• random65837@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Of course they’re not, Ukraine has zero chance of actually beating the Russian military. I’m on Ukraine’s side on this, but elementary school math here. Unless a major country puts boots on the ground with them, which is unlikely because that’ll start WW3, Ukraine’s only buying time.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Russia lost in Afghanistan (a much smaller and weaker country than Ukraine), they can lose here too.

      • Novman@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Afghanistan was a colonial war. Crimea is the only base Russia has in hot seas. Major wars was fought to conquer it. So USA cannot win a war because they too had lost in Afghanistan? And the enemy was even weaker, without any major power support ( see Rambo 3 for reference )

        • jaxxed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Novorossiysk (sp?) Only needs to be dug out IIRC. Might he cheaper than maintaining Crimea.

      • random65837@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That was a “loss” huh? Aside from there being what 15 countries involved in that one against the Soviets? The Afghans/Mujahideen lost 5x the troops during that conflict than the Soviets did. The Soviets pulling out was them being tired of it clearly because they sure as shit weren’t losing. Ukraine has small contributions from random countries at this point, these two wars aren’t even remotely comparable.