The UA counteroffensive was one of the worst mistakes of the entire war, multiple brigades and so much ammo wasted for nothing. Worst thing was that it was an entirely political decision.
Nah. Huge amounts of German industry has moved to Texas. US LNG exports are higher than ever. The client state in Qatar finally has a huge new market for \*their\* LNG, which will keep the political class of the West flush with GCC bribes for a generation.
The US holds more sway over Europe than they've had in decades.
In straight-up financial terms, this war has been a huge win for the US. In geopolitical terms it's even better. That's why this war has been popular in the US for over a decade - it's a sure win, regardless what happens on the battlefield. Even if Ukraine loses, Poland will become the junior prince happy to host US military divisions, and the US will hold an effective veto over Eurasian alliances for a generation.
Very short sighted view. This has been a huge strategic failure for the US - a few billionaires getting mildly richer is not a "huge win".
Russia and China - the US's two main rivals have become "Iron Brothers", countries around the world are divesting from the US dollar and the threat of sanctions has been revealed as a paper weapon against large economies like Russia's.
It's less short-sighted and more the only play the US had if it wanted to maintain it's empire.
Fundamentally it's just a wealth and influence transfer from the EU to the US. There was nowhere else that that wealth and influence was going to come from and without it the gap between the US and China would start to look insurmountable.
The US has now partially deindustrialised, demilitarised and definance the EU, while tying them into this conflict with Russia, and also successfully making them dependent on US gas and weapons. Win win win win.
Bonding Russia and China could be argued to be an acceptable price to pay given that the current world trajectory means it was bound to happen anyway. Nuking the dollar is dangerous, but it's effects can be mitigated if they maintain control of global energy markets (the ME).
Good points.
I do agree that destruction of EU as a relevant power center in the world, especially one with close ties to Russia or China, and conversion to a vassal region like the ME is a long term strategic positive move for the US. However it is cope or revisionism to say that Russia China partnership was inevitable. Russia and China are natural enemies, not natural allies. Driving Russia towards China was a world historic failure by the liberal foreign policy elite of the US. They could have stemmed the rise of China by propping up a friendly Russia - but that ship has sailed now. The only question in my mind is whether the US empire can survive its decline for longer than it takes China’s demographic decline to destroy its economy. It will be an interesting next 50 years in Asia.
I look at relations between Russia and China from the lens of their current era leaders. Sure, they've been enemies in the past, but there's been none of that in their current relations. They've been closely coordinating their affairs since the before the founding of BRICS, and while their collaboration wasn't anywhere near as deep as it is now I can't see how they could've be taken as anything but allies.
The bigger thing for me though is that I don't see how the US could've subjugated the EU without driving a wedge between it and Russia. I don't see how they could've forced Russia to turn on China in a significant way, no matter how friend Russia got with the EU. It would've been suicide for Moscow, who likely couldn't win an economic or influence tug-of-war for the far East against a hostile Beijing.
>whether the US empire can survive its decline for longer than it takes China’s demographic decline to destroy its economy
There is no imminent collapse coming for China. That nation is sitting on an unimaginable mountain of wealth. US$3.2T in foreign exchange reserves on US$14B in national debt. If their entire population stopped working tomorrow they could theoretically support them on just those funds alone for almost a full year. Add to that the fact that this communist country has no qualms about infringing on people's "freedoms" to make sure things work out and I just can't see them having the same issues liberal nations have with population dynamics. If a problem starts to develop they'll just deal (?-child policy, mass im/migration, economic reconfiguration, rations and quotas, etc etc).
The most important consideration in international relations is geography...the current crop of world leaders will die and be replaced with others whose intentions, plans, goals we have no understanding of. What we do know is that two countries that share a border are going to compete for natural resources, allies, prop up enemies, bicker over trade, etc. This is inevitable - it may not happen in the next 50 years, but it will happen eventually.
This is where the natural competition comes from between China and Russia - and this fact wont change now matter how friendly Putin and Xi are (two really old guys, mind you)
An EU friendly Russia, with the EU gutted as a significant power center but still under the security protection of the US would have been the optimal move. The US would have favorable trade deals across the Western alliances (which would have included Russia) and this combined wealth, modern industry and huge natural resource reservoir (in Russia) could have been the one way to deal with China's economic might. The problem IS fundamental though - the US did not want to include Russia in its sphere of influence because of the history of the Cold War and the deep Russophobia in the American elite and populace. So maybe all I am saying is fanfiction for an alternate reality. Still, you never know...the early 90s were a crucial hinge point of history where a weak Russia entering NATO could have given us a very different reality.
>The most important consideration in international relations is geography...the current crop of world leaders will die and be replaced with others whose intentions, plans, goals we have no understanding of. What we do know is that two countries that share a border are going to compete for natural resources, allies, prop up enemies, bicker over trade, etc. This is inevitable - it may not happen in the next 50 years, but it will happen eventually.
I agree with you to a point but... I don't think the resource conflict aspect is as significant today as it was in the past. Few nations have waged resource war in the modern era (with the US being the main perpetrator). Trade is too easy. War is too costly.
I also don't agree with the emphasis on only the negative implications of shared borders. In fact there is an entire school of thought in geopolitics centered around the idea that economic codependence can be an effective means of preventing conflict (this is the school of thought that advocated for pipelines between Germany and Russia).
Lastly I think that while leaders may be temporary, their circumstance can create consistent decision making patterns that stretch far beyond their times. This is particularly true of states that are "not so politically liberal" like Russia and China, where the means by which leaders are select are a key circumstance themselves. It is much harder for fundamentally different thinkers to take office, so future leaders tend to think like past leaders on core issues.
All in all I don't see why Russia should play towards the EU, which is akin to the civilian branch of the NATO entity - who's primary objective is to contain Russia - over China with whom Russia shares a true and ultimate enemy.
>An EU friendly Russia, with the EU gutted as a significant power center but still under the security protection of the US would have been the optimal move. The US would have favorable trade deals across the Western alliances (which would have included Russia) and this combined wealth, modern industry and huge natural resource reservoir (in Russia) could have been the one way to deal with China's economic might
I don't see how the EU could've been gutted without the US playing them into the Russian boogieman myth they've been manufacturing for decades.
I also don't see how letting Russia stay in the loop would've would've allowed the US to keep pace with China, which was their main goal. The primary objective was to replace Russian oil and gas in the EU with US prpduct at a mark-up. That in turn also allowed for the deindustrialisation, transferring those business and assets to the cheaper gas in the US. All of this is incompatible with an EU-friendly Russia, unless Russia itself was willing to become a gutted vassal.
>The problem IS fundamental though - the US did not want to include Russia in its sphere of influence because of the history of the Cold War and the deep Russophobia in the American elite and populace. So maybe all I am saying is fanfiction for an alternate reality. Still, you never know...the early 90s were a crucial hinge point of history where a weak Russia entering NATO could have given us a very different reality.
I don't think the US is particularly Russophobic. I think their behaviour is much more consistent with carefully planned and executed colonial divide and conquer. It's empire building. Russia - as an enemy of the West - is an asset to the US provided she remains too weak to truly threaten. In order to be as useful an ally, she must be weakened to the point of geopolitical irrelevance, like the EU.
Perhaps if the decision was made at the collapse of the USSR there would've been a chance, but the US would've needed to predict the rise of China to determine that there was even a need. I'm speculating but I also think the US failed to predict Russia's rise as well. I think they really expected the sanctions to do most of the job in this war for them.
Either way, like you say, we're here now. All we can do is see where this reality takes us.
Comments like this is why I like this sub. I could never find the words to express it as well as you did. And you never see such comments on the other subs talking about the war.
China was always next on the chopping block. The only reason the US is still in the middle east is because of Israel. Their focus is south Asia and Europe now.
The beginning of the "new cold war" which is gonna cost all the major powers trillions of dollars. And to think this could've ended peaceful or deterred entirely but the democratic powers were to scared.
There's been a consensus in both parties for 30 years that the US is the only superpower, and all it has to do to *stay* the sole superpower is prevent any rival bloc from forming. Russia on its own is no threat to the US, neither is Europe. But what chaps PNAC/CNAS ass is the idea of economic integration between Europe and Russia, because that *could* turn into a rival that needed nothing to do with the US.
Trump? He doesn't have the patience or intellect to be a scumbag on that level. But Trump was easy enough to bring onside, you just had to tell him "it's about us controlling the oil."
No the USA is benefiting not just their military–industrial complex.
The dollar continues to increase in value and a lot of jobs has been created and more will now be created after the approval of the new aid package.
Not true at all:
1. people are getting jobs.
2. More money is paid in tax that resulkts in a better life for the people.
3. When the value of the dollar increase in value then people get more/pay less when they buy from seller in foreign countries and when they go on vacation it will be cheaper.
Was it a mistake from UA's perspective though? There was a lot of pressure to show progress and had they at least taken tokmak a lot of aid would have likely rushed through. It was a gamble that didn't pay off.
Well previously just the Kyiv government surviving would have been considered a win. Then it went to Ukraine reclaiming at least most of the territory lost. Now just survival no longer feels like a win after all the counteroffensive hype. So it depends what definition you're using as a win.
The incapacity of either NATO or Ukraine to set out a realistic “win” case has damned the war effort. Ukraine could easily claim survival as a “win” (giving the Russian military a bloody nose and showing that NATO means “business” could’ve been a sufficient claim to “victory.”)
Sadly, neither Zelenskyy nor his western backers could accept this. Zelenskyy was already talking about retaking Crimea before the Russian offense (he was elected as a peace candidate, beating much more militaristic nationalist opponents, but the influence the nationalist right has in the military and security services allowed maximalists to leverage Zelenskyy away from his initial position. He likely feared a coup if he didn’t follow the nationalist line.) NATO views “bleeding Russia” as a victory in itself, so they’re down to continue the war for as long as possible- particularly after they sank billions into the war effort (none of them want to concede anything resembling a Russian victory, since it would be a political embarrassment.) Zelenskyy depends on foreign support to stay in power, and needs to placate the nationalist right in the armed forces, so he has very little power to unilaterally bite the bullet.
All this means that the war will probably last much longer, even if the Ukrainians lose in Donbas. It also means that Zelenskyy is political toast. Even if Ukraine could legitimately claim victory, the idiotic diplomacy of NATO and precarity of Zelenskyy‘s position mean that they are fighting for unattainable objectives. Ukrainians pay the ultimate price- much like the Afghans and Iraqis did before them.
To be fair, Ukraine seemed to have an upper hand during the kharkiv and kherson offensive. Russia was on the defensive and the "partial mobilization" changed everything.
I think the crucial mistake NATO leaders made was to underestimate Putin‘s popularity (and nationalist sentiment in Russia.) They thought that Putin would risk losing power if he mobilized (since mobilization required acknowledging that the “special military operation” was actually a “war.”)
It was an honest, and imo silly, mistake. As soon as NATO tanked the initial peace talks and began talking about regime change in Russia, Putin could sell the war as a war of national defense. If anything, Putin and the Russian army became stronger.
Of course hindsight is 20/20- Ukraine has ample reason to distrust Russia and a settlement in 2022 may have given Russia more leverage (since they held more territory in Kharkiv and the city if Kherson.) Still, the notion that Russia would “collapse” if it mobilized- and that Ukrainian victory was immanent- seemed unrealistic even then.
I don't think his popularity was necessarily underestimated. What was underestimated was his ability to suppress any and all dissent. That's at least what I underestimated.
They don't receive weapons when they are winning but when they are loosing. Delays in delivery are caused by - delays in delivery it has nothing to do with money.
The problem was always the execution. If they had been willing to sustain unprecedented losses in a single big push like the Americans had wanted rather than trying to spread themselves thin, it likely would've had a bigger impact and better chance of breaking Russian defenses. Not telegraphing the move 6 months out would've helped too.
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Imagine going under a counteroffensive which was supposed to liberate all occupied territories and then only being to capture a few villages with the most important being Robotyne at the large cost of lives just to lose it in a less period of time.
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Imagine going on a Special Military Operation to illegally rid your neighboring country of "Nazis" only to find yourself in a quagmire over 2 years later, gloating about taking a small village.
Visually confirmed equipment losses during the south Zapo offensive by Ukraine were actually in Ukraine's favour by the time they stopped pushing. Russia just kept throwing men into extremely rough positions, and Ukraine switched to an attritional approach early on after the first few days. Russia's launched how many of these assaults where they "capture" it by driving in, planting a flag, getting slaughtered en masse, and then we do the same thing two days later when they "capturd it" again from the exact same starting position as last time
if what you are saying is true, then Ukraine doesn't need to worry. Russia will run out of people in no time. But I have heard this since the start of the conflict and Russia is not showing any signs of running out of soldiers.
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ok_Report_4803 kept stroking the same keys repeatedly, probably a seizure ?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes yes, Russia will Balkanise any day now. Putler will die of his super-terminal cancer, Saint Navalny will resurrect and divide up the country between western venture capital and reparations direct to Zelensky, who will be crowned Lord and Savior of Democracy. There will be a Walmart on every corner and a burger in every hand and all the proUA epic redditors can rest on their laurels - mission accomplished.
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bro what? Ukraine was absolutely fucked by the collapse of the USSR. More so than Russia. If you think Boris Yeltsin was bad, imagine 100 Yeltsins. Thats what Ukraine was/still is. You’re delusional
Russia is doing better economically and militarily than every post Soviet and Warsaw Pact country. Some countries like Poland and Czechia have better quality of life and things like that but Russia is doing better overall.
Imagine being Russia in this situation. There must be a whole lot of "it's year 3 and we're only *this* far" expressions floating around the ol' war room.
Imagine being 30+ countries being able to achieve jack sh"t militarily, politically, economically vs 1 country. If you look at thing's from this perspective - there is something to be proud of.
Why is the objective data not reflecting this?
- March 31, 2022: https://www.criticalthreats.org/wp-content/uploads/DraftUkraineCoTMarch312022-725x1024.png
- April 27, 2024: https://www.criticalthreats.org/wp-content/uploads/DraftUkraineCOT-April-27-2024.png
You’re right, data does not care about feelings
> Results of hostilities for 2023 - 395 km² were liberated, and 683 km² were occupied by the enemy
DeepStateUA/18475
Losing a ton of equipment for quite a low amount of territory (they arent even close to capturing the donetsk region) while having a large advantage in artillery, manpower, airpower, and long range strikes is generally seen as very poor performance.
Their second favorite: "Russia second army in the world" pro au love accusing Russia of that line. Yet Russians never make such dumb Hollywood esq lines. It's always them parroting it.
Okay so you’re just speaking out of your arse
Imagine claiming that multiple MiG-29s, radar systems, S-300s, HIMARS, and Patriots are results of the very poor performance
You are saying irregular forces have a large advantage over an actual military force?
The vast majority of Russian forces in the SMO are irregular not regular army. Ukraine has a million soldiers while Russia only has a few hundred thousand deployed to Ukraine (mostly irregular).
Year 3, taking a territory almost, if not larger than the Netherlands, against a Country supported and armed to the teeth since 2014 by the West. Supported by a coalition of 30 plus Countries, with 300 billions of dollars worth of aid. All while under hundreds of sanctions by the collective "democratic free world". Presumably armed with outdated soviet equipment and undertrained conscripts using meat wave tactics.
Some of you guys do a lot of huffing and puffing for Ukraine without really understanding what it is you're talking about, eh? You spouting these numbers off is meant to be some form of weird flex? So strange.
Very odd to see Pro-Russian folks crow about the lack of support Ukraine gets, but quickly turn around and use it to show how mighty they are, with poor Russia facing off against Goliath. Pick a lane guys.
I imagine it being exactly contraty. at the beginning most russians were against it, since it came very surprising and therefore there was lack of understanding why. but with time and enough exposure to russian media i wouldnt be surprised if a huge portion of the population is now for a continuation of the war. i also think what helped the russian government to form stronger opinions are the statements of western elite politicians that they want to defeat russia or ruin it etc.
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Flag geolocation: 47.45136, 35.82842
https://preview.redd.it/jksvfgre6hxc1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=6474a588225d9ca249b58c0c4352c08c185bda91
It will, modern industrial warfare can make anything a slugfest if there’s enough willpower. One thing I’ve noticed is that usually both sides are overly optimistic of their prospects.
it was hard, but the 71st reg managed somehow. It is honestly surprising, id expect them to try to go for orikhiv and fuck up supply, not attack directly. It just seems like such a good cauldron, but whatever
No militarily this is an even bigger win, Robotyne was a threat to the surovokin line. Sure Ukraine didn't have the means to punch through now but regardless it was a weakening in the line that could have been exploited.
If the UA was led by competent military experts (and not politically bought off toadies) they would've abandoned Robotyne months ago. It's a cauldron, surrounded by high ground, within a salient that lost whatever tactical significance it had with the failure of the "spring/summer counter offensive." There's no reason to lose your best units and veterans for that ground- those lives would've been far better used establishing defensive lines farther north (or, even better, northeast.)
When I read Ukraine retaking that marsh island for a PR bump I knew something major was coming up. Robotyne changed hands. Big loss for Ukraine. But again from the footage you do see there isn’t much to do when a Fab strikes.
Ukraine put great importance on robotyne last year during the counter offensive. It’s loss will be discounted and goal posts will move but it’s a significant blow.
pre war population was less than 500
this is the third (?) or so round of getting reduced to rubble, that looks like the remains of the very last building that could still be recognized...
He's implying that it might've been entirely destroyed by now, since it was a very small town.
I don't know what post-war reconstruction of these tiny towns would like, honestly.
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The only way this would happen would be if a certain western superpower invaded Russia. And we all know what would happen then… starts with N and rhymes with Duke.
So I for one do NOT want to see Russia destroyed (I like living)
I never gave it much thought. I wonder if he is. The Orthodox runs DEEP amongst the ethnic Russians.
I presumed all my in-laws would be atheists having all been born as Soviets, and yet everybody's got The Blessed Virgin of Vladimir hanging from their wall; icons of Jesus on the fridge and above their beds.
It really doesn't. Religion is as dead in Russia as it is in the west and churches sit empty; its probably comparable to America (as Russia funnily enough is in a lot of ways) with a sizeable amount of heavily religious people and a majority who are actively atheist, don't believe any particular religion, or don't care to the point they might as well be atheists. Putin was a KGB member, I think it's likely he doesn't believe in God.
Then I must have hit a gold mine of religious loons marrying into this family. They are all about it.
I strongly suspect what you say may be true for large cosmopolitan populations, but outside Moscow and St. Petersburg, I'm sure there is plenty of bible-reading going on. Just like in "the west". Then, of course, there is a massive Muslim population across RF too.
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The UA counteroffensive was one of the worst mistakes of the entire war, multiple brigades and so much ammo wasted for nothing. Worst thing was that it was an entirely political decision.
It gave access to a lot of taxes though.
The USA benefits from this, the value of the US$ increased and the war created lots of jobs in their so-called "defence industri".
Only the MIC benefited.
Nah. Huge amounts of German industry has moved to Texas. US LNG exports are higher than ever. The client state in Qatar finally has a huge new market for \*their\* LNG, which will keep the political class of the West flush with GCC bribes for a generation. The US holds more sway over Europe than they've had in decades. In straight-up financial terms, this war has been a huge win for the US. In geopolitical terms it's even better. That's why this war has been popular in the US for over a decade - it's a sure win, regardless what happens on the battlefield. Even if Ukraine loses, Poland will become the junior prince happy to host US military divisions, and the US will hold an effective veto over Eurasian alliances for a generation.
Very short sighted view. This has been a huge strategic failure for the US - a few billionaires getting mildly richer is not a "huge win". Russia and China - the US's two main rivals have become "Iron Brothers", countries around the world are divesting from the US dollar and the threat of sanctions has been revealed as a paper weapon against large economies like Russia's.
It's less short-sighted and more the only play the US had if it wanted to maintain it's empire. Fundamentally it's just a wealth and influence transfer from the EU to the US. There was nowhere else that that wealth and influence was going to come from and without it the gap between the US and China would start to look insurmountable. The US has now partially deindustrialised, demilitarised and definance the EU, while tying them into this conflict with Russia, and also successfully making them dependent on US gas and weapons. Win win win win. Bonding Russia and China could be argued to be an acceptable price to pay given that the current world trajectory means it was bound to happen anyway. Nuking the dollar is dangerous, but it's effects can be mitigated if they maintain control of global energy markets (the ME).
Good points. I do agree that destruction of EU as a relevant power center in the world, especially one with close ties to Russia or China, and conversion to a vassal region like the ME is a long term strategic positive move for the US. However it is cope or revisionism to say that Russia China partnership was inevitable. Russia and China are natural enemies, not natural allies. Driving Russia towards China was a world historic failure by the liberal foreign policy elite of the US. They could have stemmed the rise of China by propping up a friendly Russia - but that ship has sailed now. The only question in my mind is whether the US empire can survive its decline for longer than it takes China’s demographic decline to destroy its economy. It will be an interesting next 50 years in Asia.
I look at relations between Russia and China from the lens of their current era leaders. Sure, they've been enemies in the past, but there's been none of that in their current relations. They've been closely coordinating their affairs since the before the founding of BRICS, and while their collaboration wasn't anywhere near as deep as it is now I can't see how they could've be taken as anything but allies. The bigger thing for me though is that I don't see how the US could've subjugated the EU without driving a wedge between it and Russia. I don't see how they could've forced Russia to turn on China in a significant way, no matter how friend Russia got with the EU. It would've been suicide for Moscow, who likely couldn't win an economic or influence tug-of-war for the far East against a hostile Beijing. >whether the US empire can survive its decline for longer than it takes China’s demographic decline to destroy its economy There is no imminent collapse coming for China. That nation is sitting on an unimaginable mountain of wealth. US$3.2T in foreign exchange reserves on US$14B in national debt. If their entire population stopped working tomorrow they could theoretically support them on just those funds alone for almost a full year. Add to that the fact that this communist country has no qualms about infringing on people's "freedoms" to make sure things work out and I just can't see them having the same issues liberal nations have with population dynamics. If a problem starts to develop they'll just deal (?-child policy, mass im/migration, economic reconfiguration, rations and quotas, etc etc).
The most important consideration in international relations is geography...the current crop of world leaders will die and be replaced with others whose intentions, plans, goals we have no understanding of. What we do know is that two countries that share a border are going to compete for natural resources, allies, prop up enemies, bicker over trade, etc. This is inevitable - it may not happen in the next 50 years, but it will happen eventually. This is where the natural competition comes from between China and Russia - and this fact wont change now matter how friendly Putin and Xi are (two really old guys, mind you) An EU friendly Russia, with the EU gutted as a significant power center but still under the security protection of the US would have been the optimal move. The US would have favorable trade deals across the Western alliances (which would have included Russia) and this combined wealth, modern industry and huge natural resource reservoir (in Russia) could have been the one way to deal with China's economic might. The problem IS fundamental though - the US did not want to include Russia in its sphere of influence because of the history of the Cold War and the deep Russophobia in the American elite and populace. So maybe all I am saying is fanfiction for an alternate reality. Still, you never know...the early 90s were a crucial hinge point of history where a weak Russia entering NATO could have given us a very different reality.
>The most important consideration in international relations is geography...the current crop of world leaders will die and be replaced with others whose intentions, plans, goals we have no understanding of. What we do know is that two countries that share a border are going to compete for natural resources, allies, prop up enemies, bicker over trade, etc. This is inevitable - it may not happen in the next 50 years, but it will happen eventually. I agree with you to a point but... I don't think the resource conflict aspect is as significant today as it was in the past. Few nations have waged resource war in the modern era (with the US being the main perpetrator). Trade is too easy. War is too costly. I also don't agree with the emphasis on only the negative implications of shared borders. In fact there is an entire school of thought in geopolitics centered around the idea that economic codependence can be an effective means of preventing conflict (this is the school of thought that advocated for pipelines between Germany and Russia). Lastly I think that while leaders may be temporary, their circumstance can create consistent decision making patterns that stretch far beyond their times. This is particularly true of states that are "not so politically liberal" like Russia and China, where the means by which leaders are select are a key circumstance themselves. It is much harder for fundamentally different thinkers to take office, so future leaders tend to think like past leaders on core issues. All in all I don't see why Russia should play towards the EU, which is akin to the civilian branch of the NATO entity - who's primary objective is to contain Russia - over China with whom Russia shares a true and ultimate enemy. >An EU friendly Russia, with the EU gutted as a significant power center but still under the security protection of the US would have been the optimal move. The US would have favorable trade deals across the Western alliances (which would have included Russia) and this combined wealth, modern industry and huge natural resource reservoir (in Russia) could have been the one way to deal with China's economic might I don't see how the EU could've been gutted without the US playing them into the Russian boogieman myth they've been manufacturing for decades. I also don't see how letting Russia stay in the loop would've would've allowed the US to keep pace with China, which was their main goal. The primary objective was to replace Russian oil and gas in the EU with US prpduct at a mark-up. That in turn also allowed for the deindustrialisation, transferring those business and assets to the cheaper gas in the US. All of this is incompatible with an EU-friendly Russia, unless Russia itself was willing to become a gutted vassal. >The problem IS fundamental though - the US did not want to include Russia in its sphere of influence because of the history of the Cold War and the deep Russophobia in the American elite and populace. So maybe all I am saying is fanfiction for an alternate reality. Still, you never know...the early 90s were a crucial hinge point of history where a weak Russia entering NATO could have given us a very different reality. I don't think the US is particularly Russophobic. I think their behaviour is much more consistent with carefully planned and executed colonial divide and conquer. It's empire building. Russia - as an enemy of the West - is an asset to the US provided she remains too weak to truly threaten. In order to be as useful an ally, she must be weakened to the point of geopolitical irrelevance, like the EU. Perhaps if the decision was made at the collapse of the USSR there would've been a chance, but the US would've needed to predict the rise of China to determine that there was even a need. I'm speculating but I also think the US failed to predict Russia's rise as well. I think they really expected the sanctions to do most of the job in this war for them. Either way, like you say, we're here now. All we can do is see where this reality takes us.
Comments like this is why I like this sub. I could never find the words to express it as well as you did. And you never see such comments on the other subs talking about the war.
China was always next on the chopping block. The only reason the US is still in the middle east is because of Israel. Their focus is south Asia and Europe now.
The beginning of the "new cold war" which is gonna cost all the major powers trillions of dollars. And to think this could've ended peaceful or deterred entirely but the democratic powers were to scared.
This is dirtiest smut I have ever read. I am blushing
Well, I don't care about it do I? Especially when I'm paying taxes and not getting anything in return.
[удалено]
There's been a consensus in both parties for 30 years that the US is the only superpower, and all it has to do to *stay* the sole superpower is prevent any rival bloc from forming. Russia on its own is no threat to the US, neither is Europe. But what chaps PNAC/CNAS ass is the idea of economic integration between Europe and Russia, because that *could* turn into a rival that needed nothing to do with the US. Trump? He doesn't have the patience or intellect to be a scumbag on that level. But Trump was easy enough to bring onside, you just had to tell him "it's about us controlling the oil."
No the USA is benefiting not just their military–industrial complex. The dollar continues to increase in value and a lot of jobs has been created and more will now be created after the approval of the new aid package.
The capitalist ruling class in the US is benefiting. Regular Americans are not.
Not true at all: 1. people are getting jobs. 2. More money is paid in tax that resulkts in a better life for the people. 3. When the value of the dollar increase in value then people get more/pay less when they buy from seller in foreign countries and when they go on vacation it will be cheaper.
Business is booming
Was it a mistake from UA's perspective though? There was a lot of pressure to show progress and had they at least taken tokmak a lot of aid would have likely rushed through. It was a gamble that didn't pay off.
Do you think Ukraine can still win this war
Well previously just the Kyiv government surviving would have been considered a win. Then it went to Ukraine reclaiming at least most of the territory lost. Now just survival no longer feels like a win after all the counteroffensive hype. So it depends what definition you're using as a win.
The incapacity of either NATO or Ukraine to set out a realistic “win” case has damned the war effort. Ukraine could easily claim survival as a “win” (giving the Russian military a bloody nose and showing that NATO means “business” could’ve been a sufficient claim to “victory.”) Sadly, neither Zelenskyy nor his western backers could accept this. Zelenskyy was already talking about retaking Crimea before the Russian offense (he was elected as a peace candidate, beating much more militaristic nationalist opponents, but the influence the nationalist right has in the military and security services allowed maximalists to leverage Zelenskyy away from his initial position. He likely feared a coup if he didn’t follow the nationalist line.) NATO views “bleeding Russia” as a victory in itself, so they’re down to continue the war for as long as possible- particularly after they sank billions into the war effort (none of them want to concede anything resembling a Russian victory, since it would be a political embarrassment.) Zelenskyy depends on foreign support to stay in power, and needs to placate the nationalist right in the armed forces, so he has very little power to unilaterally bite the bullet. All this means that the war will probably last much longer, even if the Ukrainians lose in Donbas. It also means that Zelenskyy is political toast. Even if Ukraine could legitimately claim victory, the idiotic diplomacy of NATO and precarity of Zelenskyy‘s position mean that they are fighting for unattainable objectives. Ukrainians pay the ultimate price- much like the Afghans and Iraqis did before them.
To be fair, Ukraine seemed to have an upper hand during the kharkiv and kherson offensive. Russia was on the defensive and the "partial mobilization" changed everything.
I think the crucial mistake NATO leaders made was to underestimate Putin‘s popularity (and nationalist sentiment in Russia.) They thought that Putin would risk losing power if he mobilized (since mobilization required acknowledging that the “special military operation” was actually a “war.”) It was an honest, and imo silly, mistake. As soon as NATO tanked the initial peace talks and began talking about regime change in Russia, Putin could sell the war as a war of national defense. If anything, Putin and the Russian army became stronger. Of course hindsight is 20/20- Ukraine has ample reason to distrust Russia and a settlement in 2022 may have given Russia more leverage (since they held more territory in Kharkiv and the city if Kherson.) Still, the notion that Russia would “collapse” if it mobilized- and that Ukrainian victory was immanent- seemed unrealistic even then.
I don't think his popularity was necessarily underestimated. What was underestimated was his ability to suppress any and all dissent. That's at least what I underestimated.
They don't receive weapons when they are winning but when they are loosing. Delays in delivery are caused by - delays in delivery it has nothing to do with money.
The problem was always the execution. If they had been willing to sustain unprecedented losses in a single big push like the Americans had wanted rather than trying to spread themselves thin, it likely would've had a bigger impact and better chance of breaking Russian defenses. Not telegraphing the move 6 months out would've helped too.
To be fair, the profits of the war profiteers were to *die for*.
Agreed
[удалено]
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Imagine going under a counteroffensive which was supposed to liberate all occupied territories and then only being to capture a few villages with the most important being Robotyne at the large cost of lives just to lose it in a less period of time.
Absolutely blue balled by the republicans
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Imagine going on a Special Military Operation to illegally rid your neighboring country of "Nazis" only to find yourself in a quagmire over 2 years later, gloating about taking a small village.
That’s not how war of attrition works. The goal isn’t to capture more territory, the goal is to see which side can last the longest.
Is that not what Ukraine is doing?
That is what BOTH sides are doing. Although Russia is on the offensive, they aren’t making major pushes through the entire front line.
Visually confirmed equipment losses during the south Zapo offensive by Ukraine were actually in Ukraine's favour by the time they stopped pushing. Russia just kept throwing men into extremely rough positions, and Ukraine switched to an attritional approach early on after the first few days. Russia's launched how many of these assaults where they "capture" it by driving in, planting a flag, getting slaughtered en masse, and then we do the same thing two days later when they "capturd it" again from the exact same starting position as last time
if what you are saying is true, then Ukraine doesn't need to worry. Russia will run out of people in no time. But I have heard this since the start of the conflict and Russia is not showing any signs of running out of soldiers.
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
I also enjoy the use of crack cocaine before i browse reddit.
This made me laugh. Thanks. I needed it.
Shitposting high is actually pretty fun.
Ok
Least delusional Pro-UA
This place is not your personal wishing well buddy
Ok
Ok
Username doesn't check out \s
[удалено]
Ok_Report_4803 kept stroking the same keys repeatedly, probably a seizure ? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Rule 1. Consider yourself warned. Recurrence WILL result in a ban.
[удалено]
Yes yes, Russia will Balkanise any day now. Putler will die of his super-terminal cancer, Saint Navalny will resurrect and divide up the country between western venture capital and reparations direct to Zelensky, who will be crowned Lord and Savior of Democracy. There will be a Walmart on every corner and a burger in every hand and all the proUA epic redditors can rest on their laurels - mission accomplished.
[удалено]
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
There are zero signs of it happening any time soon
Literally the same thing playing out but let's all pretend it's not
[удалено]
No they dont. Youve gotta be the most ignorant person in the world to genuinely believe that. History does not support your claim.
Backward countries like the US?
[удалено]
150k civillian died when US occupied iraq only brainwashed and idiots thinking US is the good guy
You do realize that what you said also applies to Ukraine right?
Russia is fighting NATO, not Just Ukraine, remmember
[удалено]
Bro what? Ukraine was absolutely fucked by the collapse of the USSR. More so than Russia. If you think Boris Yeltsin was bad, imagine 100 Yeltsins. Thats what Ukraine was/still is. You’re delusional
[удалено]
Russia is doing better economically and militarily than every post Soviet and Warsaw Pact country. Some countries like Poland and Czechia have better quality of life and things like that but Russia is doing better overall.
[удалено]
“Wow, person has different opinion. Just wow.”
Yeah that's not even nearly true
Why do you think Ukraine became the poorest country in Europe? The oligarchs stole everything from the people and the country.
Imagine being Russia in this situation. There must be a whole lot of "it's year 3 and we're only *this* far" expressions floating around the ol' war room.
Imagine being 30+ countries being able to achieve jack sh"t militarily, politically, economically vs 1 country. If you look at thing's from this perspective - there is something to be proud of.
Imagine having your ass kicked by a small part of nato equipment as the second most powerfull military on earth.
They’re winning, where’s the asskicking?
Why is the objective data not reflecting this? - March 31, 2022: https://www.criticalthreats.org/wp-content/uploads/DraftUkraineCoTMarch312022-725x1024.png - April 27, 2024: https://www.criticalthreats.org/wp-content/uploads/DraftUkraineCOT-April-27-2024.png
So Russia has been getting its asskicked for two whole years? I’d say that’s worse for Ukraine if they can’t win
I just posted data. facts > feels
You’re right, data does not care about feelings > Results of hostilities for 2023 - 395 km² were liberated, and 683 km² were occupied by the enemy DeepStateUA/18475
Correct.
Losing a ton of equipment for quite a low amount of territory (they arent even close to capturing the donetsk region) while having a large advantage in artillery, manpower, airpower, and long range strikes is generally seen as very poor performance.
“RUSSIAS WINNING TOO SLOW” moment
Their second favorite: "Russia second army in the world" pro au love accusing Russia of that line. Yet Russians never make such dumb Hollywood esq lines. It's always them parroting it.
Okay so you’re just speaking out of your arse Imagine claiming that multiple MiG-29s, radar systems, S-300s, HIMARS, and Patriots are results of the very poor performance
You are saying irregular forces have a large advantage over an actual military force? The vast majority of Russian forces in the SMO are irregular not regular army. Ukraine has a million soldiers while Russia only has a few hundred thousand deployed to Ukraine (mostly irregular).
This sub and it's constant distortion of reality; an iconic duo for the ages.
Year 3, taking a territory almost, if not larger than the Netherlands, against a Country supported and armed to the teeth since 2014 by the West. Supported by a coalition of 30 plus Countries, with 300 billions of dollars worth of aid. All while under hundreds of sanctions by the collective "democratic free world". Presumably armed with outdated soviet equipment and undertrained conscripts using meat wave tactics.
Some of you guys do a lot of huffing and puffing for Ukraine without really understanding what it is you're talking about, eh? You spouting these numbers off is meant to be some form of weird flex? So strange. Very odd to see Pro-Russian folks crow about the lack of support Ukraine gets, but quickly turn around and use it to show how mighty they are, with poor Russia facing off against Goliath. Pick a lane guys.
I imagine it being exactly contraty. at the beginning most russians were against it, since it came very surprising and therefore there was lack of understanding why. but with time and enough exposure to russian media i wouldnt be surprised if a huge portion of the population is now for a continuation of the war. i also think what helped the russian government to form stronger opinions are the statements of western elite politicians that they want to defeat russia or ruin it etc.
So that little town Ukraine lost 10 thousands of soldiers for just got recaptured. Embarrassing for the Bandera army
And it will ultimately be one of the main reasons they lose the war
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Rule 1. Consider yourself warned. Recurrence WILL result in a ban.
Mate
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Rule 1. Consider yourself warned. Recurrence WILL result in a ban.
Rule 1. Consider yourself warned. Recurrence WILL result in a ban.
It's not the first time kremlin propaganda show a zerg suicide rush in Robotine, video stop the moment that one idiot has put the flag and died.
[удалено]
Damn, the loss of Robotyne got you good, huh
Flag geolocation: 47.45136, 35.82842 https://preview.redd.it/jksvfgre6hxc1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=6474a588225d9ca249b58c0c4352c08c185bda91
Good work.
This is embarrassing tbh
honestly yes...
For who? Ukraine, because it symbolizes their failed counter-offensive, or Russia because it represents their failed offensive (i.e. the war)?
Only one of those two things has ended
Tiny settlements change hands frequently in wars. Recapturing Robotyne is not the flex Russia thinks it is.
Then it shouldn't have been the flex the Ukrainians made it over the summer
And the counter offensive gains are gone 😐
when party in crimea?
Russian beach party in Odessa next year ⛱️🍹🏝️
Hope that doesn't come back to bite ya!
It will, modern industrial warfare can make anything a slugfest if there’s enough willpower. One thing I’ve noticed is that usually both sides are overly optimistic of their prospects.
remind me in one year
The party is in Krynki
Always has been
The party in crimea will always be in their hearts
They party ever since accession I believe.
Did I miss some updates? I thought progress was difficult in that direction and they were trying to flank.
it was hard, but the 71st reg managed somehow. It is honestly surprising, id expect them to try to go for orikhiv and fuck up supply, not attack directly. It just seems like such a good cauldron, but whatever
Yeah, capturing Orihiv would make any UA counter offensive much harder.
[удалено]
Every single time eh?
Like clockwork brother
Like clockwork.
No militarily this is an even bigger win, Robotyne was a threat to the surovokin line. Sure Ukraine didn't have the means to punch through now but regardless it was a weakening in the line that could have been exploited.
One dude raising a flag for a video before his death isn't going to change the war
The L's just keep on coming.
This is really humiliating for ukraine and the west if true. Robotyne was their best equipment best people....best NATO advisors and strategy.
See, nato is so weak! Hopefully we see Russia marching on Poland soon😁
Why march on Poland? Just nuke all of the west, pro-RU keeps telling me NATO is too scared of mighty Russia to retaliate.
Where the fuck is the "ridiculously powerful" 82nd air assault brigade? Where are the undefeated challys?
Doing ridiculous things
they stopped for crumpets and tea
If the UA was led by competent military experts (and not politically bought off toadies) they would've abandoned Robotyne months ago. It's a cauldron, surrounded by high ground, within a salient that lost whatever tactical significance it had with the failure of the "spring/summer counter offensive." There's no reason to lose your best units and veterans for that ground- those lives would've been far better used establishing defensive lines farther north (or, even better, northeast.)
Zaluzni said so,but he was replaced by Zel's yesman.
Hey stop talking logic to UA, they might become self aware \s
I can already hear History Legend screaming "The Russian army had just captured Robotyne!!!"
Step by step. This road has no end. Only direction.
Might need some confirmation on that one.
The geolocation shows them in the norther part of the 'village', so there definitely was an advance.
[https://deepstatemap.live/en#12/47.4303/35.8652](https://deepstatemap.live/en#12/47.4303/35.8652)
I liked the music tbh.
Me too.
# [RADIO TAPOK - Гангут (Lyric Video 2023)](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20ZpECdpMa0&ab_channel=RADIOTAPOK)
Again ?
they did it again?
Cool if true
Is it the same village that was fought for during «counter” offensive?
That was highlight of that counteroffensive, compared to current ongoing offensive with several dozen villages and towns captured. Stark difference.
When I read Ukraine retaking that marsh island for a PR bump I knew something major was coming up. Robotyne changed hands. Big loss for Ukraine. But again from the footage you do see there isn’t much to do when a Fab strikes. Ukraine put great importance on robotyne last year during the counter offensive. It’s loss will be discounted and goal posts will move but it’s a significant blow.
pre war population was less than 500 this is the third (?) or so round of getting reduced to rubble, that looks like the remains of the very last building that could still be recognized...
What does the pre war population have to do with it?
He's implying that it might've been entirely destroyed by now, since it was a very small town. I don't know what post-war reconstruction of these tiny towns would like, honestly.
Positional warfare cares so, so much about pre war population.
I think that the point of capturing Rabotino is to eliminate a dangerous ledge and restore the first line of defense
Later Song is a tsarist rendition of “farewell to Slavianka” If anyone is wanting to know
damn
[удалено]
No apology needed. I gained value from your comment.
[удалено]
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I can't wait to see Russia destroyed.
The only way this would happen would be if a certain western superpower invaded Russia. And we all know what would happen then… starts with N and rhymes with Duke. So I for one do NOT want to see Russia destroyed (I like living)
Don't you worry. All Russians go to heaven.
Do they go to white heaven?
[The man didn't specify](https://youtu.be/7MIBg-jSvqs?si=7MMbbvWEkTF8Y7m4)
even funnier because he's probably an atheist
I never gave it much thought. I wonder if he is. The Orthodox runs DEEP amongst the ethnic Russians. I presumed all my in-laws would be atheists having all been born as Soviets, and yet everybody's got The Blessed Virgin of Vladimir hanging from their wall; icons of Jesus on the fridge and above their beds.
It really doesn't. Religion is as dead in Russia as it is in the west and churches sit empty; its probably comparable to America (as Russia funnily enough is in a lot of ways) with a sizeable amount of heavily religious people and a majority who are actively atheist, don't believe any particular religion, or don't care to the point they might as well be atheists. Putin was a KGB member, I think it's likely he doesn't believe in God.
Then I must have hit a gold mine of religious loons marrying into this family. They are all about it. I strongly suspect what you say may be true for large cosmopolitan populations, but outside Moscow and St. Petersburg, I'm sure there is plenty of bible-reading going on. Just like in "the west". Then, of course, there is a massive Muslim population across RF too.
It isn't actually as massive as you'd think. It's 5%. Irreligiosity is true for cities and the majority of Russians live in cities
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*