I don’t see how Ukraine fights this war without an economy, without skilled people, without factories, and so on. Once the economy collapses it’s game over. Also, trucks aren’t nearly as efficient at moving things, and they don’t help with moving heavy weaponry like tanks and artillery. Those things need to be constantly maintained and repaired. Right now, Ukraine uses trains to send them all the way to Germany and Poland then ships them back to the front lines in the east. This is already incredibly inefficient I might add.
I also don’t see any quagmire happening. Once the logistics are broken, the army is going to collapse without supplies.
Russia losing is the most unlikely scenario in my opinion. Russia is treating this as an existential threat, and they have barely tapped their available resources. Russia is also backed by China because China realizes that Russia acts as a buffer between them and the west. If Russia is ever going to find itself in difficulty keeping up with the west then China will prop them up.
I think that three and four are the most likely scenarios, and it will depend on how confident Russia is that they will be able to control all of Ukraine or if they think that’s a desirable thing to do. My expectation would be that they will create a land bridge to Transnistria via Odessa, and leave western Ukraine as west’s problem. That seems like the most sensible way to go, but I have no idea what Russian calculus there is.
I agree that US is likely cannibalizing Europe for whatever skills and economy is there. And this means that NATO is going to fall apart. So, US doesn’t get the grand prize of regime change in Russia, but they get the consolation prize of propping up their own economy by sacrificing Europe.
I’d ague this would amount to a Pyrrhic victory. While it’ll help US stabilize in the short term, burning their major ally like that will let the rest of their allies know that they’re expandable. US will find itself isolated going forward.
I don’t see how Ukraine fights this war without an economy, without skilled people, without factories, and so on. Once the economy collapses it’s game over. Also, trucks aren’t nearly as efficient at moving things, and they don’t help with moving heavy weaponry like tanks and artillery. Those things need to be constantly maintained and repaired. Right now, Ukraine uses trains to send them all the way to Germany and Poland then ships them back to the front lines in the east. This is already incredibly inefficient I might add.
I also don’t see any quagmire happening. Once the logistics are broken, the army is going to collapse without supplies.
Russia losing is the most unlikely scenario in my opinion. Russia is treating this as an existential threat, and they have barely tapped their available resources. Russia is also backed by China because China realizes that Russia acts as a buffer between them and the west. If Russia is ever going to find itself in difficulty keeping up with the west then China will prop them up.
I think that three and four are the most likely scenarios, and it will depend on how confident Russia is that they will be able to control all of Ukraine or if they think that’s a desirable thing to do. My expectation would be that they will create a land bridge to Transnistria via Odessa, and leave western Ukraine as west’s problem. That seems like the most sensible way to go, but I have no idea what Russian calculus there is.
I agree that US is likely cannibalizing Europe for whatever skills and economy is there. And this means that NATO is going to fall apart. So, US doesn’t get the grand prize of regime change in Russia, but they get the consolation prize of propping up their own economy by sacrificing Europe.
I’d ague this would amount to a Pyrrhic victory. While it’ll help US stabilize in the short term, burning their major ally like that will let the rest of their allies know that they’re expandable. US will find itself isolated going forward.