Fact is tanks are still a liability as whatever improvements are made over the years there's always a counter measure against them
& obviously they will always present a greater target.

Whereas humaniods encapsulated in Robocop type gear or even android humanoids will no doubt be all over the place in future conflicts
together with a vast array of drones.

"Build your enemy a golden bridge to retreat over" attributed to Sun Tzu

Now reported to be cluster munitions. The gift that just keeps on giving.

The US havn´t learned anything from the end of the first world war, when the allied did a number on Germany and took them to the cleaners.

Marshall Plan, West Germany.

That was the second, not the first one.

Indeed, it's lessons learned from WW1 and the carrot comes after the war ends. Before war ends, only stick.

He did ask for weapons (and ammunition...) with various occasions, but I think this is the most relevant one


https://www.france24.com/en/live-new...sure-on-russia


Again, to say that "the West" wants them to continue fighting whereas they would rather surrender is a BIG LIE.

Ukrainians don't want to surrender, but I'm sure you will agree, that "the longer Putin bleeds, the bigger the probability of removing him is".

What happens if war ends today, sanctions are cancelled, and Putin stays in power? I don't think that "Problem solved" stamp would be ready to use in that scenario.

I'm not sure if it's really true that dragging it on will make it easier to remove him.

Fewer people die. But some long-term workable agreement needs to be reached first.

It seems that UA is ready to agree to abandon NATO membership (wouldn't have happened anyway so that one is a red herring) but maybe RU loses out here because after this episode, UA will have more weapons than ever and is being armed by NATO even if not a member.

UA agreed to not seek nuclear weapons.

Finding an agreement on Crimea and Donbass seems much more difficult.

The outcome of the war is still a big unknown, can one side or the other achieve a quick and decisive victory? Or will it be a multi-year drawn out affair. If the latter, will Russia be willing to fight over years or will they use more extreme measures to end it quickly?

__________________
By replying to this post, you hereby grant Phil_MCR a royalty-free license to use, in any way, anything posted by you on the internet. If you do not accept, stop using EF and delete your account.

It's not about dragging - it's about draining Russia financially deeper. So deep, that even the zombies in Russia will wake up because of the poverty.

And just to be clear - I don't like that concept at all, but I can imagine that for some of the west countries it can be seen as useful.

The only way Ukraine agrees to neutrality is if it is armed to the teeth. Allegedly Russia demanded that Ukraine cannot have more than 50.000 soldiers ... demilitarization, you know.

Did you see any point in any other "strategic" decisions of Russia in this war?

Russia is a terroristic organisation and uses the methods of terrorists. That's its main strategy.

Cf: Syria.

He's a thug and will strike again once the West is sleeping in their shoes again.

But you have clear examples such as Cuba and Iran where it didn't work at all even after many years.

This is one of the more bizarre statements of Ms Zakharova. Maybe the native speakers can listen in to say whether this feels real. My first reaction was "must be fake".

https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/statu...65165227958272

When was the last time Cuba and Iran invaded other countries? It works.

Who took down Tsar while being pushed to the edge?

"
As a result of the defeats suffered in World War I, there was a weakening of the authority of Tsar Nicholas II. The monarch believed that he was an instrument in the hand of God, answerable only to him, and was appointed by him to protect Orthodoxy and the Tsar's absolute power (self-rule)[13].

The Tsar lost real control over the country, and the Tsarina and Rasputin, if any minister opposed their opinion, urged the Tsar to resign the politician immediately. In this way, the most competent members of the government fell into disfavor. As a result, the government was made up almost entirely of losers and Rasputin's protégés. The Tsarina and Rasputin interfered in various areas of Russian empire life. The situation at the front and food shortages increased social discontent, which was focused on the Tsarina[14].
"

Sounds pretty familiar to me.

Iran is stirring up all sorts of conflicts in the Middle East and obviously that won't get better if the are becoming a nuclear power. So I am not sure this is a good example.

Sanctions are meant to punish bad behaviour, reduce the economic and technical capabilities to do more damage, and the removal of sanctions can serve as a motivator for rogue states to normalize. Can work, or not.