War in Ukraine

The Ukrainians are dealing with a nuclear power that has a significant numbers advantage and knows the other side can only hold out on the battlefield for only so much longer. The AFU is inflicting a lot of damage and cost on the Russians but they are still slowly losing a war of attrition. The question Zelenskyy and S4 have right now is when is the moment that they will have the greatest leverage to get the Russians to the negotiating table? We are coming up on the 3rd anniversary of this war and a lot of the Ukrainians are tired of fighting it. Right now might be the best position the AFU will ever put Zelenskyy in to make a deal. If that means he needs an excuse to rule out the return of Crimea to get the Russians to the peace table, that is probably a position he is willing to take.

Remember a lot of this may not be permanent. Putin is not a young man and there is no clear, public succession plan in the event of his demise. If the Ukrainians cede Crimean for four to five years to stop the war and are able to retake it with significantly less losses after Putin passes, would that be worth it?

 

<clapping and high fives in Moscow >

 

Putin was signaling a willingness to negotiate before this so I don’t think it was a necessary concession just to get to the negotiating table. It certainly wasn’t back in 2022.

To your question, unless Russia implodes similar to the USSR I don’t see Ukraine retaking Crimea in the future without significant long term commitment from its western allies including enforcing a no fly zone and engaging in air-to-ground missions. Since that’s off the table that just leaves a Russian implosion. Possible but I’m not putting money on it.

 

All possible. The reason I’m not willing to get worked up over it is my belief that these negotiations are bound to fail in any case. You have Ukraine, which will negotiate on many points but, wisely, not on the need for a security guarantee from other states. But that’s a non-starter for Russia, because the whole point is to be able to come back for the rest later. You have a section of the Western population that views any result short of 2014 borders, reparations, and war-crimes tribunals as a failure. And that’s just laughably unrealistic. Then you got Russia, which thinks it gets to keep what is already stolen, get Kherson and Kharkiv for free, not return Ukrainian citizens under Russian control, be guaranteed that Ukraine gets no security guarantee, and see Ukraine disarmed and constitutionally subordinate to Russia. And that’s beer-shooting-out-of-your-nose laughable. The sides are too far apart and not yet exhausted enough to compromise. The only strategic value of these negotiations is to demonstrate how ridiculous Russia really is. I could be very wrong, but until we see the President actually try to pressure Ukraine to take a deal that does not involve a bonafide security guarantee, I don’t think any of us should worry.

 

Things I have been trying to explain to the forum for years…

 

Anyone who thinks Crimea is still on the table in 2025 needs to get to a rehab center and do so quickly.

 

Good god. I’ve been saying this forever. Crimea ain’t coming back. And there’s no way Ukraine is going to be allowed to join NATO. The entire reason Russia waged this war was to keep Ukraine out of NATO. Even if Russia bleeds on the battlefield for ten more years, they are not going to accept Ukrainian membership in NATO. You all really have to get your collective heads wrapped around that fact. NATO membership is not seen as a negotiating piece by Russia. It is seen as an existential threat. You can wish, hope, pray all you want. But you cannot and you will not change the minds inside the Kremlin from your fingertips here in the U.S. Not every military action from a perceived enemy is motivated by lebensraum.

For this reason, Hegseth said the correct thing. We are not going to stop the war by asking Russia to reconsider what they consider to be their most relevant existential threat. It just doesn’t work that way.

 

Strawman argument. I never claimed either of those things but don’t let me get in the way of a good rant.

 

Crimea could easily have come back had we supported Ukraine the way we should have from the beginning without all the traitors in Congress who cut off funding to Ukraine during a critical time during the last administration. Starlink going down during Ukrainian operations against Russian forces in Crimea, etc. thanks to Elmo, putting his little finger on the scale in Russia's favor. Back-channeling to Putin, why?

The fact is we have oligarchs in this country and Europe who are not willing to see what comes after Putin because they were compromised by Putin - Elon Musk being #1. They like the black Russian money that flows into our economy through the money launders like Trump. We've decided to be a kleptocracy, just like Russia. No guardrails, every major power gets to carve out their little sphere of influence as Trump sells them out. A man with no moral compass, just one that points to self-enrichment and power.

Our entire elections were subverted in 2016 and 2024 by Putin to achieve the result he just got. Trump handing Ukraine territory over to him. Trump is a straight up traitor as is Scholz in Germany, who just wants their cheap Russian gas back.

Fact is Russia's military is on the ropes, has lost the ability to conduct meaningful offensives except at great cost, Russia has been counter-invaded and Russia is powerless to take back the territory.

Their military is on the verge of collapse like it did in 1916-7.

Imagine had we supported Ukraine properly when we should have. We didn't because money is more important than liberty and freedom.

We will regret this decision and sooner than we think. Putin can't wait 5-10 years.

Putin’s Call With Trump Delivers a Victory for Russian Leader

 

I’m sorry your head is spinning so much, but Hegseths comments right now, especially if they reflect the White House, represent a complete surrender. That was horrific and certainly no reason to say that publicly before a negotiation. My goodness how embarrassing. What’s sad is I know our “leader” is “smarter than this” which means, once again, the optics are trump, at best, selling the farm for a negotiating win, or at worst, is somehow still a quiet Putin fan. Smdh.

 

I think he's just being honest. How the war ends isn't up to Ukraine, Zelensky is just a puppet and the entire state is completely bankrolled by the West. The negotiations will be between Russia, the US, and Europe. Europe will be the interesting one here, as with Trump withdrawing the US from the world stage Europe is not as likely as before to follow American orders so they may choose to continue the fight, but the rising right wing sentiment on the continent is mitigating that will.

 

Putin has been signaling a willingness to negotiate but one of his pre-conditions has been that Crimea has to be off the table. It was a necessary concession to get to the table because both sides know that the AFU retaking it is not military feasible at this point or in the next year. Between the AFU's position in Kursk and Ukrainian drones hitting targets within reach in Russia, Zelenskyy is probably in the best position he has ever had to start negotiations but it might not last, hence giving in on an unrealistic position

Without going into gnats ass detail, Crimea poses some significant challenges for Russia to hold if there is a power struggle after Putin passes and the AFU is able to refit and rearm for several years.

 

I'm sorry but this is completely unrealistic assertion. I'm not sure where you are getting that idea but it not accurate. The only way Crimea could have been taken back would have been if the AFU had been getting the same level of support that they have since '22, back in 2014.

 

The Ukrainians could have counterattacked sooner and with more strength and pushed into HIMARS firing range to interdict supplies to Crimea via the Kerch bridges and cutting it off from resupply as the Black Sea was sea denied to Russia via Ukrainian Seababy attacks. This was the entire idea of the counteroffensive which our little Putin mole airman shared with the entire world.

 

Uh, no. The AFU was in no position at anytime to conduct a serious counterattack into Crimea. The idea that HIMARS could be used to interdict supplies on the Kerch shows anyone suggesting this has no realistic understanding of indirect fire and how it works. I'm not sure where you read this but I would suggest you skip them in the future.

 

What you are saying just isn’t so. I doubt you’ll find a single career military person who thinks Ukraine could have taken back Crimea in 2022 with any level of material support. With direct military intervention by NATO, possibly, but that was never in the cards.

If restoration of Ukraine’s 2014 borders is the strategic objective, then fine, that can be done … but only at great cost, risk, and time. First, we have to publicly abandon the notion of a negotiated settlement in 2025. Second, we have to go full throttle on economic measures and enforcement (according to General Kellogg, we have never exceeded 60% on measures or 40% on enforcement), especially measures to lower the global price on petroleum and natural gas, no matter how much the environmental lobby squeals. Third, we have to invoke the DPA and convert our economic priority to the production of munitions, food, and hydrocarbons. Fourth, we have to convince our allies and partners to do the same; reward those (Poland) who do their best, and sanction those (Hungary) who obstruct. Fifth, we need a list of progressive military measures that increasingly involves us in the war (I’ve listed examples many times in this thread). I certainly did not see the Biden Administration doing any of that, even when the Democrats had full control of the government in the first year of the war (I’m afraid the narrative of Republican obstructionism just doesn’t explain Administration failures in 2022 as neatly as it does in later years).

But the point is moot, because restoration of the 2014 borders was never the policy, not under Biden and not under Trump. The policy is roughly the same: end the war as soon as possible, on terms to Ukraine that are as favorable as possible, without risking general war with Russia or pulling away any protection from Taiwan. How different the methods are remains to be seen.

 

I guess you didn't hear what Hegseth said to our European NATO and non-NATO allies yesterday - go figure it out, we have to deal with China. Reminder that this is something that is better done with allies, which we will rapidly lose if Trump has his way. Trump wants to tear up NATO for Russia's benefit. His entire mind is wrapped around sovereignty, which will leave us isolated and alone in an increasingly unstable world. The fact that he won't even include Ukraine in peace talks which he plans to hold in Saudi Arabia - hardly a friendly country, but another autocratic one.

 

How is HIMARS indirect fire if we put them directly on Russian command posts, troop concentrations, bunkers etc.?

We could have supplied an array of HIMARS munitions (ATACMS especially) much earlier than we were forced to do which would have mattered much earlier when Ukraine ran Russia out of most of the country.

Our allies have provided advanced cruise missiles while Germany and the US sat with our thumbs up our asses. Our strategy was to bleed Russia, not defeat them.

We have them on the mat about to collapse internally and we let them up off the mat instead of pinning them for the win.

Guess it wouldn't do for the Defense Department to lose an important geopolitical enemy - less leverage.

Our strategy is and has been weak in regards to Russia. We should not appease Putin, it will only lead to more war.

If we allow the Russians to back up land grabs with nukes, we are asking for more of the same.

That is not deterrence, it is disaster waiting to happen with nuclear proliferation.

 

I stopped reading after this. You really need to stop suggesting the outcomes of possible military operations if you do not understand how HIMARS munitions are indirect fires.