• Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The problem is that Ukraine is given enough not to lose, but not enough to win. At this rate, Ukraine will depend on western hand-outs much longer than if the West fully committed to see Ukraine restore its borders.

      • Bantha@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        What do you think “winning” looks like tho? Absolutely annihilating Russia?

        • Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Forcing Russia to stop and reverse its invasion. If you think that it will take the total annihilation of russia, so be it.

          • Bantha@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            No. I don’t think that’s “winning”. First of all Russia is more than just Putin. Actual people live there. As much as in Ukraine. They wouldn’t be that much better than Russia if Ukraine “invaded” Russia back. Also for that to happen the west would need to support Ukraine so dramatically that it most certainly would come to a nuclear Supergau. This “total annihilation of Russia” would mean in return the total annihilation of the human race.

            I don’t think Ukraine can “win” against Russia with sheer military might. No matter how much they are supported. That’s an archaic view of politics and war. The only real solution to bring piece is a peace contract. It isn’t the 11th century anymore where two armies would clash against each other and the one coming out victorious is the winning party of the war. I’m not one of those “stop giving Ukraine weapons and military aid und jUsT tAlK wItH pUtIn” guys but in the end there has to be a treaty. And you can’t do that by just bombing the shit out of Russia cuz that’d mean the end of the fucking world.