you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -17 points 1 year ago (39 children)

They are steadily achieving all of their stated objectives for the SMO. Russia isn't trying to do a Marvel-style total destruction of Ukraine like you see in hollywood depictions of war.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 39 child comments
  • [+] 42 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -21 points 1 year ago

    Their goalposts haven't moved, their strategy was to open with shock and awe and then push for protracted war, taking advantage of surprise. They didn't expect to topple Ukraine in a week, that's largely a misquote from the early 2010s.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (35 children)

    "steadily" as in... they complete one every couple of years? How long until they're done? 10-20-30 years? They started this in 2014 and 11 years later they've accomplished next to nothing beyond creating a pile of bodies.

    If germany took this long to take poland it probably wouldn't have been world war at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 1 year ago (33 children)

    The SMO started in 2022. In 2014, after the western-backed Euromaidan coup, Crimea was annexed but then there were multiple attempts to resolve things peacefully, called the Minsk Agreements, which Kiev broke both times. In 2014, Donetsk and Luhansk seceded from the new far-right led Ukraine, fastforward to 2022 after a decade of fighting and Russia agrees to go in and resolve things by force.

    Since 2022, Russia has steadily been gaining more and more territory, and has nearly completely taken the four oblasts they declared as their targets for annexation. Ukraine has slowly but steadily been losing ground, and NATO has proven to be incapable of matching Russian industrial output. Russia isn't trying to do a Blitzkreig, they are going carefully to fully demillitarize Ukraine and prevent casualties on their own end. They have the industrial capacity to field a protracted war, so they are playing to their advantage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (30 children)

    I read a few articles that said at russias current pace it would take them a hundred years to take Ukraine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Russia stops at Zaporishia and Dniepro (and Donetsk) if Ukraine wants to keep losing. Kherson, Odessa, Karkiv if Ukraine really insists. They have other territories they are willing to trade to facilitate important liberations without having to destroy what they liberate. At any rate, the pace of Russian advance has increased in last year, and increased again in last months. It is far higher than the 3.5 year average of the SMO.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (26 children)

    They aren't trying to take Ukraine, though, and they can progress faster as frontlines are broken through. Pokrovsk, as an example, is currently encircled by Russian forces and will probably be abandoned by Kiev soon, or a large-scale siege will occur.

    Whether you're pro-Ukrainian or not, it's important to recognize that Ukraine is steadily losing ground and has far less staying power in a protracted war than Russia does. Russia's advancing slowly and basically forcing a long-term war, which works in their favor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (25 children)

    Shame Russia is doing so poorly after so long and with so many casualties. Plus their own economy is in the shitter. Having to import oil and gas now since their refineries seem to always be on fire. And pick up soldiers from Africa and Indonesia and let’s not forget North Korea.

    Ukraine will fight to the last man

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (24 children)

    Russia is achieving its objectives, it's economy is strengthened by trade with BRICS, and the damage on refineries has been minimal. Ukraine doesn't want to fight to the last man, support for the war is waning and forced conscription is already in place. The fact that Russia has volunteers from the DPRK, Cuba, etc doesn't mean they are losing, Ukraine has volunteers from western countries as well.

    I hope the Ukrainian people can be free from this war soon, and that means surrender now. I don't share your bloodlust.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    Bloodlust lol.

    The war can be over if Russia gets the fuck out. Ukraine will fight to the bitter end. Absolutely. They do not, categorically and historically, want to be under Russian rule. And that rings true for pretty much every ex-Soviet nation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    No, there is no fantasy universe where Russia just turns around and stops when they are winning the war. Ukrainians do not want to be sacrificed for foreign profits, and are deserting in huge numbers (see the subject of this post). The far-right nationalist movements in ex-soviet states are temporary, in the long run there will be a return to socialism. There was no "Russian rule" in the USSR.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    I think you are in a fantasy world.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (14 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    Just from everything you’ve said

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    So you don't really have a point, just ad hominem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (11 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    I absolutely have given many points here and never once resorted to ad hominem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    By all means clarify your points.

    Your position though is clearly biased against Ukraine, given the instance you’re positing form.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I'm biased in that I'm a communist, sure, but my methods of analysis focus on material reality, not marvel-esque ideas of Russia just turning around and walking away right as it's clear they are winning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Not really winning as I’ve mentioned before. They’ve barely gained any ground this year.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    They are steadily gaining ground, and Ukraine can't stop Russia. Russia can go as slowly as they like to prevent casualties, they aren't doing a suicidal blitzkreig.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Ukraine can stop Russia. By continuing to stop them. One nation against the “mightiest” and largest nation on earth and in doing so proving that they (Russia) are in fact a paper dragon resting on their laurels and former glory.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Ukraine is losing, they aren't stopping Russia. Right now, Pokrovsk is encircled and about to fall to Russia. It is in Ukraine's best interests to concede and stop the bloodshed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Ok so if they concede and then Russia continues…what then. Will you change your tune? Or just continue to parrot the propaganda?

    Russia is as interested in stopping at your imaginary line as Israel is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    If Ukraine concedes, why would Russia continue? Why do you compare them with a genocidal settler-colony that needs to expand to continue their settler-colonial project?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Why would Russia continue?

    Hmm why would Russia continue. Oof you got me there. I have no idea. Why would they continue?

    I mean given their peaceful history for the last 20 years of not attacking and expanding their borders, I can totally see why you’d think they would stop completely on the imaginary line.

    I mean they totally stopped after Moldova, Georgia and Crimea.

    This isn’t a marvel-esque situation where an invading force has spent 4 years gaining ground and checks notes suddenly stops.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    If Ukraine had 10000 troops from any NATO nation the outcome would be much different.

    Those NK troops got used as fodder

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I really doubt 10,000 NATO troops would make any tangible difference besides escalation from Russia's side. The troops from the DPRK were largely sent to honor the defense agreement and to get troop training in Kursk, which was successful for the DPRK.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Th only way Russia can “escalate” is nukes or more strikes at civilian targets. They don’t have a secret reserve of highly trained and experienced troops they could magically send to win the war

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Russia has tools like Oreshnik and T-90s that they aren't fielding. There's a lot of ways the war can escalate without relying on nukes or civilian targets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Why won’t they field their best stuff and win the war quickly?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Because that's not how economies of war work. Russia doesn't need to waste their best equipment when they are doing well with their current equipment, they just need to gradually proceed as they are to minimize their own casualties. Avoiding mines, encircling strongholds before taking them, etc wouldn't make any sense to field the best stuff that also costs the most to replace.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Russia moved to take Crimea only after the Ukranian govt was couped by the USA, because there's a Russian naval base on the Crimean peninsula

    being surprised by this is like saying the USA wouldn't invade South Korea (or any of the 100s of states with US bases) if their govt was couped by another government

    as always, you're more patient than I, comrade, I respect you immensely

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Yep, when it comes to Russia liberals start thinking about their actions, past, present, and future, in terms of how evil they are, rather than as another country. It's always too weak yet too strong, always capable of steering foreign elections and taking on all of Europe but also about to collapse, etc. It's tiring, because after the dust settles the liberal cope will always be that NATO didn't support Ukraine enough for them to win, which will always be an unfalsifiable hypothesis.

    And thanks, I appreciate it comrade!

  • source
  • parent