[potatototoo99]

The war will also continue until the Russians win, since they have already formally annexed a few regions, and the Crimea is strategically and historically important.

So if I had to guess, the war ends when the US president changes and they no longer want to support the ongoing conflict, and a demilitarized border is created between Ukraine and the lost regions.

[_kbh_]

> The war will also continue until the Russians win, since they have already formally annexed a few regions, and the Crimea is strategically and historically important.

They have already formally annexed, and subsequently lost a tonne of the area they formally annexed.

Nothing happened.

Crimea is also Ukrainian territory and not Russian, when they lose it im sure they throw another hissy fit like they do nearly every week now. But no one will give it any mind as Russia does it weekly.

> So if I had to guess, the war ends when the US president changes and they no longer want to support the ongoing conflict, and a demilitarized border is created between Ukraine and the lost regions.

My guess is the war ends when enough Russians die that the Russians back at home decide they have had enough of the war.

[khochesh_kushat]

If the war continues until Russia wins simply because they annexed regions, then surely the next step is to annex a few more regions for fun and profit.

[akimball]

Finland seems obvious.

[dragonwriter]

Georgia and Moldova seem more obvious, but there is a reason that in the current wave of Russian aggression Sweden and Finland applied to join NATO and the Baltic republics and other countries of NATO’s eastern flank have been among the most assertive about the need to support Ukraine; there are lots of obvious targets if the US isn’t willing to assist Russia’s neighbors in resisting aggression.

[polotics]

Any end of the war that shows aggression pays off dividends means the start of many other aggressions elsewhere, a new world order of might-makes-right that can only stabilise again once everyone is armed with nukes.

[potatototoo99]

I don't think any outcome at this time would be a success for Russia, but feeding the meatgrinder until the world runs out of Ukranians just to send a message about aggression seems stupid.

Of course might-makes-right, the current world order was built on that - the military superiority of the US after WW2. Since then the champion of that new world order didn't shy away from invading other countries.

[polotics]

You write: "until the world runs out of Ukranians". This is very offensive, as it erases the process by which some Ukrainians are dying. Anyways, back to basics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia

Population Growth rate Decrease -0.39 (2020)[2] Birth rate Decrease 9.8 births/1,000 population (2020)[2] Death rate Neutral decrease 14.6 deaths/1,000 population (2020)[2] Life expectancy Decrease 71.54 years (2020)[2] • male Decrease 66.49 years (2020)[2] • female Decrease 76.43 years (2020)[2]

It is Russian that are deciding collectively that the world should run out of Russians. This is a sad fact, I wish Russians would get fairness and hope some day.

[msm_]

> but feeding the meatgrinder until the world runs out of Ukranians just to send a message about aggression

Or Russians.

[akimball]

Correlation is not causation. Perhaps right makes might. Or perhaps both are caused by another factor entirely, such as brane interactions.

[dragonwriter]

> The war will also continue until the Russians win, since they have already formally annexed a few regions

They didn’t control much of the territory they purported to annex when they annexed it, and they’ve lost more of it since. The PR effort represented by that annexation is not a sign that the war will progress until Russian victory, if anything its the opposite.

> and the Crimea is strategically and historically important.

Crimea being strategically and historically important is certainly the reason it was invaded and seized in 2014, but its not something that makes Russian victory inevitable.

> So if I had to guess, the war ends when the US president changes and they no longer want to support the ongoing conflict

A US president abandoning Ukraine would definitely impact the course of that front of the war, and might result in a complete Russian victory over Ukraine [0]; that won’t end the regional war that started with Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008, it will just shift the active fronts to Moldova and Georgia.

Not to mention the impacts on other areas of friction between the same China/Russia/NK/Iran bloc and the US, particularly in Syria, that will result from a demonstration of America’s lack of resolve, especially if it is accompanied by easing of the resistance in the European front of what has already become a global conflict.

[0] it might also shatter US relations with European allies especially the Eastern flank of NATO, which has been pushing support for Ukraine against Russian aggression harder than anyone, including the US, for reasons which should be geographically and historically obvious. It’s clear that there is a faction in the US, including at least the leading contender for the main opposition party’s nomination for the Presidency, that would see that as a plus, too, though why is less clear.