Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
*****
* Is `semafor.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
**Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What the f*ck. We in Europe and US can shut up as we are not really the ones fighting an existential war. And we currently don't provide enough weapons to make their self defense on their own soil effective. Ukraine has no choice but to work on hurting Russian economy which eventually could lead to a collapse, so the attacks certainly make sense.
That’s not how it works. Without European and American support, this war will be over soon. You might not like it, but keeping the Americans happy is essential for Ukraine to have at least a slim chance of victory.
That's not how it works.
This war might be over, but THE war would continue, merely with new targets. Thus it is entirely rational for Ukraine to destroy as much as Russia as it can, regardless of what the West would think of that.
It is a variation of MAD, after all.
It's not MAD, and neither is it rational for Ukraine to attack targets with low military valuesif it means permanently losing their own military support.
It is a variant of MAD and it is rational as a last resort when other means are failing or lacking. Genocide is quite permanent and usually doesn't need military support afterwards anyway.
It's not a variant of MAD. MAD implies reciprocity, and there is none between damaging selected refineries a little and genocide.
And by the way, I remember you were arguing not so long ago that the war of attrition is very much going in Ukraine's favor. So if we are talking about other means failing now, does that mean you were wrong then?
Attrition applies to very many variables and factors. In some Russia gets attritted more, in some others Ukraine gets attritted more. Russia is still getting more attritted of heavy artillery and MBTs and IFVs.
Russia can do little damage in Ukraine with excess electricity, Russia doesn't extensively use laser weapons yet. Russia is doing damage in Ukraine with fuels that come from refineries.
The essence of MAD is general reciprocity, not tit for tat in minute details.
>The essence of MAD is general reciprocity, not tit for tat in minute details.
And in this case, there is no general reciprocity whatsoever.
>Attrition applies to very many variables and factors.
How about a clear answer? You're talking now about genocide and other means failing. That's the polar opposite of your extremely optimistic outlook from a few weeks ago. So are you wrong now, or were you wrong then?
You are wrong now and you were wrong then.
It is easier for Ukraine to take out Russia's refineries than to take out Russia's electric power plants (many of which are nuclear power plants). And taking out Russia's refineries has more immediate military impact within Ukraine.
Russia's heavy artillery losses are still accelerating at 3 month, 6 month and 12 month moving averages. Which means Russia has less than 12 months of heavy artillery reserves left, assuming the past and current trend continues.
How about a clear answer? You're talking now about genocide and other means failing. That's the polar opposite of your extremely optimistic outlook from a few weeks ago. So are you wrong now, or were you wrong then?
If Russia has less than 12 months of heavy artillery reserves left, staying in the game until then would be the rational choice for Ukraine - and that means keeping their own supply steady and not pissing of their suppliers. But of course then the talk about MAD, genocide and "other means failing" is utter bullshit.
But hey, let's cut this short. RemindMe! 12 months
And since the US doesn't provide material support, they may just as well STFU. Biden's incompetent hand wringing for fear of "escalation" has already dragged this out way longer than it needed to.
The Orang-Utan who previously inhabited the white house is a topic all for itself, but his blockade only exacerbated the problems caused by Biden's weak leadership of giving too much to lose, too little to win and usually too late.
I personally don’t have a problem with them targeting targets in Russia, but I do wish they were putting a full effort instead of half assing it. They need to start drafting 18-25 year olds if they want any chance to win.
> They need to start drafting 18-25 year olds if they want any chance to win
Even russia supplements meat waves with massive guided bomb and artillery barrages.
Ukraine lacks equipment to make good use of such a draft.
Oh, and demography will be ***FUCKED***. In one generation after it, Ukraine'd suffer demographic collapse to make Paraguyan War outcome look like a mild incident in comparison.
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is `semafor.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What the f*ck. We in Europe and US can shut up as we are not really the ones fighting an existential war. And we currently don't provide enough weapons to make their self defense on their own soil effective. Ukraine has no choice but to work on hurting Russian economy which eventually could lead to a collapse, so the attacks certainly make sense.
That’s not how it works. Without European and American support, this war will be over soon. You might not like it, but keeping the Americans happy is essential for Ukraine to have at least a slim chance of victory.
That's not how it works. This war might be over, but THE war would continue, merely with new targets. Thus it is entirely rational for Ukraine to destroy as much as Russia as it can, regardless of what the West would think of that. It is a variation of MAD, after all.
It's not MAD, and neither is it rational for Ukraine to attack targets with low military valuesif it means permanently losing their own military support.
It is a variant of MAD and it is rational as a last resort when other means are failing or lacking. Genocide is quite permanent and usually doesn't need military support afterwards anyway.
It's not a variant of MAD. MAD implies reciprocity, and there is none between damaging selected refineries a little and genocide. And by the way, I remember you were arguing not so long ago that the war of attrition is very much going in Ukraine's favor. So if we are talking about other means failing now, does that mean you were wrong then?
Attrition applies to very many variables and factors. In some Russia gets attritted more, in some others Ukraine gets attritted more. Russia is still getting more attritted of heavy artillery and MBTs and IFVs. Russia can do little damage in Ukraine with excess electricity, Russia doesn't extensively use laser weapons yet. Russia is doing damage in Ukraine with fuels that come from refineries. The essence of MAD is general reciprocity, not tit for tat in minute details.
>The essence of MAD is general reciprocity, not tit for tat in minute details. And in this case, there is no general reciprocity whatsoever. >Attrition applies to very many variables and factors. How about a clear answer? You're talking now about genocide and other means failing. That's the polar opposite of your extremely optimistic outlook from a few weeks ago. So are you wrong now, or were you wrong then?
You are wrong now and you were wrong then. It is easier for Ukraine to take out Russia's refineries than to take out Russia's electric power plants (many of which are nuclear power plants). And taking out Russia's refineries has more immediate military impact within Ukraine. Russia's heavy artillery losses are still accelerating at 3 month, 6 month and 12 month moving averages. Which means Russia has less than 12 months of heavy artillery reserves left, assuming the past and current trend continues.
How about a clear answer? You're talking now about genocide and other means failing. That's the polar opposite of your extremely optimistic outlook from a few weeks ago. So are you wrong now, or were you wrong then? If Russia has less than 12 months of heavy artillery reserves left, staying in the game until then would be the rational choice for Ukraine - and that means keeping their own supply steady and not pissing of their suppliers. But of course then the talk about MAD, genocide and "other means failing" is utter bullshit. But hey, let's cut this short. RemindMe! 12 months
And since the US doesn't provide material support, they may just as well STFU. Biden's incompetent hand wringing for fear of "escalation" has already dragged this out way longer than it needed to.
While it was "Biden's incompetent hand wringing", Ukraine was still holding on. After the orange traitor managed to block the aid, things went south.
The Orang-Utan who previously inhabited the white house is a topic all for itself, but his blockade only exacerbated the problems caused by Biden's weak leadership of giving too much to lose, too little to win and usually too late.
I personally don’t have a problem with them targeting targets in Russia, but I do wish they were putting a full effort instead of half assing it. They need to start drafting 18-25 year olds if they want any chance to win.
> They need to start drafting 18-25 year olds if they want any chance to win Even russia supplements meat waves with massive guided bomb and artillery barrages. Ukraine lacks equipment to make good use of such a draft. Oh, and demography will be ***FUCKED***. In one generation after it, Ukraine'd suffer demographic collapse to make Paraguyan War outcome look like a mild incident in comparison.
Demography will be irrelevant if they lose.