The whole invasion was madness right from the start, why would the end be any different?
No, the invasion was a perfectly sound strategic act. Morality aside. It was executed so badly that one wonders if the present Russian military leadership isn’t all long term CIA sleeper agents.
Calls on Putin to resign.
Local Moscow legislators call on Putin to resign as they leave office (novayagazeta.eu)
Sounds pretty small potatoes and the source reporting, not surprisingly, is exiled opposition. Yet, it truly appears to be happening albeit on a very muted scale. Local politicians on their way out taking a parting shot as it were.
I’ve been waiting for confirmation that Izium and Kupiansk were taken by Ukraine. The Guardian has reporters in Ukraine.
A nice summary of the war in the North.
It can be two things. Troops brought in for a celebration can be used for a purge, or a coup.
how can you write this with a straight face ?
the fact that the invasion had dynamically changing objectives from day 1, tells you how perfectly sound it was, ahem … strategically
- Unless losing your black-sea-navy to a country without a navy was a strategic objective …
- or getting FI/SW into Nato …
- cementing current leadership in Ukr. with historic approval rates
- and having Nato gear up in eastern europe … (and member states eager to fund nato like crazy))
- or losing europe forever as an energy client (without any plan or infrastructure to reroute your oil/gas)
- and speeding up energy transition OUT of your assets into different ones
- and have the russian economy fall like a oligarch from a hospital window
Let’s face it … the only reason why russia isnt burning from within (at this day!) is that most people in russia have no idea of how ass-clownishly incompetent russians are being perceived today on the whole planet
.
It truely seems the whole $shit$how was planned by the marx-brothers and executed by the 3 stooges with some help of dumb and dumber
The Kherson offensive has been a strategic success for Ukraine on multiple levels. Not only did they succeed in achieving operational goals, such as recapturing strategic locations like Kubyansk and Izium, but its successful execution has also demonstrated to the Europe and NATO that Ukraine is deserving of continued military and financial support. They have made intelligent use of the weapons and supplies provided to them thus far and demonstrated that the war need not be some never-ending stalemate. There is now compelling evidence that putting more weapons in Ukrainian hands will very likely result in continued Ukrainian gains. The future prospects of reclaiming other parts of their country currently under foreign occupation seems not unrealistic.
This is a very good point.
That’s nuts. It was doomed from the beginning. Ukraine is a real country, with large and not-so-easy territory, with tens of millions of people who identify as Ukrainian, with a coherent and mostly cohesive society, and a government most of the population saw as legitimate. Such countries are very, very difficult to invade. Especially for an incompetent kleptocracy like Russia.
Time to face the fact that your assumptions were wrong from the beginning – Russia is incompetent militarily, and Ukraine was always going to be very difficult to defeat. This was true then and true now.
I am not ready to misunderestimate them just yet. This could still go very badly indeed.
Well he’s not exactly wrong. IF you look at it only from a morally bankrupt realpolitik grand strategy POV.
I think AK84 isn’t saying it was well-thought out or even remotely moral. But if you were Putin, decapitating the Ukrainian government and putting back in a compliant stooge like Yanukovych who would meekly assent to the annexation of Crimea and the Russian vassalization of an even more fully puppet Donbas seems like it would be a great idea. You get it done in a week or three, present it to the world as a fait accompli and try to ride out the political fallout.
That Russia proved woefully incapable of pulling it off, much to the surprise of Putin and probably a good chunk of the world, is not a failure of the basic concept in a moral vacuum (that it is disgustingly immoral goes without saying). It’s a failure of intelligence, planning, resources and execution exacerbated by a truly massive amount of hubris.
The attitude that you are condemning was widely shared around the world, including many governments.
Of course, you are far from the first person to insist that what is clear in hindsight should have been equally clear in foresight.
I was saying this would be very difficult for Russia since February 25th: Russia invades Ukraine {2022-02-24} (Part 1) - #124 by iiandyiiii
And while the wrongness about Russia was certainly common then, most of those who made such predictions have recognized how wrong their assumptions were. The poster in question clearly has not.
I remember distinctly why I thought the conventional wisdom was wrong - Ukraine is a very large country, larger by far than any other that Putin has tangled with. And not only is it large, both in population and land area, but it’s more prosperous than any country Putin has tangled with. And more democratic. And it’s to the west of Russia, with land borders with NATO countries.
Looking back, why did anyone think this would be easy? Ukraine is really big! It’s got tens of millions of people! Bigger than Iraq, more prosperous than Iraq, more democratic than Iraq, more cohesive ethnically than Iraq, and Russia is much weaker than America, even by the incorrect estimates of February '22. Why did anyone think Russia would have it easy? It’s crazy.
Russia came very close to decapitating the government in Kyiv. Russian Paratroopers landed in the city. I’ve never seen an explanation of what went wrong. Thankfully their failure changed history and saved Ukraine.
Well, if not easy, easier.
One of the biggest miscalculations by Western military analysts - and I’m not just talking internet armchair “experts” like us dorks, but people that get paid to do this for a living - has been the inability of Russia to achieve a dominating air superiority. Russia’s air force is much larger and a fair bit more modern. It should have been the most glaring military imbalance of all. After all Ukraine is quite flat and very open. The major geographic impediments to land movement are mostly rivers and jets don’t give a shit about rivers. But to nearly everyone’s surprise the Russian air force that everyone thought would terrorize the battlefield and rain death on Ukrainian armor, hasn’t been that much of a factor. So far.
I think that confounded a lot of military projections.
Russian forces came literally within a couple of minutes and a few dozen defenders of capturing Zelenskyy. It is not difficult to imagine a slightly different beginning that produces a vastly different outcome.
I recently read and essay in (somewhere mainstream) that a reason that Russian troops have been abusing Ukrainians they capture in such hideous ways is that they fully expected Ukraine to welcome them, to be grateful to be back in the Russian fold again. They really truly did. Remember how the initial invading command imagined they’d be feted with champagne? The reasoning of the essay was that Russia feels completely betrayed by Ukraine, which is seen not just as territory to be conquered, but treasonous towards the Mother Country.
That’s one reason why they thought it would be so easy.
Fools! Putin remains a master strategist. A Genius.
-
Overburden Ukrainian supply system by instructing thousands of Russian soldiers to surrender and defect. Good luck feeding them all.
-
Replace more advanced western military supplies by forcing Ukrainian soldiers and farmers to recover hundreds of Soviet era tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, and artillery pieces. The time and expense to paint over the “Zs” alone will cripple their offensive advance. White paint doesn’t grow on trees.
-
Cleverly prevent HIMARS batteries from targeting ammunition storage sites by hiding them behind Ukrainian lines. It’s apparent that Ukrainian missile lack the 180 deg. launch and targeting capability shown by Russian equipment.
CHECKMATE!!!
I don’t think that would have made much of a difference in the long run. Zelensky would have become a martyr, likely energizing the defenders even more. They still would have gotten western aid, and even if they lost Kiev, there would have been massive resistance, more even than the US faced in Iraq, with supplies and fighters coming in from the west.