Does Russia now control 30 percent of Ukraine?

Does Russia now control 30 percent of Ukraine?

Aren't the goals of the Special Military Operation about over?

Are we still gonna be sending so much cash and arms to save it now that it's occupied it will be bloodier and even more difficult to wrestle back from Russia?

What are the chances of Ukraine actually retaking and holding these territories?

Shouldn't Russia and Putin be atleast somewhat satiated?

and this is maybe atleast a starting point for negotiations of a ceasefire or truce?

Are there any resources? what is the value of the land Ukraine is losing?

Could there be negotiated compensation from Russia for annexing these territories

a reply to: putnam6

Russia may have military forces in 30% of Ukraine but that does not mean that they "control" that much real estate. Ukraine also has military forces in much of those same areas but that does not mean that Ukraine "controls" them either. That real estate is contested, meaning that the ultimate outcome of who ends up controlling what is still uncertain.

In my opinion, the probability of Ukraine eventually retaking much of the territory that is currently contested is fairly high, as long as they have weapons to fight with. The reason is that invaders always need much more military capability than defenders to successfully defeat and then occupy the territory of another country, especially if the defenders are highly motivated. Ukrainians are highly motivated now while Russian troops are realizing they are on the wrong side of history and have been lied to by their leaders. Right now, Russia is burning through men and materiel at an unsustainable rate. Once their 100,000 or so troops are gone, there will still be 41 million Ukrainians left.

a reply to: putnam6

They controlled Afghanistan too..

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: putnam6

Russia may have military forces in 30% of Ukraine but that does not mean that they "control" that much real estate. Ukraine also has military forces in much of those same areas but that does not mean that Ukraine "controls" them either. That real estate is contested, meaning that the ultimate outcome of who ends up controlling what is still uncertain.

In my opinion, the probability of Ukraine eventually retaking much of the territory that is currently contested is fairly high, as long as they have weapons to fight with. The reason is that invaders always need much more military capability than defenders to successfully defeat and then occupy the territory of another country, especially if the defenders are highly motivated. Ukrainians are highly motivated now while Russian troops are realizing they are on the wrong side of history and have been lied to by their leaders. Right now, Russia is burning through men and materiel at an unsustainable rate. Once their 100,000 or so troops are gone, there will still be 41 million Ukrainians left.

So you believe Russia is just gonna eventually give up and go home?

So all we got to do is keep feeding Ukraine tens of billions in aid?

FWIW last time this strategy was used it took 10 years for them to leave and our shipping of aid and weapons helped create Osama Bin Laden.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: putnam6

They controlled Afghanistan too..

see above

originally posted by: putnam6
So you believe Russia is just gonna eventually give up and go home?

So all we got to do is keep feeding Ukraine tens of billions in aid?

FWIW last time this strategy was used it took 10 years for them to leave and our shipping of aid and weapons helped create Osama Bin Laden.

They've lost as many men and nearly as much materiel as they did in those 10 years and are being isolated from the global community. This is also against an adversary that looks like them, speaks like them and were told would welcome them openly.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: putnam6
So you believe Russia is just gonna eventually give up and go home?

So all we got to do is keep feeding Ukraine tens of billions in aid?

FWIW last time this strategy was used it took 10 years for them to leave and our shipping of aid and weapons helped create Osama Bin Laden.

They've lost as many men and nearly as much materiel as they did in those 10 years and are being isolated from the global community. This is also against an adversary that looks like them, speaks like them and were told would welcome them openly.

So if we know our history we will be fighting Zelenskyy and Ukraine in Ukraine in about 15-20 years, sort of like us pumping money into Vietnam and for that matter even Korea, you know to stop the communist menace. Im, sure there was a time when this worked but I'll be damned if I can remember it happening

The CIA smuggled billions of dollars in weapons into the hands of the Afghan resistance. That bled the Red Army, leaving at least 15,000 soldiers and commandos dead on the battlefield. The United States thought it had won the last great battle of the Cold War. Victory has proved fleeting.

A thousand-page trove of just-declassified White House, CIA and State Department documents adds significantly to our knowledge of what happened before and after the Soviet invasion. It shows that in 1980, President Carter’s CIA spent close to $100 million shipping weapons to the Afghan resistance.

Carter’s global gun-running was more aggressive than we knew. He aimed to oust the Soviets. The United States even enlisted revolutionary Iran, which held American hostages. In the 1980s, it grew to become the biggest American covert action of the Cold War. President Reagan eventually upped the ante to $700 million a year.

a reply to: putnam6

Or China will save russias economy with help from other BRICS nations.

Then Russia may be softly subjucated by China. Similar to the NK/China relationship.

a reply to: putnam6


Not with putin in charge.

russia would likely beg us to let them off the hook for what putin has done after putin is removed.




But either way, Ukraine is quickly acquiring the tools and training necessary to forcibly remove russia from Ukrainian territory.

originally posted by: putnam6
So if we know our history we will be fighting Zelenskyy and Ukraine in Ukraine in about 15-20 years, sort of like us pumping money into Vietnam and for that matter even Korea, you know to stop the communist menace. Im, sure there was a time when this worked but I'll be damned if I can remember it happening.

I don't think that will occur. This is my opinion only but I think the Russian Federation will not hold together if Putin fails and is subsequently replaced. That would leave various states which may or may not be hostile to Ukraine and the West so I think what we should expect is more of a World War II type scenario where Western militaries are invited into Ukraine as partners as this country will be the buffer.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: putnam6

They controlled Afghanistan too..

Keeping Afghanistan long term was not really in the Russian national interest.

Keeping Ukraine one way or another under control is 100% in the Russian national interest.

Russia will slowly and almost certainly grind out much of southern and eastern Ukraine. They've been at it since 2014 and it's very slow progress yet after 8 long years they are still sticking to the plan and slowly taking over a significant part of their original near abroad

a reply to: putnam6

We re-opened our embassy there because we're ready to be friends with russia?

a reply to: putnam6

What makes you say it was a fleeting victory? Russia lost half of the Soviet union and they've only gained scraps of it back. If arming Afghanistan contributed to that, then it was well worth it. Now the question is, did that lead to 9/11? I don't think so. Invading Afghanistan was a mistake though, sure.

Why would they beg you to let them off the hook lol
Shouldn’t they be begging the mighty and heroic Ukraine?

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

originally posted by: Dalamax
Why would they beg you to let them off the hook lol
Shouldn’t they be begging the mighty and heroic Ukraine?

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

They will be leaving Ukraine first, then begging for sanctions relief.

After they deal with their putin madman of course.

originally posted by: Cutepants
a reply to: putnam6

What makes you say it was a fleeting victory? Russia lost half of the Soviet union and they've only gained scraps of it back. If arming Afghanistan contributed to that, then it was well worth it. Now the question is, did that lead to 9/11? I don't think so. Invading Afghanistan was a mistake though, sure.

Respectfully how is it a victory when you end up in an 18-plus year war spending trillions and in the end, Afghanistan isn't atleast an ally LOL at least in Korea we got South Korea?

As for the defeat of the Soviet Union, we are still spending billions against its still strong remnants. ON top of now we got security and aid responsibilities to even more countries worried about the Russian menace from NATO.

a reply to: putnam6

All Russia Needs is a Scaled Down Partial Buffer State in Ukraine and this War Nonsense Will be Over .

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: putnam6

All Russia Needs is a Scaled Down Partial Buffer State in Ukraine and this War Nonsense Will be Over .

All russia needs to do is stop invading non threatening neighbors to steal land and resources, and russia's war of agression will be over.


Fixed that for ya.

originally posted by: PatriotGames4u

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: putnam6

All Russia Needs is a Scaled Down Partial Buffer State in Ukraine and this War Nonsense Will be Over .

All russia needs to do is stop invading non threatening neighbors to steal land and resources, and russia's war of agression will be over.


Fixed that for ya.

So your goal is to get Putin to slink back behind his borders and lick his wounds? How much is too much to pay for that?

Doesn't that eventuality lead to Putin potentially being replaced and as has been mentioned a power vacuum in Russia?

That doesn't necessarily make anybody more secure in both the short and long term, does it?

The devil you do know and all...

a reply to: putnam6

Like I said, attacking Afghanistan was a mistake. Invading bad, sending weapons good. I never said anything about gaining an ally.

As for the defeat of the Soviet Union, we are still spending billions against its still strong remnants. ON top of now we got security and aid responsibilities to even more countries worried about the Russian menace from NATO.

What's your point? I think there's about 100,000 US troops in Europe right now. In 2021 it was 60,000. But in the 80's, more than 300,000. So, huge improvement. And if we get Sweden and Finland into NATO then most of those troops can be recalled.

Edit: Well I'm not familiar with all the troop placements. But at least it would make the Baltic states way easier to defend for NATO.