Summary
A European Parliament member claimed that the U.S. gave Europe three weeks to agree on Ukraine’s “surrender” terms or risk an American withdrawal from Europe.
Mika Aaltola made the claim on X, but provided no evidence. NBC News reported that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth suggested a U.S. troop reduction in Europe.
Trump reportedly plans to cut 20,000 troops and demand greater NATO contributions. He has pushed for higher NATO defense spending.
Trump may meet with Putin soon, believing Russia holds the upper hand in negotiations.
Go to deepstatemap.live, observe and click on few icons to verify a deep pro-Ukrainian bias. Click on the calendar icon, select a random date from the past year. Click play button. Observe constant and relentless advancement from the red areas and the simultaneous shrinking of the blue.
Sanctions have largely failed. From personal experience in Russia, I can tell you, the people don’t feel like their country is at war. Business is as usual, the goods are still moving, the oil is flowing. The prices do rise quite quick, but it’s not like they don’t any other time. If anything, it only put a roadblock to opposing views for the people who can’t be too arsed to buy a VPN subscription.
I’ve been saying this all the time, but without troops from other countries, Ukraine cannot possibly hold the lines, nevermind fighting back. Russia has 3.5x more population and 9x bigger economy before the war broke out. No amount of aid is going to turn one Ukrainian into four. It’s a simple math, and the two above points show exactly that. Anyone who tells that Russia is somehow losing is straight up lying to feed people what they want to hear.
Yes but a well placed himars strike can turn 100 russians into 0. The problem is that Ukraine has to ration their ammunition. The reason Russia is taking ground at all is because they just have more meat than Ukraine has bullets.
A well placed nuke can turn 3 mil Ukrainians into 0. What’s the point?
Well that’s kind of the point. Even if you turn the question that way, as long as Russia has more troops than Ukrainians have bullets, it is still winning. It is set up to be a Pyrrhic victory from day 1, but a victory nonetheless.
You understand that if Ukraine didn’t have to ration their ammunition, they would be able to repel Russia without much problem. It’s not an issue with manpower in the slightest. Also Xi has told Putin not to use nuclear weapons, and Putin has to do what Xi wants (unless Xi gives him a sock).
How did the Russians do in Afghanistan?
Way worse than the US. Even though Russia was next door and the US was in another hemisphere.
I’ll do you one better: Why did the war in Afghanistan broke out?
Because the coups the Soviets organised turned out to be unpopular.
And what was the role of Osama bin Laden in this war?
I’m starting to get real curious what your views are and how on earth the facts fit together in it.
He had no role at all in the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. I think he was a boy taking vacations in Europe with his family.
Oh, so you’re not crazy. Just completely clueless. Go read a book or something
“Russia is winning because media is pro ukraine on that map” and the quick advance? Yes they are advancing at a speed of 0.0003 km/day if i remember the math correctly. And for that suffer hundres of thousends of people and Equipment.
Yess the good old “it only took a million people but we finally took 5m²!” Approche from ww1 :3
The sanctions arent failing, the russian banks litterly cant give more money and the russian economy stands shortly before a collaps. And I can tell you the people to feel the weight of the war in their money, before there already was wide spread poverty but now its even worse. If a whole demographic of woman has come to the conclusion that marrying a soldier to have food when he is home and when he dies you get money is the strategie to survive, then your economy is failing. Why else is the rubble suddenly no longer able to be publicly traded? Oh what because its worthless and all your citicens exchanged it for other more stable currencys? Crazy. And with it no longer being public the government threw the banks can say what ever it wants the inflation rate and worth is, but the prices wont change for the better because of that.
And oooh what do my eyes see there? The good old “russia is big has many men, they can sustain any war!” Argument? The idiotic argument of someone who knows nothing about anything military and thinks russia = soviet union and they won ww2 all by themself with no outside help. Funny how i knew you were bringing this up lol
Russia with being on a litteral general draft where they are also in addition now taking still wounded soldiers, soldiers without arm and leg, from the hospitals, take them into a truck and send them off to the frontlines with the 60-70 year olds that get a few weeks training that already are sitting in their shit, rat infested, colera spreading trenches. For your info, ukraine still hasnt issued any draft of its people. Russias economie, which 2023 was 2,021 Billionen USD vs Ukraines which in 2023 was 102.03 Billion USD. GDP isnt a measure of how well a country is doing, if that were so everyone in the UK was a millonair and in the USA there was no poverty. That is simple economics ;)
But since you have already also proven that you dont know anything about economie or military here some tips: If your country in 2024 had to result to stolen civilain vehicles, golf carts and now also donkeys for its supplys then you’re not winning. If you have to rely on north korean soldiers, use them as bait by letting them stand in the open, you arent winning. If you lost your navy, to a country without a navy, you are losing. If you are using tech from 60 years ago, you arent winning. If you couldnt stop the enemy from gaining more land in a few weeks than you took in an entire year offensive, and the enemy only slowed down because you cut of the civilians electicity, water and other essential things, so the enemy had to organise food and water supplies for the civilians as well and because they restricted in how they can use their weapons, you arent winning.
Oil and gas may be flowing, though it is to china, 10% of what you originally sold it and is now reliant and might as well using the Yuan. Russia is at the complete mercy of Winnie Pohs Silk Empire :D Hurray celebrate comrad! What a success! /j
But yes. Russia is cleeeeaaaarly winning
My brother in christ, get a hold of yourself. Winning is winning. If I beat you up in a boxing match and shit my pants in the process, it doesn’t matter how shitty my pants were, you go down then you’re losing.
Are you NUTS?
A mine field can cancel out numerical advantage. A robotic weapons station can turn one machine gunner into four (or more). Likewise, a swarming algorithm can allow one pilot to direct a flight of several drones.
So, to put it shortly - on the battlefield, technology can cancel out numerical advantages of 3.5 to 4 quite realistically.
Economically - Ukraine alone would not sustain production against Russia, but Ukraine happens to have EU in its back yard. The Russian economy is actually quite small compared to EU’s economy. So the economic unbalance can also be canceled out.
But yes, you are correct to note that village by village, the map is turning red - Ukraine is running a thinly manned front and when pushed hard, yields territory to Russia gradually. During the past year, I would not be surprised if Russia had taken 1 additional percentage point of Ukraine, moving from 20% to 21% for example.
As for attrition on Russia - if you observe the footage and news, you will notice that they are low on cars, low on armor (and using a large percent of antiquated armor), and low on artillery barrels. Out of the USSR stockpile of ~13 000 tanks, estimated losses were recently standing at 9859 machines [1].
At a rate of 10 tanks per day, Russia will have to rely on freshly produced tanks after 300 days. Given how logistics behaves, they are using up all their production already currently, and supplementing it with renovation of increasingly old hardware.
Sadly, they are not anywhere near low on air-dropped bombs. Which I would characterize at their foremost advantage currently. As long as Ukraine cannot deter the bombing runs. (It can stretch and slow them by regularly visiting forward air bases with flights of drones.)
I will not tell you that “Russia is losing”. I will only say that just like Ukraine cannot sustain the current situation, Russia cannot sustain the current intensity of attacking. Even a small technical development (e.g. arrival of a modern long-range air defense missile comparable to quite ancient Soviet S-200 missiles, or arrival of a fighter that can fire Meteor instead of AIM-120) could drive Russian aircraft beyond bombing range of the front, and halt the advance.
Those are, in fact, good points, I just didn’t want to yap about them in the previous comment.
The battlefield has, indeed, got quite stale with rare opportunistic gains or those that were gained through massive bloodshed. Trench warfare is once again the reality of modern war. Still, even with all the aid Ukraine has received the tide isn’t going in their favor.
I stand ground on my conviction that there is no 4x force multiplier, solely by the fact that whatever Ukraine deploys could be also deployed by Russia. Most definitely a somewhat shittier version, but which gets the job done, maybe giving the Ukraine’s side at most 2X advantage, but most importantly, magnitudes cheaper.
Considering the point above, I wouldn’t be so sure about that given that we are… well, were for the past year in that position with the only difference of it being the US who’s providing most of the (military) aid rather than EU… and the front line is moving westwards nonetheless
Cars are def not a problem, the streets in Russia are absolutely flooded by Chinese imports. Tanks, artillery, and warships, from what I gather from some military analysts, and this will most likely sound controversial and so we’ll probably have to agree to disagree, is that those are basically entirely antiquated already by the advent of drone warfare. Armor shortages sounds surprising to me and I haven’t heard about that… I don’t see how it could problem for Russia, and yet it is… Corruption is the only possible answer I could see for that. But overall, even given that those are in fact necessary, as I’ve said, Russia still has a ton of economy not turned towards the war machine, and there’s a lot of factories to tap into to ramp the military production if necessary.
And please don’t take it as me praising Russia. Putin is definitely in wrong here and Zelensky has all the moral high ground there could possibly be. I just see that many news sources blow out any small Ukrainian achievements out of proportion into some kind of twisted Good vs Evil, David vs Goliath stories. And it makes my blood boil as it leaves an impression of “Why help Ukrainians even more when they’re doing quite well already”, while hundreds of innocent people are killed and displaced every day and it isn’t stopping, and won’t stop, unless a drastic measure is taken.
To go a bit deeper on the role of armor - on the background of drone warfare - I would explain like this: armor reduces casualties when moving people and supplies forward.
In these days, armor no longer controls the battlefield, it more likely delivers people and ammo.
If one moves soldiers and equipment forward with armor, it can move under machine gun fire, protect its occupants from one antitank mine, and somewhat protect them against one FPV hit.
If one moves them forward in a 4 wheel drive minivan or lorry, there will be ugly casualties when a mine is found, FPV arrives or a machine gunner opens fire. These vehicles also tend to get stuck easier. So, lack of armor tends to result in higher personnel losses and lower arrival rates of supplies.
From what I gather, the paradigm is also shifting on that front. MRAP’s and such are big, slow, noisy, easily detectable, and most often get immobilized regardless of armor, and all it takes to take one out is just a more powerful charge (in a mine or strapped to a drone). So both sides are increasingly leaning towards more lightweight vehicles, like enduro bikes, ebikes, and even EUC’s. Yes, if one blows up on a mine or by drone, there’s absolutely zero hope for them, but it limits the casualties to just that one poor sob (and possibly his passenger) rather than a whole dozen in mrap, but the big the pro is that they’re a lot harder to detect and chase with drones, while being economically unreasonable to be fought with conventional military weaponry, and have much less footprint allowing them to weave through narrower paths and right through the minefields. The big downside is that it’s not feasible to supply tanks and artillery this way, which is why I mentioned that some consider them obsolete already. On the other hand, drones, bullets and food are perfectly deliver-able by other drones. Not humans yet, though, so some will have to make the runs for rotations still, which us where most casualties happen and will continue happening unless something entirely new pops up all of the sudden
So your proofs are,
Booo, get better material