this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2024
166 points (94.6% liked)

World News

39328 readers
1689 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rayyy 25 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The west can spend a few millions to save Ukraine or pony up trillions to try to save Finland, Poland and several other small NATO countries.
If Ukraine falls US status and power will go with it. Of course Putin emboldened because he absolutely knows he has a friend in the Republican party.

[–] Kolrami 12 points 8 months ago
[–] APassenger 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

As near as I can tell, the West doesn't want Ukraine to fall, but it's afraid of it winning, too. Then there's the matter of many countries not wanting to carry costs, risks, or political capital.

I wish this was different.

[–] DigitalTraveler42 23 points 8 months ago (2 children)

but it's afraid of it winning

No, the US leadership is dealing with a bully with nuclear weapons, sure we can take a chance, do some surgical attacks to limit any launches and such, but that would be a big time escalation, and we're not there yet, and that escalation would mean a lot more people would die, a lot lot more.

The main strategy has been to try to strangle Russia economically and isolate them to wear down the populace and hopefully force either a retreat or a change in leadership, all while providing Ukraine with what they needed to halt Russia's advances. However, thanks to the MAGA/Putin alliance they have successfully stalled our resupply efforts to Ukraine, thus giving Putin more time to keep pushing and costing Ukraine lives that they can't waste while fighting a numerically superior opponent.

So ultimately Trump's lunatics are who aren't afraid of winning, they don't want Ukraine to win, because Trump is Putin's cock holster and they are Trump's cult who follow his signals for everything and anything. There's no fear of winning, only betrayal and treasons prolonging the problem.

[–] APassenger 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

halt Russian advances

This is my point. If Biden had an unlimited arsenal to send I think he would think twice about doing so.

Because nukes. We aren't disagreeing here, I don't think.

Regime change happens when Putin dies and it may not improve things. Trump is more likely to win than we are to see Putin toppled.

Edit: I was never talking NATO boots on ground. That seems like fantasy when we're struggling to provide them with ammo.

[–] DigitalTraveler42 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's all such a tricky situation, we all know Putin isn't going to deal in good faith, so you just have to kinda walk this tightrope, and that's what Biden and NATO are doing, and why Ukraine wasn't just brought into NATO already.

Trump is more likely to win than we are to see Putin toppled.

While you're definitely right, that just means we still have a problem until Puty dies or gets dethroned, and once Puty dies it's going to create quite the anxiety inducing power vacuum.

[–] APassenger 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Agree.

My general opinion, at this point:

  • Ukraine has shown and singalled that without help, the lines will be moving in the wrong direction.

  • If they get their borders back (win), Russia will have a strong argument that the war was with the West, not just Ukraine. And I don't know that Western politicians have the stomach for that kind of win, because the nuke thing, if nothing else.

  • The pols may be open to it, but even when there was less push back, I didn't see the will to win. It was the will to not lose, and then trust Ukraine had what it took.

  • At this point I think we know that Russia and Ukraine will have a massive generation-size gap in their male populations. And at the end of this, absent significant help, will be a slow war of attrition with Russia moving lines often enough to matter.

  • Anything short of restoration or either historical border is a loss. At least of land and lives, if not other.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 8 months ago

Rumor is Putin has cancer. If so, he may not have long to live but they said that two years ago.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 8 months ago

Surgical strikes against 7,000 targets?!!

Do you not know how big the Russian arsenal is?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The West had rallied to President Zelenskyy's call for military support to enable a spring offensive, and there was an air of optimism that Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine was to be defeated.

However, a year on, the much-anticipated Ukrainian spring offensive failed to deliver any significant changes to the frontline, and 2024 started with Russia on the front foot in the Donbas.

Despite robust Western political rhetoric in support of Ukraine, actions speak louder than words, and Putin will feel emboldened by the West's hesitancy over the level of commitment to combating Russian aggression.

However, the West eventually agreed to send modern tanks and then long-range missiles - such as Storm Shadow - despite a growing tirade of threats from Putin.

This is not just about Western military personnel - such a move would also enable the West to deploy modern weapons that cannot be gifted to Ukraine for security reasons.

President Putin would recognise the significance of such a move and would increase his threatening rhetoric, but he knows that it is Russia that is responsible for the war and for invading a vulnerable neighbour.


The original article contains 784 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

The USA, Russia and China have a common goal in Ukraine, to bolster their economy. A war of attrition is the capitalist way.

It's been a wake-up call for Europe to unify their defence, hopefully soon before the imperialist forces annihilate them.