Will Russia or Ukraine Win the War?

Yep thats the old Soviet Doctrine . Always dirt somebody elses back yard and not your own

 

Nobody wins in war. The innocent suffer!

 

There are no winners.

 

Actually there are winners, The owners of the war machine.

 

Of course there are winners. How do you think you Americans became American ?

"The American Indian Wars, also known as the American Frontier Wars, the First Nations Wars in Canada (French · As settlers spread westward across North America ...
‎List · ‎Beaver Wars · ‎Sioux Wars · ‎Indian massacre of 1622"

 

Unfortunately, yep, that's how history works. The fact is whoever plants their flag in the dirt and keeps it there is the winner. America is a prime example of how the "winner" isn't always the good guy, or even the guy who fights smarter, it's simply the guy who exterminates everyone else with brute force.

Don't get me started on how to "win" a war by incinerating 100,000 civilians. (Twice.)

 

Yes and look at some of the American business, that have deals in those countries. Glad to see 40 billion USA dollars going over there. That money could go a long way, making schools safer.

 

A black or white answer would be biased from me. We have family in Ukraine as well as Belarus and Russia. Naturally I would like Ukraine to win because they are not invading Russia back, they are just defending their own country at the moment.

That said realistically there are no winners. Once someone invades another country and the world appears to be against it, that first war move of attack is the first move towards their own fall. By attacking and invading other countries your own economy drops too, and Russians are already complaining of the cost of living becoming extremely high. So even if Russia takes over Ukraine, its relationship with itself and the world will dampen hugely. If Ukraine manages to keep itself standing then Russia will lose either because Putin will die and no one will lead them or because the people of Russia will turn on their own country and who knows maybe start a civil war. At the moment Putin shows no signs of stopping so Russia retreating does not seem like an option here right now...

 

The biggest winner in all of this will be NATO for the following reasons . Nobody from NATO will openly admit this of course.

1) Russia's invasion of Ukraine has galvanised NATO and not fragment it as Putin had hoped for
2) Co-operation between the individual NATO members has been increased with only Hungary likely to be the only fly in the ointment .
3) Spending on arms by the member countries will be increased.
4) The invasion has given NATO time to deploy forces into defensive positions.
5) Finland and Sweden have been jolted to join
6) Russia being bogged down in this conflict is keeping it occupied and less likely to start any other conflicts .
7) Morale of NATO forces is probably as high its ever been seeing Russia flounder
8) A weaker Russia will result making it less capable of stating any future conflicts in particular with NATO
9) Jobs will be created within the Western armaments industry .
10) Putins credibility will be dimminished as that of Russia .

 

My thought is one of Putin's mega rich buddies will eventually take him out. There's just too much money at stake for too many powerful people. He can't stay holed up in a bunker in Siberia forever.

 

It's not like I trust Putin as far as I can through him, but.... What happens to the nuclear arsenal if Putin were to be "dealt with" and Russia falls into "warring factions" grappling for power?

 

Well, you either pray to be at ground zero or that he Russian missiles are as rusty as their tanks.

 

It seems that the World are looking at this as 'Putin's War' and not that of the Russian people.

• (As an 60's child one is pleased to note the "Resistance is never futile" - and - "Persistance is rewarding") =

The removal of a Russian head of state is not 'uncommon', and be it from a Medical or Military move over of power, (which seems more likely as time passes), as you say Skip, better an internal rather than external removal a far better option.
This way would see a quicker return to (in whichever way one feels it to be so) normality.
.
In days of olde, the mightier power invaded, stole, occupied and ruled.
These days is far more complicated: -
.
The World is now so intertwined with Finance and Coporate complexeties that we are akin to being different pieces playing on a never ending chessboard. Strategic movement of pieces see near victories slip to defeat in quick time.
The short gain sees many pawns sacrificed, though in the end it is the (political) positioning of the larger pieces that sit, and wait, until delivering their cutting blow
One hopes not so much that this will be over soon - (for one has the sense that the endgame is nigh) but that we learn from this.
Sadly we never seem to do so
.
Still, "Tomorrow is another day" so here's hoping

 

I disagree . Its part of the Russian Military Doctrine to use tactical Nuclear Weapons . Its normal to them like the use of chemical weapons . So to their own military strategists it would not be an act of desperation .

We are not talking about ICBMs here but more limited and smaller shells that would take out part of a battlefield or small village .

The US and the UK had them during the cold war and would have been a first use weapon against a massive Soviet Invasion of Germany .

The US have kept quiet about these in recent years and claimed to have got rid as did the UK .

Still a nasty weapon though but I couldnt rule out its use by Russia