How eastern? I think everything east of the Dnieper may be too ambitious. The big one is Kharkiv, yes or no.
Ukrainian War Developments
- Thread starter james smith esq
- Start date
- Status
Russia will use thermobaric bombs and Daisy cutters against military attempts to take Kherson...
Realistically, conquering Ukraine and/or replacing Zelensky with an unpopular pro Russian puppet cannot be done without greatly costing Russia. Even without having a pro Russian regime installed in Moscow, Russian can obtain a major permanent or very long term objective of its, which is neutrality of Ukraine. Many people dismiss Ukraine officially declaring neutrality as merely paper neutrality that Ukraine could at any time decide to breach even without provocation. Those making such an argument often forget that even if it does so, it will likely not have the backing of NATO and any future Russian retaliation and punitive action by Russia for undertaking such a provocation will be borne largely by itself, and there will not be any appetite among most major NATO countries for another confrontation with Russia caused by Ukraine's provocations.
Among the points that you commented on was Ukraine's willingness to actually accept neutrality without actually resolving the situation of the Donbass and Crimea. It says that would be a subject of other talks. If that is true, it would be effectively a capitulation of de facto acceptance of the loss of the Donbass Region and Crimea. That is a major climb down by Ukraine even though it falls short of actually formally conceding the loss of those two territories.
From "Where's Peng?" to "Where's Shoigu?"...now that he's appeared, he could be a stunt double/clone/actor with a mask...
Mariupol has been effectively lost to Russia... There will continue to be pockets here and there able to to conduct minor attacks and also ambush a few vehicles, but let's get real... Mariupol is finished for the Azov Regiments and their allies.
I think it should be everything east of the Dnieper (Kharkiv included). Mind you, that's the bare minimum. The costs that Russia has suffered are way too large for it to go away without at least E+S Ukraine.
Says who? You think that gaining all such territory, much of it greatly hostile and unfriendly to Russia intrinsically negates from such results as:
- neutrality of Ukraine
- taking of Donbass
- recognition of Crimea
?
A neutral Ukraine goes a long way towards alleviating Russia's security concerns.
Not buying that. The costs that Russia has suffered are simply too big to be traded with a piece of paper saying that Ukraine is neutral and taking Donbas
Unlike most western propaganda, I think there was some truth to the Shoigu rumours. He, like most Soviet era Russian generals are very anti-west. I'm sure many want to continue the war into eastern Europe, using nukes if necessary. Some of the decisions being made in this war are bound to be upsetting them to say the least.
His press conference was interesting. He's announced a "reduction in military activity" in Kiev. Whether that means a withdrawal or some sort of local ceasefire we'll wait and see. If they aren't prepared to anything in Kiev it probably makes sense to redeploy them in the east, although that would be seen as a "victory" for Ukraine.
Also no mobilisation of reserve forces now, they will be called in a few months as planned for rotations.
- Status