| Forum Index > General Forum |
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. | ||
|
Yurie
11851 Posts
The initial goal when invading was to create Belarus 2.0. Territory is just a pressure point towards that. So measuring winning/losing can of course be done in territory since that is a total win. A better win for Russia is a "strong" Ukrainian client state instead of one in rubble. So if you measure the primary win condition as Ukraine being a client state. Russia is far from winning. With western support for a fast peace, they are close to winning. | ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On December 14 2024 02:45 Yurie wrote: It seems likely Russia wins when Trump becomes president if his goal is a fast "peace". If he force frozen borders for 2 years with limited security guarantees, that is a limited Russian win. Ukraine cannot afford its current military without support. So Russia can then prepare better and invade again in 1, 3 or 5 years. The threat of that will force Ukrainian concessions and slowly they become a Russian puppet, the actual goal of the war. The initial goal when invading was to create Belarus 2.0. Territory is just a pressure point towards that. So measuring winning/losing can of course be done in territory since that is a total win. A better win for Russia is a "strong" Ukrainian client state instead of one in rubble. So if you measure the primary win condition as Ukraine being a client state. Russia is far from winning. With western support for a fast peace, they are close to winning. No one is winning this war now, regardless of the outcome. Russia’s economy and credibility is in shambles for the foreseeable future in all cases. Saying that Russia can « win » is like saying someone has « won » the 1$ auction after bidding 5$. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8087 Posts
On December 14 2024 02:45 Yurie wrote: It seems likely Russia wins when Trump becomes president if his goal is a fast "peace". If he force frozen borders for 2 years with limited security guarantees, that is a limited Russian win. Ukraine cannot afford its current military without support. So Russia can then prepare better and invade again in 1, 3 or 5 years. The threat of that will force Ukrainian concessions and slowly they become a Russian puppet, the actual goal of the war. The initial goal when invading was to create Belarus 2.0. Territory is just a pressure point towards that. So measuring winning/losing can of course be done in territory since that is a total win. A better win for Russia is a "strong" Ukrainian client state instead of one in rubble. So if you measure the primary win condition as Ukraine being a client state. Russia is far from winning. With western support for a fast peace, they are close to winning. I'd argue even if Ukraine completely capitulates right now, Russia still didn't win. They've demolished the vast vast majority of their equipment, decimated an entire generation of men, and created a huge new border with Nato, who incidentally is also gearing up, whilst Russia's economy is slowly going down the drain. Whatever best outcome they can hope for now, they are much much worse off than they were before the invasion. That's not to say Ukraine isn't also losing. That's often the deal with wars; there's rarely a victor, just losers of varying degrees. The biggest difference is that the west is lining up to help rebuild Ukraine once this war is over. No one is lining up to help Russia. | ||
|
Yurie
11851 Posts
On December 14 2024 08:37 Excludos wrote: I'd argue even if Ukraine completely capitulates right now, Russia still didn't win. They've demolished the vast vast majority of their equipment, decimated an entire generation of men, and created a huge new border with Nato, who incidentally is also gearing up, whilst Russia's economy is slowly going down the drain. Whatever best outcome they can hope for now, they are much much worse off than they were before the invasion. That's not to say Ukraine isn't also losing. That's often the deal with wars; there's rarely a victor, just losers of varying degrees. The biggest difference is that the west is lining up to help rebuild Ukraine once this war is over. No one is lining up to help Russia. Sure Russia would be much happier if they got a cheap war and that is what they planned for originally. I still argue that if you achieve your war goals you win the war from your own point of view. In this case it was insanely costly and the war goal is not worth the cost any more. A classical Pyrrhic victory, even if they get their client state now. The real risk is that we get a cease fire scenario instead of a formal peace treaty (which at this stage I consider a Russian win long term). In that scenario a lot of companies and nations will assume Russia invades again in a few years. Why would you finance a rebuild in that scenario? | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5574 Posts
| ||
|
0x64
Finland4558 Posts
On December 14 2024 18:35 maybenexttime wrote: What Ukraine needs is European troops deployed in their country after the war. Signing treaties with Russia is worthless. A big stick works much better. It seems like the idea is gaining traction, which is a good sign. Any treaty not ending in Ukraine in NATO would doom Ukraine's future. We also need to address Russian sabotage operation against European infrastructure. At this point might as well wait for Russia's collapse and not give them a last minute save putin card. It take only one day to get rid of the boy. But he knew Russians hate chaos and if there is no leader ready to replace him, he gets an extra layer of safety. The regim ends when military says it's over but what will a weak military do? Also FSB had installed the windows in the houses of military leaders... So to end this madness. You need to leak a full list of FSB officers. Military to be able to peacefully help organize elections. And 40 years of generation change with economic prosperity. Russians here seems to all agree that any improvement to their daily life would be impossible as they live in an utopia. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5574 Posts
| ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On December 14 2024 21:27 maybenexttime wrote: What Russians need is an economic calamity worse than the 90's. Only that will knock some sense into their thick heads. Currently they associate authoritarianism with stability and failed democratic reforms with chaos and poverty. They need more poverty. Yeah man, if history has taught us anything, it's that calamities and poverty lead to peaceful and sensible populations... | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8087 Posts
On December 15 2024 19:37 Salazarz wrote: Yeah man, if history has taught us anything, it's that calamities and poverty lead to peaceful and sensible populations... History has taught us that it could go either way. It's a chance for a restart, but how that restart goes depends on a number of other factors. Syria is doing a restart right now, and all indications points to that it's going to end up better for them. Godwin's law aside, WW2 is the biggest proof that a calamity can restart a country into the correct direction, and end a generational feud between themselves and their neighbours. What history has guaranteed us is that no change ever happens without a calamity. | ||
|
ZeroByte13
767 Posts
On December 15 2024 20:46 Excludos wrote: I'd say let's wait a few years first before making any conclusions...Syria is doing a restart right now, and all indications points to that it's going to end up better for them. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8087 Posts
On December 15 2024 21:27 ZeroByte13 wrote: I'd say let's wait a few years first before making any conclusions... Agreed. We don't know yet of course. Just saying, from the outside at least, it looks promising. But only time will tell | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12204 Posts
On December 15 2024 20:46 Excludos wrote: History has taught us that it could go either way. It's a chance for a restart, but how that restart goes depends on a number of other factors. Syria is doing a restart right now, and all indications points to that it's going to end up better for them. Godwin's law aside, WW2 is the biggest proof that a calamity can restart a country into the correct direction, and end a generational feud between themselves and their neighbours. What history has guaranteed us is that no change ever happens without a calamity. Generally the opposite of this is true, when conditions worsen people are more willing to turn to authoritarian leaders, not less. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On December 15 2024 20:46 Excludos wrote: History has taught us that it could go either way. It's a chance for a restart, but how that restart goes depends on a number of other factors. Syria is doing a restart right now, and all indications points to that it's going to end up better for them. Godwin's law aside, WW2 is the biggest proof that a calamity can restart a country into the correct direction, and end a generational feud between themselves and their neighbours. What history has guaranteed us is that no change ever happens without a calamity. Except one of the key reasons WW2 even happened at all was that Germans felt wronged and oppressed and stuck without a future. The restart in 'correct direction' happened thanks to willingness of the Allies to forgive and forget (at least on a national level) and the desire to rebuild together. There's zero reason to believe that Germany would become the country it is now if it were ostracized and isolated after the conclusion of the war. | ||
|
0x64
Finland4558 Posts
On December 16 2024 18:19 Salazarz wrote: Except one of the key reasons WW2 even happened at all was that Germans felt wronged and oppressed and stuck without a future. The restart in 'correct direction' happened thanks to willingness of the Allies to forgive and forget (at least on a national level) and the desire to rebuild together. There's zero reason to believe that Germany would become the country it is now if it were ostracized and isolated after the conclusion of the war. Or was it just because of the global recession, that someone was able to blame others for the shortcoming of internal economics? I somewhat agree that you have to deal with Russia the way Germany was dealt with after WWII not like after WWI. It's kind of impossible to stop a country to rebuild a crazy scary military during peace time. That will be a problem for our generation and the solutions are unknown. Russia is doing its best to hint us that we need to find a solution. Russia has been probing the soft power for over 20 years, to see how well they can infiltrate the politics of each country. With varying degree of success, until they started to fail internally. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10720 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States13956 Posts
The America south after the Civil War is also a great example of forgiving and rebuilding together look how well that has gone for everyone. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8087 Posts
On December 16 2024 18:19 Salazarz wrote: Except one of the key reasons WW2 even happened at all was that Germans felt wronged and oppressed and stuck without a future. The restart in 'correct direction' happened thanks to willingness of the Allies to forgive and forget (at least on a national level) and the desire to rebuild together. There's zero reason to believe that Germany would become the country it is now if it were ostracized and isolated after the conclusion of the war. No one is saying we are going to keep isolating Russia after they've gone through a collapse. EU were already tripping over themselves to trade with Russia whilst they were still technically our enemy. Nothing is going to hold us back if there's westerly influence to be gained by shoving vast amounts of money into trade and investments. We want to be friends with these people; Putin and their oligarchs are what's holding them and us back | ||
|
Soulforged
Latvia918 Posts
Because west's support & trade is what largely funded formation of the oligarchs power base. | ||
KwarK
United States42777 Posts
On December 16 2024 21:10 Sermokala wrote: No social and societal engineering took place in Japan either to mold it to our wishes either no we decided to just forgive everyone and move on from what happened. The America south after the Civil War is also a great example of forgiving and rebuilding together look how well that has gone for everyone. Not sure if sarcastic. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42777 Posts
On December 16 2024 18:19 Salazarz wrote: Except one of the key reasons WW2 even happened at all was that Germans felt wronged and oppressed and stuck without a future. The restart in 'correct direction' happened thanks to willingness of the Allies to forgive and forget (at least on a national level) and the desire to rebuild together. There's zero reason to believe that Germany would become the country it is now if it were ostracized and isolated after the conclusion of the war. This is the opposite of historical fact. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Stormgate Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Online Event
SC Evo League
Online Event
OSC
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
CSO Contender
[BSL 2025] Weekly
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Summer Champion…
SC Evo League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
