I've barely followed what's going on in the conflict, but I think some regions of Eastern Ukraine are the insurgents with respect to the Ukraine government. So in their case perhaps they've had the time for the past years and finally Ukraine's watches are winding down there. Great proverb.
Then maybe you should go bone up on what has happened in the last week or so before commenting? Things have moved quite a bit compared to the state that you describe, to put it very mildly.
No I know enough to know about the separatist regions, if not by propaganda then by actual action because western governments have begun to scrutinize business dealings with entities in those separatist regions, not just Russia. If everybody had to be actual experts in something before commenting on it here, there would be zero comments about any Russia/Ukraine story.
Aside from that It's extremely difficult to get reliable information from any source I have found about the details of the situation. I've not seen anything that is contrary to what I said though. Maybe you can enlighten me.
So you're unable to even point out what part of my comment was not correct or outdated. Doesn't sound like you actually even know. Maybe you should take your own advice with respect to commenting then.
All the Russian speaking Ukrainians are pro Ukraine and want the Russians out. So how likely do you think it is that those regions are really separatist?
Russia claims that the Russians that are fighting there are "volunteers". So basically everybody in that region knows very well who they are really fighting. Not Ukrainians but Russian "volunteers".
Ukrainians have both the time (they tasted western freedom and don't want to go back, russian troops need to be paid by the day) and the watches (javlins, stingers, US intelligence and now extra jet fighters)
People seem to make the mistake to think that the citizens that speak Russian are automatically pro Russian. But that isn't the case, they are Lithuanians first for the most part.
Good luck finding video on YouTube favorable to any Russian viewpoints. “The media” is cultivated to display or at least promote the main narrative of the US policymakers.
> All the Russian speaking Ukrainians are pro Ukraine and want the Russians out.
I didn't say they wanted Russian occupation necessarily, just that they were separatist from Ukraine. They were all significantly in favor of Ukrainian independence from USSR of course.
> So how likely do you think it is that those regions are really separatist?
Are you in denial of the existence of Ukrainian separatist regions and the Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic?
> All the Russian speaking Ukrainians are pro Ukraine and want the Russians out
The ethnic lines between Government/Separatists aren't that clear and if that were the case, then Putin would be correct in criticising discrimination too.
Ukraine has the time, in the sense that each day that the Russian army is delayed there are more chances that someone in Russia will decide to get rid of Putin. This is roughly what happens to every dictator that doesn't know when to stop, and usually dictators are so much self confident that they soon lose any contact with reality. Putin has gone too far and now he can't withdraw because that would be his political death, and can't drag things for too long because of the above reason, therefore he hopes to bring Ukrainians to their knees as quick as possible, but that can't be achieved without hitting indiscriminately lots of civilians, therefore no matter how it ends, he's already fucked.
Also, he presumably knows all skeletons in the closet kept by the oligarchs, so it's very likely that if an international arrest warrant is issued, he'll rather be executed in Russia than surrendered.
This perspective seems to be incredibly optimistic. Oil-rich dictators can live a long time, even as they drive their countries to ruin. I don't know that there is much of a power base against him, and he still seems to have broad support from the populace (which might or might not matter).
Take for example Saddam Hussein. His 1980-1988 failed invasion of Iran cost 100,000 to 200,000 Iraqi lives (plus wounded and 70,000 Iraqi POWs held by Iran). Then the 1990-1991 failed invasion of Kuwait cost another 20,000 to 50,000 Iraqi lives… And yet he might well have never lost control, short of the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.
That is wishful thinking. Despite the initial blunders, Russia is advancing in Ukraine at the same pace Germany was in Poland. And it's unlikely they'll get worse as time goes on (the Wehrmacht in its time used Poland to massively improve their operational readiness). Dictators in times of war, in countries subjected to isolation, tend to stick around. And even then, the absence of Putin doesn't mean the general trajectory of Russia would change.
I really don't see much hope for Ukraine, and considering the size of the NATO fast response teams, I expect more countries to fold before Russia starts stalling. I'd say every country without its own autonomous nuclear arsenal is at risk. That's includes everyone under America's umbrella.
Russia can and in a way has won 'stage 1', the quick advance. But now they have to keep it, supply their troops and maintain presence and that is a very expensive operation in a country that really doesn't want you. Extra hard when it's cold you have no food and you're running out of fuel. Vehicles are being abandoned and there is plenty of evidence for self sabotage.
Supply their troops right across their border? Where do you think ukraine is? The side that will have problems with supplies is the one that had their armories, oil refineries, storage facilities, etc destroyed.
> maintain presence
Something they've done for centuries? They don't have to maintain a presence. The ukrainian army will. Notice how there aren't any major battles? Ever wonder why Zelensky is asking the civilians to fight? Because most of the ukranian army is not fighting.
> that is a very expensive operation in a country that really doesn't want you.
Half the country is russian to begin with. More than half the country voted to align with russia. That's why the West staged a coup.
> Extra hard when it's cold you have no food and you're running out of fuel.
It's only going to get warmer and Russia is not going to run out of food nor fuel. You do realize russia is the largest fossil fuel producer right?
> Vehicles are being abandoned and there is plenty of evidence for self sabotage.
Then how come major ukrainian cities are under seige?
Read what you wrote and ask yourself, is it really what's happening or is it what you wish was happening? I don't think the ghost of kiev is going to save ukraine. Unless a major power steps in to help ukraine, it'll be "liberated" in the next few weeks. And then ukranians will go on with their lives. No country is going to step in to fight russia.
> Ever wonder why Zelensky is asking the civilians to fight?
Because the total size of the Ukraine armed forces of allservekces is smaller than the Russian + Belarusian land forces deployed against them, not to count the supporting air and naval forces, where Ukraine
is outnumbered by more than an order of magnitude.
> Unless a major power steps in to help ukraine, it'll be "liberated" in the next few weeks. And then ukranians will go on with their lives.
This is as stupid as when people said the same basic thing about the 2003 Iraq invasion. (Something along that line is, IIRC, a big factor in Gen. Franks describing then-Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith as “the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth”.) People can't be relied on to just go back to their lives when a hostile foreign occupation is imposed, even if the regular forces of the preceding government are comprehensively defeated.
> No country is going to step in to fight russia.
Just like no country stepped in to fight the USSR (or the US) in Afghanistan. And neither of the armies involved in that had the degree of morale and logistical problems the Russian Army has displayed thus far in Ukraine.
> Because the total size of the Ukraine armed forces of allservekces is smaller than the Russian + Belarusian land forces deployed against them, not to count the supporting air and naval forces, where Ukraine is outnumbered by more than an order of magnitude.
The ukranian army is 250000 strong, there are less than 200000 russians in ukraine. What does army size have to do with anything. Smaller armies have fought larger armies all the time.
> People can't be relied on to just go back to their lives when a hostile foreign occupation is imposed, even if the regular forces of the preceding government are comprehensively defeated.
Ukraine : Russia != Iraq : US. Ukraine is ethnically, religiously, militarily, historically, etc tied with russia. Iraq has nothing to do with the US. Until just 8 years ago, russia and ukraine was intertwined. Yes, if saudi arabia or turkey invaded ukraine, I would expect a massive insurgency. Was there a massive insurgency after the union beat the confederates? Of course not, because we were the same people.
> Just like no country stepped in to fight the USSR (or the US) in Afghanistan.
Sarcasm?
> And neither of the armies involved in that had the degree of morale and logistical problems the Russian Army has displayed thus far in Ukraine.
Right. Because they ghost of kiev is terrorizing them right? You are literally restating intelligence propaganda. It's standard propaganda during war to portray the enemy has low morale. The russians are saying the same thing about the ukranians and the west.
People just cling to propaganda that matches their agenda. The first casualty in war is truth. I would stop believing all the propaganda and just think about what's happening rationally.
Hey I personally know Ukrainians, also those with a military background. And I can tell you, you are full of shit.
You claim that the Ukrainian army, under control of the anti-russian government, is not fighting? Why is that? And the government that staged a coup against the will of the people is now giving those people guns to fight against... who exactly?
Your story is completely contradicting itself kamaraad. Even the Russian speaking Ukrainians want the Russians out.
And guess what, Zelenskyy's first language is Russian.
You clearly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about so I'll just stop responding but just know that I got a good chuckle out of this comment because of the incredible disconnect between the situation as it is and your view of it.
> Unless a major power steps in to help ukraine, it'll be "liberated" in the next few weeks. And then ukranians will go on with their lives.
If you really the situation this way I can definitely assume you know no Ukrainians at all. It's such an absurd statement given the current situation and how Ukrainians are reacting (I know 2 who just left Sweden to go back there and help), I'm saving your comment to come pester you when the insurgency and urban warfare starts in a few months.
It did not as far as evidence goes it was initiated by Ukrainians themselves. The west did happily supply the weapons to questionable groups, but the will to change was certainly there. If that reduced corruption is another question.
A bit ironic that separatists are called separatists in light of the revolution though. Although the party that came to power after the revolution has since been replaced by the current one. I think they formed just 2-3 years ago.
> Zelenskyy was elected president in 2019 with 73.2% of the votes.
I was talking about before the coup where the ukranian population voted for a pro-russia president. Not 5 years after the coup. Lets see what the election results will be 5 years after russia takes control over ukraine and propagandize nonstop for 5 years.
> Do you actually believe yourself or do you know you are lying?
Do you really think I was referring to zelensky? Do you really think I would lie about such a trivial thing that anyone could google within a second? Or do you think you misunderstood what I was talking about. What I wrote "More than half the country voted to align with russia. That's why the West staged a coup."
Why did you cut out the "That's why the West staged a coup" part?
You and the parent comment are operating on totally different time scales.
Russia will "win" the invasion. But so long as enough Ukrainians (it need only be a small minority) would prefer to die than be subjugated and there are enough others to materially support them the conclusion is a forgone one. The Russian people will run out of fucks to give long before Ukraine runs out of people.
Poland is also a good reference point for the argument you're making. They had a long lasting resistance movement, hundreds of thousands of diehard fighters. Yet it had to wait until 1989 for any sort of independence. As for material support, it assumes both ability and willingness on the part of sympathizers. The ability might be gone were the Baltics or Finland be invaded, and the willingness might vanish when the war takes a sufficiently heavy toll.
>Yet it had to wait until 1989 for any sort of independence.
Is it not fair to say the nuclear deterrent has weakened, and the reason Poland had to wait was because NATO was afraid of supporting the resistance too much?
> And even then, the absence of Putin doesn't mean the general trajectory of Russia would change.
You never know. You could see, in the broadcast Putin's security council meeting the fidgeting and fear of its members. And those are supposedly the people who will take over if Putin croaks.