5 ms·

Travel across anything not paved during spring break up is near impossible. I don’t think it’s break up, I think it’s resistance, they are getting stalled in t

by _3u10 5y ago

Travel across anything not paved during spring break up is near impossible. I don’t think it’s break up, I think it’s resistance, they are getting stalled in the cities. Ukraine has paved highways moving tanks isn’t an issue, except that the highways run through cities. The problem is fundamentally that for every soldier and civilian they kill they are creating 5 to 10 freedom fighters. The more people are killed the greater the resistance. The less likely they can hold the country without reprisals from the people. If they have to resort to barbarism to subdue the people then the sanctions will never end. Putin needs to establish a govt quickly that doesn’t have to resort to atrocities to govern. If he fails to do that he loses the greater overall war.

munk-a 5y ago
I don't know how accomplishable that really is at this point - it's looking like Russian troop cohesion is insanely low[1] and Putin may just need to withdraw forces to keep the domestic situation under wraps. I'm pretty sure if Putin started peace talks he'd be ousted at this point, so he just has to sorta pray that western powers don't stall out the annexation - otherwise I think he's pretty hooped domestically. 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/01/russia-low-morale-ukraine-invasion/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/01/russia-lo...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- brimble 5y ago
  There's still plenty of room for them to convert this apparent impending loss into a partial success by gaining control of the territory they care most about, which is (likely) the South (to relieve Crimea's currently tenuous & expensive situation) and South East (to take full control of the fossil fuel resources there and bridge their territory over to Crimea), which also happen to be the areas they're having the most success in, judging by the various maps of territory they're semi-successfully occupying.
  - _3u10 5y ago
    personally i always thought the greater invasion was so that he had something to deal away to get the sanctions lifted.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  > I'm pretty sure if Putin started peace talks Didn't this happen two days ago?
  - mickotron 5y ago
    It's not peace talks. It is something like "agree to our demands, otherwise we keep bombing". It's trying to get the outcome they want without further military action. And a takeover by any means is not a peaceful action.
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      > It's trying to get the outcome they want without further military action. That's peace talks. The end of military action is peace.
      - mickotron 5y ago
        I get what you are saying. But referring to it as "Peace Talks" is misleading. There is no goodwill or altruism here. It is purely another military strategy. If the outcome is occupation, that is not peace.
        thaumasiotes 5y ago
        > If the outcome is occupation, that is not peace. This is not a definition of "peace" that you share with the Anglophone community in general. Are the United States and Japan currently at war?
        mickotron 5y ago
        The US is not currently occupying Japan, but they did at some point. The US and Japan are currently in an alliance. Japan's constitution requires a self-defense force, so they don't have a normal military. That was imposed by the US after WWII. Please don't deflect. Let me ask you: do you think it would be just to have Russia occupy Ukraine? Do you think countries have a right to self determination and sovereignty? Russia was signatory to the Budapest Memorandum, basically agreeing to acknowledge and help protect Ukraine's borders. I wonder why you support occupation.
- torstenvl 5y ago
  I think it's obvious what he should do if he's smart. Focus troops in the southeast. Destroy the Azov Regiment. Take their uniforms, patch, flags, make a big show of it on all media. Claim mission accomplished. "We de-Nazified Ukraine!" Set up a base on the Azov, withdraw other forces to 2014 borders. Commit $x billion in rebuilding aid and payments to families in Ukraine, once sanctions are lifted and currency exchange returns to Feb 25th levels so they can afford it. Prosecute a few token scapegoats domestically for war crimes (anyone for whom the evidence would make it politically impossible not to). Ukraine will never trust them. But it's enough to take the pressure off, and enough for him to remain in power.
  - dekhn 5y ago
    It does seem like if he's just invaded donbas he could have gotten away with it. Having watched the previous fall of the soviet union eventually enough people in moscow get pissed off and there is a regime change, although I suspect putin has control of the apparatus and security forces. So, we might just see a Russia civil war.
    - InitialLastName 5y ago
      One thing that I've never seen discussed is the notion that the incident to break the 75-year "not nuking anybody" streak the world has been on could well be a civil war in a nuclear state, in which the side in control of the notional military apparatus sees no other way our of losing.
      - torstenvl 5y ago
        Luckily, people like Eric Swalwell - the Congressman who proposed using nuclear weapons against Americans who resist gun confiscation - are few and far between.
        munk-a 5y ago
        ... In a tweet, that was pretty clearly a troll[1]. It's important to clarify that he never seriously proposed the measure. 1. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/eric-swalwell-gun-owners-nukes/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/eric-swalwell-gun-owners-n...

by _3u10 5y ago

munk-a 5y ago

I don't know how accomplishable that really is at this point - it's looking like Russian troop cohesion is insanely low[1] and Putin may just need to withdraw forces to keep the domestic situation under wraps. I'm pretty sure if Putin started peace talks he'd be ousted at this point, so he just has to sorta pray that western powers don't stall out the annexation - otherwise I think he's pretty hooped domestically. 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/01/russia-low-morale-ukraine-invasion/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/01/russia-lo...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
brimble 5y ago
There's still plenty of room for them to convert this apparent impending loss into a partial success by gaining control of the territory they care most about, which is (likely) the South (to relieve Crimea's currently tenuous & expensive situation) and South East (to take full control of the fossil fuel resources there and bridge their territory over to Crimea), which also happen to be the areas they're having the most success in, judging by the various maps of territory they're semi-successfully occupying.
- _3u10 5y ago
  personally i always thought the greater invasion was so that he had something to deal away to get the sanctions lifted.
thaumasiotes 5y ago
> I'm pretty sure if Putin started peace talks Didn't this happen two days ago?
- mickotron 5y ago
  It's not peace talks. It is something like "agree to our demands, otherwise we keep bombing". It's trying to get the outcome they want without further military action. And a takeover by any means is not a peaceful action.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    > It's trying to get the outcome they want without further military action. That's peace talks. The end of military action is peace.
    - mickotron 5y ago
      I get what you are saying. But referring to it as "Peace Talks" is misleading. There is no goodwill or altruism here. It is purely another military strategy. If the outcome is occupation, that is not peace.
      - thaumasiotes 5y ago
        > If the outcome is occupation, that is not peace. This is not a definition of "peace" that you share with the Anglophone community in general. Are the United States and Japan currently at war?
        mickotron 5y ago
        The US is not currently occupying Japan, but they did at some point. The US and Japan are currently in an alliance. Japan's constitution requires a self-defense force, so they don't have a normal military. That was imposed by the US after WWII. Please don't deflect. Let me ask you: do you think it would be just to have Russia occupy Ukraine? Do you think countries have a right to self determination and sovereignty? Russia was signatory to the Budapest Memorandum, basically agreeing to acknowledge and help protect Ukraine's borders. I wonder why you support occupation.
torstenvl 5y ago
I think it's obvious what he should do if he's smart. Focus troops in the southeast. Destroy the Azov Regiment. Take their uniforms, patch, flags, make a big show of it on all media. Claim mission accomplished. "We de-Nazified Ukraine!" Set up a base on the Azov, withdraw other forces to 2014 borders. Commit $x billion in rebuilding aid and payments to families in Ukraine, once sanctions are lifted and currency exchange returns to Feb 25th levels so they can afford it. Prosecute a few token scapegoats domestically for war crimes (anyone for whom the evidence would make it politically impossible not to). Ukraine will never trust them. But it's enough to take the pressure off, and enough for him to remain in power.
- dekhn 5y ago
  It does seem like if he's just invaded donbas he could have gotten away with it. Having watched the previous fall of the soviet union eventually enough people in moscow get pissed off and there is a regime change, although I suspect putin has control of the apparatus and security forces. So, we might just see a Russia civil war.
  - InitialLastName 5y ago
    One thing that I've never seen discussed is the notion that the incident to break the 75-year "not nuking anybody" streak the world has been on could well be a civil war in a nuclear state, in which the side in control of the notional military apparatus sees no other way our of losing.
    - torstenvl 5y ago
      Luckily, people like Eric Swalwell - the Congressman who proposed using nuclear weapons against Americans who resist gun confiscation - are few and far between.
      - munk-a 5y ago
        ... In a tweet, that was pretty clearly a troll[1]. It's important to clarify that he never seriously proposed the measure. 1. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/eric-swalwell-gun-owners-nukes/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/eric-swalwell-gun-owners-n...