Obviously it is much larger than when they were first invaded. It’s hard to get good numbers on the number of dead and wounded on either side, but this had been a bloody and grinding war for both nations. Russia has a numbers advantage, and Ukraine has made them pay heavily for each advance to keep parity (not including russia’s embarrassing performance at sea); even given that, russia has not been afraid to pay in men to make ground, playing a political game to try to appear successful and hope they win the us elections.
Russia’s strategy can work, if they wear Ukraine down and have time to rebuild during a weakened republican government in the US. I feel this is why some European leaders are rattling sabers… if they can make russia back down while the US would honor its military commitments, the situation can remain stable.
The worst thing that can happen to Russia right now is European countries openly sending troops into Ukraine, regardless of numbers. No one can win this war at that point, it is only a matter of how bad the war gets worldwide.
Good article, Russi is a great source. However my point was that entry of NATO forces would leave russia considering they may open their entire boarder as a front - I would definitely ceed the point if this just related to the current lines in Ukraine.
I feel you’re arguing that european countries wouldn’t be setting a “tripwire” force by entering, but I can see the allure of doing this before trump might end up in office. Europe could leave him entering a war and having to run away to take putin’s side… and while republicans are shameless I think….
…
Okay, well I’m pretty sure at least a few of them would be ashamed!
I think that a direct war between NATO and Russia would ultimately lead to a nuclear holocaust. So, hopefully that never happens because we’re all going to die horribly in that scenario. However, the key point of the article is that western industry simply isn’t oriented towards this sort of war, so whether it unfolds within the territory of Ukraine or as a full on conflict between Russia and NATO, the advantage is on Russia’s side in the long run. NATO might make some initial breakthroughs, but it’s highly unlikely that NATO could outright defeat Russia quickly, if that doesn’t happen then it turns into a logistics game.
The other aspect that’s important to keep in mind is China. If Russia was somehow defeated by NATO, then China would be completely surrounded. This is an existential threat from China’s perspective, so China would be supporting Russia in terms of logistics and possibly even directly militarily if push comes to shove. China absolutely dwarfs the west in terms of industrial capacity, so in a war of attrition there is no path to victory for NATO.
Obviously it is much larger than when they were first invaded. It’s hard to get good numbers on the number of dead and wounded on either side, but this had been a bloody and grinding war for both nations. Russia has a numbers advantage, and Ukraine has made them pay heavily for each advance to keep parity (not including russia’s embarrassing performance at sea); even given that, russia has not been afraid to pay in men to make ground, playing a political game to try to appear successful and hope they win the us elections.
Russia’s strategy can work, if they wear Ukraine down and have time to rebuild during a weakened republican government in the US. I feel this is why some European leaders are rattling sabers… if they can make russia back down while the US would honor its military commitments, the situation can remain stable.
Removed by mod
The worst thing that can happen to Russia right now is European countries openly sending troops into Ukraine, regardless of numbers. No one can win this war at that point, it is only a matter of how bad the war gets worldwide.
People who actually have a clue on the subject seem to disagree with you there https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine
Good article, Russi is a great source. However my point was that entry of NATO forces would leave russia considering they may open their entire boarder as a front - I would definitely ceed the point if this just related to the current lines in Ukraine.
I feel you’re arguing that european countries wouldn’t be setting a “tripwire” force by entering, but I can see the allure of doing this before trump might end up in office. Europe could leave him entering a war and having to run away to take putin’s side… and while republicans are shameless I think….
…
Okay, well I’m pretty sure at least a few of them would be ashamed!
I think that a direct war between NATO and Russia would ultimately lead to a nuclear holocaust. So, hopefully that never happens because we’re all going to die horribly in that scenario. However, the key point of the article is that western industry simply isn’t oriented towards this sort of war, so whether it unfolds within the territory of Ukraine or as a full on conflict between Russia and NATO, the advantage is on Russia’s side in the long run. NATO might make some initial breakthroughs, but it’s highly unlikely that NATO could outright defeat Russia quickly, if that doesn’t happen then it turns into a logistics game.
The other aspect that’s important to keep in mind is China. If Russia was somehow defeated by NATO, then China would be completely surrounded. This is an existential threat from China’s perspective, so China would be supporting Russia in terms of logistics and possibly even directly militarily if push comes to shove. China absolutely dwarfs the west in terms of industrial capacity, so in a war of attrition there is no path to victory for NATO.