German Chancellor Scholz calls for faster progress toward ending Russia's war on Ukraine
Posted by SunderedValley@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 45 comments
GlobalGonad@reddit
The only way this war will end is either a nuclear holocaust or peace negotiations. Peace negotiations which include Ukraine gaining back the 4 eastern oblast are pretty slim. Ukraine will probably be broken up into little pieces I think Balkanization is a good term for it. The Poles Hungarians and Romanians will get their piece. The Russians will get theirs and there will be a small demilitarized centre in the middle.
SunderedValley@reddit (OP)
This isn't exactly popular on Reddit but people have yet to explain their alternative scenario.
There seems to be this weird undercurrent that effectively assumes that if you say that it was an invasion (well yeah) loudly enough the problem will just go away.
GlobalGonad@reddit
Oh the alternative scenario is that somehow Ukraine with enough weapons from Nato will push out Russia from their borderlands supported by China and BRICS. A ludicrous assertion.
Rindan@reddit
No, The alternative scenario is that the war grinds on with losses that can be sustained for years, as it is right now, until either the Ukrainian national government politically collapses, or the very large Russian empire politically collapses.
People seem to confuse Russia's size for its population. While Russia is a large Nation, and Ukraine is a smaller Nation, it's only about 1/3 smaller by population. That means that if Ukrainians like being ruled by Ukrainians more than being ruled by a tsar in Russia, they can literally out kill the Russians if they keep up 1 to 3 kill ratio, which is hardly impossible because Ukraine is on the defense. Ukraine can completely fuck up Russia if they choose to resist as hard as other nation states have in the past.
The real question for Russia is whether or not they are willing to put a ruinous amount of men and material into a meat grinder just to win a nation of people that fucking hate them. If they are, then perhaps they can "win" at the cost of a few million people and generations worth of wealth.
As it stands, Russia has lost more territory than it has gained literally every single year of the war since their high water mark, and they have definitely spent more men than Ukraine doing so.
The real question for Ukraine is whether or not they can secure weapons. If Ukraine can stay in supply through support from the West or their own domestic manufacturing, and it can maintain a kill ratio of 1 to 3 or better, that's winning. It's a slow, brutal sort of victory that would be a pyric victory, if the alternative was n't being subjugated into the Russian empire, and forever being damned to be poorer than a Russian, and subservient to whatever psychopath has murdered his way to the top of the Russian "political system".
Personally, I say that the West should do exactly what the French did for the Americans when the Americans were fighting their vastly bigger and stronger imperial overlords; give them weapons to defend themselves for as long as they want them. Let Ukraine lead the way. If they want to defend their home, give them weapons the same way that we would want weapons if our homes were being invaded. If they want to surrender, and try and help them get the best deal. Either way, the will of Ukraine should be respected. It's their lives on the line.
Current-Wealth-756@reddit
This seems to be a really common misunderstanding of Russia's objectives; that is, that they just want to take Ukrainian territory because they're covetous and innately aggressive.
And my understanding, Russia has made it extremely clear for decades that they perceive it as an existential threat to have NATO expanding eastward and encroaching on their borders.
Regardless of whether you think that justifies the invasion, this conflict, the one in Georgia, and the one in Crimea are all consistent with the theory that Russia's strategic goal is to maintain power parity with NATO which perceives as a hostile threat, and to create a buffer zone between the NATO bloc and their own territory.
This goes back even further, to the Cuban missile crisis, in which the US reacted towards Soviet militarization of Cuba exactly as the USSR reacted toward the stationing of of weapons in Turkey: it was perceived as an existential threat, which is something they could not countenance, and they reacted accordingly.
Finally, the idea that Ukraine can sustain this attritional war indefinitely, or that the West will never tire of providing them weapons and money is probably not the case. They're having a hard enough time recruiting/conscripting now, plus public will in other countries is fickle, leadership changes regularly, and for myriad other reasons this will not remain a static situation forever.
Probably the way this will end is the Russia will retain a bunch of the territory it took and the agreement, whenever it's reached, will include provisions that Ukraine does not join NATO. The question is how long it will take for everyone to accept that and how much more destruction will be wrought until then.
GlobalGonad@reddit
This just seems a contrived and overly optimistic view of the the conflict. The Russians will and can take the 4 oblatst militarily and then just hold while systematically destroying Nato assets in Ukraine. It's not like they are in this conflict alone and lot's of theirs supporters would love nothing more than to bury the west in Ukraine
TrumpsGrazedEar@reddit
Lmaooo
It is the Russia that will get balkanisef after this.
GetLostPpl@reddit
Apart from Crimea, for security reasons, there wasn’t any inclination towards land grab, even Crimea was to be discussed between two presidents. Also, nothing points to Russia being nazi/fascist. Nazism and fascism are illegal, due to that Russian nazis flocked to Ukraine lmao
TrumpsGrazedEar@reddit
Lol spread you bullshit elsewhere
GetLostPpl@reddit
Timothy Snyder as a voice of reason, I can’t hahahahah
TrumpsGrazedEar@reddit
Yeah sure....
GetLostPpl@reddit
Nobody’s reading that much disinformation
kirosayshowdy@reddit
either let Russia invade to its heart's content (good luck), give Ukraine weaponry and ammunition that aren't near obsolete so they can actually defend themselves (good luck), or a ceasefire (good luck)
AdmirableSelection81@reddit
The issue is Russia's decisive manpower advantage. Ukraine had a manpower disadvantage and also men who are simply deserting/fleeing the country.
The casuality exchange ratio is what matters.
Ben-A-Flick@reddit
To be clear I want Ukraine to be given every possible weapon to win this war and no restraints on use of said weapons, but if I had to come up with a solution to end it below is my idea.
My suggestion for ending the war would be to create a buffer zone that peacekeeping forces manage along the border. Ukraine would lose some land along the border there and crimea would stay with Russia but a buffer zone along the north side of the island would be in place also. No military installations on crimea. All children and POWs returned and Russia leaves the occupied areas. Ukraine commits to not joining NATO but gets security guarantees that it will intervene if Russia attacks Ukraine. I think this might be enough for pootin to save face and give him an off ramp.
As for Ukraine I think frozen Russian assets should be seized and used for rebuilding efforts combined with donations from around the world and money supplied by the world bank at incredibly low interest rates to help them rebuild.
FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_@reddit
In no world would Russia agree to these terms. Perhaps back in 22 when they retreated from Kheraon but not anymore. Putin does not need to save face. They are winning.... atleast in the eyes of Russia. They would never agree to giving up any captured territory, having their assets transferred to Ukraine and they would never agree to remove assets from Crimea.
They have upper hand.
Without NATO intervention, Ukraine will never be able to capture what it has lost. Maybe take back 10% of occupied territory but not more. Remember their counter offensive? Well Russia reversed all their gains.
Ukraine just doesn't have the manpower. That's a simple fact. Even if US transfers its entire arsenal to Ukraine to the last bullet, Ukraine still won't be able to move the frontline much.
SunderedValley@reddit (OP)
The key misstep was the public back and forth with Germany and France France on whether to land troops or not.
When two key players reverse course on that and admonish each other on something this big repeatedly it just doesn't project competence.
FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_@reddit
Those troops won't matter mic without proper nato commitment and troop deployment.
Even if both france and Germany deployed 20k each, 40 k won't do much. Also, it will a political suicide when thousands of bodybags start coming back home. Without NATO, its not a winnable war.
SunderedValley@reddit (OP)
They were IIRC calling for NATO troops. That's why it was such a problem. Revealed some major communications issues.
RajcaT@reddit
Making things worse. They've annexed more than they occupy. So they can't engage in any peace process until Putin conquers all of it. Which will likely take years more at the current pace.
I wouldn't say Russia has the upper hand. Because they still need to occupy, rebuild, and colonize the areas they've taken. This will take years, and there's going to always be oligarchs willing to fund resistance movements.
FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_@reddit
I think they will negotiate that out. Putin wants entire donbass. That ain't happening. Ukraine wants entire donbass. That ain't happening either.
I think putin just claimed the entirety of annexed area so they can bargaining what they captured. Like in any negotiations, you claim high so you can negotiate down to more realistic values.
VeryOGNameRB123@reddit
Russia accepted the referendum of donetsk, luhansk, kherson and zaporozhye.
Technically only of the areas occupied as of September 2022.
FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_@reddit
I don't think they are fixated on that and would budge. Referendum was their version of "I called it so it's mine"
TrizzyG@reddit
Really depends on how involved Russian society will want to be in the long term on the Ukraine project. So far even with all of the stimulation of the economy things aren't so great. Look at other occupations such as the Soviet occupation of Afgjanistan - it was a decade long sinkhole for money, manpower and material. When the active phase of this war ends, the insurgency phase will begin and all the while Russia will need to dump enormous resources into these depopulated and destroyed territories even as their own demographics are on the decline.
VeryOGNameRB123@reddit
Read the CIA report on the Soviet effort in Afghanistan. Literally just 3-4 Soviet armies, out of 1-2 dozens. Barely any impact on the economy.
The end of the war didn't come from personnel losses or it's economic impact.
The economy was doing bad for other reasons (brezhnev kleptocracy, corruption and georitocracy started 20 years before), the war wasn't popular, and so it was ended, while support for socialist Afghanistan continued until 1992, after which they still held out for 2.5 years.
BobbyB200kg@reddit
And the armies they used weren't even the 2nd echelon. They were like 3rd and 4th reserve armies.
TrizzyG@reddit
That's not a flex dude. 16k (officially) KIA just to leave in shame and defeat. Waste of human and material resources unquestionably.
TrizzyG@reddit
That's irrelevant to the point being made, although the unpopularity was indeed a factor. Not all geopolitical projects but that one was. The point is that this situation is another one that is draining the country of resources, people and money. The scale is considerably worse
notarackbehind@reddit
The war only exists to defend Russia’s military bases in Crimea.
00x0xx@reddit
Indeed.
The trigger was the Euro-maiden coup in 2014. Which was encouraged with much enthusiasm by this guy.
Regardless, the war has took a toll on both the western nations and Russia. Russia seems to be committed to fighting till the end, and the EU and US now want out before they suffer a greater strategic loss.
NATO's original strategic goal since 2008 was to push Russian influences out of Ukraine, and make Ukraine territory part of NATO. Although now they can still make Ukraine part of NATO, Ukraine controls significantly less strategic territory towards Russia.
I do wonder what comes next after the war ends, or will the war not end for the foreseeable future?
notarackbehind@reddit
They’re not gonna make Ukraine part of nato.
00x0xx@reddit
It's certainly a hot topic among the EU nations. But I think whatever remains of Ukraine will either be in NATO, or NATO adjacent.
notarackbehind@reddit
No part of Ukraine will remain before any part of it enters nato
Toldasaurasrex@reddit
Suffer a great strategic loss? They have Finland and Sweden in nato now…
rexus_mundi@reddit
Right, they have already failed strategically if keeping NATO away was the goal. Personally I think this war has far more to do with the rare earth minerals Ukraine has, mainly lithium. The NATO stuff is just a bonus/talking points.
00x0xx@reddit
THeir goal was keeping NATO out of the former Ukraine territories, now Russian occupied territory. As this was a critial line in their border defences.
Personally, I've been reading geopolitics since early 2000's, and remember when in the 2008 Bucharest summit, Russia said they will go to war if NATO tries and take Ukraine and Georgia. Those were their red lines, set then. I didn't actually expect to see war, but I'm quite content to now understand how the flow of geopolitic events tie into each other and into future events.
But you can believe what you want.
rexus_mundi@reddit
Ok, cool. So have a lot of people on this site. Russia has set red lines this entire war, every single one has been crossed so far. No nuclear war, no WW3. Russia is and always has been full of shit. Source; I grew up in communism during the 80's and have visited Russia fairly extensively. Also I've been "reading geopolitics" since the 90's.
00x0xx@reddit
No, they've only had one, that was set in 2008. Russia has not set any other red lines during this war.
Can't cross what doesn't exist.
Nobody besides the ignorant thought this was going to be a nuclear war. Everyone who understood what's going on knew that NATO will not have engage Russia over Ukraine.
What I, and most others who followed this assumed Russia wasn't going to war after their ultimatum in December 2019. We actually did thought Putin's threats 2 months prior to February 2020 wasn't going to begin a major war. At best, we assumed that it would have been another special force OP, to take some small plot of land in Ukraine.
I was wrong, Russia certainly did have more balls than I assumed, and actually went to war.
I really doubt it, if you didn't know about the 2008 NATO summit, or how important the black sea is to Russia.
The Russia-Ukraine issue and it's stragetic depth has been a common topic in geopolitics since Ukraine broke off, and Crimea came with it. Now we know how the solution for those issues are being played out.
rexus_mundi@reddit
You could have spent 2 seconds googling something instead of being so wrong. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_lines_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War You're out here writing a dissertation That doesn't say much of anything really. It's amazing how much of my knowledge base you were able to gleam from my four sentences.
00x0xx@reddit
Finland and Sweden was never going to stay neutral. They would have always support western efforts against Russia as much as they can.
So these 2 countries joining NATO was no major strategic loss to Russia, or gain to NATO, as their support was already assumed.
Toldasaurasrex@reddit
Diminish the loss and down play the 2 countries known for their neutrality. I can assume anything I want doesn’t mean it’s going to play out like I assume it will.
00x0xx@reddit
Finland might have been known for their neutrality, but Sweden is against Russia.
Both were only neutral against Russia because they were near Russia, and did not want to deal with Russian aggression. They are culturally, economically, and institutionally aligned with the west. They were never going to be neutral when war between Russia and the west breaks out.
Pklnt@reddit
It's like they're all throwing the hot potato of "This war won't end without forcing Ukraine & Russia at the negotiating table" without outright saying it.
empleadoEstatalBot@reddit
Maintainer | Creator | Source Code
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
AutoModerator@reddit
The link you have provided contains keywords for topics associated with an active conflict, and has automatically been flaired accordingly. If the flair was not updated, the link submitter MUST do so. Due to submissions regarding active conflicts generating more contrasting discussion, comments will only be available to users who have set a subreddit user flair, and must strictly comply with subreddit rules. Posters who change the assigned post flair without permission will be temporarily banned. Commenters who violate Reddiquette and civility rules will be summarily banned.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.