Why doesn’t Oryx track Ukrainian losses?

So just a "picture" without source with ... an Hypothetical list of civilian equipement ?? Wtf loool, and it's only aircrafts ?
You must be completely desperate right



It does, I am a bit shocked to hear that you didn't even know about this website.

This post was edited by Meanwhile on Sep 17 2023 01:21pm

Think you should post these as well and add a disclaimer that these seem to be visually confirmed losses only. If there is no visual for whatever reason - they don’t add to the list?

Rumor has it Wagner are going back into Ukraine to the front

I think that you have a very different working definition of the word "fair". If we're entering into a business arrangement, and I bring 75% of the capital, it's fair that I receive 75% of the expected reward. That's to say that a fair compromise takes into account the reality on the ground. Ukraine will need to give up land in order to secure peace. How much? I have no idea, but it starts with accepting that Crimea and the Donbass are out of reach. Both of these places refused to accept the authority of the Maidan government, which would seem to make this an easy decision. Get rid of the baggage and move forward with a united Ukraine that is fully backed by NATO.

was that so difficult? i mean, i obviously anticipated that in your opinion it would be "fair" that russia should be rewarderd for murdering countless innocent people and destroying a country, but i prefer people who outright state what they think russia deserves for its warmongering.

the logical follow-up question now is: where is the compromise? in my proposal, ukraine gives up reparations for russia's repeated military aggression, for the loss of countless lives, and the destruction of its infrastructure, it potentially gives up the regions you want to outright gift russia in democratic referendums. so what does russia give up in your version of a "fair" deal? what do they concede?

This post was edited by fender on Sep 17 2023 07:13pm

You're far too caught up in this emotionally. It's not a question of rewarding or not rewarding Russia, it's a question of what both sides hold. Fairness is defined by impartiality and objectivity. The Russians objectively hold a great deal of Ukrainian land, and by any impartial observer are not in danger of a sudden collapse. In a fair negotiation, why should they accept less than what they have right now?

To your second question, is Russia likely to have to pay reparations to Ukraine? Obviously not. So what is Ukraine actually giving up? Please try to answer this concisely.

This post was edited by bogie160 on Sep 17 2023 07:56pm

I fail to see how giving up land actually achieves the securing peace part. A couple of years down the line, once Russia has replenished its military resources, what stops them from trying to take the rest of Ukraine yet again?

This would only work if whatever is left of Ukraine was officially allowed to join NATO right away. But that's fairly unrealistic. First, it would go diametrically against a ton of the Kremlin propaganda, so them accepting this provision in a peace deal would cause Putin to lose face with his own people and generals. Second, I don't see much appetite among the current NATO states for admitting Ukraine into the alliance before the conflict has truly calmed down. At the end of the day, the Germans, French, Italians as well as at least 40% of Americans aren't really willing to go to war against Russia over Ukraine. And all it takes is one nation, be it Hungary, Turkey or someone else, to block Ukraine's accession.

Is there any evidence to suggest that anything is changing in the Russo-Ukrainian war? For the past year, it seems to me that (as someone who doesn't spend much time researching this) it's essentially a stalemate with no changes in Russia-controlled vs. Ukraine-controlled territory

Where does it go from here, from both sides? Is this the current status quo for years to come?