Seymour Hersh interview

I mean the outcome hasn't changed for over a year now, Russia can't win, Ukraine can't win, all they can do is stalemate and cost more lives and fight over the fine details of the lines that will inevitably result. Putin certainly didn't get all he wanted, but he was also certainly prepared for the long war if a lightning blitz didn't give him an easy victory.

There were so many surprises during this invasion that one cannot 100% dismiss that Putin can leaves the kremlin or his bunker feet first.

Based

alot of english and irish politicians, and former leaders, fall into this category btw. it would be worth your while to learn history before getting a paintbrush. You should look at the image you posted very carefully and try to articulate in your own words what that image is saying.

This post was edited by ferdia on Jun 3 2023 07:10pm

Grinding it out is Russia's specialty. It is simply impossible to beat Russia in a war of attrition. For every 100$ Ukrainian allies spend arming them, the Russians spend 10$ to respond. They will outlast and outproduce their enemies every time, Napoleon and Hitler learned the hard way. The best Ukraine can do is halt any further expansion into their territory, which can only last as long as Russia loses interest.

Napoleon's troops were fundamentally unable to maintain the logistics required to keep a country as large as Russia occupied. A century later, the nazi troops had more modern technology at their disposal, most of all motorized vehicles, so they made more progress, but they were still hailing from a nation which had a population of 70m and limited natural resources going up against a nation which had around 150m inhabitants at the time, and vastly larger natural resources... and Russia still almost lost.

Also note that we're talking about entirely different campaigns here. Russia is yuuuuuuuuuge, trying to conquer and then hold it is a monumental task. Ukraine doesn't need to do any of that to win this war. This time around, Russia is the aggressor, the one trying to conquer. The European part of Russia alone has an area of around 4m square kilometers, Ukraine only has 600k. So they only need to hold on to one seventh of the territory Napoleon or Hitler would have needed for victory. And they got homefield advantage while Russia is the one having to maintain logistics on foreign soil.



And like I've stressed many times before: the NATO countries alone (excluding allies like SK and JP) have a GDP ten times as big as Russia's, so as long as Ukraine isn't trading at extremely lopsided rates (10:1 in Russia's favor is ludicrous), we actually can grind this out if really necessary.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jun 4 2023 12:10am

here you go another video from the guy you trash.

If you post a Peter Zeihan video , he will get an orgasm.

Ukraine realistically is a country with sub 30 million people at this point. Large swaths of its male population have already been mobilized. I live in the US and in my city I’ve met a fair amount of Ukrainian refugees both male and female.

I don’t really know how much the ‘well’ has left to give. This war is absolutely crippling Ukraine, the longer it goes the worst their prospects are of being a functioning independent state. They were already the poorest country in Europe prior to the war, even if they recover the Donbas , they are going to be extremely damaged, in debted, with a much smaller population.

To give you a personal example, my wife’s cousin has a 14 year old son and she lives in western Ukraine. Her husband is already in Holland and has been working there for a few years. They are now planning for their son to leave the country because they’re scared he’ll get drafted. This is the reality and the things I’d say hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are considering.

And to what end? Idk taking this to its logical outcome ultimately fighting was objectively worse for them.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Jun 4 2023 05:54am