zlacker

the west only cares about this to weaken russia. Weapons will only cost more lives.

"Weapons will stop this war"? How? What's the end game? When it started the people believed it would be over in 3 days. Now all of a sudden people believe ukraine can destroy russia? How many more ukranian and russian soldiers must die?

This war will not be stopped by weapons. Just like any other. But if it was, i can't see a defeated russia, but a destroyed world.

Or what is the end-game here with the weapons? What do you think is a feasible outcome here?

>>endofr+(OP)
> How? What's the end game?

Plenty of options. From complete Russian withdrawal (unlikely absent a Russian civil war) to a return to 2015 borders with neutral zones manned with international peacekeepers.

Worst case: keeping the fronts where they are while Putin burns war materiel.

> This war will not be stopped by weapons. Just like any other.

You’re claiming wars have never been stopped by weapons?

>>endofr+(OP)
What do you think the feasible outcome is of Ukraine caving and yielding territory? Do you really think Russia will stop at eating up Eastern Ukraine?

Russia believes that war is the best way to get what they want. If the war in Ukraine ends with a Russian victory it won't mean world peace, it will mean we wait a few more years for Russia to build back up before it's on to the next war of aggression.

Where does it end if it doesn't end in Ukraine?

>>JumpCr+c
Indeed - US lend-lease during WW2 would like to have a word.

>>endofr+(OP)
Ofc. More weapons for Ukraine will stop the war and provide Ukraine with a better peace position.

You don't stop a bully by saying "please". They'll take your money and come back for more after.

In this case, Russians are taking your land, men, woman, children, culture and washing machines + the gas found in 2013 nearby crimea and the minerals in the most resource dense land of Ukraine ( lithium, ... ).

Here you go:

https://www.renewablematter.eu/en/ukraine-all-lithium-reserv...

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE90N11X/

If only in 2014 the international response would have been harder ( => provide weapons), Putin wouldn't have escalated 8 years later.

Providing more to Ukraine is long overdue.

> the west only cares about this to weaken russia. Weapons will only cost more lives.

Speak for yourselve. Some of my dearest friends these days are from Ukraine. ( Belgium)

While Europe is providing shelter and a life for 6 million refugees.

>>endofr+(OP)
From the perspective of Central Europe, yielding to the decrepit Eastern empire and allowing it to conquer more territory by violence is a good way to invite more wars of conquest in the near to middle future. Moldova, the Baltics, Poland etc.

If Russia takes Ukraine, Ukrainian industrial base will be used to expand Russian military might and facilitate further wars of aggression and killing of more people.

It is not that different scenario from the one that happened in 1938-9 with Hitler and rump Czechoslovakia. Czech armament industry and Czech weapons were a welcome boost to the capabilities of Nazi Germany.

That's what you get for appeasement. A stronger and bolder enemy.

>>endofr+(OP)
Every generation has a group of useful… that will support a new front of war.

That’s my conclusion with the comments here.

>>endofr+(OP)
I am very curious of this line of thinking. Should we just destroy all our weapons and assume Russian supremacy so we can live?

What is the endgame here? It's not like we started the war? If anything we, the Europeans naively made ourselves Russia-dependent on energy assuming that having a win-win deal with Russia will eliminate any conflicts.

>Now all of a sudden people believe ukraine can destroy russia?

I don't think that anyone claims that this is the goal of Ukraine or the west. This war ends immediately as soon as Russian troops leave Ukraine. Why should it end with Russian troops taking all Ukraine?

>>endofr+(OP)
The stated goal of Russia in publicly made speeches is to control the land Gap in NATO territory in Poland. That is the reason why they invaded Ukraine

Russia will not stop at Ukraine. Their publicly stated goal just like they're publicly stated goal for invading Ukraine is The first step to militarily controlling that Gap is called the sulwaki gap

I forgot what the name of the person is, but there is a naval war college professor who explained that Russia is a continental empire and it's the key to its defense are control of seven gaps without those Russia considers themselves indefensible.

Ukraine is the necessary defense line. Because the next thing that happens is Russia invades NATO gets its ass kicked conventionally and then there's a nuclear war

>>AtlasB+9q
That's not entirely correct. NATO is not a threat in Putin's eyes.

What they want is the gas that was going to be produced in Ukraine in 2013, a year before they invaded. They also took resource rich areas.

The proof for this is easy. Russia clearly stated they have no problem with Finland joining NATO. A border of 1340 km and Finland has one of the strongest army's in Europe.

https://www.politico.eu/article/putin-russia-no-problem-finl...

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-can-finlands-armed...

What he originally wanted to keep, is resource dominance over Europe ( eg. Gas) as leverage.

And that's why a half a million Russians are dead.

>>aaomid+ei
Perhaps use arguments instead of opinions.

Or take some guidance at the countries that already suffered Russia as a neighbor in the recent past.

Here's a hint: Ukraine, Romania, Poland, Finland, ...

Here's an example: https://abcnews.go.com/International/helsinkis-underground-c...

Or are you claiming you know better than them?

>>NicoJu+qx
> Russia clearly stated they have no problem with Finland joining NATO.

Nah, before Finland (and Sweden) joined they issued multiple threats.

>>lawn+KP
That's what they always do.

Here's what they did when they actually joined: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-can-finlands-armed...

( As mentioned before)

>>NicoJu+6g1
That's just trying to save face because their empty threats were called.

Treating anything Russia says as proof of their intentions is pure ignorance given their long track record of empty threats, lies and flip-flopping.

>>endofr+(OP)
Some past superpower invades, rivals give weapons endgames for potential guidance:

Soviet invasion of Afghanistan - Soviets went home, split up a bit

American troops in Vietnam - America went home, had a rethink

Nazi invasion of USSR - nazis went home, were defeated

Following that pattern maybe the Russians go home, Putin replaced?