Came across a small collection of images from the early days of the war, I recognise these ones especially, very powerful images
Its not impossible for Russia to be made vacate Crimea, either by force or by agreement. By force is one hell of a job, but if the conditions were right, Ukraine might be able to advance onto Crimea. I suspect the Russians might even fear this as a possibility since some of their defensive lines appear to include the entrance to the Kerch peninsula. (A last ditch defence before the bridge?)
Question is, beyond territory, what do the Russians want with Crimea? The naval port is the usual answer to that, but given how badly their navy has faired in this conflict, will they have much of a navy to even host there? The Baltic up north is destined to become a Nato Lake, and the Black Sea with a Nato-member Ukraine would nearly mirror the Baltic as a Southern Nato Lake (Especially if Georgia join, which they want to). This leaves the Russians with only their arctic and far east ports free of nearby Nato scrutiny.
The Russians might eventually feel that the pains of being a pariah state are not worth the cost of a naval base that they might barely get any use of. It would however mean curtains for Putin, so he’d need to be out of office for that scenario to happen.
If Ukraine can cut the landbridge and reach the Azov sea I can't see how Crimea can be held in the long term. The only access to it from Russia will be via ferry across the Kerch strait. There will be no tourism industry. The canal is again dry so the agriculture sector will disappear. Having to import more foodstuffs will raise the cost of living and a large part of the population will relocate back to Russia. It will be military outpost, albeit a very large one.
Should Ukraine regain control of Kherson Oblast, Russia will undoubtedly fortify the isthmus further and try to defend the peninsula. But in 12 months time, with a much shorter front line to target, Ukraine can bring a lot more firepower to bear on that narrow isthmus. Coupled with increased air superiority, it will be a very uncomfortable place to be for Russian defenders. Ukraine can play the long game with Crimea.
The Donbas I think will be much easier for Russia to defend and resupply. Retaking the Donbas within my lifetime will probably require a Russian collapse most likely brought about by internal power struggles in a collapsing economy.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem possible to leave Russia in Sevastapol hampering Ukrainian grain ships. As we've seen in the past few days. Russia simply exiting the grain deal and it's unclear how interested Erdogan is in enforcing a new one.
Now this may work out again this time. Erdogan may pull through and just decide unilaterally to hold Russia to the agreement. But this isn't a good long term solution. Erdogan is an old man who hasn't been in good health recently. He could be replaced by someone less interested or more sympathetic to Russia. Or he could simply decide to push the western world and Ukraine for concessions around this situation as he has post election with Sweden and NATO.
Putin is an honourless rat. He will predictably bail on any agreement the second he isn't forced to keep his word or it doesn't suit. And Ukraine cannot exist as a state without its grain exports. So the only real solution is to evict Russia from Crimea.
And Putin won't be round forever. Every dog has his day and then it's done.
More heavy attacks on Odessa overnight. Russia not just using essential global food supply as a weapon, they are actively attempting to destroy the facilities where that food supply comes from.
Putin has always been obsessed with Crimea, he'll never give it up.
At the end of the day - is it really conceivable Russia ever vacate Crimea?
If an agreement can be reached with regards to Crimea UN observed elections etc perhaps an end to the war can be reached.
Soon Putin will want an out.
Maybe Crimean elections can be the peacemaker
Russia March 2022
Russian occupation present
The West aren't just going to stop supporting Ukraine, it's just not going to happen. I can understand why the Russians thought it would happen pre-war, but when the Ukrainians didn't fall at the first hurdle the West was always going to back it strongly. The economic impact on the West hasn't been as severe as the Russians would have hoped, and the war crimes at Bucha and Irpin quickly showed it would be immoral to just cut off Ukraine.
So the big question now is, how long can Russia keep up its own war effort? A coup had to be negotiated out of just a few weeks ago, despite the widespread censorship and propaganda many Russians now know this is an unnecessary clusterfck.
They weren't going to last much longer back home in Russia either.
They wont last long in trench life, escpeically come winter.
I don't think there's a single war in history whose prosector withstood the pressures of a crippled economy caused by said conflict. If anything, wars traditionally aid the home economy - due to all the armaments and general uptick in industry caused by the need to supply weapons, uniforms, rations, and an overall volume of "stuff"; Russia's economy - and presumably its poorer demographics - are fúcked, and if this continues you'd have to start wondering about the frontlines and what's stopping soldiers from simply giving up?
Is the drip feed of weapons, not the wanted position but the reality of it where the collective who are sending the weapons are trying to produce it as fast. Here's 2 patriots because they've just built two. I'd imagine all the countries are keeping a close eye on their stock levels and although arming Ukraine to the hilt is the way to go, practically it's not possible. Yet anyway. I know the west (I **** hate this "the west" name) can out produce but it isn't in that mindset yet by the looks of things
Hitting Odessa seems like a big FU to anyone hoping the grain deal could be restarted. Seems like they would try damage the port to make it useless for grain transport
Well for one thing, the costs of a failed invasion will no longer have to be met from an ever decreasing exchequer. So that's one positive aspect anyway from the Russian viewpoint.
I think that the economics of the war played its part in Russia's withdrawal from Afghanistan too.
Up to 70 years old..
A speculative opinion piece based on a hypothetical by an ex advisor, a view which isn't supported by Zelensky or leading officials.
I dont know what the rest of the article is, but going on that, it comes off as clickbait
Reports Odessa is under attack from dones, missiles and aircraft...
The west seems to be playing there own game here,in ways it looks like they are playing the Ukrainians at the same time, Here's a few tanks and IFV, here's a few patriots,here's a few months training,were with you until the end , which means what exactly,
Defeat of Russia ? Maybe
Retaking all occupied territories from donesk and Luhansk to Crimea? Maybe
Till you can't physically retake anymore territory? Maybe
Till the next US president gets sworn in ? maybe.
We want you to win but ,we will only give you equipment in dribs and drabs but do your best were rooting for you,
Is there something else the west are looking at China ?
The last paragraph in that article is why the west won't allow Putin to claim victory in this war. Which is what Putin will do if there is a negotiated settlement that allows Russia to hold on to Ukranian territory. Also as well as emboldening China, it may encourage Putin to try again if Ukraine does not have NATO protection. The West has to stop pussy footing around and give Ukraine all it needs to kick Russia out.
What do you mean?
I don't think the length of the front line is really related to the amount of territory captured.
Alright so I looked at this guys previous 'commentary'
cached/free: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:l89erkF22PcJ:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/01/battle-kyiv-will-utter-tragedy/&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
It will shock us, but we must remain resolute in our support for Ukraine’s right to exist and increasingly support them with military hardware.
As for https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/18/ukraine-and-the-west-are-facing-a-devastating-defeat/
This gruelling endeavour was always going to take longer than the occasionally impatient
international audience was prepared to wait for. It is a military effort of immense
proportions, where mass, manpower, morale, equipment, stocks, logistics, grit and luck all
play vital roles. So far, the Ukrainians are displaying all of these military qualities.
The variable that isn’t on their side is time. In war, time is perhaps the cruellest factor one
cannot change. We saw this in NATO’s operation in Afghanistan, where the Taliban took
great delight in the retelling of a famous Afghan proverb; ”you may have the watches, but we
have the time”.
Summer will soon begin to roll into autumn. Indeed, we are already half-way through the
season. The fighting will begin to grind to a cold halt as the freezing winter saps troops’
ability to conduct high-intensity warfare. This will only give Russia more time to further
build up its defences, as it did last winter.
I'd say how easy this was to get around the paywall but I don't wanna give them a free patch idea.
Which, argument isn't terribly analogous, the Russians aren't a non-state terror group of people within their own sovereignty, they're a nuclear power invading a sovereign state. The only similarity will be 'defenses' in the form of human shielding IMHO, and use of deadlier weapons.
The source of all the consternation of the article is a disgraced former presidential advisor who tried to help Putin blame residential casualties on Ukrainian action, saying in his subsequent resignation that his comments were both erroneous and premature:
Who is described as a "Media trickster":
Oleksiy Arestovych is an archetypal fluid and unpredictable “trickster”: his biography is a patchwork of acting, intelligence work, esoteric and theological studies, political blogging, and radical politicking. (In 2005–2009, he was a member of the right-wing Brotherhood party, created by another political “trickster,” Dmytro Korchynsky.) Arestovych excelled at cultivating a protean and effervescent public image, making good on the propagandist credentials that ultimately led him to Ukrainian high politics.
I'd treat what he says and does, or any reporting or 'commentary' based on taking his commentary seriously, with a healthy spoon of salt.
No need. Click this link.
https://archive.ph/3r6GK.
Explain the 1500 +km front line
Guys according to Deep state map Russia occupies the following of Ukraine
Before Feb ‘22 44k = 7.2%
After Feb ‘22 66k = 10.7%
For a total of or 108.9k = 18%
Biggest problem with that is there is no iron clad guarantee that they would get into NATO with significant part of their own borders occupied by Russian forces,this is why they are getting nowhere with their demands to be made NATO members before meeting any of the criteria set in a stone for membership .
But the an agreement could only happen if Ukraine has no realistic expectations of removing the Russians occupiers
Here's the first two paragraphs from that Daily Telegraph article:
"Since Putin’s tanks crossed into Ukrainian territory last year, three options have been on the table for how this war would end: victory for one side or the other, a frozen conflict or a negotiated settlement. The public comments made this week by Oleksiy Arestovych, a former advisor to Volodymyr Zelensky’s chief of staff, appear to indicate the last may be more likely than previously thought.
Arestovych raised the prospect of Ukraine making territorial concessions in return for the rest of the country receiving the most cast-iron security guarantee there is: Nato membership. These comments have proved highly controversial. Not only would such an outcome be unpalatable to many in Kyiv and other European capitals, raising it as a possibility highlights a growing uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of the war – particularly amongst Ukraine’s western backers."
Must say that Arestovychs proposal could have destabilising consequences for Ukraines current strategy if the West gets war fatigue. A smaller Ukraine, but one that gets into NATO. Would it be pushed on Zelenskyy as a possible solution? The precedent would be Finland in 1940 where it kept its independence but lost about 9% of its territory.
@johnnyskeleton
I wonder how long the Russian people will tolerate how awful their country has become!
I hope it won't be for much longer, but I fear it'll be a while yet. It appears that Putin's strategy of maintaining support, if not apathy, is to shield urban Russians from the war as much as he can, while sending off the rural poor, and poor rural Russians seem to have an abiding fetish for misery anyway.
Not that this strategy is novel. You could even say it's the standard method of staffing an army, or at least the ranks of its infantry. If Putin is not stopped somehow, he'll be looking to prosecute this war until Ukraine is subjugated or until the war causes some kind of internal crisis like a demographic collapse that attentions must be urgently diverted homeward.
If they haven't been able to increase what they are already given what makes you think this will pass ,
But it does make it look like Europe is planning for a 5 year war ,
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/82d003fd2122b93acc890998f11fd913.svg)
