The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Your opinion. Mine is that Ukraine is ready for negitiations but not under Russian conditions.
It's the same thing. Ukraine wants everything they want, and they're not willing to give anything in return. Their argument amounts to that it's unfair. And it's fundamentally correct, but what does that have to do with negotiations? Negotiations aren't about justice, they're about making a deal. What do you want to get and what are you willing to give in return?

Inacceptable for the UA.* You are knowing that. And in the Anchorage talks Lawrow said that Trump had assured that he will force Zelenskij to accept the Russian terms, and that Russia is disappointed that Trump was not able to deliver.
*Emphasis mine.

I think that's the essential part. For an actual peace treaty Ukraine wants a deal that they can't get by offering anything of comparable value. Therefore they don't want to negotiate.

The Russian terms were a little bit more than the Luhansk and Donezk oblasts. No souvereign country can agree to this kind of surrender.
Why rewarding the aggressor and war criminal? Ukraine currently is retreating (not losing) at the front, but is winning strategically in the Russian backyard.
I don't think Ukraine is winning strategically and I don't think they themselves believe that either.. I think they found a way to deliver some pain and they will use it. But it's far from anything resembling a strategic victory. And Ukraine's willingness to now take a ceasefire along the line of contact, and openly talking about future deals proceeding from that logic is a departure from what their position was back when they themselves thought they were winning strategically.

Just one question...

How is Ukrainian backyard doing?
Fiery but mostly peaceful.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member

The article paints Ukraine’s military reforms as a belated attempt to contain a deepening manpower crisis. Kyiv is offering fixed-term contracts, higher frontline pay and guaranteed breaks from duty, but the measures stop short of full demobilisation for soldiers who have been fighting for years. The central tension is that Ukraine needs to make service feel less indefinite and more humane, while still relying on compulsory mobilisation to keep depleted frontline units staffed. The reforms may help morale at the margins, but the article suggests the harder problems- exhaustion, distrust of commanders, fear of poor training, desertion and coercive draft practices- remain unresolved.
Not only do these reforms come late, they also only come on paper. Several articles have outlined that. For example:


Note that the AWOL’s ability to return straight to the desired units is not new at all. It has been allegedly implemented over a year ago, with effective dates long expired now, and was discussed here. It was clear it wouldn’t work then and it is not going to work now, no matter how many times you announce it as new legislation and new “effective dates”. People do not want to die in the meat grinder and it is a reasonable position, especially in the circumstances.

The same is true for the ability to transfer from one unit to another using the Army+ app or whatever it is. It’s old news, about as old as the AWOL mentioned above (all was implemented around the same time in order to reduce the new AWOL cases and an attempt to return some of the old ones). Presenting it all as new legislation simply proves that it was ineffective last time.

If you dig around, the contract thing isn’t new either. Maybe some small tweaks and whatnot. But good luck leaving after the contract is over. Part of the reason for AWOL numbers. Also good luck surviving for up to 14 months in the infantry. A good chunk of 14 months could also be spent dieting in some hole, surrounded by dirt, with no access in or out. A little more on infantry and assault in the next post.

What is new, however, is the money part. Yet again, does anyone actually believe that this is tied to reality? On several previous occasions I presented evidence that people do not get paid as it is. And that includes foreigners. Probability of Ukraine being able to pay $7,000-10,000 per month to the infantry and assault troops in any significant numbers is zero. Unless promise to pay and wait for them to simply get killed and declared MIA. So yeah, this is not happening. $670 is probably realistic, but that is the aim for the personnel in the rear, which is probably not easy to find either because they have been sent to the very front to assault Russian positions on numerous occasions that we had also discussed here. This new bit of lots of money is probably an addition to all the old stuff that didn’t work (repacked as new here) in hopes that it will serve as another incentive.

So yeah, this isn't much of a reform. But it does look good on paper and headlines “Great News: We Are Fixing It All Up!” Especially because people apparently have extremely short memories or don’t particularly care to begin with. Those “soldiers-to-be” in Ukraine, however, know exactly what is going -> nothing will change. This whole current information campaign is probably a part of the initiative to increase the number of volunteers because “Great Success! Russia Is About to Collapse and We Will Take Back Crimea!” They must think people are idiots. They aren’t necessarily wrong, but when it comes to “50/50” (laughing) as far as your actual (not some low-IQ “RU will genocide you” hypothesis) survival is concerned… They aren’t as dumb as they think they are.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
More on the infantry and assault troops. This one is about probably the most famous assault regiment Skala (would have to use translate of some kind from Ukrainian):

The assault regiment "Skel" has combat merits and good support. And also, eyewitnesses say, people are tortured and slaughtered to death there. The "Babel" investigation

The beginning of the article:

Beaten head, torn hands, crossed lower back, dirty and broken fingers. In this condition, 35-year-old Oleksandr Semenov came to Kropyvnytskyi Hospital in January 2026. He said that he escaped from the 425th separate assault regiment "Skelia", where he was mocked, beaten, tied to a quad bike and dragged on the ground. In a video taken by local doctors, the man said he had witnessed at least nine suicides in the unit, briefly described their circumstances and named one of the dead. The video, which is available to "Babel", was shot on January 23, 2026, and a few days later Oleksandr Semenov died in hospital. The official cause of death is pneumonia.

More:

Due to accusations of heavy losses, the regiment has established a reputation as a "meat". However, "Skelya" loses people not only on the battlefield, but also before the combat - during military training. "Babel" correspondent Kateryna Lykhoglyad studied this issue for almost two months. Over the past six months, she has counted 26 deaths in the rock training centers. Most of the dead men did not last a month in the regiment. The official cause of death is mostly pneumonia.

This is just from the introduction. It’s a long, but “good” read. Some facts about the Rock from the article. The initial stage, the chicken coop, aka the barracks:

- 1,000-1,200 “recruits” are usually in the barracks, many with addictions;
- cellphones are confiscated at the sorting centre (I ogle here at Zelensky's claim of (paraphrased) “our troops can use social media and talk to relatives and friends any time they want”);
- upon arrival, everyone is undressed, completely, has to squat, etc.
- many people sent to Skala come from the infamous busification, those disliked by commanders, etc (one interviewed dude served since 2023 until being sent there by the new commander, for example);
- the stay in the barracks usually lasts a few days, after which “internal buyers” (reps from the Skala battalions) come to pick their recruits;
- trips to washrooms, dining, and everywhere else are accompanied by the armed convoys (they call them “vertuhai” - which is actually a prison slang for guards, my note), squatting and searches are a regular occurrence;
- drug withdrawal is a natural thing, hardly any or no medications are provided, instead people are beaten;
- those refusing orders are sent to the cells, where a double-sized mattress occupies most of the room (one of the interviewed (not an addict) spent 2 days in such a cell for refusing to sit, along with 5-6 others, 4 of whom were on full-on withdrawal);
- to calm people down, the cell is sprayed with tear gas;
- the washroom in the cell, for “small needs” is a bottle;
- many recruits have an official record of “unfit for service” (duh?).

Training camp:

- those who try to flee on the way from the coop to the training camp are caught and severely beaten;
- tents are located few kilometres from the training ground, 35-40 people per tent;
- some trainees live in dugouts (some of the training camps are set up that way);
- if someone lines up in the wrong way (have to lineup to go anywhere), the guards shoot in the air or into the ground, sometimes wounding the trainees;
- nighttime washroom is an old friend bottle;
- the representative (head of the civil-military cooperation group) from the Rock calls it all “exaggeration” and says that the recruits are only accompanied by an armed convoy when they go “long distances”, to the shooting range or the dining room, for example;
- the perimeter around the camp is mined (at least one dude who exploded on a mine died of pneumonia two weeks later, other verified witness accounts);
- the same Rock’s representative after long hesitation: "If it is written "mines" somewhere, you should not check it with your foot."
- those trying to run can also be shot in the back;
- those tried to run but caught, ended up with broken ribs, knocked out teeth, etc (not as in either or, but in combination);
- “scotching” is a normal practice - being “scotched” to a log in a dugout for a day, for example;
- special dugouts for those refusing to fight due to the religious beliefs;
- mentally-ill are assigned to the religious dudes and beaten, despite being clearly insane (symptoms are clear to an average person, some have difficulties speaking);
- those with the HIV, tuberculosis, hepatitis C, etc are deprived of their meds “necessary for life”;
- all these dudes (recruits) are called one-timers - that is, the expectation is that they will be used once, so you can “estimate” the rate of survival after the mission.

A couple of direct wuotes:

One of the active soldiers of the "Scalk" witnessed a "zombie apocalypse" during a formation to which drug addicts were brought: people were beaten, some arbitrarily defaecated simply in formation. He says it was scary. He also adds that although he is not a supporter of such harsh methods of "working" with people, he saw how after training some drug addicts "become people, real motivated tigers". When asked what happened to those who did not become a "tiger", he answers briefly - they went through the same BZVP, and went to the exit in the same way, but "without knowledge, without skills, without anything".[…]

A person who is registered with a narcologist can only voluntarily join the army, explains the head of the All-Ukrainian Association of People with Drug Addiction,[…]

"I don't quite understand when I'm told that I have to fight for years to go on, and a person who receives methadone at my expense should be sent home, and I don't have to my children," says Andriy Surai, head of the Rocky, civil-military cooperation group [the rep already mentioned]. There is a lot of talk about social justice in the regiment. Different people fight there: both successful and educated men, and with a colorful biography - recruits from prisons and drug addicts. The regiment rightly notes that there are very few people willing to go to the army, especially in the assault troops, and there is a critical shortage of people.


Anyway, there is more to read, as this is only about 1/2 - 2/3 of the article (via google translate, which sucks in this case, by the way). But yeah, $10,000 per month and all that jazz. One of those escaped:

The man is ready to serve in support units, medical units and in logistics, security, in the communication unit. Instead, he hides from the "Rock".The man is ready to serve in support units, medical units and in logistics, security, in the communication unit. Instead, he hides from the "Rock".

This is just one regiment and the most famous one to boot. Imagine what is going on in the other, smaller, less advertised and public units. The article has a correction up on top:

After the publication, the editorial board clarified that Vyacheslav Borisov died in another military unit. We removed his last name from the list and adjusted the number in the text from 26 to 25. The deaths of 25 mobilized "Skelya" confirmed. Due to the fact that after publication in the public sphere appeared a lot of information about the beatings and deaths in the unit, the list may increase.

So one out of 26 “pneumonia cases” had happened in another military unit. And there is quite a bit of public discussion, so likely a lot more to follow. The commander of Skala has been allegedly dismissed and an investigation launched after the publication. As if it was a secrete prior.

So back to the reform, there is nothing one can do when there are no people willing to fight (and die in) a losing war. There is no reform, no matter how repetitive or actually new, that can fix it.

Some thoughts from a (usually reasonable, not so much lately) Ukrainian on the subject matter:

IMG_5626.jpeg
IMG_5627.jpeg
IMG_5628.jpeg

The tweet quoted in the first image (part of the reform too, which has been happening since before the “great counteroffensive” of 2023):

IMG_5624.jpeg

So yeah, all normal stuff, mined (Gulag-type) camps and all. They are doing everything they can to defend themselves. Glory and all.


Edit: I said the commander of the Skala regiment was dismissed. Correction on that point: he was suspended pending investigation, not dismissed.
 
Last edited:

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
I don't think Ukraine is winning strategically and I don't think they themselves believe that either.. I think they found a way to deliver some pain and they will use it. But it's far from anything resembling a strategic victory. And Ukraine's willingness to now take a ceasefire along the line of contact, and openly talking about future deals proceeding from that logic is a departure from what their position was back when they themselves thought they were winning strategically.
Too early to tell who will "win" strategically. Who would have believed 20 or 15 years ago that the Taliban would win strategically in Afghanistan?

Ukraine just started inflicting pain on russia, the question is if they can keep it up. can the putin regime survive another year if the fuel crisis becomes even more severe? And the Ukranian attacks on russian military factories will also be a big problem for russia long term, unless russia is able to stop them. At the same time more of the Ukranian military equipment is being produced jointly with other European countries; in the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Norway, etc. Very difficult for russia to neutralize those factories.

Keep in mind the different level of motivations. russians are fighting and dying for the idea of expanding the russian empire. Ukraine is fighting for their lives. If russia stops fighting the war will simply end. If Ukraine stops fighting Ukraine will disappear as a nation, more Ukranians will be raped, tortured and murdered, more Ukranian children will be kidnapped and brainwashed.
 

rsemmes

Active Member
Maybe it´s more "Putin sends his soldiers to death because is dreaming of a Great Russia in historical borders?"
Another question then...

Why is Zelenski sending his soldiers to their deaths in a war he knows he cannot win. In 2023 it was clear that Ukraine couldn't win the war (I would say it was clear before the war started, two ex-Soviet armies, one a lot bigger than the other), after the Kursk retun ticket it was simply criminal.
Of course, you have to define "victory", but Ukraine has lost 20% of its territory and doesn't have the money to fight the war; only 60%, but lets see at the end of the year. So, what is "victory" for a country in ruins, without money? Unless all Ukrainian refineries are working at a 100%, of course.
 
Last edited:

tonnyc

Well-Known Member
Another question then...

Why is Zelenski sending his soldiers to their deaths in a war he knows he cannot win. In 2023 it was clear that Ukraine couldn't win the war (I would say it was clear before the war started, two ex-Soviet armies, one a lot bigger than the other), after the Kursk retun ticket it was simply criminal.
Of course, you have to define "victory", but Ukraine has lost 20% of its territory and doesn't have the money to fight the war ;only 60%, but lets see at the end of the year. So, what is "victory" for a country in ruins, without money? Unless all Ukrainian refineries are working at a 100%, of course.
There are people who believe that they should defend their country from foreign aggression even if the war doesn't look winnable. Because if they don't try, then their failure is 100% guaranteed, but if they try, then who knows, maybe in the future something will change and tip the balance.

And historically the second possibility has happened from time to time. Consider that the Taliban can't possibly win a war against the US, and yet in the end the US left Afghanistan and the Taliban came back to power. It doesn't always work and in fact most of the times it doesn't work, but again, if they don't try, then failure is 100% guaranteed.

I honestly can't comprehend why in this defense-oriented forum, there are people who can't seem to grasp that patriotism is real. You may not agree with it, but it exists. Evidence of this are too numerous to count throughout history.
 

rsemmes

Active Member
Too early to tell who will "win" strategically. Who would have believed 20 or 15 years ago that the Taliban would win strategically in Afghanistan?

Ukraine just started inflicting pain on russia, the question is if they can keep it up. can the putin regime survive another year if the fuel crisis becomes even more severe? And the Ukranian attacks on russian military factories will also be a big problem for russia long term, unless russia is able to stop them. At the same time more of the Ukranian military equipment is being produced jointly with other European countries; in the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Norway, etc. Very difficult for russia to neutralize those factories.

Keep in mind the different level of motivations. russians are fighting and dying for the idea of expanding the russian empire. Ukraine is fighting for their lives. If russia stops fighting the war will simply end. If Ukraine stops fighting Ukraine will disappear as a nation, more Ukranians will be raped, tortured and murdered, more Ukranian children will be kidnapped and brainwashed.
First of all, what "strategically"? You win the war or you don't, that word adds nothing. Then, a lot people, specially after Vietnam, guerrilla wars in difficult terrain may get those results.

A very good point, Ukraine "just started". How long has Ukraine been suffering pain? Why one year, what about 40 days and Russia will collapse? What about the attacks on Ukrainian factories? Wait... Is Ukraine almost self-sufficient or is NATO providing the weapons? You cannot have the cake and eat it. Anyway, if a factory is making tanks instead of pans, Ukraine has to buy pans; it's not the weapons industry, it's the country. And, as far as we know, Russia has increased weapons production, by a lot. Have you consider the long term implications for Ukraine, with every passing month, after 4 years of being hit by missiles?
Sorry to disappoint, the "motivation" is your mates, to get the job done; as you will always read. King and Country are far, far away when you are dirty, wet, hungry and tired in a trench, with people trying to kill you. I don't know about the motivation of that couple of millions of Ukrainian deserters, but Ukraine will not disappear, Ukraine was never going to disappear. But yes, let's keep repeating the mantra that Russia will collapse and that the only point was to make Lemberg a Russian city again.

And let's keep fighting to the last Ukrainian soldier.
 

rsemmes

Active Member
There are people who believe that they should defend their country from foreign aggression even if the war doesn't look winnable. Because if they don't try, then their failure is 100% guaranteed, but if they try, then who knows, maybe in the future something will change and tip the balance.

And historically the second possibility has happened from time to time. Consider that the Taliban can't possibly win a war against the US, and yet in the end the US left Afghanistan and the Taliban came back to power. It doesn't always work and in fact most of the times it doesn't work, but again, if they don't try, then failure is 100% guaranteed.

I honestly can't comprehend why in this defense-oriented forum, there are people who can't seem to grasp that patriotism is real. You may not agree with it, but it exists. Evidence of this are too numerous to count throughout history.
He was talking about Putin, I was talking about Zelenski and someone forgot to mention Russian patriotism.

Yes, "la fleur au fusil", I read about that (I almost felt that), I also read, repeatedly, that it lasted less than the flower. There is a long quote by B. Mauldin about digging a hole in your backyard...
 
Last edited:

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
Imagine believing this nonsense.
What is nonsense? Can you elaborate? What is nonsense is to believe that NATO was a military threat to russia. The russian military was in pretty bad shape in the nineties; at the same time NATO still was pretty solid. So that would have been the perfect time to make a military move by NATO. However, instead of invading, European NATO countries reduced defense spending quite significantly, cutting defense budgets year after year, quite the opposite of what you would do if you plan to invade someone. The US did not as much as Europe, mainly because they have their own global presence including the need to consider China.

It is very clear that the dream of the russian empire is the main motivation for the illegal and aggressive invasion of Ukraine, which so far also has included a large number of war crimes committed by the invading forces.

Germany and Japan learned their lessons after WWII and became democracies that do not yearn for building empires. russia unfortunately did not learn this lesson; not after WWII, and not after the end of the cold war. That's why it's essential that we keep supporting Ukraine until russia understands that empire building in Europe is no longer permitted.
 

Hoover

Active Member
Another question then...

Why is Zelenski sending his soldiers to their deaths in a war he knows he cannot win. In 2023 it was clear that Ukraine couldn't win the war (I would say it was clear before the war started, two ex-Soviet armies, one a lot bigger than the other), after the Kursk retun ticket it was simply criminal.
Of course, you have to define "victory", but Ukraine has lost 20% of its territory and doesn't have the money to fight the war ;only 60%, but lets see at the end of the year. So, what is "victory" for a country in ruins, without money? Unless all Ukrainian refineries are working at a 100%, of course.
The Ukrainians don´t want to live under Russian terror gouvernment. That is their right to defend their country. I know, you would surrender immediatly I you would attacked by another country.
In every of your post I read Urkaine has already lost, can´t win and so on. For years now. You never will be able to understand, why a country is fighting. Did you ever talk to Ukrainians? I do. Very often. They are knowing, what conditions the Ukranians facing in the occupied territories.

You win the war or you don't, that word adds nothing.
If that is your understanding of war and politics, than I am very disappointed by your horizon.

Wait... Is Ukraine almost self-sufficient or is NATO providing the weapons?
So what? Russia is not able to continue the fight without the support of China, Nortkorea, Iran. Should Russia surrender then?


Fact is:
Ukraine is being attacked by Russia. Yes.
Has UA the right to defend itself, his land and his sovereignity? Yes.
Is it right to support UA in their war? Yes, of course.
Is the alternative to surender better fpr the people? No. Aks Ukrainians who fled from the occupied territories.
Will UA regain all russian occupied territory? Not by military action.
Will UA win? Depends on the interpretation.
Will Russia win? Depends in the interpretation.

It is neither your or my decision to tell UA to surrender. The war is a crime by Russia, and every possible end of that war will not be fair for UA, they will lost land and being under constant future thread of further Russian attacks.
And I think you are very happy of it, isn´t it?
 

rsemmes

Active Member
The Ukrainians don´t want to live under Russian terror gouvernment.
Only that you never mentioned what Russians want. Patriotism, like tonnyc said?
If that is, was, the only point (Do the people from Donbas want to live under an Ukrainian government? The Hungarian minority?), since (Istanbul) 2022, all the people south of the Dnieper wouldn't be living under the Russian government. Not Crimea, that would had been the price.

Why is Zelenski still fighting this war? He is not going to win military, he has acknowledged the fact that he will have to reach a compromise, he is simply doubling down. Nothing to negotiate with?, as Feanor mentioned.
"Why is Zelenski still sending his soldiers to their deaths?" The answer that you are not providing is, as least now, that "window of opportunity"; but The Economist says 3 years. What strong position to negotiate is he hoping to achieve? How? That would be a reason, for Zelenski, to keep in the fight, to keep sending his soldiers to their deaths.

Yes, I have the terrible habit to stick to reality. "Two ex-Soviet armies, one a lot bigger than the other", Ukraine is still in the fight because of NATO, not because of Ukraine.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Only that you never mentioned what Russians want. Patriotism, like tonnyc said?
WTF knows want Russian citizens want. Its all about what Putin and his fellow criminals want.

Ukraine is still in the fight because of NATO, not because of Ukraine.
Yes NATO allows Ukraine the ability to continue the fight but most Ukrainians oppose giving their country away to Putin. NATO seems to agree albeit the IOTUS is somewhat suspect wrt support.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
WTF knows want Russian citizens want. Its all about what Putin and his fellow criminals want.
I think this isn't true. Even in authoritarian countries popular opinion matters. Sometimes it matters more than in democracies.

Ukraine is still in the fight because of NATO, not because of Ukraine.
I think we need to unpack this a little more. If Ukraine wasn't willing to fight, NATO wouldn't be able to keep them in the fight. Consider Crimea in 2014; could any amount of NATO involvement gotten Ukrainian forces in Crimea to fight? Obviously not, out of the ~17k troops in Crimea ~14k ended up joining the Russian military after annexation. NATO enables Ukraine to continue fighting because Ukraine is willing to continue fighting. And yes, it's not all of Ukraine that wants to fight, but enough of it to keep them in the fight.
 

rsemmes

Active Member
Of course, 300.000 deserters and 2.000.000 in hiding, but the front line is still manned. But, without NATO money, no 10 brigades for the Robotine offensive and I think the conflict would have ended in 2023 (maybe in 2022 without NATO promises), long before any Shahed.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
Maybe it´s more "Putin sends his soldiers to death because is dreaming of a Great Russia in historical borders?"
That would make more sense than what was stated, but still way off, in my opinion.


What is nonsense? Can you elaborate?
This:

russians are fighting and dying for the idea of expanding the russian empire.

Do you have some poll I am not aware of that provides us with a glimpse of what Russian troops think they are fighting for? Do you actually think they are there fighting and dying in order “to expand the Russian Empire”? If you do, I have an ocean property to sell you in Ukraine (but you sound like you had already bought one, figuratively speaking and my choice of words was specific on purpose).

I am not sure what the thought process is with many, but an average Russian has their own thoughts on the situation. Those thoughts were shaped by history and propaganda they and those who brought them up and surrounded them in their lives were/are exposed to. No different from you and your thoughts. They are people, like any other people.

Chances are, if you ask an average Russian soldier about what he is fighting for, the most common answer would be “for motherland” and that they are fighting against NATO, etc. That would be my guess (and bet). I actually doubt you would get even one “in order to expand the vast lands of the Great Russian Empire and conquer -whatever it is you think it is-“.

Imagine thinking one can get hundreds of thousands of volunteers to sign up to fight so that they can conquer the ruins of Donbas for the purpose of expansion and making Russia (of all places) a bigger country or some such. Many more volunteers, in fact, than the country fighting an existential war that, if lost or not fought, will cause the said country to “disappear as a nation, more Ukranians will be raped, tortured and murdered, more Ukranian children will be kidnapped and brainwashed”. That makes a lot of sense, right? No, it makes none; thus, it is nonsense.

And again, while it is your prerogative, purposefully writing words that are meant to be capitalized otherwise does not make you look smarter, but otherwise. For a child, it would be understandable, their brain is not developed enough for critical thinking and they do not have a sufficient knowledge base to begin with, so they protest in silly ways. For adults, it’s a different matter, on the other hand; they should be able to make an argument. Sometimes I truly wonder, about the age of the person on the other end of the line.

Everything else you said in your post has beed discussed dozens of times. No point to come back to it yet again.


I think this isn't true. Even in authoritarian countries popular opinion matters. Sometimes it matters more than in democracies.
I’d say significantly more often than sometimes because the consequences of losing are often more significant and retirement from the political career may look quite different there.

Consider Crimea in 2014; could any amount of NATO involvement gotten Ukrainian forces in Crimea to fight? Obviously not, out of the ~17k troops in Crimea ~14k ended up joining the Russian military after annexation.
They are all dreaming to voluntarily join back Ukraine though. Just wait for it. Once “Putin” withdraws from Crimea and takes his “settlers” with him. Any day now.
 

personaldesas

Active Member
Of course, 300.000 deserters and 2.000.000 in hiding, but the front line is still manned. But, without NATO money, no 10 brigades for the Robotine offensive and I think the conflict would have ended in 2023 (maybe in 2022 without NATO promises), long before any Shahed.
Trying to understand your actual claim, because I think there are two mixed together:

1. Without foreign money/weapons, Ukraine couldn't fight at this scale.
2. Ukrainians have no real will to fight, it's only Zelensky coercing them.

So, straight: no inherent will to fight, or just no means without NATO? Those go very different directions.
 

rsemmes

Active Member
Trying to understand your actual claim, because I think there are two mixed together:

1. Without foreign money/weapons, Ukraine couldn't fight at this scale.
2. Ukrainians have no real will to fight, it's only Zelensky coercing them.

So, straight: no inherent will to fight, or just no means without NATO? Those go very different directions.
Zelenski cannot coerce them, I cannot see how you could be confused. "The front is manned", that means that a lot of Ukrainians are actually fighting. Feanor mentioned the will to fight, something that a lot of Ukrainian don't have. As usual, there is a lot of "get on with it" and very little of "King & Country".

I don't think I know many cases of "black and white". For example, limited means long ago exhausted without NATO.
 
Top