191–200 of 419 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Kyiv cannot hold out forever. I agree with that, but if it takes going Full Grozny or Idlib on them, what's the point, other than saving face?
You mean Alleppo. Idlib still under opposition/Turkish proxies.
My partners and I have a couple hundred employees in Dnipro, Ukraine. Most of the employees have relocated to Poland or western Ukraine, some are sheltering in place, some are fighting. We started to source supplies last week, especially for those who are sheltering in place or fighting. During discussions with various parties across the supply chain it became clear that an enormous effort was underway by hundreds/th…
1. Offer immediate provisional citizenship/asylum to anyone who immigrated to fight.
2. Anyone in their prisons, offer them clemency if they agree to fight (bad idea I know but it works)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Russian government knew there would be sanctions no matter what happened. They had already decided to accept those even in the event of victory. They aren't in a no-win scenario either. Kyiv cannot hold out forever. The Russians have an overwhelming numeric advantage and they can simply wait out the defenders, using that time to fix their supply lines. It's tempting to exaggerate a Russian setback into a total co…
>Kyiv cannot hold out forever. I agree with that, but if it takes going Full Grozny or Idlib on them, what's the point, other than saving face?
If the country wont agree to NATO neutrality, the next best outcome is destroying it so thoroughly that it will be a humanitarian disaster for decades to come.
The former is a much more attractive option to them because it would pose the lest threat. The second is still favorable to a prosperous NATO and EU member.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Putin fails in Ukraine, he'll be forced from power in Russia. He has no reason to give up and every reason to continue until he can claim at least some sort of victory.
What is clear is that Putin is highly paranoid and has been since taking power and he's willing to commit crimes against humanity to stay in power. He's already announced he is willing to use nukes if threatened and NATO will not respond unless multiple re-entry vehicles carrying nukes rain on their cities. He could do a lot here by using small scale nukes that don't create huge fallouts even. If you were Putin, does…
Armies have momentum. Germany almost lost in 1941 when Barbarossa failed. Hitler managed to keep his armies from disintegrating, but it was a near thing. Japan's armies went far further then they had any right too in the same period, because of the perception of invincibility, higher morale, and everyone underestimating them for racial reasons. It's very clear that the Russians badly screwed up their logistics chain…
The Russian government knew there would be sanctions no matter what happened. They had already decided to accept those even in the event of victory. They aren't in a no-win scenario either. Kyiv cannot hold out forever. The Russians have an overwhelming numeric advantage and they can simply wait out the defenders, using that time to fix their supply lines. It's tempting to exaggerate a Russian setback into a total co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given what's already happened, and provided (I'm hoping) Ukraine continues to hold out as it has, both EU/NATO membership is looking very realistic and likely to occur in relatively quick order. I think settling for less would be illogical at this point.
EU membership is only possible if certain economic metrics are met, IIRC, and that is impossible to achieve while under attack or even soon after in the rebuilding phase. So to me EU membership is looking pretty far out. Why does it look realistic to you?
I think if Russia backs them into fully rejecting all security agreements with the West as part of a settlement, they're just in for a takeover by other means, once Russia has its near-term concerns addressed by the peace settlement and can afford to sit back and wait. I think the most likely way out of that (assuming Ukraine achieves one) is a novel arrangement of some kind, more likely with with the EU than NATO, or (waaaay less likely) a new bloc & mutual defense agreement with Sweden and Finland.
Reminds me of the time Trump won and I'd "hedged my emotions" - chucked £50 on him winning when he had 1/10 odds, so figured my friends and I could spend the £500 (that I eventually won) drink our sadness away in the pub that evening. Worked an absolute charm.
But in this case there's no actually money on the line, that's not how the linked website works. (PredictIt and others won't take bets on the issue, it appears.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The logistics of taking a country that is thousands of miles away are very different from taking one you share a border with. It took 47 days to take Kabul, counting from the first day the CIA agents were sent to prepare the invasion. Furthermore, the objective was to find bin Laden, not to take cities. The war in Ukraine isn't really comparable to Afghanistan. The US mostly "softened" strategic objectives with air s…
It wasn't logistics that caused issues in Afghanistan though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please elaborate on what else the West can do? No fly-zone is a non-starter
Bring back the old lend-lease program. It was basically a way to remain officially neutral while arming your allies.
My partners and I have a couple hundred employees in Dnipro, Ukraine. Most of the employees have relocated to Poland or western Ukraine, some are sheltering in place, some are fighting. We started to source supplies last week, especially for those who are sheltering in place or fighting. During discussions with various parties across the supply chain it became clear that an enormous effort was underway by hundreds/th…
All Ukraine has to do is: 1. Offer immediate provisional citizenship/asylum to anyone who immigrated to fight. 2. Anyone in their prisons, offer them clemency if they agree to fight (bad idea I know but it works)