I can’t wait for the Winter War-tier copium from liberals that will come after this. “Ukraine won despite losing its territory and having to stay neutral as Russia demanded because Ukraine remains independent and not completely annexed into the new Putino-Tsarist Soviet Union 2.0. Also now everyone knows that the Russian army sux because they took 2 years to win a war against a smaller country (also the US army still rocks in comparison despite spending 10 times longer in Afghanistan and losing)”.
I expect that’s precisely the narrative we’ll get as long as there’s anything left of Ukraine in the end. The secondary narrative is going to be that Ukraine would’ve totally won if not for those darn republicans blocking additional 60b spending.
Ukraine really might have had a much better chance if it could have borrowed an extra $60bn to pay for the same 84 shells, all the stores marked “illegal weapons” ‘left over’ from before the Geneva convention, and the 3 tanks left in the warehouse. Nobody wants to be at war paying pre-war prices. What will the neighbours think? Don’t answer. We already know—it’s highly unfashionable.
Right, like the elephant in the room is that the west lacks industrial capacity to produce weapons and ammunition at the rate they’re consumed. Dumping more money into this doesn’t solve that problem. Also, how is another 60b going to accomplish what hundreds of billions they pumped into Ukraine over the past two years couldn’t accomplish.
And if EU had pushed just one more sanctions package, prohibiting imports of Russian ostriches or something, that would have made all the difference! 🤣
I can’t wait for the Winter War-tier copium from liberals that will come after this. “Ukraine won despite losing its territory and having to stay neutral as Russia demanded because Ukraine remains independent and not completely annexed into the new Putino-Tsarist Soviet Union 2.0. Also now everyone knows that the Russian army sux because they took 2 years to win a war against a smaller country (also the US army still rocks in comparison despite spending 10 times longer in Afghanistan and losing)”.
I expect that’s precisely the narrative we’ll get as long as there’s anything left of Ukraine in the end. The secondary narrative is going to be that Ukraine would’ve totally won if not for those darn republicans blocking additional 60b spending.
Liberals becoming 2nd term Nixon republicans
Apt analogy, and the whole dynamic with Ukraine has a lot of parallels with Vietnam actually.
Ukraine really might have had a much better chance if it could have borrowed an extra $60bn to pay for the same 84 shells, all the stores marked “illegal weapons” ‘left over’ from before the Geneva convention, and the 3 tanks left in the warehouse. Nobody wants to be at war paying pre-war prices. What will the neighbours think? Don’t answer. We already know—it’s highly unfashionable.
Right, like the elephant in the room is that the west lacks industrial capacity to produce weapons and ammunition at the rate they’re consumed. Dumping more money into this doesn’t solve that problem. Also, how is another 60b going to accomplish what hundreds of billions they pumped into Ukraine over the past two years couldn’t accomplish.
And if EU had pushed just one more sanctions package, prohibiting imports of Russian ostriches or something, that would have made all the difference! 🤣