By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ryuu96 on 07 February 2025
Edit Thread
Phaeton said:
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.

I think you're misinterpreting what I am saying, in regards to the territory concessions. The Kursk invasion happened last year, before that, the West was telling Ukraine they weren't allowed to use Western made equipment on Russian territory and were pushing Ukraine away from that idea, but with the upcoming election there were very real fears that Trump would pull Ukraine's support and pressure them to freeze the conflict on the current frontlines. Freezing the conflict would have benefited Russia more than Ukraine and prior to Kursk, may have been something that Russia accepted, as they would have essentially gained 15-20% of Ukraine and been able to repair their military to try again.

If Russia accepted such a proposal but Ukraine didn't then it would give Trump his excuse to say Ukraine are being unreasonable. However, the Kursk invasion changed things, it put Russia in a position where they would absolutely not accept such a proposal because it would now mean surrendering Kursk. I don't believe it is a coincidence that Ukraine only invaded Russia right before the US Election. It was a strategic goal in more ways than one, I believe one of those goals are related to negotiations.