What has happened with Ukraine?

[msc545]

Trump promised again and again during the campaign last year that he would end the war in Ukraine “in a single day” before he even took office. That didn’t happen. Did Trump fail - again?

[jshm2]

LOL. Trumps promises are worth less than a whores word.

As for Ukraine - they've got a few months worth of weapons and money to continue their useless war. They are going to enjoy it until then, as they know their military and government is going to face war crimes trials right after.

[Syntosi]

Wait.. Is it a war crime to kick Russias ass that hard?

Also, last I checked they had military equipment to last around 2-3 more years and that is without new military aid. Turns out that Ukraine is a major weapons manufacturer even before the war, who knew? (I did.. I was well aware)

[CaptainObivous]

@Syntosi Ukraine isn't kicking Russia's ass, they are only prolonging a unwinnable war thanks to US and NATO. Both sides are guilty of committing, yes killing ethnic Russians is a war crime.

[Syntosi]

@CaptainObivous Even if they were "just" prolonging an unwinnable war, which they are not, that is still a win condition for the defending side in a war. Wars can't extend forever, if Ukraine drags it out long enough then there will come a time when Russia has to simply go home. That is just how the world works. If Ukraine continues to exist and nothing more, that is still them in the process of "winning".

And no. Killing ethnic Russians in a war is not a war crime. That is what a war is and what Putin signed up for when he invaded Ukraine.

[CaptainObivous]

@Syntosi When those ethnic Russians being killed are Ukrainian citizens, it is a war crime. The Ukraine war will continue as long as it remains profitable, and yes, it is unwinnable, Ukrainians are being killed so MIC get a pay check. We should be taking steps to end war, but we don't because peace isn't profitable. This war would have never happened had we not carried out a coup in in 2014 and allowed Ukraine to remain neutral instead of pushing them to join NATO.

[Syntosi]

@CaptainObivous I agree, this war should have never happened. Which is why Ukraine has to win so Russia learns its lesson and stop invading its neighbors all the damn time.

[msc545]

@CaptainObivous Sorry, but what is MIC?

[Syntosi]

Shorthand for "Military-Industrial Complex". He is just peddling conspiracy theories here and blaming it on the "evils of capitalism" or whatever.

[CaptainObivous]

@msc545Military Industrial Complex, Eisenhower warned us about it before he left office.
@Syntosi Has to win and actually winning are 2 different things, Ukraine will not win and will end up being the next Afghanistan. Russia invaded because because they didn't want NATO weapons on their border anymore than we didn't want Soviet missiles in Cuba, and during and after the 2014 coup, Ukraine banned the Russian language and was killing ethnic Russians. The invasion was initially to get Ukraine to the negotiation table, which worked as Russia started withdrawing troops when peace agreement mediated by Turkey was reached. We sabotaged the agreement and convinced Ukraine to continue fighting knowing they couldn't win.

[msc545]

@CaptainObivous right - I call it the "War industry".

[CaptainObivous]

@msc545 all are the same in my book.
@Syntosi it's not a conspiracy theory if it's true, doesn't take a genius to figure out our government is heavily influenced by defense contractors who profit off of war. Many conspiracy theories turn out to be true, MKUltra being one example.

[msc545]

@CaptainObivous Agreed, all the same really. War contractors get more money from the government (~ 1 trillion per year) then anyone else.

[Syntosi]

@CaptainObivous If Russia can't close out the war then Ukraine wins by default. While Russia keeps gaining tiny amounts of land here and there they have failed to win a significant breakthrough which can actually end the war. Another way to phrase that is Ukraine successfully stopping Russias invasion and is currently winning the war unless something changes.

As for Russia invading because they "didn't want NATO weapons on their borders?" Complete nonsense. Not only did they already HAVE NATO weapons on their borders, but taking Ukraine would make them border EVEN MORE NATO countries that would have weapons on their borders. That is obviously just a weak excuse they gave to justify their aggressive imperialistic expansion.

And quite frankly, I got zero sympathy for Russia at this moment. They will lose this war and they will deserve that loss.

As for conspiracy theories, just because the US MIC are often pushing for conflicts does not mean that EVERY conflict was their design. There was no indication that USA was behind the Ukrainian revolution and it was very telling that USA had to play catch-up after the revolution started because they were not prepared for things to escalate like that.

[blackeagle007]

@CaptainObivous uh Russia poured invading troops in Ukraine don’t forget

[CaptainObivous]

@blackeagle007 Russia also started withdrawing troops when Ukraine and Russia was on the verge of agreeing to a peace agreement that being mediated by Turkey. If we had left Ukraine to accept a peace agreement instead of talking them into continuing fighting, the war would have been over and thousands of Ukrainians would still be alive.
@Syntosi The goal of the war wasn't to take Ukraine, the goal was to force them to the negating table for a peace agreement which would ensure them Ukraine would remain neutral instead of joining NATO. Ukraine is a little different than the other countries bordering Russia, it's very close to the Russian capital of Moscow, and all the times Russia has been invaded through out it's history, has been through Ukraine. Back in the early 90's we assured Russia we wouldn't move NATO to the east in exchange for unifying Germany, what did we do? We moved NATO to the east. The war has been brewing ever since we started moving NATO to the east, with the 2014 CIA backed coup being the tipping point. Sachs does a good job at explaining how the war started.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYi5S81fKxI

[Syntosi]

@CaptainObivous Okey this is complete rubbish. Everything about how Russia moved and acted at the beginning of the war showed their intentions of capturing territory above achieving a negotiating peace. They were definitely intending on general conquest rather than specific objectives.

The fact that Russia invaded Ukraine is also a good example of why Ukraine would want to have joined NATO and why it was in their best interest of doing so. Being neutral was provably the wrong choice as this war demonstrates as it would never have happened if Ukraine was in NATO.

If Russia is upset about its capital city being close to Ukrainian borders then Russia is perfectly welcome to move their capital somewhere else. That is neither Ukraine's problem nor NATO's problem.

As for NATO or USA assuring Russia/Soviet Union that NATO would not expand east of Germany that is neither confirmed nor was it an actual agreement as it was never signed or even officially recorded. This is a nonsense myth that Russia has been pushing for a very long time but it does not make it any more real.

And no, the revolution in 2014 was not CIA backed.

As for Jeffrey Sachs, I pretty much disagree with everything he says.

And no, Russia has at no point in this war stepped back from attacking nor wanted to negotiate. Have have feigned interest a few times as a means to gain battlefield advantages or allow their forces to recover but the intention was always to continue persecuting this war at all costs.

[lightbulb27]

I vited for the effort and direction … vs the other side. Did not expect achievement of that goal.


We know he postures and positions. But he has atrempted to solve it.


Question is if he makes it worse…


To his credit so far… has not thrown ukraine under the bus. That decision is approaching.

[msc545]

What has he done to end it so far?

[Anonymous]

Ukraine can do whatever they want and stay at war as long as they want as long as we quit footing the bill.

[msc545]

The whole reason we support Ukraine is to prop up the US war industry.

[msc545]

The US government cannot stop supporting Ukraine because the US war industry *owns* the US govt. Do you understand now?

[Opinion Owner]

I understand. I still said what I said.

[msc545]

@Opinion Owner think before you write.

[purplepoppy]

Won't be long before he sends troops to help his buddy Putin.

[RealMarek]

He said that before Biden made negotiations much more difficult by authorizing long-range missile strikes (which requires direct involvement of US military) into Russia and placing additional sanctions on Russian trade after the election. However, there is no way Trump could have ended the war within a day. His mistake is that he believes too much of the mainstream media narrative about the war. In reality, Russia is winning decisively, Ukraine is suffering far greater losses than Russia, it’s economy is not falling apart, and the West is at a huge disadvantage in terms of key military material such as shells and missiles due to decades of deindustrialization. Russia has no incentive to accept a quick ceasefire.

[Syntosi]

Wut? Russia is winning? Ukraine is suffering more losses than Russia?

Since when? How come I was not informed of anything like this? Last I heard Russia was 3 years into a 2 weeks invasion of Ukraine and they had to crawl on their hands and knees to beg North Korea for weapons and troops to hold their own country against a counter invasion.

[msc545]

Oh yes, try to blame Biden. HORSESHIT.

[RealMarek]

@Syntosi The reason you haven’t heard is because the mainstream press has served up a whole lot of lies and propaganda. For example, the whole bit about the invasion being planned for two weeks (or three days) was a lie told by General Milley. As for North Korea, the only solid evidence of NK involvement is the use of a small amount of North Korean long-range artillery, which is probably meant to provide military experience with the equipment for the North Koreans. The West, on the other hand, is low on ammunition and did have to ask South Korea for a large shipment of shells, which was accomplished in violation of South Korean law. Furthermore, the US clearly backed the coup attempt by South Korea’s president against its legislature in an attempt to get more artillery shells out of SK.

@msc545 Well, his admin did do its best to escalate the conflict during his last days in office and I thought that was HORSESHIT that violated the express will of the electorate. That said, I made clear that I’m not claiming Trump could have ended the conflict in a day. That was a foolish claim on Trump’s part. At this point, with the war going in Russia’s favor there is no reason to think they will end the war without the West offering major concessions.

[Syntosi]

I have seen videos of dead North Koreans in Ukraine. I have seen interrogations of captured North Korea soldiers by Ukraine and I have seen massive amounts of losses both directly, through identifying destroyed tanks and equipment but also seen the Russian stockpiles emptied out through satellite pictures. If I remember off-hand then Russian losses stand between 4-8 times more than Ukraine depending on the system category you look at.

And no. The "West" still have plenty of equipment and ammunition. Sure, they might have given Ukraine a large part of their reserves but most countries like USA still have years worth of ammunition left because they never sent what was in active supply and only sent their surplus.

USA alone has like 200 000 light vehicles and armored vehicles left and that is after giving Ukraine like 20 000 or so.

If the "west" wanted to they could rebuild the Ukranian military 10 times or more easily with modern equipment alone, not to talk about their surplus stockpiles which is even larger. You are mistaking the "wests" unwillingness to part with their toys with the assumption that they dont have any more.

[RealMarek]

@Syntosi There have been a lot of clever fakes purporting to be proof of NK’s in this war. In any case, this is a war of attrition. Time will tell which side was all propaganda and which was really winning when one side collapses.

[Syntosi]

Again, there is no benefit to a long war for the invader. The fact that Russia, the SUPPOSED 2nD BEST ARMY IN THE WORLD, has not been able to defeat Ukraine in this many years means that they have failed to achieve their objectives and that Ukraine is winning.

[RealMarek]

@Syntosi Russia’s main objective is to keep Ukraine (more specifically territory east of historic Galicia/Lviv) out of NATO, If it takes Russia four or five years but they annex the four oblasts, have a permanently neutral Ukraine with a government acceptable to them in Kyiv, and protections for Russian speakers, is that a Ukrainian victory? In attritional warfare, time is on the side of whoever has more men, more artillery, and air power advantage.

[Syntosi]

Yeah, no. That does not correspond with how Russia behaved at the beginning of this war. They were REALLY HEAVILY trying to end this war as quickly as possible and they had no plan B. Attrition warfare only truly benefits the defender as well.

[RealMarek]

@Syntosi that’s partially true: Their approach at first was to try to force Ukraine into a peace agreement quickly. They did not invade with nearly enough men to take Kyiv or to hold all the initial gains. They almost got the peace deal (Istanbul) but Blinken in particular threatened the Ukrainians and forced them into the war.

As for attritional warfare, you are simply wrong about it inherently favoring the defender. It favors whoever can fight the longest. If an attritional war plays out without intervention the side that loses collapses catastrophically. There is no reason why the defender cannot be the party that collapses. That said, in this war Russia has performed one very costly offensive operation (the initial invasion) while Ukraine has conducted several offensives with heinous Ukrainian losses (summer 2023 frontal attack in the south, Krynki, Kursk).

[Syntosi]

Kyiv was their primary goal which is easily demonstrated because that is where they put their best units like the VDV air drop on the nearby airport to serve as a bridge head or the reallocation of other formations to capture Kyiv after it became apparent that the original force was insufficient.

It was also the complete failure to capture Kyiv that triggered Russia to completely change up their strategy and abandon the entire norther invasion approach to refocus on the eastern and southern. That is the point where Russia realized that they had lost and transitioned into a "Losers mentality" AKA an attrition warfare.

As for why attrition warfare is stupid it is a complicated subject that I dont really feel like going into. Suffice to say that even if Russia somehow WINS the attrition warfare it would still be by paying a far higher cost than any other strategy of winning. It is the slowest, least efficient and dumbest way to conduct a war that you only do when you have literally NO OTHER CHOICE.

As for being on the offensive? Russia has pretty much never stopped to push, which means Ukraine has enjoyed the defenders advantage for pretty much the entire war. Even the times where Ukraine is launching an offensive such as in Kursk, that was while Russia was pushing elsewhere. Russia is losing over 1000 soldiers a day because of this stupid strategy.

[RealMarek]

@Syntosi If attritional warfare is your only choice, then how is it stupid? If plan A fails, then a shift to plan B is reasonable. As for the facts, we don’t agree on key things like who is taking heavier losses, who is short on artillery, etc. Again, time will tell.

[Syntosi]

If plan A fails, and plan B fails.. and plan Z fails.. and you are stuck with attritional warfare. Then that means that you have basically failed in every aspect of warfare and is stuck trying to hammer down the brick wall with your own face. Its a self-admittance that you suck.

[DryGermanGuy]

Something is happening, all right!

USAID Suspends All Humanitarian Projects in Ukraine

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/46089

[Dargil]

This kind of whatabout is frightfully boring. Still waiting for your Dear Leader to end cancer.

The civil war officially ended April 9, 1865, but there were skirmishes as it wound down. Some of my neighbors may think it has not ended at all. We do not know what DJT has done behind the scenes.

[msc545]

He said he would nd in in 24 hours. What happened?

[Dargil]

It took longer. like waiting in line at WalMart.

[msc545]

It is not "taking longer" - like Mexico paying for that stupid wall, it will never happen. It was a lie, AGAIN.

[RavVid]

Doubtless every western country would have been delighted if that happened. I don't think US allied countries really thought that would happen but probably do think Trump is more likely to achieve peace than the alternative options.

Mostly I think it is up to Europe more than the US. They have to stop Russia arranging for ships to drag anchors through cables in the Baltic. 4 times is not accidental. They need to put constraints on shipping to and from Russia.

[CaptainObivous]

Everyone is a fool for thinking Trump would end the Ukraine war. No president Democrat or Republican would have ended the war, deep state would never allow it and they'd be the next JFK. Ukraine war will continue regardless of who's president as as long as it remains profitable. Wouldn't surprise me if the Vietnam war was the reason JFK was assinated.

[Anonymous]

No no no, you see ummmm, that's Ukraine's fault for not surrendering. Never blame Dear Leader for anything!

[Anonymous]

Let them keep fighting, but I don’t think we should spend another dime on that stupid war.

[Anonymous]

All I know is that it's cost the UK taxpayers billions and now the government is taxing us heavily to pay for it.

[exitseven]

Putin is willing to negotiate. Trump will get this job done soon. If there is no negotiation he will cut off Ukraine and they will surrender the next day.
Either way it will be over.

[msc545]

What happened to 24 hours?

[exitseven]

did I not say that Trump likes to exaggerate? Businesses are starting to line up to do business in Ukraine again because the insiders are confident that Trump is going to put an end to it soon.

[Anonymous]

No, he probably wanted to drop a nuke but was advised it would be a bad idea

[msc545]

He IS that stupid, and I am surprised he listened to any rational advice - he probably fired the person that told him that.

[dustybiker2]

Campaigns over