X Close

Ukraine’s path to victory The attritional conflict is shifting into a war of manoeuvre

Muhammed Enes Yildirim/Anadolu Agency/Getty

Muhammed Enes Yildirim/Anadolu Agency/Getty


May 11, 2023   4 mins

In “continental warfare”, each side strives to retain and, if possible, increase its “operational reserve” — the sum total of trained and equipped combat units that are not in combat. It is only with an operational reserve that strategic choices can be made: whether to keep forces ready to counter an expected enemy offensive, or to launch an offensive to drive back the enemy, or, better still, to penetrate the enemy front, roll out and encircle enemy forces. It was by a succession of such offensive “envelopments” that the Red Army drove back the Germans from Stalingrad all the way to Berlin. The Allies did the same on a much smaller scale after the 1944 Normandy landings.

Of course, until an operational reserve is built up and offensives can be launched, frontal forces are absolutely necessary, whether to resist an advancing enemy or to keep attacking the enemy, so that it cannot withdraw its frontal forces to build up its own operational reserve. But frontal forces can only fight by attrition, First World War-style, to kill and wound enemy troops in front of them. And an entire war fought by attrition alone must last for years, killing and maiming troops on both sides until one side or the other gives up because of sheer exhaustion.

That is what happened on November 11, 1918, when Germany surrendered, even though not one Allied soldier had entered German territory, which remained almost undamaged in spite of the British and French air raids that hit a few buildings here and there. It was because Germany was neither devastated nor occupied after its surrender that it could go to war again just 20 years later, with catastrophic consequences. In other words, attrition is not only costly in lives, but it is also inconclusive, for it does not exhaust the will to fight.

Why is this relevant? Ever since the failure of the Russian air assault at the Antonov airfield on the first night of its invasion, which was supposed to open the way for the conquest of Kyiv and the country’s surrender, Ukraine has been fighting a war of attrition. At the cost of mounting casualties, Ukrainian frontal warfare has been successful enough to induce the Russians to withdraw from Kharkiv, the country’s second-largest city, to prevent the seemingly inevitable Russian conquest of Odesa, the country’s premier port, and to limit Russian advances in the most contested Donetsk and Luhansk regions, lately by holding Bakhmut in a house-by-house, street-by-street fight, in spite of relentless attacks by Russia’s Wagner mercenaries.

But the greatest success of Ukraine’s frontal resistance has occurred behind the front, with the gradual build-up of an increasing large, well-trained, and well-armed operational reserve of combat units that could be held back from combat because the frontal forces proved sufficiently strong to stop Russian advances without need of large reinforcements. It means that, for the first time since the start of the war, Ukraine’s war leaders can now take the initiative, instead of just repelling one Russian attack after another in different sectors of the very long front.

They can therefore choose a course of action from within a spectrum of risks and possible gains: from remaining on the defensive overall while launching successive attacks to drive back the Russians in one sector after another, each a limited-risk effort; to the boldest option of concentrating all available forces for a deep-penetration offensive to scythe across the roads and rail lines that sustain Russia’s forces within an entire region. The peculiar geography of the war, dominated by the curve of the great Dnipro river, offers several choices for such a bold move, including the most ambitious: an all-out offensive from Zaporizhzhia all the way to the Black Sea at Berdyans’k, or even at Mariupol, only 40 miles from the Russian border.

Regardless of the chosen sector, unless the Russians have large forces ready to counter-attack powerfully enough to promptly drive back the Ukrainians, the result of an all-out offensive could be a spectacular Russian defeat, complete with an unprecedented number of prisoners. It might even finally provoke challenges to Putin’s direction of the war, and hence his entire leadership.

That Ukraine’s leaders can finally choose between different options is a great advance, even if the chosen option is to hold back the operational reserve until the Russians make a move of their own. This is entirely possible: the assault on Bakhmut that has long dominated the headlines has been intense but also very limited in its scope. The Russians who fought and died in the house-to-house fighting were not the military professionals of the elite forces, nor were they the deployable troops obtained from last year’s call-up of 300,000 reservists, or the units manned by contract soldiers — but rather the Wagner expendables.

This means that there are sufficiently large numbers of uncommitted Russian forces somewhere — perhaps in Belarus, Russia itself or occupied Ukraine — to allow the Kremlin to launch its own offensive. But even that is bound to be inconclusive because only a conquest of Kyiv could be decisive, and that is now an impossibility unless the entire Russian army is mobilised for that purpose.

If there is a Russian offensive, a Ukrainian counter-offensive launched after the Russians have used their operational reserves could yield even greater results, forcing the Kremlin onto the defensive, perhaps even to the point of seeking a ceasefire. If Kyiv and the West are looking for the most plausible path to victory, this is it.


Professor Edward Luttwak is a strategist and historian known for his works on grand strategy, geoeconomics, military history, and international relations.

ELuttwak

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

185 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago

Doesn’t look very plausible to me.
The great Ukrainian counter-offensive came on the back of Russian tactical withdrawals after the original gambit failed. Since that sugar hit the Ukrainian Army has not moved forward anywhere for almost 12 months and have been suffering catastrophic losses in Bakhmut, to which they seem to be drawn as a moth to a flame.
NATO only offers Ukraine enough to keep themselves under the grindstone and shows no interest in an expansion that might enable Ukraine to succeed. Maybe that is all that they can do, having believed their own rhetoric that Russia is an gas station masquerading as a country and they didn’t think they needed to try too hard to bring it down.
Meanwhile the Russians have been building fortifications that make the Maginot Line look like a fence, yet the Ukrainian Army is supposed to smash through this without air-cover and 180 tanks. They used to have several thousand tanks and didn’t achieve very much with them. At least the Germans could advance around the Maginot Line and take it from the rear but that possibility is not available here.
Call me a skeptic.
By the way, how do these people get to have such cushy jobs as Strategic Analysts when they seem to know jack shit?

Last edited 1 year ago by Chris Keating
Max Rottersman
Max Rottersman
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Even with all the weapons and troops available it took the U.S. 7 months to prepare and execute the 2nd Iraq war. What “catastrophic losses in Bahkmut”? Losses yes, but I haven’t seen anything one would call catastrophic. Also, as the author points out, the only thing that matters is the line is held until a reserve fighting force can be properly trained and equipped.
The Maginot Line didn’t ultimately work, as you point out, and can fail for the Russians in the same way if Ukraine were able to get behind Russian lines in the North and work their way down.

Last edited 1 year ago by Max Rottersman
Nick H
Nick H
1 year ago
Reply to  Max Rottersman

This seems like motivated reasoning. The Russians have performed poorly, but they have a shit ton of Soviet artillery and rounds for it. The defensive works can’t be outflanked unless Ukraine wants to expand the war to Belarus, which would be a disaster for the smaller force. All of this ignores the most important aspect of American conventional warfare dominance, Air power. We took 7 months to prepare and execute Iraq so that we could take the country in 22 days and show the world how we can cut through the fourth largest army in the world with less than 200 dead. That’s because of air power. I want Ukraine to return to previous borders and have peace but it doesn’t change the fact that the west is only in this as long as it remains convenient, Russia will continue until exhausted, it’s too close to home for them.

Last edited 1 year ago by Nick H
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Nick H

Air power isn’t a factor for either side. If either flies over the other’s territory, they go down in flames. Been that way since almost the beginning of the war.
Russia is already exhausted.
The tragedy is that Putin still doesn’t realize it.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Nick H
Nick H
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

True that air power is not a factor for the most part, but you cannot create or sustain breakthroughs in modern combined arms warfare without air power and a lot of armor/troop carriers. If they push their limited mechanized assets into Russian lines they will get torn up by Kornets and other AT weapons with no close air to suppress those AT teams. Similar to what happened to the overextended Russians at the outbreak. We now have a horrific attritional war that will bleed both nations white; both combatants are poor and unsophisticated, but only Russia can sustain the war without outside intervention. The moment that UKR loses massive western support they are gone, no industrial base of their own to produce the materiel. The West is betting it all on Russia falling apart but that’s an easy bet to make when it’s not your son fighting.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Nick H

UH, in armoured warfare, it’s something called “infantry” that suppress AT teams. Not air power. No jet is going to find a pair of guys hiding in a treeline.
Ukraine has plenty of infantry, and plenty of AFVs, both western and Soviet era.

Stoater D
Stoater D
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

A10s can and do.
Type in “A10 treeline” on YT.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Stoater D

Given the rate of losses today, no worries over Russian air power. 2 Helos and 2 jets.
They won’t venture anywhere near the front lines.
If they do, they die.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Stoater D

Given the rate of losses today, no worries over Russian air power. 2 Helos and 2 jets.
They won’t venture anywhere near the front lines.
If they do, they die.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Stoater D
Stoater D
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

A10s can and do.
Type in “A10 treeline” on YT.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Nick H

UH, in armoured warfare, it’s something called “infantry” that suppress AT teams. Not air power. No jet is going to find a pair of guys hiding in a treeline.
Ukraine has plenty of infantry, and plenty of AFVs, both western and Soviet era.

Nick H
Nick H
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

True that air power is not a factor for the most part, but you cannot create or sustain breakthroughs in modern combined arms warfare without air power and a lot of armor/troop carriers. If they push their limited mechanized assets into Russian lines they will get torn up by Kornets and other AT weapons with no close air to suppress those AT teams. Similar to what happened to the overextended Russians at the outbreak. We now have a horrific attritional war that will bleed both nations white; both combatants are poor and unsophisticated, but only Russia can sustain the war without outside intervention. The moment that UKR loses massive western support they are gone, no industrial base of their own to produce the materiel. The West is betting it all on Russia falling apart but that’s an easy bet to make when it’s not your son fighting.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Nick H

Air power isn’t a factor for either side. If either flies over the other’s territory, they go down in flames. Been that way since almost the beginning of the war.
Russia is already exhausted.
The tragedy is that Putin still doesn’t realize it.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  Max Rottersman

Ukrainian losses in Bahkmut and elsewhere have indeed been near-catastrophic, if the recent ‘pentagon papers’ leak is accurate (and no one claims it’s not.) 5 or 6-to-1 loss ratio for Ukraine vs Russia? A counteroffensive is fantasy if those numbers are even close to true.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

As you well know, the original figures of 3 Rusisans for every Ukrainian were doctored to reflect that.
You really learn a lot–if you stay away from sites like Scott Ritter’s.
BTW, did you get to attend his book launch in St P? Could have got there via Turkey.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

As you well know, the original figures of 3 Rusisans for every Ukrainian were doctored to reflect that.
You really learn a lot–if you stay away from sites like Scott Ritter’s.
BTW, did you get to attend his book launch in St P? Could have got there via Turkey.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Ira Perman
Ira Perman
1 year ago
Reply to  Max Rottersman

Ukraine’s line has not held. What a difference a week (since this article was written) and battle maps published in the 5.21.23 Financial Times make. We’ve been had. https://www.ft.com/content/5950d5d5-26b4-4b8b-a4c6-9dfbd62e9a99

Nick H
Nick H
1 year ago
Reply to  Max Rottersman

This seems like motivated reasoning. The Russians have performed poorly, but they have a shit ton of Soviet artillery and rounds for it. The defensive works can’t be outflanked unless Ukraine wants to expand the war to Belarus, which would be a disaster for the smaller force. All of this ignores the most important aspect of American conventional warfare dominance, Air power. We took 7 months to prepare and execute Iraq so that we could take the country in 22 days and show the world how we can cut through the fourth largest army in the world with less than 200 dead. That’s because of air power. I want Ukraine to return to previous borders and have peace but it doesn’t change the fact that the west is only in this as long as it remains convenient, Russia will continue until exhausted, it’s too close to home for them.

Last edited 1 year ago by Nick H
0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  Max Rottersman

Ukrainian losses in Bahkmut and elsewhere have indeed been near-catastrophic, if the recent ‘pentagon papers’ leak is accurate (and no one claims it’s not.) 5 or 6-to-1 loss ratio for Ukraine vs Russia? A counteroffensive is fantasy if those numbers are even close to true.

Ira Perman
Ira Perman
1 year ago
Reply to  Max Rottersman

Ukraine’s line has not held. What a difference a week (since this article was written) and battle maps published in the 5.21.23 Financial Times make. We’ve been had. https://www.ft.com/content/5950d5d5-26b4-4b8b-a4c6-9dfbd62e9a99

Pete Rogers
Pete Rogers
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

I must say that I agree with this.
I notice that the main thread from both our Government and the Media seems far more black and white, not to mention upbeat about Ukraine, with this continual assault on “Putin” who is now so propagandised that it is hard to credit. He is clearly neither Hitler nor Stalin, but you wouldn’t guess it from the streams we get.
To deal with these things it is necessary to be fully vertebrate and to stand up and look at the deeds of the adversaries.
If a fully vertebrate person, capable of putting his predispositions on side for a moment, looked at things objectively and purely so – or, indeed, the proverbial Martian came down for a dekko – he or she would note the histrionic stream against Putin coming from the West.
What he or she would do then would be to look dispassionately at the deeds of both sides.
A big problem would arise at that point for us, because he or she will notice that Putin’s accusers were unapologetically involved in inexplicable invasions and mass destructions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya (what was that about?), Syria, Yemen, Somalia etc. accounting for perhaps 2m lives.
It is at this point that he would realise that even if this very guilty coalition; guilty considering the huge volumes of US war crimes revealed by Chelsea Manning through Wikileaks, and those of British Troops with criminal Govt. coverup shown by BBC Panorama in Oct ’19: was absolutely honest in its accusations against Putin then he is still a pathetic amateur in the Mass-Murder stakes compared to us according to the honest hard evidence.
Accordingly, we are not in the traditional world of good leaders fighting evil leaders, that’s just propaganda – a fairy tale. We are actually in the world of “Which of these is the less-worse horse in this glue factory?”
The worst one – by a street – just pointed its blood covered hoof at another bad, but lesser, one and cried “Get Putin – he’s a dangerous madman, a Hitler, not like us!” and all the evils of which the former has been guilty – including the vicious punishment of the Publisher Assange for daring to publish the truth – simply melt away and we howl to the dog-whistle at the lesser horse.
The Martian would not hesitate in the condemnation of the West these 60 years- if we go back to Vietnam – and throw our case out unless and until we volunteer for a thorough impartial investigation into our own war activity and accept punishment of any found Guilty of war crimes including Prime ministers and intelligence officers – otherwise honesty cannot be ascribed to our accusations.
At least Russia has a reason to fight in Ukraine if one uses our own standards to justify that statement.
It is the same reason that America used when the USSR sought to interfere on its borders and that the US would repeat today if Russia funded and worked up a militant anti-US split on its borders – say in Mexico.
I know it is hard but if we let our rulers press our buttons so that we stop thinking about what they have done we will be taken for a ride, in fact we really have.
Stop this US Proxy War.
When was Crimea honestly part of a Ukrainian Nation and why should Russophone Donbas. Luhansk and Odessa be denied autonomy given the Nazi led coup d’etat facilitated by the US at the end of Maidan.
I used to laugh at the dumbness of the Soviet people swallowing all the rot they got, but according to this evidence we are no better.
Wake up and take control of your thinking equipment so to stop the uncritical swallowing of all this bullshit coming from our profoundly dishonest rulers.
What is being done to our brains?

Last edited 1 year ago by Pete Rogers
Stoater D
Stoater D
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

An excellent post.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

Sadly you are inebriated by your own verbosity!
Try being a little more concise.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

It’s only a couple of screens worth Charlie.. go and have a nap and come back to it!

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

It’s only a couple of screens worth Charlie.. go and have a nap and come back to it!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

The Proxy War seems to be working quite well.
Just hope most Russians can get out of Crimea before it’s too late.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Which proxy war is going well? Not this one surely, at least not for NATO.. getting on for an investment of $200 billion and sfa to show for it, so far.. $200 billion from countries that are more or less bankrupt or will be in 9 months time.
Russia’s GDP growth is outstripping the UK’s – maybe you meant the war is going well for Russia? Ah, yes.. that makes more sense!

Last edited 1 year ago by Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Which proxy war is going well? Not this one surely, at least not for NATO.. getting on for an investment of $200 billion and sfa to show for it, so far.. $200 billion from countries that are more or less bankrupt or will be in 9 months time.
Russia’s GDP growth is outstripping the UK’s – maybe you meant the war is going well for Russia? Ah, yes.. that makes more sense!

Last edited 1 year ago by Liam O'Mahony
Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

Problem is your whole argument is based on blatant lie.
In Ukrainian Independence referendum in 1991 both Donbass and Luhansk voted 83% for independence.
Even Crimea voted 54% for it.

So your supposed Rusophone regions of Ukraine are nothing of the sort.

War can be stopped when Russian looters, rapists and murderers leave territory of Ukraine.

Stoater D
Stoater D
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

Crimea is Russian, as are the people living there.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Stoater D

Not if they can make it over the bridge in time.
If they can’t, it’s going to get mighty ugly.
The Ukrainians are not in a forgiving mood, and the Russians are just about to crack.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Can you give an approx date for the crack, for the craic.. because I’ll be back to either commend or ridicule your forecast whichever occurs.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Can you give an approx date for the crack, for the craic.. because I’ll be back to either commend or ridicule your forecast whichever occurs.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Stoater D

Not if they can make it over the bridge in time.
If they can’t, it’s going to get mighty ugly.
The Ukrainians are not in a forgiving mood, and the Russians are just about to crack.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

..now your just being silly!

Stoater D
Stoater D
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

Crimea is Russian, as are the people living there.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew F

..now your just being silly!

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

Well put.. the case you make is unassailable and yet, seemingly intelligent people fall for this crap all the time.. I find it amazing that they don’t learn any lessons even when they see evidence with their own eyes, coming directly from the liars/propagandists themselves!
Like you say, something has happened to their brains.. has the water been tainted? Oh yes, I almost forgot, it’s full of crap as well!

Stoater D
Stoater D
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

An excellent post.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

Sadly you are inebriated by your own verbosity!
Try being a little more concise.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

The Proxy War seems to be working quite well.
Just hope most Russians can get out of Crimea before it’s too late.

Andrew F
Andrew F
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

Problem is your whole argument is based on blatant lie.
In Ukrainian Independence referendum in 1991 both Donbass and Luhansk voted 83% for independence.
Even Crimea voted 54% for it.

So your supposed Rusophone regions of Ukraine are nothing of the sort.

War can be stopped when Russian looters, rapists and murderers leave territory of Ukraine.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Pete Rogers

Well put.. the case you make is unassailable and yet, seemingly intelligent people fall for this crap all the time.. I find it amazing that they don’t learn any lessons even when they see evidence with their own eyes, coming directly from the liars/propagandists themselves!
Like you say, something has happened to their brains.. has the water been tainted? Oh yes, I almost forgot, it’s full of crap as well!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Pls cite the “catastrophic losses” you speak of–outside of that single doctored image on line.
Moreover, since neither side dares to fly over the other’s territory, air power isn’t a factor.
And thankfully, you know nothing of the allied crossing of the similarly “well-defended” Siegfried line some years later.
Also nice to see the 250 Km range UK missiles that are shortly to arrive. Every part of Russian held-Ukraine is now under direct threat.
Fact is, Kyiv has lulled Putin into a false sense of security for many months–while comprehensively destroying the morale of his army.
He’s about to get unlulled.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

…and your forecasted date for the unlulling is? Approximate will do.. I’ll get back to you to congratulate or ridicule you as appropriate.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

…and your forecasted date for the unlulling is? Approximate will do.. I’ll get back to you to congratulate or ridicule you as appropriate.

Max Rottersman
Max Rottersman
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Even with all the weapons and troops available it took the U.S. 7 months to prepare and execute the 2nd Iraq war. What “catastrophic losses in Bahkmut”? Losses yes, but I haven’t seen anything one would call catastrophic. Also, as the author points out, the only thing that matters is the line is held until a reserve fighting force can be properly trained and equipped.
The Maginot Line didn’t ultimately work, as you point out, and can fail for the Russians in the same way if Ukraine were able to get behind Russian lines in the North and work their way down.

Last edited 1 year ago by Max Rottersman
Pete Rogers
Pete Rogers
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

I must say that I agree with this.
I notice that the main thread from both our Government and the Media seems far more black and white, not to mention upbeat about Ukraine, with this continual assault on “Putin” who is now so propagandised that it is hard to credit. He is clearly neither Hitler nor Stalin, but you wouldn’t guess it from the streams we get.
To deal with these things it is necessary to be fully vertebrate and to stand up and look at the deeds of the adversaries.
If a fully vertebrate person, capable of putting his predispositions on side for a moment, looked at things objectively and purely so – or, indeed, the proverbial Martian came down for a dekko – he or she would note the histrionic stream against Putin coming from the West.
What he or she would do then would be to look dispassionately at the deeds of both sides.
A big problem would arise at that point for us, because he or she will notice that Putin’s accusers were unapologetically involved in inexplicable invasions and mass destructions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya (what was that about?), Syria, Yemen, Somalia etc. accounting for perhaps 2m lives.
It is at this point that he would realise that even if this very guilty coalition; guilty considering the huge volumes of US war crimes revealed by Chelsea Manning through Wikileaks, and those of British Troops with criminal Govt. coverup shown by BBC Panorama in Oct ’19: was absolutely honest in its accusations against Putin then he is still a pathetic amateur in the Mass-Murder stakes compared to us according to the honest hard evidence.
Accordingly, we are not in the traditional world of good leaders fighting evil leaders, that’s just propaganda – a fairy tale. We are actually in the world of “Which of these is the less-worse horse in this glue factory?”
The worst one – by a street – just pointed its blood covered hoof at another bad, but lesser, one and cried “Get Putin – he’s a dangerous madman, a Hitler, not like us!” and all the evils of which the former has been guilty – including the vicious punishment of the Publisher Assange for daring to publish the truth – simply melt away and we howl to the dog-whistle at the lesser horse.
The Martian would not hesitate in the condemnation of the West these 60 years- if we go back to Vietnam – and throw our case out unless and until we volunteer for a thorough impartial investigation into our own war activity and accept punishment of any found Guilty of war crimes including Prime ministers and intelligence officers – otherwise honesty cannot be ascribed to our accusations.
At least Russia has a reason to fight in Ukraine if one uses our own standards to justify that statement.
It is the same reason that America used when the USSR sought to interfere on its borders and that the US would repeat today if Russia funded and worked up a militant anti-US split on its borders – say in Mexico.
I know it is hard but if we let our rulers press our buttons so that we stop thinking about what they have done we will be taken for a ride, in fact we really have.
Stop this US Proxy War.
When was Crimea honestly part of a Ukrainian Nation and why should Russophone Donbas. Luhansk and Odessa be denied autonomy given the Nazi led coup d’etat facilitated by the US at the end of Maidan.
I used to laugh at the dumbness of the Soviet people swallowing all the rot they got, but according to this evidence we are no better.
Wake up and take control of your thinking equipment so to stop the uncritical swallowing of all this bullshit coming from our profoundly dishonest rulers.
What is being done to our brains?

Last edited 1 year ago by Pete Rogers
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Pls cite the “catastrophic losses” you speak of–outside of that single doctored image on line.
Moreover, since neither side dares to fly over the other’s territory, air power isn’t a factor.
And thankfully, you know nothing of the allied crossing of the similarly “well-defended” Siegfried line some years later.
Also nice to see the 250 Km range UK missiles that are shortly to arrive. Every part of Russian held-Ukraine is now under direct threat.
Fact is, Kyiv has lulled Putin into a false sense of security for many months–while comprehensively destroying the morale of his army.
He’s about to get unlulled.

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago

Doesn’t look very plausible to me.
The great Ukrainian counter-offensive came on the back of Russian tactical withdrawals after the original gambit failed. Since that sugar hit the Ukrainian Army has not moved forward anywhere for almost 12 months and have been suffering catastrophic losses in Bakhmut, to which they seem to be drawn as a moth to a flame.
NATO only offers Ukraine enough to keep themselves under the grindstone and shows no interest in an expansion that might enable Ukraine to succeed. Maybe that is all that they can do, having believed their own rhetoric that Russia is an gas station masquerading as a country and they didn’t think they needed to try too hard to bring it down.
Meanwhile the Russians have been building fortifications that make the Maginot Line look like a fence, yet the Ukrainian Army is supposed to smash through this without air-cover and 180 tanks. They used to have several thousand tanks and didn’t achieve very much with them. At least the Germans could advance around the Maginot Line and take it from the rear but that possibility is not available here.
Call me a skeptic.
By the way, how do these people get to have such cushy jobs as Strategic Analysts when they seem to know jack shit?

Last edited 1 year ago by Chris Keating
J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago

An interesting article. One thing the author doesn’t mention is the possibility of Putin using nuclear weapons to stop a massive Ukrainian offensive that the Russians cannot otherwise stop. It now seems fashionable to sneer at the possibility of Putin using nukes. I’m not so sure.

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Russian troops aren’t equipped to fight on a nuclear battlefield. ll that would achieve is to turn the entire world against Russia. Xi has told Putin repeatedly to no use nukes

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Russian troops aren’t equipped to fight on any battefield, but that hasn’t deterred Putin. I can cheer on the Ukrainian people whilst sharing J Bryant’s sense of foreboding.This is war, not a morality tale where the good guys inevitably win.

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Russia gains absolutely nothing by using nukes. They invite NATO intervention, lose support from China and India, and become complete pariahs.
Why would the Russian military/FSB even obey? These are highly successful men with wives, children, friends, and hefty overseas bank accounts. If they’re given the choice of potentially starting WW3 or shooting Putin, the latter is by far the safer path.
We didn’t fall for nuclear buffs from Stalin, or Khrushchev, or Brezhnev. Why would we worry now?

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Maybe, maybe not. Well – push hard enough and we will find out, won’t we? You are close to arguing that MAD was a flawed concept all along. To repeat myself, maybe, maybe not.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

we?

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Yes – we

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

..yes, you. You’re about to send nuclear weapons to Ukraine aren’t you? Depleated Uranium shells? Putin has named these nuclear weapons.. is he wrong?

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Yes – we

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

..yes, you. You’re about to send nuclear weapons to Ukraine aren’t you? Depleated Uranium shells? Putin has named these nuclear weapons.. is he wrong?

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

we?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

The ‘Jupiter’ missile crisis came very close to Armageddon.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

and it was the US response that was extreme, after all the Russians simply shipped missiles to Cuba just as the US had shipped missiles to Turkey. History is important here, and the Ukraine are NOT the good guys anymore than Putin is the bad guy. This is basically a war over Soviet drawn borders in a post Soviet world, with Russia supporting the secessionists in the Ukraine, as NATO/US supported the secessionists in the other dangerous post Soviet border wars in the Balkans. We should have no part in it at all.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

The Cuban Missile Crisis was the first phase in the collapse of the Russian Empire.
This war is just the final phase.
Empires are obsolete, as both Britain and France discovered half a century ago.
It’s coalitions like the one which supports Ukraine that will win any future conflicts.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

It’s the US Empire that’s in decline.. Russia, with BRICS+ is in the ascendancy.. Surely that’s clear? $31 trillion in debt, the US dollar in serious decline, no gold, no industrial base apart from the war industry.. near civil war, a senile leader governed by oligarchs.. how many more signs do you need??

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

It’s the US Empire that’s in decline.. Russia, with BRICS+ is in the ascendancy.. Surely that’s clear? $31 trillion in debt, the US dollar in serious decline, no gold, no industrial base apart from the war industry.. near civil war, a senile leader governed by oligarchs.. how many more signs do you need??

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Quite right.. the charge of the Light brigade was ages ago. Move on!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

The Cuban Missile Crisis was the first phase in the collapse of the Russian Empire.
This war is just the final phase.
Empires are obsolete, as both Britain and France discovered half a century ago.
It’s coalitions like the one which supports Ukraine that will win any future conflicts.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Quite right.. the charge of the Light brigade was ages ago. Move on!

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago

and it was the US response that was extreme, after all the Russians simply shipped missiles to Cuba just as the US had shipped missiles to Turkey. History is important here, and the Ukraine are NOT the good guys anymore than Putin is the bad guy. This is basically a war over Soviet drawn borders in a post Soviet world, with Russia supporting the secessionists in the Ukraine, as NATO/US supported the secessionists in the other dangerous post Soviet border wars in the Balkans. We should have no part in it at all.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

That applies if Putin uses nukes first.. It’s more like the crazy US warhawks will shoot first from their armchairs in DC and Langley and then quick retire to their bunkers on Bill Gates’ ranch!
Since the UK is about to deliver nuclear weapons to Ukraine, ie deplete Uranium shells, Putin will say he’s justified in using small tactical nuclear weapons.. he has already hinted at this.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Maybe, maybe not. Well – push hard enough and we will find out, won’t we? You are close to arguing that MAD was a flawed concept all along. To repeat myself, maybe, maybe not.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

The ‘Jupiter’ missile crisis came very close to Armageddon.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

That applies if Putin uses nukes first.. It’s more like the crazy US warhawks will shoot first from their armchairs in DC and Langley and then quick retire to their bunkers on Bill Gates’ ranch!
Since the UK is about to deliver nuclear weapons to Ukraine, ie deplete Uranium shells, Putin will say he’s justified in using small tactical nuclear weapons.. he has already hinted at this.

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

It’s not just that the good guys might not win. There aren’t any good guys in this war.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

But there are competent and wealthy guys.
They ALWAYS win wars.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Wealthy yes, competent no.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Wealthy yes, competent no.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

You got that right!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

But there are competent and wealthy guys.
They ALWAYS win wars.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

You got that right!

Kerie Receveur
Kerie Receveur
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

The assumption that Ukr is the “good guy” is rather swingeing. There is no black-and-white here, only shades of grey.

Alan Tonkyn
Alan Tonkyn
1 year ago
Reply to  Kerie Receveur

Well, who invaded whom? Someone was, at the very least, the better guy!

Alan Tonkyn
Alan Tonkyn
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Tonkyn

….and who has been ‘liberating’ Ukraine by bombing blocks of flats, hospitals and schools?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Tonkyn

Russia, of course.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

He meant between 2014 and 2022!

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

He meant between 2014 and 2022!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Tonkyn

Russia, of course.

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Tonkyn

Who was the good guy in 2014, when the democratically-elected government was overthrown?
Who was the good guy in the years that followed, when the Ukrainian government shelled their own citizens in separatist areas?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

The number of civilians killed in Donbas (by both sides) was one or two dozen in the last few years.
Most “ingeniously” conflate the total losses in teh war with the handful of civilian deaths afterward–on both sides.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Propagandist garbage..

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Propagandist garbage..

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

The number of civilians killed in Donbas (by both sides) was one or two dozen in the last few years.
Most “ingeniously” conflate the total losses in teh war with the handful of civilian deaths afterward–on both sides.

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Tonkyn

Try least worse! I bet you still get it wrong..

Alan Tonkyn
Alan Tonkyn
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Tonkyn

….and who has been ‘liberating’ Ukraine by bombing blocks of flats, hospitals and schools?

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Tonkyn

Who was the good guy in 2014, when the democratically-elected government was overthrown?
Who was the good guy in the years that followed, when the Ukrainian government shelled their own citizens in separatist areas?

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Tonkyn

Try least worse! I bet you still get it wrong..

Alan Tonkyn
Alan Tonkyn
1 year ago
Reply to  Kerie Receveur

Well, who invaded whom? Someone was, at the very least, the better guy!

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Who exactly are the good guys?

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Russia gains absolutely nothing by using nukes. They invite NATO intervention, lose support from China and India, and become complete pariahs.
Why would the Russian military/FSB even obey? These are highly successful men with wives, children, friends, and hefty overseas bank accounts. If they’re given the choice of potentially starting WW3 or shooting Putin, the latter is by far the safer path.
We didn’t fall for nuclear buffs from Stalin, or Khrushchev, or Brezhnev. Why would we worry now?

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

It’s not just that the good guys might not win. There aren’t any good guys in this war.

Kerie Receveur
Kerie Receveur
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

The assumption that Ukr is the “good guy” is rather swingeing. There is no black-and-white here, only shades of grey.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Who exactly are the good guys?

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

“Xi has told Putin repeatedly to no use nukes”.
And you know this because…?

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago

Public statements by Xi saying “Nuclear wars must not be fought”. Who do you think the target audience was?

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago

Public statements by Xi saying “Nuclear wars must not be fought”. Who do you think the target audience was?

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Russian troops aren’t equipped to fight on any battefield, but that hasn’t deterred Putin. I can cheer on the Ukrainian people whilst sharing J Bryant’s sense of foreboding.This is war, not a morality tale where the good guys inevitably win.

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

“Xi has told Putin repeatedly to no use nukes”.
And you know this because…?

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

The only ones willing to set off a nuke where the wind would blow the fallout right over Russia or over Europe would be the same ones behind the blowing up of the pipeline. 

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve White
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

Rather depends on whether you go for “air bursts” or “ground bursts”.

ps:Does anyone understand the difference?

pps: Obviously not!

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

Would they be the guys who ALREADY dropped atomic bombs on the defenseless populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? and used Agent Orange in Vietnam? and came very close to using nukes in Korea? and carpet bombed Iraq killing half a million children (but it was worth it, they said).
Those guys?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

Rather depends on whether you go for “air bursts” or “ground bursts”.

ps:Does anyone understand the difference?

pps: Obviously not!

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

Would they be the guys who ALREADY dropped atomic bombs on the defenseless populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? and used Agent Orange in Vietnam? and came very close to using nukes in Korea? and carpet bombed Iraq killing half a million children (but it was worth it, they said).
Those guys?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

The MAD mantra has always been nonsense, at least from the US standpoint.
In any major nuclear exchange from say 1950 onwards, the US would have undoubtedly triumphed.

However that it not to say that victory would been cost free. For a start Europe is/was indefensible and would have been vaporised.

Additionally, and it would have needed considerable luck it must be said, the ‘Soviets’ may well have been able to accomplish a couple of ‘strikes’ on the continental US itself.

However the damage inflicted would have been an acceptable price for a victory that would have seen the annihilation of the Soviet Union.

So start digging Europe!

Michael Coleman
Michael Coleman
1 year ago

From what source do you conclude that the soviets may have achieved only a couple of continental US strikes? It’s estimated they had >1,100 ICBM warheads at peak and prior to Reagan’s star wars initiative such a low hit rate would require >95% failure rate, even high for the soviets.
https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-sheet-russias-nuclear-inventory/

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago

I am assuming a US ‘first strike’ and thus the complete neutralisation of the Soviet ICBM capability.

However their submarines, useless as most were, might have achieved something, but it would hardly have been decisive.

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

To comply with the Marquis of Queensbury rules the Ruskies would have sat there to see the US nukes striking before they responded would they?

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

To comply with the Marquis of Queensbury rules the Ruskies would have sat there to see the US nukes striking before they responded would they?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago

I am assuming a US ‘first strike’ and thus the complete neutralisation of the Soviet ICBM capability.

However their submarines, useless as most were, might have achieved something, but it would hardly have been decisive.

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Indeed.
And a first strike by the Soviets would have done similar damage–unless they knew that parts of the Triad would still survive.
US strategy was to convince the USSR that it could never win a nuclear war.
It succeeded. And now there is no more USSR, just as soon there will be no more Russia.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

An excellent synopsis, thank you.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

I bet you €100 Russia lasts longer than the US! ..put your money where your mouth is..

Scott Towns
Scott Towns
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Russia will not simply cease to exist, however, with a population of under 140 million, they no longer have the one battlefield advantage they relied on to win the Eastern front in WWII…numbers. Their strategy has always and as we can still see, been to overwhelm the enemy forces through sheer numerical superiority. Yes, they have this superiority over the population of Ukraine, they do not have it over Western Europe.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia lost the Baltics, the Balkans, the Visegrad, and the Central Asian States. They can no longer draw on the East German engineering. Russia is not what it was during the Soviet times.
And the Russian military technologies are proving to be inadequate. Look at the toll the Soviet on Soviet battles in Eastern Ukraine have had on Russian armor. How many turrets have played the Jack in the Box game?
Russia will limp along, but I truly believe a Putin has accelerated its demise and marginalization on the global scene. It is not impossible that the Russian Federation could be facing the same future that the Ottoman Empire faced following WWI.

Scott Towns
Scott Towns
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Russia will not simply cease to exist, however, with a population of under 140 million, they no longer have the one battlefield advantage they relied on to win the Eastern front in WWII…numbers. Their strategy has always and as we can still see, been to overwhelm the enemy forces through sheer numerical superiority. Yes, they have this superiority over the population of Ukraine, they do not have it over Western Europe.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia lost the Baltics, the Balkans, the Visegrad, and the Central Asian States. They can no longer draw on the East German engineering. Russia is not what it was during the Soviet times.
And the Russian military technologies are proving to be inadequate. Look at the toll the Soviet on Soviet battles in Eastern Ukraine have had on Russian armor. How many turrets have played the Jack in the Box game?
Russia will limp along, but I truly believe a Putin has accelerated its demise and marginalization on the global scene. It is not impossible that the Russian Federation could be facing the same future that the Ottoman Empire faced following WWI.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

An excellent synopsis, thank you.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

I bet you €100 Russia lasts longer than the US! ..put your money where your mouth is..

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

“Acceptable” like MADalene Albright said when the US killed half a million children in Iraq. I bet Charlie you have your bunker and baked beans to the ready? I’m told rats and cockroaches will survive? You’ll probably be okay.

Michael Coleman
Michael Coleman
1 year ago

From what source do you conclude that the soviets may have achieved only a couple of continental US strikes? It’s estimated they had >1,100 ICBM warheads at peak and prior to Reagan’s star wars initiative such a low hit rate would require >95% failure rate, even high for the soviets.
https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-sheet-russias-nuclear-inventory/

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Indeed.
And a first strike by the Soviets would have done similar damage–unless they knew that parts of the Triad would still survive.
US strategy was to convince the USSR that it could never win a nuclear war.
It succeeded. And now there is no more USSR, just as soon there will be no more Russia.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

“Acceptable” like MADalene Albright said when the US killed half a million children in Iraq. I bet Charlie you have your bunker and baked beans to the ready? I’m told rats and cockroaches will survive? You’ll probably be okay.

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

They don’t need nukes as they are winning as it is. If nukes come it will be a NATO false flag

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Winning? Suffering 2.5:1 losses, and losing territory for the past 12 months is winning?

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Even our own leaked Pentagon papers say that it’s about a 6 to 1 loss for Ukraine. Many say it’s much worse than that.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve White
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

That’s the doctored evidence that originally said 3:1 in Ukraine’s favour.
Russians may not want to fight in Ukraine. But they sure do it on line.

Phil Mac
Phil Mac
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

As the up/down votes on here seem to confirm.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Phil Mac

And as the Ukrainian offensive will refute rather painfully.
Just thank the Lord you aren’t a Russian.
You’d be fleeing your nation next year.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Phil Mac

And as the Ukrainian offensive will refute rather painfully.
Just thank the Lord you aren’t a Russian.
You’d be fleeing your nation next year.

Phil Mac
Phil Mac
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

As the up/down votes on here seem to confirm.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

That’s the doctored evidence that originally said 3:1 in Ukraine’s favour.
Russians may not want to fight in Ukraine. But they sure do it on line.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Shhh.
Let him continue to live in his pleasant little world…

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Russia has lost territory? I didn’t know that! Which parts??

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Even our own leaked Pentagon papers say that it’s about a 6 to 1 loss for Ukraine. Many say it’s much worse than that.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve White
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Shhh.
Let him continue to live in his pleasant little world…

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Russia has lost territory? I didn’t know that! Which parts??

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

Winning? Suffering 2.5:1 losses, and losing territory for the past 12 months is winning?

Benedict Waterson
Benedict Waterson
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Yes these kind of offensive tactics, to try and embarrass putin, are basically just calling his bluff.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

Putin is not a man I’d like to play poker with!

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

Putin is not a man I’d like to play poker with!

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Russian troops aren’t equipped to fight on a nuclear battlefield. ll that would achieve is to turn the entire world against Russia. Xi has told Putin repeatedly to no use nukes

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

The only ones willing to set off a nuke where the wind would blow the fallout right over Russia or over Europe would be the same ones behind the blowing up of the pipeline. 

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve White
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

The MAD mantra has always been nonsense, at least from the US standpoint.
In any major nuclear exchange from say 1950 onwards, the US would have undoubtedly triumphed.

However that it not to say that victory would been cost free. For a start Europe is/was indefensible and would have been vaporised.

Additionally, and it would have needed considerable luck it must be said, the ‘Soviets’ may well have been able to accomplish a couple of ‘strikes’ on the continental US itself.

However the damage inflicted would have been an acceptable price for a victory that would have seen the annihilation of the Soviet Union.

So start digging Europe!

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

They don’t need nukes as they are winning as it is. If nukes come it will be a NATO false flag

Benedict Waterson
Benedict Waterson
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Yes these kind of offensive tactics, to try and embarrass putin, are basically just calling his bluff.

J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago

An interesting article. One thing the author doesn’t mention is the possibility of Putin using nuclear weapons to stop a massive Ukrainian offensive that the Russians cannot otherwise stop. It now seems fashionable to sneer at the possibility of Putin using nukes. I’m not so sure.

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
1 year ago

The person who wrote this was paid to do so. He is now sitting behind a computer in a reasonable, quiet house, trying to earn more money. He has studied history. What does he KNOW? UnHerd contributors are reading articles in magazines and journals. Great.
Russia is a huge country which has concentrated all its efforts and industry on armaments. The same for the USA. Neither will just give up without first causing real devastation. Maybe nobody will win. It is just practice for the generals.

Michael F
Michael F
1 year ago

He knows more than you, it is clear. And I suspect that if you knew more, you would have a higher regard for him.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

I’d say that’s close.. it’s gotta be easier to do in your own back yard though? ..doing it from thousands of miles away and losing 30-70% of your stuff on the black market makes the fight a bit one-sided. Also, Russia is fighting for its very survival.. that’s usually a good morale booster. My money is on the Ruskies!

Michael F
Michael F
1 year ago

He knows more than you, it is clear. And I suspect that if you knew more, you would have a higher regard for him.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

I’d say that’s close.. it’s gotta be easier to do in your own back yard though? ..doing it from thousands of miles away and losing 30-70% of your stuff on the black market makes the fight a bit one-sided. Also, Russia is fighting for its very survival.. that’s usually a good morale booster. My money is on the Ruskies!

Caradog Wiliams
Caradog Wiliams
1 year ago

The person who wrote this was paid to do so. He is now sitting behind a computer in a reasonable, quiet house, trying to earn more money. He has studied history. What does he KNOW? UnHerd contributors are reading articles in magazines and journals. Great.
Russia is a huge country which has concentrated all its efforts and industry on armaments. The same for the USA. Neither will just give up without first causing real devastation. Maybe nobody will win. It is just practice for the generals.

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago

“the result of an all-out offensive could be a spectacular Russian defeat”

Fantasy.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

I think Hitler had the same idea! ..and he was nearly right too! Napoleon also had that idea.. I forget how it worked out for them.. do you remember?

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark Goodhand

I think Hitler had the same idea! ..and he was nearly right too! Napoleon also had that idea.. I forget how it worked out for them.. do you remember?

Mark Goodhand
Mark Goodhand
1 year ago

“the result of an all-out offensive could be a spectacular Russian defeat”

Fantasy.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

Come on…..

”the result of an all-out offensive could be a spectacular Russian defeat, complete with an unprecedented number of prisoners.”

Sure it will – then Ukrainian tanks in Red Square.

Ukraine loses 7 men for every Russian lost. The medical system Ukraine has for injured is a fraction of the Russian so their disabled are disproportionate on top of that. This is not the war of drones and missiles all expected – it is WWI and the grinding of men into an artillery barrage meat grinder from ranges nothing else can reach. Russia is expert at this – the Great Western thinkers planned otherwise and called it wrong.

This is a wicked, evil, corrupt Political Proxy War which was none of our business – and by pumping in $200 Billion, and Intel, and training and arming Ukraine for this very war the last 15 years –

We used that poor nation as the chess board and pawns to play a globalist war game on – resulting in the collateral damage of destroying the People, Infrastructure, and nation of Ukraine its self. It has about destroyed Europe, wrecked the global economy, caused BRICS+++++++ to form an alliance against the West. It has Saddled USA with vast debt that really is disastrous just now fallowing the Great Plandemic.

Now Blackrock and Vanguard have officially been given Ukraine as their property to rebuild by sucking endlessly more Western Tax Dollars into the money pit. They will own Ukraine for ever.

You Globalist, Warmongering Lefty-Neo-Con Vampires have killed and destroyed your way around the globe for 80 years – Exactly, Exactly as Ike said you would.

Dwight Eisenhower:

”American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. . . . This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. . . .Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. . . . In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

David Adams
David Adams
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Lie after lie after lie.

The Ukrainians are not losing seven to every one Russian. This is an old piece of nonsense spread about by Col Douglas McGregor, who made a number of very precise and falsifiable predictions about the war which turned out to be incorrect (for example, that Ukrainian military would have collapsed before the first patriot missile system was active in the country).

Aside from that whopper, the Russian combat medical system is inferior, not superior, to Ukraine’s. The war is not simply a new WW1, drones and tanks do play a significant role in combat. We have only seriously been training Ukraine for the last 9 years, since the first Russian invasion. The BRICS and associated countries have not formed an alliance against the West. The West’s debt is almost entirely the result of lockdowns, the military spending has made negligible difference in comparison.

Russia does not, despite what Putin says, have a god-given right to a friendly and submissive neighbour (we in the UK don’t expect that, and we certainly don’t get it, from ROI). Ukraine should be free to choose it’s own path, and if Russia had a less corrupt, malevolent government, and had shown at least some remorse for Stalin’s actions, it might have been more attractive at least to southern and eastern Ukrainians.

You can be skeptical about the military-industrial complex, globalism, and “the latest thing” without parroting the Russian mafia-state’s blatant falsehoods.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  David Adams

The US expects it and responds appropriately IF it doesn’t think they have it. Try reading more widely.

Roger Smith
Roger Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  David Adams

You can also be sceptical about the Russian mafia-state and “the latest thing” without parroting the blatant falsehoods of the military-industrial complex and globalism.
Comparing the relations between the straightforward Bandera-obsessed Ukrainian mafia-state and the Russian mafia-state with the relations of ROI with UK tells everything about your current level of blindness and ignorance.
Well let’s have some more “Lie after lie after lie” then, just to bring your comparison into some balance.
Let’s imagine that ROI not just organises camps with expressed nazi signs, slogans and curriculum for tens of thousands of children for years after years with the declared aim to kill “British orks”, but also that its leaders demand nuclear weapons from China “for security” against the “British threat” long before any actual military activity of London, but after ever-growing conventional “military aid” from China and visible military build-up in the ROI for almost a decade. All this in addition to decade-long systematic oppression, terror and killing of hundreds (if not thousands) of local Englishmen – especially in NI. Then, after a badly planned/organized eventual intervention by London, ROI unleashes a global hysteria over the “illegal, unprovoked, appalling aggression” and over the (NI-included) “territorial integrity” of ROI, all of which becoming such an unquestionable mantra that it is worth hundreds of thousands killed, millions physically and mentally damaged without the slightest consideration of negotiations “with the aggressor”. Now let’s imagine that ROI, however ruled by the sickest oligarchs and being in fact the most corrupt playgroud in Europe, now cherished as the cornerstone of democracy. Having been freely aligned to (acquired by) the most prominent corporate and political powers of China, it is now receiving hundreds of billions worth of ammunition against the British aggressors. China does not even hide that it seeks “regime change” in the UK: total cleansing of current “authoritarian” political and business establishment and replacement with “freedom-fighter” opposition powers and “economic freedom”. The aim is, and has ever been, to “share democratic values and the same level of commitment to human rights” as in China (not that China and its allies could control anything that used to be controlled by the UK, however it might lead to the very same outcome). Also accidently, all major “independent” Chinese media outlets, business and public figures unanimously echo the exact same view with the exact same words, mocking and smearing immediately anyone with any kind of understanding towards the UK or the British people, even banning and retrospectively cancelling the most comprehensive, persistent sources that “spread disinformation and the UK-narrative.” Consequently, the Chinese society is extremely pro-ROI, intellectuals and business leaders are even more than common people.
They are truly convinced that the UK must (and will) face and admit the humiliating conventional defeat, during the cheering victory of the considerably smaller but heavenly heroic ROI, because it is what the UK deserves after its dumb aggression against the “whole” civilised world. The dog’s bark is worse than its bite: the blood-sucking, children-raping, genocidal, terrorist, defeated UK dictator will shamefully be chicken (maybe he will even transfer the nukes to the hero museum in Dublin or directly to China), while overseeing the collapse of its state and kissing its culture a final goodbye flushing down the toilet of history.

Bright future. Great odds. We are the brightest good guys for sure, and nothing else matters.

Roger Smith
Roger Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  David Adams

You can also be sceptical about the Russian mafia-state and “the latest thing” without parroting the blatant falsehoods of the military-industrial complex and globalism.
Comparing the relations between the straightforward Bandera-obsessed Ukrainian mafia-state and the Russian mafia-state with the relations between ROI and UK tells everything about your current level of blindness and ignorance.
Well let’s have some more “Lie after lie after lie” then, just to bring your comparison into some balance.
Let’s imagine that ROI not just organises camps with expressed nazi signs, slogans and curriculum for tens of thousands of children for years after years with the declared aim to kill “British orks”, but also that its leaders demand nuclear weapons from China “for security” against the “British threat” long before any actual military activity of London, but after ever-growing conventional “military aid” from China and visible military build-up in the ROI for almost a decade. All this in addition to decade-long systematic oppression, terror and killing of hundreds (if not thousands) of local Englishmen – especially in NI. Then, after a badly planned/organized eventual intervention by London, ROI unleashes a global hysteria over the “illegal, unprovoked, appalling aggression” and over the (NI-included) “territorial integrity” of ROI, all of which becoming such an unquestionable mantra that it is worth hundreds of thousands killed, millions physically and mentally damaged without the slightest consideration of negotiations “with the aggressor”. Now let’s imagine that ROI, however ruled by the sickest oligarchs and being in fact the most corrupt playgroud in Europe, now cherished as the cornerstone of democracy. Having been freely aligned to (acquired by) the most prominent corporate and political powers of China, it is now receiving hundreds of billions worth of ammunition against the British aggressors. China does not even hide that it seeks “regime change” in the UK: total cleansing of current “authoritarian” political and business establishment and replacement with “freedom-fighter” opposition powers and “economic freedom”. The aim is, and has ever been, to “share democratic values and the same level of commitment to human rights” as in China (not that China and its allies could control anything that used to be controlled by the UK, however it might lead to the very same outcome). Also accidently, all major “independent” Chinese media outlets, business and public figures unanimously echo the exact same view with the exact same words, mocking and smearing immediately anyone with any kind of understanding towards the UK or the British people, even banning and retrospectively cancelling the most comprehensive, persistent sources that “spread disinformation and the UK-narrative.” Consequently, the Chinese society is extremely pro-ROI, intellectuals and business leaders are even more than common people.
They are truly convinced that the UK must (and will) face and admit the humiliating conventional defeat, during the cheering victory of the considerably smaller but heavenly heroic ROI, because it is what the UK deserves after its dumb aggression against the “whole” civilised world. The dog’s bark is worse than its bite: the blood-sucking, children-raping, genocidal, terrorist, defeated UK dictator will shamefully be chicken (maybe he will even transfer the nukes to the hero museum in Dublin or directly to China), while overseeing the collapse of its state and kissing its culture a final goodbye flushing down the toilet of history.

Bright future. Great odds. We are the brightest good guys for sure, and nothing else matters.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  David Adams

What utter arse gravy! I live in the ROI and I don’t remember us attacking and murdering all the (pro) English people remaining here in 1922+ unlike Ukraine which murdered 14,000 (pro) Russians that tried to secede after the Maidan coup; and vicious anti Russian attacks in Kyev, Odessa and especially the Donbas+ .. and that despite England exporting Irish food to England at gunpoint while a million Irishmen starved to death and a million and a half were forced to emigrate in ‘coffin’ ships a mere 70 years before. On the contrary, all were treated more than fairly and discrimination was entirely positive in favour of the English/protestant minority. NI under British control did the opposite! Gross discrimination against the Catholic minority for 75 years!

Last edited 1 year ago by Liam O'Mahony
Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  David Adams

The US expects it and responds appropriately IF it doesn’t think they have it. Try reading more widely.

Roger Smith
Roger Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  David Adams

You can also be sceptical about the Russian mafia-state and “the latest thing” without parroting the blatant falsehoods of the military-industrial complex and globalism.
Comparing the relations between the straightforward Bandera-obsessed Ukrainian mafia-state and the Russian mafia-state with the relations of ROI with UK tells everything about your current level of blindness and ignorance.
Well let’s have some more “Lie after lie after lie” then, just to bring your comparison into some balance.
Let’s imagine that ROI not just organises camps with expressed nazi signs, slogans and curriculum for tens of thousands of children for years after years with the declared aim to kill “British orks”, but also that its leaders demand nuclear weapons from China “for security” against the “British threat” long before any actual military activity of London, but after ever-growing conventional “military aid” from China and visible military build-up in the ROI for almost a decade. All this in addition to decade-long systematic oppression, terror and killing of hundreds (if not thousands) of local Englishmen – especially in NI. Then, after a badly planned/organized eventual intervention by London, ROI unleashes a global hysteria over the “illegal, unprovoked, appalling aggression” and over the (NI-included) “territorial integrity” of ROI, all of which becoming such an unquestionable mantra that it is worth hundreds of thousands killed, millions physically and mentally damaged without the slightest consideration of negotiations “with the aggressor”. Now let’s imagine that ROI, however ruled by the sickest oligarchs and being in fact the most corrupt playgroud in Europe, now cherished as the cornerstone of democracy. Having been freely aligned to (acquired by) the most prominent corporate and political powers of China, it is now receiving hundreds of billions worth of ammunition against the British aggressors. China does not even hide that it seeks “regime change” in the UK: total cleansing of current “authoritarian” political and business establishment and replacement with “freedom-fighter” opposition powers and “economic freedom”. The aim is, and has ever been, to “share democratic values and the same level of commitment to human rights” as in China (not that China and its allies could control anything that used to be controlled by the UK, however it might lead to the very same outcome). Also accidently, all major “independent” Chinese media outlets, business and public figures unanimously echo the exact same view with the exact same words, mocking and smearing immediately anyone with any kind of understanding towards the UK or the British people, even banning and retrospectively cancelling the most comprehensive, persistent sources that “spread disinformation and the UK-narrative.” Consequently, the Chinese society is extremely pro-ROI, intellectuals and business leaders are even more than common people.
They are truly convinced that the UK must (and will) face and admit the humiliating conventional defeat, during the cheering victory of the considerably smaller but heavenly heroic ROI, because it is what the UK deserves after its dumb aggression against the “whole” civilised world. The dog’s bark is worse than its bite: the blood-sucking, children-raping, genocidal, terrorist, defeated UK dictator will shamefully be chicken (maybe he will even transfer the nukes to the hero museum in Dublin or directly to China), while overseeing the collapse of its state and kissing its culture a final goodbye flushing down the toilet of history.

Bright future. Great odds. We are the brightest good guys for sure, and nothing else matters.

Roger Smith
Roger Smith
1 year ago
Reply to  David Adams

You can also be sceptical about the Russian mafia-state and “the latest thing” without parroting the blatant falsehoods of the military-industrial complex and globalism.
Comparing the relations between the straightforward Bandera-obsessed Ukrainian mafia-state and the Russian mafia-state with the relations between ROI and UK tells everything about your current level of blindness and ignorance.
Well let’s have some more “Lie after lie after lie” then, just to bring your comparison into some balance.
Let’s imagine that ROI not just organises camps with expressed nazi signs, slogans and curriculum for tens of thousands of children for years after years with the declared aim to kill “British orks”, but also that its leaders demand nuclear weapons from China “for security” against the “British threat” long before any actual military activity of London, but after ever-growing conventional “military aid” from China and visible military build-up in the ROI for almost a decade. All this in addition to decade-long systematic oppression, terror and killing of hundreds (if not thousands) of local Englishmen – especially in NI. Then, after a badly planned/organized eventual intervention by London, ROI unleashes a global hysteria over the “illegal, unprovoked, appalling aggression” and over the (NI-included) “territorial integrity” of ROI, all of which becoming such an unquestionable mantra that it is worth hundreds of thousands killed, millions physically and mentally damaged without the slightest consideration of negotiations “with the aggressor”. Now let’s imagine that ROI, however ruled by the sickest oligarchs and being in fact the most corrupt playgroud in Europe, now cherished as the cornerstone of democracy. Having been freely aligned to (acquired by) the most prominent corporate and political powers of China, it is now receiving hundreds of billions worth of ammunition against the British aggressors. China does not even hide that it seeks “regime change” in the UK: total cleansing of current “authoritarian” political and business establishment and replacement with “freedom-fighter” opposition powers and “economic freedom”. The aim is, and has ever been, to “share democratic values and the same level of commitment to human rights” as in China (not that China and its allies could control anything that used to be controlled by the UK, however it might lead to the very same outcome). Also accidently, all major “independent” Chinese media outlets, business and public figures unanimously echo the exact same view with the exact same words, mocking and smearing immediately anyone with any kind of understanding towards the UK or the British people, even banning and retrospectively cancelling the most comprehensive, persistent sources that “spread disinformation and the UK-narrative.” Consequently, the Chinese society is extremely pro-ROI, intellectuals and business leaders are even more than common people.
They are truly convinced that the UK must (and will) face and admit the humiliating conventional defeat, during the cheering victory of the considerably smaller but heavenly heroic ROI, because it is what the UK deserves after its dumb aggression against the “whole” civilised world. The dog’s bark is worse than its bite: the blood-sucking, children-raping, genocidal, terrorist, defeated UK dictator will shamefully be chicken (maybe he will even transfer the nukes to the hero museum in Dublin or directly to China), while overseeing the collapse of its state and kissing its culture a final goodbye flushing down the toilet of history.

Bright future. Great odds. We are the brightest good guys for sure, and nothing else matters.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  David Adams

What utter arse gravy! I live in the ROI and I don’t remember us attacking and murdering all the (pro) English people remaining here in 1922+ unlike Ukraine which murdered 14,000 (pro) Russians that tried to secede after the Maidan coup; and vicious anti Russian attacks in Kyev, Odessa and especially the Donbas+ .. and that despite England exporting Irish food to England at gunpoint while a million Irishmen starved to death and a million and a half were forced to emigrate in ‘coffin’ ships a mere 70 years before. On the contrary, all were treated more than fairly and discrimination was entirely positive in favour of the English/protestant minority. NI under British control did the opposite! Gross discrimination against the Catholic minority for 75 years!

Last edited 1 year ago by Liam O'Mahony
0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Read Putin. So Ukraine should go cap in hand to Moscow and relinquish its people and its territory until Putin says: “Thanks” Your alarmism is nothing more than appeasement and we know how that will end for eastern Europe and the Baltics.
The alternative is emotionally unsatisfying and involves lots of people dying because that’s the nature of war. Your claim of 7:1 Ukrainian to Russian dead is unsupported because its untrue. The Ukrainians never sought war and they deserve the aid, weapons, and political support the West can provide until they have driven every last occupier from their land — or until they’ve had enough and are prepared to cut a deal. But that is their decision, not ours. After 15 months of war and more than 150,000 casualties, they’ve earned the right to make it. After all, we would want the same, if we were in their shoes. And like them, we’d want our friends to do the right thing.
Good versus evil; right versus wrong. Its really is that simple. And you will be reminded of that when this is over

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

Very well said.
It’s astonishing that people are still posting the sort of garbage and lies that you had to reply to.

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Ah! – from the man that struggles to know the difference between fish and CHIPS and microchips.

This is what most thinking Americans think of the West:
“How much evidence is required before it is clear that Western Civilization is empty of integrity, judgment, reason, morality, empathy, compassion, self-awareness, truth, empty of everything that Western Civilization once respected?

All that is left of the West is insouciance and unrestrained evil.”

~Dr Paul Craig Roberts, former Undersecretary Of Treasury, Reagan Administration

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

Can’t you be a bit more original Branagan?
You keep on quoting Roberts and it is becoming rather tedious.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

That about sums it up alright.. but in the immortal words of Sam Golwin “include us (Irish) out”.. We’ll ‘none it. Not our circus, not our monkey even. If the UK is smart it’ll go for a little humility and brown nosing to the new Empire, the BRICS+ Empire.. if not it’ll go down the toilet (even further) with the end of empire, rotten to the core, declining US.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

Can’t you be a bit more original Branagan?
You keep on quoting Roberts and it is becoming rather tedious.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  P Branagan

That about sums it up alright.. but in the immortal words of Sam Golwin “include us (Irish) out”.. We’ll ‘none it. Not our circus, not our monkey even. If the UK is smart it’ll go for a little humility and brown nosing to the new Empire, the BRICS+ Empire.. if not it’ll go down the toilet (even further) with the end of empire, rotten to the core, declining US.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

What have you done to ‘wind up’ Branagan?

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Ah! – from the man that struggles to know the difference between fish and CHIPS and microchips.

This is what most thinking Americans think of the West:
“How much evidence is required before it is clear that Western Civilization is empty of integrity, judgment, reason, morality, empathy, compassion, self-awareness, truth, empty of everything that Western Civilization once respected?

All that is left of the West is insouciance and unrestrained evil.”

~Dr Paul Craig Roberts, former Undersecretary Of Treasury, Reagan Administration

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

What have you done to ‘wind up’ Branagan?

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

True, the current US/EU sympathetic Ukrainians thought that the ethnic Russian enclaves would simply accept the US/NATO/EU backed overthrow of a Russian leaning President.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

They did accept the overthrow.
It took the Russian Army to stop the Ukrainians at Ilovaisk.
That they also shot down an airliner with a Buk (secretly smuggled in-country) was an unfortunate minor detail.
Looks like Shakhtar is returning to Donetsk…

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

They did accept the overthrow.
It took the Russian Army to stop the Ukrainians at Ilovaisk.
That they also shot down an airliner with a Buk (secretly smuggled in-country) was an unfortunate minor detail.
Looks like Shakhtar is returning to Donetsk…

0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

Why would the 7:1 claim be untrue? Didn’t the recent pentagon papers leak show close to that?
Putin’s invasion is inexcusable but the fighting in the Donbass since 2014 and refusal to implement the Minsk accords were contributing factors.
As to it being ‘[Ukraine’s] decision’ on when to end this, it absolutely is not– the US and Nato are propping things up in Ukraine and if they decide to pull the plug for whatever reason (cost, rising unpopularity at home) then Ukraine will have to accept it. This is a proxy war with Ukrainian lives (and Russian ones) used as pawns.

Rocky Martiano
Rocky Martiano
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

Good versus evil; right versus wrong. Its really is that simple. And you will be reminded of that when this is over.
I always admire people who are simple enough to believe that things are that simple.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

The war is not 15 months old, it is 8 years and 15 months old!

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

Very well said.
It’s astonishing that people are still posting the sort of garbage and lies that you had to reply to.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

True, the current US/EU sympathetic Ukrainians thought that the ethnic Russian enclaves would simply accept the US/NATO/EU backed overthrow of a Russian leaning President.

0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

Why would the 7:1 claim be untrue? Didn’t the recent pentagon papers leak show close to that?
Putin’s invasion is inexcusable but the fighting in the Donbass since 2014 and refusal to implement the Minsk accords were contributing factors.
As to it being ‘[Ukraine’s] decision’ on when to end this, it absolutely is not– the US and Nato are propping things up in Ukraine and if they decide to pull the plug for whatever reason (cost, rising unpopularity at home) then Ukraine will have to accept it. This is a proxy war with Ukrainian lives (and Russian ones) used as pawns.

Rocky Martiano
Rocky Martiano
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

Good versus evil; right versus wrong. Its really is that simple. And you will be reminded of that when this is over.
I always admire people who are simple enough to believe that things are that simple.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  0 0

The war is not 15 months old, it is 8 years and 15 months old!

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

I don’t agree with your calling the neocons running the shit show in the US leftists but the rest of it is pretty much spot on.
Why would any leftist help Blackrock and Vanguard loot the planet much less Ukraine?

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

It seems extreme right-wing warhawks are now leftist; and liberal means ending free speech; and Conservative means leav8ng nothing for 90% of people; and news is fake; and propaganda is news; black’s white today, day’s night today and so goes the song..

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Keating

It seems extreme right-wing warhawks are now leftist; and liberal means ending free speech; and Conservative means leav8ng nothing for 90% of people; and news is fake; and propaganda is news; black’s white today, day’s night today and so goes the song..

Jeff Watkins
Jeff Watkins
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

I personally think you are right as are pundits such as Col McGregor. Any way the offensive is going to take place in next three or four weeks so we should have a definitive answer before long. Interesting to see who is right.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Watkins

I’m betting big bucks there’ll be no major counter-offensive.. maybe a few show charges/retreats to keep the money flow alive and the propagandists, warhawks and military industrial complex in business.
It’ll grind away, ever do slow ..but ever so sure in Russia’s favour, for years..

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Watkins

I’m betting big bucks there’ll be no major counter-offensive.. maybe a few show charges/retreats to keep the money flow alive and the propagandists, warhawks and military industrial complex in business.
It’ll grind away, ever do slow ..but ever so sure in Russia’s favour, for years..

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

The Biden’s have done well out of the Ukraine I expect, pity the US MSM didn’t decide to look more closely at the ‘skills’ Biden Jnr had that paid so well in Ukraine’s fossil fuel industry when they had that laptop hard drive data.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Indeed.
Doubtless Biden colluded with Putin to invade.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Simon Simple

Indeed.
Doubtless Biden colluded with Putin to invade.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

He certainly got that right. The US MIC is now an out of control monster that forments war all over the planet in order to feed its voracious appetite..
But the rapidly growing BRICS+, crippling debt, senile/lunatic leaders, virtual civil war and above all de-dollarisation will spell the end of the murderous US evil empire. If the UK is smart it’ll switch its allegiance to BRICS+

David Adams
David Adams
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Lie after lie after lie.

The Ukrainians are not losing seven to every one Russian. This is an old piece of nonsense spread about by Col Douglas McGregor, who made a number of very precise and falsifiable predictions about the war which turned out to be incorrect (for example, that Ukrainian military would have collapsed before the first patriot missile system was active in the country).

Aside from that whopper, the Russian combat medical system is inferior, not superior, to Ukraine’s. The war is not simply a new WW1, drones and tanks do play a significant role in combat. We have only seriously been training Ukraine for the last 9 years, since the first Russian invasion. The BRICS and associated countries have not formed an alliance against the West. The West’s debt is almost entirely the result of lockdowns, the military spending has made negligible difference in comparison.

Russia does not, despite what Putin says, have a god-given right to a friendly and submissive neighbour (we in the UK don’t expect that, and we certainly don’t get it, from ROI). Ukraine should be free to choose it’s own path, and if Russia had a less corrupt, malevolent government, and had shown at least some remorse for Stalin’s actions, it might have been more attractive at least to southern and eastern Ukrainians.

You can be skeptical about the military-industrial complex, globalism, and “the latest thing” without parroting the Russian mafia-state’s blatant falsehoods.

0 0
0 0
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Read Putin. So Ukraine should go cap in hand to Moscow and relinquish its people and its territory until Putin says: “Thanks” Your alarmism is nothing more than appeasement and we know how that will end for eastern Europe and the Baltics.
The alternative is emotionally unsatisfying and involves lots of people dying because that’s the nature of war. Your claim of 7:1 Ukrainian to Russian dead is unsupported because its untrue. The Ukrainians never sought war and they deserve the aid, weapons, and political support the West can provide until they have driven every last occupier from their land — or until they’ve had enough and are prepared to cut a deal. But that is their decision, not ours. After 15 months of war and more than 150,000 casualties, they’ve earned the right to make it. After all, we would want the same, if we were in their shoes. And like them, we’d want our friends to do the right thing.
Good versus evil; right versus wrong. Its really is that simple. And you will be reminded of that when this is over

Chris Keating
Chris Keating
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

I don’t agree with your calling the neocons running the shit show in the US leftists but the rest of it is pretty much spot on.
Why would any leftist help Blackrock and Vanguard loot the planet much less Ukraine?

Jeff Watkins
Jeff Watkins
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

I personally think you are right as are pundits such as Col McGregor. Any way the offensive is going to take place in next three or four weeks so we should have a definitive answer before long. Interesting to see who is right.

Simon Simple
Simon Simple
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

The Biden’s have done well out of the Ukraine I expect, pity the US MSM didn’t decide to look more closely at the ‘skills’ Biden Jnr had that paid so well in Ukraine’s fossil fuel industry when they had that laptop hard drive data.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

He certainly got that right. The US MIC is now an out of control monster that forments war all over the planet in order to feed its voracious appetite..
But the rapidly growing BRICS+, crippling debt, senile/lunatic leaders, virtual civil war and above all de-dollarisation will spell the end of the murderous US evil empire. If the UK is smart it’ll switch its allegiance to BRICS+

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
1 year ago

Come on…..

”the result of an all-out offensive could be a spectacular Russian defeat, complete with an unprecedented number of prisoners.”

Sure it will – then Ukrainian tanks in Red Square.

Ukraine loses 7 men for every Russian lost. The medical system Ukraine has for injured is a fraction of the Russian so their disabled are disproportionate on top of that. This is not the war of drones and missiles all expected – it is WWI and the grinding of men into an artillery barrage meat grinder from ranges nothing else can reach. Russia is expert at this – the Great Western thinkers planned otherwise and called it wrong.

This is a wicked, evil, corrupt Political Proxy War which was none of our business – and by pumping in $200 Billion, and Intel, and training and arming Ukraine for this very war the last 15 years –

We used that poor nation as the chess board and pawns to play a globalist war game on – resulting in the collateral damage of destroying the People, Infrastructure, and nation of Ukraine its self. It has about destroyed Europe, wrecked the global economy, caused BRICS+++++++ to form an alliance against the West. It has Saddled USA with vast debt that really is disastrous just now fallowing the Great Plandemic.

Now Blackrock and Vanguard have officially been given Ukraine as their property to rebuild by sucking endlessly more Western Tax Dollars into the money pit. They will own Ukraine for ever.

You Globalist, Warmongering Lefty-Neo-Con Vampires have killed and destroyed your way around the globe for 80 years – Exactly, Exactly as Ike said you would.

Dwight Eisenhower:

”American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. . . . This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. . . .Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. . . . In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

“It was because Germany was neither devastated nor occupied after its surrender”.
It was in fact partially occupied by allied troops (mainly French and Belgian). Ruhr to 1925, Rhineland to 1930. Saarland to 1935. Large major industrial areas. Apparently we (Britain) were in and around Cologne until 1929. Alsace-Lorraine was also recovered by France.
Germany was also near starvation in 1918. About to collapse.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

“Germany was also near starvation in 1918”
The Ukrainian harvest of 1918 would have taken care of that if ‘they’ hadn’t been so overconfident..

ps. Come on, who seriously denies this?

Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Fine, but they still were being pushed back so much that the front would never have held.
Germany had already exhausted its eastern forces, whereas the US was still sending in fresh forces. They had no alternative but surrender in 1918.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

If they had gone on the defensive on the Western front in March 1918, they could probably have slaughtered a million Americans and put ‘Black Jack’ Pershing back in his box where he rightly deserved to be.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

So In Operation Michael they essentially did what the Russians have done in the last few months?
I’m reminded of an old aphorism.
“There are no “ifs” in war.”

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Hardly!
They had already ‘won’ at Brest-Litovsk and should have sought a compromise peace in the West.
“A bird in the hand etc”



martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Yeah, “shudda”.
Like Putin “shudda” stayed in Russia.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Yeah, “shudda”.
Like Putin “shudda” stayed in Russia.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Hardly!
They had already ‘won’ at Brest-Litovsk and should have sought a compromise peace in the West.
“A bird in the hand etc”



martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

So In Operation Michael they essentially did what the Russians have done in the last few months?
I’m reminded of an old aphorism.
“There are no “ifs” in war.”

Charles Stanhope