Avdiivka, Longtime Stronghold for Ukraine, Falls to Russians

Yes yes you've accused me of being a Russkie many times, so I don't know why you are so offended at being outed as a non American when you are playing one online.

 

A flippant answer to a serious problem. The US has the opportunity to both assist a democratic state and (given it's size) a valuable future ally while also crippling Russia's conventional military forces for the best part of decade without any direct involvement required. And once this war is over Ukraine will be in the market for US combat equipment because it will be wanting to modernize it's military to NATO Standards asap. Doing nothing? Just empowers Russia and Putin.

 

Any state that outlaws a religion, bans opposition political parties and media and cancels elections is NOT a democratic state.

And sure, Ukraine will be in the market for any and all weapons we can suppply ..... on ultra long-term credit, of course since Ukraine has no money now and its president operates as beggar-in-chief.

Time to cut that tar baby loose.

 

This is what mafialand is fielding:

 

I read that....on another message board.

Funny it wasn't posted here yet.

 

Well...yeah Mike....it's what's good for the goose, same as the gander...don't ya think?

 

I've responded multiple times on this forum as to why I'm against that, however people who think like me are not in charge, people who think like you are. So you are winning. Well not the actual war, that's going to end in Ukrainian defeat but you are winning the political war.

 

Meh...the difference is that I'm actually American.

 

Wow....imagine my relief...LOL.

 

One would never know.

 

1) By 'outlawing a religion' I can only assume your referring to the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) and organization that supports Vladimir Putin's nationalist agenda and his regime's policies in general including his little plan to 'unify Ukraine' and Russia under his enlightened leadership. Its matter of record he that the Patriarch of the ROC in Moscow (and Putin's pet) actually went so far as to official 'bless' the invasion and called on loyal members in Ukraine to welcome Russian troops when they arrived. Also and finally the ROC is still active in Ukraine it's just not recognized as the legitimate Orthodox Church of Ukraine by the Government there. So much for 'banned'. Now lets move on to comparing the state of democracy in Ukraine and Russia. Your time starts now...... (BTW do you have any idea how many political parties are officially banned in Russia). Oh and Germany still bans 'National Socialist' parties. I presume it's not democratic either.

2) Really? Did you consider the fact that other Western nations particularity other NATO members will be lining to help pay for that rearmament given Ukraine's size and strategic position as a road block in the path of Russian expansionism. Where do you think they would rather engage Russian forces (if they must) in any future confrontation Poland and eastern Germany or the Dnepr river?

 

1) Only if Trump wins in 24 and follows through with past threats to drop Ukraine like a hot rock. He may yet be persuaded that continued support for Ukraine gives him a huge advantage with which to leverage concessions out of Putin in any future negotiations and if nothing Else Trump likes leverage when he makes a deal. (Probably an unlikely outcome but still possible - I suppose.)

2) So you keep saying and saying and saying without providing any evidence.

In a strictly military sense (which is the only one that matters BTW) Ukraine is not yet 'losing' the war, neither is Russia. That claim is as ridiculous as someone saying Ukraine had 'won' after their victories last year. In reality victory is still an open question. With the benefit of hindsight the first quarter of 24 might turn out to be a turning point in the war. Might. In reality November 24 is more likely to be the turning point. And even if Trump wins? There's no way in hell Putin will get to achieve his original ambitions (overthrowing the Ukrainian Government and occupying all of Ukraine. Because that outcome not even in Trumps best interest's.

 

Excellent post.

 

You still think Ukraine can win this thing huh? Let me ask you this then. If you had the surety that I do that Ukraine can't win, would you still support funding this and grinding their population into dust? Or would there come a time when you think that you are simply killing your own "allies" for nothing?

 

You seriously need to study military history. For a start it's possible to 'win' a war just by denying a powerful the enemy the ability to obtain most of his starting victory conditions. (Case in point? I seem to remember one of America's key ambitions at the onset of the war of 1812 was the absorption of Canada into the United States. Hows that working out BTW?) So history is replete with wars ended by treaty where the nominal 'victor' was forced to accept face saving terms after achieving few if any of their original goals or in cases where they did achieve some of them? Only doing so at a cost that was so high it made continuing hostilities prohibitivly expensive. So lets look at this war shall we? Putin entered this war with the express intention of, in no particular order;

1) Expelling American, NATO and EU influence from Ukraine;
2) Overthrowing the democratically elected government of Ukraine and installing a puppet government;
3) Occupying the entire country and garrisoning it with Russian troops; and
4) Utilizing its geographic position , resources to bolster Russia's military, political and economic influence in Eastern Europe.

And lastly but very importantly ALL of of the above was to be achieved via a 'short victorious war' at little or no cost for Russia itself.

Those were his aims, whether he denies it now or not. Now after two years of war? How is all that working out for him?

Lets be clear. It's quite possible Russia might win this war but only if by 'win' you mean get to retain control of that portion of former Ukrainian territory it's holding when the war ends. (Which is likely to be little more than it holds now given how hard it is for either side to advance territorial major gains when confronted with the mine fields and obstacles etc both sides are constructing along the confrontation line.) It might also as a concession received a commitment that Ukraine will not be allowed to join NATO maybe even the EU (although that last seems unlikely especially since Trump has no say in that decision) But even in the case of NATO? Nothing prevents Ukraine's future government from buying western arms, training alongside other NATO nations and integrating their forces with individual NATO members countries by way of bi-lateral treaties with them because (again) Trump has no say in that. Over time we'd also certainly see the sanctions imposed on it by the West lifted although how in the hell they'll ever get around Putin's arrest warrant for war crimes I don''t know. So the map of central Europe gets redrawn and Russia gets to keep the bombed out wreck that is the territory it currently holds and maybe a little bit more. (We'll see how well it's 2025 offensive shapes out.)

What Putin absolutely wont get in full is any of the four points stated above. He won't control the entire country not even anything near the majority of it. He won't see a puppet government installed in Kiev and Russian won't troops control Ukraine's borders with the EU. And even then? What partial success he does have will have been achieved at the cost of breaking Russia's modernized pre-war armed forces. That's gone for about a decade at least. Why? Because even if Trump wants to kiss ass and give him everything he want's he can't do it without European co-operation. Trump can't force Europe to ease sanction's re-open trade with Russia, stop the EU from letting Ukraine join or stop it supplying arms and money to Kiev even if its only a fraction of the amount the US could provide.

As I said before you serious need to read military history, I'd start with the classical period and move forward. Hubris is a bitch when it come to fighting wars.

 

I think if Russia gets what I've highlighted, than yes I think it's fair to say they won the war and Ukraine lost it. Ukraine, coming out of this war, after the incredible cost it's paid, with less territory, is going to be a loss, and I don't know how you think you can finagle that into declaring it a victory.

 

He says completely forgetting what Russia's objectives were when they started the war. Have you never heard of the term 'pyrrhic victory'?

Are you seriously telling me that if you paid someone to build you a new home and that at the end of the day that person never puts the roof on it you'd still regard that as a 'win' for you?

 

On a side note we are at least in agreement on one point i.e. that (IMO) its unlikely Ukraine will ever recapture all the territory it's lost since 2014 including the Crimean Peninsula. The majority of the seized territory outside of the Kherson Oblast were majority ethnic Russian before the war started anyway and the majority of young/healthy adults residing there who supported Ukraine have long since either fled west, been imprisoned or killed. After the war? There may well be population switches who knows.? Point is though achieving even that much does not make this a great Russian victory it just mans Putin has saved face, that's all because the extent of his real ambitions were so much vaster than that.

 

You do realize that at the end of the day Russia will have territory that it snatched from Ukraine. You may think it will only be a pyrrhic victory for Russia but it will definitely be an actual real loss for Ukraine.

 

See post 419

 

That was a lot of equine excrement to unpack but concerning 1 - 4, none of those were ever the goals. And #2, I just laughed. The last democratically elected government was overthrown by the US/CIA which is what brought about the war. You need to study....20% of the population hasn't been able to vote since 2014. The shithole of ukraine is not a democracy. Wasn't much of one to begin with, damn sure ain't one now.

zelensky had his chance to keep Donetsk and Luhansk in March of '22, but he instead decided to send hundreds of thousands to their deaths in exchange for bribes.

Military history? It was the Russians that beat the nazis. They will do it again. If you knew anything about history then you'd know what would happen with the US training and funding nazis on Russia's borders.

 

Sure Bill whatever makes you happy.

 

The RuZzkis couldn't tame the Mujahideen in Afstan back in the 80s when it was the USSR.

How do you expect them to defeat some "NAZIS " ....Bill?

 

This war has gone through different phases.

The euphoria, however, about a Ukraine victory after marginal gains in their much publicized counter-offensives in 2022/23 was mainly the product of obnoxious western propaganda (obnoxious because it led to unnecessary death and destruction when Ukraine instead should have used the marginal gains as leverage for a reasonable resolution of the conflict). Opting instead for hopelessly delusional maximalist demands that lacked even genuine equitable (never mind realistic) foundation, the ensuing stalemate in 2023 was predictable and I had predicted it myself.

This phase, however, sees Ukraine very much on the ropes. The final resolution could even see the collapse of Ukraine's resistance and the Zelensky regime. Putin might still feel cautious after the many disappointments and reversals Russian forces have experienced in the war and allow Zelensky a life-line. The key issue will no longer be territorial at all (the Russian parts of Ukraine previously improperly incorporated as part of Ukraine will remain Russian), but how stringently Ukrainian "nonalignment" and "neutrality" will be interpreted and enforced? A truly non-aligned, neutral, Ukraine serving as a buffer between the Russians and NATO is what Russia will seek. They will be offered assurances of Ukraine not being accepted into NATO. And the point between these two positions at which the war is settled will determine if this war was won outright by Russia or ends in mostly a geopolitical stalemate between Russia and its foes.

 

One more time. Not the gain Russia wanted or expected going in. And even then only achieved at a price far higher than it ever imagined it would have to pay before the war started. Simply put the scale of the gain is far, far outweighed by the price paid to get it. The Russian's have bought themselves a house with no roof.

As for the Rest. Ukraine has lost agricultural land and a couple of now depopulated and largely destroyed industrial centers that were soviet era relics to begin with. AND Russia is the one whose going to have to pay the price to de-mine that farm land before getting it back into production and rebuild those centers if it can be bothered. Assuming anyone still wants to live there that is.

Meanwhile Ukraine retains the majority of its farm land, joins the EU and gets all the investment finds it needs to rebuild, modernize and become a prosperous western nation. Who do you think gets the better end of the deal?