Anon052

Of course the numbers are going to fluctuate over time.  Right now this war is viewed as bogged down and in slow motion - except for the Russians of course who are poised to break out and re-take Kharkiv.  The fact that a divisions worth signed up and fought in that first year is an enormous contribution considering that all foreign fighters really had no duty or obligation to join this fight beyond a greater ideal to right a wrong.
The shoulder shrugging on this issue is not impressive in the least.  How do people on this forum think wars are actually won or lost?  Who do you actually think is really doing the fighting and dying?  I hear comments like "well most of the UA were already in the military" and what I think I am really hearing is "well some people just want to fight anyway, so let them."
Wars are collisions of human certainty.  Violent, lethal collisions.  Once a side loses that certainty they are on the road to defeat - history backs me up on this going back thousands of years.  Certainty demands sacrifice.  For a nation state that sacrifice has been done in many ways.  In the past nations would hire mercenaries to do the fighting, so at worst it was financial sacrifice.  We do not live in that era anymore.  Wars like the one in Ukraine are as near to total as we can get under the nuclear umbrella.  
If too many Ukrainian 18 year old's run away, while enough Russian 18 year old's keep signing up for the $$, how do you think this war will end?  

Freedom ain’t free.  Someone has to stop Russia from doing what it is doing which is definitely not “perfectly fine”.  In reality the kid did not run away, his family did when he was 16.  Now that he is 18 and of age; he is “staying away”.  I think every citizen has a duty to protect their nation in times of crisis.  A duty to protect each other when threatened.  If they cannot or will not do that then they really are no longer a nation.  This is one thing I think we have lost, and it will come back and bite us.  There is a solemn duty in being a citizen, and even a greater one in a free nation.  It is one that takes sacrifice for the greater good.  Now this kid could be from a pacifist ideology or religion, ok there are a lot of ways to fulfill this duty to serve.
What I disagree with is that is all fine for a young man like this to selfishly protect himself while his own people are suffering.  Running away to “embrace life” when Ukrainian children are dying back in Ukraine does not wash with me.  Personally I have been in two wars that really had not much to do with Canada.  We were really doing it for some greater global good (really did not turn out well in the end) but we all believed in it and honoured kids maybe a year older than this one who died in crappy places no one will remember in 50 years. The idea that one could “sit out” an atrocity like this invasion of Ukraine and still claim citizenship or ethnicity does not sit well with me at all.  It is shirking duty and letting others pay the price.   As we have discussed this kid does not even have to fight.  He can be in a support trade or work in industry or even humanitarian.  But his people and his country need him right now which is more important than how he gets to spend his twenties.  It is more important than him as an individual.  
Mark my words on this, we have more of this coming.  The future is likely going to demand more sacrifice for the greater good not less.  We will have to stand or kneel in the end.  And right now to my eyes, that young man is kneeling.

So the story really does not get into his motivations for not fighting.  “I want to be safe” is what we get.  Of course to “be safe” in Ukraine right now means fighting for that safety.  We do not know if the young man has religious grounds or even ideological ones.
White feathers is a poor analogy.  They were used in the British Empire to shame young men to go and fight in a mainland European war.  Many of these young men were in far flung nations such as Canada or Australia.  The peer pressure for them was to go to fight and die in what could be considered an imperial war.
Ukraine is in an existential war. The Russians have left pretty much zero doubt of this based on both their plans and actions.  If anyone wants to “go home to safe Ukraine” as a Ukrainian they are going to have to either be willing to fight for this..or let someone else do it for them.  This young man definitely would have somewhere to live…likely a trench on the front.  Based on how desperate the UA is for manpower he would likely have a job…killing Russians.  
Now it is his personal choice as to whether or not he wishes to do that but this reads a lot like the “cake and eat it too” generations we have right now.  I want all the healthcare safeties but no vaccines.  I want peace and security but not to fight for it.  I want cheap products and lifestyles but no climate change.  If this young man wants to live in a free and safe Ukraine he needs to be willing to do what generations before have done…be willing to fight and die to make that happen. Because it simply won’t be delivered like DoorDash or streaming entertainment.  Don’t want to kill?  Become a medic.  
My fundamental question back to this kid is “if you want to go home to Ukraine one day then what are you still doing here?” 

Mixed feelings. Congress version is stronger than Senate one (ATACAMS + Russian actives). But... How much thousands lives have gone, what economical damage was done, how much our lands were occupied until both political forces have been conducting own dirty pre-election games during these five-six months. All this could have been avoided if Senate agreed to continue lend-lease law. 

https://forbes.ua/ru/news/ukrainskiy-virobnik-gotue-seriyne-virobnitstvo-analoga-dji-mavic-shmavik-forbes-diznavsya-yogo-kharakteristiki-ta-tsinu-17042024-20603
Via: https://mastodon.social/@kravietz@agora.echelon.pl/112296332321909985
I still don't know why Ukrainians allies don't seem able to get projects like this on the way. The cost of development is a fraction of the cost of a leopard... Peanuts to what else is being sent. 

This reactive policy to Ukraine by the West is actually past time to end. Pledges of munitions and equipment must no longer be reactive, like closing the barn door after it burned down. No more dallying on vehicles. Bradleys, M113s, M1s, strip everything possible from NATO, and send it to Ukraine. How can we expect the Ukrainian soldier to fight and win when we can’t even be bothered to send some more m113s? 
past time to equip it with long range missiles. The question we have now, should not be, “what does Ukraine need the most?” It should be, what can Ukraine use now and in the future, and start making it now and shipping it now.
at this point, it’s clear Russia does not have will to negotiate, therefore, the prior reactive aid to Ukraine is now a failure, and only signaling to Russia that it can outlast the West. 

It is potentially worse than that.  This sort of dysfunction does nothing but feed anti-democracy sentiment.  Democracies die due to abandonment, history demonstrates this quite well.  If the system is seen as "unworkable" democracies often choose suicide.  This is the threat to the US and global stability.  Trump and Greene are symptoms of something far deeper and dangerous....apathy that leads to despair.

What the extreme fringes do and say affects regular people, at least in rich coastal cities. It’s certainly not just idiots screaming at each other online. One ridiculous example of this is hosptials at least where I am no longer can say “mother”, but have to use the word “birthing person”. Remember the Stanford guide for acceptable words? It does bleed into our lives. More practically, at my previous employer, a major software company, anything but the most progressive political stance was unacceptable to voice- and that stance was voiced quite a bit- much to the befuddlement of all the foreign employees. This is not atypical at large, well-paying software companies.
 

Israel hasn't a border with Iran. Well, maybe Hezbollah proxy in Lebanon. So, they mostly will be needed in long range weapon, which USA rejected to give to Ukraine. Guys. Wake up. West, stucking on "tolerance, multiculturalism, diversity, inclusive, 100500 genders, LGBT, BLM, coala saving and carbon trail" lost sense of reality in that time, when dictatorships were arming, using western technologies to contest post WWII world order. WW3 is coming. It will not be like WWII, It will begin like several distant regional conflicts tied with one goal - to weaken West. And then... If this probes are not stopped, the global clash will begin. So, Iran-Israeli conflict maybe it's not good for us in short perspective, but probable weaken of Iran it's a good for future. If some of "Evil Axis" will get bright blow at own teeth, than less probability that West will fight directly in huge global war in nearest 10-15 years

I don't believe anymore in "innocent people". Neither in Russia, nor in Gaza, nor in Iran. Sorry.  

I more Eastern European that "old European"

Even wrong clock shows a right time twice for a day. As for me "western values" is that, what was in gold 70-90th. Not this sh...t, like a hate of J.Rowling because she dare to use a word "women" instead "menstruating persons". I don't want to live in such idiotic society

When EU parliament is doing better than the House of Representatives, I hope Speaker Johnson looked at the eclipse without protection. What a ridiculous mind boggling genuinely bad look for the Republican Party, Congress and the U.S. At this point, a pure Ukraine bill should be able to pass. The fact it cannot, despite a majority of republicans, democrats, a bipartisan majority in Congress, alongside a majority of the American people, due to one man, the speaker, and I suppose, one presidential candidate, how can any ally of the U.S have faith in us? I mean, let’s be blunt, support for Ukraine is bipartisan and popular and not a fringe position. The fact that despite this, we are unable to pass the bill will not reassure any American allies, nor our enemies, nor neutrals to trust us.

I find reading walls of naked opinion (when it even gets that far) as tedious as the next person, so I don’t mean this to sound at all like a rebuke:  however I would argue that it’s important for a forum such as this one, which prides itself on trying to be a rational and open-minded place, to at least engage with dissenting views for those first few rounds that may be necessary to determine whether they are trying to contribute in good faith, or not.  Some people just honestly aren’t aware how to express themselves constructively or struggle to isolate coherent streams of thought if they have a lot going on in their heads at once.  That doesn’t necessarily mean they have nothing of value to add, likely thought that admittedly does seem in many cases.

Except that terrorist acts aren't committed with a specific reaction in mind.  Terrorist acts are committed with a specific goal in mind.  The goals of Hamas are not comparable to the goals of ISIS and there is no possible reconciliation between Israel and Hamas.  Hamas doesn't need to create acts of terrorism in order to gain Palestinian recruits.  Polls, for what they are worth, show that Hamas has somewhere upwards of 70 percent favorability to the citizens of Gaza so they don't need to convince anyone.  Everyone in their neighborhood is already signed up.  No, the only people Hamas needs to recruit are non Palestinians to buy what they are selling so that they can continue to attack Israel and convince the international community to condemn Israel for defending itself.  Therefore the goal of Hamas is to attack Israel, claim that Israel is filled with genocidal Nazi colonizers who rape and pillage for entertainment, and hope that eventually either they can remove Israel from the face of the earth themselves, or that the international community will do it for them.  The only way Israel can end the cycle is to completely destroy Hamas and replace them with a government structure that's more amenable to compromise, because if they don't Hamas will just attack again as soon as they are able and we'll be right back where we are again today.  ISIS isn't concerned so much with Israel.  Their goals are more comprehensive.   How does an attack inside Russia advance the goal of the restoration of the caliphate I'm not really sure, but they have launched attacks in Iran recently too and Russia has / had troops in Syria so maybe it's not all that complicated.  I don't want to get this thread sidetracked though and I know how badly this topic can spin out of control so I think I'll just leave it there. 
3. What are Hamas’ aims?
What Hamas plainly seeks is the establishment of a Palestinian state. Where there is doubt is over the territory in which it envisages the establishment of the state, since it initially called for a Palestinian state occupying the West Bank, Gaza and the space now occupied by the state of Israel. In fact, they violently opposed the 1993 Oslo peace accords between the Palestine National Liberation Organisation and the State of Israel. Accordingly, they initially refused to form part of the Palestinian National Authority, which was beginning to gain international –though not unanimous– recognition as the legitimate Palestinian authority and the blueprint for the future Palestinian state.
4. Does Hamas recognise Israel?
Although public statements by Hamas leaders vary, its denial of the legitimacy of the state of Israel has been a constant point of friction in the region.
 
Important doctrines of ISIL include its belief that it represents the restoration of the caliphate of early Islam, and that all Muslims are required to pledge allegiance to it;[9] that a "defiled" Islam must be purged of apostasy, often with bloody sectarian killings,[10] that the final Day of Judgment by God is near and will follow the defeat of the army of "Rome" by IS;[2] that a strict adherence to following the precepts "established by the Prophet Muhammad and his earliest followers" is necessary, surpassing even that of other Salafi-Jihadi groups.[2]

If the guys they are parading around with missing bits, broken bones, and worse are in fact the guys that did it? Then my only question what were they thinking letting themselves be taken alive? The scary thought is that the guys they are more or less publicly torturing to death are four random guys they grabbed off the streets who had the misfortune o resemble the guys in the video. That would be uhm...BAD.
That said the treatment these guys are getting in Russian detention is no different than what they have done to tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of of thousands of others in both Ukraine and Russia. They are just posting video of it in real time. That of course is the reason why Russia is going to get to pay a thousand casualties for every square kilometer of Ukraine they even temporarily occupy. Because the Russians have demonstrated beyond clearly that giving up is just not an option.
Edited: for clarity
 

Hmm I never subscribed to this vengeful nonsense either, if only for its massive simplifications (you definitelly have people of great civil courage there like Kara Mourza or, more controversially, Navalny himself; a pitty so few of them). But on other side that doesn't mean we should look at the world through pink glassess and project on Russia our own expectations how authoritarian system should look like (like folks still waiting Muscovia magicaly falling apart into ethnic pieces). This picture is often created by mediation of liberal Russian emigrees, who mostly try to avoid difficult issues, stick to safe topics like corruption and their conclusion is usually that Russians are just fooled victims of bad old dictator- which was btw. Navalny's greatest sin. Self-pitty is their driver here, not empathy, and that is why so many Ukrainians are pissed on them for.
As I understand their reactions, they are already sensing return of comfortable, relativistic narration "not us, it was Putin's fault" that West fell pray to so many times in history. While in reality it's Russians' long-lasting, deep-rooted mix of collective passivity, brutal domestic culture and historically- proven shauvinism that let them here; Putin is their creation, responsibility and lot. Note it is neither still not North Korea level of control; Russians are not cut off from information like Koreans and have basically unobstructed freedom of movement both internally and abroad.
Practically, we have no means of determining what Russia would look like within softer regime; it was political fiction long time before this conflict started. Important questions now are: how it's economy will hold in this, likely few additional years long war; If it will not hold well, what political and military means Kremlin is ready to apply; Will Europe have guts to supply UA through this period, especially when US fall out, and what would be our reactions to potentiall turmoil in RU (judging by our reactions to Prig's coup, not very proactive, but this attitude may change in time).

Shilpkin's study is not the evidence- it's approximation of voting anomalies based on various, quite complicated statistical methods. Russian liberals naturally like to call it "ingenious" and whole plethora of superlatives, but even if it is close to truth, it's still just estimate (there are others who put fraud ballots even higher numbers, like 30+ mlns). Especially that turn-out ratio is very murky this time due to war, immigration, online voting and overall atmosphere. Also note 51% isn't any barrier, since there is no one opposition candidate. It is certain some voting base is by default already "lended" by Putin to certified opposition, like Kharitonov (a communist candidate harnessing sentiments of mostly older people, who under more normal circumstances would also support current president).
     More solid are perhaps exit-polls made by foreign polling companies abroad, but they are naturally very limited in their usefulness too. There is interesting logic there- while in Western countries Putin generally lost royally according to exit polls (like last times, circa 15%; his support in Germany for example was unexpectedly low this time), in Turkey, Cyprus, Greece and several other states that absorbed a lot of Russian emigrees or are popular travel destinations,  his support was something like 30-40%, with accordingly high amount of refusals to questions.
So what we can only be sure is only that Russian society is depoliticized, hunkering down and Putin is only viable candidate. Like it was in last years.
About second part you are right- siloviki are crude when comes to electional frauds. They always were. But still I see no reason to see unexpectedly high official ratings of Putin as some sort of desperation on behalf of Kremlin or tectonic changes in Russian psyche. There are other, simpler explenations, including current propaganda needs, over-zelous local officials and overall geopolitical situation.
 

Yes, I think he would.
Putin's regime crack on democracy, like Luka's, Kazakh etc. are products of progressive uncertainty on part of aparatus of power, which includes a lot of fears (real or token), irrational decisions, systemic inertia and lack of real data available to ruler. In some ways, this process it is like with decision of invading Ukraine- regime is drawn into certain types of behaviour the more it is in this mud. Except the process lasts much longer here. To organize these mock elections is simpler and cheaper solution for Putin, not necessarly a proof that he would loose the real ones. Much less it is the evidence that more Russians silently opppose his regime now than in the past (like significant part of emigre liberals like to explain it).
       Real democratic processess are a lot, like throwing a coin for Kremlin- even if they would secure the vote anyway, they instinctively push away this idea. Especially in times of war, globals struggles, villain NATO barking on the corner. Even meagre democracy also needs some debates, tiresome compaigns, talking to some peasants in villages lost in Syberia...a lot of hassle, costing tonns of money and effort that should be beyond Tsar dignity *. Strange, awkward and ulitimatelly hollow ritual, good for Western hypocrites, where financial oligarchy rules anyway (at least from Kremlin perspective). Add that Putin is genuinly convinced that Americans and CIA are puting their fingers into every election around him, so- like milions of citizens remembering USSR firmly believe- people can be simply communally programmed into being "nazis" and traitors just like that.
      We will never know, but personally I had little doubt that Putin would most probably win every major election in recent Russian history even without murders and authoritarian propaganda (he would have problems with changing constitution, though)- in some scenarios, he could even rule like Orban in Hungary, just by buying media by friendly oligarchs and controlling judiciary, if not for the militaristic needs of Russian state. But it would cost a lot of effort and always bring some risk, so why even bother? There was always little to no alternatives to Putin in minds of Russians in last 20 years anyway; probably even Navalny was just a phenomena, representing some resentments against corruption but not being taken seriously enough as statesman figure in muscovite sense. So, here we are.
*Probably clips of Buffallo Man on January 4th were like a cold shower for elites of many non-democratic states on this planet; a visible confirmation what can happen if you let the mob to stick their heads too high.

Macron can't be re-lected. He is in his second term and in France there is a two-term limit. And the presidental elections are three years away....so this makes the rest of this analysis questionable.

Huh?  The same legacy system that has kept Russia in this war far longer than they should have.  There is nothing militarily wrong with the Soviet system for the time it was in.  In fact a modernized Soviet system might just be better at modern warfare than the western one - massed precision, for example.
The Soviet military system demonstrated its full potential at the end of WW2 and frankly was highly effective until about the mid-80s.  If modernized there is no proof it could not be highly effective again.  We have a tendency to blame every failure on this “Soviet legacy” without really understanding what that military was, or was not.  The Soviet system had very high resilience, which the RA is demonstrating pretty much on a daily basis.  It also could marshal and project mass like no one’s business.  Problem is that the mass was “dumb” - and frankly I am not sure it was as dumb as we believed.
Problems in a medical system could be from many causes.  The “Soviet legacy” has become an easy-button for western analysts to explain pretty much everything.  

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP82-00039R000100110060-3.pdf
https://www.milbank.org/wp-content/uploads/mq/volume-40/issue-04/40-4-Highlights-of-Soviet-Health-Services.pdf
The Soviet medical system, for example, had its strengths and weaknesses but there was nothing inherently “wrong” with it (for example the Soviet Union had lower doctor to patient ratios than the US).  It was designed for a different baseline, much like pretty much everything else in the Soviet system.  The Soviet system was by-design aimed at supporting mass.  So failures in the current UA system buckling under the weight of casualties cannot all be thrown at the feet of Soviet legacy, when that legacy was designed specifically not to buckle under massive casualties.
 
 

https://warontherocks.com/episode/therussiacontingency/30664/ukraine-battlefield-dynamics-manpower-fortifications-and-ammunition/
My notes:
They made another trip to UKR front lines. They are doing these around every 3months. 
Ukraine's Challenges: Ukraine faces a triple threat with manpower, fortifications, and ammunition shortages. Mobilization remains stalled at political level, hindering long-term force generation. This decision also has a long lead time to effects on the battlefield Last year we saw you cannot make brigades in couple of months  Fortifications are being worked on now, but only lately. Ammunition depends on external factors like US aid and Europe commitment drones are going to help to bridge the gap to an extent. These problems are the same as last trip three months ago. Ukraine leadership changes are still an unknown. Generally seems the leadership is on the same page about the main challenges as the front line troops The war is at an intersection. Many things can go either way, US support, UKR mobilization... Depending on these the war can change radically. Even a Harkiv-style collapse for the Ukrainians is not out of the question on the "bad timelines".  Overly extended summer offensive and pointless commitment of reserves to those attacks have depleted Ukraine Especially Ukrainian infantry has been under extreme strain, battalion might be in OK condition but only have a couple of platoons of fully mission-capable infantry.  Unlikely to see any strategic level offensives from the Ukrainians in 2024  Some Russian challenges:   Russian Force Quality: While a concern in 2023, Russia has demonstrated a capacity to sustain casualties and maintain a baseline level of force quality. This has been shown in practice during the summers stubborn defense and the bloody assaults we are now seeing. UKR has reported increased discipline and executions by the RU Manpower: So far Russia has been able to compensate for it casualties with recruitment. This has been surprisingly successful. Several 100k last year and now in the tens of thousands a month. Unkown how long Russia can keep up. If they cannot a new mobilization wave is going to be required. Equipment availability: Main limiting factor for the Russians at this moment. Ukraine's Evolving Tactics: Shortage of Soviet-era AA ammunition is a major concern. and now also western ammunition  UKR is having increasing success with small mobile AA defenses (MANPADS, AAA, HMG) supported by well integrated sensors and coordination. This is against RU cruise missiles and suicide drones. Especially in parts of the front UKR is developing integration of assets, intelligence and troops to a whole new level. Big steps compared to three months ago Drone war moving more towards competition in quality and integration rather than quantity. 
Ukraine Battlefield Dynamics Manpower, Fortifications, and Ammunition.mp3

Could be a little difficult. "Guys, I am going for shopping to newest Krauss-Maffei Wegmann tank dealer saloon, do you need anything?"
Most countries by that time were discouraged from selling any serious, top-shelf military eqipment to UA. I think we all agreed it was wrong policy, so no point in further beating dead horse.

This has be to be a joke, right? No way Germany would have sold any weapons to Ukraine pre-02/22. Even the second hand sale of a handful ancient East German howitzers was through Latvia was out of the question. Best we were willing to do was sending 5000 helmets. Supplying arms to "conflict zones" was simply not a possibility in pre-war German politics.