Quote (ownyaah @ Jul 31 2022 04:36am)
Good examples, but they don't align perfectly because vietnam and afghanistan were continents away from the (country of) the main army, and the proxy troops were not particularly motivated. DPR forces look extremely motivated and are willing to fight to death, and Russian troops have a far more vested interest.
Afghani army was widely despised by both mostly the rural but also city populations for example
Quote (ferdia @ Jul 31 2022 04:43am)
just trying to tease this out:
DPR forces, by this you mean those aligned with Russia? and more critically Russian troops have a far more vested interest ? I dont understand, or rather, I dont agree with this comment. The safest option for my response is to side step your comment and say :
I would argue (which i believe is Goomshill's point) that Ukraine is the side which is highly motivated and has the greatest vested interested in what happens, in or to, Ukraine. And ukrainian people wholly support their armed forces, thus all the more reason to support that even with heavy losses, ukraine can prevail.
^Goomshill keep me on track if i erred anywhere there.
The cases aren't comparable and I don't think they need to be, its really just an illustration of denying an assertion rather than establishing another one.
The VC and Taliban had a hostile populace fending off a foreign invader. That's not the case with Russia in the separatist regions, where they are clearly being supported by a highly motivated population with a vested interest in their outcome. And that gives Russia a lot more staying power against the hostile populace fighting their foreign invasion beyond the donbass.