quote:

Originally posted by Tumbleweed:
At this point, Putin knows he’s made a huge mistake invading Ukraine. In the global context, he’s already lost more than he stands to gain.

I’m sure his ego will never allow him to accept defeat and simply withdraw, and I’m equally sure Ukraine will never bow to him; to do so would be the end of their nation and their culture, and they’d suffer constant persecution forevermore. They will fight to the last man; surrender would be worse.

I only see three possible futures in the next six months. Either (1) Putin throws all cautions to the wind and accelerates without limit as in Hitlers “total war” concept, or (2) someone does the world a favour and helps him become a Russian martyr.

The third and most dangerous outcome would be direct intervention by NATO forces on Russian territory. That would almost certainly result in nuclear deployment, and I think that’s all that’s holding the world back at this post.

At the same time, Putin cannot be allowed to take Ukraine. If he does, he will see that as an absence of resistance to take the rest of the region and by extension, control the economies of Europe and Asia through energy and minerals.

I don’t think the world has been in a more precarious position since WWII. Even the Cuban missile crisis wasn’t as dicey as what we’re seeing right now.

quote:

Originally posted by MtElkHunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Tumbleweed:
At this point, Putin knows he’s made a huge mistake invading Ukraine. In the global context, he’s already lost more than he stands to gain.

I’m sure his ego will never allow him to accept defeat and simply withdraw, and I’m equally sure Ukraine will never bow to him; to do so would be the end of their nation and their culture, and they’d suffer constant persecution forevermore. They will fight to the last man; surrender would be worse.

I only see three possible futures in the next six months. Either (1) Putin throws all cautions to the wind and accelerates without limit as in Hitlers “total war” concept, or (2) someone does the world a favour and helps him become a Russian martyr.

The third and most dangerous outcome would be direct intervention by NATO forces on Russian territory. That would almost certainly result in nuclear deployment, and I think that’s all that’s holding the world back at this post.

At the same time, Putin cannot be allowed to take Ukraine. If he does, he will see that as an absence of resistance to take the rest of the region and by extension, control the economies of Europe and Asia through energy and minerals.

I don’t think the world has been in a more precarious position since WWII. Even the Cuban missile crisis wasn’t as dicey as what we’re seeing right now.

I agree. It the way I see it also.

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
Russia is three times the size of Ukraine. If the internal political support doesn't give out, that matters in a war of attrition.

It's a game of reverse return on investment: what can you destroy that costs more than the resources needed to destroy it?

An air force general was reputed to have said that an atomic bomb was the least expensive way to destroy a square mile (once the development costs are finished).

quote:

Originally posted by MtElkHunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Tumbleweed:
At this point, Putin knows he’s made a huge mistake invading Ukraine. In the global context, he’s already lost more than he stands to gain.

I’m sure his ego will never allow him to accept defeat and simply withdraw, and I’m equally sure Ukraine will never bow to him; to do so would be the end of their nation and their culture, and they’d suffer constant persecution forevermore. They will fight to the last man; surrender would be worse.

I only see three possible futures in the next six months. Either (1) Putin throws all cautions to the wind and accelerates without limit as in Hitlers “total war” concept, or (2) someone does the world a favour and helps him become a Russian martyr.

The third and most dangerous outcome would be direct intervention by NATO forces on Russian territory. That would almost certainly result in nuclear deployment, and I think that’s all that’s holding the world back at this post.

At the same time, Putin cannot be allowed to take Ukraine. If he does, he will see that as an absence of resistance to take the rest of the region and by extension, control the economies of Europe and Asia through energy and minerals.

I don’t think the world has been in a more precarious position since WWII. Even the Cuban missile crisis wasn’t as dicey as what we’re seeing right now.

I agree. It the way I see it also.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
Russia is three times the size of Ukraine. If the internal political support doesn't give out, that matters in a war of attrition.

It's a game of reverse return on investment: what can you destroy that costs more than the resources needed to destroy it?

An air force general was reputed to have said that an atomic bomb was the least expensive way to destroy a square mile (once the development costs are finished).

Maybe I'd disagree since Russia is quite a bit smaller than Ukraine with the entire western world supporting Ukraine.

My impression is that a war of attrition for Russia would be devastating. Russia produces nothing other than natural resources, their limited manufacturing is demonstrably junk. Given that Russia has destroyed a good bit of what did work when you hit the start button, what really can Russia hurry off an assembly line that'd even meet their usual low bar?

Should go without saying I'm dead last in the experts line.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
Russia is three times the size of Ukraine. If the internal political support doesn't give out, that matters in a war of attrition.

It's a game of reverse return on investment: what can you destroy that costs more than the resources needed to destroy it?

An air force general was reputed to have said that an atomic bomb was the least expensive way to destroy a square mile (once the development costs are finished).

Maybe I'd disagree since Russia is quite a bit smaller than Ukraine with the entire western world supporting Ukraine.

My impression is that a war of attrition for Russia would be devastating. Russia produces nothing other than natural resources, their limited manufacturing is demonstrably junk. Given that Russia has destroyed a good bit of what did work when you hit the start button, what really can Russia hurry off an assembly line that'd even meet their usual low bar?

Should go without saying I'm dead last in the experts line.

The sad part is, that they have the two things they have always had. plenty of warm bodies, and a disregard for their own people.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Yes I agree with you. Its just sad is all.
A fucken waste of humanity.
But I think they will keep throwing those half frozen bodies at that wall until there are none left, and so the only way to win for Ukraine will be hoping they kill as many of them as they can and as quickly as they can.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by MtElkHunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Tumbleweed:
At this point, Putin knows he’s made a huge mistake invading Ukraine. In the global context, he’s already lost more than he stands to gain.

I’m sure his ego will never allow him to accept defeat and simply withdraw, and I’m equally sure Ukraine will never bow to him; to do so would be the end of their nation and their culture, and they’d suffer constant persecution forevermore. They will fight to the last man; surrender would be worse.

I only see three possible futures in the next six months. Either (1) Putin throws all cautions to the wind and accelerates without limit as in Hitlers “total war” concept, or (2) someone does the world a favour and helps him become a Russian martyr.

The third and most dangerous outcome would be direct intervention by NATO forces on Russian territory. That would almost certainly result in nuclear deployment, and I think that’s all that’s holding the world back at this post.

At the same time, Putin cannot be allowed to take Ukraine. If he does, he will see that as an absence of resistance to take the rest of the region and by extension, control the economies of Europe and Asia through energy and minerals.

I don’t think the world has been in a more precarious position since WWII. Even the Cuban missile crisis wasn’t as dicey as what we’re seeing right now.

I agree. It the way I see it also.

Me too.

.