Support NeoGAF

[sinnergy]

So apparently, it was expected to be doable with the resources given, but Kyiv couldn't stand taking the losses necessary and switched tactics.

Of course, it would be better to have the necessary tools to take a more decisive victory and minimize losses entirely. But, at least according to this article, the rate that they were using up stuff (and lives) was according to plan, but they got squeamish?

I understand it, it are humans yuu are doing simulations with .. and to be honest , the west isn’t familiar anymore with this kind of war .. who would have guessed Russia would lay mines ever 30 -40 cm .. it’s all fine and dandy in a computer simulation.

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

Russia's top general Sergei Shoigu bragged that the Kremlin's war in Ukraine has 'debunked many myths' that NATO weapons and military standards are superior​

news.yahoo.com/russia...

 

[Tams]

The frustrating part is I don't think the world would ever see justice from Russia for all the horrible shit they did. That's what fucking kills me. It seems like they can do this endlessly and at the end of the day still be protected because they have nukes. Fuck that shit. Fuck that country and fuck the people that simp for them.

It depends on what you call justice, and what moral principles you have, or rather are prepared to sacrifice.

It would be very easy to hit Russia indiscriminately with terrorist attacks. You can't nuke terrorists. We take the moral high ground and don't, thankfully. But someone might in the end.

 

[ThatStupidLion]

Americans say Ukraine won’t achieve its goals… because Americans won’t give them what they need to do it.

Thanks Americans!

Its feels funny being hated and wanted at the same time.

 

[acm2000]

Its feels funny being hated and wanted at the same time.

really? i feel that most nights from the missus

 

[Lunarorbit]

Its feels funny being hated and wanted at the same time.

It's been like this my whole adult life as an American.

 

[ThatStupidLion]

really? i feel that most nights from the missus

America: The World's Husband

 

[winjer]

F-16s are approved for Ukraine. But not many.

 

[delirium trigger]

The intel leaks from months back implied it was a forever war and an expert on CNN from a week or two ago basically said the same thing. I want Ukraine to win too but there are limits. I'm tired of hearing all about how we're fighting Russia for pennies on the dollar. We have problems of our own. There has to be a better attempt at diplomacy.

 

[Tams]

The intel leaks from months back implied it was a forever war and an expert on CNN from a week or two ago basically said the same thing. I want Ukraine to win too but there are limits. I'm tired of hearing all about how we're fighting Russia for pennies on the dollar. We have problems of our own. There has to be a better attempt at diplomacy.

it's hard to be diplomatic with an interlocutor that's in denial of reality, lies endlessly and successively, gaslights, would love to see your way of life end, and has committed atrocities.

I think you're being hopelessly naïve.

 

[delirium trigger]

it's hard to be diplomatic with an interlocutor that's in denial of reality, lies endlessly and successively, gaslights, would love to see your way of life end, and has committed atrocities.

I think you're being hopelessly naïve.

Zalensky doesn't want to negotiate until all of the territory is back. It's been a stalemate with miniscule advances being made by both sides at the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives. Of course, when you read this thread it seems like only one side has casualties.

 

[TwinB242]

it's hard to be diplomatic with an interlocutor that's in denial of reality, lies endlessly and successively, gaslights, would love to see your way of life end, and has committed atrocities.

I think you're being hopelessly naïve.

So what exactly is the alternative. Ukraine just keeps going until they lose a significant amount of their male population? Thats not sustainable especially given the news thats been coming out recently



This recent casualty figure is not at all good. Less than 2:1 despite Russia having nearly 5x the population. And it also really puts into perspective just how much Ukraine's military staff have been lying. How many times have they come out and claimed that Ukraine has 5x less, 7x less, and even 10x less casualties in some of the bigger battles (like Bakhmut). This is why you can't trust the propaganda that comes from them in the same way you can't trust a lot of what comes out of Russia. And since Ukraine is on the offensive, that ratio is likely only going to get worse in the foreseeable future especially given how dug in the Russians are in the south.

I know everyone wants to look on the positive side but eventually there will need to be a compromise, and yes there's a significant chance that will involve Ukraine giving up territory. But ultimately Russia tried to take over the ENTIRE country, and even in their best case scenario they might only come away with 1/5th of Ukraine's territory. So even in the event of that happening we can still view this war as ending with a Ukrainian victory.

 

[winjer]

Ceding any territory to Russia is just an invitation for a new invasion a decade from now.
Ukrainian resolve is strong, but the west has to stop with the lolly gagging.
Drip feeding Ukraine with old weapons is not enough. We have to give them weapons that can make a difference.

 

[Ironbunny]

Zalensky doesn't want to negotiate until all of the territory is back. It's been a stalemate with miniscule advances being made by both sides at the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives. Of course, when you read this thread it seems like only one side has casualties.

From May 26 to June 5, 2023

The poll, conducted in late May and early June by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), found that 84% of Ukrainians opposed making any territorial concessions to Russia, even if this means prolonging the war. In line with other surveys of public opinion in wartime Ukraine, the KIIS poll identified strikingly similar attitudes across the country, with 75% of respondents in eastern Ukraine ruling out any territorial concessions compared to 84% in central Ukraine and 86% in both the south and west. This illustrates the unifying impact the Russian invasion has had on Ukrainian public opinion, and underlines the significance of the ongoing war as a major milestone in modern Ukraine’s nation-building journey.

 

[Madserb2023]

So what exactly is the alternative. Ukraine just keeps going until they lose a significant amount of their male population? Thats not sustainable especially given the news thats been coming out recently



This recent casualty figure is not at all good. Less than 2:1 despite Russia having nearly 5x the population. And it also really puts into perspective just how much Ukraine's military staff have been lying. How many times have they come out and claimed that Ukraine has 5x less, 7x less, and even 10x less casualties in some of the bigger battles (like Bakhmut). This is why you can't trust the propaganda that comes from them in the same way you can't trust a lot of what comes out of Russia. And since Ukraine is on the offensive, that ratio is likely only going to get worse in the foreseeable future especially given how dug in the Russians are in the south.

I know everyone wants to look on the positive side but eventually there will need to be a compromise, and yes there's a significant chance that will involve Ukraine giving up territory. But ultimately Russia tried to take over the ENTIRE country, and even in their best case scenario they might only come away with 1/5th of Ukraine's territory. So even in the event of that happening we can still view this war as ending with a Ukrainian victory.

This might be seen as confirmation bias going by my previous thoughts but the Ukrainian numbers do not match what is happening on the ground. If you take their casualty figures as fact, they would be in Crimea. I still don't know why people insist that this is the first war in history where those involved would be completely honest about casualty numbers. As I have always said, all that matters is the end result and the truth will be revealed over the next year.

 

[Liljagare]

Does anyone here live in a country that would start peace negotiations while a huge swath of their land is being held by the enemy?

I don't know of a single currently existing sovereign country that would do that. It just not how it works, and Ukraine is still holding out.

Satellite imagery of the section of the enemy's second layer of defense that is being engaged by the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the vicinity of Verbove.



The biggest hope here is that the south front will get penetrated.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Zalensky doesn't want to negotiate until all of the territory is back. It's been a stalemate with miniscule advances being made by both sides at the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives. Of course, when you read this thread it seems like only one side has casualties.

You cannot legitimize military land conquest like that. Besides, Russia is a bad faith actor that cannot be trusted: in Georgia they had to deploy a massive amount of personnel just to watch the borders of the two regions Russia invaded because if you aren't looking they move the fences to annex more land. Reality is after months of war and sanctions, Russia's economy is starting to sink. Moscow is desperate for a deal to consolidate the gains and end the campaign.

 

[TwinB242]

You cannot legitimize military land conquest like that. Besides, Russia is a bad faith actor that cannot be trusted: in Georgia they had to deploy a massive amount of personnel just to watch the borders of the two regions Russia invaded because if you aren't looking they move the fences to annex more land. Reality is after months of war and sanctions, Russia's economy is starting to sink. Moscow is desperate for a deal to consolidate the gains and end the campaign.

People have been saying their economy has been in the gutter since the first sanctions were implemented early last year and a collapse is imminent. Thats not going to happen anytime soon, the reality is that Russia still has a significant amount of manpower and resources that they can commit to this war for another few years at least.

But any peace deal will need to come with some kind of security guarantees for Ukraine to prevent Russia from invading again. Whether or not that could be NATO is hard to say at this point.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

People have been saying their economy has been in the gutter since the first sanctions were implemented early last year and a collapse is imminent. Thats not going to happen anytime soon, the reality is that Russia still has a significant amount of manpower and resources that they can commit to this war for another few years at least.

But any peace deal will need to come with some kind of security guarantees for Ukraine to prevent Russia from invading again. Whether or not that could be NATO is hard to say at this point.

Raising the interest rate 3.5 points is a measure not often seen.

As for "security guarantees", good luck. Russia will accept nothing in that regard.

 

[winjer]

People have been saying their economy has been in the gutter since the first sanctions were implemented early last year and a collapse is imminent. Thats not going to happen anytime soon, the reality is that Russia still has a significant amount of manpower and resources that they can commit to this war for another few years at least.

But any peace deal will need to come with some kind of security guarantees for Ukraine to prevent Russia from invading again. Whether or not that could be NATO is hard to say at this point.

Russia gave security guaranties that it would never invade Ukraine, if they got rid their nukes.
But as usual, Russian promises are worthless. And this is already the second time Russia has invade Ukraine since they signed that deal.

 

[Facism]

Always comes back to diplomacy and Compromise with Russia, because history has shown they honour agreements like this.

 

[FunkMiller]

Any talk of ‘peace negotiations’ while Russians are on Ukrainian soil is pro-Russian, tankie bullshit. If you think otherwise, try paying a bit more attention to what’s actually going on, instead of what you think is going on.

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

Since 2022, Russia has eased the process for foreigners to get a passport and shortened the process to obtain citizenship to 3 mos. Today the deputy head of the Council of the Presidency said those who obtained passports or submitted applications will be registered as available for military service.​

x.com/tass_a...

 

[Chittagong]

The aide to the NATO boss let the truth slip. Ukraine alone won’t get those areas back, jets and missiles or not. And nobody else will join the war on their side. The main rationale to want those areas back is to show to Russia that it can’t take more land. So concede the lands that can’t be fought back on the condition of joining NATO, nullifying the main concern.

 

[Ironbunny]

Since 2022, Russia has eased the process for foreigners to get a passport and shortened the process to obtain citizenship to 3 mos. Today the deputy head of the Council of the Presidency said those who obtained passports or submitted applications will be registered as available for military service.​

x.com/tass_a...

 

[Lunarorbit]

Raising the interest rate 3.5 points is a measure not often seen.

As for "security guarantees", good luck. Russia will accept nothing in that regard.

Kremlin just shook down everyone again for their foreign currency. The ruble was in a freefall this past week. Not a good sign for the Russian economy.

 

[delirium trigger]

Ukraine lost Crimea 10 years ago and now you're telling me no negotiations can take place unless they get it back?

 

[Deleted member 1159]

Ukraine lost Crimea 10 years ago and now you're telling me no negotiations can take place unless they get it back?

I’ll leave it up to Ukrainians to figure out what terms they want

 

[delirium trigger]

I’ll leave it up to Ukrainians to figure out what terms they want

They can fight forever if they want to but not with everyone else's money and resources. Take out a loan or negotiate.

 

[TwinB242]

Any talk of ‘peace negotiations’ while Russians are on Ukrainian soil is pro-Russian, tankie bullshit. If you think otherwise, try paying a bit more attention to what’s actually going on, instead of what you think is going on.

So how are you going to get the Russians to leave? Are you going to head to the frontlines and politely ask them to exit Ukraine?

You guys are also forgetting that support for arming Ukraine is at an all time low in the U.S. According to the latest polls only 45% of Americans think the U.S. should continue sending them weapons. That is clearly going to be a hot topic going into the elections next year, and regardless of which side ends up winning there is little chance the same level of support will continue for very long afterwards.

Unless Ukraine has some kind of ace up their sleeve nobody knows about, time is very much on Russia's side in this conflict.

 

[delirium trigger]

So how are you going to get the Russians to leave? Are you going to head to the frontlines and politely ask them to exit Ukraine?

No, that's on Zelensky and he's said over and over and over again that he wants Crimea back and he won't negotiate without it. They lost Crimea 10 years ago and it's not coming back. You read this thread and people make it out like Ukraine has sharks with laser beams attached to their heads and the Russians are all barefoot on horseback. The truth is the Russians are pretty dug in and Ukraine doesn't have the manpower. We're staring down yet another forever war with no real end. They go back and forth a little bit and more people die.

 

[FunkMiller]

So how are you going to get the Russians to leave? Are you going to head to the frontlines and politely ask them to exit Ukraine?

You guys are also forgetting that support for arming Ukraine is at an all time low in the U.S. According to the latest polls only 45% of Americans think the U.S. should continue sending them weapons. That is clearly going to be a hot topic going into the elections next year, and regardless of which side ends up winning there is little chance the same level of support will continue for very long afterwards.

Unless Ukraine has some kind of ace up their sleeve nobody knows about, time is very much on Russia's side in this conflict.

I don’t care what Americans think, frankly. They don't care to understand international events properly, so why should I care what they think about Ukraine? If they had a grasp on the situation, they’d see that America is getting an absolute bargain here. The entire geopolitical situation is shifting in their favour, for a small amount of money, compared to the total defence budget.

But some of them will ignore anything that doesn’t concern them directly, and will whine all the way to the ballot box, not comprehending how much more powerful properly and fully supporting Ukraine makes the USA.

 

[Madserb2023]

I don’t care what Americans think, frankly. They don't care to understand international events properly, so why should I care what they think about Ukraine? If they had a grasp on the situation, they’d see that America is getting an absolute bargain here. The entire geopolitical situation is shifting in their favour, for a small amount of money, compared to the total defence budget.

But some of them will ignore anything that doesn’t concern them directly, and will whine all the way to the ballot box, not comprehending how much more powerful properly and fully supporting Ukraine makes the USA.

They are getting a bargain. The same was said about arming the Afghans against the Soviets. The problem is that everything has repercussions and we don't know at the moment what these are. I guess the immediate is that the war is being prolonged and hundreds of thousands more will die. It would also be naive to predict the geopolitical future. Nobody knows what's going to happen.

 

[Lunarorbit]

I don’t care what Americans think, frankly. They don't care to understand international events properly, so why should I care what they think about Ukraine? If they had a grasp on the situation, they’d see that America is getting an absolute bargain here. The entire geopolitical situation is shifting in their favour, for a small amount of money, compared to the total defence budget.

But some of them will ignore anything that doesn’t concern them directly, and will whine all the way to the ballot box, not comprehending how much more powerful properly and fully supporting Ukraine makes the USA.

I've always wondered if americas location is one reason for people's distain for international politics. Canada and Mexico are pretty chill neighbors (minus migration and drugs).

America gives a fuckton of international aid every year, lots to countries who don't give a fuck about what we think (looking at you India). You are 100% correct that the cost to us Americans is a pittance especially considering how much Russia is falling apart. Plus it's the morally correct thing to do.

As much belly aching and shit talking as Europe and the USA do to each other, the European union as a whole are our closest allies. We gotta have the EUs back in my mind.

But I've actually traveled in Europe and have compassion for the situation which is more than I can say for lots of my countrymen

 

[Tams]

Zalensky doesn't want to negotiate until all of the territory is back. It's been a stalemate with miniscule advances being made by both sides at the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives. Of course, when you read this thread it seems like only one side has casualties.

It's far bigger than just Ukraine and you damn well know that.

We can't allow Russia to hold onto the territory it has stolen. We tried that (Georgia, Crimea) and it led to now.

NATO can't ignore it either, as the Baltic states are screaming at the rest of the organisation to do something, and now Finland is a member too. NATO has stepped up to those calls, to be fair.

I don't like analogies, but you seem to need one. If a bully keeps stealing your lunch money, do you think saying 'I'll split it 50/50 with you if you don't punch me' is a fair and lasting solution? No, no it isn't. You need to smash the bully in the face, get them in a head lock, and smash their head into a wall a few times. If you need to get a burly friend to help or do it for you, well that's still better.

 

[Tams]

They are getting a bargain. The same was said about arming the Afghans against the Soviets. The problem is that everything has repercussions and we don't know at the moment what these are. I guess the immediate is that the war is being prolonged and hundreds of thousands more will die. It would also be naive to predict the geopolitical future. Nobody knows what's going to happen.

A poor analogy.

Arming the Mujahedeen was done 'covertly' and the Mujahedeen had almost no affinity to the US other than a shared desire to remove the Soviets from power.

Ukrainians are much more culturally aligned with the West. I'd go so far as to say they are 'Western' now. They have the usual significant issues of an ex-Soviet state, but they have left most of that in the past, especially since the invasion started.

 

[Liljagare]

Ukraine Receives New Air Defence Systems From Berlin​

Ukraine Receives New Air Defence Systems From Berlin

Germany provides Ukraine with new air defense systems .

www.kyivpost.com

Ukraine making progress in counteroffensive, U.S. officials say

One of the goals of the counteroffensive is to advance south through heavy Russian fortifications in a bid to reclaim occupied Melitopol – the gateway to Crimea.

www.cbsnews.com

5 people were killed, 42 people were injured (including 11 children) after the russian missile attack on Chernihiv.
The terrorists hit the Drama Theater.

https://www.rbc.ua/rus/news/raketniy-udar-chernigovu-42-lyudini-postrazhdali-1692439988.html

Just a kindly reminder to foreign colleagues - after WaPo article that according to US intelligence, chances for UA offensive are modest and the NYT article that UA might have lost 70K dead and 100-120K wounded.
Armistice will solve nothing.
The only thing any hypothetical armistice between UA and RU can do now is to add a major point of contention in UA internal politics - in other words, it would be another opening for RU to exploit with its influence operations toolbox.

"#Russia now claims to have destroyed 87 out of the 72 Krab SPGs delivered to Ukraine, and 260 out of the 183 M777 towed artillery pieces delivered to #Ukraine."

Counting is hard when you are drunk.

 

[delirium trigger]

It's far bigger than just Ukraine and you damn well know that.

We can't allow Russia to hold onto the territory it has stolen. We tried that (Georgia, Crimea) and it led to now.

NATO can't ignore it either, as the Baltic states are screaming at the rest of the organisation to do something, and now Finland is a member too. NATO has stepped up to those calls, to be fair.

I don't like analogies, but you seem to need one. If a bully keeps stealing your lunch money, do you think saying 'I'll split it 50/50 with you if you don't punch me' is a fair and lasting solution? No, no it isn't. You need to smash the bully in the face, get them in a head lock, and smash their head into a wall a few times. If you need to get a burly friend to help or do it for you, well that's still better.

Are these NATO troops in Crimea then?

 

[Tams]

Are these NATO troops in Crimea then?

Now you're just being an obtuse idiot.

 

[Madserb2023]

A poor analogy.

Arming the Mujahedeen was done 'covertly' and the Mujahedeen had almost no affinity to the US other than a shared desire to remove the Soviets from power.

Ukrainians are much more culturally aligned with the West. I'd go so far as to say they are 'Western' now. They have the usual significant issues of an ex-Soviet state, but they have left most of that in the past, especially since the invasion started.

That was not the point I was making. I am not implying that Ukraine will turn their weapons on us. I would caution projecting Western views on them though. It's still a very Conservative/Religious country like most of Eastern Europe . I was simply implying that no one knows what the long term outcome of this war will be. Very few things in this world have zero cons. There is always a price. If there is a reason for hesitation, it's not because of cowardice it's because more intelligent people than any of us are looking at this.

 

[BlackTron]

So how are you going to get the Russians to leave? Are you going to head to the frontlines and politely ask them to exit Ukraine?

You guys are also forgetting that support for arming Ukraine is at an all time low in the U.S. According to the latest polls only 45% of Americans think the U.S. should continue sending them weapons.

I wonder what percentage of Americans wanted to go and smash Hitler? I recall the USA seeing the antics in the European theater as a largely foreign problem and not giving a shit enough to do anything. Unless we are just going to wait until Putin has invaded multiple countries and set up concentration camps. If you compromise and cede territory every time they get spicy, then you're rewarding Russia's bad behavior with a consistent pattern, and asking for more invasions later. Do you want to brush up on history and come back to the thread?

That is clearly going to be a hot topic going into the elections next year, and regardless of which side ends up winning there is little chance the same level of support will continue for very long afterwards.

Regardless of how political they make the issue, the decisions of how to actually manage military decisions at the highest levels are unlikely to be severely impacted. They might dress it up for the public to digest it, but it's for their tacticians and bean counters to decide, not us. Remember, US considers Russia a problem and liability and the fact is that its given the chance to severely weaken it for, as they've been saying, pennies on the dollar, by proxy. If you think Biden, who can't even talk straight, made this decision all by himself...lol.

Unless Ukraine has some kind of ace up their sleeve nobody knows about, time is very much on Russia's side in this conflict.

There is literally an entire world (minus China) of possibilities that could happen aside from having an ace.

That was not the point I was making. I am not implying that Ukraine will turn their weapons on us. I would caution projecting Western views on them though. It's still a very Conservative/Religious country like most of Eastern Europe . I was simply implying that no one knows what the long term outcome of this war will be. Very few things in this world have zero cons. There is always a price. If there is a reason for hesitation, it's not because of cowardice it's because more intelligent people than any of us are looking at this.

We are already suffering a con of the war: thousands of lives lost of innocent Ukrainian soldiers who should be alive today, who died defending their homeland. I'll even include the lives of hapless Russians thrown into a meatgrinder without a choice. OK there are cons. You made your point. There are cons no matter what. We are already grappling with really horrible cons. Now let's look at some of the cons of not taking a stand: Russia invades your entire country, kidnaps all your children and and rapes all the women. Due to an unknown con that MIGHT happen, stop arming the Ukrainians! Because intelligent people think ahead! DURRR

 

[Liljagare]

Frontline report: Ukraine forces repel Russian advances, dealing heavy blows to modern tanks - Euromaidan Press

As Ukrainian forces thwart Russian advances in Klishchiyivka and Andriyivka, their effective defense and destruction of advanced T-90M tanks mark a significant tactical victory, potentially altering the course of the war.

euromaidanpress.com

Thats a nice blow to the RuSSkies.



Currently 68 diplomatic ongoing missions.

 

[Stitch]

Americans say Ukraine won’t achieve its goals… because Americans won’t give them what they need to do it.

Thanks Americans!

turn on subtitles

 

[TwinB242]

I wonder what percentage of Americans wanted to go and smash Hitler? I recall the USA seeing the antics in the European theater as a largely foreign problem and not giving a shit enough to do anything. Unless we are just going to wait until Putin has invaded multiple countries and set up concentration camps. If you compromise and cede territory every time they get spicy, then you're rewarding Russia's bad behavior with a consistent pattern, and asking for more invasions later. Do you want to brush up on history and come back to the thread?



Regardless of how political they make the issue, the decisions of how to actually manage military decisions at the highest levels are unlikely to be severely impacted. They might dress it up for the public to digest it, but it's for their tacticians and bean counters to decide, not us. Remember, US considers Russia a problem and liability and the fact is that its given the chance to severely weaken it for, as they've been saying, pennies on the dollar, by proxy. If you think Biden, who can't even talk straight, made this decision all by himself...lol.



There is literally an entire world (minus China) of possibilities that could happen aside from having an ace.



We are already suffering a con of the war: thousands of lives lost of innocent Ukrainian soldiers who should be alive today, who died defending their homeland. I'll even include the lives of hapless Russians thrown into a meatgrinder without a choice. OK there are cons. You made your point. There are cons no matter what. We are already grappling with really horrible cons. Now let's look at some of the cons of not taking a stand: Russia invades your entire country, kidnaps all your children and and rapes all the women. Due to an unknown con that MIGHT happen, stop arming the Ukrainians! Because intelligent people think ahead! DURRR

The WW2 comparison does not work here. USA had plenty of reasons to get directly involved in the European theater and they had a significant effect on its outcome. But there is no chance they will get directly involved in this war. And you do not have much of an idea of how U.S. politics work if you think supporting Ukraine in the war indefinitely is possible if there is limited support for that back at home. Hell, just look at how many presidential candidates are openly speaking about cutting aid. Before that type of thing would fall on deaf ears but its starting to resonate with more and more of the populace, especially in the last 2 months given Ukraine's limited success on the front.

 

[tommolb]

The WW2 comparison does not work here. USA had plenty of reasons to get directly involved in the European theater and they had a significant effect on its outcome. But there is no chance they will get directly involved in this war. And you do not have much of an idea of how U.S. politics work if you think supporting Ukraine in the war indefinitely is possible if there is limited support for that back at home. Hell, just look at how many presidential candidates are openly speaking about cutting aid. Before that type of thing would fall on deaf ears but its starting to resonate with more and more of the populace, especially in the last 2 months given Ukraine's limited success on the front.

I'll add in here an important fact.; RUSSIA DOES NOT WANT TO NEGOTIATE.
Talk that Ukraine should open negotiations misses this important point. Russia wants total Ukrainian surrender, nothing less.
This total surrender might take the form of; Ukraine must remain neutral i.e. it cannot join the EU and cannot join NATO. Russian minorities in Ukraine must have "special rights". Russian keeps all it's land, plus gets all the land in Ukraine it has "claimed" but doesn't occupy. Ukraine cannot have a Navy, it cannot have an army greater than 50,000 troops, cannot buy NATO weaponry, cannot station any troops within 500 miles of the Russian border. Ukraine cannot sign any international deals within Russian approval etc.

The second important point; RUSSIA CANNOT BE TRUSTED.
Even if Russia did enter negotiations, any promises made by Russia to not attack again would be meaningless. They gave these promises back in the 90's and they've invaded twice since then.

What is clear is that Europe MUST consider a future state of the US withdrawing all support for Ukraine and step up, rearm and prepare for a future of facing Russia without American support (but that's probably going off topic).

 

[BlackTron]

The WW2 comparison does not work here. USA had plenty of reasons to get directly involved in the European theater and they had a significant effect on its outcome. But there is no chance they will get directly involved in this war. And you do not have much of an idea of how U.S. politics work if you think supporting Ukraine in the war indefinitely is possible if there is limited support for that back at home.

There was limited support for the US to get involved in WW2 as well, it was just a matter of time until they became a big enough problem for us to get directly involved. It appears that you are only seeing the differences from WW2 -not the similarities. It's almost staggering that you could not see the similarity of ceding territory to Putin with the appeasement policy of Chamberlain which led to further Nazi expansion. It literally already happened when they took Crimea, now they are back for more, and getting another piece. It will never stop. Any "negotiations" are worthless.

This time, we have the benefit of recent history being so glaringly obvious with its parallels, so that we can try to nip it in the bud earlier than later, so it doesn't need to hit such critical mass due to our own blunders first.

 

[Madserb2023]

I wonder what percentage of Americans wanted to go and smash Hitler? I recall the USA seeing the antics in the European theater as a largely foreign problem and not giving a shit enough to do anything. Unless we are just going to wait until Putin has invaded multiple countries and set up concentration camps. If you compromise and cede territory every time they get spicy, then you're rewarding Russia's bad behavior with a consistent pattern, and asking for more invasions later. Do you want to brush up on history and come back to the thread?



Regardless of how political they make the issue, the decisions of how to actually manage military decisions at the highest levels are unlikely to be severely impacted. They might dress it up for the public to digest it, but it's for their tacticians and bean counters to decide, not us. Remember, US considers Russia a problem and liability and the fact is that its given the chance to severely weaken it for, as they've been saying, pennies on the dollar, by proxy. If you think Biden, who can't even talk straight, made this decision all by himself...lol.



There is literally an entire world (minus China) of possibilities that could happen aside from having an ace.



We are already suffering a con of the war: thousands of lives lost of innocent Ukrainian soldiers who should be alive today, who died defending their homeland. I'll even include the lives of hapless Russians thrown into a meatgrinder without a choice. OK there are cons. You made your point. There are cons no matter what. We are already grappling with really horrible cons. Now let's look at some of the cons of not taking a stand: Russia invades your entire country, kidnaps all your children and and rapes all the women. Due to an unknown con that MIGHT happen, stop arming the Ukrainians! Because intelligent people think ahead! DURRR

I am not arguing with the premise of what you are saying and from Ukraine's point of view that makes sense. The issue and what is obviously being considered and you can see this by the reaction to the offensive Is the outcome relative to the input. This does matter because people's lives matter and we don't think like the Russians. By arming Ukraine we are prolonging the war and as a result a lot more Ukrainians will die. Imagine a situation where the number of Ukrainian casualties double or triple but they still don't push the Russians out. That is what is being considered. The difference is that Nato has ruled out putting troops on the ground so this isn't like fighting the Nazis. If arming the Ukrainians won't do it, there is no next step and that seems to be forgotten.

 

[BlackTron]

I am not arguing with the premise of what you are saying and from Ukraine's point of view that makes sense. The issue and what is obviously being considered and you can see this by the reaction to the offensive Is the outcome relative to the input. This does matter because people's lives matter and we don't think like the Russians. By arming Ukraine we are prolonging the war and as a result a lot more Ukrainians will die. Imagine a situation where the number of Ukrainian casualties double or triple but they still don't push the Russians out. That is what is being considered. The difference is that Nato has ruled out putting troops on the ground so this isn't like fighting the Nazis. If arming the Ukrainians won't do it, there is no next step and that seems to be forgotten.

The issue here is that the Ukrainians have not been armed sufficiently to take a victory that minimizes casualties. Thing is, even if we decide to stop and negotiate because we can't take it anymore, the inevitable result is just more problems in the future and more war -more casualties from further Russian aggression.

I don't see what is stopping Russia from conquering more of Ukraine after supposedly "settling" with this piece of the country. There is a reason so many Ukrainians want to take a stand here and now -they aren't as naive as Americans. It would make sense to arm them to the teeth right now, but even barring that, they would rather fight to the last man than negotiate. They know that, if they acquiesce to Russia, the enemy will be back in short order anyway for round two -excuse me, round three.

If Ukraine is unsuccessful in pushing out Russia with 3x the casualties, then the blame falls squarely on America for dragging their feet and throwing Ukraine (and the world) under the bus by making it a self-serving attrition contest to get it done for the lowest number of pennies instead of taking a decisive victory for the world against Hitler 2.0. But ceding territory to Russia is not a way out of stemming Ukrainian losses. It's a way out of the immediate uncomfortable conversation. They will be back and 10x as angry to kill whoever is left anyway because we will have just given them a big message that they can get away with it over and over again. Maybe America will pull support to stem casualties and then Russia will feign compliance until the timing is right to come back, wiping out everyone left. Are we going to act like we didn't see it?

 

[Tams]

I am not arguing with the premise of what you are saying and from Ukraine's point of view that makes sense. The issue and what is obviously being considered and you can see this by the reaction to the offensive Is the outcome relative to the input. This does matter because people's lives matter and we don't think like the Russians. By arming Ukraine we are prolonging the war and as a result a lot more Ukrainians will die. Imagine a situation where the number of Ukrainian casualties double or triple but they still don't push the Russians out. That is what is being considered. The difference is that Nato has ruled out putting troops on the ground so this isn't like fighting the Nazis. If arming the Ukrainians won't do it, there is no next step and that seems to be forgotten.

And if Ukraine stop trying to take back territory, what do you think Russia will do?

On top of having a modern history of invading others to take territory, they have a stated aim to take back more, and on top of all that also feel like they are the victims here and want revenge.

What you propose would almost certainly see a further Russian invasion, and also more dead people, likely more civilians, and Ukraine (and possibly others) losing even more territory.

And that's not even touching on what kind of message it would send to the PRC.

 

[Madserb2023]

The issue here is that the Ukrainians have not been armed sufficiently to take a victory that minimizes casualties. Thing is, even if we decide to stop and negotiate because we can't take it anymore, the inevitable result is just more problems in the future and more war -more casualties from further Russian aggression.

I don't see what is stopping Russia from conquering more of Ukraine after supposedly "settling" with this piece of the country. There is a reason so many Ukrainians want to take a stand here and now -they aren't as naive as Americans. It would make sense to arm them to the teeth right now, but even barring that, they would rather fight to the last man than negotiate. They know that, if they acquiesce to Russia, the enemy will be back in short order anyway for round two -excuse me, round three.

If Ukraine is unsuccessful in pushing out Russia with 3x the casualties, then the blame falls squarely on America for dragging their feet and throwing Ukraine (and the world) under the bus by making it a self-serving attrition contest to get it done for the lowest number of pennies instead of taking a decisive victory for the world against Hitler 2.0. But ceding territory to Russia is not a way out of stemming Ukrainian losses. It's a way out of the immediate uncomfortable conversation. They will be back and 10x as angry to kill whoever is left anyway because we will have just given them a big message that they can get away with it over and over again. Maybe America will pull support to stem casualties and then Russia will feign compliance until the timing is right to come back, wiping out everyone left. Are we going to act like we didn't see it?

The problem is that the first point you make is not fact. Never heard a single military official claim that there is a way to equip them to a point where they can minimize casualties. You always will lose far more troops when on the attack. There is no certainty that long range missiles or planes will push the Russians out. This has been stated many times. It might but it could also make no difference. This is what is being assessed right now. When we give Ukraine weapons, we are increasing their casualties because it allows them to go on the offensive. People disconnect the two as if people aren't involved. Planes will be shot down and tanks will be destroyed. What we are trying to avoid is Ukraine losing 50,000 for a village or two. The Russians can if they want. That's why the narrative has changed from pushing the Russians out to degrading the Russian military but how many Ukrainians is that worth. Even the Ukrainians went against NATO'S strategy to minimize lives. It's easy because we're not dying.