They literally already failed step one of that plan. Does anyone actually think they can do what this guy is suggesting?
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
104 points (99.1% liked)
Ukraine
8212 readers
910 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They failed in their thunder run, but the west is giving Ukraine only enough aid to keep surviving, not winning. For everyone's sake, including the russian people, we have to make it clear to Putin, that he can't just throw a few million more men into the grinder to eventually get Ukraine to relent.
Ukraine is winning, just not as quickly as we'd like.
I know some speculate that the west is interested in drawing this out, to bleed the Russian military as much as possible.
But this war is harmful to the west too, most obviously the economy is generally slowing down because of the increased energy cost. Also hunger in African countries could increase unwanted immigration to the west. That's apart from the purely humanitarian aspect, of innocent Ukrainians suffering the worst of it.
Of course if you are cynical enough to want the war to drag on, the humanitarian aspects are probably irrelevant. But even for the cynical, there are reasons to want Ukraine to win quickly. The Russian war machine is already ruined. Both their capability, but more importantly the poor performance should make any Russian leader think twice before using it again.
I can speak for Germany at least, the political will to actually follow up on the "Zeitenwende", as chancellor Scholz announced, is wavering. Apart from artillery munition, our government failed to order anything in large enough quantities to suggest they are working towards a more capable military, let alone increased support for Ukraine. No new tanks, no IFVs, only a small amount of air defense and fighter planes and no new artillery platforms. The military industry in Germany has not had large orders for any of the mentioned systems placed.
I don't understand Scholz' decisions so far. He's like working in favor of Russia while yet going against it sometimes. I haven't heard his party nor coalition partners aren't particularly pro-Russia.
Honestly, what is he after?
It's just domestic politics, as usual. There are those within the government that want to spend less money on everything, there are those concerned about anti-war movements or general apathy in the population, a historic resistance against military buildup and the chancellor is unwilling to ruffle anyone's feathers by actually committing to any rearmament plan. Half-measures are the name of the game.
I would absolutely love to see Germany go all in on helping Ukraine, Germany is the biggest economy in Europe, and would make a huge difference if they committed.
IDK how much they help compared to others, but I know it was a historic event that they gave any military help at all. Because they've held back all the years since WW2. So that's quite an accomplishment for Putin on top of everything else, like expansion of NATO and increased military budgets in many NATO countries.
I think it seems like a pretty impressive list of help though.
https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/news/military-support-ukraine-2054992
Also hunger in African countries could increase unwanted immigration to the west
I've been assuming this is their intention ever since they started sabotaging the grain deal. It worked with brexit and is causing ongoing internal tension in Europe.
It seems implausible in the short term, but if statements like these are in any way reflective of long term strategic goals, or even official rhetoric, it's still ominous. Of course, given the fact it's state TV, it could be the General purely reciting the party line to give the public the impression that the war is going vastly better than it really is. But it also reminds me of what were purported to be strategic planning documents leaked by FSB sources early in the war, from when Russia still believed they'd take Kyiv in three days. It described a plan to conquer the country in weeks, then present their army on the Polish border as a fait accompli and declare a no-fly zone over the Baltics as an ultimatum to NATO.
Whether that's true or not, subsequent events showed that the ZSRF was incapable of even that plan, as you say. But the very level of disparity between nominal and actual capabilities that led Moscow to believe such a thing was possible to begin with certainly doesn't speak to their ability to make accurate estimations of what their forces are capable of.
The way I see it is that the real problem is that they wanted to. Normal people don't want to kill their neighbors and take their things, even if they could. This also applies to most countries. The fact that the Russians are thinking about invading other European countries is a problem by itself.
No matter how the Ukraine war ends, Russia will find itself staring down the barrels of a lot of guns. All of Europe is now united against them (OK, there's Hungary, but they're at best an annoyance) and rearming like crazy. Russia, on the other hand, has shown just how weak it is and whatever strength they had is now squandered and will take decades to rebuild. Any threats they make should just be answered with "you and what army, Valodja?".
Also Switzerland and Austria are happy to stand by and watch the genocide of their neighbors.
Russia is demanding a world war. Pre-emptive strikes on Russian assets is clearly justified right now.