It’s not looking good, and it doesn’t really make sense to fight a losing war.
How do the Ukrainian people go about even discussing surrender among themselves? I’d imagine any mention of it would be met with hostilities, perhaps even violence.
It’s a shame because that lack of reasonable discussion can directly influence how many people die that could’ve otherwise been saved.
Oh, so the sunk-cost fallacy doesn’t apply here?
You believe that Ukrainians can win if they just get enough material support, even without additional armies?
While I wholeheartedly think Ukraine is deserving of additional armies to defend its territorial integrity, and that claims of nuclear annihilation are used more as a Russian fear-mongering tool rather than being realistic in any manner, I certainly think Ukraine can win the war with enough arms, particularly if it increases its targeting of Russian energy infrastructure that funds Russia’s ability to conduct warfare in the first place.
It will indeed be harder without American support, but when the alternative for the Ukrainian people is ethnic cleansing, it’s no surprise that Zelenskyy remains popular three years into the war.
That’s fair. I’m coming at this from the position of I don’t believe Ukraine has what’s necessary to win the war without additional armies coming in to help.
Human lives are human lives. All the materials in the world can’t replace them. Losing their friends and family for what they thought would be a successful counteroffensive must take its toll going forward.
Each soldier lost is also another one who can’t defend his allies. It’s a compounding effect.