>Fails to take Kyiv, Chernihiv, and Sumy, forced to abandon their attempts after a couple of weeks.>Fails to capture all of the Donbass. Sloyansk and Kramatorsk are still in Ukrainian hands.>Gets btfo near Kharkiv and pushed to the other side of the Oskil River.>Abandons the ONLY regional capital that they took in the entire war.>Spent two years grinding for Bakhmut, Avdiivka, PokrovskPeople here love to say that Russia is winning but never say how or why? If you point out Russia’s NUMEROUS failures in Ukraine, they insult you and leave. If you ask how Russia is winning, they just Ukraine is losing and think that’s enough proof. If you can’t effort to argue your point then why should others care about it? Will someone here actually explain their reasoning? Or resort to petty insults once again.
Here’s a question for all of you: When this war began, did you think that it would still be ongoing 1,339 days later?
The sun is up tomorrow, you need a source for that?
>>519794671The idea is that Russia can outlast Ukraine in a war of attrition. Russia is spending about 3% of GDP on the war, so from a financial perspective, the war is sustainable indefinitely. Russia still relies on volunteers, while Ukraine has relied on abducting people for a while already.
>>519794729No. I don't think many people did. But then most people expected that WW1 would be over in a few months. Military history is replete with surprises, because technology changes war in surprising ways. People, including myself, didn't realize that today's drones and satellites would make maneuver warfare nigh impossible in Ukraine.
