02Pilot said:
In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :
Clarify a couple of things for me. First, you say "total and complete loss of Russia" - can you define exactly what level of defeat you're suggesting? Is this a military defeat confined to Ukraine? Or does it go beyond that? [...] Put simply, was does a defeated Russia look like, and what role does it play in the international system?
To me, it's Putin looses in not only all his short AND long term goals, but in fact is in a far worse position afterwards. This means that instead of making NATO look weak or spineless they took a stance (Done), strengthened NATO (Done), pushed more eastern European nations towards "The West" politically than before (DONE), lost the war in a military defeat (Arguably done if the current retreat maintains and losses are correct), and finally loses of at least one of the slave republics (which Ukraine is probing into Dontesk, referendums have stopped, and now Russia is amassing in Crimea).
We're almost there to my limited, civilian sensibilities. Most recent count is ~50,000 Russians dead and more than ~100,000 casualties before the rout, and it seems like surrender is becoming more commonplace. Russia physically doesn't have the men, nor the material anymore to take Ukraine; captured soldiers report their training has been from days to a week, tanks are visibly taken from outside open storage and pressed into service... at this point Russia can only saber-rattle and I imagine the world is tiring of it, now that they've seen what it actually looks like.
Also to support that:
Vladimir Putin's press secretary Dmitry Peskov made a number of statements about the course of the war ➤ The “special military operation” continues and will continue until the goals that were originally set are achieved. ➤ Everything that happens, any actions that the military do during the “special operation”, are reported to the Supreme Commander. The President is in constant contact with the Minister of Defense and with all the military leaders (on the question of whether Putin knows about the retreat of the Russian troops - Meduza's note). ➤ We do not currently see any negotiation prospects and continue to state the absence of any prerequisites for such negotiations [between Putin and Zelensky].
Oleksiy Arestovich, adviser to the Presidential Office, assessed the prospects for the offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Zaporozhye direction in the near future
"These" heroes "are terribly afraid of an offensive along the Zaporozhye-Melitopol line and are constantly throwing new troops there. About four or six BTGs have arrived there - they are building a terrible defense there," he said.
According to Arestovich, "of course, we would have attacked, but for such an attack, with such a number of their troops, a lot of forces are needed."
"We'll see... On the other hand, who knows? Maybe we'll find them," the adviser to the OP added.
Anyway:
Second, you state that "the more chaos internally the weaker they'll become". That may be true in the short term, but doesn't it seem problematic given the history of nations in weakened post-war conditions? Arguably, Russia is where it is today because of the weakness and chaos of the years following the Soviet collapse, amplified by NATO expansion. Hitler rose in Germany after the punitive Treaty of Versailles and the weak, chaotic Weimar years. The Bolsheviks took power in the chaos of WWI and weakness of the Kerensky government following the fall of the czar. I cannot think of a single example where this sort of situation ended with long-term stability.
That's a great point, and will also open them up to predations by China which is in everyone's best interest to not allow (which might not since they're not on good terms since Nikita) so that's bit's my bad :p. Still, their propaganda has suddenly taken a sharp turn in the last few days and I wonder what it'll mean in the near future.
Also, Putin has canceled all military meetings, has gone to his mansion in Sochi: https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/1569334222242070536
