this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
71 points (100.0% liked)

GenZedong

4048 readers
380 users here now

This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.

This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information.

Rules:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

really doubt it, i mean look at the map, its still just small gains

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

War for territory is the western idea of the war in Ukraine, but it is clearly and explicitly contradictory to what the russian government has stated as official goals and strategy. Small territorial gains? Yes, but the russian objective is "demilitarization" and the only way to demilitarize a state that is unwilling to do it is to destroy their army and their ability to fight. Even the 3rd assault brigade, what's left of the infamous Azov Battalion, refused their orders to counter attack on the flanks of Avdeevka and there are reports and rumors that Zelensky might move /legally/politically against them. If even the most fanatical of their forces refuse to fight, then the rest of the army might stop following orders soon enough. That is a recipe for disaster in Ukraine, and at the least expected moment it all can get out of control for the government in Kiev. Not to mention that Zelensky's term is about to end, and who knows what will happen after that, since the country is really in no position to hold elections.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I understand that they aren't there to eat Ukraine, I'm more pointing out that this still seems to be a stalemate. I feel like if they take kharkiv or something that would be a more obvious sign of the war coming close to an end

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

I think the real indicator of the war to me has always been the casualty rate and the resources spent. It went from 5 dead UKR to 1 dead RUS right from the start, now we're at 10:1 ratios--atrociously bad. The billions in Western weapons, tanks, and cold hard cash have all evaporated; their economies are in shambles while Russia's "fortress economy" lives up to its name.

It only looks like a stalemate if we look at it from the lens of territory. If Russia defined its own victory conditions as capturing all of Ukraine territorially in the shortest amount of time, they could have swept the entire country in a month or two. However, Russia defines victory by minimizing its own losses while bleeding Ukraine, minimizing civilian losses and destruction of civilian infrastructure, beating the West in the economic arm wrestle, and ensuring that liberated Ukranian territory is not a frothing hotbed of Neo Nazi paramilitary terrorist activity. By all of these self-defined victory metrics, they have consistently been performing exemplarily with only minor hiccups.

Even when some form of peace declaration is signed, the war won't be over. Banderites and their NATO masters will be waging war with Russia until the West as we know it has completely collapsed and been reinvented.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

the only way to demilitarize a state that is unwilling to do it is to destroy their army and their ability to fight

all the more reason for Russia to move aggressively to envelop and destroy elements of the UAF like those 'routing' from these front line positions---if this is still too dangerous for Russia, the UAF must not be in that bad of a spot

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think slow and steady has done them nothing but good, they are in no rush, why start now?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

sticking to slow and steady when the enemy is running away is prolonging a conflict by giving them an opportunity to regroup later. now it's possible the UAF really are in crisis, but if Russia doesn't exploit that with big moves that's as good as the Ukainians not collapsing in terms of how long it will take for the war to end

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I have said it before: this conflict ends with the demilitarization and denazification of NATO. Ukraine is irrelevant at this point. It has’t been for a while.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

why would not pressing an advantage against a NATO proxy in any way be conducive to that