• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Should Ukraine give up?

Hercules56

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Aug 4, 2013
Messages
11,458
There are reports in the Jerusalem Post that Russia and Ukraine are negotiating a path to peace, and its a hard one.

-Ukraine will have to give up Donbass region.

-Pledge that Ukraine will not join NATO.

-Military of Ukraine must be reduced in size.


Zelensky knows that he has tons of support. Financial, sanctions and weapons. But no country will defend Ukraine. They will have to do all the fighting.

The word is if Ukraine rejects this offer, Russia will go full Bear and crush Ukraine, quick and painful.

If Zelensky says no, he will look like a massive Ukrainian patriot. But possibly a dead one or be President of a non-existent nation.

If Zelensky says yes, he may look like a coward to some, but a pragmatic realist to others. NATO will not save Ukraine, maybe its not worth losing the nation in the name of pride and honor. I dont know.


https://www.jpost.com/international...ussia+and+Ukraine?&utm_campaign=March+9,+2022
 
Do that and just give Putin the rest of Eastern Europe and Taiwan to China to save us all the trouble.
 
AIUI The demand by Putin is not to 'reduce' the Ukrainian army but to get rid of it all together.

In other words, just roll over and let Russia takeover everything.
 
Do that and just give Putin the rest of Eastern Europe and Taiwan to China to save us all the trouble.

Its very easy for you to say, you're not watching your nation be destroyed. And you're not faced with the decision to compromise or face annihilation.

NATO is a great ally, but only when you're a member. No one is fighting for Ukraine and they are losing.
 
AIUI The demand by Putin is not to 'reduce' the Ukrainian army but to get rid of it all together.

In other words, just roll over and let Russia takeover everything.

Well if that's the case, then Zelensky must say no.
 
Its very easy for you to say, you're not watching your nation be destroyed. And you're not faced with the decision to compromise or face annihilation.

NATO is a great ally, but only when you're a member. No one is fighting for Ukraine and they are losing.

Easy for you to say since you don't live in the countries Putin WILL take next if he gets away with taking Ukraine.
 
I'm struggling to think through how this could actually end though.

Barring some palace coup scenario that ends with Putin getting the old Makarov to the back of the head treatment, it's hard to imagine this war ending through anything but a negotiated peace where Putin is going to demand something, anything just to save face.

The terms cited here strike me as something Ukraine is not going to accept, even with all the bloodshed. But I wouldn't assume that there aren't terms that include them giving something to the aggressor that they wouldn't agree to.
 
It appears that Russia already went "full bear". Spearheaded the invasion with Airborne and Spetsnatz - and got smacked hard. 120 Battalion Tactical Groups (BTG) are in Ukraine out of a nationwide total of about 160. That is to say that fully 3/4 of Russia's ground forces are in Ukraine right now. 100% of the forces that they pre-deployed to the area around Ukraine are now in Ukraine - Russia has no reserves left in the theater. Two years ago Russia had less than 100 BTG's, they ramped up their ground forces in anticipation of this, but it wasn't enough.

They could pull in BTGs from elsewhere, but that could leave them out of position, that's especially an issue in Georgia. Russia still has popular support for this war, but they are also facing large scale protests. Russian troops in Ukraine are demoralized. There is evidence that many of the abandoned Russian vehicles captured in Ukraine are a result of desertion (not all, lack of fuel and maintenance issues play a larger role).

Ukraine can still win this - grind Russia to a halt, bleed them white and wait for societal pressure to get Putin removed from power. The number of forces Russia would need to even just encircle Kyiv is much more than they have in that part of the country - Russia has no chance at all of capturing the city. None. Yet that seems to be their focus right now.

Meanwhile, Ukraine's military is getting bigger. Much bigger. Their active duty military before this was as large as Russia's invasion force. Add to that 200k reserves and recent veterans with experience in the Donbass area and they have a trained force double the size of the Russian force. That Ukrainian force has far fewer vehicles than Russia, but is very motivated and is getting resupply from Europe.

Add to that another 100k or so of foreign volunteers (many with military experience) and untrained but in-training Ukrainians defending their own cities.

I don't know if Ukraine will win this - but they still can and it looks a bit more likely everyday.
 
No. I have a feeling that Putin is not going to survive much longer, maybe due to his health. Try to wait him out until he's gone.
 
I figured Donbass is already lost from the last time around. Agreeing to that costs Ukraine nothing else at this point. But the rest of it just makes it easier for Russia to finish the job next time.

My view is that Ukraine should concede Donbass to get rid of the territorial dispute, and then join NATO as quickly as possible.

The real question is, should NATO give up? I.e., declare that it's not going to admit Ukraine anyway, on account of not wanting to run the risk of actually having to defend them next time around.
 
I figured Donbass is already lost from the last time around. Agreeing to that costs Ukraine nothing else at this point. But the rest of it just makes it easier for Russia to finish the job next time.

My view is that Ukraine should concede Donbass to get rid of the territorial dispute, and then join NATO as quickly as possible.

The real question is, should NATO give up? I.e., declare that it's not going to admit Ukraine anyway, on account of not wanting to run the risk of actually having to defend them next time around.

You are not getting it. Should Ukraine wave the white flag, a Putin puppet government will be installed. One of Putin's demands for 'peace' is that Ukraine be a 'neutral country', i.e., it does NOT join NATO.
 
You are not getting it. Should Ukraine wave the white flag, a Putin puppet government will be installed. One of Putin's demands for 'peace' is that Ukraine be a 'neutral country', i.e., it does NOT join NATO.

It seems pretty clear that Ukraine will not be joining NATO anytime soon. At least not in the next 10 years.

As far as the Eastern Russian speaking region it is a lost cause. They will obviously become part of Russia.

As for becoming a demilitarized nation that is something Ukraine cannot accept
 
I suspect Ukraine might agree to recognise the loss of Crimea, and agree not to join NATO or the EU. I really don't see them yielding more than that while waiting for whatever disease is killing Putin to do its work.
 
I suspect Ukraine might agree to recognise the loss of Crimea, and agree not to join NATO or the EU. I really don't see them yielding more than that while waiting for whatever disease is killing Putin to do its work.

To bad he can't catch the instant lead poisoning that OBL caught back in the day.
 
Do that and just give Putin the rest of Eastern Europe and Taiwan to China to save us all the trouble.

What kind of trouble do you actually have?

I think 99% of the trouble is on the ukrainian people. Should they fight to their pretty certain death so that you could be spared some trouble? Aren't we outsourcing the fight to the ukrainians? Let them fight russia with our weapons, so that we don't have to do it ourselves?

I know it is a loaded point of view. But, I think there is a point to it.
 
I think Ukraine could live with letting go of Crimea, Donbass, and NATO membership.

But what will Russia give in return? Will they commit to respect Ukraine's territory? Will they commit to never again invade?
 
Will Russia hand over War Criminals to be tried in Ukraine?
No?
Then any peace will just be temporary until Putin has more supplies.
 
Ukraine could just promise not to be Nazis and not to commit genocide in Donbass. That would remove all the reasons Russia invaded after all and it would be trivially easy to do since they already weren't doing it. They could even agree to neutral 3rd party inspectors regularly checking they're not Nazis.
 
I think Ukraine could live with letting go of Crimea, Donbass, and NATO membership.

"... and anything else Russia decides they shouldn't have at any point in the future, whenever they feel like it, for no good reason."

But what will Russia give in return? Will they commit to respect Ukraine's territory? Will they commit to never again invade?

Why would Russia give anything or commit to the even the mere possibility that they might commit to anything if they get everything they want?
 
They could even agree to neutral 3rd party inspectors regularly checking they're not Nazis.

I think nowadays it's too easy to find "nazis" under every bed, and too hard to find truly neutral inspectors.

Inspectors: "Well there's been some improvement, but there's still a few Azovs out there. And we did see distressing signs of racist sentiment in several cities."

Putin: "Told you so. Buckle up, we're going back in."
 
Will they commit to never again invade?

Russia already committed not to invade Ukraine. Four or five weeks ago. You know, a week or two before they actually invaded Ukraine.

Let's just say that Russia earned itself some trust issues.

Any Russian commitments would need to be physical. Severe troop reductions with 100km of the border, inspections of military facilities to ensure compliance with that. That sort of thing.

Words mean nothing when they come from the Russian government.
 
Let's just say that Russia earned itself some trust issues.

This is important to remember.

I wouldn't lend the Russian government 20 bucks right now, no matter how much they promised to pay me back next week. I certainly wouldn't trust them with the lives of the Ukrainian people after certain conditions are met.
 
Russia already committed not to invade Ukraine. Four or five weeks ago. You know, a week or two before they actually invaded Ukraine.

Let's just say that Russia earned itself some trust issues.

Any Russian commitments would need to be physical. Severe troop reductions with 100km of the border, inspections of military facilities to ensure compliance with that. That sort of thing.

Words mean nothing when they come from the Russian government.

Indeed, Russia would need to commit to a military-free zone within 100 miles of the Ukraine border. That's the only way Ukraine could ever feel a bit of safety.
 
Indeed, Russia would need to commit to a military-free zone within 100 miles of the Ukraine border. That's the only way Ukraine could ever feel a bit of safety.

"Got it, a Russian military free zone that starts 100 miles INSIDE the Ukraine Border." - Putin.
 
I think Ukraine could live with letting go of Crimea, Donbass, and NATO membership.

But what will Russia give in return? Will they commit to respect Ukraine's territory? Will they commit to never again invade?

Russia commited to respect Ukraine's territory in exchange for Ukraine giving up it's soviet nuclear weapons and allowing a single russian naval base on the Crimea.

That went very well too.
 
There are reports in the Jerusalem Post that Russia and Ukraine are negotiating a path to peace, and its a hard one.

-Ukraine will have to give up Donbass region.

-Pledge that Ukraine will not join NATO.

-Military of Ukraine must be reduced in size.


Zelensky knows that he has tons of support. Financial, sanctions and weapons. But no country will defend Ukraine. They will have to do all the fighting.

The word is if Ukraine rejects this offer, Russia will go full Bear and crush Ukraine, quick and painful.

If Zelensky says no, he will look like a massive Ukrainian patriot. But possibly a dead one or be President of a non-existent nation.

If Zelensky says yes, he may look like a coward to some, but a pragmatic realist to others. NATO will not save Ukraine, maybe its not worth losing the nation in the name of pride and honor. I dont know.


https://www.jpost.com/international...ussia+and+Ukraine?&utm_campaign=March+9,+2022

What does 'Full Bear' consist of?

What will they do that that they aren't doing now?

Would you give up?
 
I don't much credence in the JP's report since no one else is reproting it, but the big problem is how the hell can Ukraine trust Russia not to tear up the deal and invade again, six months from now, a ls Hitler invading Czechslovakia 6 months after Munich?
 
Indeed, Russia would need to commit to a military-free zone within 100 miles of the Ukraine border. That's the only way Ukraine could ever feel a bit of safety.

Have any idea how fast a modern military can cover 100 Miles unoppposed?
 
What kind of trouble do you actually have?

I think 99% of the trouble is on the ukrainian people. Should they fight to their pretty certain death so that you could be spared some trouble? Aren't we outsourcing the fight to the ukrainians? Let them fight russia with our weapons, so that we don't have to do it ourselves?

I know it is a loaded point of view. But, I think there is a point to it.

We have a new Putin supporter, I see.
 
Have any idea how fast a modern military can cover 100 Miles unoppposed?

Wikipedia says the top speed of the T-90 is 37 mph, and the top speed of the T-80 is 50 mph. So I have some idea how fast the Russian military might be able to cover that distance unopposed:

Note that is all pure SWAG.

* Assume the T-72/T-90 is the predominant tank in the Russian army, and therefore the limiting factor on overall speed of the advance.

* Assume that the tanks can't actually sprint at top speed for 100 miles. Rather, they have to move in convoy, stop to refuel, conserve their treads, stay with their supporting elements, do a bit of maneuvering along the route, etc.

* SWAG it out to, the whole business would probably move at about half the top speed of the tanks, or about 18 mph.

* Preliminary conclusion: About five and a half hours.

* Corollary: Some smaller, "elite" units would likely sprint ahead, covering the last few miles quickly to launch surprise attacks on defenders who aren't expecting contact for another couple of hours yet. Then they would promptly stall out and entrench while they waited for their reinforcements and supplies to catch up.

* Corollary: If they're really ballsy, and truly unopposed, they might even infiltrate light infantry by air much earlier, reinforcing these shortly thereafter by sprinting to them with some elite units, and then the rest of the invasion force catches up sometime later.

* Final SWAG: Somewhere between 3 and 6 hours from first contact to full engagement.
 
Back
Top Bottom