What? In other words, you're saying: "Russia is losing war with Ukraine, so it wants to start a second front with bigger enemy".

Also, how's Ukraine war is sustainable for Ukraine? It's economy is non-existent (almost 100% dependent on western donations), it has less than 50% of population of 2022 (they don't publish any population stats directly, but if you combine available statistics, there are about 10-15 millions left most of them old retired people or young people that are too young to send them to the front lines), they are losing territory every day.

This is some weird "Ukraine is winning but front is moving in the wrong direction" logic.

▲

kasey_junk 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

A war doesn’t need to be sustainable for Ukraine, it’s existential. For the aggressor that backstop doesn’t exist. They could literally stop the war anytime they wanted so they need to continue to prove it’s sustainable to keep doing it.

▲

leonidasrup 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not all wars have a simple way to say who is winning, who is loosing. See the Vietnam war, different Afgan wars.

▲

mcv 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Ukraine is gaining some ground, but very slowly. It's basically a stalemate. Except that Ukraine is making the war extremely costly for Russia with the recent attacks on refineries and other targets deep into Russia.

As long as the EU keeps supporting them, I think Ukraine will be better able to maintain the current situation than Russia. But Ukraine is nearly as exhausted as Russia, and I think a European coalition sending real practical ground and air support would help a lot. I suspect sufficient support could force a breakthrough in southern Ukraine an liberate a very large chunk of land very quickly.

The reason that's not happening is either that NATO thinks this would give Putin the excuse he needs for large scale mobilisation, or simply because Europe is afraid to get its hands dirty. I don't think the former is nearly as big an issue as some believe; Putin has never needed any action from NATO or EU members to justify escalation, and has never responded to imagined red lines getting crossed.

The latter is more likely. I think Europe needs to remember the sacrifice that Canada and the US brought to liberate Europe in WW2, and recognise the moral obligation that creates to liberate others in a similar position. Like Ukraine today.

▲

CapricornNoble 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Ukraine is gaining some ground, but very slowly. It's basically a stalemate.

Ukraine has been gaining some open fields, while losing major urban areas. Kostyantynivka just fell and Russian troops are securing the high ground overlooking the Slovyansk-Kramatorsk urban conglomerate. Pokrovsk also fell faster than expected, suggesting that Ukraine increasingly lacks the infantry manpower density to defend urban terrain.

> As long as the EU keeps supporting them, I think Ukraine will be better able to maintain the current situation than Russia.

European support doesn't rectify Ukraine's critical vulnerability: manpower...or a lack thereof. Although Euro governments seem like they might start deporting military-age Ukrainian males back to Ukraine so they can be forcibly conscripted....because sending men to their deaths against their will screams "Western liberal values", or something.

> I think a European coalition sending real practical ground and air support would help a lot

Russian analysts have been coming on Western alt-media outlets warning that Russian hardliners are increasingly advocating for striking logistics and military production sites in Europe. HistoryLegends has a good video about how France, one of the more experienced and expeditionary European countries, absolutely struggled to even get a brigade into Romania for an exercise. Europe could definitely send air support.....but do you think European citizens are ready for their cities to eat Oreshniks (at a minimum) as a response?

> I suspect sufficient support could force a breakthrough in southern Ukraine an liberate a very large chunk of land very quickly.

There isn't enough combat engineering vehicles in all of Europe to clear lanes through the Surovikin Line. The Ukrainians already learned this the hard way in summer 2023.

▲

miohtama 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It has turned out to be luck in disguise when Trump stopped weapon deliveries to Ukraine. Because Biden, Trump, and the Germans set all kinds of limitations so as not to strike Russia. For the first three years, Ukrainians were defending with one arm tied behind their back.

Now, when they finally can damage the Russian economy enough to make the war unsustainable for them, there is a chance we can get an end to this confict.

▲

worldthruword 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ukr is attacking Retailers (Wildberries) in Russia because Russia helps Iran attack Amazon (US retailer) Data centers in the Gulf.

	▲	petre 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Nothing to do with Amazon. They sell military and dual use goods, that's why. https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/07/26/8045972/

▲

tclancy 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think you’re misreading the comment and conflating Putin’s survival with the current war. I believe the OP is saying the administration can’t keep selling the war with Ukraine as a good idea indefinitely and will need to pivot to something more marketable. In our Internet-shaped world, everything is entertainment. This particular show has run its course and needs a pivot, add new actors, make a Very Special Episode or kill off one of the main characters.