War in Ukraine

Your guess as to what will actually happen, or what would constitute success?

 

doesn't the west have hundreds of billions of russian assets under their control?

 

Sure. But if we’re talking about negotiations here, I would think that leveraging their return against some kind of Russian concession would be the move. I only see those being given to Ukraine in the event of Russian regime collapse, and even then I doubt that’s a fraction of what Ukraine needs to rebuild.

 

Remember when we thought Al Qaeda was our enemy? Then we backed them in Libya and Syria.

Remember when Mitt Romney said Russia was our biggest strategic adversary? Remember what Obama said?

"The '80s called. They want their foreign policy back....The cold war's been over for 20 years."

 

"The Russians are reusing body bags, they have such a shortage."

 

It’s called recycling

 

No doubt the thieves that run Russia want their assets returned to them by the West. How much get returned and how much land Russia is willing to return (in exchange?) seems to me to be one of the larger issues.

 

Yes, Kursk was a catastrophe. But for whom ?

“Almost every tactician not working for Ukraine has questioned the offensive, calling it potentially one of the greatest military blunders in modern history.”

Failing Kursk Offensive May Backfire On Ukraine As Russian Troops Mass Near Sumy | ZeroHedge

 

Another pathetic, crappy article from Zerohedge. The Kursk offensive has been highly successful for Ukraine. Especially right after Ukraine destroyed a counter-offensive by wiping out hundreds of Russian tanks in possibly the biggest tank battle since 1943. Putin established Dec. 20th as the latest date that Ukraine should be ejected from Kursk, and they're still there. Kursk is of some value strategically, as railroads running through there deliver supplies to the Russian front lines. It is also a forward launching point for the longer-range missiles that Ukraine is now allowed to use, and the long-range drones that they have been using. It's also possible that Ukraine has set up anti-aircraft missile defenses in Kursk that could divert glide-bomb planes into longer routes or keep them on the sidelines. The fact that Ukraine's defenses within their country have not collapsed (they have retreated in an orderly fashion, killing large numbers of Russian troops in a trade of land for dead enemy soldiers) is also an indication that this was a very smart thing to do. Also, if there is a settlement in the near future, Ukraine has some land in Russia to exchange for Russia's land in Ukraine.

This stupid article is the only place I've heard of "tacticians" criticizing the offensive. Unless by "tacticians" you mean the Kremlin propagandists, and crackpots living in their parents' basement. The Kremlin boys are getting nervous that the war might end soon, and Russia will have to give up most of its gains to get Kursk back, and the war will wind up being a massive failure for Putin.

 

Another knee-jerk response from an unhinged Empire boot-licker who’s shot more messengers than Ukrainian troops have shot Russians with Asian facial features and designated them North Koreans.

 

There is only one empire (builder) in this war, and that country is Russia. You're probably too busy licking an old pair of Putin's boots to notice. If the Russians were allowed to fight a proxy war against the U.S. in Korea in the 1950's, then there should be nothing wrong with the U.S. returning the favor in the 1980's and again in the 2020's. It does not make the U.S. an "empire" any more than it makes the dozens of other countries supporting Ukraine empires. The U.S. is supporting Ukraine because it is the right thing to do. Ukraine did not start this war any more than the U.S. or any other country not named Russia did. The U.S. does occasionally pursue its interests, but generally (in the last few decades) the U.S. pursues those interests within the framework of international law. I know that these are all things you do not want to hear, but they are the truth. Deal with it.

And it doesn't matter at this point whether troops killed in the fighting are North Korean or Russian. What matters is that Russia is losing troops as they lose this war. You propaganda does not change that.

 

I assumed this was Ukraine …

 

Fair question. Because in my opinion Russia would only agree to such a condition (and I said 2014, not 2022) under the circumstances of having been defeated militarily. It won’t come out of any kind of negotiated peace in 2025. I did mean Russia retreating to its 2014 borders, but I especially meant reparations. There is nothing I can think of we can offer Russia (except perhaps something ridiculous, such as the return of Alaska for free) that would make them take that deal. They would prefer to keep fighting without regard to how risky that is for them strategically. And, ultimately, I think that’s what will happen: negotiations, if they happen at all, will break down because the two sides are just too far apart, and neither is exhausted … yet. At that point, Trump will realize (if he has not already) that Ukraine is far less vulnerable to the maximum pressure that the U.S. can bring to bear (which is essentially no more than cutting off aid) than Russia is (far more options there for cranking up the pain at low risk to us), and we will begin to effect a deliberate strategy to exhaust Russia and bring them to a more reasonable mindset about giving back that which is not theirs.

 

I'm not suggesting he would, but Trump could apply more pressure on Ukraine by easing sanctions against Russia.

 

That is possible but would be more difficult to do unilaterally without Congressional and allied support. That is also the sort of thing that would guarantee him loss of the Congress in 2026, which is a situation he would strongly desire to avoid. He wants something he can sell as a victory as quickly as possible. The quickest path is a negotiated peace that is somewhat fair and sustainable, but I don’t think Russia has bled enough yet to realistically get that. The second quickest, which would also maximize Congressional and allied support, is ratcheting up pressure on Russia. What you described, maximizing pressure on Ukraine, would probably take the longest and cause him greater political resistance to other things he would prefer to focus on. But we will see. I am encouraged by some of the language coming from Trump and his national security team lately.

 

Reduce, reuse, recycle. If Russia was eco friendly they’d be at “reduce” - aka ending their invasion.

 

Get ready for "Who knew that resolving a war could be so complicated?"

 

Sickening.