4 ms·
They can't. Russia simply cannot control the tens of millions survivors of it's brutal invasion even if they manage to defeat the Ukrainian army in the field, w
by sofixa 5y ago
They can't. Russia simply cannot control the tens of millions survivors of it's brutal invasion even if they manage to defeat the Ukrainian army in the field, which they can't. The attrition rate of troops, equipment ( which is why they've started using stuff from the reserves which was made decades ago, and probably has been maintained even worse than the supposedly combat ready equipment), morale and the general Russian economy are unsustainable. I honestly don't know how all of this could end, but Ukraine "losing" the war is extremely unlikely. Russia claiming a "win" over some very limited gains is a possibility , but that's not sustainable either. Best case scenario is a coup and immediate ceasefire, peace, one way tickets for most of the Russian high command and many of the frontline troops to The Hague. One can only dream.
- konart 5y agoI wasn't even talking about some kind of occupation. Even securing some sort of political victory is impossible at this point. NATO|West will be going all in into that one and we simple don't have the army\logistics or production to compete in any possible way. Either this shit is over by September or we are going for the red button in August.
- tablespoon 5y ago> They can't. Russia simply cannot control the tens of millions survivors of it's brutal invasion even if they manage to defeat the Ukrainian army in the field, which they can't. I wouldn't be so sure about that. If the Russians are brutal enough (and continue to be brutal) and the survivors have some place to flee too, they might be able to hold on to quite a bit if they can defeat the organized military by "evaporating" away those that would challenge them.
- ElectricalUnion 5y ago> They can't. Russia simply cannot control the tens of millions survivors of it's brutal invasion even if they manage to defeat the Ukrainian army in the field, which they can't. Well, there's no need for millions of survivors in wars. Right now, Russia is keeping it's line about "Ukraine is Russia" and with that, reasonable restraint towards civilians compared to Syria, but, if that is no longer "necessary" or "reasonable" in their point of view, using nukes and leaving no survivors is a cheap, cost-reducing strategy.
- sofixa 5y ago> Right now, Russia is keeping it's line about "Ukraine is Russia" and with that, reasonable restraint towards civilians compared to Syria I disagree with this. Mariupol, Kharkiv, etc. were bombed and shelled indiscriminately like Aleppo was.