Russia Invades Ukraine XVII

[Huckleberry]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1894591455429001439

Macron giving Fox an interview in which he puts forward the French & European point of view on what a peace deal on Ukraine needs:
1. Security guarantees
2. European peacekeeping forces
3. A strong Ukrainian Army numbering 1M soldiers
4. “A U.S. backstop”

 

[81usaf92]

Russia can’t be driven back without US direct intervention. We sadly either accept some form of negotiated peace that preserves as much of Ukraine as possible or lose the whole thing. Crimsonaudio was expressing the only way to win was US forces intervening. Which I am adamantly against.

There in lies the problem. Russia despite what liberal media and a bunch of wishful thinking entities believe is going to throw every man at having some positive end to the war. Putin has 4 years to come up with what that looks like and Zelensky might only have 4 months before he has less distance between Kyiv and the Russian front to negotiate for.

I think Trump winning the presidency ended all hope for a pro Ukrainian peace settlement, if one existed in the first place. At this point I think unless Britain, Turkey, Poland, and France want to send troops into Ukraine then it’s in Zelensky’s best interest to find an agreement that Ukraine can live with because time is about to run out without US aid.

 

[AWRTR]

There in lies the problem. Russia despite what liberal media and a bunch of wishful thinking entities believe is going to throw every man at having some positive end to the war. Putin has 4 years to come up with what that looks like and Zelensky might only have 4 months before he has less distance between Kyiv and the Russian front to negotiate for.

I think Trump winning the presidency ended all hope for a pro Ukrainian peace settlement, if one existed in the first place. At this point I think unless Britain, Turkey, Poland, and France want to send troops into Ukraine then it’s in Zelensky’s best interest to find an agreement that Ukraine can live with because time is about to run out without US aid.

Time is slowly running out even with US aid. You’re right Putin will continue the meat grinder.

 

[Tidewater]

Time is slowly running out even with US aid. You’re right Putin will continue the meat grinder.

And, the unfortunate thing is that the Russian system appears to be self-sustaining at this point, even with the Russian casualty rate. Given the ratio between Russian casualties and Russian territorial advances, this appears to be a race between the collapse of the Putin regime (unlikely) and the collapse of the Ukrainian army. And time is on the Russians' side.

This really is reminiscent of the Confederate side in the War to Prevent Southern Independence. Grant kept stretching his lines around Petersburg further and further south and west. Lee kept stretching his lines to match, but had fewer soldiers and was losing them at a faster rate. Finally April 1-2 1865, the Confederate front snapped. The collapse of this army on this front swept away the government in the operations that immediately followed. Ukraine would be wise to bear this example in mind.

 

[crimsonaudio]

And, the unfortunate thing is that the Russian system appears to be self-sustaining at this point, even with the Russian casualty rate. Given the ratio between Russian casualties and Russian territorial advances, this appears to be a race between the collapse of the Putin regime (unlikely) and the collapse of the Ukrainian army. And time is on the Russians' side.

This really is reminiscent of the Confederate side in the War to Prevent Southern Independence. Grant kept stretching his lines around Petersburg further and further south and west. Lee kept stretching his lines to match, but had fewer soldiers and was losing them at a faster rate. Finally April 1-2 1865, the Confederate front snapped. The collapse of this army on this front swept away the government in the operations that immediately followed. Ukraine would be wise to bear this example in mind.

Based on your military knowledge, what are the chances the Russians have some sort of catastrophic breakthrough in the Ukrainian lines? Are the Russians even trying this and if so, do the Ukrainians have enough reserves to stop them?

 

[Bamaro]

Are you literally not reading the posts?

Ukraine cannot win without more bodies to fight. Weapons aren't enough. I don't know how much more imply I can say it.

I'm reading. I'll repeat, no US troups. Its your opinion that this cant be ended without more boots on the ground. I'm not agreeing or arguing against that point. I will say this, we know where the drone and missile attacks are orininating from. Maybe these should be targeted and stop worrying about upseting Putin. Dont believe for a second that Red China isn't watching the weak response.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Its your opinion that this cant be ended without more boots on the ground.

I've not found a single person who has studied war that believes Ukraine can win with their troop levels. Russia simply outmans them.

 

[Tidewater]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1894591455429001439

Macron giving Fox an interview in which he puts forward the French & European point of view on what a peace deal on Ukraine needs:
1. Security guarantees
2. European peacekeeping forces
3. A strong Ukrainian Army numbering 1M soldiers
4. “A U.S. backstop”

Macron is impressive.
To speak extemporaneously in a foreign language like that requires a sound grasp of the facts and what he wants to say and where he wants his country to go.

Franco-British force on the ground inside Ukraine but not on the front lines. He understands the necessity of a strong mandate so when a violation occurs, the international community is not wringing their hands and drafting letters telling Putin how angry they are with him.

 

[Tidewater]

Based on your military knowledge, what are the chances the Russians have some sort of catastrophic breakthrough in the Ukrainian lines? Are the Russians even trying this and if so, do the Ukrainians have enough reserves to stop them?

It will happen eventually, it is just a matter of time.
When it does, if the Austrian colonel whose briefing I posted a few days ago is correct (400k Ukrainian soldiers on the front lines and 400k in reserve and along other frontiers), then a breakthrough will be bad, but not the end.
I am not sure what kind of units are along other frontiers and in reserve (type of unit, armor, infantry etc.) and what quality (how many of the soldiers are over 45?), but it won't be the end.

 

[81usaf92]

I've not found a single person who has studied war that believes Ukraine can win with their troop levels. Russia simply outmans them.

Their best outcome for Ukraine might be something like the Winter War in which they lose some territory after a late Russian push.

 

[Isaiah 63:1]

Just one question: did you vote for Trump?

What relevance does my vote have on my assessment of the geopolitics? I'm either right, wrong, or somewhere on the spectrum irregardless...

 

[Tidewater]

What relevance does my vote have on my assessment of the geopolitics? I'm either right, wrong, or somewhere on the spectrum irregardless...

Sorry for being nosy.
It has more to do with your assessment that the United States would honor its treaty obligations under the Washington Treaty. I'd ask what evidence you have for that conclusion.
Trump has this weird ability to get his domestic opponents to come to the strangest conclusions.
If you are a Trump voter and you believe it would be 50/50 whether the US would honor Article V of the Washington Treaty, then I'd ask why you voted for him.
If you are a Biden-Harris voter, then I would chalk your assessment up to partisan thinking.

 

[Tidewater]

What relevance does my vote have on my assessment of the geopolitics? I'm either right, wrong, or somewhere on the spectrum irregardless...

I learned early on that Trump just drives some folks stark raving insane.
Here is an example. Billy Graham died. Trump announced he would attend the funeral. His opposition said, "Oh. My. Gosh! Graham was a nice man and you are going to make his funeral all about you! You precocious boor!"
Then Trump announced out of respect for the family's privacy, he was not going to attend. "Oh. My. Gosh! You can't even be bothered to attend his funeral. You self-centered lout!"
I remember thinking, "Dang, this guy literally cannot win with some people no matter what he does."

There is plenty of legitimate things on which to criticize him. (No, Donald, Ukraine did not "start the war."), I just try to keep my criticisms based in facts, not conjecture about his motivations or his future policy, which are much more difficult to discern.

 

[Bamaro]

I've not found a single person who has studied war that believes Ukraine can win with their troop levels. Russia simply outmans them.

Lets meet and have a drink. That will be 1. There are alternatives to more boots on the ground. Thats not where Russis is having its biggest success. Playing only defense is not a good strategy.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

I learned early on that Trump just drives some folks stark raving insane.
Here is an example. Billy Graham died. Trump announced he would attend the funeral. His opposition said, "Oh. My. Gosh! Graham was a nice man and you are going to make his funeral all about you! You precocious boor!"
Then Trump announced out of respect for the family's privacy, he was not going to attend. "Oh. My. Gosh! You can't even be bothered to attend his funeral. You self-centered lout!"
I remember thinking, "Dang, this guy literally cannot win with some people no matter what he does."

There is plenty of legitimate things on which to criticize him. (No, Donald, Ukraine did not "start the war."), I just try to keep my criticisms based in facts, not conjecture about his motivations or his future policy, which are much more difficult to discern.

And the thing that really knocks me out is the number of Dems I'm hearing who genuinely believe the left needs its own "Trump" to counter the real McCoy. They talk about getting their own loud guy who talks tough and all that without realizing that Trumps abrasiveness is still a liability for him, just as it always has been. It is amazing to me the level of mental gymnastics some will go through to avoid having to admit that Trump is right about some things and this is why he won.

 

[Its On A Slab]

And the thing that really knocks me out is the number of Dems I'm hearing who genuinely believe the left needs its own "Trump" to counter the real McCoy. They talk about getting their own loud guy who talks tough and all that without realizing that Trumps abrasiveness is still a liability for him, just as it always has been. It is amazing to me the level of mental gymnastics some will go through to avoid having to admit that Trump is right about some things and this is why he won.

If Trump is right, so is a stopped clock twice a day.

I will give him that.

The country doesn't need another Trump. We need someone who can negate the damage that he is doing and will be doing.

 

[81usaf92]

Sorry for being nosy.
It has more to do with your assessment that the United States would honor its treaty obligations under the Washington Treaty. I'd ask what evidence you have for that conclusion.
Trump has this weird ability to get his domestic opponents to come to the strangest conclusions.
If you are a Trump voter and you believe it would be 50/50 whether the US would honor Article V of the Washington Treaty, then I'd ask why you voted for him.
If you are a Biden-Harris voter, then I would chalk your assessment up to partisan thinking.

I think most opinions on the War in Ukraine stem from how you perceive Trump. I think many people are seeing the most likely outcome (Ukraine signing a bad treaty) more negatively because of how Trump will gloat about ending the war than what it truly means for Europe.

Personally i wish Putin would suffer a Stalin death from being so high strung and paranoid sooner than later, but at the same time I just can’t help but seeing the invasion of Iraq and 20 year occupation of Afghanistan as more or less the same as Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Militaristic states are going to act within their nature and inevitably are going to invade someone. When someone punches back they are going to spend all available resources in an effort to try to justify the invasion or try to find some positive last chapter in a crummy war to write a song about.

Putin is willing to sacrifice everything to achieve a positive last chapter and will try to avoid being seen like Brezhnev and Gorby at the end of a bad invasion. Again it’s more of a question of how much real estate Ukraine has when that is achieved. Other than Putin suddenly dropping dead and his replacement being another Yelstin I don’t see Ukraine getting a great deal without direct foreign involvement.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

I want Macron to define “backstop,” and tell us how it differs from what NATO counts on now.

 

[Huckleberry]

I think most opinions on the War in Ukraine stem from how you perceive Trump. I think many people are seeing the most likely outcome (Ukraine signing a bad treaty) more negatively because of how Trump will gloat about ending the war than what it truly means for Europe.

Speaking as someone who has a mostly negative view of Trump, the prospect of his ego boost has absolutely nothing to do with my stance on any issue. From my perspective, I think most Trump policy supporters would follow the guy off a cliff, regardless of the circumstances. They're ok if Ukraine is screwed since it appears to them that Trump is the person calling the shots.

For the record, I recognize that the war needs to end and that Ukraine will likely be seen as the loser, but how the eventual agreement affects the future of Ukraine, Europe as a whole, and NATO is what really matters.

 

[81usaf92]

Speaking as someone who has a mostly negative view of Trump, the prospect of his ego boost has absolutely nothing to do with my stance on any issue. From my perspective, I think most Trump policy supporters would follow the guy off a cliff, regardless of the circumstances. They're ok if Ukraine is screwed since it appears to them that Trump is the person calling the shots.

For the record, I recognize that the war needs to end and that Ukraine will likely be seen as the loser, but how the eventual agreement affects the future of Ukraine, Europe as a whole, and NATO is what really matters.

I wish Ukraine would win and somehow get Crimea back but that’s extremely wishful thinking. I think anyone supporting the Russians is a fool and my grandfather is rolling over in his grave at the countless aunts and uncles I have who are passively and actively doing so because Trump’s stance on it.

But with that said, there are many on the left and never Trump faction who are only outraged by the stoppage of US aid and support to Ukraine because of the potential spin Trump and Vance are going to put on it.

I think the miscalculation by the left at basing our policy against Russian aggression off of how we handled it with their invasion of Afghanistan is a sign that they don’t see the difference between a Russian leader like Gorbachev and one like Stalin. One is capable of looking at things from a bigger perspective and one likes to incinerates ants from a magnifying glass all day because it’s fun. Putin is the latter so economic sanctions and large casualties aren’t really a big deal in his view. I mean the guy literally used sarin gas on a movie theater just to show the Chechens that he doesn’t negotiate with them.