Russia lacks 'numbers for strategic breakthrough' in Ukraine: NATO

MicroWave@lemmy.world to World News@lemmy.world – 280 points –
Russia denies plans to capture Kharkiv
euronews.com

Moscow says it will keep pushing its offensive in Ukraine, though NATO doubts Russia has the resources to make a significant breakthrough.

NATO’s top military officer has said Russia’s armed forces are incapable of any major advance.

“The Russians don’t have the numbers necessary to do a strategic breakthrough,” NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe Christopher Cavoli told reporters on Thursday.

“More to the point, they don’t have the skill and the capability to do it; to operate at the scale necessary to exploit any breakthrough to strategic advantage,” the general said.

76

You are viewing a single comment

I really hope this is true. The delay in US funding gave a huge advantage to Russia

It was a straight-up Republican gift to Vladimir Putin. Fuck these cowards...

I find that Americans that usually say this kind of thing are staunch Sanders supporters. The same Sanders that continuously blocked the bill with quite a few other non-Republicans in that cohort.

We watch such bills abroad too because they're international. There's no sides and parties to it, just an example of how dumb American politics is as a whole. Don't worry, I'm sure the Republicans are dumbest if that makes you feel better. But it is important to scratch a bit deeper below social media's handpicked articles and comments, lest you end up becoming the same as those you oppose without realising it.

Republicans blocked it. There's no "both sides" to this.

There's slightly more to it than that in politics and voting, but sure. Let's go with it being a single party's decision over everything else if that suits the rhetoric everyone wants to hear. Life's easy focusing on just one of many things anyway.

Someone doesn't understand symbolic votes. Lol

Bernie has always been on the right side, morally of pretty much every issue. Your implication otherwise here is simply laughable.

It wasn't symbolic. He was (arg. rightfully) opposed to other parts in the propositions. This is laughable? What is the implication? You can read it directly on his site as well as those of other democrats and independents who ultimately contributed towards the bills not passing. These are the sources, so I doubt they're implying anything.

If I'm personally implying anything, it is that many Americans seem to not do the above. When they make a statement, it's based on a single component of a much larger picture, as though that single component is the entire picture. However, looking up information rather than being fed information socially would resolve this. Unfortunately, pekple tend to fall for argumentum ad populum quite easily. Additionally, pride rejects the claim that oneself has fallen to fallacy.

Sanders opposed aid to Israel. Republicans are the sellouts sucking off Putin.

Yeah, I know. I literally just mentioned the source and the broad reasonings, of which one was that... So, obviously that detail isn't the point.

6 more...