For serious discussion - like your thoughts beyond simple “Russians go home” platitudes. What even is a russian theory of victory at this point?
First off - this STILL seems to be a war where their only goal is conquest and capitulation of the Ukrainian government to a Russian puppet one. But - how do they intend realize that?
-
Terroristic bombings against civilian targets from standoff distance has never, ever been successful at defeating an industrial society. It’s way, way way too expensive to maintain and doesn’t hold ground.
-
Russia’s mechanized forces in mass have largely been wiped out and is cost-ineffective compared to Ukraine’s ability to stop them with drones.
-
Russia’s infantry tactics is literally sending in small infiltration teams into forward areas, where they are eventually either droned, sniped, mined, shelled or outright counter attacked and killed.
Ukraine seems capable of increasingly automating their defense AND assualt forces to be less manpower intensive, and able to trade a little bit of land temporarily until they can kill the infiltration teams that bum rush positions in cars, motorbikes or on foot. The latter is NOT a serious or effective strategy for occupying and pacifying conquered land.
In the big picture - Russia seems to just be prolonging the slaughter and hoping to be given something in return to make it stop. But - that doesn’t seem likely to work. No serious minded thinkers expect Russia to honor any agreement, so why WOULDN’T Ukraine logically look at the stiatuion and conclude that the ONLY way to stop future russian aggression is to bleed out their army until there is fundamental change in Russian political leadership.
How does Russia ‘win’ this war? It’s hard to see. Things feel very endgame, but also stagnant since life of their soldiers means absolutely nothing to the Kremlin, when they probably know the alternative is that stopping the war leads quickly and directly to total domestic collapse.
Your thoughts please.
In the short term, it’s probably what Russia says it is: getting the territories that it wrote into the constitution. Stopping at the areas currently in control would also be acceptable, as that’s already more than Russia had before 2022. Then it’s going to be about regrouping for new attacks and invasions, which don’t have to be aimed at Ukraine. Even if attacking Europe were out of the picture, there are former Soviet countries to its south.
Well - here’s the thing. The worst part of the war for Russia might not even have started - occupation. A war of conquest is only meaninful if you can exploit and extract value from that territory. If Ukraine retains the ability to snipe, drone, bomb, harass and kill occupation forces and any moronic Russian pioneer replacement settlers, then what good is owning burning rubble. Just like the U.S. experience in Vietnam, if the terrioty you take can’t be held or pacified when your most qualified troops are killed or move to the next objective, then what has been the point of taking Hill 835 or whatever. You have to leave at some point because it’s not worth the ongoing bloodshed, and then the ‘enemy’ just comes back.
But territory can only be exploited from economic activity underwritten by a peaceful state of things. And occupation forces can’t live in smouldering puddles of rain water - they live in barracks among communities that generate economic wealth. Russia is YEARS away from reaping occupation, reconstruction and repopulation benefits, and that’s assuming Ukraine stops shooting at all. Nobody seriously expects Russia NOT to try again in a couple years, so from Ukraine’s perspective, the only path to lasting peace is to keep bleeding the Russians dry until something fundamental changes withe the political leadership
Russia’s expectation is what it wrote for Trump’s peace deal. It definitely wants it in writing. Though Russia itself doesn’t respect its agreements, if one were signed by Ukraine and supported by the US, Ukraine would likely not attack unless attacked. We saw this with Russia’s de facto annexation of parts of Georgia and with Crimea. The latter became a vacation resort for Russians and many bought property there, doing just fine until 2022.
Kazakhstan and the other neighboring countries may be within China’s sphere of influence, but I don’t see China getting involved in any serious way.
china cares more about its economy, than wars, a war/military assistance can seriously affect its trades, they think in the long term. thats why taiwain is mostly sabre rattling its for internal consumption.
Sure, but those states have already aligned themselves to China (Kazazhstan and the rest of the Central Asian Republics), Turkey (Azeris) or otherwise disavowed themselves from Russia like Armenia. Georgia and Belraus are pale consolation prizes for what was a one-time shot at restoring the great russian empire.