GUEST BLOG: Ben Morgan – Spring offensive, Russia’s quickest way to lose the war!
This week discussion about the war in Ukraine has centred on a Russian ‘Spring Offensive’. Furrow browed pundits spent the week worrying about Ukraine’s ability to withstand the might of Russia post mobilisation. We have heard lots of discussion about Russia’s historical disregard for casualties, about how Russian mobilisation will produce an enormous and unstoppable army. That there will be attacks on Kyiv, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia and in the Donetsk. And; that Russia needs to attack before NATO’s tanks arrive. Putin has played to the mob; sabre rattling and at the commemoration of the Battle of Stalingrad’s 80th anniversary making vague threats that have been jumped upon by main stream commentators.
The reality is that Putin is caught on the horns of a dilemma. On one side, he needs results; both politically and because when NATO tanks arrive the ground battle will change significantly in favour of Ukraine. On the other hand, he needs time to build an effective military force. A fact which is not well explained in main stream media. The aim of these columns is to help make these situations easier to understand.
An inescapable truth is that wars are fought by a small group of people at the ‘tip of the spear’. Mostly, by the infantry. The cold, tired, hungry foot soldiers that press forward on foot into enemy fire or hold ground by doggedly defending their positions. The infantry is important because they are the only arm of service that can ‘hold’ ground. Artillery, missiles, aircraft and drones can attack troops on the ground but they cannot control; or hold that ground. Tanks can punch through defences and destroy other vehicles but can’t slither into the sewers, buildings, ditches and other small voids in the landscape that could conceal an enemy sniper or anti-tank team. Before the war Russia’s armed forces; army, navy, air force and strategic rocket forces totalled about one million people. Of this total about 400,000 were in the army and of this total perhaps a third to a quarter were infantry, maybe less.
Most credible estimates put Russian mobilisation at about 300,000 extra soldiers and (in very broad terms) if we accept that Russia has been able to maintain its normal recruitment cycle, the army is likely to have a total current strength of around 700,000. Of which probably 3-400,000 may be deployed in the Ukraine campaign. In turn, taking into account natural attrition and demobilisations we can extrapolate that about a million Russians have served in the army since this time last year; of which probably 250-300,000 were infantry.
And; this is the point at which the human questions need to be asked. The most recent credible figure for Russian losses is that about 188,000 soldiers have been killed or wounded. Pundits will tell you that “Russia doesn’t care about casualties”. An old trope, based on historical campaigns. Russia’s vast population soaked up and destroyed two of the world’s most feared armies; Napoleon’s Grand Armee and Hitler’s Wehrmacht. Both dictators beaten into submission by Russia’s willingness to sacrifice its people.
However, war is a human activity and the simple fact is that over the last year roughly 1 in 5 Russian soldiers serving in the army (not the military as a whole) has been killed or wounded in Ukraine. Further, the casualties are logically going to be concentrated in the infantry, the arm of service that always suffers the highest casualty rates meaning that about 1 in 2 or 1 in 3 Russian infantrymen may have been killed or injured in the last year. And; a sad fact of war is that the bravest die first. So at this stage in the war a large proportion of Russia’s existing junior leadership, experienced or highly motivated soldiers will be dead or recovering from wounds. The Russian army has been hollowed out; and no matter how many new soldiers are mobilised it will be very unlikely to be effective in offensive operations.
It is a safe bet that NATO, Ukrainian and Russian staff officers (all with better information than me) have reached the same conclusion. It is likely that NATO’s political leaders are ramping up support not because Ukraine needs it but because their military professionals are explaining this calculus to them and showing that Russia is beaten. Ukraine, knows that it can make the war shorter with more NATO weapons so it is important that they maintain the threat of the Russian Bear; and more power to them because the shorter this war is, the less people suffer. In Russia, the staff officers will be busy not telling their political masters, sweating and trying to figure out if there is a way around the stark mathematics of their situation.
Gerasimov could still give Putin a victory, but it will take time and require an unconventional approach – ‘going backwards to go forwards’. In my opinion there is no tactical margin in a major Russian offensive. It simply burns resources that Russia needs, specifically trained and motivated infantry soldiers. The soldiers that will train and lead the next waves of mobilised soldiers. By defending the territory already captured; Russia would force Ukraine to make costly attacks against defended positions, using attrition to slowly wear down Ukrainian resources eventually forcing negotiations. Meanwhile, Russia could take time to pacify the captured areas and to let its army develop the capabilities that it needs to be effective in a modern conflict; ready for when NATO’s attention is diverted elsewhere and another better planned attack can be made.
Can Putin accept a solution like this?
A Russian Spring Offensive will answer that question; and if he does need his offensive, what will it look like and where will it land?
Even though Russia’s mobilisation is being talked up in the mainstream media, Russia does not have the numbers to launch any sort of multi-pronged assault. Even in a worst-case scenario, with 400,000 soldiers committed this force it is still less the United States and its coalition partners deployed in the Invasion of Iraq in 2003. And; Russia lacks air superiority, modern equipment and training so will need to rely on numbers at the decisive point. The first deduction therefore is that an offensive will be concentrated in one area.
Determining where the attack will come involves considering a number of factors, the first of which is Russia’s strategic intent. Obviously, Putin wants all of Ukraine but at the moment he needs to be more focussed and the key area that he wants to hold is Crimea. Strategically, this island has always been vital to Russia because it dominates the Black Sea; and on a personal level one of Putin’s great triumphs is the reconquest of Crimea. Holding Crimea though requires Russia to hold the strip of Black Sea coast between the Dnipro River and Mariupol. This ‘Crimean Land Bridge’ provides a buffer for Crimea and an alternate land supply route if the Kerch Bridge is destroyed. In military terms it is his ’vital ground’, if Ukraine holds it, Putin is unlikely to be able to hold Crimea; and if Russia holds it Ukraine is unlikely to retake Crimea. Therefore, our second deduction is that any offensive will have to contribute to securing the Crimean Land Bridge.
The largest reported concentrations of Russian combat power in Ukraine are near Luhansk. This city forms the landing pad for forces from Russia’s Southern Military District entering the eastern part of the country and these troops are then fed east into the fighting near Bakhmut, or south west to Donetsk. Operations around Kharkiv and around Kremina and Svatove appear to be staged from Western Military District formations based north of Ukraine. A build-up of forces near Luhansk, about 80 km west of Bakhmut is consistent with operations in the east aiming for Sloviansk and Kramatorsk the two large cities in Donetsk not yet held by Russia.
However, we should be cautious about what we see reported in the media; because as both sides gird themselves for battle the amount of information that they make public decreases. It is a safe bet, based on past experience that NATO intelligence knows exactly where every Russian unit is in Ukraine; and in Western Russia. The detail of United States intelligence that has been made public and Ukraine’s uncanny ability to hit ammunition dumps and kill senior officers tells us that Ukraine (supported by NATO) is winning the intelligence war. So it is interesting that we haven’t yet seen satellite photos of Russian troop concentrations confirming Russia’s intentions. We have seen images of Russian’s digging in across the Crimean Land Bridge from the Dnipro River to Melitopol and in Crimea itself, but to date no photos of Russian troop concentrations ready for an offensive. Perhaps the Russians have got smarter at hiding their troops? Or perhaps the Russians are too busy funnelling soldiers to the frontlines to defend against a Ukrainian offensive? Maybe though Ukraine knows exactly where Russian forces are concentrated and is keeping this knowledge secret as they plan to attack elsewhere? We simply don’t know.
If the Russians attack there are three likely options for the axis of their main effort:
- Pushing south-west towards Kremina; relieving pressure on the P66 highway and possibly aiming to retake Lyman. This town is a potential launch pad for an attack on Sloviansk and Kramatorsk from the north; or to push west towards Kharkiv.
- Pushing west, taking Bakhmut and establishing a launch pad for an attack on Kramatorsk and Sloviansk from the east.
- Attacking the area around Vuledhar, a small town roughly 80km north of Mariupol. Capturing it helps secure the north-east end of the Crimean Land Bridge, provides a buffer around the city of Donetsk and possibly establishes a launch pad for an advance into Zaporizhzhia. An attack here could also be a ‘spoiling attack’, an offensive against a Ukrainian force preparing to advance towards either Donetsk or Mariupol.
All of these axes of advance are close to rail networks, and the objectives are within about 60-100km of current Russian positions; or the distance that Russian logistics may be able to support an advance within. It is possible that there could be attacks in other areas; but any attack on Kyiv or Kharkiv diverts effort from securing the Crimean Land Bridge and reduces troop numbers in the east and south which are areas of interest for Ukraine. The key point is that we (the public) are very likely to see concentrations of Russian troops before the offensive hits. Unless, Ukraine moves first.
Ukraine’s next move is likely to be an offensive isolating Crimea. Hence, the recent United States aid package that include extended range missiles for HIMARS. Then later in the year, an assault into Crimea. The new NATO tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are unlikely to be prioritised for this battle. An assault on Crimea will be a hard-fought, close-range battle in which artillery prepares the way for infantry who will have to fight through difficult terrain and heavy defences. Instead, the new vehicles will provide the mobility and firepower for re-taking the east.
In summary, tension is building as both sides wait for the weather to turn. If Russia launches a large offensive, it will be defeated and the war will be shorter. The Russian army is a hollow threat even after its mobilisation. The first part of the campaign cost Russian dearly, slaughtering its most important asset, experienced infantrymen. An asset that any Russian offensive or defence needs to succeed. If politics forces the Russian army into an offensive, it will be costly and give Ukraine the opportunity to attrit Russian forces then counter-attack; as opposed to having to find a weak point in Russia’s defences and force their own attack. Therefore, we are at a decisive point or time in the campaign when Putin’s ego will either hasten his army’s downfall or keep Russia’s campaign alive.
Jackanory, Jackanory.
I REALLY hope people are reading the other ‘sides views’ on this USA/NATO created disaster. Otherwise they’ll all be so shocked and surprised when NATOstan loose and ‘do an Afganistan’.
As opposed to a Russiastan?
America was beaten in Vietnam long before the war was ended. But decided to continue the senseless killing for no discernable advantage.
“…..military professionals are explaining this calculus to them and showing that Russia is beaten.”
Russia is in no position to mount any offensive, any attempt to do so courts devastating military failure.
Just like the Americans were beaten in Vietnam long before the war was ended Vladimir Putin rather than admit his military’s defeat in Ukraine has hinted that Russia will continue with a long grinding war.
My view: Russia cannot win a long war either.
The anti-war movement in Russia may be cowed now, but a long war will see anti-war sentiment grow until the vast majority of the Russian people tire of the war and go onto the streets to demand its end.
A sensible person would advise to cut their losses now. Give up all the occupied Ukrainian territory (including the land bridge), and sue for peace. And you may (possibly) retain Crimea. Continue with the war. And Ukraine will destroy the Kerch Bridge and launch an assault to retake the land bridge.
Pat, you’re comparing America and Americans with a civilized country, Russia, run by civilized, and human beings. Apples and oranges. This is just very disappointing and sad.
America is very civilised…mass shooting every week,huge numbers of homeless,40 million on foodstamps,has 25% of the worlds prisoners ,constantly at war,and comes up with presidents like Trump and…Biden.
You can’t make this…up.
Well though the internet provides ample opinion as to Russia’s intentions, capability and losses that varies from this presently expressed extreme to the other , interestingly the final expectations don’t seem to be so different.
If Ben expects Russia to gradually push the Ukraine army back to the borders of the regions Russia has undertaken to take control of, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, ( and Crimea of course) and not attempt at least initially to advance further , which would be consistent with what they themselves have stated as intended, unlike such as above and most MSM that assumes , or rather wants us to assume that Russia intends to overrun all of Ukraine, then strangely we agree.
The “spring offensive”idea seems strange to me. The majority of Ukraine’s East is part of the Black earth region . And as such is low lying flat deep peaty soil that gets impassible in the wet. The only times it would be passable for heavy machinery would be in the summer when it is dry and the depths of winter when it is frozen . In the springtime it will be wetter than any other time as the accumulated snowfall of all winter is melting. Why would anyone mount a spring offensive. Either the push will come in the winter , very soon in fact. or not till Summer.
To sum up I think that the ideas expressed here and in most of the Western MSM that anticipate a spring offensive and an attempt to take ofer the whole of Ukraine are an attempt to depict Russia’s success as failure
by assigning intentions to Russia that Russia never had and never stated.
What I expect Russia to do is secure the boundaries of the Oblasts they have claimed, and then make some demands of Ukraine and the West that Ukraine must hold new election under UN supervision in the hope of having the Nazi component of government voted out, undertake not to join NATO but more importantly never to harbour American inter continental missile basses on Ukrainian soil. If they can’t negotiate that arrangement in a reasonable period , probably a year or so, then the advance will continue.
Let’s see
D J S
I might add that the huge call up of forces in Russia IMHO is not essentially to invade the remainder of Ukraine so much as anticipating the possibility that US / Nato will enter the war fully with Nato equipment and personnel .
D J S
And you are very mistaken David Stone. All Putin wants is more cannon fodder.
Great commentary Ben. Keep them coming!
I didn’t know that Ukraine now has extended range HIMARS. That is a game changer.
As you say, if the Russians do attack, the Ukranian will be forewarned and have time to set up defence in depth. At which point the Russians can attack and slowly bleed to death doing so. The Ukraine Army can steadily retreat into their vast country to reduce losses and the Russians will have gained a piece of largely worthless dirt at the cost of their remaining manpower.
Recent photos of Putin show he is wearing body armour under his jacket, even in tightly controlled events with only his top echelon present. That’s interesting!
UPDATE:
The Ukraine is getting the GLSDB glide bomb from the USA. These are a ground launched glide bomb with a 150km range using the HIMARS launcher they already have: A game changer because it puts most of Donetsk Oblast in range and the northern half of Crimea. This and NATO intelligence will make it very hard for the Russians to assemble before an attack and drive munition stockpiles much further away from the battlefield.
Lots of RuSSian Trolls out today!
What actually is the point of this article? That Russia won’t launch a new offensive any time soon, but will consolidate the land bridge?
On that I would agree. General Gerasimov seems a careful man, and like Zhukov in WW2, can stand up to Putin. At least ensure that Putin will take his military advice.
As I have noted in comments here for many months, the shape of the eventual ceasefire is becoming apparent. Russia will defend the Donbas, the land bridge and Crimea. It will probably take all the newly mobilised troops to achieve that, but in my view they can achieve this goal. Russia’s military capability, especially to conduct major offensives has been severely reduced, though it is by no means nil.
The build up of Ukraine’s military is essential to forestall future Russian offensives, but in my view it is not sufficient for Ukraine to embark on major new offensives. Possibly no bad thing.
Overall this would still be a Russian defeat, but not a humiliation. Yes, Russia will have got the land bridge. The price they will have paid by end of 2023 will be 200,000 dead. Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Probably, given everything, Ukraine also ultimately joining NATO. Perhaps with a condition that NATO forces are not actually permanently stationed in Ukraine. But nevertheless Ukraine gets the NATO guarantee. Suspicion about Russia for the next two decades, with likely restrictions on investment and oil and gas supples to Europe, which won’t put themselves into quite the level of energy dependence as in the last 20 years
Overall the price paid by Russia is higher than what they have gained.
Bit of a F**k Up by Putin IMHO.
Wayne, who is going to be supplying Nato’s weaponry?.Do you think the US is going to be able to ramp up its production of armour without Chinese and Russian titanium ?.Together they hold the vast majority of the world’s supply .Is Europe going to be able to remilitarise without cheap Russian energy driving its economy?
Is Europe that united really?Croatia, Hungary and Turkey are looking a bit shaky as far as loyalty goes.I think we tend to have a slanted view on what the international community comprises .Russia is certainly not a pariah in the eyes of the middle east, Africa, India , China, Latin America, and several nations are now flocking to join Brics,the Euasian Economic Union and SCO, bypassing the World Bank and the IMF.
America has probably over reached with its theft of Russian citizen’s assets, sanctions , capture of Russian foreign reserves and the freezing /control of Afghanistan’s Central Bank reserves .
All of this has led countries to turn away from the US dollar and form warmer relations with Russia and China
The war in Ukraine is a proxy war between Russia and the United Sates, with Ukraine merely the stage. For 100 years or more, US foreign policy has been directed towards neutralising and controlling Russia, including stealing its abundant resources. Connected to this goal is preventing Germany, Russia and “Eurasia” forming any kind of alliance that would shut out America and thwart its designs on domination and control of the region. Controlling Russia means they could also complete their encirclement of China.
The trouble is, the United States is a fast-declining hegemon and thus it no longer has the ability to project power anywhere it likes, and in so doing, prevent countries like Russia from exercising their own sphere of influence and protecting their security interests. Russia invaded Ukraine to prevent the United States (under the guise of NATO) moving in completely, and thereby presenting an unacceptable threat to Moscow. We don’t have to favour war to see the logic of events (and it impossible to understand the events in one begins in February 2022: you need to go back at least to 2014, and even back into the Cold War era, and even to the era of Tsarist Russia, to fully and intelligently appreciate the entirety of issues).
There was never any way Russia was ever going to lose in Ukraine, and they won’t lose now. Even the most powerful Pentagon think tank, the RAND Corporation, thinks it’s time for the United Sates to end its proxy war adventure in the Ukraine.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA2510-1.html
From the preamble: ““The costs and risks of a long war in Ukraine are significant and outweigh the possible benefits of such a trajectory for the United States. Although Washington cannot by itself determine the war’s duration, it can take steps that make an eventual negotiated end to the conflict more likely.”
The ongoing attempts by the US to economically cripple Russia have backfired spectacularly, with the most serious effects being experienced by Western Europe. The “international community” that supports the US is a myth, primarily consisting of only Western Europe, North America and Australasia – the rest of the world supports Russia, and are forming alliances that shut out the Americans, so much so that the reserve currency of the US dollar (backed only by debt as it is), is in grave danger.
If the United States is willing to sacrifice Ukraine out of pig headedness, then the conflict will continue. If they have any sense, they will see that, short of full and open US involvement in the conflict (which will lead to nuclear war), Russia is not going to be defeated in Ukraine, and that they will keep Eastern Ukraine.
Well put……
“There was never any way Russia was ever going to lose in Ukraine, and they won’t lose now.” Antoine Forbes-Hamilton
Said no other imperialist ever
There was never any way France was ever going to lose in Vietnam, and they won’t lose now.
There was never any way the US was ever going to lose in Vietnam, and they won’t lose now.
There was never any way the USSR was ever going to lose in Afghanistan, and they won’t lose now.
There was never any way the US was ever going to lose in Afghanistan, and they won’t lose now.
The only one of your examples where the countries are neighbours and cause an existential threat to the larger combatant is Russia/Ukraine.
HENCE the HUGE difference in motivation and outcome.
I DON’T recall ANYONE in the west saying USSR can’t/wont lose in Afganistan.
“HENCE the HUGE difference in motivation and outcome.” Keriman
The Ukrainians are fighting to defend their country from a blood thirsty expansive imperialist power which oppresses its own people.
The ‘HUGE’ difference in motivation is on the Ukrainian side.
The Ukrainians will never surrender to the imperialist invader.
Afghanistan is known as the ‘Graveyard of Empires’. Ukraine will be the graveyard of Russian imperialism.
Because, whether this war is long or short.
The Ukrainian and/or the Russian people, will eventually end this disgusting imperialist war.
Let’s see Pat.
I believe you are wrong and Ukraine is PURELY a convenient NATO/USA pawn and they sadly will get ‘taken around the back of the bike shed’, even with ALL the NATO/USA help-staff-support they’re getting.
The USA PURELY wants to weaken Russia, not give it cause to use nuclear weapons if it feels it is under an exostential threat, like the USA with Cuba missile crisis.
This is caused, started and planned to be, by the USA/NATO.
Just do some NON-western propaganda reading and it’s fairly obvious to all but the blind.
I have had my disagreements with Antoine on TDB, but his take here is good. I am not a Putin fan, the Russian people have to sort that one out.
The Nazis could not defeat Russia in WWII on their territory–and–the yanks will not do it in Ukraine. There are some great photos online of Soviet troops hoisting flags in Germany showing what they were made of.
What a load of specious rubbish AFH
Audrey Forbes-Hamilton, Russia v. Ukraine is NOT a proxy war. It is primarily a civil war. Why don’t you study the history of the region before you make such blasé observations.
Getting some very well informed comments Ben what a joke
Ben wins the award for..wishful thinking.
No, Ben has been rather accurate with his predictions so far. The pro Russian trolls here were confident Odessa would fall by Xmas 2022 and that Kherson would not fall and that mobilisation was unnecessary and would not happen. How did that work out? We are all speculating about the future but time will tell. Ben has done well and been more on to it than his critics. By the end of summer 2023 we will have a clearer picture!
Quite right Trev. Agreed.
IMHO, PURE projection on YOUR part.
Make up an objective and then claim Russia failed because it didn’t ‘achieve’ it.
Look at what’s happening on the ground and there is ONLY ONE winner, and it is Russia. t WILL get what it set out to achieve, and MUCH MORE, thanks to NATO clearly being a paper tiger.
As soon as America gets ‘bored’ of having Europe commit financial suidice (for the benefit of the USA) and Ukraine runs out of kamakhazis’, then the next proxy war will start elsewhere.
Taiwan?
Looking forward to the spin when Russia decisively wins the war in the coming months (which I fully expect to happen), and Ukraine subsequently begs NATO for direct involvement (as in boots on the ground and US planes enforcing a “no-fly zone”). This may actually happen to avoid the “sunk loss fallacy” of all the 10’s of billions already burnt by the West in the Ukraine money furnace.
Wishful thinking Nitrium. You are a typical brainless Putinist.
How do you know he is brainless and based on what do you claim he is a Putinist?
One can see Russia wont lose and are clearly winning and NOT be a Putinist.
One can differ with others and not have to be, brainless.
So much for intelligent debate and sharing views and information, so we can try to come to a best guess, with the facts at our fingertips.
Look in the mirror.
‘One can see Russia can’t lose’. You are an even bigger idiot Keriman.
Such statements are just stupid. The reality is that both sides will lose – 100,000 each approximately.
The win will be when Putin is deposed and the siloviki are liquidated.
I’m not a “Putinist” whatsoever. I am a realist through. The reason I don’t buy into the Western propaganda surrounding this war is that I have a cousin married to a Ukrainian (thankfully no longer in Ukraine but is being updated by her family) who told me the war isn’t going anything like is being reported here. Russia is not going to lose this war, unless NATO directly intervenes (but I doubt there will be in any “winners” anywhere if that happens).
So where in Ukraine does your cousin’s wife actually come from? What’s more do you actually consider that she might be wrong? I have many Ukrainian friends and the vast majority would disagree with this woman.
All over by Christmas?
The winner of the best pro-imperialist war quote.
Drum roll…. Nitrium!
“…when Russia decisively wins the war in the coming months (which I fully expect to happen)”
Logistics wins war mate, what I’ve seen of the Russian Military Logistic so far in the last 12mths they couldn’t organise a piss up in the brewery let alone a root a Chow Brothers Knock Shop.
Now they are pretty much back on their original start line 12mths ago, expect in Sth’ern Ukraine.
By rights & Military logic, the Russians should be in Livi by now but they aren’t & I wonder why?
Numbers don’t mean much if you piss have poor Logistics, have the inability to Rise Train & Sustain your Combat Arms not only in Peacetime but in Wartime, Piss poor Doctrine (SOP’s/ TTP’s) a Corrupt Officer Corp with non existent NCO Corp which is the backbone to all Military Force & an Airforce that can’t even gain Air Superiority over Ukraine Airspace let alone Air Parity over Battlespace in certain sectors of the battlefield. Shit the Luftwaffe was still achieve Air Parity & in some cases Air Superiority over the parts of the Eastern Front right to the end of WW2!
Russian, You’re got some big problems to overcome!
Will Russian launch a Spring Offensive? I’m 50/50 atm because there is one major big problem with this assumption? That is the Ukraine Theatre Reserve Force Commanded by head of the Ukrainian Armoured Corp, which who btw led the Ukrainian Autumn Offensive & is an old Ukrainian Born Russian Armoured Officer who got fucked over Tsar Poots who later moved back to his homeland only to be fucked over again by Tsar Poots Toady President between 2010-2014.
The Ukrainian Theatre Reserve has gone to ground (no it hasn’t be knock out btw), if Russian can’t locate this very large Combine All Arms Unit of Tanks, Panzer Grenadiers & Artillery. Then it’s likely Russia’s Spring Offensive could very will come unstuck, leaving Ukraine the initiative on the battlefield to exploit?
The lesson from history! The invaders always loose.
The Germans in Russia.
The Russians and Americans in Afghanistan
The Americans in Vietnam.
The Germans in Europe.
Etc
And to all those wishful thinkers Russia will eventually loose in Ukraine, their determination have no equal.
Let’s see.
I’ll happily take that bet.
Better get it clear what winning or loosing looks like.
I’d suggest a gentlemans bet, given the media we’re using.
I’d take that bet too.
But how could I collect my winnings from gutless blow hard pro-war pseudo-anonymous commenters?
Don’t worry Pat, you will be the loser.
Nick J -you are a loser!
Hi Gad! Have another fabulously deluded day.
Pierre February 6, 2023 at 7:15 pm
“The lesson from history! The invaders always loose.
The Germans in Russia. Pierre
The invaders in this case being the Russian Federation.
I think the Ukrainians are going for the traditional approach – “…bleed them with bullets until they’ve got no blood left to leave…”, mainly because why would you volunteer to run into the bullets when the morons on the other side are prepared to run into yours. I suspect Putin had a reasonable point initially that Ukraine was really a fake country made up of Russians that had forgotten who they were. Putin’s army didn’t win quickly enough and now I suspect the fake country has become very real. The ability to trade slavic blood with each other will go on for a long time.
Put this all together and it makes for a long war, eventually the West will get bored and put pressure on Ukraine to make peace and the Americans will satisfy themselves that they’ve achieved there objectives and give this their “blessing”.
If this is the outcome (lots of ifs and buts to come!) then this is likely to be the most consequential American “victory” since the end of WW2. Consider what will have been achieved. Russia is defanged and isolated but the bear has put the fear of god into Europe. Europe will rearm and detach from Russian energy and be more than capable of dealing with whatever Russian basket case remains. Finland & Sweden join NATO, with Turkey probably ejected. US continues to pivot towards Asia this time with more space and time. China sits back and decides any foreign adventures aren’t really worth it for now. Pax Americana Take 2.
All things considered probably not the worst outcome from an NZ perspective either, as we will have greater strategic space to continue to suckle on the Chinese teat without much consequence.
Thanks should be offered to Darth Putin, in a roundabout way his stupidity and strategic vanity combined with his callousness in sacrificing russian youngster’s blood has probably saved the world from a far larger conflagration. Thanks should also be offered to the people of Nevada, Arizona and Pennyslvania because without them Trump would have remained in power and we would be in WW3 with nukes raining down there and every fucking where .
We shall see.
NATO will not expel Turkey. It is too important strategically. It controls the entrance to the Black Sea.
Pat, Gad, Sum. WTF is the NYT trying to tell us?
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/06/world/europe/ukraine-russia-offensive.html
That article quotes a volunteer from Carpathian Sich
Nice people , the sort that Pat etc supports
https://reportingradicalism.org/en/dossiers/groups/karpatska-sich-right-wing-anti-gender-lgbt-group-most-active-in-western-ukraine
I read that article. Nice to know you are reading different sources Nick J
Address the issue Gad, the NYT admits that Ukraine mysteriously is now losing. Those who read widely knew this all along. Arrogant twat.
I wonder how everyone feels now about the boneheaded, unfathomable refusal of Nato/US to take Russia’s security concerns seriously .Oh the Russians are full of bluff they said, nah, they can just fuck off, what’re they gonna do?
Well now we know they’re not bluffing, and yet we still have utter idiots bleating on about Russia bluffing, and how by escalating Russia will cave.
Peaceful agreements were offered ,Russia’s concerns put forward .What did they get ?Promises that Georgia and Ukraine would join NATO.And who is NATO’s proclaimed enemy?
Russia
What did anyone expect?
Beware the wroth of a patient man!
D J S
Proof that Russian neo-Nazis are involved in the Donbas – Igor Mangushev has been ‘assassinated’ by rival paramilitaries, possibly the Vagner Group. Mangushev was a notorious neo-Nazi who founded a mercenary group called ‘Yenot’
Wait, so a Neo Nazi was “Assassinated” by Wagner Neo Nazis? Son you need to get out more.
Meanwhile in the really real world Ukraine is using chemical weapons, Seymour Hersh has outed the US for Nordstream and credible evidence is emerging the Far right was responsible for the sniper shootings during the Maiden.
Maidan to you Finngrin of little brain. The shootings were done by the Berkut who were representing the Russian FSB. Must you believe any right wing commentator who fits your confirmation bias?
Go and read Mark Galeoti if you don’t believe about the infighting between Russian paramilitary groups. You might learn something.
And what’s more Finngrin, Seymour Hersh has zero credibility as a journalist. If you believe all his bs, then you are very gullible indeed!
Zero credibility? He has more credibility in his little finger than your “PHD” from Canterbury University.
Ho Ho Ho! Tall Poppy syndrome. You are just one of Putin’s useful idiots. Why is a Nazi not a Nazi because he was born in Russia? Oh wait! If they’re born in Ukraine they must be Nazis because Putin tells me so! Get a life Finngrin!
Hersh is in Putin’s pocket. He tried to block the Magnitsky Act in the US. If you don’t know what that is, and I suspect you don’t, read Bill Browder’s books which tell about how his lawyer Sergei Magnitsky was tortured to death in a Russian prison.