The main goal in Ukraine should be to make sure that Russia has as little benefit from their invasion as possible. Luckily this is effectively wholly compatible with Ukrainian goals.
> The main goal in Ukraine should be to make sure that Russia has as little benefit from their invasion as possible
But how? Is it mostly to prolong the war until Russia gets tired of spending money and resources on it?
Rather the have adopted the doctrine of "Ukraine can't lose, but Ukraine may not win". Always supplying just enough arms to keep the Ukrainian front from collapsing not to "stir up" Russia.
I watched a video recently that discussed all the grudges against the West/NATO Russia (Putin) has been holding onto since the mids 90s that makes them feel justified now.
The only thing left would be nuking. He hasn't dared and likely won't.
He has dared. Empty threats? Maybe... but that's quite the gamble to make.
On the contrary: Should Putin risk everything for some sq km of Ukrainian soil?
History tells us that appeasement is a worse gamble.
If at all possible, take back any Ukrainian territory. Reduce whatever gain they got from this invasion. But even if the current line stands, the more Russia can be made to bleed, the less it will think that war can be a net postive for them.
Anders Puck Nielsen on that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNZ56C-f4a8&t=422s That's starting at the Ukrainian plan but it's worth watching the whole vid if you are interested.
Another commenter suggest sent a video about this that I'll watch later, I suspect the answer lies there, but thought I'd share with you so you can have some understanding of what someone who sees both side's surface level plans as confusing and problematic .
Nothing will stop Putin but force.
Russia has no allies, just cronies such as Lukashenko and Russia is de-facto at war with the west. The front line just goes through Ukraine.
Of course, with the US under Trump withdrawing their support we will see what will happen, but currently it is a stalemate.
Even the billions in humanitarian support spend in Europe are mostly just housing refugees from Ukraine in Europe thus flows to landlords and supermarkets in Europe.
This war in Ukraine is costing us pennies for each dollar that Russia is wasting in the blood fields of Ukraine.
Europe's bill may create jobs in Europe, if it was genuine.
>billions in humanitarian support spend in Europe are mostly just housing refugees from Ukraine in Europe thus flows to landlords and supermarkets in Europe.
>This war in Ukraine is costing us pennies for each dollar
Now that the state-level propaganda machine is starting to wear down, the world is realizing that America wants America First.
What does this even mean?
And do you realize that most of American GDP prowess in the last 40 years was driven by running a trade deficit and letting the world loan the money back to the US?
Even if it doesn't enter M1 circulation and directly increase monetary supply, it put upwardly increasing inflationary pressure on the dollar by inflating demand artificially.
I would look more towards outstanding bonds or GDP to debt ratio. The US has overspent for decades but it worked very well because as world's reserve currency it didn't lead to currency depreciation as any other country would have experienced in a similar situation.
It is so shameful and disgusting.