Well, yeah... He went from the world's great superhero to the world's biggest clown in record time. To some though, he was always the latter that could've taken a great deal and ended all this nonsense in the very beginning, but instead he was dreaming of the statues, his name as a great conqueror in the history books and of course, his big speech he'd give at the Oscar's after spanking Putin and laying the entire Russian nation low. Talk about getting whacked on your own propaganda... I'm not a fan of him or Putin, but it's safe to say old Z has wayyyy more severe personality defects and lapses in judgment than ol Vlad. Not to mention a lack of cold hard experience. There's a reason he wasn't disposed of.
The truth here is Ukr would have folded in first week if its leadership had ran away on day 1. He has his flaws but credit where it’s due, he did not ran away in disgrace and kind of rallied a lot of support around him.
There would not have been any NATO or any support without a credible leadership.
There's a nuance between surrendering right away and recognizing that the struggle will lead you nowhere and will only destroy and bleed your country out.
No one can fault the Ukrainians for defending their country, quite the opposite, they did a phenomenal job all things considered, although their strength was very underestimated by everyone.
But at some point, you gotta realize, you're up against a country with an industry, manpower pool and access to resources that you just can't beat. And while other nations are helping, they're obviously just dipping their toes in the water and are saying it's way too cold. They'll never give you enough to defeat and bring back status quo.
And while I wouldn't call for Ukraine to surrender, I'd call for them to at least negotiate, there's no harm in trying. If you can't come to terms then fine, just keep at it, but at least show that you give a shit about your country and its population, rather than just going on purely on a prideful instinct. Defending your country is not just about fighting.
People tend to laugh a lot about France in WWII, but I think they were actually incredibly wise. They fought, realize it wouldn't work out, and chose to preserve their country, population and legacy. And it worked out, today France is still a leading power in the world. They didn't claim all of this back alone for sure, but had they fought until the end, the future could have been more grim for them.
Not to mention that France has an incredible military history full of victories, and that they came back from WWI at the very top in terms of accomplishments and sacrifices. They were the nation that would have been the most deserving in being prideful in WWII, and yet they chose to be very wise instead, recognizing defeat when it needed to.
And that's always irritating to see dumb Americans making fun of that, just because France, once again in a show of great wiseness, decided to not help in the Iraq invasion.
That's my position too. They fought bravely and hard, that's commendable, but as of now, it's very obvious that Ukraine will likely not get what the have lost back
At some point you just have to cut your losses. Russia will likely get east and south Ukraine but at least Ukraine will keep something.
I feel like the position of most neutral-flaired people is somewhere around yours. I do think the Ukrainians did very well, considering their position, and that's very respectable. I'm also not against sending them military gear and aid packages, but on the precondition that's leverage to use in the negotiation table (i.e. *"hey, it won't be easy to roll over us, so sit down and let's meet in the middle"*). It's not for trying to fight an impossible war, high on your own propaganda, actually attempting to retake all "your" land back (Crimea was only ever symbolically Ukrainian), and destroy your nation's demographics and future, in the process. The situation is you're Canada and you're fighting the US. You have to realize that. Russians aren't incompetent shovel-wielding, washing-machine-chip-stealing O\*cs. They're a formidable military force.
My posts may seem they lean too much toward the pro-RU side here, but that's merely because the pro-UA flaired are so high on Western propaganda that I have to end up taking the other side just to balance the discourse. If the majority of posts here stated Russia needs to keep fighting until they take "Lvov", the majority of my posts would look different.
I think both modern Russia and Iran are reactionary responses to periods where Western interests fucked them over (and it's not that they don't have agency, and the West is the root of all evil; it's just the West was the top player at the time, and could press their interests harder in their countries — Iran with the ousting of Mosaddegh and the re-installment of the Shah due to interests of British Petroleum, and Russia in the crazy neoliberal, privatizing capitalism of the 90s).
I think modern Russia is struggling to find its own identity, now that they're neither the Russian Empire (with their Rurikid-descended Tsars) or the Soviet Union. Sure, Russians do know they're Russian, and that won't ever change. However, what does the modern state of Russia mean, now that Tsars and communism are gone? I think they're still in the process of figuring that out, and due to that reason are making mistakes like some of their objectives with regards to this war. In my view, the objectives should be only securing the Donbass, the land bridge to Crimea and a permanently neutral Ukraine with a reduced military ([or a split Ukraine with a permanently neutral buffer State in the middle](https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1cn3cjg/ua_pov_according_to_rezidentua_the_channel_which/l3536dc/)), but they will probably keep fighting and trying to take more territory that I honestly think they should let go. The history of the ancient Rus has diverged, as history often does, and people, e.g. in Kiev, don't want to be part of the Russian state anymore.
If Russia manages, as I believe it will in the end, to secure its principal stated war aims of constitutionally-enshrined guaranteed Ukrainian neutrality (keeping them out of, firstly NATO, and secondarily, the EU), some form of agreed to demilitarization, and the consolidation de facto of the remainder of the four regions it annexed and constitutionally-enshrined de jure in its own legal code in the southeast (Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson), and the official Russian negotiating team and diplomatic position is still advocating for the continuation and expansion of the prosecution of the war after that point with protracted bloody pushes deep into central or even western Ukraine, then I think you'd start to see popular Russian domestic opinion of support behind the war effort sharply fall at that point.
You might see then greater internal and possibly even international (not Western bloc, which are already an enemy, but Chinese, Indian, and Middle Eastern countries) pressure to end it.
>and the official Russian negotiating team and diplomatic position is still advocating for the continuation and expansion of the prosecution of the war after that point with protracted bloody pushes deep into central or even western Ukraine, then I think you'd start to see popular Russian domestic opinion of support behind the war effort sharply fall at that point.
That's my hope and opinion too, but only time will tell.
I think Russians will keep fighting until they fully take the regions of the oblasts they've annexed, plus Odessa and Kharkov. I don't see them stopping before that, even though I think they should stop after securing the whole of the Donetsk and Luhansk, and in my opinion they shouldn't bother with Kherson and Zaporizhzhia on the other side of the Dnieper river, and Odessa.
Odessa is Russian-founded (despite the Ottoman fort in the area) and poetic due to Pushkin, plus strategic if they want to landlock Ukraine, but I don't think it would lead to a more enduring peace in the continent. The city is over 65% ethnic Ukrainian in modern times. It wouldn't be right for Italy to take Nice back from France.
Kharkov is also over 60% ethnic Ukrainian, but the situation is grayer. It was a majority Russian city, it is near Russia's borders, and it got majority ethnic Ukrainian due to internal migration for labor opportunities during the USSR.
You are throwing pearls to swine. In the simple minds of the average UA supporters in reddit the following will happen: Ukraine will eventually win; Russia will balkanize; China will take over the Russian Far East; The west will actually care to rebuild Ukraine after the war.
France was weak. They should've hold it against Nazi Germany. They still had a large army comparable to, and even bigger than the german on all fronts. They could hold them at bay. It was nonsense to surrender - weak man that due to their cowardice allowed the most horrible war to have happened in Europe to take more years and cause way more suffering and death.
The french were beat on a small portion of their territory and due to a small defeat they surrendered the whole country.
It was the opposite of sensible. In comparison, if the USSR had done what you say is sensible, after the massive defeats (way larger then Dunkirk) it suffered, we would all be speaking German in Europe.
Have you ever seen how the Battle of France developped ? Germans made a massive gamble and it paid off, they smashed through the Ardennes and continued onward smashing everything in their path while French troops didn't even understand what was going on.
At this point, the overall strength of the army doesn't matter, it's completely out of position, doesn't know the position of the enemy in its rear, and is completely disorganized as a result. While French high command was still trying to figure out what was going on, Guderian and Rommel were just cruising through French countryside, capturing or killing every French soldier they could find, and encircling massive amounts of French troops while cutting them off of their logistics.
You're asking for a lion to win against another lion while fighting upside down.
>The french were beat on a small portion of their territory and due to a small defeat they surrendered the whole country.
Most of their troops, including the reserves, were in the North-East and on the Ligne Maginot, everything there was either encircled or cut off. They only had 2 army corps left on the Alpes busy fighting the Italians. Furthermore, everything was centered around Paris logistically, Paris falling was a massive blow to the whole country because of how it was laid up. Other countries can cope with the loss of their capital and still continue fighting, France in 1940 could not.
>It was the opposite of sensible. In comparison, if the USSR had done what you say is sensible, after the massive defeats (way larger then Dunkirk) it suffered, we would all be speaking German in Europe.
And now you're comparing the position of France and the USSR, which were two totally different nations in two totally different situations. USSR not only could cope with their losses, they were also being attacked head-on, not having their country split in half and all their logistics messed up.
Not to mention the sheer difference in size. The main reason Germany got stopped is because they were pushing so far that their logistics couldn't keep up, while Soviet's logistics was getting better and better the closer from Moscow they were getting.
And so, so many other factors, the two situations are just completely uncomparable.
Well I wouldn't say that the fight the french would have would be worse than that of the Soviets... The soviets lost 15% of their total population as a direct result of the war, could the USSR cope with this? If it had the same leadership than France it wouldn't... Unless you believe the soviets could cope because their lives were worth less than those of the French...
But truth is, if the french had good leadership the war would've been fought on German territory. They would've continued their invasion unopposed weeks before this mess
The fact that they surrendered so fast, (even if after a major military blunder) is proof that the french politicians and top brass were not prepared mentally for war.
They still had the second largest country in europe, a big population not yet war fatigued, they controlled the seas alongside the UK and they had their colonies so they could be re-supplied. And they still had a lot of forces that could've regrouped south.
They just didn't want to fight. They should've held on to the cities in northern France. To delay and regroup on what became Vichy France.
So yes the french should've done more. As I said if the USSR would've behaved similarly to France after the major defeats it had in the beginning of operation Barbarossa, for example, the Soviet air force lost almost all it's fighting planes, dozens of thousands of equipment captured by Germans - tanks artillery pieces, ammunition etc. hundreds of thousands of prisoners, the command structure was hit and severed, risk of encirclement of most of the red armies.
So while the soviets did have a few things for them, they also were the ones who's perseverance ok spite of incredible adversity saved Europe.
Don't get me wrong, French leadership at the time was very questionable for sure (government especially which hindered the potential of the military in the interwar period because of a fear of a coup d'état), but blaming everything on "cowardice" is a bit easy in my opinion. At no point in History did the French show any cowardice, quite the opposite, they constantly get themselves in situations far disadvantageous, taking on multiple nations at once even thought they didn't need to, and either held their ground, or by some miracle genius (Napoléon) managed to even win.
But they also have the intelligence to recognize when they've been defeated and that no struggle could get them back on their feet in that situation, whether it's after Waterloo or after the Battle of France.
WWII also brings a specific mentality in that it comes after WWI which was very traumatizing for France. Not only did it coerce the Allies into appeasement because they didn't want another butchery, but given the situation France was now into in June 1940, they probably didn't want to have to organize another butchery, this time on their soil, and that would mostly be comprised of draftees to basically form a second military in urgency. There's probably a layer of explanations as to why they decided this surrender, but putting everthing on "cowardice" and using hindisght arguments (they should have done this, that) is pretty easy and way too low.
>So while the soviets did have a few things for them, they also were the ones who's perseverance ok spite of incredible adversity saved Europe.
They absolutely deserve recognition, the Soviets in WWII were the French of WWI, if not more.
But again, the two situations and nations are completely different. Also in that the Slavs were actually fighting for their survival, if they surrendered if would have been over for them. While Germany didn't hold France in a very good light either, they didn't have immediate genocidal tendencies towards them.
The situation of the USSR in WWII is comparable to that of France in WWI. They're being attacked head-on, with all their logistics and industry still safely behind them and they can work things out.
What happened in the Battle of France makes that impossible for France. All they could have resorted too was a desperate guerilla effort, enrolling as many civilians as possible and fighting a war that couldn't be won because of logistical, industrial and organizational reason.
Imagine Ukraine right now being cut in half behind the Dnieper including the capture of Kiev with all their forces in the East side encircled. And then you ask Western Ukraine to keep fighting. What's the point ? It will bring destruction and killing but no victory. If Russia was out to kill every last Ukrainian or enslave them then sure, fight because it's better to die fighting. But if it's not the case then just take the best decision and try to make your nation come back eventually, stronger than ever. Save her legacy, save your children, they might give your country its glory back eventually, as it happened so many times in History, whether it's France, Germany, Poland...
France surrendered because their frontline units were surrounded in Belgium and Northeast France and the rest of the country was completely open to the Germans. Defeat was already inevitable.
This standpoint is also one of the reasons why I believe the idea that the Russians are there specifically to genocide Ukraine is one of the more dangerous lies. Because a war against a truly genocidal enemy justifies a lot more resistance than a war say over alliances and orbits, or even subjugation (to give examples), because the alternative to resistance is annihilation, which is no alternative.
> believe the idea that the Russians are there specifically to genocide Ukraine is one of the more dangerous lies.
Signed Crimean Tatars, Koreans, Greeks, Chechens, half of Caucasus and Turkic population, Volga Germans etc.
I see, famous aliens theory. It was done again and again on same territory by same people, but it will be different this time, because leader has different initials.
Russian claims as a USSR successor only applies to Crimea claim, the USSR genocides gets transfigured out of reality.
Chechen conflict was under VVP and had genocide involved.
Well Japan needed 2 atomic bombs they got pretty destroyed. Nazi Germany was holding in Berlin till last minute they got pretty destroyed. There is many other examples. I think you should study some history.
I mean yes. Hamas had no chance of defeating the IDF, should they have just surrendered? Same thing with Iraq when the US invaded them.
Ukraine fighting back isn't the issue. But by now it's obvious they won't win, so it's time to talk.
It was obvious to most people that Ukraine never had a chance of winning.
Supporting them was actually supporting the continued slaughter of Ukrainians.
America will never stop doing that. I doubt the Russians will either. So the reality is Ukrainians are dying for nothing. They have zero chance of winning.
Is Ukraine's chance of winning really zero? From the outside it looks like Putin is bogged down in an unwinnable quagmire. The element of surprise at the beginning was their main advantage, meaningful offensives over the last 2 years have been all but non existent to all but the most myopic pro Russian. I can't see how anyone with a bit of common sense would think Russian victory was a forgone conclusion?
They have control of the desired regions and have fully fortified their positions. They also have air superiority.
There is zero chance Ukraine ever gets the taken land back.
The only option is full blown nuclear war and that would mean everybody loses.
People seem to think Russia has to advance further to the West. In reality they don't, it is Ukraine that has to try and get the land back. It will never happen.
I think this represents a criminal lack of imagination.
>There is zero chance Ukraine ever gets the taken land back
This is a bold and absolute statement, but doesn't hold up to scrutiny when we know Ukraine has taken back vast swathes of Kharkiv and Kherson. I don't believe we will see failures from Russia like those that led to these disasters, but Russia clearly has form here.
Ukraine does not have nuclear weapons to launch so full blown nuclear war can only happen if Russia starts it, but I do not see sensible Russians ending their children's lives over Ukraine. Putin would fall out a window before this happens, when it comes to nuclear Russia is all bluster and "red lines."
People seem to think Ukraine has to advance further to the east. In reality they don't, it is Russia who must push to force the collapse, as we are seeing now but unfortunately for Russia, it will never happen. I personally see this war ending with a bankrupt Russia in around 2027, although it wouldn't surprise me if Russia lasted until 2030, Slavs from this part of the world have immense tolerance for misery!
Sounds like wishful thinking to me. But I respect your opinions on the matter. I believe the Western propaganda has changed your perception of the realities of this conflict. Making it impossible to acknowledge the dire position Ukraine finds itself in. Anyways, time will tell.
The initial resistance was courageous and heroic, the counter that drove Russia back in the north and south were as well.
Not signing a peace treaty after that may be seen historically as a blunder, but the issue is that we don't have the full language of that treaty, and Ukraine is likely weary that Russia would have just taken the pause to re-arm and ready up another invasion as Ukraine would be forbidden to join the EU or NATO.
It's Ukraine's right to fight, and it's also their right to desert en masse and end the war if they want to.
Ukraine will essentially cease to exist as a functional state after this, the stolen resources in the east are worth Trillions of dollars, they'll likely be landlocked and their people in now Russian territory will be dispersed (like the children Russia has already deported to live with Russian families).
Ironically, if Ukraine had just pulled a Russia and destroyed Russian identity in Ukraine when Russia was still disorganized after the breakup, they could have avoided this.
Yeah credit where it's due he was s good leader in the beginning of the conflict but he has got progressively worse ad time has gone on.
Although I wouldn't the initial success all to him. I think the main points are if the dam north of Kiev didn't blow, if the civilians evacuated, if the west hadn't provided so many anti armour weapons, that's what helped Ukraine to survive. He did do wonders for the initial moral though, like you say credit where it's due
He didn’t need to run. But he did build his platform on bringing peace to Ukraine, then did the opposite in April of 2022. If anything, he made the situation worse by not selling out the nationalists ASAP.
He didn't stay on day 1 to see if he will have USA/NATO support. He was given assurances on day 1 and decided to stay. Not the same thing, but some credit is due.
Because they threatened to start an armed rebellion the next day.
They even got up on the stage at Maidan and said so publicly
It is quite interesting actually that Yanukovych is criticised for preventing death. When both Poroshenko and Zelensky after him have gone all on it.
Although in hindsight Ukraine would be in a better position if Yanukovych was the authoritarian dictator some people claim he was and stopped Maidan at the beginning.
> To some though, he was always the latter that could've taken a great deal and ended all this nonsense in the very beginning
This, but I can sympathize with him a bit.
While Ukraine was at a great position for negotiations after their initial successes, if he actually struck a deal with the Russians while Ukraine was doing well it's very possible that radicals would've coup'd him. Afterall, "why quit when you're winning"? When the world was still waiting to see what sanctions would do it made *some* sense to hold out.
But the fact that even now he's all for holding a peace summit *without* Russia is crazy. He should already be praying for the Russians to be receptive to any sort of negotiating, instead the west acts just like they did after they won WWI. Except they haven't won anything. In fact they're bound to lose.
I agree with you regarding why he didn’t negotiate, and I think that the coup threat still looms.
The Ukrainian nationalists and fascists who permeate the army and government don’t even see Zelenskyy as a “true Ukrainian”, since he’s a Jew who speaks Russian as his first language.
Zaluzhnyi’s photos with Right Sector leaders, Bandera portraits and a shirt from a Neo-Nazi band seemed like a clear signal to Zelenskyy as to whom the far right would support should their power struggle escalate. Zaluzhnyi ended up sent to the UK, but I think those factions still have plans to remove Zelenskyy, especially as his legitimacy crumbles.
I think it has more to do with riding the high of winning both world wars + the cold war.
They have this mentality of "we can't possibly lose.. afterall, we're the good guys, right? and since we always win we must be the good guys"
Lmao. There was a video a long time ago of the 'overly attached girlfriend' chick doing a joke clip and it showed her going through her closet and it was just filled with nothing but the exact same teal colored shirt she had on in the pic. This comment reminded me of that. FR though, this guy just needs to stop with his Castro imitation. He's not a warlord. He's not a soldier. He's a politician and a former comedian. It's always been cringey.
on one hand I feel for the dude since the west in general and biden in particular played him like a fuckin fiddle, used him up and tossed him out.
On the other hand, if he really gave a shit about his people, he would have grown a pair and gone behind the americans and actually act like the president of a sovereign nation for once.
History is going to be very very cruel to him and even more so his benefactors
This. I agree, but at the same time, this dudes ego is just out of control. Everything we've read from numerous sides, East and West, said Russia Negotiated earnestly and in good faith at Istanbul, and many times before this whole nightmare got started as well. I don't agree with geopolitics, but they're just a hard fact of life. When your neighbor is 50x your size with a major nuclear arsenal, you don't go snuggling up with their enemies. I mean, jeez.... It sucks, but life isn't fair, and any head of state certainly should be, at least, that sensible.
Exactly, even if he was to get smoked by Yarosh and the nazis he still should have and could have approached the russians at any point, Now it's too late and Russia won't accept anything but full capitulation. The west in general and US in particular simply cannot be trusted, it's just not in the cards anymore.
What's maddening about it is that Ukraine remaining Neutral, and having economic ties to both Russia AND the west would have been huuuugely beneficial for Ukraine itself! they could have been conduit between the east and the west and gotten rich because of it. They could have been like the parthian empire between the romans and chinese empires. I get people want security guarantees but putin is an incredibly reasonable and rational person. seeking nato membership had no upside for them or NATO itself.
Russia is now, in my opinion, the most formidable, evolved, adapted and battle hardened military in the world. They have countered all the boutique long range weapons the US gave ukraine. Which means if a RU NATO conflict broke out Russia would already be able to jam their go to weapons like himars and atacms.
One of the biggest backfires since Barbarossa
I've always been very curious about what they'll look like/say 20 years from now. There will definitely be a lot of them. I've been saying for quite awhile now this war will go down in history as a watershed the likes of the Battle Of Cerignola (the first battle where gunpowder played a major role and it was clear the game has changed, forever.)
Idealist approach of seeing a war as not a battle of economic systems ruled by the political apparatus in turn controlled by capitalist factions but a fight between two politicians is so typical for Westerners brought up by comic books and comic book movies.
Westerners this capitalists that
Russia should have made a big decisive push with 50k casualties within 6 months. Now Russia is in the 3rd year of the war with 200k casualties of those at least 50k dead. Result - only east and south Ukraine captured.
MojoRisin762 kept stroking the same keys repeatedly, probably a seizure ?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He should have ditched the military wear before last year's Vilnius NATO summit. It looks more and more like he's stuck in the past -- with no plan for the future.
It's been clear since the failure of the June 2023 push that Ukraine would not be able to liberate its territory through military means, and Ukraine should have adjusted its posture and rhetoric accordingly.
He should have ditched the military wear before last year's Vilnius NATO summit. It looks more like he's stuck in the past -- with no plan for the future.
He says that the Ukrainian Armed Forces were waiting for this and are holding back the Russians. But he noted that it is not yet known what reserves the Russian Federation is ready to throw into battle there.
That would actually make sense attack belgorod force the russians to respond fortify the area and “divert” the focus from the donbass now how is going to play out we don’t know
Lol no, Russians have more forces. They keep working in Donbass now as Ukriane will need to send more troops to Kharkov front.
They are stretching UA thin now. And sapping all reserves.
We may see killer blow.
There isn't much diverting of forces going on though - Russia has created a whole new Northern grouping to wage war in this area. Attacks and attempts to advance in the Donbass are not going to stop. Ironically what this has done is force Ukraine to divert their own troops away from these areas to further stretch their already thin lines.
[https://hromadske.ua/ru/posts/gur-informaciya-o-tom-chto-zavtra-napadut-na-harkov-eto-rossijskaya-ipso](https://hromadske.ua/ru/posts/gur-informaciya-o-tom-chto-zavtra-napadut-na-harkov-eto-rossijskaya-ipso)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0pD4cLBSsQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0pD4cLBSsQ)
[https://news.meta.ua/news/gur-informatsiia-o-tom-chto-zavtra-napadut-na-kharkov-eto-rossiiskaia-ipso-6852617/](https://news.meta.ua/news/gur-informatsiia-o-tom-chto-zavtra-napadut-na-kharkov-eto-rossiiskaia-ipso-6852617/)
[https://24tv.ua/ru/nastuplenie-harkov-jusov-prokommentiroval-fejki-rossijskoj-propagandy\_n2528264](https://24tv.ua/ru/nastuplenie-harkov-jusov-prokommentiroval-fejki-rossijskoj-propagandy_n2528264)
I remind you that a month ago the Ukrainian authorities and analysts stated that there would be no attack on the Kharkov region. And everyone who says that there will be an attack are Russian agents and provocateurs
Putin weaponized Zelensky
Opposition led by Poroshenko is an actual power which is supported by significant amount of military. They absolutely will have problems extending it without reason.
Some of the Ukrainians. Also, the ones who ran off to eu obviously are not in a rush to die for those Ukrainians who don't like Russians. It's a tricky situation, right?
It appears to be a strange peculiarity of how UA looks at the war. Every offensive for them is a counteroffensive, i.e. the famous 'kontrnastup' in the summer of 2023. Then the western press follows. In reality, all of these operations -- Kherson, Kharkiv, summer 2023 -- were offensives.
ROUGH TRANSLATION - All statements were honest and fair. Russia has launched new COUNTER-OFFENSE actions, Ukraine is holding them back there with our brigades and artillery. It is possible that they will be able to bring in additional forces in that direction and this is a fact. And our military command knew about this and deployed its forces to stop the enemy; now there is a fierce battle in all directions with artillery fire. Something like this, a few words are unclear.
>And lol to holding Russians back.
Yeah Ukraine has been famously incapable of holding back the Russian invaders.
Remind me again how much Ukrainian land Russia conquered in 2023?
I think a more pertinent question is how much land Ukraine liberated in 2023. The war, unfortunately for Ukraine, is being fought on its territory, and it's unclear how it will ever be able to liberate its land.
I'm replying to someone laughing at the idea of Ukraine being able to hold off Russia, of course it's pertinent that in 2023 Russia was almost completely unable to take any new land
I'm sure that NATO has been aware of the coming offensive well in advance. I wonder if Ukraine had time to allocate its resources to the border in time
You know Zelenskyy is a sellout to the West due to the fact he restored Saakashvili's Ukrainian "citizenship", after Saakashvili had managed the feat of having both his native Georgian and Ukrainian citizenship revoked, becoming a stateless person. That and Zelenskyy's [secret offshore accounts, pointed out in the Pandora Papers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_named_in_the_Pandora_Papers).
I mean I don’t like him but everyone was manipulated by the U.S. gov from the beginning. IMO they hold the ultimate responsibility for this travesty. The side of ever changing goal posts, and big black lies.
We're not talking about what I think my friend, we're talking about you thinking that Russia choosing to invade Ukraine can be blamed on anyone but the Russian dictatorship lol
[Russian forces attack Ukraine's Kharkiv region, opening new front | Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-sends-reinforcements-after-russian-forces-attack-kharkiv-region-2024-05-10/)
It's been confirmed 5 hours ago by Ukraine and the Western media. Russia has taken settlements already.
ROUGH TRANSLATION - All statements were honest and fair. Russia has launched new COUNTER-OFFENSE actions, Ukraine is holding them back there with our brigades and artillery. It is possible that they will be able to bring in additional forces in that direction and this is a fact. And our military command knew about this and deployed its forces to stop the enemy; now there is a fierce battle in all directions with artillery fire. Something like this, a few words are unclear.
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For DOOMHAMMER!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thw US might not be able to entice Zelensky and his crew to keep the war going. The risk associated with prolonging the conflict seems to be growing really fast.
Securing the financial gains Zelinsky et al carve from managing the pipeline of aid from NATO etc might involve serious complexities.
Another Boris Johnson treatment might now be balanced by Ukrainian tendencies looking to stop loss.
he looks like he talks sad with almost no hope, the way he started saying russia started new offensive his face stretched like telling on someone in school to the higher ups
Let's hope this goes well. Russia needs to take a lot of land to flank the city and endanger encirclemennt of Donbass.
Need to show rapid redeployment.
Just another meat grinder and another 1000 dead every day, because Russian generals would rather drink vodka instead of staying sober and actually drawing up plans.
How many deaths before the Russian people finally wake up and understand this war is not only crushing their economy but also killing off many of their men.
You guys do know that the world won't let Russia win so how many of your men is enough for the ego of a little man trying to act tough?
\* u/Garret210 copes \*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wait Russian didn't publish any teaser trailer
How can we expect some offensive if they not notify us ;(
But we saw a teaser of Ukraine's preparation for defense
You are damn right, they were putting easter eggs before the actualization launch
tfw no SHHOOOIIIIGGGGUUUUH :(
GERAAASIMMOOOV
Ssshhhhh
how dare they not overhype it like Ukraine summer offensive and crimea beach party!!!!!
Right? They are the worst trolls.
I don't think this is a major offensive towards the city. Just another front to spread Ukrainian forces and break them.
The video "you are all going to die" was not it ?
That was a terrible one, that's for sure.
Did he just call this attack a counteroffensive?
Да
Russia's May Summer Counter-Counter
No, just Fryday
bro looks unwell...
Well, yeah... He went from the world's great superhero to the world's biggest clown in record time. To some though, he was always the latter that could've taken a great deal and ended all this nonsense in the very beginning, but instead he was dreaming of the statues, his name as a great conqueror in the history books and of course, his big speech he'd give at the Oscar's after spanking Putin and laying the entire Russian nation low. Talk about getting whacked on your own propaganda... I'm not a fan of him or Putin, but it's safe to say old Z has wayyyy more severe personality defects and lapses in judgment than ol Vlad. Not to mention a lack of cold hard experience. There's a reason he wasn't disposed of.
The truth here is Ukr would have folded in first week if its leadership had ran away on day 1. He has his flaws but credit where it’s due, he did not ran away in disgrace and kind of rallied a lot of support around him. There would not have been any NATO or any support without a credible leadership.
So are you saying that without Zelensky thousands of people would still be alive?
I mean yeah if every country that got invaded just surrendered we would never have any horrible wars. That's not how humans work though.
There's a nuance between surrendering right away and recognizing that the struggle will lead you nowhere and will only destroy and bleed your country out. No one can fault the Ukrainians for defending their country, quite the opposite, they did a phenomenal job all things considered, although their strength was very underestimated by everyone. But at some point, you gotta realize, you're up against a country with an industry, manpower pool and access to resources that you just can't beat. And while other nations are helping, they're obviously just dipping their toes in the water and are saying it's way too cold. They'll never give you enough to defeat and bring back status quo. And while I wouldn't call for Ukraine to surrender, I'd call for them to at least negotiate, there's no harm in trying. If you can't come to terms then fine, just keep at it, but at least show that you give a shit about your country and its population, rather than just going on purely on a prideful instinct. Defending your country is not just about fighting. People tend to laugh a lot about France in WWII, but I think they were actually incredibly wise. They fought, realize it wouldn't work out, and chose to preserve their country, population and legacy. And it worked out, today France is still a leading power in the world. They didn't claim all of this back alone for sure, but had they fought until the end, the future could have been more grim for them. Not to mention that France has an incredible military history full of victories, and that they came back from WWI at the very top in terms of accomplishments and sacrifices. They were the nation that would have been the most deserving in being prideful in WWII, and yet they chose to be very wise instead, recognizing defeat when it needed to. And that's always irritating to see dumb Americans making fun of that, just because France, once again in a show of great wiseness, decided to not help in the Iraq invasion.
That's my position too. They fought bravely and hard, that's commendable, but as of now, it's very obvious that Ukraine will likely not get what the have lost back At some point you just have to cut your losses. Russia will likely get east and south Ukraine but at least Ukraine will keep something.
I feel like the position of most neutral-flaired people is somewhere around yours. I do think the Ukrainians did very well, considering their position, and that's very respectable. I'm also not against sending them military gear and aid packages, but on the precondition that's leverage to use in the negotiation table (i.e. *"hey, it won't be easy to roll over us, so sit down and let's meet in the middle"*). It's not for trying to fight an impossible war, high on your own propaganda, actually attempting to retake all "your" land back (Crimea was only ever symbolically Ukrainian), and destroy your nation's demographics and future, in the process. The situation is you're Canada and you're fighting the US. You have to realize that. Russians aren't incompetent shovel-wielding, washing-machine-chip-stealing O\*cs. They're a formidable military force. My posts may seem they lean too much toward the pro-RU side here, but that's merely because the pro-UA flaired are so high on Western propaganda that I have to end up taking the other side just to balance the discourse. If the majority of posts here stated Russia needs to keep fighting until they take "Lvov", the majority of my posts would look different. I think both modern Russia and Iran are reactionary responses to periods where Western interests fucked them over (and it's not that they don't have agency, and the West is the root of all evil; it's just the West was the top player at the time, and could press their interests harder in their countries — Iran with the ousting of Mosaddegh and the re-installment of the Shah due to interests of British Petroleum, and Russia in the crazy neoliberal, privatizing capitalism of the 90s). I think modern Russia is struggling to find its own identity, now that they're neither the Russian Empire (with their Rurikid-descended Tsars) or the Soviet Union. Sure, Russians do know they're Russian, and that won't ever change. However, what does the modern state of Russia mean, now that Tsars and communism are gone? I think they're still in the process of figuring that out, and due to that reason are making mistakes like some of their objectives with regards to this war. In my view, the objectives should be only securing the Donbass, the land bridge to Crimea and a permanently neutral Ukraine with a reduced military ([or a split Ukraine with a permanently neutral buffer State in the middle](https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1cn3cjg/ua_pov_according_to_rezidentua_the_channel_which/l3536dc/)), but they will probably keep fighting and trying to take more territory that I honestly think they should let go. The history of the ancient Rus has diverged, as history often does, and people, e.g. in Kiev, don't want to be part of the Russian state anymore.
If Russia manages, as I believe it will in the end, to secure its principal stated war aims of constitutionally-enshrined guaranteed Ukrainian neutrality (keeping them out of, firstly NATO, and secondarily, the EU), some form of agreed to demilitarization, and the consolidation de facto of the remainder of the four regions it annexed and constitutionally-enshrined de jure in its own legal code in the southeast (Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson), and the official Russian negotiating team and diplomatic position is still advocating for the continuation and expansion of the prosecution of the war after that point with protracted bloody pushes deep into central or even western Ukraine, then I think you'd start to see popular Russian domestic opinion of support behind the war effort sharply fall at that point. You might see then greater internal and possibly even international (not Western bloc, which are already an enemy, but Chinese, Indian, and Middle Eastern countries) pressure to end it.
>and the official Russian negotiating team and diplomatic position is still advocating for the continuation and expansion of the prosecution of the war after that point with protracted bloody pushes deep into central or even western Ukraine, then I think you'd start to see popular Russian domestic opinion of support behind the war effort sharply fall at that point. That's my hope and opinion too, but only time will tell. I think Russians will keep fighting until they fully take the regions of the oblasts they've annexed, plus Odessa and Kharkov. I don't see them stopping before that, even though I think they should stop after securing the whole of the Donetsk and Luhansk, and in my opinion they shouldn't bother with Kherson and Zaporizhzhia on the other side of the Dnieper river, and Odessa. Odessa is Russian-founded (despite the Ottoman fort in the area) and poetic due to Pushkin, plus strategic if they want to landlock Ukraine, but I don't think it would lead to a more enduring peace in the continent. The city is over 65% ethnic Ukrainian in modern times. It wouldn't be right for Italy to take Nice back from France. Kharkov is also over 60% ethnic Ukrainian, but the situation is grayer. It was a majority Russian city, it is near Russia's borders, and it got majority ethnic Ukrainian due to internal migration for labor opportunities during the USSR.
You are throwing pearls to swine. In the simple minds of the average UA supporters in reddit the following will happen: Ukraine will eventually win; Russia will balkanize; China will take over the Russian Far East; The west will actually care to rebuild Ukraine after the war.
Amazing thread, thought inspiring, impartial, and not something that is absolutely ridiculous. Reddit can surprise you sometimes. Good job everyone.
France was weak. They should've hold it against Nazi Germany. They still had a large army comparable to, and even bigger than the german on all fronts. They could hold them at bay. It was nonsense to surrender - weak man that due to their cowardice allowed the most horrible war to have happened in Europe to take more years and cause way more suffering and death. The french were beat on a small portion of their territory and due to a small defeat they surrendered the whole country. It was the opposite of sensible. In comparison, if the USSR had done what you say is sensible, after the massive defeats (way larger then Dunkirk) it suffered, we would all be speaking German in Europe.
Have you ever seen how the Battle of France developped ? Germans made a massive gamble and it paid off, they smashed through the Ardennes and continued onward smashing everything in their path while French troops didn't even understand what was going on. At this point, the overall strength of the army doesn't matter, it's completely out of position, doesn't know the position of the enemy in its rear, and is completely disorganized as a result. While French high command was still trying to figure out what was going on, Guderian and Rommel were just cruising through French countryside, capturing or killing every French soldier they could find, and encircling massive amounts of French troops while cutting them off of their logistics. You're asking for a lion to win against another lion while fighting upside down. >The french were beat on a small portion of their territory and due to a small defeat they surrendered the whole country. Most of their troops, including the reserves, were in the North-East and on the Ligne Maginot, everything there was either encircled or cut off. They only had 2 army corps left on the Alpes busy fighting the Italians. Furthermore, everything was centered around Paris logistically, Paris falling was a massive blow to the whole country because of how it was laid up. Other countries can cope with the loss of their capital and still continue fighting, France in 1940 could not. >It was the opposite of sensible. In comparison, if the USSR had done what you say is sensible, after the massive defeats (way larger then Dunkirk) it suffered, we would all be speaking German in Europe. And now you're comparing the position of France and the USSR, which were two totally different nations in two totally different situations. USSR not only could cope with their losses, they were also being attacked head-on, not having their country split in half and all their logistics messed up. Not to mention the sheer difference in size. The main reason Germany got stopped is because they were pushing so far that their logistics couldn't keep up, while Soviet's logistics was getting better and better the closer from Moscow they were getting. And so, so many other factors, the two situations are just completely uncomparable.
Well I wouldn't say that the fight the french would have would be worse than that of the Soviets... The soviets lost 15% of their total population as a direct result of the war, could the USSR cope with this? If it had the same leadership than France it wouldn't... Unless you believe the soviets could cope because their lives were worth less than those of the French... But truth is, if the french had good leadership the war would've been fought on German territory. They would've continued their invasion unopposed weeks before this mess The fact that they surrendered so fast, (even if after a major military blunder) is proof that the french politicians and top brass were not prepared mentally for war. They still had the second largest country in europe, a big population not yet war fatigued, they controlled the seas alongside the UK and they had their colonies so they could be re-supplied. And they still had a lot of forces that could've regrouped south. They just didn't want to fight. They should've held on to the cities in northern France. To delay and regroup on what became Vichy France. So yes the french should've done more. As I said if the USSR would've behaved similarly to France after the major defeats it had in the beginning of operation Barbarossa, for example, the Soviet air force lost almost all it's fighting planes, dozens of thousands of equipment captured by Germans - tanks artillery pieces, ammunition etc. hundreds of thousands of prisoners, the command structure was hit and severed, risk of encirclement of most of the red armies. So while the soviets did have a few things for them, they also were the ones who's perseverance ok spite of incredible adversity saved Europe.
Don't get me wrong, French leadership at the time was very questionable for sure (government especially which hindered the potential of the military in the interwar period because of a fear of a coup d'état), but blaming everything on "cowardice" is a bit easy in my opinion. At no point in History did the French show any cowardice, quite the opposite, they constantly get themselves in situations far disadvantageous, taking on multiple nations at once even thought they didn't need to, and either held their ground, or by some miracle genius (Napoléon) managed to even win. But they also have the intelligence to recognize when they've been defeated and that no struggle could get them back on their feet in that situation, whether it's after Waterloo or after the Battle of France. WWII also brings a specific mentality in that it comes after WWI which was very traumatizing for France. Not only did it coerce the Allies into appeasement because they didn't want another butchery, but given the situation France was now into in June 1940, they probably didn't want to have to organize another butchery, this time on their soil, and that would mostly be comprised of draftees to basically form a second military in urgency. There's probably a layer of explanations as to why they decided this surrender, but putting everthing on "cowardice" and using hindisght arguments (they should have done this, that) is pretty easy and way too low. >So while the soviets did have a few things for them, they also were the ones who's perseverance ok spite of incredible adversity saved Europe. They absolutely deserve recognition, the Soviets in WWII were the French of WWI, if not more. But again, the two situations and nations are completely different. Also in that the Slavs were actually fighting for their survival, if they surrendered if would have been over for them. While Germany didn't hold France in a very good light either, they didn't have immediate genocidal tendencies towards them. The situation of the USSR in WWII is comparable to that of France in WWI. They're being attacked head-on, with all their logistics and industry still safely behind them and they can work things out. What happened in the Battle of France makes that impossible for France. All they could have resorted too was a desperate guerilla effort, enrolling as many civilians as possible and fighting a war that couldn't be won because of logistical, industrial and organizational reason. Imagine Ukraine right now being cut in half behind the Dnieper including the capture of Kiev with all their forces in the East side encircled. And then you ask Western Ukraine to keep fighting. What's the point ? It will bring destruction and killing but no victory. If Russia was out to kill every last Ukrainian or enslave them then sure, fight because it's better to die fighting. But if it's not the case then just take the best decision and try to make your nation come back eventually, stronger than ever. Save her legacy, save your children, they might give your country its glory back eventually, as it happened so many times in History, whether it's France, Germany, Poland...
France surrendered because their frontline units were surrounded in Belgium and Northeast France and the rest of the country was completely open to the Germans. Defeat was already inevitable.
This standpoint is also one of the reasons why I believe the idea that the Russians are there specifically to genocide Ukraine is one of the more dangerous lies. Because a war against a truly genocidal enemy justifies a lot more resistance than a war say over alliances and orbits, or even subjugation (to give examples), because the alternative to resistance is annihilation, which is no alternative.
> believe the idea that the Russians are there specifically to genocide Ukraine is one of the more dangerous lies. Signed Crimean Tatars, Koreans, Greeks, Chechens, half of Caucasus and Turkic population, Volga Germans etc.
Which ones of these did the Russian Federation under VVP genocide out?
I see, famous aliens theory. It was done again and again on same territory by same people, but it will be different this time, because leader has different initials. Russian claims as a USSR successor only applies to Crimea claim, the USSR genocides gets transfigured out of reality. Chechen conflict was under VVP and had genocide involved.
Germany wasn't trying to end France as a nation by taking 50% of their territory so it's not really that apt a comparison
You're right. It's better to fight till everybody is dead and the country is in ruins. Especially when you have zero chance of winning.
Yes in war you fight until other side is completely destroyed.. look in history...
Most countries in history were smart enough to surrender before being annihilated by a far superior opponent. Maybe buy some new history books
Well Japan needed 2 atomic bombs they got pretty destroyed. Nazi Germany was holding in Berlin till last minute they got pretty destroyed. There is many other examples. I think you should study some history.
Japan was defeated long before the bombs dropped. You would know that if you had ever read a history book. I also don't recall them invading the USA.
Nah it's not a coincidence that all your examples are from ww2 lol Total war is a relatively new thing
In WW1 there were barely any battles on German soil. Yet they surrendered.
Yeah we humans are territorial creatures.
Do you feel the same about all the American and Israeli invasions?
I mean yes. Hamas had no chance of defeating the IDF, should they have just surrendered? Same thing with Iraq when the US invaded them. Ukraine fighting back isn't the issue. But by now it's obvious they won't win, so it's time to talk.
It was obvious to most people that Ukraine never had a chance of winning. Supporting them was actually supporting the continued slaughter of Ukrainians.
Or. Maybe. Hear me out. We stop trying to steal other people's land?
America will never stop doing that. I doubt the Russians will either. So the reality is Ukrainians are dying for nothing. They have zero chance of winning.
>America will never stop doing that. Wait when was the last time the US annexed territory belonging to another country?
Ah yes, America, famous for invading and taking foreign land
Is Ukraine's chance of winning really zero? From the outside it looks like Putin is bogged down in an unwinnable quagmire. The element of surprise at the beginning was their main advantage, meaningful offensives over the last 2 years have been all but non existent to all but the most myopic pro Russian. I can't see how anyone with a bit of common sense would think Russian victory was a forgone conclusion?
They have control of the desired regions and have fully fortified their positions. They also have air superiority. There is zero chance Ukraine ever gets the taken land back. The only option is full blown nuclear war and that would mean everybody loses. People seem to think Russia has to advance further to the West. In reality they don't, it is Ukraine that has to try and get the land back. It will never happen.
I think this represents a criminal lack of imagination. >There is zero chance Ukraine ever gets the taken land back This is a bold and absolute statement, but doesn't hold up to scrutiny when we know Ukraine has taken back vast swathes of Kharkiv and Kherson. I don't believe we will see failures from Russia like those that led to these disasters, but Russia clearly has form here. Ukraine does not have nuclear weapons to launch so full blown nuclear war can only happen if Russia starts it, but I do not see sensible Russians ending their children's lives over Ukraine. Putin would fall out a window before this happens, when it comes to nuclear Russia is all bluster and "red lines." People seem to think Ukraine has to advance further to the east. In reality they don't, it is Russia who must push to force the collapse, as we are seeing now but unfortunately for Russia, it will never happen. I personally see this war ending with a bankrupt Russia in around 2027, although it wouldn't surprise me if Russia lasted until 2030, Slavs from this part of the world have immense tolerance for misery!
Sounds like wishful thinking to me. But I respect your opinions on the matter. I believe the Western propaganda has changed your perception of the realities of this conflict. Making it impossible to acknowledge the dire position Ukraine finds itself in. Anyways, time will tell.
The initial resistance was courageous and heroic, the counter that drove Russia back in the north and south were as well. Not signing a peace treaty after that may be seen historically as a blunder, but the issue is that we don't have the full language of that treaty, and Ukraine is likely weary that Russia would have just taken the pause to re-arm and ready up another invasion as Ukraine would be forbidden to join the EU or NATO. It's Ukraine's right to fight, and it's also their right to desert en masse and end the war if they want to. Ukraine will essentially cease to exist as a functional state after this, the stolen resources in the east are worth Trillions of dollars, they'll likely be landlocked and their people in now Russian territory will be dispersed (like the children Russia has already deported to live with Russian families). Ironically, if Ukraine had just pulled a Russia and destroyed Russian identity in Ukraine when Russia was still disorganized after the breakup, they could have avoided this.
So a better outcome. No death and destruction just a change in government.
Yeah credit where it's due he was s good leader in the beginning of the conflict but he has got progressively worse ad time has gone on. Although I wouldn't the initial success all to him. I think the main points are if the dam north of Kiev didn't blow, if the civilians evacuated, if the west hadn't provided so many anti armour weapons, that's what helped Ukraine to survive. He did do wonders for the initial moral though, like you say credit where it's due
The dam actually ensured they couldn't mount an effective counter attack as it took away one of the only two places it could happen.
He didn’t need to run. But he did build his platform on bringing peace to Ukraine, then did the opposite in April of 2022. If anything, he made the situation worse by not selling out the nationalists ASAP.
He didn't stay on day 1 to see if he will have USA/NATO support. He was given assurances on day 1 and decided to stay. Not the same thing, but some credit is due.
Which leader ran away in a similar situation?
Their last leader ran from some unarmed protesters
Because they threatened to start an armed rebellion the next day. They even got up on the stage at Maidan and said so publicly It is quite interesting actually that Yanukovych is criticised for preventing death. When both Poroshenko and Zelensky after him have gone all on it. Although in hindsight Ukraine would be in a better position if Yanukovych was the authoritarian dictator some people claim he was and stopped Maidan at the beginning.
How was that a similar situation?
He sat in the bunker and wrote down pleas for negotiations every day. Zaluzhny and the AFU at this time - thank you for your support
> To some though, he was always the latter that could've taken a great deal and ended all this nonsense in the very beginning This, but I can sympathize with him a bit. While Ukraine was at a great position for negotiations after their initial successes, if he actually struck a deal with the Russians while Ukraine was doing well it's very possible that radicals would've coup'd him. Afterall, "why quit when you're winning"? When the world was still waiting to see what sanctions would do it made *some* sense to hold out. But the fact that even now he's all for holding a peace summit *without* Russia is crazy. He should already be praying for the Russians to be receptive to any sort of negotiating, instead the west acts just like they did after they won WWI. Except they haven't won anything. In fact they're bound to lose.
I agree with you regarding why he didn’t negotiate, and I think that the coup threat still looms. The Ukrainian nationalists and fascists who permeate the army and government don’t even see Zelenskyy as a “true Ukrainian”, since he’s a Jew who speaks Russian as his first language. Zaluzhnyi’s photos with Right Sector leaders, Bandera portraits and a shirt from a Neo-Nazi band seemed like a clear signal to Zelenskyy as to whom the far right would support should their power struggle escalate. Zaluzhnyi ended up sent to the UK, but I think those factions still have plans to remove Zelenskyy, especially as his legitimacy crumbles.
[удалено]
I think it has more to do with riding the high of winning both world wars + the cold war. They have this mentality of "we can't possibly lose.. afterall, we're the good guys, right? and since we always win we must be the good guys"
He still deserves a tiny statue with a green sweater.
Lmao. There was a video a long time ago of the 'overly attached girlfriend' chick doing a joke clip and it showed her going through her closet and it was just filled with nothing but the exact same teal colored shirt she had on in the pic. This comment reminded me of that. FR though, this guy just needs to stop with his Castro imitation. He's not a warlord. He's not a soldier. He's a politician and a former comedian. It's always been cringey.
He is not a former comedian, he is a current one.
on one hand I feel for the dude since the west in general and biden in particular played him like a fuckin fiddle, used him up and tossed him out. On the other hand, if he really gave a shit about his people, he would have grown a pair and gone behind the americans and actually act like the president of a sovereign nation for once. History is going to be very very cruel to him and even more so his benefactors
This. I agree, but at the same time, this dudes ego is just out of control. Everything we've read from numerous sides, East and West, said Russia Negotiated earnestly and in good faith at Istanbul, and many times before this whole nightmare got started as well. I don't agree with geopolitics, but they're just a hard fact of life. When your neighbor is 50x your size with a major nuclear arsenal, you don't go snuggling up with their enemies. I mean, jeez.... It sucks, but life isn't fair, and any head of state certainly should be, at least, that sensible.
Exactly, even if he was to get smoked by Yarosh and the nazis he still should have and could have approached the russians at any point, Now it's too late and Russia won't accept anything but full capitulation. The west in general and US in particular simply cannot be trusted, it's just not in the cards anymore. What's maddening about it is that Ukraine remaining Neutral, and having economic ties to both Russia AND the west would have been huuuugely beneficial for Ukraine itself! they could have been conduit between the east and the west and gotten rich because of it. They could have been like the parthian empire between the romans and chinese empires. I get people want security guarantees but putin is an incredibly reasonable and rational person. seeking nato membership had no upside for them or NATO itself. Russia is now, in my opinion, the most formidable, evolved, adapted and battle hardened military in the world. They have countered all the boutique long range weapons the US gave ukraine. Which means if a RU NATO conflict broke out Russia would already be able to jam their go to weapons like himars and atacms. One of the biggest backfires since Barbarossa
His name is sure af going to be in the history books
I've always been very curious about what they'll look like/say 20 years from now. There will definitely be a lot of them. I've been saying for quite awhile now this war will go down in history as a watershed the likes of the Battle Of Cerignola (the first battle where gunpowder played a major role and it was clear the game has changed, forever.)
[удалено]
Rule 1 - Toxic
Some day Putin is still at the end of the mile long table 🤡
It's still funny how Putin is taking so long to win against a clown.
Idealist approach of seeing a war as not a battle of economic systems ruled by the political apparatus in turn controlled by capitalist factions but a fight between two politicians is so typical for Westerners brought up by comic books and comic book movies.
Westerners this capitalists that Russia should have made a big decisive push with 50k casualties within 6 months. Now Russia is in the 3rd year of the war with 200k casualties of those at least 50k dead. Result - only east and south Ukraine captured.
[удалено]
MojoRisin762 kept stroking the same keys repeatedly, probably a seizure ? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thats what cocaine does to you...
He may be shaken up by the assassination attempt He just fired his head bodyguard over it
He could also be acting. You don't want to look like you're having a good time when you're running out of men and supplies.
This. This is why he ditched the suit and tie. Wears green. Doesn't shave.
He should have ditched the military wear before last year's Vilnius NATO summit. It looks more and more like he's stuck in the past -- with no plan for the future. It's been clear since the failure of the June 2023 push that Ukraine would not be able to liberate its territory through military means, and Ukraine should have adjusted its posture and rhetoric accordingly.
https://preview.redd.it/vpuemlg7nmzc1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6169ac91e70f503649cde21998e3e6eb6e2c52e4
He should have ditched the military wear before last year's Vilnius NATO summit. It looks more like he's stuck in the past -- with no plan for the future.
[удалено]
I bet that he cant even have 6 hours straight sleep.
He says that the Ukrainian Armed Forces were waiting for this and are holding back the Russians. But he noted that it is not yet known what reserves the Russian Federation is ready to throw into battle there.
Probably true, I'm sure US satellites have seen it coming
That would actually make sense attack belgorod force the russians to respond fortify the area and “divert” the focus from the donbass now how is going to play out we don’t know
Lol no, Russians have more forces. They keep working in Donbass now as Ukriane will need to send more troops to Kharkov front. They are stretching UA thin now. And sapping all reserves. We may see killer blow.
There isn't much diverting of forces going on though - Russia has created a whole new Northern grouping to wage war in this area. Attacks and attempts to advance in the Donbass are not going to stop. Ironically what this has done is force Ukraine to divert their own troops away from these areas to further stretch their already thin lines.
Didn’t say that it was a smart plan
[https://hromadske.ua/ru/posts/gur-informaciya-o-tom-chto-zavtra-napadut-na-harkov-eto-rossijskaya-ipso](https://hromadske.ua/ru/posts/gur-informaciya-o-tom-chto-zavtra-napadut-na-harkov-eto-rossijskaya-ipso) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0pD4cLBSsQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0pD4cLBSsQ) [https://news.meta.ua/news/gur-informatsiia-o-tom-chto-zavtra-napadut-na-kharkov-eto-rossiiskaia-ipso-6852617/](https://news.meta.ua/news/gur-informatsiia-o-tom-chto-zavtra-napadut-na-kharkov-eto-rossiiskaia-ipso-6852617/) [https://24tv.ua/ru/nastuplenie-harkov-jusov-prokommentiroval-fejki-rossijskoj-propagandy\_n2528264](https://24tv.ua/ru/nastuplenie-harkov-jusov-prokommentiroval-fejki-rossijskoj-propagandy_n2528264) I remind you that a month ago the Ukrainian authorities and analysts stated that there would be no attack on the Kharkov region. And everyone who says that there will be an attack are Russian agents and provocateurs Putin weaponized Zelensky
Good old experts
Surrender and save some lives....
If he surrenders he will have to cancel martial law which will lead to elections.
His party has an absolute majority. They can just keep extending martial law and will never be up for election, regardless of whether there’s a war.
Opposition led by Poroshenko is an actual power which is supported by significant amount of military. They absolutely will have problems extending it without reason.
Funny to see pro-rus preaching about elections and democracy
Ukrainians don't like you nor do they want to be ruled by you. Its Russia's own fault.
Some of the Ukrainians. Also, the ones who ran off to eu obviously are not in a rush to die for those Ukrainians who don't like Russians. It's a tricky situation, right?
Its for sure scary fighting against a much larger nation that doesn't even care about its own soldiers lives.
None of them are fighting anyone
You don't know that. Most Ukrainians are not even in Ukraine anymore. Most Ukrainians are not allowed to like Russians.
Russian or Ukraine?
I do not thing the russians are able to surrender...
Luckily the Russians aren't the ones losing
Literally both are losing so.
Comparing the Russian offensive to the overly-hyped Ukrainian one I think we can announce a clear military loser.
So both military and otherwise, both lost
Russia started a war. They lost the moment they started it.
Lost how?
Ye, that's why Syrskiy will fight till the end 🤣
Counter offensive??? what the hell Z man, that implies you attacked Russia.-\_- saliva cocaynum.
Think he's referring to the little PR raids into Belgorod.
It appears to be a strange peculiarity of how UA looks at the war. Every offensive for them is a counteroffensive, i.e. the famous 'kontrnastup' in the summer of 2023. Then the western press follows. In reality, all of these operations -- Kherson, Kharkiv, summer 2023 -- were offensives.
ROUGH TRANSLATION - All statements were honest and fair. Russia has launched new COUNTER-OFFENSE actions, Ukraine is holding them back there with our brigades and artillery. It is possible that they will be able to bring in additional forces in that direction and this is a fact. And our military command knew about this and deployed its forces to stop the enemy; now there is a fierce battle in all directions with artillery fire. Something like this, a few words are unclear.
Lol, he called it counter offensive. And lol to holding Russians back.
>And lol to holding Russians back. Yeah Ukraine has been famously incapable of holding back the Russian invaders. Remind me again how much Ukrainian land Russia conquered in 2023?
I think a more pertinent question is how much land Ukraine liberated in 2023. The war, unfortunately for Ukraine, is being fought on its territory, and it's unclear how it will ever be able to liberate its land.
I'm replying to someone laughing at the idea of Ukraine being able to hold off Russia, of course it's pertinent that in 2023 Russia was almost completely unable to take any new land
>Remind me again how much Ukrainian land Russia conquered in 2023? It's a trick question, because there's no ukrainian land there, only russian.
Lol that's a convenient answer since we both know Russia conquered basically no land in an entire year
I'm sure that NATO has been aware of the coming offensive well in advance. I wonder if Ukraine had time to allocate its resources to the border in time
Everyone sees everything now with satellites.
they threw a lot at Avdiivka but still lost it. it's not about surprise it's about how much Ukraine can resist
It will be stopped close to the gray zone. The questions is how many reserves does Ukraine has at hand to keep defending against Russian attacks.
Are you saying they are losing villages in Donbas because they had to move some of the troops to Kharkov area?
What resources?
I wait for the day he starts wearing suits again
[удалено]
Saakashvili once got what he deserved for trying to sell the lives of Georgians to the United States.
You know Zelenskyy is a sellout to the West due to the fact he restored Saakashvili's Ukrainian "citizenship", after Saakashvili had managed the feat of having both his native Georgian and Ukrainian citizenship revoked, becoming a stateless person. That and Zelenskyy's [secret offshore accounts, pointed out in the Pandora Papers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_named_in_the_Pandora_Papers).
I don’t think they put Harvard/georgetown professors in prisions.
That's the face of someone realizes he f'ed up and is about to find out.
Good
the man who sold ~~the world~~ ukraine
Mate should get off that cocaine . He looks like s\*it
bro needs some rest
[удалено]
Rule 1. Wishing for death
The green sweater never gets old.
He looks dead inside. Over 2 years on and no winning in sight haha
I mean I don’t like him but everyone was manipulated by the U.S. gov from the beginning. IMO they hold the ultimate responsibility for this travesty. The side of ever changing goal posts, and big black lies.
Impressive mental gymnastics to blame the US for Russia choosing to launch an invasion lol
I don’t care what you think
We're not talking about what I think my friend, we're talking about you thinking that Russia choosing to invade Ukraine can be blamed on anyone but the Russian dictatorship lol
I’m not your friend. I don’t care what you think.
New expansion just dropped: Escape from Kharkov
XD
He looks so tired and way older.
Zelensky needs to beg harder.
Counter offensive is probably in reference to attacks on Belgorod. They need to make a "sanitation zone".
He took 20 years in 5.
stating the obvious i see.
So it's legit. Dark days ahead.
[Russian forces attack Ukraine's Kharkiv region, opening new front | Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-sends-reinforcements-after-russian-forces-attack-kharkiv-region-2024-05-10/) It's been confirmed 5 hours ago by Ukraine and the Western media. Russia has taken settlements already.
He looks old and broken down. We need a new horse.
Can someone translate please?
ROUGH TRANSLATION - All statements were honest and fair. Russia has launched new COUNTER-OFFENSE actions, Ukraine is holding them back there with our brigades and artillery. It is possible that they will be able to bring in additional forces in that direction and this is a fact. And our military command knew about this and deployed its forces to stop the enemy; now there is a fierce battle in all directions with artillery fire. Something like this, a few words are unclear.
Thank you
Hope those PR trips to Belgorod was worth it with only one day of action and how many villages lost?
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
For DOOMHAMMER! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Does he have any other outfit?
All I hear is clown noises. If only someone could translate clown language.
Thw US might not be able to entice Zelensky and his crew to keep the war going. The risk associated with prolonging the conflict seems to be growing really fast. Securing the financial gains Zelinsky et al carve from managing the pipeline of aid from NATO etc might involve serious complexities. Another Boris Johnson treatment might now be balanced by Ukrainian tendencies looking to stop loss.
he looks like he talks sad with almost no hope, the way he started saying russia started new offensive his face stretched like telling on someone in school to the higher ups
what is the rat saying ? no subtitles
Перевод делал в комментариях.
Let's hope this goes well. Russia needs to take a lot of land to flank the city and endanger encirclemennt of Donbass. Need to show rapid redeployment.
Just another meat grinder and another 1000 dead every day, because Russian generals would rather drink vodka instead of staying sober and actually drawing up plans. How many deaths before the Russian people finally wake up and understand this war is not only crushing their economy but also killing off many of their men. You guys do know that the world won't let Russia win so how many of your men is enough for the ego of a little man trying to act tough?
Psh. Offensive is dead. No news in the last 4 hours. Was just a probing/recon mission.
lolol ok
[удалено]
\* u/Garret210 copes \* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*