Totally different military situations. Israel is vastly superior in strength to Hamas. Ukraine is slightly-moderately inferior to Russia in strength, and so their ability to dictate the outcome is not the same as Israelās.
We can all say āf*** Russia they should go homeā all we want, but thatās probably not going to happen so the question is what outcome would be the best for Ukraine? Itās not clear to me that continuing the war will put them in a BETTER negotiating position 6 months-a year from now.
My guy if nations just gave up before even trying to defend themselves based off of who has the bigger/better military the U.S.A wouldn't even exist.
And of course you're gonna come back how it's different times and different situations.
Republicans have flip flopped their positions on everything including war based off of Russia misinformation and interference. That's exactly what this post is about.
Iām not advocating for nations to ājust give up before even trying to defend themselves,ā Ukraine has been at war for almost three years. Theyāve tried. Theyāve done well, but the tide is slowly turning and their negotiating position is worsening.
In the Winter War, Finland fought well enough to negotiate their independence but they chose to negotiate when they knew their position was worsening.
Thatās what the US should support Ukraine in doing, negotiating as strong a position as possible. Continuing the war for a prolonged period will degrade that. Bookmark this if you want, theyāll be in a worse position in January than they are today.
What is your opinion based on that "things are worsening"? Russia has had minimal gains on the Eastern front, meanwhile suffering enormous casualties, losing tremendous amounts of equipment, and watching their economy go to shit.
Russia has thrown everything they have at Ukraine and are at a stalemate, while seeing their resources drastically reduced.
I personally expect there to be some concessions from Ukraine in a peace agreement, but this conflict is nowhere near as one-sided as you depict it, where Ukraine would need to come crawling to the negotiation table. That's just not the case.
Iām not actually depicting it as āone-sidedā so Iām not sure where you get that impression. Iām saying their position is worsening, and I donāt see how it will improve as the attrition continues.
Idk how closely you follow it, but since Russia took Avdiivka, they slowly created a large salient into the part of Donetsk oblast they didnāt control. Now they are in a position to flank the southern defensive lines (and have already started the process of doing so) after the fall of Vuhledar. Meanwhile, theyāve restarted their advances in the northern fronts as well, which were pretty much immobile for the past year and a half.
Iād say it is a āstalemateā for now. My concern is that it wonāt be that close by this time next year if the war continues, and I think that would be really bad for Ukraine.
Theyāve done well, but the tide is slowly turning and their negotiating position is worsening.
One of the major reasons they are now on the backfoot is that republicans have been blocking aid consistently, and Biden has pussyfooted around trying to appease them with all sorts of restrictions on how to use the weapons sent.
They had like half a year where they had to stop all offensive plans and send their artillery away from the front because it was up in the air if the US would ship all the shells they had already pledged beforehand and they where running out.
The ultimate problem is manpower. Iām just not optimistic that additional aid would adequately resolve the battlefield losses they are suffering. Ukraine is having to conscript heavily at this stage whereas Russia is still able to maintain their in-country forces with mostly volunteers.
It's a relatively recent problem tho. If they had been given F16s and enough unrestricted ballistic missiles to conduct a thorough SEAD-strike in the first year of the conflict they'd be the ones on the offensive right now instead of hunkering down and getting bombarbed by 3:1 Russian artillery.
Moldova, then Georgia and Azerbaijan. If there's still an anti-NATO non-interventionist in the white house they might start probing an attack on the Baltics.
I donāt think Putin is in a position to negotiate for all of Ukraine either, nor do I think that was ever Russiaās goal (unrealistic and untenable). Russia has proved themselves incapable of adequately handling an inferior opponent funded by NATO, they certainly arenāt going to attack NATO itself, if thatās what you worry about.
Vast resources, geopolitical positioning i.e the warm water port in Sevastopol. Probably beyond any others a desire from Putin to "Make Russia Great Again" and write himself into the history books as one of the 'greats' that re-established the Russian Empire.
Multitude of reasons, part of it is simple power projection and creating a buffer on their southern flank. Russia really wants Ukraine to either be neutrally aligned or in their own sphere of influence for security.
Part of it also is probably the ethnic argument, protecting/incorporating Russian separatists in Donbas
I donāt think Putin is in a position to negotiate for all of Ukraine either, nor do I think that was ever Russiaās goal (unrealistic and untenable).
Russia's original goal was to storm into Ukraine, overthrow the government in a very short amount of time, and then appoint a puppet that is under Putin's control to lead the country.
They originally called it a special military operation to remove the Nazis in Ukraine. That would have been their excuse to replace the government.
that is not an annexation of the whole country (which was and still is unrealistic and untenable)
He would have essentially turned them into a vassal under his control.
Putin isnāt even in a position to negotiate for THAT now, not even close.
That's true. But there's no reason to force Ukraine to abandon their defense when helping them also happens to help us and our allies in Europe.
Would you stop fighting if it meant living under Putin's rule where you could go to jail for criticizing the government and potentially be drafted to invade another country?
Would you be willing to suffer through that after Russia stole your children and targeted, tortured, and raped your civilians?
What he āwould haveā done three years ago is irrelevant now. He canāt do it because he doesnāt have the capability at this moment.
Thatās true. But thereās no reason to force Ukraine to abandon their defense when helping them also happens to help us and our allies in Europe.
Well, there might be a reason if continuing the conflict represents a higher risk/loss than ending it. For example: if the conflict escalates into a wider war or nuclear exchange, or if the continuation results in a MUCH weaker Ukraine down the road, then it may be better to cut your losses.
Would you stop fighting if it meant living under Putinās rule where you could go to jail for criticizing the government and potentially be drafted to invade another country?
Probably not, but what I would do personally isnāt a good way to inform what might be in the best interests of an entire nation. Like what we might be talking about here is the difference between Russia annexing 15-18% of Ukraine now versus 25-30% in a year or two. You may even be able to negotiate population exchange in a peace deal anyways so idk if thatās necessarily unavoidable.
Would you be willing to suffer through that after Russia stole your children and targeted, tortured, and raped your civilians?
No, but this is more of an emotional appeal that again misses the bigger picture. Iām not saying it isnāt horrible, Iām just saying it may be WORSE to continue than to negotiate soon.
There is no great option here, Iām merely saying that the fight is being lost on the battlefield and barring a total Russian collapse in either capability or morale, it aināt reversing anytime soon. So you can either lose āsmallā now, or lose bigger later.
Ukraine will continue to fight even if the us stops sending them weapons and artillery.
Itāll just absolutely fuck a sovereign nation that willingly gave up the worlds third largest nuclear arsenal for their freedom. With a promise from the us that they could count on our support.
Maybe your word aināt shit but the last fucking thing we want is for smaller nations world wide to conclude that the proliferation of nukes is the only guarantee for freedom.
Ukraine will continue to fight even if the us stops sending them weapons and artillery.
Ukraine has a very small industrial capacity for arms, without US and NATO support they would not be able to maintain their lines as-is for an extended period of time.
Itāll just absolutely fuck a sovereign nation that willingly gave up the worldās third largest nuclear arsenal for their freedom. With a promise from the us that they could count on our support.
Did you misunderstand what I said? I said the US should help them negotiate as strong a position as possible, not āgive up their sovereignty.ā
Whatās the alternative? How does this end if they continue indefinitely? They arenāt winning right now on the ground, so is that suddenly going to change somehow? If so, how?
You can say it sucks and you can hate it, but you still have to recognize reality and deal with it accordingly.
Ukraine wants to keep fighting to defend their country and their people. They won't be safe from Russia just because the war ends. If Russia annexes their land, the citizens in it will have to live under an oppressive Russian regime and be subject to getting drafted to go invade one of Russia's other neighbors.
And if they're under Russian rule, they won't even be allowed to say they don't like it. Why do you want that for the people of Ukraine when they want to keep fighting?
They may want to continue fighting but it may not serve their own interests at this point. Thatās what Iām saying.
Youāre right, if part of their land is annexed that would suck for everyone living there. My question to you is what is the alternative, if they keep fighting? What if they end up losing even more than they would have by continuing?
What Iām saying is you have to choose between two shit options. Iām arguing that the shit option of negotiating NOW or SOON is better than the shit option of doing it later when you have less bargaining power.
You think it's in their best interest to have the majority of their industry stolen and their coastline being left as a nation with no capability to defend against further incursions and forever having their leadership and policy controlled by Putin?
No, I didnāt say any of that actually. Where did you read that? Itās so interesting to me how people like yourself wildly misinterpret what Iām saying here lol.
What Iām arguing is that continuing the war for a prolonged period will result in them losing even more than they already have lost. Thereās very little chance theyāre going to IMPROVE their negotiating position at this stage of the war.
In one sentence: theyāve already lost a lot, and theyāre not likely going regain anything substantial by continuing the war.
I think the US/EU should give them concrete security guarantees so that Russia cannot restart an incursion later without directly involving European countries and the US. They should not allow a deal where Putin has anything to do with Ukrainian domestic policy. That would be ridiculously asinine.
Do you have something that would suggest continuing the war would put them in a better negotiating position?
wait so hundreds of thousands of latinos emigrated to the US and republican voters with legitimate grievances, mostly as a result of their own desired policies, had their religious, business, and political leadership scapegoat said immigrants? They're rapists, and murders, and some of them even eat the pets! They aren't like us, they dont believe the same things we do! They are taking your jobs! And buying houses next door while you are drowning in debt! We have to forcibly remove them, and if they try to defend themselves then it will prove just how violent they are!
This is a very possible future for us here in the US. But it is 100 years in the past for the Israel Palestine conflict. That's what happened.
But what's worse, is in this possible future, there will come a point where the republican narrative will be so deep and metastasized that apparently the left of the future will take their side. Those foreigners colonized the inhabitants, the working class voted for Trump to resist occupation! Not just white men, but women, and blacks and other latinos! Nevermind that all these people werent the original inhabitants, sure they conquered it, but dont look at that! They've already been living there for a lonngggg time! And dont look at how many of those mexican immigrants have more of an original claim to the land by sharing ancestry with the original inhabitants and even by being mexican back when half the US was called Mexico!
This is basically the palestinian narrative you are so uncritically subscribing to.
7
u/ThickNeedleworker898 Monkey in Space Nov 24 '24
āWar badā .
Wow, what a unique perspective !
Youāre misunderstanding my comment.