Russia hasn’t gained any ground in over a year. They have lost their airpower. The Black Sea Fleet is heavily damaged and a good chunk has been sunk. On top of that, they have lost 5,618 tanks, 10,482 Amored vehicles, 8,045 artillery systems, 919 MLRS, 605 Anti-air systems, 324 airplanes, and another 324 Helicopters, 6,116 UAVs, 1,571 cruse missiles destroyed, 22 ships, 1 submarine, 10,561 vehicles, 1156 special equipment systems, and 336,230 personnel.
Ukraine isn’t losing right now, not by a long shot.
Not to mention their collapsing demographics over the last few decades, made all the worse by the pandemic/failed invasion double whammy. Compounded with the fact that they cannot mount another such an offensive for the foreseeable future.
Even taking all Ukraine as a willing slave at this point would not lessen those defeats, and the AFU would only become a hardened insurgency if the government falls.
Russia has dashed itself to smithereens on Ukraine whether they win or not, and even that is not yet sure.
The article states that any gain in substantial ground for Russia would be deemed a victory.
If these are the victory conditions, then Russia is really close to victory. They just have to negotiate a cease fire and uphold it, until the borders become normality and a peace treaty is signed with them.
It is really just a definition of what it means to win and loose.
That would be like if a football game with a 60 point lead changed the rules mid-game to say that the victory conditions for the team losing by 60 points is now just gaining a single yard.
That’s war. You have a victory target and try to achieve that. We do not know the victory target of Russia (we only know the propaganda they are spreading publicly).
The victory target may also change over time with what is realistically achievable.
So it is difficult to speak of winning or loosing without that information.
In a sports game, the teams agreed on the terms before the game started.
Yeah, but Russia is in an objectively worse geopolitical position than before the war. Before the war, Ukraine was a staunch Russian ally, and SW/FI weren’t NATO members. Also, they had ~5000 more tanks and a couple hundred thousand more servicemen. Also, CSTO was a thing. Also, Kazakhstan. Also, Wagner didn’t attempt a coup showing how weak Russian leadership is. Also, the Black Sea Fleet had a flagship floating on the Black Sea.
It’s as if the US went to war with the UK, broke apart NATO, lost a couple carrier groups, and said “we’ve got Scotland so we’re totally winning”.
Russia hasn’t gained any ground in over a year. They have lost their airpower. The Black Sea Fleet is heavily damaged and a good chunk has been sunk. On top of that, they have lost 5,618 tanks, 10,482 Amored vehicles, 8,045 artillery systems, 919 MLRS, 605 Anti-air systems, 324 airplanes, and another 324 Helicopters, 6,116 UAVs, 1,571 cruse missiles destroyed, 22 ships, 1 submarine, 10,561 vehicles, 1156 special equipment systems, and 336,230 personnel.
Ukraine isn’t losing right now, not by a long shot.
Not to mention their collapsing demographics over the last few decades, made all the worse by the pandemic/failed invasion double whammy. Compounded with the fact that they cannot mount another such an offensive for the foreseeable future.
Even taking all Ukraine as a willing slave at this point would not lessen those defeats, and the AFU would only become a hardened insurgency if the government falls.
Russia has dashed itself to smithereens on Ukraine whether they win or not, and even that is not yet sure.
The article states that any gain in substantial ground for Russia would be deemed a victory.
If these are the victory conditions, then Russia is really close to victory. They just have to negotiate a cease fire and uphold it, until the borders become normality and a peace treaty is signed with them.
It is really just a definition of what it means to win and loose.
That would be like if a football game with a 60 point lead changed the rules mid-game to say that the victory conditions for the team losing by 60 points is now just gaining a single yard.
That’s war. You have a victory target and try to achieve that. We do not know the victory target of Russia (we only know the propaganda they are spreading publicly).
The victory target may also change over time with what is realistically achievable.
So it is difficult to speak of winning or loosing without that information.
In a sports game, the teams agreed on the terms before the game started.
Yeah, but Russia is in an objectively worse geopolitical position than before the war. Before the war, Ukraine was a staunch Russian ally, and SW/FI weren’t NATO members. Also, they had ~5000 more tanks and a couple hundred thousand more servicemen. Also, CSTO was a thing. Also, Kazakhstan. Also, Wagner didn’t attempt a coup showing how weak Russian leadership is. Also, the Black Sea Fleet had a flagship floating on the Black Sea.
It’s as if the US went to war with the UK, broke apart NATO, lost a couple carrier groups, and said “we’ve got Scotland so we’re totally winning”.
In that case, we’ll have to change the term from Pyrrhic Victory to Putic Victory.
If your opponent is beating you that badly, you take a W where you can.
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/a39e1f1d-0296-4a65-8a79-a5726282aabd