3 ms·

I think Russia knows that this is a war with NATO for world hegemony and it is going to last a very long time. Maybe a decade or more. Thus, what's the best w

I think Russia knows that this is a war with NATO for world hegemony and it is going to last a very long time. Maybe a decade or more. Thus, what's the best way to conserve resources and deplete the enemy? Just sit in defensive positions with good logistics and shell while the Ukranians send more and more cannon fodder and the west slowly runs out of armaments. Eventually, they'll send the polish recruits. Then they'll send the rest of Europe, and finally American troops. That's why Russia is going slowly here and not getting out over their skis with the advance. I think China was supposed to not back Russia, but they reneged on the deal. That's the critical thing that went wrong with the western war effort and why Russia's economy did not collapse as was expected.

lostlogin 4y ago
This is one view, the other is that the Russian military and its supplies have been decimated, it’s military smashed and the west has spent a fraction of a fraction of its reserves and none of its armies. Do you really think that Russia isn’t trying to advance? China may come out in the best position, but surely that’s the best that the non western world can hope for?
- narrator 4y ago
  Russia isn't trying to advance. They withdrew in Kherson in an orderly fashion because they believed the supply lines were too vulnerable. The Ruble did not crash vs. the U.S dollar. In fact it strengthened for a while and it's back to its long-term average[1]. Anecdotal reports from inside Russia from average Russians that I read on other forums seem to show that there is not a lot of economic stress. [1] https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=RUB&view=2Y https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=RUB&view=2Y
  - lostlogin 4y ago
    Yes, but that wasn’t a victory, its was a loss. The earlier retreats were complete collapses. What would you describe the carry on in the Bakhmut region as? That’s chewing up Russian resources at a far higher rate than the western ones, and for a ruined town of little strategic significance.
    - somenameforme 4y ago
      This [1] is a map of the war. To locate Bakhmut, find the most critical section of the war and go to the center of it. You will be at or near Bakhmut. Alternatively, locate highway 32 ("H-32") and follow it straight to the frontline. The battle for that city has been going on for about 8 months now; the rhetoric about it being strategically irrelevant only began once the tide began shifting. But I think the real meaning of Bakhmut is not about its strategic value. What really wins battles, and wars alike, is morale. This is why things like propaganda and disinformation plays such a significant role. You try to keep your own side's morale high, while doing everything to break that of the enemy. If we imagine war only in terms of strategy then it's very possible that something like defense in depth [2] would be optimal for Ukraine. It's a massive country with lots of well fortified locations. Let the Russian forces overextend and suffer severe casualties advancing on ever fresh fortifications. But the problem is morale. Each time you fall back you suffer a morale loss, and each time the enemy achieves victory they receive a morale boost. And in Bakhmut this has become critical. Both sides have suffered immense losses there, and so the ultimate conclusion of that battle is going to have a tremendous impact on morale. I think this is the main reason there's so much dispute on the proper strategy. You have to measure an immeasurable (morale/morale impact) in order to determine the proper action, all the while balancing this against the reality on the ground. [1] - https://ukraine.liveuamap.com/uk https://ukraine.liveuamap.com/uk [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_in_depth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_in_depth

lostlogin 4y ago

This is one view, the other is that the Russian military and its supplies have been decimated, it’s military smashed and the west has spent a fraction of a fraction of its reserves and none of its armies. Do you really think that Russia isn’t trying to advance? China may come out in the best position, but surely that’s the best that the non western world can hope for?

narrator 4y ago
Russia isn't trying to advance. They withdrew in Kherson in an orderly fashion because they believed the supply lines were too vulnerable. The Ruble did not crash vs. the U.S dollar. In fact it strengthened for a while and it's back to its long-term average[1]. Anecdotal reports from inside Russia from average Russians that I read on other forums seem to show that there is not a lot of economic stress. [1] https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=RUB&view=2Y https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=RUB&view=2Y
- lostlogin 4y ago
  Yes, but that wasn’t a victory, its was a loss. The earlier retreats were complete collapses. What would you describe the carry on in the Bakhmut region as? That’s chewing up Russian resources at a far higher rate than the western ones, and for a ruined town of little strategic significance.
  - somenameforme 4y ago
    This [1] is a map of the war. To locate Bakhmut, find the most critical section of the war and go to the center of it. You will be at or near Bakhmut. Alternatively, locate highway 32 ("H-32") and follow it straight to the frontline. The battle for that city has been going on for about 8 months now; the rhetoric about it being strategically irrelevant only began once the tide began shifting. But I think the real meaning of Bakhmut is not about its strategic value. What really wins battles, and wars alike, is morale. This is why things like propaganda and disinformation plays such a significant role. You try to keep your own side's morale high, while doing everything to break that of the enemy. If we imagine war only in terms of strategy then it's very possible that something like defense in depth [2] would be optimal for Ukraine. It's a massive country with lots of well fortified locations. Let the Russian forces overextend and suffer severe casualties advancing on ever fresh fortifications. But the problem is morale. Each time you fall back you suffer a morale loss, and each time the enemy achieves victory they receive a morale boost. And in Bakhmut this has become critical. Both sides have suffered immense losses there, and so the ultimate conclusion of that battle is going to have a tremendous impact on morale. I think this is the main reason there's so much dispute on the proper strategy. You have to measure an immeasurable (morale/morale impact) in order to determine the proper action, all the while balancing this against the reality on the ground. [1] - https://ukraine.liveuamap.com/uk https://ukraine.liveuamap.com/uk [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_in_depth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_in_depth