I like Duda's statements a lot. Nobody should backdown from Russia and nobody should give up their sovereignty. Ukrainians are willing to fight for it; the West should be willing to give them support.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
Best the West can do is strongly worded letters about being concerned and alarmed, a few sanctions and not imposing new restrictions on Ukraine's use of weapons if North Korea joins war.
I’m sure they’ll win the war and return Russia to former Soviet glory soon. Just around the corner!
I wonder how many lives is too many lives for Putin?
The day men from Moscow and SPB are getting shoved in vans and brought to the military registration office is the day we can all begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel for this conflict. It must be men from exactly those 2 cities that being to get drafted. Nowhere else matters except for there. Certainly not poor villagers from Siberia or North Koreans.
If/when men from those 2 cities begin getting plucked off the streets, russian society might actually begin to think this is a bit much and push back.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
Anders Puck Nielsen with an excellent summary on how Ukraine thinks about the war and what needs to happen for it to end, highly recommended.
Main point: Ukraine is ready to negotiate on soil, but it doesn't feel like it can stop fighting the war unless there's some guarantee that Russia won't use the break in fighting to just build up a new army and try again.
Which for them means either building their own nukes, or NATO protection.
The intensity of artillery fire from russian invasion forces in Ukraine has significantly decreased following a series of drone strikes on large ammunition depots inside russian territory, according to Lieutenant General Ivan Havryliuk, First Deputy Minister of Defense of Ukraine.
In an interview with#RBC-Ukraine, Havryliuk revealed that the current artillery fire ratio between Ukrainian and russian forces is about 1:2. This marks an improvement from early summer 2024, when the ratio was 1:3, and even more so compared to the beginning of the year, when the ratio heavily favored russia at 1:7, 1:8, or worse.
The above is really good news for Ukraine, as the Russian way of war is so dependent on artillery superiority.
Quote:
In September 2024, Russian forces recorded an average of#1,271 casualties per day, the highest since the start of the conflict. This surge in losses, surpassing the previous record set in May 2024, is attributed to expanded combat zones in Kharkiv and Kursk and the high-density front lines where fierce fighting is ongoing.
Quote:
Russian forces are still making slow tactical advances, particularly in the eastern regions. However, these gains are limited by a range of issues, including high attrition rates, logistical challenges, and officer shortages.
Casualties are of course high in both sides right now.
However: rising Russian casualty rates is something to look out for when trying to find signs that Russia is starting to run short in equipment. After all, throwing more meat to the grinder is a classic Russian way to make up for... well anything and everything.
Last edited by Itse; 10-30-2024 at 03:46 AM.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
Not sure if any of you keep an eye on the flow of videos running through Funker530 but there's one today the russians released with the gear and bodies of several members of a unit they hit in Bryansk; an international team comprised at least of US, Polish and Canadian members. Looks like at least two Canadian KIA.
Saw a thread on reddit about a recent article in the Economist, but the article is locked down to subscribers only. The comments in that thread paint a very different picture from what I've been reading in my feeds and on here.
Ukraine is now struggling to cling on, not to win
Russia is slicing through Ukrainian defences in parts of the battlefield
Quote:
“AFTER 970 days of war,” said Lloyd Austin, America’s defence secretary, visiting Kyiv on October 21st, “Putin has not achieved one single strategic objective.” And Mr Austin offered confidence: “Moscow will never prevail in Ukraine.” In private, however, his colleagues in the Pentagon, Western officials and many Ukrainian commanders are increasingly worried about the direction of the war and Ukraine’s ability to hold back Russian advances over the next six months.
There has been positional losses in Donbas, but there is no strategic breakthrough and at the rate Russia advances they will need a hundred years. They still have no prospect of actually occupying the country.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to burn_this_city For This Useful Post:
There has been positional losses in Donbas, but there is no strategic breakthrough and at the rate Russia advances they will need a hundred years. They still have no prospect of actually occupying the country.
It's probably going to come down to which society can hold on the longest. It will be won or lost at the street level and not on the battlefield. The military victories and defeats obviously play a part in that, but it's not the whole part.
It's a lot harder on Ukrainian society due to the vast majority of the attacks and virtually all the civilian losses being on their soil. On the other hand while Russian society isn't witnessing the horrors, they could start tire of it because many people in Russia might not see the value in it like Ukrainians whose existence depends on resisting.
I wonder what happens if Putin dies before it is over. There are other hardliners in Russia who could take over, but none of them have the hold over the country, and specifically the oligarchs like Putin has. A lot of powerful people in Russia are losing money over this war and if they choose not to support Putin's successor, it could stop the whole thing.
Ukrainian society could start to crack as well though. Some Ukrainians particularly in the western part of the country, could start to wonder if keeping territories that have been ethnically cleansed of Ukrainians is worth it in the long run. If you welcome those Russian settlers back into the Ukrainian body politic, it just perpetuates a vector for Russian influence in Ukraine, and probably future conflict. In the past, the solution would be to take the territory back with such force that you do the same thing to the enemy population that they did to you at the start of the war to balance it out. Modern sensibilities do not reconcile with that concept anymore though, but it used to be the way to achieve long term peace. Nowadays the approach is to just kick the problem down the road and hope that "peace keepers" can keep it in check even if the regions don't function well.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
It's probably going to come down to which society can hold on the longest. It will be won or lost at the street level and not on the battlefield. The military victories and defeats obviously play a part in that, but it's not the whole part.
It's a lot harder on Ukrainian society due to the vast majority of the attacks and virtually all the civilian losses being on their soil. On the other hand while Russian society isn't witnessing the horrors, they could start tire of it because many people in Russia might not see the value in it like Ukrainians whose existence depends on resisting.
I wonder what happens if Putin dies before it is over. There are other hardliners in Russia who could take over, but none of them have the hold over the country, and specifically the oligarchs like Putin has. A lot of powerful people in Russia are losing money over this war and if they choose not to support Putin's successor, it could stop the whole thing.
Ukrainian society could start to crack as well though. Some Ukrainians particularly in the western part of the country, could start to wonder if keeping territories that have been ethnically cleansed of Ukrainians is worth it in the long run. If you welcome those Russian settlers back into the Ukrainian body politic, it just perpetuates a vector for Russian influence in Ukraine, and probably future conflict. In the past, the solution would be to take the territory back with such force that you do the same thing to the enemy population that they did to you at the start of the war to balance it out. Modern sensibilities do not reconcile with that concept anymore though, but it used to be the way to achieve long term peace. Nowadays the approach is to just kick the problem down the road and hope that "peace keepers" can keep it in check even if the regions don't function well.
I think the war ends if Putin dies, for all the reasons you stated. Different factions will be too busy fighting for a share of the power to even care about Ukraine. And whoever ends the conflict likely becomes super popular in Russia, and probably endears himself to the West too. Might begin the long road to normalizing relations again.
I am about as pro Ukraine as it but you can tell that the west is beyond strategically confused as to what to actually do here. They don't appear to really have a plan. Just today it is being reported that that massive aid package from the US that was delayed and delayed, has delivered just 10% of what was promised. https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-...zelensky-says/
Delays with fighter jets from all countries who promised, delays with firepower, equipment and more from countries like Canada. A still shocking lack of air defense nearly 3 years into this crisis. You hear concerns and criticisms from Zelensky and I think he may even be more confused, promises here and there, all these visits from heads of state, talks of forever support but on the ground it's a challenging situation.
It's too much dithering and not enough actual planning. If the west wants Ukraine to actually win, then let them try with everything we have within reason. If the west doesn't want to piss off Russia too much for fear of escalation, then they better have a backup plan for what the other parties in the group have in store for the west. America, the west, Israel and other western friendly countries and allies like NATO have been calling the shots for a long time. They want to flip the script and starting dictating to us what is going to be happening from now on, their finger is going to be on the scale in their favor going forward, not the way it has been for a long time.
It's very frustrating in a lot of ways and I get the complications part of things but let's get real with these conflicts, they can get solved very quickly if there was actual will to get things resolved. As with everything else, it's the small, selective few who call the shots and the rest of the crumbs of society pay the price in blood and in costs throughout the world.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to curves2000 For This Useful Post:
Been saying it for a while, but pretty apparent there is no plan. A concept of one perhaps, but no real plan. I think the original plan was that once the petroleum revenue was in jeopardy there was hope that russia would see it wasn't worth it to continue and would select money over imperialism. Instead, all russia had to do was pivot to other countries and use intermediary countries to continue to sell to the EU.
Literal NK soldiers invading Europe and barely a whisper from the EU or NATO. I supposed we should be happy we at least got the classic strongly worded statements, but even those were lacklustre at best.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
Been saying it for a while, but pretty apparent there is no plan. A concept of one perhaps, but no real plan. I think the original plan was that once the petroleum revenue was in jeopardy there was hope that russia would see it wasn't worth it to continue and would select money over imperialism. Instead, all russia had to do was pivot to other countries and use intermediary countries to continue to sell to the EU.
Literal NK soldiers invading Europe and barely a whisper from the EU or NATO. I supposed we should be happy we at least got the classic strongly worded statements, but even those were lacklustre at best.
I think the "plan" from the west was probably that they expected Donbas/Crimea to fall and be integrated into Russia. A new border would be drawn and all the defensive weapons that were donated would be used to deter future conflict after the new borders were drawn.
I think western leaders were surprised that Ukraine fought with the heart that it did so now they don't know what to do.
I am about as pro Ukraine as it but you can tell that the west is beyond strategically confused as to what to actually do here. They don't appear to really have a plan. Just today it is being reported that that massive aid package from the US that was delayed and delayed, has delivered just 10% of what was promised. https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-...zelensky-says/
Delays with fighter jets from all countries who promised, delays with firepower, equipment and more from countries like Canada. A still shocking lack of air defense nearly 3 years into this crisis. You hear concerns and criticisms from Zelensky and I think he may even be more confused, promises here and there, all these visits from heads of state, talks of forever support but on the ground it's a challenging situation.
It's too much dithering and not enough actual planning. If the west wants Ukraine to actually win, then let them try with everything we have within reason. If the west doesn't want to piss off Russia too much for fear of escalation, then they better have a backup plan for what the other parties in the group have in store for the west. America, the west, Israel and other western friendly countries and allies like NATO have been calling the shots for a long time. They want to flip the script and starting dictating to us what is going to be happening from now on, their finger is going to be on the scale in their favor going forward, not the way it has been for a long time.
It's very frustrating in a lot of ways and I get the complications part of things but let's get real with these conflicts, they can get solved very quickly if there was actual will to get things resolved. As with everything else, it's the small, selective few who call the shots and the rest of the crumbs of society pay the price in blood and in costs throughout the world.
I wasn't aware, but apparently Zelenskiyy is upset after he submitted some plan to the west recently and in the plan it included the US giving Ukraine some long-range ballistics (I assume capable of striking Moscow from Ukraine). The US will not be giving these to Ukraine given the risk of escalation if Ukraine were to launch on Russian cities.
Jets are rate-limited by type-certified pilots. Ward Carroll's youtube channel has some good videos on the topic including a great recent interview with Justin Bronk that touches on the subject: https://youtu.be/_QXzCL-93UE?si=HejkpPsmcFYb7wyN
I wasn't aware, but apparently Zelenskiyy is upset after he submitted some plan to the west recently and in the plan it included the US giving Ukraine some long-range ballistics (I assume capable of striking Moscow from Ukraine). The US will not be giving these to Ukraine given the risk of escalation if Ukraine were to launch on Russian cities.
Essentially it's Zelensky laying out what military support Ukraine needs to defeat Russia, and in return Ukraine's partners will have a share in their natural resources and save money on overseas military spending (that last aimed directly at the US).
I've read that the "invitation to NATO" is not the same as "acceptance to NATO", just the first step in Ukraine one day joining.
Quote:
Zelensky said three other “secret annexes” to his plan exist, including one related to his deterrence strategy
I've read that one of the secret annexes is Ukraine will pursue nuclear weapons if his victory plan doesn't garner support. So, "help us defeat Russia, or..."
The Following User Says Thank You to BloodFetish For This Useful Post:
Essentially it's Zelensky laying out what military support Ukraine needs to defeat Russia, and in return Ukraine's partners will have a share in their natural resources and save money on overseas military spending (that last aimed directly at the US).
I've read that the "invitation to NATO" is not the same as "acceptance to NATO", just the first step in Ukraine one day joining.
I've read that one of the secret annexes is Ukraine will pursue nuclear weapons if his victory plan doesn't garner support. So, "help us defeat Russia, or..."
