Potentially Ninja Edit: Russia’s military is actually battle hardened. The things they’ve learned in Syria are applicable in this conflict. Syria is standing today because of Russia, this conflict is a little bit easier because Russia can more readily absorb civilian populations and protect them.

Every push into enemy territory means a further, harder retreat. The Ukrainians may very well be overextending themselves. We’ve seen that the Russians have a methodical approach to taking territory, the UA relies on overwhelming strength in an area. Having the northern flank cut off and surrounded by UA would be a huge disaster, since many of those soldiers would be LPR citizens. The closer UA pushes to the border, the more dangerous the threat from the Russian skies are, and we know that Russia is using significantly less bombs and missiles than the US had used against Iraq (the last comparable conflict between modern militaries).

The “tactics” which you take issue with are working, because Ukraine spends more resources per kilometer of land taken than Russia does.

Ukraine has made it clear that they are not in any way interested in surrendering, so it would be a waste for Russia to chase them around the prairies. The best way to win the war is to exhaust Ukraine, which opens the discussion to that of imperialism.

The West is replenishing the wasteful UA military. There’s an issue though, Western arms manufacturing in Europe relies on energy from Russia (lol). In tandem with the general energy crisis, Western defense production is now competing with civilian manufacturing and consumers, reinforcing an energy crisis across the West. Interestingly, the two groups who are actually gaining from this situation are the American and Russian gas producers, (there may be Russian bourgeois interest in extending this conflict, but that interest is shared with those wanting to overextend Western imperialism). Ukraine has become a blackhole of resources and one path to Russian victory is maintaining their low energy effort and the high Ukrainian effort as the longer UA holds out, the worse the blowback is for Europe as a whole. The long term process at stake here, the gamble the US has made, is the integration of Europe and the rest of Asia. The US hopes that this conflict gives them at least a century of a buffer before a Socialist Republic of China emerges as an alternative to global Capitalism, and European and Asian integration would be the economically obvious direction. We have to remember that this conflict has nothing to do with Ukraine, or putting missiles in Ukraine as a member of NATO, it is about creating a rift between Russia and the rest of Europe, and to keep the Eurasian continent from achieving economic integration. The US will continue to provoke conflict in the Eurasian continent to keep these countries on opposing sides of the barrel. Having Iran and Iraq fighting is good for the US. Having China preoccupied with Islamists is good for the US. Scaring Germany and Japan into remilitarizing is good for the US. Having Azerbaijan turn the attention of Russia and Iran is good for the US. Every conflict in Eurasia is a good opportunity in the eyes of the Beast.

The elephant in my comment is the Ukrainian civilians, particularly those of the “third sort” as accused by the Ukrainian fascists. Russia has to make tough decisions, they’ve chosen to withdraw in the north and take as many civilians with them as possible. Partially, this is what the nazis want, for the Russian speakers to leave the country and to expropriate their lands, but it is better for them to be alive so they can return when the nazi filth is mopped up.

I know that on a human level, we are distraught at the scene in Kharkiv, it’s a blow to our humanity. We feel these emotions because we care. The Ukronazis haven’t gotten away with it yet, there’s still a universe where they will be punished.