Poland, Romania, lithuania, UK and others will easily pick up the slack. They DO NOT like the idea of Russia being next door again. Ukraine will be relatively okay without just us, they’ve already made ammo and Vic manufacturing deals with neighboring countries. It would suck to not have our influence but it wouldn’t be doomsday for them.
Russia's Invasion of Ukraine (Official Thread)
- Thread starter newarkhiphop
- Start date
Poland, Romania, lithuania, UK and others will easily pick up the slack. They DO NOT like the idea of Russia being next door again. Ukraine will be relatively okay without just us, they’ve already made ammo and Vic manufacturing deals with neighboring countries. It would suck to not have our influence but it wouldn’t be doomsday for them.
Yeah, taking the US out of the equation would be like losing your queen in chess. But if a player is good enough at using all of the other pieces in their possession and the opponent is constantly misusing theirs then a win is still possible.
I don't hear any coup talk going on in Ukraine either...
Neo. The Only. The One.
THE ONE
Let's go point for point. Why would Russia give up the Ukrainian territories that it has already successfully seized? Crimea plus Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, etc?
What leverage could Ukraine possibly hold to make them give up those territories?
They have nothing to threaten Russia with. If the Ukrainians go into Russia and attack Russia head-on, the US and NATO will more than likely be forced to pull their support. They can't be party to an attack on Russia's sovereignty while Russia is a nuclear nation.
Ukraine has Russian prisoners but Russia has Ukrainian prisoners so that cancels out.
What leverage could they possibly hold over Russia to make them give up territories that Putin says he has annexed?
You can say that the Ukrainians will fight until they expel every single Russian within their borders, but I don't see it that way. I think a time will come when Ukraine will gladly accept a stalemate where Russia keeps the territory that they've seized while also promising to halt any further invasion.
Russia is not leaving Ukraine of their own accord without getting SOMETHING out of the deal.
Neo. The Only. The One.
THE ONE
dbl
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
Ukraine has already retook the majority of territory that Russia took in the latest invasion.
You’re giving Russia way more credit than they are due which is completely irrational based on how things have transpired so far.
Pretty pathetic tbh
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
Russian Military Hit by Uncertainty as One General Is Killed and Another Remains Absent
A Russian lawmaker says that Gen. Sergei Surovikin, who has not been seen in public since a short-lived mutiny, has been “taking a rest.”
Because Ukraine won't let them. You do realize there is a war going on over this?
Continuous resistance backed by NATO, South Korea, Japan...
Hold this :skp:
Absolutely nobody is suggesting this. Why even bring this vodka driven nonsense into the convo? And to be honest, if Ukraine did bumrush the Russian border then you best believe that NATO is right behind it. Stay shook.
Ukraine has POW's.
Russia has kidnapped civilians that they need to repopulate with.
See above responses.
Please tell me why?
Hold this
lol...
You know what Russia is gonna get? And it aint gonna come from a deal. Russia is gonna get the Bane/Batman treatment. Worn down to the point they can get ragdolled and back broke.
C'mon, you know this is all true.
Neo. The Only. The One.
THE ONE
![[Something Cool]](/data/avatars/m/1/1586.jpg?1601998769){kind=avatar}
[Something Cool]
Not a Well-Known Member
The problem that Ukraine sees with entering into a truce with Russia is that it’s already been proven that you cant trust a Kremlin run Russia to adhear to it. There is a reason why people are floating the 2014 borders as being a possible solution. That was the last agreement that Russia didn’t stick to. In Ukraine’s eyes it’s absolute defeat of Russia or nothing at this point. So of course they want Crimea too.
This current situation isn’t Ukraine’s fault by any measure. These a$$hole’s fukked up an invasion, killed their family members, and now are refusing to leave. Ive asked this before, what is a “win” for Russia at this point? You pushed your military capacity back to the 1940s, you're resigning your energy based economy to bartering discount deals, your frontline has expanded thousands of miles, and your best and brightest have chucked up the deuces and left.
There is a win for “Russians” to pack up their loses and not resign themselves to a Chinese run satellite. Thats just not a win for the Kremlin, but they need to figure that shyt out.
This current situation isn’t Ukraine’s fault by any measure. These a$$hole’s fukked up an invasion, killed their family members, and now are refusing to leave. Ive asked this before, what is a “win” for Russia at this point? You pushed your military capacity back to the 1940s, you're resigning your energy based economy to bartering discount deals, your frontline has expanded thousands of miles, and your best and brightest have chucked up the deuces and left.
There is a win for “Russians” to pack up their loses and not resign themselves to a Chinese run satellite. Thats just not a win for the Kremlin, but they need to figure that shyt out.
Last edited:
I feel Russia simply cannot hold the territories it gained last year in the long run. The Wagner fukkery showed that their army is stretched thin so much that a column aiming at Moscow met little meaningful resistance.
They took those territories but they really don't control them yet and to control them, they would need far more troops that they simply don't have (yet).
The winning play for the West is simply to keep arming Ukraine because Russia's production just can't match the West deliveries. The longer it lasts, the more Russia depletes itself but the more Ukrainians die unfortunately.
We know Russia made currency/materiel/equipment reserves before going to war but they have already tapped well into that 500 days in as they have pulled out T55s. We also know that their storage practices are not really top notch as their is evidence of open air storage in Siberia of all places.
So IMO, at the prices of a prolonged war and more civilian/troop losses on the Ukrainian side, the West really just need to keep the current strategy, as cynical at it is
[Something Cool]
Not a Well-Known Member
Right, a valid point I forgot to add. So now youre king of the rubble, hurray! You now have to occupy, rebuild, and pacify an openly hostile and completely decimated territory. I can’t see Partisans making it easy with the way Russia terrorized the civilian population.I feel Russia simply cannot hold the territories it gained last year in the long run. The Wagner fukkery showed that their army is stretched thin so much that a column aiming at Moscow met little meaningful resistance.
They took those territories but they really don't control them yet and to control them, they would need far more troops that they simply don't have (yet).
The winning play for the West is simply to keep arming Ukraine because Russia's production just can't match the West deliveries. The longer it lasts, the more Russia depletes itself but the more Ukrainians die unfortunately.
We know Russia made currency/materiel/equipment reserves before going to war but they have already tapped well into that 500 days in as they have pulled out T55s. We also know that their storage practices are not really top notch as their is evidence of open air storage in Siberia of all places.
So IMO, at the prices of a prolonged war and more civilian/troop losses on the Ukrainian side, the West really just need to keep the current strategy, as cynical at it is
I posted the general rule the US came up with regarding the number of troops you need to quell any potential insurgency and I believe the number was 5 troops for every 1 citizen. The Donbas by itself was around 2.5 million alone, a lot less now, but good luck with that.
Anyway peace talks are so far away with Russia currently losing territory, it’s all academic. It can’t be anything other than an ugly war of attrition with people dying for nothing.
The only other thing that would stop it is anything involving Zaporizhzhia - I think that would be the straw to have outside parties step in and say enough is enough - with Chinese support.
Last edited:
Neo. The Only. The One.
THE ONE
I would agree with this if we didn't see Russia successfully occupy Crimea.
Russia is stretched thin because they are trying to take over all of Ukraine. If they scale back their efforts and say "we're only going to focus on the territories that we already occupy", then that frees up a lot of their war effort and requires a lot less effort.
Neo. The Only. The One.
THE ONE
I hear what you're saying, but correct me if I'm wrong... This gets more into the logistical/political side of things, but isn't Ukraine receiving resources from NATO nations?
My point being, here's something that Trump accurately said: The US accounts for a large part of the NATO budget.
If he gets back in office and either limits US participation or even completely withdraws the US entirely from NATO, that would be a very different looking NATO. And a lot of nations would be forced to tighten their bootstraps.
We should never get it confused: the US is responsible for much of Ukraine's defense. Yes, Poland, Romania, Lithuania and the UK are contributing, but they ain't contributing like we are. They can't contribute like we do even if they wanted to.
Nations are contributing to Ukraine because the US is leading the effort. If the US no longer leads that effort, then other nations would undoubtedly pull back too.