No. of Recommendations: 2
Which benefits Russia as well.
Sure, but not nearly as much as Zelensky. The west can replenish the Ukrainians with modern equipment a hell of a lot faster than Russia can rebuilt its stocks and ESPECIALLY if the Europeans stop or slow down buying Russian oil and gas.
They still don't, but now Trump is actively weakening Ukraine's bargaining position with his public statements, and now an actual cut off of military aid. This isn't just being a conduit for a cease fire - it's working to force Ukraine to agree to what Russia wants, rather than vice versa.
No it isn't. Trump is telling Zelensky to get to the bargaining table.
Which has been true in every asymmetric conflict that was successfully won by the smaller party. The Viet Cong repelling the U.S., the mujahedin driving the Soviets out of Afghanistan, the Taliban getting us to leave Afghanistan....the smaller party doesn't need to militarily repel the invaders. They just have to make it too costly for it to be worthwhile for the invaders to remain.
Huh?
The Viet Cong were backed by the North Vietnamese, China and the Soviet Union. They had PLENTY of dudes, guns and money.
See my other post about Afghanistan and the US. As far as the Soviet experience goes, the mujahedeen had PLENTY of US materiel support. In other words, dudes guns and money.
These historical analogies you guys keep raising...are just wrong, I'm sorry.
So Zelenskyy's notion of victory is to keep fighting not until they actually "throw Ivan off their land," but until Putin decides that it's worth taking only a partial achievement of his war aims rather than keep this up for another year.
Is it, now.
