Hacker News Reader

Comment by nbzso | Hacker News Reader

No. You should realize that saving people lives is more important than being "right" or "wrong". And the reality of war is ugly. Ukrainian military was one if not the most trained professional army in Europe. Second to none. With enough military supplies, fortified trenches and predefined logistical support, trained on NATO standards. The Russians, which we believed to be inferior, actually adapted to the task and without mobilization are winning.

Yes, Ukrainians are capable of inflicting pain, but this will not change the outcome.

View on HN

> but this will not change the outcome.

I mean, if the history of the USA between the years of 2001 and 2021 are any indication, small countries inflicting pain on much larger and better equipped armies is absolutely enough to change an outcome.

Hello from Kyiv.

Surrounding Kyiv several months ago, were thousands of items of Russian military hardware, plus thousands of troups.

After most were destroyed/liquidated/killed, the remainder ran away like the barbarian cowards they are.

Current Russian military presence around Kyiv = zero.

Outcome = changed.

"winning"

> You should realize that saving people lives is more important than being "right" or "wrong".

We've seen how Russians castrate those who surrender, cut heads and hands and put them on pikes, rape women and children. There's literally no reason to surrender. It's better to fight and die than to surrender and die.

> The Russians, which we believed to be inferior, actually adapted to the task and without mobilization are winning.

The Russians are mobilizing. If you read the Institute for the Study of War's daily briefings on Ukraine (which is based entirely on open-source intelligence), it's clear that Russians are trying everything short of a draft to patch up their manpower numbers.

And Russia is most definitely not winning. Five months into the war, their original intentions of a lightning-quick decapitation of Kyiv failed, followed by the failure of their attempt to press it by force. Similarly, Kharkiv--a day's march from the Russian border--remains unbesieged. Zaporizhzhia and the Dnieper River remain largely in Ukrainian hands. Advances to Odessa have been repeatedly checked, and Russia not long ago retreated from Snake Island. Russians have successfully advanced in the Izyum region, not to mention Marioupol, but they are losing ground in the Kherson region, and the latest attacks show that even Crimea is within attack range of Ukraine. I'd hardly say that Ukraine is winning either, but Russia is most certainly not in a position of strength here.

> Ukrainian military was one if not the most trained professional army in Europe. Second to none. With enough military supplies, fortified trenches and predefined logistical support, trained on NATO standards. The Russians, which we believed to be inferior, actually adapted to the task and without mobilization are winning.

Are you trying to pivot the russian narrative into a underdog story?

Winning?

The fascist russians retreated from Kyiv.

The fascist russians retreated from Kharkiv.

The fascist russians retreated from Sumy.

The fascist russians retreated from Chernobyl.

The fascist russians retreated from Zmiinyi.

The fascist russians lost the flagship of their Black Sea Fleet.

The fascist russians have lost tens of thousands of soldiers.

The fascist russians have brought NATO right up close by their second city.

…

Winning!?

Gee, I guess Chamberlain was wrong for not partitioning Czechoslovakia and yielding Sudetenland to the Reich. And Poland not giving northen part of its territory for Reich to connect with Eastern Prussia. This man right here found a way to avoid WW II from happening!

Chamberlain was wrong. That’s pretty well established, I think. Some modern apologists would blame his reputation on Churchill’s 1948 writings that savaged him as ineffective, but was Churchill wrong?

Best case, Chamberlain bought the UK time, while appearing as an appeaser and only very quietly funding rearmament.

Personally, I think one of Chamberlain’s greatest errors was staying “dovish” after Munich: had he adopted a more hawkish position upon his return, he might have kept his job and reputation.

As it was, his reputation being savaged after his death was as inevitable as the war itself.

It’s not as if there weren’t loud counter arguments being made, and not just by Churchill.

I thought its obvious I was sarcastic here by „not partitioning czechoslovakia” part because thats opposite of what he supported: partially partitioning Czechoslovakia to appease Hitler.

> You should realize that saving people lives is more important than being "right" or "wrong".

Let's not do classic victim blaming here: it's Putin who should realize that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com