- Joined
- Apr 14, 2019
- Messages
- 8,617
- Points
- 284
Warfare Russia/Ukraine War
- Thread starter morris
- Start date
- Featured
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2019
- Messages
- 8,617
- Points
- 284
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2019
- Messages
- 8,617
- Points
- 284
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2019
- Messages
- 3,994
- Points
- 234
Not quite right. The October polls showed a relative majority willing to negotiate, but almost 80% unwilling to cede territories and some two thirds willing to fight as long as necessary.
Moreover, throughout fall reports came from Ukraine that soldiers, veterans and their families are quite opposed to making concessions. It's clear to me that the Kremlin tries to plunge Ukraine into internal chaos, maybe even civil war.
Zelensky should hold a referendum on a potential deal.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2019
- Messages
- 6,859
- Points
- 293
There won't be any cessation of hostilities until a deal has been agreed upon because it's not in russia's interest as long as they have the momentum and before that a referendum is out of the question, similarly to any elections. Drawing the population to predetermined locations will lead to mass casualties.
The government would need to make a decision based on what they think the population would support based on polling.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2019
- Messages
- 5,977
- Points
- 258
Very right and it’s even worse.
October was October, but we have the third decade of November now and the opinion has changed drastically in the last couple of weeks.
That’s what I heard a Polish analyst saying yesterday.
Google is our friend, so:
Half of Ukrainians Want Quick, Negotiated End to War
Ukrainians are growing increasingly weary of the war with Russia. Gallup's latest surveys of Ukraine show 52% would like to see the war end as soon as possible.
news.gallup.com
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2019
- Messages
- 5,977
- Points
- 258
There’s no truce with RuZZia.
Remember what happened after the peace treaty in Minsk in 2015.
After peace was negotiated and hostilities stopped, the Orcs launched an offensive to take Debaltseve.
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2019
- Messages
- 6,605
- Points
- 378
On the practical level, ukr would be ‘giving’ Russia, land, destroyed towns, laced with minefields. Very few people, no assets, no working businesses, destroyed bridges etc.
Putin doesn’t have time to re-arm and go again in the baltics.
If ukr agrees to a truce, then it hasn’t given away those territories, plus it has the Kursk land to trade for something.
Maybe Elon can put a deal together.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2019
- Messages
- 5,977
- Points
- 258
The key mineral is lithium that is necessary for batteries in electric cars. The Orcs know demand for oil will be decreasing due to many countries going green.
They need to rework their business model.
Ukraine: all lithium reserves and mineral resources in war zones
In the ancient rocks of Ukraine are hidden lithium deposits with great potential. Findings that have been identified mainly around the area of Mariupol, the port city of Donbass torn apart by Russian bombing
www.renewablematter.eu
Speaking of Kursk, the Orcs won't trade it for anything.
When the hostilities stop, they will do what they did at Debaltseve.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2020
- Messages
- 2,279
- Points
- 259
if that was true Ukraine probably wouldn't have a problem generating new troops.
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2019
- Messages
- 3,994
- Points
- 234
First things first: 63% of Ukrainians ready to endure the war as long as necessary, survey shows
This was just a few weeks ago. Many more where this has come from.
The polls depict a remarkable coexistence of seemingly conflicting views.
For example, whilst high numbers of Ukrainians support continuing the war, more than 50% also think that draft-dodgers should not be punished. One would think that you can't have it both ways, right? If you're for the war–if you think it's necessary to continue resisting Russia– shouldn't you have unsympathetic views towards men refusing to do their part?
Another recurring theme in the polls is that the people of Western and Southern Ukraine are more opposed to the war than the ones living closer to the frontlines. That's also quite interesting if you think about it. Counter-intuitive even: If you assume the Ukrainians are war-weary, shouldn't the people from Zaporizhzhia be more fed up than the inhabitants of Lviv which hasn't seen much of the war?
I'd suggest what's happening here is not so much growing war-weariness in general but rather a political rift opening inside Ukraine concerning what exactly they're fighting for.
Renewed nationalism has gained momentum in the western half of Ukraine, with radical elements even in parliament openly advocating for the discrimination of Russian-speaking soldiers in the army. Imagine that, they're at war, need boots on the ground yet still they're willing to antagonise many thousands of troops. But the use of the Russian language has seen a sharp decline even amongst Russo-Ukrainians anyway.
It seems to me a narrative has gained ground in Ukraine that the entire nation endures this war mostly for the benefit of some Russo-Ukrainians who secretly might prefer living under Russian rule anyway. That's the problem.
Selensky's government was mistaken not to formulate a simple, clear objective early on in the war; that's what's led to this growing uneasiness amongst the populace. I understand why they didn't do it, the polls showed it was exactly what the people wanted them to do.
But a mistake it was nevertheless. They should've decided right away that Ukraine seeks to return "only" to the status quo ante 2022. They wasted time and ressources not focusing on their best shot.
Besides, Ukraine's recruitment woes aren't what they seem. They've been able to recruit more and more soldiers on a voluntary basis – but at the same time, they now have to drag conscripts out of night clubs. What gives? Well, I've frequently posted content from Roman Ponomarenko, a military historian and active-duty officer of the Azov Brigade. (Use a translator, his posts are well worth the read.)
Ponomarenko has commented a couple of times on the discrepancy in morale between conscripts and volunteer troops and even advocated suspending conscription in favour of intensifying volunteer recruitment, suggesting it would benefit the war effort.
He blames the fact that more and more conscripts refuse to fight not on the war itself, but on systemic injustices surrounding Ukraine's draft: Much like in America during the Vietnam War, men from rich families use money and influence to avoid having to serve. And then there's the age cap, with only those aged 25 or above having to serve on the front lines.
According to Ponomarenko, that's what's ruining morale. The conscripts feel unfairly treated.
This was just a few weeks ago. Many more where this has come from.
Incorrect. Take the phrasing above, for example: ready to endure. Notice something? It doesn't say "ready to fight".
The polls depict a remarkable coexistence of seemingly conflicting views.
For example, whilst high numbers of Ukrainians support continuing the war, more than 50% also think that draft-dodgers should not be punished. One would think that you can't have it both ways, right? If you're for the war–if you think it's necessary to continue resisting Russia– shouldn't you have unsympathetic views towards men refusing to do their part?
Another recurring theme in the polls is that the people of Western and Southern Ukraine are more opposed to the war than the ones living closer to the frontlines. That's also quite interesting if you think about it. Counter-intuitive even: If you assume the Ukrainians are war-weary, shouldn't the people from Zaporizhzhia be more fed up than the inhabitants of Lviv which hasn't seen much of the war?
I'd suggest what's happening here is not so much growing war-weariness in general but rather a political rift opening inside Ukraine concerning what exactly they're fighting for.
Renewed nationalism has gained momentum in the western half of Ukraine, with radical elements even in parliament openly advocating for the discrimination of Russian-speaking soldiers in the army. Imagine that, they're at war, need boots on the ground yet still they're willing to antagonise many thousands of troops. But the use of the Russian language has seen a sharp decline even amongst Russo-Ukrainians anyway.
It seems to me a narrative has gained ground in Ukraine that the entire nation endures this war mostly for the benefit of some Russo-Ukrainians who secretly might prefer living under Russian rule anyway. That's the problem.
Selensky's government was mistaken not to formulate a simple, clear objective early on in the war; that's what's led to this growing uneasiness amongst the populace. I understand why they didn't do it, the polls showed it was exactly what the people wanted them to do.
But a mistake it was nevertheless. They should've decided right away that Ukraine seeks to return "only" to the status quo ante 2022. They wasted time and ressources not focusing on their best shot.
Besides, Ukraine's recruitment woes aren't what they seem. They've been able to recruit more and more soldiers on a voluntary basis – but at the same time, they now have to drag conscripts out of night clubs. What gives? Well, I've frequently posted content from Roman Ponomarenko, a military historian and active-duty officer of the Azov Brigade. (Use a translator, his posts are well worth the read.)
Ponomarenko has commented a couple of times on the discrepancy in morale between conscripts and volunteer troops and even advocated suspending conscription in favour of intensifying volunteer recruitment, suggesting it would benefit the war effort.
He blames the fact that more and more conscripts refuse to fight not on the war itself, but on systemic injustices surrounding Ukraine's draft: Much like in America during the Vietnam War, men from rich families use money and influence to avoid having to serve. And then there's the age cap, with only those aged 25 or above having to serve on the front lines.
According to Ponomarenko, that's what's ruining morale. The conscripts feel unfairly treated.
Similar threads
