Russia’s war in Ukraine is already in its 17th month. In that time, President Vladimir Putin has clearly demonstrated that he is not bothered by losses — whether they be financial, material, or human. His war will go on as long as he needs. And, judging by how the authorities have woven the so-called “special military operation” into Russian life, that will be a long time.

    • SuspiciousUser@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      He can wait to see if Trump becomes president, because we all know how it will end with his BFF in charge.

      • kingthrillgore@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This is the long game, because if Trump wins, he can get the US out of NATO and that’s a constitutional crisis at home, and a serious flashpoint to drive Europe back into squabbling.

          • FaceDeer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, it really isn’t. The rest of eastern Europe’s countries remember what it was like to live under the Russian thumb and they have plenty of modern weapons and well-trained soldiers salivating to ensure Russia is going to be a crippled husk for the next few generations. Western Europe is none to fond of Russia either. And if America stops helping because an obvious Russian puppet president has taken power, that’s only going to make it worse.

            America may be the sole “superpower”, but bear in mind that that means Russia is not a “superpower”. They’re a peer to the various countries of Europe at best, and by this point I would not even call them that. Ukraine has more tanks than Russia does now. America’s already done a lot of the heavy lifting in breaking Russia, if they bowed out now it’s not like everything resets to the way it was in 2021. Russia is still on the ropes.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              14
              ·
              1 year ago

              The rest of eastern Europe’s countries remember what it was like to live under the Russian thumb

              • FaceDeer@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Surveys conducted in 2013.

                Gee, I wonder if anything might have happened from 2014 to present that would have changed those numbers a bit.

                Also, to dig up an old favourite, you forgot Poland. And a bunch of others. More countries were “living under the Russian thumb” than just literal members of the USSR. Here’s 14 former Soviet republics that joined NATO, whose primary purpose is to defend against Russian attack.

                • Duży Szef [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  To ja ci kurwa powiem, że lepiej było dla młodzieży za PRLu niż teraz. Jebać Solidarność, chuje sprzedali nas za paczkę fajek.

                  Gdyby nie program ziemii odzyskanych nigdy bym kurwa nie marzył o tym że kiedykolwiek będę miał dom na własność.

                  Prawie każdą osobę którą znam chce spierdolić na zachód za “lepszym” życiem, więc dzięki wielkie za tą waszą “wolność”.

                  Ingles?

                  NIE

                • abraxas@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  LOL. Looks like the 2013 study decided not to ask anyone they knew for sure would answer that they were glad they were free from the USSR.

              • vegai@suppo.fi
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Would be interesting to see what the current opinion would be. I guess it wouldn’t be easy to conduct a similar poll now.

                • LarkinDePark@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It was about some brainwashed ahistorical idea of these countries having it bad under the USSR. You want a new poll to see if they changed their memories? Try to be honest with yourself at least.

          • FaceDeer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            There’s a vast difference between America ceasing to support Ukraine and America supporting Russia. Simply never going to happen, that’s a loonie scenario.

            NATO is not officially supporting Ukraine. It just so happens that all the various NATO member countries are all individually deciding that it’s in their interests to support Ukraine. If America drops out that’s not going to change whether it’s in the interests of those countries to continue supporting Ukraine. Indeed, it becomes all the more important for many of them to make sure Russia’s strength is broken if they don’t feel they can rely on America to support them.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Russia’s committing way more resources into this conflict than they ever did for previous similar operations though. Ukraine is claiming they killed/wounded over 200000 Russian soldiers. That’s not anywhere near comparable to previous post WWII conflicts.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ukraine claims a lot of things, it’s called war propaganda. We won’t know what the actual losses are on each side until the war is over. It’s certainly absurd to take Ukrainian numbers uncritically. In fact, it doesn’t even match up with Ukraine having done multiple mobilizations now while Russia has only done one. If Russia was losing anywhere close to manpower Ukraine claims, then they would’ve had to do multiple mobilizations by now as well. Also, as many military experts have pointed out, this is primarily an artillery war and Russia has a huge artillery advantage over Ukraine. That’s where vast majority of casualties comes from.

          • Rinox@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Russia never really stopped mobilizing men. They started the mobilization back in autumn, then passed several reforms to allow them to keep mobilizing men in a less conspicuous way, like making the delivery of the mobilization letter electronic and without receipt, adding restrictions to those who don’t go the conscription office and other laws. All these were done in the winter and thousands of reports of electronic mobilization letters surfaced during these months on the internet. It’s a steady stream conscripts rather than big batches, but the result it’s the same.

        • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Human resources yeah, but financial? I’m not sure. The Iraq war cost 3 trillion dollars.

          And mind you, you’re talking about the victors (mostly) the Korean war cost the lives of 2 million people. As did the Vietnam war.

            • Noughmad@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The thing about corruption is that it’s very inefficient. Spending a trillion dollars on weapons translates to only a couple of billions in the pockets of profiteers, the rest is used to actually make the weapons, move them in place, and to pay the people using them.

              So with a useless war, you waste far more than you would if you just have the money to the profiteers.

              • WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The money would be wasted on things like super yachts anyways. At least a good chunk of this waste goes to things like feeding and housing soldiers and contractors and paying those people and all the people who make the food, supplies, etc. Seems less wasteful than just giving it to billionaires. Granted, the weapons, when they actually function at all, can be used to cause harm to many people…

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The plan is to profit from war, and that’s the thing, it never ends.