Russian invasion of Ukraine

[BlueAnorak]

Stuff 03/06:

Russian stuff blowing up: Large group of Russian soldiers surrenders at Vovchansk

The situation at Vovchansk has improved for Ukraine, which now controls about 70% of the city on the border with Russia north of Kharkiv. About 60 Russians surrendered instead of waiting to become cannon fodder. Remember how Ukraine using...

www.dailykos.com

60 surrender in Vovchansk rather than become dead meat.

 

[don84]

What will? Standing up to tyrants ?

Not accepting a Ukraine defeat will lead to ww3. Simple as that. Putin concider a win a must, if NATO do the same, it's inevitable. Simple math.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Not accepting a Ukraine defeat will lead to ww3. Simple as that. Putin concider a win a must, if NATO do the same, it's inevitable. Simple math.

How did the same scenario work out in Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan? West fighting east, yet no WW3?

 

[don84]

How did the same scenario work out in Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan? West fighting east, yet no WW3?

Vietnam didn't have nukes, nor did Korea or Afganistan. I promise you, if they had, they would have used it. Everyone believe Putin is mad, but still not mad enough to use nukes if his conventional forces or domestic infrastructure is attacked by NATO as a way of defending Ukraine?

It's so easy to reason that Putin is all in on Ukraine, and will not settle until a military victory or a peace talk where territory is adjusted. We may not like it, but it's the rational outcome.

By asserting a balanced preassure on Russia, not pushing back too hard, it will be a forever stalemate, which slowly kills off Ukraine and Russian population, and eventual NATO helpers. But if pushing too hard with massive NATO forces, they will be nuked by Putin as a response.

Ukraine has shown no ability to fight off Russia, that's the truth, and it's the expected outcome with such a massive opponent. The longer the war lasts, the more drastic plans Putin must make as a response to finish the war. Something bad for Europe will happen then.

 

[Two Gun Bob]

Ukraine has shown no ability to fight off Russia, that's the truth, and it's the expected outcome with such a massive opponent. The longer the war lasts, the more drastic plans Putin must make as a response to finish the war. Something bad for Europe will happen then.

I would imagine it's the other way around after 27 months or so of intense fighting. The all powerful "massive opponant" Russia has only managed to take 20% of Ukrainian soil in all this this time. That is the truth!

 

[mexico1970]

I would imagine it's the other way around after 27 months or so of intense fighting. The all powerful "massive opponant" Russia has only managed to take 20% of Ukrainian soil in all this this time. That is the truth!

Ukraine has no ability to fight off Russia, although they ARE fighting off Russia. The common sense approach when you are unable to beat the little guy is to pick a fight with the big guy.

 

[don84]

I would imagine it's the other way around after 27 months or so of intense fighting. The all powerful "massive opponant" Russia has only managed to take 20% of Ukrainian soil in all this this time. That is the truth!

The truth is that this is only due to NATO support behind the scene. NATO is a formidable power, I am sure you can agree to that?

Russia and China are the only powers big enough to face NATO and decide to play their own game.

At the moment, no advanced modern weaponry are being used, as what we see from media. So it's a stalemate more or less. But as soon as lasers, nukes and others game changing weaponry are being used in Ukraine, it will escalate quickly.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Vietnam didn't have nukes, nor did Korea or Afganistan. I promise you, if they had, they would have used it. Everyone believe Putin is mad, but still not mad enough to use nukes if his conventional forces or domestic infrastructure is attacked by NATO as a way of defending Ukraine?

It's so easy to reason that Putin is all in on Ukraine, and will not settle until a military victory or a peace talk where territory is adjusted. We may not like it, but it's the rational outcome.

By asserting a balanced preassure on Russia, not pushing back too hard, it will be a forever stalemate, which slowly kills off Ukraine and Russian population, and eventual NATO helpers. But if pushing too hard with massive NATO forces, they will be nuked by Putin as a response.

Ukraine has shown no ability to fight off Russia, that's the truth, and it's the expected outcome with such a massive opponent. The longer the war lasts, the more drastic plans Putin must make as a response to finish the war. Something bad for Europe will happen then.

Same situation nuclear powers fighting each other in another country. And Putin is a coward.

By the way you're sounding very much like a Russian bot, or at least very pro Russian. Either way I'm not interested in debating any further with a Putin supporter.

 

[Alvin-blue-qhd]

The US economy is the envy of the world. They can afford it for another 20 years.
I don't think an escalation is a good idea.
Why take that risk?

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

The US economy is the envy of the world. They can afford it for another 20 years.
I don't think an escalation is a good idea.
Why take that risk?

Because Ukraine is a free sovereign nation and doesn't deserve to be invaded by some nationalistic dictator.

In 1937 Japan invaded China and captured Beijing and Shanghai, would you have preferred it if your Chinese ancestors and the Allied forces back then laid down their weapons gave up fighting and let Japan illegally hold on to large parts of China? ( I assume your Chinese, apologies if you are not)