• Bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    45
    ·
    2 days ago

    I wonder if in retrospect this will be considered “the straw that broke the camel’s back”?

    Putting aside the jokes about “they don’t gain ground fast enough therefore I win”, Zelensky’s strategy of fighting with a slave army of kidnapped men was and still is quite sucessful - Russia liberates no more than tens of km2 a day.
    But now, for whatever reason, he lets a good chunk of potential cannon fodder leave. Eventually running out of cannon fodder was always a ticking time bomb, and now it’s even worse…

    • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 days ago

      The reason Russia liberates no more than tens of km2 a day is because Russia has the advantage at multiple levels and therefore can afford to move more slowly, risk fewer casualties, gather better intelligence, and maintain a sufficiently responsive position in the case of surprise.

      It is not to Russia’s detriment that they move slow they are choosing it.

      • Bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        Ah right, thanks for pointing out my mistake!
        When talking about army of kidnapped slaves I of course meant the one from the country where busification (act of violently kidnapping someone to send them to the meatgrinder, obviously against their will) has become “the word of 2024” according to a dictionary organization from that same country.
        Would you be so kind to help me to identify this country, pretty please?

        • fox2263@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          2 days ago

          Russia. They conscripted. They also ran out of them so had to empty prisons and use them. And when that wasn’t enough, conscripted again. And also enlist from overseas, offering lavish pay to Africans and Pakistanis et al for engineering and analytics jobs in the army but were actually sent to the front lines (so they’d die and not have to continue paying them).

          A marked difference from conscription in defence of the homeland wouldn’t you say?

            • fox2263@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              Thank you. Sometimes it feels like shouting into the wind!

              But yea, two things can indeed be true.

              When your country is under invasion and you have a legally mandated conscription … of course people will be scared and try to evade it.

              But they try and hand wave over the fact that Russia also does it and much worse, especially when they don’t need to because they’re fighting an offensive war (badly).

              America had the draft and so did Britain. Was that decried as abhorrent?

              • Faux@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Two things can indeed be true. Like Russia invading Ukraine and Russia defending itself from NATO expansion in the bigger picture.

                Or like the fact that Ukrainian people are the biggest victim of this war and Ukrainian government is a Yankee proxy that caused this war.

                • fox2263@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 hours ago

                  Ah the NATO expansion argument.

                  And yea Ukrainians are suffering, from Russia, who didn’t need to invade and genocide them.

                  Ifs, buts and what abouts