• Omniraptor
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Well the strategic calculus for Ukraine is 100% guaranteed war now or 95% guaranteed war later. I don’t see a practical reason why ceasefire is a bad option here.

    I’m sure ww2 Britain would have been quite happy with a simple ceasefire especially if it meant more time for American aid to arrive

    • crackajack@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      And let the Nazis recoup and build up forces… just like allowing Putin to do so when he had asked for a ceasefire before.

      People haven’t learned have they?

      • Omniraptor
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Brother the whole reason Putin started this war is he was scared Ukraine was becoming too well armed and he wouldn’t be able to invade it in the future. This isn’t ww2, we both know Russia cannot hope to compete in industrial/military output with the countries supplying Ukraine (if only they would actually supply the gear).

        And also I might be misremembering but when has Putin asked for much less gotten a ceasefire of any length of time after 2022? Can you give a source?

        • crackajack@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Fair point on your first paragraph. Ukraine was also making a huge headway in defeating separatists in Eastern Ukraine before Putin ordered the full scale invasion.

          Putin asked for ceasefire several times especially after Ukraine retook Kharkov region and stopped at the current frontline https://www.atalayar.com/en/articulo/politics/putin-certifies-annexation-occupied-ukrainian-territories-and-calls-ceasefire-kiev/20220930153801158438.html

          • Omniraptor
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I suspect the reason they didn’t take it is more of internal politics, the current government is synonymous with war and growing more and more unpopular as fatigue and stalemate sets in. They don’t understand what drives US foreign policy; The US keeps telling Ukraine to avoid striking at Russia itself, and moderating the flow of equipment so Ukraine never gets too successful.

            The United States doesn’t want Ukraine to lose but they really really don’t want Russia to lose either, because that would cause instability (and god knows what could happen when the government of a nuclear superpower collapses). Like, when prigozhin was doing his thunder run to Moscow, they specifically told Ukraine not to rock the boat, even though that’s when Russia was at its most vulnerable with its command structure in total disarray/panic.

            In general I feel like they just want the Ukraine conflict to simmer down already so they can focus on China (and also now that it’s about to erupt, on the middle east).

            • crackajack@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The Ukraine war reached to a standstill, discouraging others to give further support and prosecuting the war. But anything can still happen in the next couple of months.

              It’s hard to say whether it was a good idea to capitalise on Prigozhin’s coup at the time. The problem with the fog of war is that everyone’s vision is hindered. And when look back and say we should have done this and that, someone will say hindsight is 20/20.