Okay, let's call it a failed defence, if it comes down to definitions.
As for "futile", a matter of perspective. We know from reports that even within there's lots of disagreement about whether Bakhmut was wise or a colossal waste (concerns both sides)
They probably were, to some degree, a spent force until they got the N. Korean shells and Ukraine's supply was down 30% because of Gaza.
You are talking about Avdiivka then it was futile, the Ukrainians let themselves get into a position of defending on 3 sides or someone was quoted as saying "360 degrees" which used to be called surrounded in old money. Thats just being stubborn and is bad strategy. The Ukrainians need to fall back to lines they can better defend and get out of places like Robtoyne or that other place where they were/are on the wrong side of the river
Brush up on your basic English yourself would be my suggestion .... futile means "having no result or effect : useless"
So why was defending Adviika and Bakhmut to the extend Ukraine did a useless exercise from a military perspective ?
But that's the nature of defence, you fortify a position and hold it for as long as possible, when the time comes you retreat to your next fortified position forcing your attacker to bleed men/equipment trying to take that position and repeat when that too gets too difficult to hold.
If you're fighting for your country and trying to stop an invader from overrunning it then of course it's not a "futile defence"
You say "I don't think Ukraine should let Russia take the country without a fight" but when they do fight you call it futile.
I expect the West and Russia have a clear agreement: no (Western-backed) assassination of Putin and no assassination of Zelensky. We know there is constant talk behind the scenes and this is presumably a mutually agreed red line.
Whether the Ukrainians have to stick to that I don't know
Futile defence=it failed. Basic English, not that hard to understand. Of course I don't think Ukraine should let Russia take the country without a fight, nothing I wrote even remotely suggests that. But both Russia and Ukraine have had a really bad 12 months militarily, only the deluded on both sides pretend differently
Hopefully not.
I'm a realist about this conflict, I celebrate genuine Ukrainian successes but don't stick my head in the sand and pretend everything is going well and victory is in sight when it clearly isn't. Some people don't like that, it's their problem.
Did they leave men and equipment behind ?
"A lot of Ukrainians will have died too for the futile defence"
How was it a "futile defence"
Should Ukrainian troops pull back at the first sight of Russian troops? Should they just surrender and let Russia take the country?
He's an idiot.. Touting the line "but other people did bad stuff as well " regarding Navalny
I get Ardivka has fallen and that’s just war but if they left 2000 men there with loads of equipment and didn’t pull them out in time, well that’s really poor leadership and worrying for the overall strategy and direction of the war.
Is it really so difficult to just assassinate Putin?
Surely if a proper effort was made to off him it could be done and it would help end the war.
And tens of thousands of Ukrainians died or were injured in the failed counter offensive. Both sides suffered horrible losses and are seriously stretched
A lot of Ukrainians will have died too for the futile defence.
Undoubtedly and I'm not trying to mask defeat as a secret victory but it is always keeping in mind Russia's payment for these "gains". This wasn't the Soviet army of yore, roaring through Eastern Europe on the way to Berlin; I daresay Ukrainian losses were a percentile of Russia's.
Russia obviously have a depth here that Ukraine doesn't but if the headlines are telling of Nepalese volunteers we're not exactly talking of an army in rude health. Moscow will eventually run out of forces it can send that aren't the Moscow/Petersburg middle class.
As I expected, you try to put a positive spin on it.
You can use the term collapse in resistance in place of withdrawal if that is what you prefer. The losses in putin's forces in Ukraine did spike yesterday and the day before so that would fit in with a major assault somewhere along the front lines. Hopefully Ukraine having being defending this area for ten years against attack from putin's forces means their withdrawal plan was well prepared and their fall back positions are capable of containing any further attacks. I would trust the judgement of the armed forces of Ukraine that if this area is no longer worth keeping in the face of repeated assaults then a withdrawal might allow more damage to putin's war machine.
Yeah I would have thought that with Bakhmut Russia has won a Pyrrhic victory and be unable to launch a massive offensive again, that they'd be a spent force.
Yet here we are.
Russia has once again proven it can muster up huge quantities of troops and weaponry to push on. Its caused them a lot in both , but they accomplished their goals.
The rumours of a lot of heavy Western equipment and possibly 2000 captured is very worrying. As are chats the Russians continue to advance towards Yor.
A lot of Ukrainians will have died too for the futile defence. And the same thing was said after Bakhmut, that Russian manpower loss was unsustainable and there'd be no repeats. And look.
Anyway, the whole thing is terribly sad, while I'm sure Putin and his gang of criminals sleep soundly in their beds, the most prominent opposition leader murdered alongside all the dead Ukrainians and their own soldiers, none of whom matter a damn to them.
It's bad news but how much Russian fertiliser did it take to control the town? As always with these russian "successes" they are more than likely utter Pyrrhic.
They've now withdrawn from the town completely. If that's not a collapse of resistance I don't know what is, I'm sure you'll find some positive spin to put on it
Willy OAM - quite the update, not looking for Ukraine here , there could be a couple of thousand prisoners when the dust settles here.
They're not a super power but they've insane stockpiles of equipment from the soviet era. Thankfully after almost 2 years much of that has been wiped out. If this war last another 2 year's you'll see a hell of a lot more t62 and maybe evenea few t56 tanks on the march.
And by then NK won't have any artillery left to spare either. It's a dark moment now but there are 3 things which will help maintain Ukraine. Western fighter jets, renewed American support and Taurus missile's from Germany. I really wish Germany would give those missiles to give Ukraine a few short term victory's after losing Avdiivka. I'd love to see the Crimean bridge fall on election day.
I really don't get how some people pretend the current model of the Russian war economy is sustainable.
Russia's GDP is completely average for a country of its size.
Sure, their form of Government means they can pump money into military funding in a way that democractic countries cannot.
But it's finite. There is only so much pushing around of roubles you can do on a limited economy for so long. What are they spending now on military. 30%? That's completely, 100%, unsustainable in even the medium term.
This wierd persistent myth that they're some sort of superpower is perplexing.
I would say the fact they're 2 years into a war against their poor neighbour and faring badly is more or less the ultimate fact of the matter that can't be danced around. I note China, despite its support in some aspects, is shocked at the terrible performance of the Russian army. I say shocked, but to some degree, I would say delighted.
Putin is still going because he has no other choice, no more than Hitler felt he had no choice after 1943. That's pretty much it. There isn't a future for Putin if he admits defeat and withdraws in humiliation. But of course there is a future for Russia, and obviously, a better future.
But Putin won't allow that. Like Hitler he'd likely be content to see Russia burn and spin his tale of woe, betrayal, blame his generals, blame the people, before he'd admit that he made a monumental, for the history books, blunder by invading.
Also the west is never going to supply Ukraine with actual war-winning weapons. It's pretty obvious that the strategy is for Russia to burn out and retreat of their own accord and admit defeat.
Ukraine suddenly getting an influx of war-winning weapons is a receipe for nuclear disaster by a vengeful maniac and not really sure why people don't get that. The goal is for Russia to reach collapse stage and be forced to withdraw.
Not very nice for the people and soldiers of Ukraine but it's realistic.
Russian society is already suffering from a lack of people in the workforce. Throughout this winter, the amount of malfunctioning heating systems in the cities reached an all-time high. No maintenance workers available, and this is only one sector, there's many more. Ordinary Russians are now starting to feel the bad effects of Putins war.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
