Russia may win this war in the conventional sense. They may take Kiev, install a Russia-friendly government, and even have military forces occupying the country to keep the terrorists from simply walking in and overthrowing them. But the West will do all they can to spread civil unrest in the populace, to get them to side with the russophobes, to fund and arm those russophobes, and to recreate this same model in all of Russia's neighboring countries. I'm not sure you can actually "win" the style of war the imperialists wage nowadays unless the imperialists lose wholesale. If the US and its lackeys keep channeling their propaganda in a region, keep throwing their money in a region, keep arming fascists in a region, then you have an infection you can't control. And if you crack down and secure it, it makes your liberalized population sympathetic to the fascists because they can't see or comprehend the threat to their sovereignty or lives. This is the game the West plays and has played for decades, and I don't think its going to end until the head is cut off the snake and the fascists are cut off from their platforms and funding.
Of course, everyone here knows this. How this is going to turn out for Ukraine, who can say? The terrorists might slip the leash and attack Europe, immediately turning everyone off from the whole thing and giving Russia a needed reprieve. I suspect Russia may win the war, but the peace will be a grueling and draining affair for years, until the US is forced to divert resources elsewhere and the fascists are forced to go underground as their funding dries up.
It's a mistake to focus on Ukraine as the core of the conflict. Geopolitical outcome of the war is far more relevant. We're seeing much of the world turning away from the west now, and BRICS is already a larger economy than the G7. The trend will be for western economic bloc to shrink and for BRICS to grow. This will cause a deep economic crisis in the west, and I'd argue we're already seeing the start of it happening. Current political system in the west is already unstable, and I don't think it will survive the crisis.
Meanwhile, Russia doesn't have to take all of Ukraine. An alternative scenario to consider is that Russia takes the territory that's largely populated by Russian speakers where there will be little support for any kind of insurgency. They will likely cut off remaining rump state of Ukraine from the sea by going through Odessa and connecting to Transnistria.
The remaining territory of Ukraine will be cut off from most of the industrial and agricultural areas, and it's populated by hardcore nationalists who will be very bitter with the west abandoning them. If the west allows western Ukraine fail then Europe will be faced with a flood of refugees feeding further into the current economic crisis. However, continuing propping western Ukraine up will become an economic black hole for the west.
That makes sense. But wouldn't leaving the rump state invite the fascists back into power? Does the gained territory really offer much of a buffer for Russia if what's left of Ukraine keeps getting funded by the West to agitate the region?
The rump state is not going to be very easy for Russia to destabilize, and eventually Russia will likely end up with a puppet regime there. There's already precedent for this in Chechnya right now. Meanwhile, the buffer Russia gains comes from the fact that whatever is left of Ukraine will not be able to join NATO. Whatever is left of Ukraine will be demilitarized going forward.
Russia has increased the military budget like never before. I think it will crush Kiev's government once in for all. They have 2 options either go for a long war or go for regime change in kiev.
I don't doubt that. But I don't doubt that it's going to need to be a thorough victory to prevent the West from having anything to fund further action with. In the end, this is all speculation.
Russia may win this war in the conventional sense. They may take Kiev, install a Russia-friendly government, and even have military forces occupying the country to keep the terrorists from simply walking in and overthrowing them. But the West will do all they can to spread civil unrest in the populace, to get them to side with the russophobes, to fund and arm those russophobes, and to recreate this same model in all of Russia's neighboring countries. I'm not sure you can actually "win" the style of war the imperialists wage nowadays unless the imperialists lose wholesale. If the US and its lackeys keep channeling their propaganda in a region, keep throwing their money in a region, keep arming fascists in a region, then you have an infection you can't control. And if you crack down and secure it, it makes your liberalized population sympathetic to the fascists because they can't see or comprehend the threat to their sovereignty or lives. This is the game the West plays and has played for decades, and I don't think its going to end until the head is cut off the snake and the fascists are cut off from their platforms and funding.
Of course, everyone here knows this. How this is going to turn out for Ukraine, who can say? The terrorists might slip the leash and attack Europe, immediately turning everyone off from the whole thing and giving Russia a needed reprieve. I suspect Russia may win the war, but the peace will be a grueling and draining affair for years, until the US is forced to divert resources elsewhere and the fascists are forced to go underground as their funding dries up.
It's a mistake to focus on Ukraine as the core of the conflict. Geopolitical outcome of the war is far more relevant. We're seeing much of the world turning away from the west now, and BRICS is already a larger economy than the G7. The trend will be for western economic bloc to shrink and for BRICS to grow. This will cause a deep economic crisis in the west, and I'd argue we're already seeing the start of it happening. Current political system in the west is already unstable, and I don't think it will survive the crisis.
Meanwhile, Russia doesn't have to take all of Ukraine. An alternative scenario to consider is that Russia takes the territory that's largely populated by Russian speakers where there will be little support for any kind of insurgency. They will likely cut off remaining rump state of Ukraine from the sea by going through Odessa and connecting to Transnistria.
The remaining territory of Ukraine will be cut off from most of the industrial and agricultural areas, and it's populated by hardcore nationalists who will be very bitter with the west abandoning them. If the west allows western Ukraine fail then Europe will be faced with a flood of refugees feeding further into the current economic crisis. However, continuing propping western Ukraine up will become an economic black hole for the west.
That makes sense. But wouldn't leaving the rump state invite the fascists back into power? Does the gained territory really offer much of a buffer for Russia if what's left of Ukraine keeps getting funded by the West to agitate the region?
The rump state is not going to be very easy for Russia to destabilize, and eventually Russia will likely end up with a puppet regime there. There's already precedent for this in Chechnya right now. Meanwhile, the buffer Russia gains comes from the fact that whatever is left of Ukraine will not be able to join NATO. Whatever is left of Ukraine will be demilitarized going forward.
Again, makes sense.
Russia has increased the military budget like never before. I think it will crush Kiev's government once in for all. They have 2 options either go for a long war or go for regime change in kiev.
I don't doubt that. But I don't doubt that it's going to need to be a thorough victory to prevent the West from having anything to fund further action with. In the end, this is all speculation.
Yeah.. True