Russia - threadbanned users in OP

It's not exactly true to say that the majority of Russian forces are in Bakhmut, considering that this is famously Wagner's fight, primarily, and Russia has drafted in 100,000s of conscripts and there are various flashpoints along the whole front. It certainly looks like the most brutal fight, though, based on reports we've been seeing, and so long as Ukraine are inflicting high enough casualties on the Russians while suffering low enough casualties themselves, then the battle of Bakhmut may serve its purpose when all is said and done.

Coming back on the 100,000s of Russian conscripts thing - do we have any idea how many are being thrown into active battle vs how many are being used to man defensive lines or logistical routes in preparation for the predicted Ukrainian counter-offensive.

Never said that at all ,

Where did you get the idea of I said ukraine should negotiate as they won't win,

That's literally making it up as you go along

Gatling you’re saying here Zelensky might have no choice soon but to negotiate.

You’re softening your stance that you held all through this thread.

You said on the Ukraine thread Russia will loose and Ukraine will be victorious.

Total opposite of your post above.

So Russia still has enough ammunition for the areas they focus their attacks just not enough for the entire frontline. Hopefully in the coming months their stock gets even lower.

It would be valid to ask how exactly Ukraine is even supposed to negotiate with an entity that has no respect for international law and procedure. As I said before, the only guarantee Ukraine could really benefit from is NATO membership because that's not dependent on Russia pinky-swearing not to attack for X amount of time.

Ukrainians have dismissed any idea of negotiations on Crimea.

Where would Russia muster the resources or even willpower to have another go at Kyiv? There's nothing about this current phase of the war which indicates that kind of capability, and I have not seen much talk that Russia are quietly gathering the means to do this. However, presuming this talk you mention has any weight to it, Russia would presumably have to attack from the north, given their ability to advance on the southern and eastern fronts is almost nil. But that would require having to advance over much fortification if going by land, and if by air, they would have to contend with (presumably) the highest concentration of air defences in the country. Russia would have learned a thing or two since their initial attempt, but so would Ukraine, and they'd have a lot more western weapons to boot.

This isn't to mention my suspicion that if Russia posed a credible threat to strike at Kyiv, the Poles may well decide to line their forces out along the Belarusian border and essentially say, "Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough."

That was the top story this morning, seemed like a serious development to me….perhaps it was not

That's what many of us have been saying since last summer and were called defeatists or Putin bots. Seems reality is dawning a bit more broadly around here. Only a few weeks ago there were many confident predictions Crimea would be back in Ukrainian hands by summer.

Big factor is the US elections. I suspect Putin is hoping to keep the war going in the hope a Republican will win and military support for Ukraine decline from there

The reason for being called Putinbots etc. is not so much for suggesting that negotiations should happen but for suggesting that negotiations should happen (these were attempted at the beginning and quickly broke down) even if the agreement is tantamount to surrender, based on this insidious, persistent assumption that Russia will win out if given enough time.

I am certain Trump would abandon Ukraine at once and De Santos has also made a few dubious statements.

But it's early days yet. Time will tell. Best think for Ukraine would probably be Biden reelection, he seems all in