How much has Ukraine’s army changed?

[Fledermaus]

I wont call that fighting.

You have never been on the receiving end of small arms or artillery. Have you?

 

[Fledermaus]

Might makes right. Unfortunately that is the way it has always been, and the way it will always be.

How Hitler of you.

 

[Fledermaus]

De facto cessation.

If a piece of land is occupied by troops and they’re not your troops it ain’t your land. It’s as simple as that. Of course Ukraine is free to use force to try to assert their claims and that will fail

Incorrect. As usual.

 

[Fledermaus]

Crimea is still there. If Ukraine is doing nothing militarily to get it back, then we have de facto cession.

You misspelled 'illegal occupation'.

 

[Juin]

You have never been on the receiving end of small arms or artillery. Have you?

Never.

 

[Juin]

You misspelled 'illegal occupation'.

My apologies

 

[Juin]

How Hitler of you.

Why stop at Hitler; make it Stalin, Hitler, Genghis Khan, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, of me. LOL

 

[beerftw]

When I talked of the Ukrainian Army folding it was case of Russia going full bore. The frontiers are long, very long. Ukraine has a very long border with Belarus. It is not a given that Russia will come in through Belarus, but how can Ukraine be sure? So Ukraine has no choice but to position forces on her border with Ukraine, just in case. The Donbass frontier with Russia is also long. Then Russia has ample forces in Crimea to launch offensives from there as well.

But I dont see Putin doing that. Another Russian leader may, but I dont see Putin doing that. He has so far always appeared to settle for less than he could have obtained with the forces he had. In Georgia Putin could have pushed much further than just the breakaway portions; there was nothing to stop him. In the Donbass he had the Ukrainians on the ropes. It seemed to me like he settled for far less. He didnt have to seize major Ukrainian cities, but he could have pushed his artillery to within range of say Kharkiv. Put Kharkiv within artillery range, not take it.

I will have to leave it to those who have a better grasp of military matters. I was a cub scout as a kid, that is the closest I ever came to a military uniform .

In ukraine putin just wanted crimea plus enough stability to prevent them from joining nato, he was fine with just leasing crimea but went to war over threats of it being yanked from russian use.

In georgia that is a completely different scenario, russia was acting as peace keepers in the breakaway regions, the ossettians launched attacks on georgia and lured them to the border, causing georgia to not only hit russian peacekeepers but also have attacks hit russian neighborhoods on the other side of the border. In georgia russia had no plans to just take said regions until georgia attacked them, in ukraine russia had no plans to attack unles something strategic was taken ie crimea or they planned to join nato.


One had to do with trying to play peacekeeper with georgia actually being the agressor, the other was russia being the agressor over land they deemed of the upmost importance that they leased being taken from them by a new ukrainian govt threatening just that.