Correct. NATO did not take on the role of being the military arm and protector of Ukraine. That role if it belonged to anyone should have fallen on the shoulders of the United Nations (blue helmets) which is strangely absent in the whole affair. Other than passing resolutions I haven't seen any blue helmets. I don't think I need go into Ukraine being a Russian satellite for years and the demographics of the population that has Russian speaking people in the West with Ukrainian speaking people in the East. The two have never gotten along with each other.
If you think the West fomented “coups” in Ukraine, then you don’t understand what a coup is. The people of Ukraine collectively rose up against a corrupt, Russian-puppet government that they felt did not represent their interests. The Ukrainian armed forces did not, as you imply, overthrow the popularly elected government at the behest of a foreign power, such as happened in Chile in 1973.
And that's what allies do in times of war. Why this makes any difference is beyond me. The most important aspect is the individual soldier which was a Russian. You need someone to aim that weapon and shoot it. This is what Ukraine lacks and this is why we are in this quagmire of attrition.
Ukraine has (or had) the second-largest military in Europe, behind Russia, with something like 900,000 troops, all in Ukraine. Russia has a fraction of its 2+ million troops in Ukraine. Most likely, Ukraine has more soldiers in Ukraine than Russia does. As successful as Ukraine has been in fighting this war, it is likely that they have less casualties than Russia has had (estimated at 80,000), and fewer soldiers surrendering or running away (or shooting themselves to get out of military service). Why would you suggest that Ukraine lacks soldiers?
Then why impose a mandatory conscription of 18-60 year old males and put them on the front lines no less?
Yes I do and I noted my concern about attrition and why this war needs to end soon. The US cannot continue down this path without severely crippling our own military prowess.
There are reasons that Putin started his expansion of Russia with Ukraine, and not one of the other countries. Ukraine has the biggest and strongest military of all of the old USSR satellite countries. Defeat them, and the rest will fall like dominoes. If you attack Poland first, your military might be too weakened to take on Ukraine afterwards. Defeat Ukraine, and the other countries will be intimidated and that much easier to invade. Ukraine also has two things of economic value: agriculture and metals. So it is the most profitable of all the neighbors. Ukraine is also the most financially successful of Russia's neighbors, causing jealousy among Russians. Russia did not initially explain that the NATO angle was the reason for the war--they said they were ridding Ukraine of Nazis, which was obviously false. If NATO was the reason for the war, then why initially hide it? Basically, Putin was trying to cover up a blatant theft of a neighboring country, and was grasping at straws to justify the theft. All he could offer was bad excuses. NATO is part of his thinking process, but by no means is it a primary motivation for the war.
Because they are in an existential fight? For their freedom? For their homeland? Against a numerically superior enemy with the largest collection of tanks in the world?
If you're putting fresh recruits on the front line with minimal training that certainly doesn't speak volumes for the core units does it? BTW we did the same in Vietnam with fresh recruits. When we got rid of the draft we depended heavily on the reserves in Iraq and Afghanistan. What do think will happen here if the US puts boots on the ground?
Given that we would not put such boots on the ground without air and naval superiority, victory is what would happen.
Russia is putting fresh troops with much less training and very little gear on the front lines. They are sacrificing tens of thousands of men to try and prop up Putin ego. Sadly, they wll almost all certainly die
Idk why we keep debating Vietnam and the us putting troops on the ground. There is almost a zero percent chance the us puts any meaningful level of troops in ukraine absent a direct attack on nato.
Do you mean the core units that have already handed Putin his ass? USA to Vietnam is NOT equivalent to Ukraine is to Russia in almost any way.
It is in one way, sort of. If the estimate of 65,000 Russian KIA is close to accurate, then Russia has now lost roughly as many personnel in Ukraine as the U.S. did in Vietnam. You might say, yeah, but that was over the course of nine years, not nine months. Details. It’s a comparison.
That is the stated point of view. Yet it is one we choose not to do. That is the problem and why we are in a war of attrition. Further I doubt Russia would cease and desist if we did so. It would open an escalation for Russia to use whatever they see fit in their arsenal. If you think the Ukrainians have resolve I expect the same from the Russians.
First we have no idea what the total losses are on either side of the equation at this point. The description you paint is a war of misfits.
we do know that the misfits on the Ukranian side are dismantling the misfits on the Russian side and the Ukranian misfits are fighting for their country while the russian misfits are fighting to avoid being shot by their own troops or sent to prison. One set of msifits is properly equipped and supported, the other one, not at all. spin that however you choose.
Do you mean political resolve or battlefield resolve? If the latter, lololol. If the former, maybe. In a one man / oligarchical sense - assuming they don't tip the scales of support too far. You know, like by arming criminals and the masses and sending them off to the slaughter. That didn't work to well for Russian authoritarians 100 years ago. Seems to me that if the West can keep the political resolve, this is all but wrapped up (RU out of UKR). Shame so many are willing to either ignore the reality of the situation or openly subvert that resolve.
Does anyone even know what carp's points are anymore other than kissing the boots of his beloved Czar? Carp how can you possibly support anyone other than Ukraine unless you are affiliated with Russia in some way or worse, motivated to do so? Ukraine did not invade Russia. Russia had no reason to invade Ukraine other than "Empire Building" by the dictator. There is just nothing to argue here. If you are pro Russian, fine, just admit it. Salut
