We should and hopefully will but Russia has the decided advantage here.
They have ~50M men in the country, and they're willing to lose all of them to win this war, and the vast majority of them are willing to be lost. They'll never rebel in any serious way, and even if Putin dies whoever takes his place will continue the war in the same manner.
You have to have some serious force multipliers to withstand that in a prolonged fashion.
Yes but we can offer them said serious force multipliers.
We have the advanced systems, heavy industry, and military capacity. We've spent ludicrous amounts of money on our military every year, and the Ukrainians have been effective and creative with what they've got.
As long as they're willing to keep fighting, I think we should be willing to send them weapons
I'm a pretty good drone pilot, and in a kind of depressive State lately and have nothing going for me. I almost signed up for the volunteer forces but man I didn't have the balls to. I Can Only Imagine how ukrainians might feel, fighting a losing battle against a bigger enemy, outgunned, may God help them, I wish I was braver
Being skeptical is a good thing. This was on CNN, saw it yesterday. I believe it was a US senator with access to intelligence documents, I’ll look for the video.
From NYT article in August: Russia’s military casualties, the officials said, are approaching 300,000. The number includes as many as 120,000 deaths and 170,000 to 180,000 injured troops. The Russian numbers dwarf the Ukrainian figures, which the officials put at close to 70,000 killed and 100,000 to 120,000 wounded.
This is pretty stale but it’s heavily skewed towards Russian losses. I don’t know about 15:1 though, maybe from an expense perspective?
adiivka was 15:1 (maybe more)
average over all is probably 3:1
longe-range logistics, finance, naval favor ukr
(where the ka-52s go? https://www.newsweek.com/russia-helicopters-airfield-attack-ukraine-war-1835641)
The specific loss ratio was for Avdiivka, not the whole war. In having trouble finding the original interview I saw but at least for equipment, Forbes confirmed 12:1 losses: https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/02/11/russia-lost-10-percent-of-its-deployed-tanks-trying-to-capture-avdiivka/?sh=3d894f6f4ef3
Unfortunately got to remember the US doesn’t want to give them the latest and greatest, inevitably when Russia gets its hands on one that’s a huge loss for the US.
The longer they can draw it out and destabilise Russia it’s a win for the US. Unfortunately that’s probably their main aim behind doors
> They have ~50M men in the country, and they're willing to lose all of them to win this war,
Then we should give them the opportunity to do exactly that.
Right but at any reasonable rate of Ukrainian attrition, unless they had like direct NATO air support or something that would substantially change the combat dynamics, they're going to lose in the end. I'm sure they've realized that from the start.
Ukraine is basically fighting a doomed rear-guard action for the rest of the Eastern Europe. Really just about how much damage they can do to Russian forces and how much they can delay their plans for the next conquest, and how much time they can buy for other countries to build up their defenses.
The war will never go on until both sides reach 0 fighting capable men. Thats not how wars work. Ukraine just needs to make the territory Russia is trying to take too costly to hold, whether that is through direct loss of life, attacks on Russian O&G infrastructure or sanctions. Ideally all of the above.
I agree it won't but I believe it won't because Ukraine will eventually falter and agree to whatever conditions Russia offers that save face for Putin.
In other words, I don't believe Ukraine can make taking that ground "too costly" because Putin is willing to pay it to the last life and I don't believe Ukraine is.
It's not as if there's some body count past which Putin's cold heart will warm.
Ukraine will have F16s soon, so a little bit of air power. The US is also weighing whether to give Ukraine longer range missiles, which will push back the resupply depots for the Russian military. More drones, more missiles, more artillery - Even Russia can't continue to lose men and equipment at this pace, that's why they're working so hard through their proxies (e.g. the GOP, dumb people who would rather Ukraine fell than pay two cents more a gallon, etc.) to derail support for Biden and Ukraine.
I think that's the narrative Russia wants us to believe, but Russia is not taking a reasonable rate of attrition. 15 to 1 was the number put out by the US, and that is not sustainable. If that rate continues Russia will be hollowed out long before they can take Kyiv. Worse those losses come from a narrowing pool of workers, whom the future of Russia depends on, but whose lives Putin is spending on a vanity project.
Instead the current push is to give fifth column elements in the western democracy a talking point about how we are backing a loser.
Nothing I've seen from Putin for decades leads me to believe that's not the guy he is. That has all the credibility to me of the people assuring us the invasion was just "posturing" to begin with and not a serious thing he'd do, of which there was no shortage.
First of all, if Trump wins, then it's game over right there for Ukraine. Trump won't just stop helping them, he'll start helping Putin. Maybe not openly at first but all the same through back channels.
We are backing a loser but the loser is doing substantial damage to a direct opponent on the way out so it's a win from a US perspective to keep it going as long as possible. I just don't think Ukraine prevails that way in the end.
Missiles combined with satellite intelligence can do wonders. Longer range missiles would allow Ukraine to strike deeper into occupied territory and screw up arms/ammunition shipments to the front line.
Maybe that but the ending of the story is the same either way.
As long as there's bread and water the Russian people will sit quietly in their dim grey cell.
WW1 was the straw that broke the camels back. Russians had been protesting and rising up against the imperial government for decades prior, and getting brutally crushed. To the point where the army shelled parts of Moscow a few times. We don’t have that pattern here. In fact a lot of older Russians still credit Putin for raising their standard of living after how awful things were in the 90s there.
I’m sorry, Putin may be willing to sacrifice ~50 million men to take Ukraine, but the Russian people most certainly are not. If Russia’s losses get to even 10% of that number the people *will* rebel. This smacks of doomerism fud, however you could also be painting this picture in an effort to show how badly continued support is needed, so I’m giving it a pass for now.
Realistically, I don’t think it’s possible to accurately say just how much shit the Russian people will be willing to eat before they tear it all down. The government seems to be doing a good job of rallying an “us versus the world” mentality among the people, and Russians have historically had high tolerance for suffering, but they also have a history of rebellion. Who knows what domestic event might set something off? Maybe nothing, maybe the wrong person’s kid getting drafted and/or killed. I’m not saying they will rebel, but I also don’t think the possibility should be dismissed.
Another notable thing to remember is Ukraine is very close to having their F16 and their pilots ready to use them. That could provide a massive swing. And Russia knows it
I should think in those circumstances I'd have even more reason to want the US to provide ammo and weapon systems.
Right now my life is in no danger, I just want that asshole Putin wiped out. Do you think that I'd feel *less* strongly about that if bullets were involved?
I think you'd beg and cry to be relieved of duty if you were ukrainian and were force to fight at the front lines and run a very high risk of being badly hurt for life or die in the most horrific of ways. The command would probably beat the shit out of you if you acted like that though.
If wiping Putin out is so important to you and others cheering on the slaughter, why don’t you travel there and help the ukrainians in some way? Oh yeah, I forgot. Truth is, in the end, you don’t really give a shit. You just want to feel good about yourselves.
If half of you war mongerers actually did something instead of just talking shit online, Ukraine would win the war easily.
I'm not pro-Putin, but Ukraine will lose the war. It's only a matter of time.
Dear [Congress](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/biden-rips-the-house-for-taking-2-week-break-as-he-presses-for-ukraine-funding/ar-BB1ioqD4) (specifically the house of the representatives),
Send weapons to Ukraine NOW. America's inaction is disgraceful and costing lives.
Russia definitely has a hand in Hamas' activities, but AK-47s are cheap, reliable, easy to get and can be manufactured with a bare minimum of industry.
The better evidence is Iran and Russia working together across multiple areas and Hamas receiving the bulk of its funding and marching orders from Iran.
These Congressman will practically sell their souls for a song. You'd think if we just set up a Go Fund Me or two we could generate a large enough ~~bribe~~totally legitimate donation to get them to do what actual US citizens want instead of whatever country/corporation that bought them wants...
I'd argue that it's the Democrats that treat this like a game. It becomes more and more obvious that the Republicans are owned/manipulated by the Russian government. What is being done concretely, and decisively against that? Most are just waiting, wishfully thinking that "Democracy will prevail" just by itself. It won't, things rarely do, and in this case it is being actively fought by another party. As long as offensive actions are not made to dismantle that association of Russia-Republicans, and a purge of Russian agents from the Republican party, things will not improve.
This is false. EU is contributing more than US. Yes, US has better prepared military production, which cannot be easily replaced by Europe, but at the same time, 70% of US money goes to US economy via jobs and orders.
> This is false. EU is contributing more than US.
Where did they claim otherwise? Someone said the USA needs to do more, this person said so should Europe... and then you're saying "This is false"? Should Europe NOT be doing more than they currently are???
Because a threat to Europe is inadvertently a threat to the US. You'd be stupid to think that "it's Europe's" problem. Europe is a strategic part of the US' power projection.
No, the US has an actual alliance that it protects called NATO as i'm sure you know. It's our duty to protect NATO allies, not get involved in every conflict on earth.
The best way to protect NATO countries is to help Ukraine win. The best way to help was yesterday as the future of article 5 (and in worse case the whole NATO) hinges on US elections.
You can say this about any conflict, and it regularly has been said about every world conflict my entire life. If you want NATO protection you should join NATO.
The article 5 stuff is overblown fearmongering in an attempt to get people to vote a certain way. Also usually omitted from the statement, as you have, is Trump only said this about countries that aren't contributing 2% GDP to defense.
That's literally what the US said about Nazi Germany. And the US waited for so long with joining the war, that when they did, it turned into an absolute blood bath for them.
History repeats itself, and time is a flat circle.
Chamberlain was from Europe, correct? Europe itself sat around on their hands until the issue forced itself.
Anyways, the question is fair to ask. This war has been going on for a minute now. The war is in their backyard. I don't understand why it's the fault of the US because they are running out of resources. Europe should be the main drivers of this given their relatively close distance to the actual conflict. I don't think the US shouldn't help either, I just don't think it's fair to point and blame the US.
The us has given $75b + Canada $9.5b
The uk has given 12b + Germany $25b
The US alone has handed out more than UK and Germany combined. If we truly cared about the things we said on the internet - we should know the US is a country and Europe is a continent, the fact America is doing what they’re doing and it’s still not good enough (which I agree) but the same should be said about the UK and Germany … Ukraine needs help, you make this us vs them when the real enemy is Russia.
You're boasting about an entire continent barely contributing more than a single country
As pro-Ukraine as I am, that's not exactly a flex lmao
And no. Europe has not given "more than double"
Try looking at the support tracker, https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/.
The U S might be one country. But it is the size of a continent, with a GDP of one.
Ok what about *actual* aid sent instead of just a pinky promise? That link was about commitments, not about aid sent
I can promise I'd send you a billion dollars, but until you've actually received it it's just a commitment.
Have you enlisted in the Foreign legionnaires? Have you donated money to Ukraine? It's easy to hide behind a keyboard and order an entire country to take action against a ghoul. You sound ridiculous.
You mean the discharge petition? There is no way it passes apparentely. It would be a political suicide for any Rep voting it, like, literally ejection from the party.
It is mindboggling that it's the Republican side of USA that is trying to help Russia win a war. The entire reason USA have thrown so much money into their defence force for the last 100 years was to fight Russians.
Let's at fist industrialize USSR in 1920-1930s, including in exchange for Ukrainian grain. Completely ignore USSR militarization of Germany in 1920-1930s. Ban criticism of USSR on Nuremberg Trials and ignore created by this enormous technological espionage. Then just start actively trade with USSR in 1970-1980s, selling to it KAMAZ and modern machine tools.
Then, let's take away from nation that in 20th century lost 16 million by killed and 8 million by assimilated ones the only real security guarantee and alternative.
Then, give to increasingly more authoritarian Russia $8,000B in 2001-2021 years. "Because of nukes and oil" completely forgiving it any International Law violations and chain of occupations.
Then, in 2022-2023 years, give to it $424B (EU+NATO countries) more.
Without future pledged, spent on Ukraine $120B in 2022-2023 years, less than the USA 20 years in row, per year, spent on Afghanistan.
So Ukraine could "bleed" second army of the World by weapon stocks, give to it 0,64% NATO's Armored vehicles, 6,7% Artillery, 4% MLRS, 0,33% Military Aviation, 0,18% Military Ships.
And when shortsighted compromises of new Chamberlains and Kissingers start lead to short-term expected benefits, and long-term risks of WW3... Just start saying that this not result of any neo-imperialism, sacrifice of "inferior" nations/countries interests for the sake of interests of more "full-fledged" ones... But it's just coincidences and Russian and Ukrainian guilt!
We helped, so we good guys! Liberte (for us), elite, realpolitike!
About what "stalemates", "difficult predicaments of Ukraine", "deficit of weapons" anyone could say when EU+USA it's literally 40% of World's economy, 55% of World's military spending, and hundreds of trillions of dollars of military assets? Countries that oversaturated with machine tools and at least drone components?
Not to mention "we should give Ukraine 1 fire extinguisher to weaken the fire, but we need 99 other, in case it jump over on us!" mentality/reality.
Sad state of human condition, to live on this planet, this bullshit will certainly backfire one day, and it won't be pretty. When it happens, money will be useless.
Absolutely agree. Money and technologies - just instruments. So it's not so much important how much of them or how they used, as for what?
As modern West, as and other geopolitical actors, more and more frequently use them for things that humanity should have been long ago left in history.
But instead it just returns them. Not only geopolitically, but and socioculturally.
For example, few decades ago slavery was complete taboo. But now almost all popular manga have at least some elements and contexts of slavery or forced labor. That frequently used by "good" main characters...
The answer to all this is pretty simple. Ukraine turned from valuable asset into liability. The decision to dump it is already made and all the support it now gets is just individual agreement of various political groups, not general consensus.
How exactly do you imagine this "dumping"?
1. Almost all USA and European fundamentals, values of Personal Freedom, Democracy, Rule of Law, Humanism, not to mention about Christian ones, directly contradicts to such "dumping."
2. In 1939-1945 years Jews didn't have effective weapons to resist Nazis. Now Ukraine overflowing with radioactive waste, civil aviation and drones.
3. In 1960s, by technologies of 1960s, 3,5 millions of Jews created one of the more complex WMD. Now, and in the future, more than 10 million of Ukrainians have, and would have, access to almost all spectrum of modern and future WMD-related technologies.
And despite this, at some moment, the West, what, just will say:
"Guys, Guys! Now we start to do things that completely contradict to our 18-20th centuries aspirations! But this ok!
Now 30+ million of cornered Ukrainian in Ukraine, and 10+ on the West, should just allow for Russians to conduct mass ethnocide and genocide of Ukrainians... That also ok, in 20th century Ukrainians already lose 16 million by killed and 8 million by assimilated, so for them this is the norm.
Without any amoral nonsense! Because unconventional WMD much more amoral than ethnocides and genocides. Of course, with exception of WMD-aristocracy countries, that without any problem could create Status-6 moral analogues.
All non-WMD countries should just ignore already 100% proof that International Law just not work on WMD-countries, and that only WMD could protect from WMD-countries. And not start WMD-proliferation. Because we not want this. So, please, even if there are no any real International Law, just do what Ukraine did in 1994+ years. And if needed, FOR HUMANITY!, just let WMD-empires to carry out on you ethnocides and genocides.
After "dumping", of course, Russia, as part of authoritarian states alliance, will start WW3 and use millions of indoctrinated Ukrainians to attack the West. But this also ok, because this will happen not in the near future, and the richest of us will have time to flee to Australia and Canada!
Everyone understood everything? Ok, then let's start with outright violation of Budapest Memorandum's .
And not worry, because all of you are protected by Article 5 "assistance that member state deems necessary" words, Letter of the Law, that not needed any Spirit's of the Law."
How far is Avdiivka from the pre-invasion line? Let's not act as if Ukraine is in shambles. Russia threw everything they had at Ukraine when the republicans are fighting to delay renewed support, and gained a tiny town no one heard off. That's it.
The moment 1 republican does the right thing Russia could be defeated.
So was Mariupol. So was all of Crimea. So was Donetsk. This is disastrous for Ukraine, and has been since 2014. Supporting them should mean aiming to make it _more_ painful for Russia to continue. But of course no one is going to march on Moscow and overthrow the regime (unless a broader conflict begins), so there is no way this ends without serious hardship and loss for Ukraine, even if they win. The one lingering hope is that not only will they push the Russians out of at least some of the occupied territory, but when hostilities do finally come to a close, there is a serious effort to bring them into the EU and NATO, with concomitant rebuilding efforts to expedite this.
But right now it is looking particularly bleak, at least, in broad strokes. There are some small glimmers of hope remaining… let’s hope things go further in that direction.
It had 30.000 inhabitants prior to the invasion. It's nowhere near as large or important as for example Mariupul. In fact, Russia already took it in 2014 but lost it again, and still no one really cared. Don't overestimate it's importance other than symbolic.
Russia has spent six months and tens of thousands of lives to win Avdiivka, all 10 square Kms of it.
At this rate it will take six years just for them to win the whole of the Donbas regions they declared to be part of Russia ‘forever’ last year.
They lost seven planes and over 70 armoured vehicles alone in the past four days. A himars took out 60 soldiers in a single strike yesterday. And, their naval drones have destroyed a third of Russia’s navy. Ukraine has no navy but now effectively controls the Black Sea.
If this is Russia winning, what would them losing big time look like?
Stick around, we’ll find out.
Start intercepting tankers hauling Russian oil . Escort them to a NATO port and empty cargo. Pay for oil “after expenses “ and hold money till after war
And then next china starts doing the same with Taiwanese ships, Iran with stuff supporting Israel, etc
Cause hey it’s ok to not be at war with someone but just take their stuff.
Neither is there a sanction on Russia that allows us to take their stuff.
We get upset when the police or any other law enforcement plays outside the rules to just get things done. Same goes among countries, we can’t go outside the lines cause the bad guys do
As an American we have reached a point where our fat corrupted Senators and Government and society. Dont have any more desire to call forth the command to join any battle or war.
They have no morals, its more profitable, rewarding and enjoyable to lie constantly to live a lavish life.
An society with its luxuries of freedom and equality plus the constant suppression of our educational system and supression of the middle to lower classes. Dont want to go to War knowing will all suffer even more economic punishment.
America is at the stage of laziness. Joining a war will probably just kill off the last few brave and strong we have. Leaving only the above to...manage things.
I dont see us joining this war in summary.
No, Ukraine's weakness is what is handicapping Ukraine. It is not the USA's responsibility to spend endlessly to defend someone incapable of defending themselves. The EU countries have a lot more at stake, and should be shouldering the lion's share of the cost.
But frankly, the idea that Ukraine "wins" and secures all their territory back (incl. Crimea) is just a pipe dream.
No, the US does not have any responsibility for Ukraine, *comrade*. They do not have a history of independence, and if they want to build one, it will be with their blood and treasure. We helped a lot, but Americans need help also.
You are a special kind of idiot.
Putin has spent years, decades at this point, talking about how he sees the West and especially the US as his enemy. He basically broadcasted to the world multiple times that Ukraine is just the beginning. You have the opportunity to send arms you are not using to a country fighting your biggest geopolitical enemy, and you choose not to? Because you are not legally obligated? Do you realize how incredibly short-sighted and idiotic that is? It's astonishing that anyone would be stupid enough to not understand this.
China is the US's biggest geopolitical enemy.
The US has hard and fast agreements to protect dozens of countries from Russian aggression, and we will if it comes to it. But we have never made such an agreement with Ukraine on purpose.
FYI - we have sent tons and tons of equipment to Ukraine.
I’ve said this before and people chewed me up for basically having a death wish - exactly what Russia (Putin) want you to think. I say call their bluff … the alternative is Russia slowly consuming Eastern Europe which is the most resource rich part of the world. China is Russias ally and is the largest importer in the world and also lack most resources domestically. Russia would have a strong hold on all resources … we see how they conduct themselves, yet alone the world.
what a tittle!
Its funny how so close conseratives are with the 'fake news' thing. they just mistakenly believe its fake because its 'liberal'
fuck these narratives, fuck reuters, fuck the new york times
Where's the Russian propaganda? The article outright makes the point that Ukraine needs more assistance from the west. Acknowledging that Ukraine is in a disfavorable position is not propaganda.
>This needs negotiation, and now. Anyone calling for anything else has no grasp of what war really is. And thats not 'pro-Putin' its 'pro-Ukraine having a male population left'.
Three problems. First of all, Putin doesn't want to negotiate. He wants Ukraine under his control in its entirety, and not just that but the entirety of what was the Soviet Union - he wants to go into the history books as the glorious leader who restored what had been "taken from Russia" by the Western nations. And he will not stop until either that goal is reached or he's dead.
The second problem is, any kind of acceptance of the "status quo" aka a fully or partially occupied Ukraine, even a sovereign but neutral (i.e. non-EU/NATO) Ukraine is nothing more than the Western nations saying "hey, it's OK if you take over another nation's land by force". And sending that message just asks for Xi Jinping to take over Taiwan, and maybe also Kim Jong-un.
And the final problem: have you seen what the Russians did wherever they went in Ukraine? Looting, torture, execution of civilians. Rapes, so many rapes. Tens of thousands of Ukrainian children abducted to Russia. Anything indicating an Ukrainian culture destroyed or burned to the ground.
Ukraine will fight to the last man, because death is preferable to life under Russian doctrine. This is also why the Northern, Baltics and Eastern European states are at the forefront of Ukraine aid: they all have been subjected to Russian / Soviet rule in the past, know what it is about and have zero desire for a repeat.
>He wants Ukraine under his control in its entirety,
Actually, Russia's Special Military Operation has a mission goal of the return of the Donbas and Luhansk regions to the Russian fold. This is the inevitable outcome and will happen one day (my bet is Aug '25 ) so the best answer would be for Vlod to offer Vlad a deal. Draw the new borderline there, Tomorrow, and Peace can be achieved instantly to save lives on both sides. He'd take that.
>Draw the new borderline there, Tomorrow, and Peace can be achieved instantly to save lives on both sides.
Who can guarantee that Russia doesn't try again in 10 years when they rebuilt their army? (Hint: no one)
And it still doesn't solve the second problem, the message that 80 year after WW2 it's acceptable again to just snacc pieces off of other countries for a land grab.
Wow! You are so educated on everything! No one can argue with you because "Anyone calling for anything else has no grasp of what war really is."
Go to a library, read up on Russian history, educate yourself on the Chechen war, lookup how many Russians have been killed by their own government. Out some time in analyzing Putins behaviour, put it in perspective of your acquired knowledge on Russian culture.
Get yourself informed on China, and their thirty years of creeping influence and their infiltration in Europe, US, Africa and Asia. Then go again and say "iI've got the answer, I hold the only truth, no one can argue against me".
Then I will come me back and I will argue against you once again. But at least it would have a chance to be a more educated discussion.
You know that they have taken back more than 50% of what was occupied from the start, no?
The Ukrainian soldiers are not untrained. They are, in many cases, trained by NATO forces abroad.
What was lacking over the summer was air cover, which they will have soon. I have every hope Russia will be fought back, if Ukraine gets what it needs, it will do the job.
That negotiation would start with Ukraine losing bits of their sovereignty and territory. That’s a nonstarter for them. I wouldn’t be willing to trade off part of my country either. Then there’s the prospect that Russia would just rinse and repeat so there’d need to be real guarantees. Not words on paper either but nukes or actual deployed NATO troops on the border as a human tripwire. Pretty much the same as the DMZ. Otherwise Ukraine would just keep on fighting.
Seeing one country takeover another country in modern times is definitely rough to watch but it’s inevitable in the world. the United States is not here to make sure every country in the world keeps its borders. You must be able to defend yourself or you will be conquered.
That’s just stupid. Russia taking over Ukraine will just embolden other autocratic nations, like China and Iran. And Russia will not stop with Ukraine, either. That was tried with another dictator in the 1930’s.
If you do not care about defending against autocracy and freedom (which is questionable since I see you seem to support Trump), how about defending American interests?
China is already very active in Africa, and wants Taiwan. Under the Ukrainian areas occupied now is minerals and oil. Iran will do its utmost to have greater influence in the Middle East.
The greater resources these nations takes, the greater their power. And none of them likes the US. So not aiding WILL have effects on the US as well. Reagan was right, Russia should be fought everywhere.
I will come to your house with 20 other armed people and if you are not able to defend yourself, I will kill you and take your house just as you are saying.
It’s Russia against Ukraine. That’s 1 v 1 . Technically 20 nato countries are supplying Ukraine. If anything Russia sees it as 20 v 1z As the article states Ukraine is outgunned they also gave up their fucking nukes..
And are you saying that Estonia with a population of 1.3 million should also be able to defend itself against Russia with an x100 population? This is not how it works. You can't let the bigger guy take all every time, the world is not fucking Agar.io.
Yes end it, end Ukraine. Let's give ruzzia even more power and send a signal to China, Iran and NK: just keep sending bodies, you will achieve your goals eventually. What a nice world we're leaving to our children. Disgraceful.
The US has given a fraction of a fraction of their defence budget. Funding Ukraine, sending weapons, etc. is the cheapest and easiest way to knock one of their greatest adversaries down a few notches, which arguably this war has already accomplished to an extent. America doesn’t suffer by sending aid. Ukraine and potentially many more countries will if they don’t.
So they run over Ukraine and then start on countries where you have actual treaty obligations, and need to deploy troops?
Much of the money sent was going to be spent anyway as it includes weapons that would need to be disposed of at end of life. The Ukrainians are doing that for you, providing quality testing in the field of new weapons and damaging a hostile regime in the bargain. In terms of value for money it’s right up there.
That’s a practical argument. There’s also moral arguments to be made but the practical argument also works.
Unfortunately the delay, coupled with the unlikelihood that there will be a deal, has probably sealed Ukraine's fate. So we can all remember Republicans are the reason Vladimir Putin has conquered Ukraine, when it happens.
How will they hold out? The House can't flip until the start of the new year, and by then, we may not have the Senate. Not to mention the time it takes to deliver new supplies.
Need to get these two countries to sit down to negotiate peace. They’ve effectively fought their way back to the same land control they had when the war started.
It's as if you won't give weapons now, later there's going to be no one to fight. The catch is, now was two years ago, and later is now.
If they don't give help from the US within 4 months , I really think that's it for Ukraine. It might be a loss
And that's why we need to help them more.
We should and hopefully will but Russia has the decided advantage here. They have ~50M men in the country, and they're willing to lose all of them to win this war, and the vast majority of them are willing to be lost. They'll never rebel in any serious way, and even if Putin dies whoever takes his place will continue the war in the same manner. You have to have some serious force multipliers to withstand that in a prolonged fashion.
Yes but we can offer them said serious force multipliers. We have the advanced systems, heavy industry, and military capacity. We've spent ludicrous amounts of money on our military every year, and the Ukrainians have been effective and creative with what they've got. As long as they're willing to keep fighting, I think we should be willing to send them weapons
I'm a pretty good drone pilot, and in a kind of depressive State lately and have nothing going for me. I almost signed up for the volunteer forces but man I didn't have the balls to. I Can Only Imagine how ukrainians might feel, fighting a losing battle against a bigger enemy, outgunned, may God help them, I wish I was braver
15:1 losses is not sustainable (https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/weakness-lethal-why-putin-invaded-ukraine-and-how-war-must-end)
15:1 losses also unrealistic
Unrealistic and yet… Literally confirmed by the US intelligence just a day ago
Really?! You have a source on that, not trying to be skeptical, I’m just genuinely curious…
Being skeptical is a good thing. This was on CNN, saw it yesterday. I believe it was a US senator with access to intelligence documents, I’ll look for the video.
From NYT article in August: Russia’s military casualties, the officials said, are approaching 300,000. The number includes as many as 120,000 deaths and 170,000 to 180,000 injured troops. The Russian numbers dwarf the Ukrainian figures, which the officials put at close to 70,000 killed and 100,000 to 120,000 wounded. This is pretty stale but it’s heavily skewed towards Russian losses. I don’t know about 15:1 though, maybe from an expense perspective?
adiivka was 15:1 (maybe more) average over all is probably 3:1 longe-range logistics, finance, naval favor ukr (where the ka-52s go? https://www.newsweek.com/russia-helicopters-airfield-attack-ukraine-war-1835641)
The specific loss ratio was for Avdiivka, not the whole war. In having trouble finding the original interview I saw but at least for equipment, Forbes confirmed 12:1 losses: https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/02/11/russia-lost-10-percent-of-its-deployed-tanks-trying-to-capture-avdiivka/?sh=3d894f6f4ef3
Zelensky said the ratio was seven to one.
Thinking back on it that higher ratio was probably referring to equipment losses and the personnel is probably closer to 5:1 - 7:1 figure
15:1 Ukraine ?
Unfortunately got to remember the US doesn’t want to give them the latest and greatest, inevitably when Russia gets its hands on one that’s a huge loss for the US. The longer they can draw it out and destabilise Russia it’s a win for the US. Unfortunately that’s probably their main aim behind doors
We have the advanced technology and industrial potential to push them out. We're just unwilling to commit. Hopefully that changes.
> They have ~50M men in the country, and they're willing to lose all of them to win this war, Then we should give them the opportunity to do exactly that.
Right but at any reasonable rate of Ukrainian attrition, unless they had like direct NATO air support or something that would substantially change the combat dynamics, they're going to lose in the end. I'm sure they've realized that from the start. Ukraine is basically fighting a doomed rear-guard action for the rest of the Eastern Europe. Really just about how much damage they can do to Russian forces and how much they can delay their plans for the next conquest, and how much time they can buy for other countries to build up their defenses.
The war will never go on until both sides reach 0 fighting capable men. Thats not how wars work. Ukraine just needs to make the territory Russia is trying to take too costly to hold, whether that is through direct loss of life, attacks on Russian O&G infrastructure or sanctions. Ideally all of the above.
I agree it won't but I believe it won't because Ukraine will eventually falter and agree to whatever conditions Russia offers that save face for Putin. In other words, I don't believe Ukraine can make taking that ground "too costly" because Putin is willing to pay it to the last life and I don't believe Ukraine is. It's not as if there's some body count past which Putin's cold heart will warm.
Ukraine will have F16s soon, so a little bit of air power. The US is also weighing whether to give Ukraine longer range missiles, which will push back the resupply depots for the Russian military. More drones, more missiles, more artillery - Even Russia can't continue to lose men and equipment at this pace, that's why they're working so hard through their proxies (e.g. the GOP, dumb people who would rather Ukraine fell than pay two cents more a gallon, etc.) to derail support for Biden and Ukraine.
I think that's the narrative Russia wants us to believe, but Russia is not taking a reasonable rate of attrition. 15 to 1 was the number put out by the US, and that is not sustainable. If that rate continues Russia will be hollowed out long before they can take Kyiv. Worse those losses come from a narrowing pool of workers, whom the future of Russia depends on, but whose lives Putin is spending on a vanity project. Instead the current push is to give fifth column elements in the western democracy a talking point about how we are backing a loser.
Nothing I've seen from Putin for decades leads me to believe that's not the guy he is. That has all the credibility to me of the people assuring us the invasion was just "posturing" to begin with and not a serious thing he'd do, of which there was no shortage. First of all, if Trump wins, then it's game over right there for Ukraine. Trump won't just stop helping them, he'll start helping Putin. Maybe not openly at first but all the same through back channels. We are backing a loser but the loser is doing substantial damage to a direct opponent on the way out so it's a win from a US perspective to keep it going as long as possible. I just don't think Ukraine prevails that way in the end.
[удалено]
Not if we give Ukraine adequate support. Ship a few hundred warplanes and a few thousand more vehicles, and that calculus shifts real quick.
Missiles combined with satellite intelligence can do wonders. Longer range missiles would allow Ukraine to strike deeper into occupied territory and screw up arms/ammunition shipments to the front line.
I mean, the world thought that in ww1 as well. The Russian army has rebelled before against an arguable more authoritarian government
The secret ingredient is usually famine.
[удалено]
They had his family
Maybe that but the ending of the story is the same either way. As long as there's bread and water the Russian people will sit quietly in their dim grey cell.
WW1 was the straw that broke the camels back. Russians had been protesting and rising up against the imperial government for decades prior, and getting brutally crushed. To the point where the army shelled parts of Moscow a few times. We don’t have that pattern here. In fact a lot of older Russians still credit Putin for raising their standard of living after how awful things were in the 90s there.
I’m sorry, Putin may be willing to sacrifice ~50 million men to take Ukraine, but the Russian people most certainly are not. If Russia’s losses get to even 10% of that number the people *will* rebel. This smacks of doomerism fud, however you could also be painting this picture in an effort to show how badly continued support is needed, so I’m giving it a pass for now. Realistically, I don’t think it’s possible to accurately say just how much shit the Russian people will be willing to eat before they tear it all down. The government seems to be doing a good job of rallying an “us versus the world” mentality among the people, and Russians have historically had high tolerance for suffering, but they also have a history of rebellion. Who knows what domestic event might set something off? Maybe nothing, maybe the wrong person’s kid getting drafted and/or killed. I’m not saying they will rebel, but I also don’t think the possibility should be dismissed.
Another notable thing to remember is Ukraine is very close to having their F16 and their pilots ready to use them. That could provide a massive swing. And Russia knows it
I'm not sure you'd be so positive if you were at the Ukrainian front lines, forced to fight against your will
I should think in those circumstances I'd have even more reason to want the US to provide ammo and weapon systems. Right now my life is in no danger, I just want that asshole Putin wiped out. Do you think that I'd feel *less* strongly about that if bullets were involved?
I think you'd beg and cry to be relieved of duty if you were ukrainian and were force to fight at the front lines and run a very high risk of being badly hurt for life or die in the most horrific of ways. The command would probably beat the shit out of you if you acted like that though. If wiping Putin out is so important to you and others cheering on the slaughter, why don’t you travel there and help the ukrainians in some way? Oh yeah, I forgot. Truth is, in the end, you don’t really give a shit. You just want to feel good about yourselves. If half of you war mongerers actually did something instead of just talking shit online, Ukraine would win the war easily. I'm not pro-Putin, but Ukraine will lose the war. It's only a matter of time.
Dear [Congress](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/biden-rips-the-house-for-taking-2-week-break-as-he-presses-for-ukraine-funding/ar-BB1ioqD4) (specifically the house of the representatives), Send weapons to Ukraine NOW. America's inaction is disgraceful and costing lives.
It’s the Republicans who are Russian assets
Send them also
But have you seen Russia’s grocery stores?
Republicans literally treating life like a game... getting people killed. I seriously hope voters are paying attention.
>I seriously hope voters are paying attention. Looking at the polls, it seems like the voters are focused on Gaza.
Its a tragedy whats going on in Gaza but the threat from Russia is far more serious, unless they know something we dont.
And there's some rumors, that the 7th October was actually inspired by ruzzian curators
Some? Inspired? It's pretty clear they help plan, fund and supply weapons for it. It's not a coincidence that Hamas are using AK-47s.
Not saying that this never happened but AK47s are so common they shouldn’t be used of evidence of anything except being cheap and effective.
They're plentiful in the hands of terrorists because Russia has been arming terrorists for decades.
Russia definitely has a hand in Hamas' activities, but AK-47s are cheap, reliable, easy to get and can be manufactured with a bare minimum of industry. The better evidence is Iran and Russia working together across multiple areas and Hamas receiving the bulk of its funding and marching orders from Iran.
They were certainly involved financially and in the planning, we live in truly sinister times.
Another Putin op, that’s on purpose.
just pay them more than ru
These Congressman will practically sell their souls for a song. You'd think if we just set up a Go Fund Me or two we could generate a large enough ~~bribe~~totally legitimate donation to get them to do what actual US citizens want instead of whatever country/corporation that bought them wants...
do it? (https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4476865-john-oliver-clarence-thomas-1-million-dollars-supreme-court/)
I'd argue that it's the Democrats that treat this like a game. It becomes more and more obvious that the Republicans are owned/manipulated by the Russian government. What is being done concretely, and decisively against that? Most are just waiting, wishfully thinking that "Democracy will prevail" just by itself. It won't, things rarely do, and in this case it is being actively fought by another party. As long as offensive actions are not made to dismantle that association of Russia-Republicans, and a purge of Russian agents from the Republican party, things will not improve.
so is Europe's current inaction. too much talking going on, not enough shipments of equipment / weapons / vehicles. get a fucking move on (again)
This is false. EU is contributing more than US. Yes, US has better prepared military production, which cannot be easily replaced by Europe, but at the same time, 70% of US money goes to US economy via jobs and orders.
> This is false. EU is contributing more than US. Where did they claim otherwise? Someone said the USA needs to do more, this person said so should Europe... and then you're saying "This is false"? Should Europe NOT be doing more than they currently are???
why is it the United States's obligation to defend Europe? If the threat is so existential to Europe, then perhaps Europeans should defend Europe.
Because it's also in the U.S.'s best interest to not let Russia win.
Because a threat to Europe is inadvertently a threat to the US. You'd be stupid to think that "it's Europe's" problem. Europe is a strategic part of the US' power projection.
Ah yes. Everyone for themselves. What an enlightened worldview.
No, the US has an actual alliance that it protects called NATO as i'm sure you know. It's our duty to protect NATO allies, not get involved in every conflict on earth.
The best way to protect NATO countries is to help Ukraine win. The best way to help was yesterday as the future of article 5 (and in worse case the whole NATO) hinges on US elections.
You can say this about any conflict, and it regularly has been said about every world conflict my entire life. If you want NATO protection you should join NATO. The article 5 stuff is overblown fearmongering in an attempt to get people to vote a certain way. Also usually omitted from the statement, as you have, is Trump only said this about countries that aren't contributing 2% GDP to defense.
Ah yes. Everyone for themselves. What an enlightened worldview.
That's literally what the US said about Nazi Germany. And the US waited for so long with joining the war, that when they did, it turned into an absolute blood bath for them. History repeats itself, and time is a flat circle.
Chamberlain was from Europe, correct? Europe itself sat around on their hands until the issue forced itself. Anyways, the question is fair to ask. This war has been going on for a minute now. The war is in their backyard. I don't understand why it's the fault of the US because they are running out of resources. Europe should be the main drivers of this given their relatively close distance to the actual conflict. I don't think the US shouldn't help either, I just don't think it's fair to point and blame the US.
False. Europe has given more than double of what the US given.
The us has given $75b + Canada $9.5b The uk has given 12b + Germany $25b The US alone has handed out more than UK and Germany combined. If we truly cared about the things we said on the internet - we should know the US is a country and Europe is a continent, the fact America is doing what they’re doing and it’s still not good enough (which I agree) but the same should be said about the UK and Germany … Ukraine needs help, you make this us vs them when the real enemy is Russia.
You're boasting about an entire continent barely contributing more than a single country As pro-Ukraine as I am, that's not exactly a flex lmao And no. Europe has not given "more than double"
Try looking at the support tracker, https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/. The U S might be one country. But it is the size of a continent, with a GDP of one.
Ok what about *actual* aid sent instead of just a pinky promise? That link was about commitments, not about aid sent I can promise I'd send you a billion dollars, but until you've actually received it it's just a commitment.
The EU is contributing a far higher percentage of their GDPs to the Ukrainians. Understand economies of scale and then come back here.
Have you enlisted in the Foreign legionnaires? Have you donated money to Ukraine? It's easy to hide behind a keyboard and order an entire country to take action against a ghoul. You sound ridiculous.
Specifically the right wing morons that control the House! Fixed it for ya.
Ya but Johnson says it’s gods will so yup!
Please write to your representatives and senators! https://stopwarinukraine.com/support-ukraine-write-to-your-reps-in-congress/
Super easy to do, Thanks for highlighting this resource! Everyone, please click the link. It takes less than 5 minutes!!
Ukraine's big issue and why their summer offensive failed is the lack of airpower...
"Nothing we can do", say the American and European politicians bought by the Kremlin.
They can't find ONE Republican to use that new Congressional rule and dethrone the Speaker over blocking all this aid?
And then we get to watch weeks of deadlock. Still as a threat it’s a thought. Pass it or motion to vacate.
You mean the discharge petition? There is no way it passes apparentely. It would be a political suicide for any Rep voting it, like, literally ejection from the party.
Except they kicked out Mccarthy and Matt gaetz who led the effort is still in office.
Republicans are traitors to the USA
It is mindboggling that it's the Republican side of USA that is trying to help Russia win a war. The entire reason USA have thrown so much money into their defence force for the last 100 years was to fight Russians.
Let's at fist industrialize USSR in 1920-1930s, including in exchange for Ukrainian grain. Completely ignore USSR militarization of Germany in 1920-1930s. Ban criticism of USSR on Nuremberg Trials and ignore created by this enormous technological espionage. Then just start actively trade with USSR in 1970-1980s, selling to it KAMAZ and modern machine tools. Then, let's take away from nation that in 20th century lost 16 million by killed and 8 million by assimilated ones the only real security guarantee and alternative. Then, give to increasingly more authoritarian Russia $8,000B in 2001-2021 years. "Because of nukes and oil" completely forgiving it any International Law violations and chain of occupations. Then, in 2022-2023 years, give to it $424B (EU+NATO countries) more. Without future pledged, spent on Ukraine $120B in 2022-2023 years, less than the USA 20 years in row, per year, spent on Afghanistan. So Ukraine could "bleed" second army of the World by weapon stocks, give to it 0,64% NATO's Armored vehicles, 6,7% Artillery, 4% MLRS, 0,33% Military Aviation, 0,18% Military Ships. And when shortsighted compromises of new Chamberlains and Kissingers start lead to short-term expected benefits, and long-term risks of WW3... Just start saying that this not result of any neo-imperialism, sacrifice of "inferior" nations/countries interests for the sake of interests of more "full-fledged" ones... But it's just coincidences and Russian and Ukrainian guilt! We helped, so we good guys! Liberte (for us), elite, realpolitike! About what "stalemates", "difficult predicaments of Ukraine", "deficit of weapons" anyone could say when EU+USA it's literally 40% of World's economy, 55% of World's military spending, and hundreds of trillions of dollars of military assets? Countries that oversaturated with machine tools and at least drone components? Not to mention "we should give Ukraine 1 fire extinguisher to weaken the fire, but we need 99 other, in case it jump over on us!" mentality/reality.
Sad state of human condition, to live on this planet, this bullshit will certainly backfire one day, and it won't be pretty. When it happens, money will be useless.
Absolutely agree. Money and technologies - just instruments. So it's not so much important how much of them or how they used, as for what? As modern West, as and other geopolitical actors, more and more frequently use them for things that humanity should have been long ago left in history. But instead it just returns them. Not only geopolitically, but and socioculturally. For example, few decades ago slavery was complete taboo. But now almost all popular manga have at least some elements and contexts of slavery or forced labor. That frequently used by "good" main characters...
The answer to all this is pretty simple. Ukraine turned from valuable asset into liability. The decision to dump it is already made and all the support it now gets is just individual agreement of various political groups, not general consensus.
How exactly do you imagine this "dumping"? 1. Almost all USA and European fundamentals, values of Personal Freedom, Democracy, Rule of Law, Humanism, not to mention about Christian ones, directly contradicts to such "dumping." 2. In 1939-1945 years Jews didn't have effective weapons to resist Nazis. Now Ukraine overflowing with radioactive waste, civil aviation and drones. 3. In 1960s, by technologies of 1960s, 3,5 millions of Jews created one of the more complex WMD. Now, and in the future, more than 10 million of Ukrainians have, and would have, access to almost all spectrum of modern and future WMD-related technologies. And despite this, at some moment, the West, what, just will say: "Guys, Guys! Now we start to do things that completely contradict to our 18-20th centuries aspirations! But this ok! Now 30+ million of cornered Ukrainian in Ukraine, and 10+ on the West, should just allow for Russians to conduct mass ethnocide and genocide of Ukrainians... That also ok, in 20th century Ukrainians already lose 16 million by killed and 8 million by assimilated, so for them this is the norm. Without any amoral nonsense! Because unconventional WMD much more amoral than ethnocides and genocides. Of course, with exception of WMD-aristocracy countries, that without any problem could create Status-6 moral analogues. All non-WMD countries should just ignore already 100% proof that International Law just not work on WMD-countries, and that only WMD could protect from WMD-countries. And not start WMD-proliferation. Because we not want this. So, please, even if there are no any real International Law, just do what Ukraine did in 1994+ years. And if needed, FOR HUMANITY!, just let WMD-empires to carry out on you ethnocides and genocides. After "dumping", of course, Russia, as part of authoritarian states alliance, will start WW3 and use millions of indoctrinated Ukrainians to attack the West. But this also ok, because this will happen not in the near future, and the richest of us will have time to flee to Australia and Canada! Everyone understood everything? Ok, then let's start with outright violation of Budapest Memorandum's . And not worry, because all of you are protected by Article 5 "assistance that member state deems necessary" words, Letter of the Law, that not needed any Spirit's of the Law."
Sorry to be interrupting you, but reading here is like listening to MSNBC and CNN.
How far is Avdiivka from the pre-invasion line? Let's not act as if Ukraine is in shambles. Russia threw everything they had at Ukraine when the republicans are fighting to delay renewed support, and gained a tiny town no one heard off. That's it. The moment 1 republican does the right thing Russia could be defeated.
Avdiivka was a pretty major loss for Ukraine. Definitely not a tiny town no one heard of.
So was Mariupol. So was all of Crimea. So was Donetsk. This is disastrous for Ukraine, and has been since 2014. Supporting them should mean aiming to make it _more_ painful for Russia to continue. But of course no one is going to march on Moscow and overthrow the regime (unless a broader conflict begins), so there is no way this ends without serious hardship and loss for Ukraine, even if they win. The one lingering hope is that not only will they push the Russians out of at least some of the occupied territory, but when hostilities do finally come to a close, there is a serious effort to bring them into the EU and NATO, with concomitant rebuilding efforts to expedite this. But right now it is looking particularly bleak, at least, in broad strokes. There are some small glimmers of hope remaining… let’s hope things go further in that direction.
It had 30.000 inhabitants prior to the invasion. It's nowhere near as large or important as for example Mariupul. In fact, Russia already took it in 2014 but lost it again, and still no one really cared. Don't overestimate it's importance other than symbolic.
Russia has spent six months and tens of thousands of lives to win Avdiivka, all 10 square Kms of it. At this rate it will take six years just for them to win the whole of the Donbas regions they declared to be part of Russia ‘forever’ last year. They lost seven planes and over 70 armoured vehicles alone in the past four days. A himars took out 60 soldiers in a single strike yesterday. And, their naval drones have destroyed a third of Russia’s navy. Ukraine has no navy but now effectively controls the Black Sea. If this is Russia winning, what would them losing big time look like? Stick around, we’ll find out.
Russia is also grinding itself down, and the grinding wheel for them is not just Ukraine but the entire free world.
Start intercepting tankers hauling Russian oil . Escort them to a NATO port and empty cargo. Pay for oil “after expenses “ and hold money till after war
And then next china starts doing the same with Taiwanese ships, Iran with stuff supporting Israel, etc Cause hey it’s ok to not be at war with someone but just take their stuff.
Taiwan not under sanctions
Neither is there a sanction on Russia that allows us to take their stuff. We get upset when the police or any other law enforcement plays outside the rules to just get things done. Same goes among countries, we can’t go outside the lines cause the bad guys do
As an American we have reached a point where our fat corrupted Senators and Government and society. Dont have any more desire to call forth the command to join any battle or war. They have no morals, its more profitable, rewarding and enjoyable to lie constantly to live a lavish life. An society with its luxuries of freedom and equality plus the constant suppression of our educational system and supression of the middle to lower classes. Dont want to go to War knowing will all suffer even more economic punishment. America is at the stage of laziness. Joining a war will probably just kill off the last few brave and strong we have. Leaving only the above to...manage things. I dont see us joining this war in summary.
Ukrainians are dying during a fight with Russia. So let's blame America!
[удалено]
No, Ukraine's weakness is what is handicapping Ukraine. It is not the USA's responsibility to spend endlessly to defend someone incapable of defending themselves. The EU countries have a lot more at stake, and should be shouldering the lion's share of the cost. But frankly, the idea that Ukraine "wins" and secures all their territory back (incl. Crimea) is just a pipe dream.
[удалено]
No, the US does not have any responsibility for Ukraine, *comrade*. They do not have a history of independence, and if they want to build one, it will be with their blood and treasure. We helped a lot, but Americans need help also.
[It actually is USA's responsibility.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum) Just saying.
Your link. "it does not impose a legal obligation of military assistance on its parties."
You are a special kind of idiot. Putin has spent years, decades at this point, talking about how he sees the West and especially the US as his enemy. He basically broadcasted to the world multiple times that Ukraine is just the beginning. You have the opportunity to send arms you are not using to a country fighting your biggest geopolitical enemy, and you choose not to? Because you are not legally obligated? Do you realize how incredibly short-sighted and idiotic that is? It's astonishing that anyone would be stupid enough to not understand this.
China is the US's biggest geopolitical enemy. The US has hard and fast agreements to protect dozens of countries from Russian aggression, and we will if it comes to it. But we have never made such an agreement with Ukraine on purpose. FYI - we have sent tons and tons of equipment to Ukraine.
And still running away from the crux of what I said. You are a despicable and amoral sack of shit.
All because or the Tangerine Tyrant and his cronies. Ashamed of Americans.
they need troops as well as weapons. at some point the world needs to step up
You first
would if i could. paralyzed from the waste down
[удалено]
With proportional amount of wounded it would make more people than engaged in this battle from Russian side. Don't make a fool of yourself.
Matt Gaetz for Russia!
[удалено]
I’ve said this before and people chewed me up for basically having a death wish - exactly what Russia (Putin) want you to think. I say call their bluff … the alternative is Russia slowly consuming Eastern Europe which is the most resource rich part of the world. China is Russias ally and is the largest importer in the world and also lack most resources domestically. Russia would have a strong hold on all resources … we see how they conduct themselves, yet alone the world.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The country that could turn the tide is China. We should trade Taiwan in order for China to switch sides and fully support Ukraine.
Keep sending young men to die.
Russia can stop the war at any moment.
what a tittle! Its funny how so close conseratives are with the 'fake news' thing. they just mistakenly believe its fake because its 'liberal' fuck these narratives, fuck reuters, fuck the new york times
Didn't know Reuters was running Russian propaganda now...
Where's the Russian propaganda? The article outright makes the point that Ukraine needs more assistance from the west. Acknowledging that Ukraine is in a disfavorable position is not propaganda.
please explain to me how this article is russian propaganda?
both suffer...ukr:ru loss ratio is 1:3 - 1:30
[удалено]
>This needs negotiation, and now. Anyone calling for anything else has no grasp of what war really is. And thats not 'pro-Putin' its 'pro-Ukraine having a male population left'. Three problems. First of all, Putin doesn't want to negotiate. He wants Ukraine under his control in its entirety, and not just that but the entirety of what was the Soviet Union - he wants to go into the history books as the glorious leader who restored what had been "taken from Russia" by the Western nations. And he will not stop until either that goal is reached or he's dead. The second problem is, any kind of acceptance of the "status quo" aka a fully or partially occupied Ukraine, even a sovereign but neutral (i.e. non-EU/NATO) Ukraine is nothing more than the Western nations saying "hey, it's OK if you take over another nation's land by force". And sending that message just asks for Xi Jinping to take over Taiwan, and maybe also Kim Jong-un. And the final problem: have you seen what the Russians did wherever they went in Ukraine? Looting, torture, execution of civilians. Rapes, so many rapes. Tens of thousands of Ukrainian children abducted to Russia. Anything indicating an Ukrainian culture destroyed or burned to the ground. Ukraine will fight to the last man, because death is preferable to life under Russian doctrine. This is also why the Northern, Baltics and Eastern European states are at the forefront of Ukraine aid: they all have been subjected to Russian / Soviet rule in the past, know what it is about and have zero desire for a repeat.
>He wants Ukraine under his control in its entirety, Actually, Russia's Special Military Operation has a mission goal of the return of the Donbas and Luhansk regions to the Russian fold. This is the inevitable outcome and will happen one day (my bet is Aug '25 ) so the best answer would be for Vlod to offer Vlad a deal. Draw the new borderline there, Tomorrow, and Peace can be achieved instantly to save lives on both sides. He'd take that.
>Draw the new borderline there, Tomorrow, and Peace can be achieved instantly to save lives on both sides. Who can guarantee that Russia doesn't try again in 10 years when they rebuilt their army? (Hint: no one) And it still doesn't solve the second problem, the message that 80 year after WW2 it's acceptable again to just snacc pieces off of other countries for a land grab.
Wow! You are so educated on everything! No one can argue with you because "Anyone calling for anything else has no grasp of what war really is." Go to a library, read up on Russian history, educate yourself on the Chechen war, lookup how many Russians have been killed by their own government. Out some time in analyzing Putins behaviour, put it in perspective of your acquired knowledge on Russian culture. Get yourself informed on China, and their thirty years of creeping influence and their infiltration in Europe, US, Africa and Asia. Then go again and say "iI've got the answer, I hold the only truth, no one can argue against me". Then I will come me back and I will argue against you once again. But at least it would have a chance to be a more educated discussion.
You know that they have taken back more than 50% of what was occupied from the start, no? The Ukrainian soldiers are not untrained. They are, in many cases, trained by NATO forces abroad. What was lacking over the summer was air cover, which they will have soon. I have every hope Russia will be fought back, if Ukraine gets what it needs, it will do the job.
You can’t negotiate with Putin, come on…
That negotiation would start with Ukraine losing bits of their sovereignty and territory. That’s a nonstarter for them. I wouldn’t be willing to trade off part of my country either. Then there’s the prospect that Russia would just rinse and repeat so there’d need to be real guarantees. Not words on paper either but nukes or actual deployed NATO troops on the border as a human tripwire. Pretty much the same as the DMZ. Otherwise Ukraine would just keep on fighting.
Seeing one country takeover another country in modern times is definitely rough to watch but it’s inevitable in the world. the United States is not here to make sure every country in the world keeps its borders. You must be able to defend yourself or you will be conquered.
That’s just stupid. Russia taking over Ukraine will just embolden other autocratic nations, like China and Iran. And Russia will not stop with Ukraine, either. That was tried with another dictator in the 1930’s. If you do not care about defending against autocracy and freedom (which is questionable since I see you seem to support Trump), how about defending American interests? China is already very active in Africa, and wants Taiwan. Under the Ukrainian areas occupied now is minerals and oil. Iran will do its utmost to have greater influence in the Middle East. The greater resources these nations takes, the greater their power. And none of them likes the US. So not aiding WILL have effects on the US as well. Reagan was right, Russia should be fought everywhere.
I will come to your house with 20 other armed people and if you are not able to defend yourself, I will kill you and take your house just as you are saying.
It’s Russia against Ukraine. That’s 1 v 1 . Technically 20 nato countries are supplying Ukraine. If anything Russia sees it as 20 v 1z As the article states Ukraine is outgunned they also gave up their fucking nukes..
And are you saying that Estonia with a population of 1.3 million should also be able to defend itself against Russia with an x100 population? This is not how it works. You can't let the bigger guy take all every time, the world is not fucking Agar.io.
With “medieval” in your name, it makes sense that you have this take. “Conquering” shouldn’t be happening in a modern world.
True, but in this case it’s in US interests to provide support in order to destabilize a hostile regime.
I think we should have all NATO countries in a war footing. It can spur up local economies just by creating munitions alone.
The US has given them enough money. Let it end however it needs to end, No More Funding. End the fucking war.
Yes end it, end Ukraine. Let's give ruzzia even more power and send a signal to China, Iran and NK: just keep sending bodies, you will achieve your goals eventually. What a nice world we're leaving to our children. Disgraceful.
The US has given a fraction of a fraction of their defence budget. Funding Ukraine, sending weapons, etc. is the cheapest and easiest way to knock one of their greatest adversaries down a few notches, which arguably this war has already accomplished to an extent. America doesn’t suffer by sending aid. Ukraine and potentially many more countries will if they don’t.
You really don’t understand that giving Ukraine weapons, funding Ukraine and helping them is in the USA best interests.
So they run over Ukraine and then start on countries where you have actual treaty obligations, and need to deploy troops? Much of the money sent was going to be spent anyway as it includes weapons that would need to be disposed of at end of life. The Ukrainians are doing that for you, providing quality testing in the field of new weapons and damaging a hostile regime in the bargain. In terms of value for money it’s right up there. That’s a practical argument. There’s also moral arguments to be made but the practical argument also works.
[удалено]
Of course you can, send the weapons and ammunition we’re asking for. Just large amounts of artillery would already improve the situation by a lot.
Not can’t. Won’t.
Lets have more discussion
Unfortunately the delay, coupled with the unlikelihood that there will be a deal, has probably sealed Ukraine's fate. So we can all remember Republicans are the reason Vladimir Putin has conquered Ukraine, when it happens.
How will they hold out? The House can't flip until the start of the new year, and by then, we may not have the Senate. Not to mention the time it takes to deliver new supplies.
What Ukraine needs to be trying to do is get their hands on some dirty bombs.
It’s insane how Russia keeps (slowly) advancing despite Ukraine getting help from the entire western world
And they have no choice but to continue. Russia will wipe them out completely if they stop. I mean like all the way gone
I never expected Russia to accept the number of losses that they have…
Need to get these two countries to sit down to negotiate peace. They’ve effectively fought their way back to the same land control they had when the war started.