Disarming your enemy by absorbing their bullets in your troops and tanks is a really bad strategy. Putin was safer when Europe was complacent.
Disarming your enemy by absorbing their bullets in your troops and tanks is a really bad strategy. Putin was safer when Europe was complacent.
> Disarming your enemy by absorbing their bullets in your troops and tanks is a really bad strategy.
Certainly, losing 1k+/day of your own men (imagine the logistics of that) and shooting women and children first is horrible. But it is a winning strategy. Russia is ramping up much much faster, they switched to a war economy. And they managed to show economic growth.
I suppose we agree, support for Ukraine is top priority and we need to turn around to achieve that.
But yes, I'd like to see aid to Ukraine increase to the point they can actually win, not just bog Russia down.
No, this is not a winning strategy for Russia and they will absolutely lose a war of attrition ad long as the weet continues to support Ukraine.
The "economic growth" Russia is claiming is not real. Their numbers are made up and dumping everything into producing war material artificially props up the economic growth values, but it's not actual growth.
It is happening, all right. There are four large ammunitions companies in Europe -- all are expanding. Pretty much every NATO country is increasing defense spending.
At the same time, it's true that a lot of it is empty bluster. The UK and Germany, in particular, think budget cuts are more important than defense spending and are holding back. On the other extreme are countries like Poland, headed for defense spending of 5% of GDP. So it's a mixed bag, but the overall curve is sharply up.