• KiG V2@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    9 months ago

    I think slow and steady has done them nothing but good, they are in no rush, why start now?

    • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      sticking to slow and steady when the enemy is running away is prolonging a conflict by giving them an opportunity to regroup later. now it’s possible the UAF really are in crisis, but if Russia doesn’t exploit that with big moves that’s as good as the Ukainians not collapsing in terms of how long it will take for the war to end

      • Kaplya [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I have said it before: this conflict ends with the demilitarization and denazification of NATO. Ukraine is irrelevant at this point. It has’t been for a while.

          • Kaplya [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Russia has no interest in destroying the Ukrainian forces, because the latter is already a spent force.

            For them, the only means of destroying NATO is when Europe increases their defense budget spending and leading to the crumbling of their own economy. This is already happening, and ending the war now gives room for Europe to breathe and rebuild their economy.

            As you might have noticed, the militarization of European NATO states will paradoxically lead to the demilitarization of NATO instead.

            • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              you’re just asserting direct contradictions. UAF not destroyed—but they’re spent, more military–demilitarization. but i’m really not interested in the layers upon layers you need to understand Russia’s 20-year-plan that totally exists and guides every cautious or backward step the Russian army seems to make.

              if the Russians don’t want to destroy the UAF and continue the war in perpetuity, then the retreat at Adiivka (the event this comment thread is about) does not then herald a collapse of the Ukrainian position & the war will probably continue. which is what i was concluding, granted from different premises

          • KiG V2@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            This is a fair point. Hm. Maybe they’re genuinely concerned about escalation, nuclear proliferation? They only want to deal with one Nazi regime at a time and maybe mowing down the routing Nazis all at once will make Poland or the Baltics all slide into conflict at once? Like, control the flow, leak the dam don’t burst it. Speculation.

            • Kaplya [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              What is quickly ending the war going to do for Russia, except for risking higher casualties and giving Europe the room to breathe, as the latter is already going into austerity mode due to their increased military spending?

              Russia’s only win condition in this war is economic in nature.

              Remember, this is an industrial war - Russia can keep doing this forever while the EU is constrained by its monetary system and fiscal rules. The eurozone will not survive this if they truly want to defeat Russia in military terms. Europe ultimately has to make a choice, and all options available are worse for them.