

Thanks for the lesson with the data. I stand corrected

Agree on points 4-5-6. The current political climate makes it nearly impossible and probably would only happen when conflict is at the door, or probably past the door

But again, never thought that what i said is plausible, only that the EU should strive to achieve it even if it is a 30-40 years path

They absolutely should. A united Europe is clearly the logical answer to everything that's happening in the world. Not only Russian aggression and the US becoming an unreliable partner but also China's and India's economic growths. Many European startups ignore the European market and directly launch in the US because it is a nightmare to expand a business throughout Europe with all the different regulations in place.

But we are at a crossroad. Ring-wing populism is very strong in Europe as well and it tells people that the answer to their problems is isolation and not collaboration and if you take a close look at the agendas of right-wingers and conservatives, it becomes clear that the driving factor behind this are the people who hoard the money - and as Alfonso explained, it primarily comes down to corporate self-interests that prevent a European army. IMO, real progress in all important questions - climate protection, geopolitical security, defending democratic values - goes hand in hand with leftist agendas. Luckily, it seems that not only the right-wing populism grows but more and more people are getting aware that the current system needs to change in order to prevent non-elected individuals from amassing political power through obscene wealth. In a way, Elon is actually having a positive effect in Europe it seems.

 

[stefan92]

Thank you. Yes I understand that some of the GAF Tornado are nuclear capable. But some are either the IDS or ECR versions. The IDS versions are attack bombers and the ECR versions are designed to detect and attack ground radar installations.

The ECR also need replacement (will be Eurofighter).

Bundeswehr procurement has been neglected a lot in past decades so that's all difficult.

As I see it the only realistic option would have been our oldest Eurofighters which wouldn't leave a capability gap and will be replaced by newer ones.

 

[Buster15]

The ECR also need replacement (will be Eurofighter).

Bundeswehr procurement has been neglected a lot in past decades so that's all difficult.

As I see it the only realistic option would have been our oldest Eurofighters which wouldn't leave a capability gap and will be replaced by newer ones.

Understood thank you.

 

[Smores]

I appreciate your comment and I can understand that.
However, if Ukraine had to give up those areas to Russia, wouldn't Russia see that as victory and encourage them to make further attacks in the future?

I fundamentally don't understand the premise that peace now is worthless if there's a chance of war in future years.

There's not many wars that have ended with complete certainty of future peace and those that do require occupation or annihilation. It's just not on the cards here.

 

[stefan92]

I fundamentally don't understand the premise that peace now is worthless if there's a chance of war in future years.

There's not many wars that have ended with complete certainty of future peace and those that do require occupation or annihilation. It's just not on the cards here.

The basic idea is that it's better to fight a weakening Russia until a reliable peace can be made than to make peace without guarantees and having to fight a stronger Russia again in a few years.

Occupation or annihilation aren't necessary, but Ukraine has somehow to be put under the MAD umbrella.

 

[Real Name]

The basic idea is that it's better to fight a weakening Russia until a reliable peace can be made than to make peace without guarantees and having to fight a stronger Russia again in a few years.

Occupation or annihilation aren't necessary, but Ukraine has somehow to be put under the MAD umbrella.

How long till we'll get to the weak Russia thing. I mean, its not a good tactic overall cause even if they're weaking its an incredibly slow thing. In the meantime Ukrainians manpower is shrinking all the while Russia throws more and more men into the fight. Its not realistic Ukraine will get back occupied parts any time soon sadly.
What I mean is, peace treaty should include NATO protection for Ukraine and strong guarantees they wont be attacked again, maybe even NATO men on the ground. Thing is, even if Trump gives that and it seems he doesnt intend to, fickle and a small ant petty man he is, it wont mean jack shit.

 

[stefan92]

How long till we'll get to the weak Russia thing. I mean, its not a good tactic overall cause even if they're weaking its an incredibly slow thing. In the meantime Ukrainians manpower is shrinking all the while Russia throws more and more men into the fight. Its not realistic Ukraine will get back occupied parts any time soon sadly.
What I mean is, peace treaty should include NATO protection for Ukraine and strong guarantees they wont be attacked again, maybe even NATO men on the ground. Thing is, even if Trump gives that and it seems he doesnt intend to, fickle and a small ant petty man he is, it wont mean jack shit.

Russia is weakening every day. Still strong, and still able to slowly push forward, but nonetheless it's happening.

So far Russia makes Ukraine surrendering a precondition (!) for any peace talks which is just absurd. So it won't happen until that changes or Ukraine is effectively annihilated and forced to actually surrender. And despite the Ukrainian problems we are far from that either.

It's a terrible situation.

 

[Smores]

The basic idea is that it's better to fight a weakening Russia until a reliable peace can be made than to make peace without guarantees and having to fight a stronger Russia again in a few years.

Occupation or annihilation aren't necessary, but Ukraine has somehow to be put under the MAD umbrella.

That's a seperate and more valid point but it's still a unicorn. There's no reliable peace with Russia nor guarantees and is it certain they'll grow/recover quicker than Ukraine?

The only sense to continue the war is if the stalemate can be maintained and it's advantageous (it can't indefinitely) or if Ukraine are more likely to receive third party arms during war than peace. The last point could well be true and I'm sure fear of abandonment is a central concern given they're not being fully supported even now.

 

[Zehner]

That's a seperate and more valid point but it's still a unicorn. There's no reliable peace with Russia nor guarantees and is it certain they'll grow/recover quicker than Ukraine?

The only sense to continue the war is if the stalemate can be maintained and it's advantageous (it can't indefinitely) or if Ukraine are more likely to receive third party arms during war than peace. The last point could well be true and I'm sure fear of abandonment is a central concern given they're not being fully supported even now.

Why isn't there a reliable peace with Russia? This war is crippling the Russian economy and a Ukrainian win could prevent further aggressions from Putin completely because his regime his overthrown and his country will lack the capabilities to build an army that can threaten it's neighbors. Not only against Ukraine but against other countries as well.

I think what people might not really get is that Russia has been burning through money and resources at a highly unsustainable rate during this war. They've been living off their absurdly big Soviet era weapons and ammo stocks and they prepared financially for the war and sanctions for years if not decades essentially by setting aside money as well. But those stocks are coming to an end. Inflation is hitting very hard and many companies are at the risk of bankruptcy.

Probably because reports at the beginning of the war expected the Russian economy to implode much faster than it eventually did, many people now believe that it won't implode at all but it is very visible that the war economy and the sanctions are taking a huge toll on Russia. And the worse the living standards become, the bigger the threat of Putin being overthrown. Especially since corporate bankruptcies now threaten the oligarchs' wealth as well and not just that of the population.

 

[WPMUFC]

fecking psychopaths
https://bsky.app/profile/businessukraine.bsky.social/post/3li4vsmj7zk2k

 

[harms]

I appreciate your comment and I can understand that.
However, if Ukraine had to give up those areas to Russia, wouldn't Russia see that as victory and encourage them to make further attacks in the future?

I don’t think any outcome of this, realistically, is going to discourage Russia from trying again at some point in the future. Only a hopeless and demoralizing loss (Russia’s) on the battlefield and it clearly isn’t happening right now.

So it’s always a case of trying to understand in which scenario you’re losing the least. Donetsk and Luhansk now (it wasn’t the case in 2014 by the way, despite what Russia says) are full with people with anti-Ukrainian mindset*, many of them have been fighting against Ukraine for a better part of the decade.

In an ideal world where Ukraine was free to choose their preferred scenario of how to end this, they’re still going to choose to keep Crimea, Donetsk & Luhansk and opt for slow reintegration, I’m pretty sure. In a world where they’re likely gonna have to make territorial concessions with Trump forcing their hand, losing Donetsk & Luhansk (but keeping newly occupied oblasts) is acceptable for some.

* not that we have any trust worthy sociological polls on the matter, of course

 

[harms]

Why isn't there a reliable peace with Russia? This war is crippling the Russian economy and a Ukrainian win could prevent further aggressions from Putin completely because his regime his overthrown and his country will lack the capabilities to build an army that can threaten it's neighbors. Not only against Ukraine but against other countries as well.

That would require even more guaranteed support from the West while with Trump at power we’re likely going to see a drastic reduction in it. And even with it it’s not a given.

Russian economy is imploding at an alarming and non-containable rate. That’s if we’re speaking in the historical perspective. In reality we don’t know how long it will be able to hold, it’s important to understand that Putin doesn’t care about the economy and his countrymen’s long-term well-being. And with that approach (weirdly the current “lever system” at Barça feels like an appropriate, while unfair to them, football comparison) who knows how long they’ll be able to keep it up. Maybe even a few years. And Ukraine without the outside support doesn’t have that time.

Damn I became such a pessimist at the end of the third year of this.

 

[Zehner]

That would require even more guaranteed support from the West while with Trump at power we’re likely going to see a drastic reduction in it. And even with it it’s not a given.

Russian economy is imploding at an alarming and non-containable rate. That’s if we’re speaking in the historical perspective. In reality we don’t know how long it will be able to hold, it’s important to understand that Putin doesn’t care about the economy and his countrymen’s long-term well-being. And with that approach (weirdly the current “lever system” at Barça feels like an appropriate, while unfair to them, football comparison) who knows how long they’ll be able to keep it up. Maybe even a few years. And Ukraine without the outside support doesn’t have that time.

Damn I became such a pessimist at the end of the third year of this.

Yes, the support is mandatory, no doubt about that. Which makes the current developments all the more frustrating.

 

[stefan92]

fecking psychopaths
https://bsky.app/profile/businessukraine.bsky.social/post/3li4vsmj7zk2k

Oh come on... it is a war zone. Air defense is active and whatever. Some thing crashing somewhere doesn't mean anything.

 

[Real Name]

Always wondered about the population in Donetsk and Luhansk. Are they Ukraninians who feel closer to Russia, Russians who moved there or all of the above? Whatever it is its certainly all changed now in the sense people belonging to the same nation hating each other, but the question is more of pre 2014 situation.

 

[Buster15]

That would require even more guaranteed support from the West while with Trump at power we’re likely going to see a drastic reduction in it. And even with it it’s not a given.

Russian economy is imploding at an alarming and non-containable rate. That’s if we’re speaking in the historical perspective. In reality we don’t know how long it will be able to hold, it’s important to understand that Putin doesn’t care about the economy and his countrymen’s long-term well-being. And with that approach (weirdly the current “lever system” at Barça feels like an appropriate, while unfair to them, football comparison) who knows how long they’ll be able to keep it up. Maybe even a few years. And Ukraine without the outside support doesn’t have that time.

Damn I became such a pessimist at the end of the third year of this.

What is the reason for the problems with the Russian economy.
Is it the result of a drop in oil and gas revenue or are the sanctions having an effect.

Either way, great news.

 

[harms]

What is the reason for the problems with the Russian economy.
Is it the result of a drop in oil and gas revenue or are the sanctions having an effect.

Either way, great news.

A lot of it is sanctions, especially the exclusion of Russia from SWIFT. A lot of it is the complete switch to the war economy (which gave an artificial boost to the GDP that they’ve paraded around so proudly but which meant feck all). Hundreds of thousands of men of the peak working age are on the front lines.

The key (credit) rate, not sure what’s the correct English term for this — the % at which the Bank of Russia gives out money to commercial banks — is at 21% at the moment. So the real credits that the population can get start out at around 25-30%. Imagine how good it is for small or medium-sized businesses… The inflation (the real one) is crazy. The ruble had became a rubble. Etc.

 

[That_Bloke]

They absolutely should. A united Europe is clearly the logical answer to everything that's happening in the world. Not only Russian aggression and the US becoming an unreliable partner but also China's and India's economic growths. Many European startups ignore the European market and directly launch in the US because it is a nightmare to expand a business throughout Europe with all the different regulations in place.

But we are at a crossroad. Ring-wing populism is very strong in Europe as well and it tells people that the answer to their problems is isolation and not collaboration and if you take a close look at the agendas of right-wingers and conservatives, it becomes clear that the driving factor behind this are the people who hoard the money - and as Alfonso explained, it primarily comes down to corporate self-interests that prevent a European army. IMO, real progress in all important questions - climate protection, geopolitical security, defending democratic values - goes hand in hand with leftist agendas. Luckily, it seems that not only the right-wing populism grows but more and more people are getting aware that the current system needs to change in order to prevent non-elected individuals from amassing political power through obscene wealth. In a way, Elon is actually having a positive effect in Europe it seems.

Excellent post, but I don't see how we're going to avoid the right-wing wave in one form or another.

Whilst the education level in Europe is more homogenous than in the US and politics not locked in a purely bi-partisan system fuelled by legal bribes, I have little hope that right-wing populism to be something we're going to be able to shake off anytime soon. It now has firmly implemented itself in a notable part of the european populations will have its word to say for quite a long time. Italy has given in for a long time, Austria is not that far off, France and Germany are under real threat and it's rearing its ugly head even in Spain and Portugal.

A united, independent Europe relying on its own army, something I personally long for, is a pipe dream. Not with 27 members and as you and others said, corporate interests that conflict with this very idea.

 

[Mavs]

There have been some strong responses from various European officials after Trumps and Hegseths statements, but most of it is things that we have heard before. No discussion about Ukraine without Ukraine, that Europe needs to be involved in the discussions, etc. But this current situation should not be a surprise to any of them. Trump isn't doing or saying anything that hasn't been on the horizon for months now.

The most interesting comment though that I have seen comes from the french defense minister, where he calls in question the future of NATO:



I don't remember seeing such comments from other European officials before. Continuing with a half-hearted US investment will definitely put the alliance in jeopardy, the core strength of NATO is the belief that Article 5 will be upheld by all capable countries and particularly US. Maybe all this backlash will Trump reconsider his stance, but the European countries need to step up and get ahead of Trump in the decision making process here, either sell him a plan that could work with continued US involvement or plan for US withdrawal. These are big decisions but its been coming for a while now. Waiting for Trump to make the decisions and complain when they are not to your liking is going to end in disaster.

 

[ManUtd1999]

Two short months ago, Putin looked weakened: he couldn’t win the war in Ukraine and the Assad regime fell almost overnight.

Then, someone takes over in the U.S. on January 20, and suddenly Putin looks in a much better position: the war will end (if it ends) on his terms, Crimea is gone, Ukraine will not have a chance at joining NATO, the latter is in real jeopardy (at least Article 5), Trump supports bringing Russia back into the G7-G8, etc.

All it took was one man putting his hand on a holly book and walking into the Oval Office. All it took was 3.5 weeks.

 

[Buster15]

A lot of it is sanctions, especially the exclusion of Russia from SWIFT. A lot of it is the complete switch to the war economy (which gave an artificial boost to the GDP that they’ve paraded around so proudly but which meant feck all). Hundreds of thousands of men of the peak working age are on the front lines.

The key (credit) rate, not sure what’s the correct English term for this — the % at which the Bank of Russia gives out money to commercial banks — is at 21% at the moment. So the real credits that the population can get start out at around 25-30%. Imagine how good it is for small or medium-sized businesses… The inflation (the real one) is crazy. The ruble had became a rubble. Etc.

That is very interesting and thank you.

 

[Buster15]

Two short months ago, Putin looked weakened: he couldn’t win the war in Ukraine and the Assad regime fell almost overnight.

Then, someone takes over in the U.S. on January 20, and suddenly Putin looks in a much better position: the war will end (if it ends) on his terms, Crimea is gone, Ukraine will not have a chance at joining NATO, the latter is in real jeopardy (at least Article 5), Trump supports bringing Russia back into the G7-G8, etc.

All it took was one man putting his hand on a holly book and walking into the Oval Office. All it took was 3.5 weeks.

A simply fantastic way to start a negotiating position. Concede right at the start.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Hitting the shield at Chernobyl. Dearie me.

 

[Buster15]

There have been some strong responses from various European officials after Trumps and Hegseths statements, but most of it is things that we have heard before. No discussion about Ukraine without Ukraine, that Europe needs to be involved in the discussions, etc. But this current situation should not be a surprise to any of them. Trump isn't doing or saying anything that hasn't been on the horizon for months now.

The most interesting comment though that I have seen comes from the french defense minister, where he calls in question the future of NATO:



I don't remember seeing such comments from other European officials before. Continuing with a half-hearted US investment will definitely put the alliance in jeopardy, the core strength of NATO is the belief that Article 5 will be upheld by all capable countries and particularly US. Maybe all this backlash will Trump reconsider his stance, but the European countries need to step up and get ahead of Trump in the decision making process here, either sell him a plan that could work with continued US involvement or plan for US withdrawal. These are big decisions but its been coming for a while now. Waiting for Trump to make the decisions and complain when they are not to your liking is going to end in disaster.

What people are terming the new reality is that Europe at least is going to have to stand up on its own and not continuing to hide behind the US. To stand up both economically and militarily.
At least that is very clear.

It obviously ignored the warning signs from the President last time. But can not ignore them any longer.

Whether that has to result in a European Military, should NATO begin to fragment remains to be seen.
But what it means right now is that the countries of Europe are going to have to increase their defence capabilities. And there are a number of world class equipment manufacturers in Europe who are more than capable of fulfilling that need.

 

[Mavs]

What people are terming the new reality is that Europe at least is going to have to stand up on its own and not continuing to hide behind the US. To stand up both economically and militarily.
At least that is very clear.

It obviously ignored the warning signs from the President last time. But can not ignore them any longer.

Whether that has to result in a European Military, should NATO begin to fragment remains to be seen.
But what it means right now is that the countries of Europe are going to have to increase their defence capabilities. And there are a number of world class equipment manufacturers in Europe who are more than capable of fulfilling that need.

Yep, agreed. It is very frustrating to now see the European leaders being caught offguard and powerless by the current situation, having had years to prepare and all the capabilities and warnings to do it as you say.

 

[The Firestarter]

Yep, agreed. It is very frustrating to now see the European leaders being caught offguard and powerless by the current situation, having had years to prepare and all the capabilities and warnings to do it as you say.

Always has been.

 

[Simbo]

How long till we'll get to the weak Russia thing. I mean, its not a good tactic overall cause even if they're weaking its an incredibly slow thing. In the meantime Ukrainians manpower is shrinking all the while Russia throws more and more men into the fight. Its not realistic Ukraine will get back occupied parts any time soon sadly.
What I mean is, peace treaty should include NATO protection for Ukraine and strong guarantees they wont be attacked again, maybe even NATO men on the ground. Thing is, even if Trump gives that and it seems he doesnt intend to, fickle and a small ant petty man he is, it wont mean jack shit.

I can sort of forgive people for thinking this, with the state of our news and media, but what you just wrote is the opposite of reality.

Yes Ukraine doesn’t have ‘enough’ troops because what is enough? 2mil? 5mil would be better.

Ukraines is still a majorly volunteer army without having to offer people a lifetime wage as sign-on bonus and conscription age cap remains at 25, only having adjusted it once since the start of this war, down from 27.

We’ll know when they get desperate for manpower… there are several stages they can go through yet if it ever comes to that.

What does desperate look like? Well just look at Russia, basically every single thing they do. Removed all conscription restrictions, emptied the prisons, mercs from Africa, brought N. Korea into the war ffs… They are now rounding up the injured and sending them back out to the front…. Either to save money, absorb a drone or stop them spreading the truth of this war at home? I dunno. They have severe workforce shortages among many other problems that Ukraine doesn’t have to their extent. Their assaults have already begun ti slow this last month or so, they are exhausting themselves.

The ‘deal’ is a giant distraction, Ukraine just needs to carry on.

If the total fecking idiots of this world want to believe Russia gaining Another 0.01% of Ukrainian land for the cost of 10k troops and whatever gear they road in on means they are winning this war and Ukraine is on the back foot then…. They can carry on too I guess.

 

[Denis79]

Oh no doubt about that! Probably make him a scapegoat too. Wouldn't be surprised if Putin asks for Zielinsky to be extradited to Russia once he becomes a private citizen again

World has gone mad.

 

[ManUtd1999]

The amazing thing is that many of us, ordinary folks who have never been in government, let alone in high offices, could see this from miles away. We could see this since Trump announced his candidacy for president 10 years ago.

Trump doesn’t like NATO, Trump likes Putin, Trump wants the world order post 1945 to change, not necessarily for the benefit of Americans or the West. It was clear since 2015.

 

[Real Name]

I can sort of forgive people for thinking this, with the state of our news and media, but what you just wrote is the opposite of reality.

Yes Ukraine doesn’t have ‘enough’ troops because what is enough? 2mil? 5mil would be better.

Ukraines is still a majorly volunteer army without having to offer people a lifetime wage as sign-on bonus and conscription age cap remains at 25, only having adjusted it once since the start of this war, down from 27.

We’ll know when they get desperate for manpower… there are several stages they can go through yet if it ever comes to that.

What does desperate look like? Well just look at Russia, basically every single thing they do. Removed all conscription restrictions, emptied the prisons, mercs from Africa, brought N. Korea into the war ffs… They are now rounding up the injured and sending them back out to the front…. Either to save money, absorb a drone or stop them spreading the truth of this war at home? I dunno. They have severe workforce shortages among many other problems that Ukraine doesn’t have to their extent. Their assaults have already begun ti slow this last month or so, they are exhausting themselves.

The ‘deal’ is a giant distraction, Ukraine just needs to carry on.

If the total fecking idiots of this world want to believe Russia gaining Another 0.01% of Ukrainian land for the cost of 10k troops and whatever gear they road in on means they are winning this war and Ukraine is on the back foot then…. They can carry on too I guess.

I dont think Russia is winning this one, I just meant that waiting for them to collapse is going to be a long wait. As for other things you wrote, thank you and you're right. I didnt mean the exact numbers what is enough, but in any case its not a bottomless pit from where they can draw soldiers from and also sending men in a peak age for work and life is not helping the future, on the contrary. What is important is Ukraine doesnt agree on whatever terms 'offered' by Trump and doesnt fold in and that Europe stick to their support for them, cause sure as hell Trump will let them down any way or another.

 

[africanspur]

I can sort of forgive people for thinking this, with the state of our news and media, but what you just wrote is the opposite of reality.

Yes Ukraine doesn’t have ‘enough’ troops because what is enough? 2mil? 5mil would be better.

Ukraines is still a majorly volunteer army without having to offer people a lifetime wage as sign-on bonus and conscription age cap remains at 25, only having adjusted it once since the start of this war, down from 27.

We’ll know when they get desperate for manpower… there are several stages they can go through yet if it ever comes to that.

What does desperate look like? Well just look at Russia, basically every single thing they do. Removed all conscription restrictions, emptied the prisons, mercs from Africa, brought N. Korea into the war ffs… They are now rounding up the injured and sending them back out to the front…. Either to save money, absorb a drone or stop them spreading the truth of this war at home? I dunno. They have severe workforce shortages among many other problems that Ukraine doesn’t have to their extent. Their assaults have already begun ti slow this last month or so, they are exhausting themselves.

The ‘deal’ is a giant distraction, Ukraine just needs to carry on.

If the total fecking idiots of this world want to believe Russia gaining Another 0.01% of Ukrainian land for the cost of 10k troops and whatever gear they road in on means they are winning this war and Ukraine is on the back foot then…. They can carry on too I guess.

Ukraine is the defending force here. Any situation in which they lose any land, regardless of how small, and even a situation where the front lines stay as they are, having lost a large amount of territory, is a loss.

Unless something has significantly changed in the last half a year or so, the Ukrainian MoD reports that the ratio of volunteers to conscripts is 1:3 so not sure where that information is coming from?

 

[harms]

Ukraine is the defending force here. Any situation in which they lose any land, regardless of how small, and even a situation where the front lines stay as they are, having lost a large amount of territory, is a loss.

Unless something has significantly changed in the last half a year or so, the Ukrainian MoD reports that the ratio of volunteers to conscripts is 1:3 so not sure where that information is coming from?

I mean, the Winter War (Soviet Union - Finland in 1939-1940) ended with Finland seceding about 10% of its territory to the Soviet Union. I don't think people consider it a win by U.S.S.R. or a loss by Finland.

 

[oreon]

I dont think Russia is winning this one, I just meant that waiting for them to collapse is going to be a long wait. As for other things you wrote, thank you and you're right. I didnt mean the exact numbers what is enough, but in any case its not a bottomless pit from where they can draw soldiers from and also sending men in a peak age for work and life is not helping the future, on the contrary. What is important is Ukraine doesnt agree on whatever terms 'offered' by Trump and doesnt fold in and that Europe stick to their support for them, cause sure as hell Trump will let them down any way or another.

The key is Europe. If they had any balls, they could swing this war in Ukraine favour. There was talk of EU forces in Ukraine in the western part and Northen part of Ukraine away from the fighting to relieve Ukraine forces to focus on the battlefield. I think thats needed. I think Western European especially France need empty their warehouses for Ukraine and begin a massive rearmament. But this would take a collective agreement and effort between the major European powers but none of them have the balls. I think they are all waiting for that major shock when Russia invades a NATO country to truly act. Best they act now. NATO is dead. And even after Trump the US isolationism won't go away.

 

[africanspur]

I mean, the Winter War (Soviet Union - Finland in 1939-1940) ended with Finland seceding about 10% of its territory to the Soviet Union. I don't think people consider it a win by U.S.S.R. or a loss by Finland.

I don’t see how people could consider it anything other than a loss by Finland to be honest. Note that I specifically didn’t say this is a victory for Russia either, especially when compared to the initial maximalist aims or the massive geopolitical impact it’s had.

For me, were this to end tomorrow along current lines, it would be a loss for both. Ukraine would have lost territory, men, an armistice with an unreliable neighbour and likely no guarantee of moving into NATO to protect themselves in future. Russia would have lost men, money, weaponry, international reputation , its Middle Eastern bases and surrounded itself with more NATO neighbours.

Nobody would be a winner there.

 

[Red in STL]

The key is Europe. If they had any balls, they could swing this war in Ukraine favour. There was talk of EU forces in Ukraine in the western part and Northen part of Ukraine away from the fighting to relieve Ukraine forces to focus on the battlefield. I think thats needed. I think Western European especially France need empty their warehouses for Ukraine and begin a massive rearmament. But this would take a collective agreement and effort between the major European powers but none of them have the balls. I think they are all waiting for that major shock when Russia invades a NATO country to truly act. Best they act now. NATO is dead. And even after Trump the US isolationism won't go away.

Sending EU forces in to Ukraine would likely be seen as NATO intervention by Russia

 

[AfonsoAlves]

A lot of people where??
How do you know they would be happy.
Obviously you would be happy if another country invaded yours and took over a large part of it.

That is no way to have a lasting peace is it.

Half of my family are Ukrainian, my wife's entire family are Ukrainian. A lot of my friend circles are Ukrainian but a lot of them have left.

Regarding the latter:

This kind of stuff is callous as hell mate. Almost everyone is affected by conscription - everyone's got a family member or close friend serving in AFU right now. Everyone has suffered, everyone has a direct blood relation been severely wounded, paralyzed, lost a limb or died.

Everyone lives in fear every day of their lives because they're double compounded by the fact that a missile could drop on their heads at any given time or they'll receive a call or an officer at their door telling them that their husband/son/uncle/father is dead.

Most people at this point just want it to end, no matter for how long, despite sovereignty.

 

[4bars]

Sending EU forces in to Ukraine would likely be seen as NATO intervention by Russia

Maybe, but North Korea had been invited to defend Russian territory in Kursk. the EU could do the same without attacking Russia. Just defending Ukraine. And yes, I know that this is not happening

 

[4bars]

weirdly the current “lever system” at Barça

Didn't see that coming to be fair