Still can’t see the forest for the trees.
I see a lot of projection from the US and a total lack of any ability and/or interest in seeing things from the perspective of another nation.
The stated objectives from the US are to weaken Russia as much as possible with partition and regime change as the long-term goal.
The assumption is that Putin has the same objectives for NATO countries. Western leaders have been shocked when that is not the case.
Sounds about like what Germany was saying after they couldn’t take Stalingrad.
3 Likes
“The ideal option is to announce the end of the special military operation, to inform everyone that Russia has achieved the results that it planned, and in a sense, we have really achieved them.”
Hoping we forget that the goal was to take Kiev in a couple of weeks and install a puppet government that would do the bidding of Putin to the cheers of the happy pro Russian Ukrainian people.
1 Like
Pure propaganda.
1 Like
I just wonder if it is a salaried position, or piece work, by post.
2 Likes
It’s a full time gig lol.
Actually the Ukrainian hold-Bakhmut-at-all-cost approach is very similar to that of the Germans in Stalingrad. The strategy did not work well for the Germans in 1943. It is not working well for the Ukrainians 80 years later.
A classic example of the difference between western European and Russian military strategy is the French invasion of Russia in 1812. Napoleon had already conquered most of Europe between Russia and Britain. Napoleon’s successful approach had been to conquer territory and live off the land, but the Russians withdrew and burned the crops behind them all summer. The Russian strategy denied needed supplies for the invading French.
By September, Napoleon had taken Moscow. He expected the Russians to surrender, but the Russian army was still intact after burning most of the city. By October it was clear that the French army would freeze or starve to death if it remained in Moscow. The Russian Army harassed the retreating French forces all the way be to the border. Napoleon entered Russia with a force of roughly 615,000 in June 1812 but only 110,000 frostbitten and half-starved survivors stumbled back in January 1813.
Western militaries are used to thinking about conquering and holding territory. Russian military strategy has been about destroying the opponent’s army while protecting their own forces. That is still true today.
Wow.
It is rare to see history abused so mercilessly, but there you are.
2 Likes
Napoleon won the battles in 1812, but lost the war and lost his empire.
The same is true for the Germans in 1941.
Is NATO looking for a repeat?
That struck me as excessively hopeful.
Understatement of the day.
2 Likes
Indeed…no way will Russia/Putin relinquish control over Crimea. I’ve been wrong before…see siege of Kiev.
1 Like
A lot of wishful thinking in this thread
Yep Nagasaki and Hiroshima are living proof of that.
There are a lot more to choose from.
you should quit now, it cost Ukraine almost nothing to defeat those attacks.
won’t be difficult. take the rest of kherson back, destroy the kirch bridge, lob missiles and shells at anything resembling a military target, cut off the water and wait. The hard part is the first step
I have for months been expecting news that Putin was tapped twice in the head overnight.
Since he has not, I have to think that he has surrounded himself with a bunch of very loyal folks who protect him. And with his power he has been able to expel those in the military and government who would harm him.
Don’t hold your breath.
Military expert. Biden, NATO, and Zskyy needs you.
