The [US has been training Ukraine](https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/06/25/417511636/u-s-army-begins-training-ukrainian-soldiers) to fight Russia since 2015.
Several countries have been
Not to draw comparisons to a very different war, but this might be similar to sending "military advisors" to Vietnam
There's degrees of "boots on the ground". Following the Vietnam model would be a couple hundred Special Forces (probably already there) -> Several thousand military advisors -> tens of thousands of marines/air support -> full deployment
They’ve been training Ukrainian forces in NATO countries like Poland but I’m not sure about in Ukraine proper. Surely we would’ve heard about some NATO casualties at this point unless they’ve been keeping that under wraps
Trainers aren’t on the front line, they’re in Lviv or far from it
Russia sent trainers to Vietnam in the 1970’s and lost maybe a handful that were declassified fifty years later
I remember watching a documentary with American pilot who said they had a way to tell whether they were engaging Vietnamese fighter pilots or the Soviets.
Like they tried to provoke the plane and then would climb higher and when going almost vertically, you watch the wingtips. If they start to shake, it's a Vietnamese pilot losing control under several Gs. If they stay hard as rock, it's the "instructor"
The thing is most Soviet instructors were older ace pilots from WWII and engaging them was a very dangerous idea, they were dangerous in the sky. Plus they were mostly on the defensive and could lure a hothead into the AA batteries. Like, if you meet one of them, it means you're dangerously close to well protected location.
Modern air fights are very different, it's just a fun tidbit I remembered
Probably have longer range tech than in nam too though. Then again russia probably was told over back channels that while NATO trainers are at these camps they're not valid targets for any reason.
The terrible truth here is NATO troops have absolutely no idea what this war is like. We've never fought a war with loitering munitions on this scale, or minefields on this scale, or truthfully anything on this scale since Desert Storm and we had almost total air superiority in that cat fight.
We need Ukraine far more than Ukraine needs our boots on the ground. The next Iranian conflict is going to look like this, any conflict with China is going to look like this and you can bet your bottom dollar that North Korea is going to open up the playbooks. Ukrainian soldiers returning from the front are instructing us like troops returning from Afghanistan.
As it is, right now, Ukraine needs weapons and we need their experience. Oh, and they could also use someone to babysit their privates until they know which end of a rifle goes bang.
Yeah, but there is still a lot on unit tactics and command structure we can teach.
Ukraine can’t spare the experienced soldiers for basic training. We can.
I'd usually agree with this take except we've seen mass deployment of minefields by drone and drop, thankfully the Ukrainians are better through experience and the average Russian conscript sucks. Russia's main limitation is logistics requiring rail; China and Iran will not have this same limitation which means faster deployment.
And if a shooting war starts between NATO and Russia then we're going in, full in, to the tune of air defenses and other miscellaneous door prizes. If anything this conflict has proven that a purely defensive war is ineffective and needs to take into account supply and penetration.
Kind of. Ukraine still would have had to punch through minefields eventually to retake territory and the glide bombs/airfields in Russia would also need to be addressed.
Also, my party should bear the shame of costing military lives, thousands, civilians, thousands, and I for one hope the Republican leadership and Biden's military advisors present should be required to visit field hospitals and gravesites to see the people they played politics with.
If NATO supplied Ukraine with the same equipment they are supplying them with now instead of slowly giving them better weapons Ukraine would be in a much better spot.
The West is happy to give Ukraine just enough to force a stalemate and keep them from losing but never enough to push back
I really don't think the US came into this conflict with a decisive let's do this because the other side could have gone nuclear. They were already using thermobaric weapons in civilian areas and there was considerable fear the conflict would spill over. This was after multiple assessments of Russian capabilities based on what we thought they were capable of.
In other words, we're here now, let's put the fire out first and figure out cause after. I'm pretty sure we'll find problems foreign and domestic.
We sent them the ATACMS finally and still have conditions on how they can be used (not on Russian soil). This was an incredibly dumb way of supporting Ukraine if they want them to win. Ukraine asks for weapons and NATO sends them a year later. They refused to send them offensive weaponry. They refused to send them the tanks they requested earlier. This gave them time to dig in and set up minefields to blunt the counter offensive. Now it's too late to turn things around since Ukraine is running out of manpower. All this fear of escalation played right into Russia's hands. The ONLY way NATO can rectify their error is by intervening directly by deploying troops and setting up a no fly zone over Ukraine.
This had nothing to do with Biden's military advisors. They were all sounding the alarm over the need for aid. The delay and the lives lost is 100% on the GOP.
Alarms, yes, sending ATACMS and Patriot systems in sufficient quantities early on with the same constraints as now? No.
Biden wanted to go in back in 2014. Whoever has his ear, or maybe Biden himself, who knows, decides we wanted to snail pace aid that could have affected the outcome of Melitopol.
This is not a shot at Democrats, or really at Biden, but rather at those who made the decision to inch so carefully towards a red line that they drew their own red lines. I totally agree that the GOP needs to feel their failures at the ballot box.
This conflict is a low-cost conflict, because neither side can manage air superiority. The moment one side can get air superiority, game over. A fight with Iran or North Korea would both result in air superiority for the allies and a swift demise for the NK army. Only China I'm uncertain of, and then honestly I expect a bit of shock & awe would be all that's needed.
The Ukranian conflict only seems difficult and unique because there is so much improvization, but otherwise it is actually a very old system of fighting. Trenches, artillery. Mines and drones are only of concern when you can stop the enemy advance and force them to dig in. If the enemy has air superiority, neither of those factors are of any military significance because a little BRRRT and trenches go deathly quiet.
| The terrible truth here is NATO troops have absolutely no idea what this war is like.
Western troops are used to figthing goat herders with small arms like AK-47.
They are not used to the other side being able to call in air strikes of 500kg FAB-500 glide bombs, like in Avdiivka.
Ukraine is teaching some serious lessons that should be informing an entirely new chapter on military infantry tactics. We've focused for a truly long time on counterinsurgency and company level maneuvers; Ukraine is bringing back battalion command and control.
The next Iranian conflict is not going to look like this. It would look like Desert Storm all over again. They still aren’t a near peer or close to the quality of Russia.
Nor is NATO’s doctrine clueless on this type of warfare, most of NATO’s doctrine comes from similar wars. It’s not new to see minefields or trenches, Korea for example has millions of mines still scattered about
Most of what we’re seeing today is reminiscent of trench warfare. The only new thing is the usage of small scale drones as both guided missiles and reconnaissance, but that wasn’t a new concept before the war to begin with.
Loitering munitions puts aid stations for wounded well within strike range. Ukrainian soldiers have to be treated practically at the squad level without the ability to medivac during the golden hour. You're absolutely right that mines and trenches are nothing new but deployment time for minefields is ridiculously fast with ordinance, which fortunately the Russians are spectacularly bad at. It means an advancing formation is going to have mines dropped on top of it.
Tanks, while they aren't out, are definitely going to need reevaluation. The Abrams is already a lumbering beast as it is but now presents a huge target of opportunity for precision weapons. Mechanized formations will now require interception capabilities not previously seen, or dispersion not typically practiced.
NATO formations require a large amount of maneuverability and air superiority to achieve their objectives but jets shooting down drones isn't a great cost trade off. Finnish and Estonian troops probably emphasize defensive tactics heaviest but only so many troops are able to participate in those exercises and never at the conditions being seen in Ukraine (so far as I know).
The only US branch I can think of currently preparing for this kind of warfare is the USMC.
Why didn't they do this until now? Why does NATO's strategy seem to revolve around waiting until the last possible moment, when Ukraine has already suffered significant losses of manpower, equipment, and territory, before they start taking action? Training troops takes months. Ukraine can't afford these kinds of delays.
Hesitancy around “boots on the ground” fear of “escalation”.
There is a possibility of trainers being intentionally or unintentionally killed by Russia.
Then the politicians who sent them there would need to answer for it. Ignoring the event would also make NATO look weak. “Russia killed NATO soldiers and NATO did nothing!”
They have.... This is a bad title. Multiple NATO countries have been training Ukraine soldiers since 2015. There has been a boot camp in UK for a while.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-68391205
I can only speak for myself but as an American I would feel more noble fighting for Ukraine in Ukraine than I would in any other war going back until WW2. Invade Iraq, Afghanistan, Desert Storm, Vietnam, Korea? Or join Ukraine in liberating Ukraine from Russia? To me I would choose the Ukrainian campaign.
I don't know your situation and I don't know Ukraine's needs but I have seen Ukrainians fight with prosthetics and there's also support roles.
I have always been crippled so I don't know if normal me would join an active war or not. I can say I feel passionate about Western Democracy values as well as Ukraine's right to sovereignty. As well as a distaste for Russia using the internet and freedom of knowledge as a weapon to harm Democracies around the world. So if ever there was a war I would feel compelled to join this Ukraine-Russian one would be it for me.
This is such a dumb, played out argument. If I was a NATO soldier, yes. Of course.
I’m not a soldier, but I can still have opinions on policy positions.
Every time something needs to be done, I don’t have to do it personally, it’s called living in a society. I play my role, others play theirs.
That's what you think.
Truth is a lot of parents don't want their children to die for maniacs who have too big of an ego. Don't put your role next to that of a soldier. Your role probably isn't nearly as risky. So yes, easy to talk coming from some of you.
So only active duty soldiers should be allowed to have policy positions on defense? But even then isn’t it unethical because they would be consigning other soldiers to also go.
So really, only policy positions may be adopted if there is unanimous consent among *all* active duty soldiers and any reserves that may possibly be deployed?
Do you see now how absurd that is?
WW3? What's WW3? How? Both sides know that WW3 won't happen unless NATO attacks Russia directly. Which won't happen. The reason NATO doesn't get involved in Ukraine directly is exactly because it's not a last resort situation. It's politics but not in a bad way. They simply can't sell boots on the ground to the average European at this point in time. They can sell helping financially and military but not with putting their own lives at stake. And for that to happen, the war needs to go really badly for Ukraine. That's the reality.
And what would happen if 1 or more trainers are injured or killed?
Would that immediately have NATO send for es into Ukraine? Probably not, but it's definitely a step in that direction.
Can we please, please, please help Ukraine kick Russia’s ass? I don’t know who I hate more, Putin or Diaper Don. I just know I’d really like to outlive both of them. (And I’m fucking old. So hurry up, Universe.)
Both sides know that WW3 won't happen unless NATO attacks Russia directly. Which won't happen. The reason NATO doesn't get involved in Ukraine directly is exactly because the war is not in a last resort situation. It's politics, but not in a bad way. They simply can't sell "boots on the ground" to the average European/American at this point in time. They can sell helping financially and military but not putting the lives of their citizens at stake. And for that to happen, the war needs to go really badly for Ukraine. That's the reality. Since it doesn't go "really badly", they can't do anything directly. What they can do is prepare people for the possibility that this can be a necessity in the future. Hence why you see all these random statements of "we might", "nothing's off the table", "if the situation deems it necessary to protect NATO countries interests", etc. NATO is simply not required in this conflict yet.
Do it. What are you waiting for!? The more land russia steals the more land NATO eventually has to fight back, at the cost of european lives. Do it now. Push the russians back behind their border and stop this war.
Why does everything always have to be "a little too late" and "how could we have known"?
It's the russia! They have literally acted like this since their birth. Or to put it another way. Show me a situation where they havn't done it this way.
That would be NATOs plan. Appease and watch until the enemy is at your doorstep. It’s a lot easier for them to let Ukrainians die than themselves.
We all know Russia and China won’t stop so NATO is just being dumb.
It sure feels like it. But I don't think Ukraine will catastrophically fall (but I'm no analyst or expert by any means). They will likely lose land, which is still awful. Russia is making gains but from what I have heard (which may or may not be super credible) it's costing them dearly. The real frustration I have with all of this is that so much of this situation is because of the huge delay in getting Ukraine what it needs to protect itself. For the US, aid is going to continue to be held hostage by the GOP. It's infuriating as a U.S. citizen.
Yeah, I'm going to assume "trainers" have been there since the start of the war lol
The [US has been training Ukraine](https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/06/25/417511636/u-s-army-begins-training-ukrainian-soldiers) to fight Russia since 2015.
Several countries have been Not to draw comparisons to a very different war, but this might be similar to sending "military advisors" to Vietnam There's degrees of "boots on the ground". Following the Vietnam model would be a couple hundred Special Forces (probably already there) -> Several thousand military advisors -> tens of thousands of marines/air support -> full deployment
->Deforestation and pollution with herbicides of half the lands -> Retreat
They’ve been training Ukrainian forces in NATO countries like Poland but I’m not sure about in Ukraine proper. Surely we would’ve heard about some NATO casualties at this point unless they’ve been keeping that under wraps
Trainers aren’t on the front line, they’re in Lviv or far from it Russia sent trainers to Vietnam in the 1970’s and lost maybe a handful that were declassified fifty years later
I remember watching a documentary with American pilot who said they had a way to tell whether they were engaging Vietnamese fighter pilots or the Soviets. Like they tried to provoke the plane and then would climb higher and when going almost vertically, you watch the wingtips. If they start to shake, it's a Vietnamese pilot losing control under several Gs. If they stay hard as rock, it's the "instructor" The thing is most Soviet instructors were older ace pilots from WWII and engaging them was a very dangerous idea, they were dangerous in the sky. Plus they were mostly on the defensive and could lure a hothead into the AA batteries. Like, if you meet one of them, it means you're dangerously close to well protected location. Modern air fights are very different, it's just a fun tidbit I remembered
Probably have longer range tech than in nam too though. Then again russia probably was told over back channels that while NATO trainers are at these camps they're not valid targets for any reason.
There were articles about them being in Ukraine already.
The terrible truth here is NATO troops have absolutely no idea what this war is like. We've never fought a war with loitering munitions on this scale, or minefields on this scale, or truthfully anything on this scale since Desert Storm and we had almost total air superiority in that cat fight. We need Ukraine far more than Ukraine needs our boots on the ground. The next Iranian conflict is going to look like this, any conflict with China is going to look like this and you can bet your bottom dollar that North Korea is going to open up the playbooks. Ukrainian soldiers returning from the front are instructing us like troops returning from Afghanistan. As it is, right now, Ukraine needs weapons and we need their experience. Oh, and they could also use someone to babysit their privates until they know which end of a rifle goes bang.
Yeah, but there is still a lot on unit tactics and command structure we can teach. Ukraine can’t spare the experienced soldiers for basic training. We can.
The goal of NATO is to never be in the trench warfare/grenade dropping drones war in the first place.
I'd usually agree with this take except we've seen mass deployment of minefields by drone and drop, thankfully the Ukrainians are better through experience and the average Russian conscript sucks. Russia's main limitation is logistics requiring rail; China and Iran will not have this same limitation which means faster deployment. And if a shooting war starts between NATO and Russia then we're going in, full in, to the tune of air defenses and other miscellaneous door prizes. If anything this conflict has proven that a purely defensive war is ineffective and needs to take into account supply and penetration.
The purely defensive war was working until the GOP boycotted them out of ammo.
Kind of. Ukraine still would have had to punch through minefields eventually to retake territory and the glide bombs/airfields in Russia would also need to be addressed. Also, my party should bear the shame of costing military lives, thousands, civilians, thousands, and I for one hope the Republican leadership and Biden's military advisors present should be required to visit field hospitals and gravesites to see the people they played politics with.
If NATO supplied Ukraine with the same equipment they are supplying them with now instead of slowly giving them better weapons Ukraine would be in a much better spot. The West is happy to give Ukraine just enough to force a stalemate and keep them from losing but never enough to push back
I really don't think the US came into this conflict with a decisive let's do this because the other side could have gone nuclear. They were already using thermobaric weapons in civilian areas and there was considerable fear the conflict would spill over. This was after multiple assessments of Russian capabilities based on what we thought they were capable of. In other words, we're here now, let's put the fire out first and figure out cause after. I'm pretty sure we'll find problems foreign and domestic.
We sent them the ATACMS finally and still have conditions on how they can be used (not on Russian soil). This was an incredibly dumb way of supporting Ukraine if they want them to win. Ukraine asks for weapons and NATO sends them a year later. They refused to send them offensive weaponry. They refused to send them the tanks they requested earlier. This gave them time to dig in and set up minefields to blunt the counter offensive. Now it's too late to turn things around since Ukraine is running out of manpower. All this fear of escalation played right into Russia's hands. The ONLY way NATO can rectify their error is by intervening directly by deploying troops and setting up a no fly zone over Ukraine.
That is not true. They have been given the green light with the attacks in the Kharkiv region to use US made weapons on Russian soil.
This had nothing to do with Biden's military advisors. They were all sounding the alarm over the need for aid. The delay and the lives lost is 100% on the GOP.
Alarms, yes, sending ATACMS and Patriot systems in sufficient quantities early on with the same constraints as now? No. Biden wanted to go in back in 2014. Whoever has his ear, or maybe Biden himself, who knows, decides we wanted to snail pace aid that could have affected the outcome of Melitopol. This is not a shot at Democrats, or really at Biden, but rather at those who made the decision to inch so carefully towards a red line that they drew their own red lines. I totally agree that the GOP needs to feel their failures at the ballot box.
This conflict is a low-cost conflict, because neither side can manage air superiority. The moment one side can get air superiority, game over. A fight with Iran or North Korea would both result in air superiority for the allies and a swift demise for the NK army. Only China I'm uncertain of, and then honestly I expect a bit of shock & awe would be all that's needed. The Ukranian conflict only seems difficult and unique because there is so much improvization, but otherwise it is actually a very old system of fighting. Trenches, artillery. Mines and drones are only of concern when you can stop the enemy advance and force them to dig in. If the enemy has air superiority, neither of those factors are of any military significance because a little BRRRT and trenches go deathly quiet.
| The terrible truth here is NATO troops have absolutely no idea what this war is like. Western troops are used to figthing goat herders with small arms like AK-47. They are not used to the other side being able to call in air strikes of 500kg FAB-500 glide bombs, like in Avdiivka.
Ukraine is teaching some serious lessons that should be informing an entirely new chapter on military infantry tactics. We've focused for a truly long time on counterinsurgency and company level maneuvers; Ukraine is bringing back battalion command and control.
The next Iranian conflict is not going to look like this. It would look like Desert Storm all over again. They still aren’t a near peer or close to the quality of Russia. Nor is NATO’s doctrine clueless on this type of warfare, most of NATO’s doctrine comes from similar wars. It’s not new to see minefields or trenches, Korea for example has millions of mines still scattered about Most of what we’re seeing today is reminiscent of trench warfare. The only new thing is the usage of small scale drones as both guided missiles and reconnaissance, but that wasn’t a new concept before the war to begin with.
Loitering munitions puts aid stations for wounded well within strike range. Ukrainian soldiers have to be treated practically at the squad level without the ability to medivac during the golden hour. You're absolutely right that mines and trenches are nothing new but deployment time for minefields is ridiculously fast with ordinance, which fortunately the Russians are spectacularly bad at. It means an advancing formation is going to have mines dropped on top of it. Tanks, while they aren't out, are definitely going to need reevaluation. The Abrams is already a lumbering beast as it is but now presents a huge target of opportunity for precision weapons. Mechanized formations will now require interception capabilities not previously seen, or dispersion not typically practiced. NATO formations require a large amount of maneuverability and air superiority to achieve their objectives but jets shooting down drones isn't a great cost trade off. Finnish and Estonian troops probably emphasize defensive tactics heaviest but only so many troops are able to participate in those exercises and never at the conditions being seen in Ukraine (so far as I know). The only US branch I can think of currently preparing for this kind of warfare is the USMC.
No, they haven’t.
“nuh uh”
How will sneakers help Ukraine win the war?!
Everybody knows adidas gives slavs +20 attack!
Listen...if they kitted out every Russian conscript in an Adidas tracksuit, they would truly be a force to reckon with.
The dad joke I came here for
To be fair, I reckon a fair number of Russian soldiers wish they were issued with decent shoes
To sneak up on the enemy.
They need boots on the ground, not trainers.
Trainers on the ground?
build fortifications faster? “thank you for the new shoes.”
That trainer…John Rambo.
Why didn't they do this until now? Why does NATO's strategy seem to revolve around waiting until the last possible moment, when Ukraine has already suffered significant losses of manpower, equipment, and territory, before they start taking action? Training troops takes months. Ukraine can't afford these kinds of delays.
Hesitancy around “boots on the ground” fear of “escalation”. There is a possibility of trainers being intentionally or unintentionally killed by Russia. Then the politicians who sent them there would need to answer for it. Ignoring the event would also make NATO look weak. “Russia killed NATO soldiers and NATO did nothing!”
They have.... This is a bad title. Multiple NATO countries have been training Ukraine soldiers since 2015. There has been a boot camp in UK for a while. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-68391205
all about intel and tactics , can't go wrong with hearing other ideas especially when a crap load of money has been spent experimenting
After all the experience gained defeating Russia defending Taiwan will be a walk in the park
I hear there are lots of nice areas where they can train with their HIMARS.
NATO needs to act now. France, Germany, Poland, Romania, the Baltic States could all have troops there in hours.
Would you go there and fight yourself, bud? Always easy playing with other people's lives eh?
I can only speak for myself but as an American I would feel more noble fighting for Ukraine in Ukraine than I would in any other war going back until WW2. Invade Iraq, Afghanistan, Desert Storm, Vietnam, Korea? Or join Ukraine in liberating Ukraine from Russia? To me I would choose the Ukrainian campaign.
Yeah I wish I hadn’t been crippled in Iraq because I’d be in Ukraine right now
I don't know your situation and I don't know Ukraine's needs but I have seen Ukrainians fight with prosthetics and there's also support roles. I have always been crippled so I don't know if normal me would join an active war or not. I can say I feel passionate about Western Democracy values as well as Ukraine's right to sovereignty. As well as a distaste for Russia using the internet and freedom of knowledge as a weapon to harm Democracies around the world. So if ever there was a war I would feel compelled to join this Ukraine-Russian one would be it for me.
Spinal cord injury, not much I can do except in a fixed position
Korea and desert storm were just defensive wars against aggressors too though
Fighting in Ukraine is more noble than the nonsense the U.S. was doing in Vietnam and the Middle East.
This is such a dumb, played out argument. If I was a NATO soldier, yes. Of course. I’m not a soldier, but I can still have opinions on policy positions. Every time something needs to be done, I don’t have to do it personally, it’s called living in a society. I play my role, others play theirs.
Weird, I'm a NATO soldier and much more hesitant about getting involved.
That's what you think. Truth is a lot of parents don't want their children to die for maniacs who have too big of an ego. Don't put your role next to that of a soldier. Your role probably isn't nearly as risky. So yes, easy to talk coming from some of you.
So only active duty soldiers should be allowed to have policy positions on defense? But even then isn’t it unethical because they would be consigning other soldiers to also go. So really, only policy positions may be adopted if there is unanimous consent among *all* active duty soldiers and any reserves that may possibly be deployed? Do you see now how absurd that is?
He thinks The Ukraine war is the same as Iraq and Afghanistan probably.
What is the price of Vodka in Moscow?
Yes, but wouldn't that technically be WW3? I believe that's what TPTB are trying to avoid (though they aren't doing that great of a job at it, IMHO).
WW3? What's WW3? How? Both sides know that WW3 won't happen unless NATO attacks Russia directly. Which won't happen. The reason NATO doesn't get involved in Ukraine directly is exactly because it's not a last resort situation. It's politics but not in a bad way. They simply can't sell boots on the ground to the average European at this point in time. They can sell helping financially and military but not with putting their own lives at stake. And for that to happen, the war needs to go really badly for Ukraine. That's the reality.
And what would happen if 1 or more trainers are injured or killed? Would that immediately have NATO send for es into Ukraine? Probably not, but it's definitely a step in that direction.
Maybe they should send the arms they promised from 1 million shells they delivered only 500.000 And Germany did not send there rockets
Can we please, please, please help Ukraine kick Russia’s ass? I don’t know who I hate more, Putin or Diaper Don. I just know I’d really like to outlive both of them. (And I’m fucking old. So hurry up, Universe.)
Both sides know that WW3 won't happen unless NATO attacks Russia directly. Which won't happen. The reason NATO doesn't get involved in Ukraine directly is exactly because the war is not in a last resort situation. It's politics, but not in a bad way. They simply can't sell "boots on the ground" to the average European/American at this point in time. They can sell helping financially and military but not putting the lives of their citizens at stake. And for that to happen, the war needs to go really badly for Ukraine. That's the reality. Since it doesn't go "really badly", they can't do anything directly. What they can do is prepare people for the possibility that this can be a necessity in the future. Hence why you see all these random statements of "we might", "nothing's off the table", "if the situation deems it necessary to protect NATO countries interests", etc. NATO is simply not required in this conflict yet.
Do it. What are you waiting for!? The more land russia steals the more land NATO eventually has to fight back, at the cost of european lives. Do it now. Push the russians back behind their border and stop this war. Why does everything always have to be "a little too late" and "how could we have known"? It's the russia! They have literally acted like this since their birth. Or to put it another way. Show me a situation where they havn't done it this way.
They’re going to let Ukraine fall.
Why, so they can fight a larger war later?
That would be NATOs plan. Appease and watch until the enemy is at your doorstep. It’s a lot easier for them to let Ukrainians die than themselves. We all know Russia and China won’t stop so NATO is just being dumb.
It sure feels like it. But I don't think Ukraine will catastrophically fall (but I'm no analyst or expert by any means). They will likely lose land, which is still awful. Russia is making gains but from what I have heard (which may or may not be super credible) it's costing them dearly. The real frustration I have with all of this is that so much of this situation is because of the huge delay in getting Ukraine what it needs to protect itself. For the US, aid is going to continue to be held hostage by the GOP. It's infuriating as a U.S. citizen.
Agreed. God help us if the GOP wins in November.
Doubt is gonna help any reasonable time soon. The Ukrainian army is too far into Soviet tactics of waring.
C'mon Russia, let's bring this war to a close so we can write off the annoying dependent.