(03-16-2022, 08:35 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: I don't see what's so hard to get about this... he is content with destroying the place. He wants to ruin the infrastructure and try to leverage them into signing a treaty that keeps them from joining NATO.

Not true based on the actions. If he wanted the place destroyed, it would be destroyed. So far the 2 largest cities are fine except for the locations with air defenses.

Russia could have leveled everything if they wanted but that would probably bring the rest of the world into the war. They have split the army and cut off supply routes. The Azov and main army was already in the east. Then some in the port city and capital. Russia has taken or is finishing off the port, cutting supply routes from the south. The capital is encircled but not a ton of fighting yet. Then in the east the military is cut-off and getting destroyed.

The Azov and main military are not going to go away quietly but they have already lost. It's just a matter of when. They are going to run out of supplies and Russia doesn't really need to do much. I expect them to try and kill as many as possible in the east to purge Azov but I don't expect them to advance into the capital.

They have gotten full control of a war in 3 weeks to where it is over and is only waiting until they finally admit defeat. They also haven't leveled the place. For a war strategy and implementation, it is a tremendous success for Russia. This isn't the US taking Baghdad in 3 weeks or so. This is against a competent army.


Also for destroying Ukraine, they will get aid to rebuild from NATO countries. If Russia destroys more, they risk pushing Ukraine closer to them, no matter what a treaty says. Infrastructure is still up and running except for the few locations with open conflicts right now.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

---