Source: The Wall Street Journal.
The writer, to my mind, makes a number of mistakes, but we can cull a few useful observations:
- “The likely result [of continuing to arm Ukraine] will be a prolonged and bloody stalemate reminiscent of the Western Front of 1915.”
In other words, stalemate is the most Ukraine can hope to achieve.
- “The Russians’ capture of Severodonetsk wasn’t a breakthrough; it had even less strategic significance than Mariupol.”
In other words, Russia achieved its military objective in capturing Severodonetsk. The writer should have noted that almost immediately afterwards, Russia also captured nearby Lysychansk, thereby securing the entire Republic of Luhansk.
- “…this new phase [of the Russian operation] depends on taking advantage of Russia’s massive advantage in indirect artillery, rocket and missile systems.”
In other words, Russia continues to enjoy a decisive battlefield advantage.
Let’s assume the writer is correct that the next phase of the war will become a stalemate. That strikes me as a horrendous prospect.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
It’s cliché by now, but…”Willing to fight to the last Ukrainian” and whatnot. Grisly stuff. Really unfortunate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NATO strategy and our commitment is to give Ukraine every assistance short of military intervention that they ask for. Whether to fight on is entirely THEIR decision. I doubt that the leaders and people of Ukraine are under any delusions about the struggle ahead.
War is a contest of will as much as it is of weapons. The will of the leaders and the will of the people. A ruthless dictator such as Putin can start a war but sustaining it at great cost in blood and treasure is another matter. We got stuck in a “prolonged, bloody stalemate” in Vietnam. Vietnam achieved its goals. We did not. And we had regime change at home as a result.
Russia can return to the family of civilized nations. All it need do is remove the regime that is violating its treaty obligations and International Law with its unprovoked aggression.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “I doubt that the leaders and people of Ukraine are under any delusions about the struggle ahead.”
I doubt they are, as well. However, the leaders of Ukraine must know, as the WSJ writer states, that Western arms “will fall far short of [their] requests.” As for the Ukrainian people, they celebrated when Mariupol fell to Russia, and again when Severodonetsk and Lysychansk fell.
I see no virtue in arming a loosing army. Quite the contrary, U.S. involvement in this war is immoral.
LikeLike
…”U.S. involvement in this war is immoral.”
But Russia’s invasion isn’t?
And those that celebrated the fall of Mariupol and other cities were NOT Ukrainians; they were the ethnic Russians that were complicit with the separatists in the region.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “But Russia’s invasion isn’t?”
I believe Russia complied with the principles of “just war theory.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory#Criteria
LikeLike
HORSESHIT! Russia invaded a peaceful, non aggressive neighbor with no provocation and no valid reason.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are full of shit. Russia’s war is not a just war. By ANY standard – moral or legal. They were not attacked. They were not defending themselves. They violated solemn treaty obligations both to the Internation community and specifically to Ukraine when Ukraine gave up the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world in exchange for Russia pledge to never attack or threaten militarily.
LikeLiked by 3 people
@Adam Green
@Paul Murphy
You two ignore a lot of history with your claims, especially Ukraine’s history of war crimes committed against the people of the breakaway republics.
LikeLike
“You two ignore a lot of history with your claims, especially Ukraine’s history of war crimes committed against the people of the breakaway republics.”
I, for one, will stipulate that sometimes very bad things happen in a civil war.
The difference between me and you is that I do not ignore the fact that Russia started, exacerbated and took part in the conflict in Donbas. And, unlike you, I have not been duped by Russia’s claims that the people who resisted their military incursions are all Neo-Nazis or that the people resisting their land grab were the only ones who did bad things. War is Hell. And ALL the blood is on Russia’s hands.
LikeLiked by 3 people
RE: “I, for one, will stipulate that sometimes very bad things happen in a civil war.”
Good for you, then, for acknowledging that Ukraine is not an innocent victim of Russian aggression.
LikeLike
What threat was there to RUSSIA itself from Ukraine?
Separatists in the “break away areas” of Ukraine were baked and armed by the Kremlin. If any country had reason to invade a neighbor, it would have been Ukraine.
Your dilly-dallying about Russia waging a “just war” is just one big load of SHIT.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Good for you, then, for acknowledging that Ukraine is not an innocent victim of Russian aggression.”
Of course, that does not follow. Not in the least. Do you ever think before you post the first thing that pops into your head?
Russia’s aggression began by sending in soldiers and mercenaries to seize Ukrainian territory in Crimea and Donbas. In Donbas Ukraine resisted so Russia sent in more soldiers, mercenaries and weapons and they offered recognition to illegitimate little fiefdoms. Ukraine sent in forces to defend ITS TERRITORY. Forces that you call Neo-Nazis because that is what your Daddy Putin calls them.
Ukraine is very much the innocent victim of Russian aggression. War is Hell and ALL the blood shed since 2014 is on Russia’s hands. Civilized and democratic people all over the world understand the obvious truth. But you don’t. Both sad and ridiculous at the same time.
LikeLiked by 3 people