Who's winning the war in Ukraine?

Ganesh Venugopal@lemmy.ml to Asklemmy@lemmy.ml – 178 points –

The media won't give me great answers to this question and I think this I trust this community more, thus I want to know from you. Also, I have heard reports that Russia was winning the war, if that's true, did the west miscalculate the situation by allowing diplomacy to take a backseat and allowing Ukraine to a large plethora of military resources?

PS: I realize there are many casualties on both sides and I am not trying to downplay the suffering, but I am curious as to how it is going for Ukraine. Right now I am hearing ever louder calls of Russia winning, those have existed forever, but they seem to have grown louder now, so I was wondering what you thought about it. Also, I am somewhat concerned of allowing a dictatorship to just erase at it's convenience a free and democratic country.

201

You are viewing a single comment

The goal posts for both sides are very, very different.

The invading Russian forces have basically failed their first goal; to fully take over Ukraine. They can now claim a minor victory by stealing more territory from Ukraine than just Crimea.

Ukraine's goal was to stop Russia from wiping them off of the map. Things appear to have changed. Their new goal is to retake all land that Russia has stolen (including Crimea).

The war has largely been at a standstill for a while, and the only times that Ukraine has been able to make progress is when the word has given its attention and resources. Since "Israel vs Hamas" is the guerre-du-jour, Ukraine seems to be getting less of both.

So I may sound like a doomer, but it's not looking good for the good guys. They have a much harder victory condition, and the resources that they have relied so far may be drying up.

The invading Russian forces have basically failed their first goal; to fully take over Ukraine.

Has Russia ever stated that this was their goal?

Yes.

Can you provide proof for this?

Oh my god, we get it, you’re exhausting.

No, I’m not providing proof of this exhaustion. Do your own research.

I did try. I just didn't find anything that remotely comes close to supporting what you claimed.

Considering Russia denied their intent to invade as they were conducting it, I don't know that their statements should be considered truth regarding their plans and goals. But here's Westpoint's take on the matter:

Initially, the Russian regime may have regarded its invasion of Ukraine as a “regional conflict” with “important” military-political goals, and its classification as a “special military operation” may have been genuine. Indeed, it seems that the Kremlin’s ambitious political objective was to install a new, pro-Russian government in Kyiv by lightning action.

https://mwi.westpoint.edu/what-is-russias-theory-of-victory-in-ukraine.

You are unironically sharing a quote riddled with "may"s and "seem"s from United States Military Academy

And you are making a statement that seems to suggest absolute knowledge of a country's intentions are possible with a leader with a lack of credibility and long history of lying on the world stage.

Gee, this is fun. Or were you making some point? Were you expecting some report about their magic mind-reading device?

Were you expecting some report about their magic mind-reading device?

But this is what you have been doing all along. Nothing in reality suggests that total annexation of Ukraine was the goal. Not the words of anyone nor the manner in which Russia has executed the invasion yet here you are somehow reading minds to conjure grand motives and subjecting me to smug Reddittor-speak for the crime of asking you to back your frivolous claims. "Gee, this is fun." Jesus Christ.

Nothing in reality suggests that total annexation of Ukraine was the goal

Wait, I'm confused, were you looking for "is" or "suggests?" Because I sent you an article all about "suggests." And, follow-up question, did you think 'You are unironically sharing a quote riddled with "may"s and "seem"s from United States Military Academy' is not smug and was a genuinely civil question?

Since it seems you might not be great at this whole "communicating" thing, I'll be explicit: Yes, those questions were rhetorical. No, you've given me nothing to suggest I should care what your response is.

Gee, this is fun. Reality is not wishy washy statements from literal America military institutions. It just exposes you as someone who gobbles American state department nonsense wholesale uncritically. If you watched your Rick and Morty properly you would have known that it is not a smart thing to do. Reality in this case refers to what's happening on the ground in the war. Like Russia holding it's annexed territories rather trying to expand indiscriminately.

No, you’ve given me nothing to suggest I should care what your response is.

You are an idiot.

1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
2 more...