Arming the Ukrainians

[Outrider]

Thanks for clarifying. Yes Nato is not involved in the Article 5 sense (and if it was, it would not work out well for them either)

Ahahhahaahahhahahhahah!

, but there is a lot the mainstream media hasn't been telling us, if reports from some of the independent journalists are true. The YouTube blogger Borzzikman, for example, reports the deaths of Nato personnel most days.

If NATO personnel were dying, NATO would be involved, and Russia would lose. Quickly. There are people from NATO countries who have volunteered on a personal level, but they are not 'NATO Personnel'.

Ukraine is relying on US supply and support, including intelligence, which is why the war has been in stalemate.

Allied support and intelligence, much of it from the US, but far from all. Yes, that's why it's a stalemate. You seem to think that the entirety of NATO joining in wouldn't shift that much, which is frankly just a denial of reality.

Until the past year, that is, because the attrition seems to be taking a higher toll on Ukraine.

And, again, Ukraine aren't trying to win a war of eradication, they're trying to score an economic victory. Russia haven't been interested in a peace settlement - it's questionable how serious they are about it right now - but something in the balance of what they think they can keep and what they'll end up having paid for it seems to have shifted, and they've not gained very much territory, none of it particularly significant. They have been increasingly seeing infrastructure damage within Russian territory, though...

I suggest that because the losing side can't expect to dictate the terms of a peace agreement, the West is currently claiming that Russia isn't winning, or can't win, in order to avoid having to agree to peace terms dictated by Russia.

I suggest that modern warfare isn't about killing every last man - the personnel attrition, whilst an important factor, isn't 'THE DETERMINING FACTOR' in a peace deal. How much Russia needs to cut its financial losses and accommodate the demographic shifts the war has created, how quickly it needs sanctions to be lifted to get its cratering economy stumbling along again are far more weighty influences on their side.

O.

[Spud]

Ahahhahaahahhahahhahah!

If NATO personnel were dying, NATO would be involved, and Russia would lose. Quickly. There are people from NATO countries who have volunteered on a personal level, but they are not 'NATO Personnel'.

Allied support and intelligence, much of it from the US, but far from all. Yes, that's why it's a stalemate. You seem to think that the entirety of NATO joining in wouldn't shift that much, which is frankly just a denial of reality.

And, again, Ukraine aren't trying to win a war of eradication, they're trying to score an economic victory. Russia haven't been interested in a peace settlement - it's questionable how serious they are about it right now - but something in the balance of what they think they can keep and what they'll end up having paid for it seems to have shifted, and they've not gained very much territory, none of it particularly significant. They have been increasingly seeing infrastructure damage within Russian territory, though...

I suggest that modern warfare isn't about killing every last man - the personnel attrition, whilst an important factor, isn't 'THE DETERMINING FACTOR' in a peace deal. How much Russia needs to cut its financial losses and accommodate the demographic shifts the war has created, how quickly it needs sanctions to be lifted to get its cratering economy stumbling along again are far more weighty influences on their side.

O.

It's quite simple. Russia will kill every last Ukrainian if they have to, whether they go broke or not. Knowing this, you are advocating for Ukraine to continue fighting.
If NATO were all in, it would be bad for both sides.

[Outrider]

It's quite simple.

"I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that." Dr Ben Goldacre, and applicable to pretty much any situation in life.

Russia will kill every last Ukrainian if they have to, whether they go broke or not.

Putin wants people to think he'd be happy with that, but he knows that the oligarchy he relies upon to maintain power will start to push back when the funds for their corruption start to dry up, which is increasingly happening.

Knowing this, you are advocating for Ukraine to continue fighting.

Knowing this, as with pretty much everything else that every comes out of his mouth, I advise against taking Putin at his word.

If NATO were all in, it would be bad for both sides.

Not really.

Minor concern for NATO, largely on the families of those being sent to the front, because there's always a chance in a combat situation that something can go wrong, and there will be some losses on the NATO side, even if only from incidents and accidents.

Vast improvement for Ukraine, with a significant increase in personnel, weapons technology and logistics.

Serious brown alert for Russia who don't have the logistics or the finances to replace that many pairs of soiled trousers.

O.