Phaeton on 07 February 2025
| Ryuu96 said:I still think the 2023 offensive should have been invading Russia instead of charging directly into the frontline, it's clear that the Russian border isn't well defended, but the West back then didn't have the stomach to allow Ukraine to invade Russia. I feel like it still makes more sense to invade into Russia and then double back into Ukraine, hitting behind Russian fortifications, right now if they try a counteroffensive in Ukraine itself they're just charging into a shit load of mines, artillery, drones, trenches and other Russian fortifications so it results in heavy losses. |
Strategic offensives have strategic goals.
"Invade into Russia and double back"accomplishes nothing.
It makes sense for Kiev regime's only strategic offensive to have proper,strategic goal that accomplishes something at least on paper.
And with claims like this,made by alleged British tank commander,how could it fail?
Reality is that some people don't get the basics.
"Russia would likewise have to agree to surrender territory"
Like,why?It's not about who controls what at the end of the conflict,it's about accomplishing war goals.
During final stages of WW1,German forces were within firing range from Paris.Spoiler alert:Germany didn't get to keep that territory.
Essay Pro