Russia has lost 20 percent of its fleet in a land war against a country with no navy….
The concept of a stalemate where one party is fighting for their existence is nothing more than propaganda, a Russian talking point for the fools that already fell for their bullshit.
Ukraine’s destruction of so much of the black Sea fleet is amazing and definitely something to be proud of.
I hate it, though, when the West uses it to say there’s not a stalemate–the front line of the land war remains relatively unchanged (to the degree that ukrainian leaders themselves use the term *stalemate*), despite the destruction of so many ships.
Instead, the ships (and moreover, denying access to Sevastopol) were more of a strategic victory– each victory costs Russia hundreds of millions of dollars and a piece of equipment they can’t replace for years… But that, with the exception of the *Moskva* didn’t really contribute much to the active land war–the submarine didn’t do much of anything, the Corvette really wasn’t in the firing rotation for it’s kinzhals, the landing ships used for cargo transport were easily replaced and of secondary importance to rail anyway (the recent destruction of the cargo of shaheds might be an exception, but even those don’t really contribute to the fighting on the front).
This isn’t a dig at Ukraine. Again, it’s an amazing thing they’ve done, it’s made the seas and skies safer, they should be proud of it and militaries around the world are already changing tactics because of their novel approach. Instead, it’s a dig at Western leaders who shouldn’t be using it to try to disprove the stalemate–and again, Ukraine itself has acknowledged it as such–and the destruction of the naval vessels hasn’t made much practical difference to the guys in the trenches. Insisting that there’s not a stalemate either comes across as mistaken or even belies a perception that the current support levels are effective, subconsciously implying that perhaps they don’t need to increase. Either hurts the cause.
Instead, Western leaders need to play up the fact that by destroying these vessels, Ukraine is actually doing something that benefits the world in the long run, even though it doesn’t necessarily help Ukraine’s immediate tactical needs, and is the perfect example of how cheap an investment in Western security it is to put some storm shadows in the hands of good stewards fighting a common enemy –and how important it is to give them more assets with which to actually overcome the stalemate.
20% ? Not enough!
I appreciate his attempt at putting a good spin on a shitty situation. Unfortunately, as of today, Putler’s Russia has increased, not lost, its control over Ukrainian land. Marinka is one example. Yeah, sure, there is nothing but ruins there. But Russian advance means more villages/towns ruined, and what does it matter what percent they lost if the fuckers keep advancing? And we are barely helping, it’s so frustrating.
Well it is a stalemate even if any side is losing more of a type of equipment or troops, it’s not a balanced war, Russia has more of everything. I just hope there swill be a breakthrough in 2024 and a renew EU-US aid.
6 comments
Russia has lost 20 percent of its fleet in a land war against a country with no navy….
The concept of a stalemate where one party is fighting for their existence is nothing more than propaganda, a Russian talking point for the fools that already fell for their bullshit.
Ukraine’s destruction of so much of the black Sea fleet is amazing and definitely something to be proud of.
I hate it, though, when the West uses it to say there’s not a stalemate–the front line of the land war remains relatively unchanged (to the degree that ukrainian leaders themselves use the term *stalemate*), despite the destruction of so many ships.
Instead, the ships (and moreover, denying access to Sevastopol) were more of a strategic victory– each victory costs Russia hundreds of millions of dollars and a piece of equipment they can’t replace for years… But that, with the exception of the *Moskva* didn’t really contribute much to the active land war–the submarine didn’t do much of anything, the Corvette really wasn’t in the firing rotation for it’s kinzhals, the landing ships used for cargo transport were easily replaced and of secondary importance to rail anyway (the recent destruction of the cargo of shaheds might be an exception, but even those don’t really contribute to the fighting on the front).
This isn’t a dig at Ukraine. Again, it’s an amazing thing they’ve done, it’s made the seas and skies safer, they should be proud of it and militaries around the world are already changing tactics because of their novel approach. Instead, it’s a dig at Western leaders who shouldn’t be using it to try to disprove the stalemate–and again, Ukraine itself has acknowledged it as such–and the destruction of the naval vessels hasn’t made much practical difference to the guys in the trenches. Insisting that there’s not a stalemate either comes across as mistaken or even belies a perception that the current support levels are effective, subconsciously implying that perhaps they don’t need to increase. Either hurts the cause.
Instead, Western leaders need to play up the fact that by destroying these vessels, Ukraine is actually doing something that benefits the world in the long run, even though it doesn’t necessarily help Ukraine’s immediate tactical needs, and is the perfect example of how cheap an investment in Western security it is to put some storm shadows in the hands of good stewards fighting a common enemy –and how important it is to give them more assets with which to actually overcome the stalemate.
20% ? Not enough!
I appreciate his attempt at putting a good spin on a shitty situation. Unfortunately, as of today, Putler’s Russia has increased, not lost, its control over Ukrainian land. Marinka is one example. Yeah, sure, there is nothing but ruins there. But Russian advance means more villages/towns ruined, and what does it matter what percent they lost if the fuckers keep advancing? And we are barely helping, it’s so frustrating.
Well it is a stalemate even if any side is losing more of a type of equipment or troops, it’s not a balanced war, Russia has more of everything. I just hope there swill be a breakthrough in 2024 and a renew EU-US aid.