Sadly, I don’t think the goal was ever to win. It is to make a Russian victory so costly that they will never think to do something like this again.
I’m reserving judgment to see what happens over the next six months during mud season when the Russians are bogged down and Ukraine is gaining greater air power
Like Lindsey Graham said, it’s all about the trillion in mineral rights and weakening Russia. Ukraine and Ukrainians are just the vessel and the servants who’ll deliver for ol Uncle Sam.
the big solution all this doomerism offers is just to lay down and give up, let a midget in moscow perform his ethnic cleansing country wide, rewrite history and have his way, no matter how bad they say things are it’s nothing compared to how bad it would be if bootlicking appeasement stooges get into power
My take him is wee. Need to properly arm Ukraine so they can clear Russians out and destroy their military assets. Fully agree with this.
[removed]
Nothing can be arguably real anymore.
The ONLY thing I’ve agreed with the the Biden Administration has been his support for Ukraine, however I do see very clearly it has been just enough, but not enough when we could very easily provide all they need to break Russia. Meanwhile they lose personnel, equipment and territory they cannot afford while they wait and fight.
I do trust The Atlantic, it’s one of the few left that I do trust.
The US has been absolutely terrible as an ally for Ukraine . The only hope we have is for Kamala to have a spine and actually try and help Ukraine to win. The slow aid coupled with restrictions is hurting Ukraine
[removed]
Articles like this hurt because while it is ultimately an opinion piece, it’s not exactly lacking in some data and trends. They’re not unsympathetic either – their pain stems from the idea that the US is half-assing something that cannot be half-assed. I unfortunately tend to agree.
I wish like hell we in the US could just say, “we’re going to win in Ukraine and this is how, and why, and when.” It would cost more up front, Americans would complain of the cost and effort more… and it would ultimately be cheaper AND better for Ukraine. The current strategy seeks to remain just below the level of public opinion and Russian escalation needed to “continue” aid…but that also means we inherently stay below the threshold needed to be decisive.
We’re in the dugout next to a guy fighting for his life. If we shoot for him, we’re in the war too. If we give him our rifle and grenades, we might wonder if we can do without. So we’re tossing him rifle rounds, one at a time, and hoping that he can make each shot count. If he doesn’t, every round he fires just calls more attention to him until he finally goes down.
We just need to start shooting for him, really.
[removed]
It is not a strategy, it is the lack of one since USA has a two party system where the 2 parties spend all their time trying to figure out how to fuck up a policy introduced by the other.
USA just does not have a political system that is willing to unite on any subject, There are plenty of people who want to take decisive action and plenty who want to do nothing, there’s hardly anyone that wants to do what this article describes, that description is just the result of the two sides clashing so it ends up with a small trickle of aid.
[removed]
NATO needs to send a fully equipped ground force of 150,000 troops into the Donbas to help Ukraine smash through the Russian lines and end this war next summer, or at least push it back across the Russian border. Anything less is not going to steer events effectively and is a waste of time and resources.
There is a lack if arms in Europa. Countries are not going to disarm themselves in order to help Ukraine. The defence industry in Europa is booming. Saying nothing has been done to help Ukraine is ridiculous. They warehouses are practical empty and new production is slow. Growing constantly but slowly.
Actually, what I’m implying is that it is cowardice to justify cutting your defense budget in half (if that’s actually what you’ve done) in the face of a conflict less than a thousand kilometers away from you, while everyone else continues to fund the Ukranian defense. You might call it smart economics. So was providing Russia with a near monopoly on gas that was supplied to Germany. Germany made a mess and now it has to fix it at the same time that it’s former economic partner is trying to make Ukraine a vassel state, devour the Black Sea ports, and push it’s authority across the Baltics. Economics or not, cowardice or not, at some point Germany is going to have to cut this check.
Not sure if OP is trustworthy really, seems to be shady, lots of doomerism in comments fueled further by trolls.
In all honesty, this will be common until the US election is done, you should prepare yourselves there’s gonna alot of this shit in the coming month.
23 comments
Sadly, I don’t think the goal was ever to win. It is to make a Russian victory so costly that they will never think to do something like this again.
I’m reserving judgment to see what happens over the next six months during mud season when the Russians are bogged down and Ukraine is gaining greater air power
[removed]
Here’s a [gift article](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/09/ukraine-losing-war/680078/?gift=LBltdhUhOIOktw5kupbp5y0PgYYdcBG9d4OjQvwl-EM&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share) version, which removes the soft paywall ❤️🇺🇦
[removed]
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Like Lindsey Graham said, it’s all about the trillion in mineral rights and weakening Russia. Ukraine and Ukrainians are just the vessel and the servants who’ll deliver for ol Uncle Sam.
the big solution all this doomerism offers is just to lay down and give up, let a midget in moscow perform his ethnic cleansing country wide, rewrite history and have his way, no matter how bad they say things are it’s nothing compared to how bad it would be if bootlicking appeasement stooges get into power
My take him is wee. Need to properly arm Ukraine so they can clear Russians out and destroy their military assets. Fully agree with this.
[removed]
Nothing can be arguably real anymore.
The ONLY thing I’ve agreed with the the Biden Administration has been his support for Ukraine, however I do see very clearly it has been just enough, but not enough when we could very easily provide all they need to break Russia. Meanwhile they lose personnel, equipment and territory they cannot afford while they wait and fight.
I do trust The Atlantic, it’s one of the few left that I do trust.
The US has been absolutely terrible as an ally for Ukraine . The only hope we have is for Kamala to have a spine and actually try and help Ukraine to win. The slow aid coupled with restrictions is hurting Ukraine
[removed]
Articles like this hurt because while it is ultimately an opinion piece, it’s not exactly lacking in some data and trends. They’re not unsympathetic either – their pain stems from the idea that the US is half-assing something that cannot be half-assed. I unfortunately tend to agree.
I wish like hell we in the US could just say, “we’re going to win in Ukraine and this is how, and why, and when.” It would cost more up front, Americans would complain of the cost and effort more… and it would ultimately be cheaper AND better for Ukraine. The current strategy seeks to remain just below the level of public opinion and Russian escalation needed to “continue” aid…but that also means we inherently stay below the threshold needed to be decisive.
We’re in the dugout next to a guy fighting for his life. If we shoot for him, we’re in the war too. If we give him our rifle and grenades, we might wonder if we can do without. So we’re tossing him rifle rounds, one at a time, and hoping that he can make each shot count. If he doesn’t, every round he fires just calls more attention to him until he finally goes down.
We just need to start shooting for him, really.
[removed]
It is not a strategy, it is the lack of one since USA has a two party system where the 2 parties spend all their time trying to figure out how to fuck up a policy introduced by the other.
USA just does not have a political system that is willing to unite on any subject, There are plenty of people who want to take decisive action and plenty who want to do nothing, there’s hardly anyone that wants to do what this article describes, that description is just the result of the two sides clashing so it ends up with a small trickle of aid.
[removed]
NATO needs to send a fully equipped ground force of 150,000 troops into the Donbas to help Ukraine smash through the Russian lines and end this war next summer, or at least push it back across the Russian border. Anything less is not going to steer events effectively and is a waste of time and resources.
There is a lack if arms in Europa. Countries are not going to disarm themselves in order to help Ukraine. The defence industry in Europa is booming. Saying nothing has been done to help Ukraine is ridiculous. They warehouses are practical empty and new production is slow. Growing constantly but slowly.
Actually, what I’m implying is that it is cowardice to justify cutting your defense budget in half (if that’s actually what you’ve done) in the face of a conflict less than a thousand kilometers away from you, while everyone else continues to fund the Ukranian defense. You might call it smart economics. So was providing Russia with a near monopoly on gas that was supplied to Germany. Germany made a mess and now it has to fix it at the same time that it’s former economic partner is trying to make Ukraine a vassel state, devour the Black Sea ports, and push it’s authority across the Baltics. Economics or not, cowardice or not, at some point Germany is going to have to cut this check.
Not sure if OP is trustworthy really, seems to be shady, lots of doomerism in comments fueled further by trolls.
In all honesty, this will be common until the US election is done, you should prepare yourselves there’s gonna alot of this shit in the coming month.