Thanks for that, and what I was trying to emphasize (perhaps not as cogently) in posts 26,176 & 26,177, above.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Thanks for that, and what I was trying to emphasize (perhaps not as cogently) in posts 26,176 & 26,177, above.Just a thought based I admit on no personal information. Much is understandably made of the much larger Russian population which gives it the ability to use almost WW1 like meat grinder tactics.
However there must be a limit which may not be so far away which once reached puts Russia in trouble. The poorer outlying areas of Russia are being bled white to supply the troops needed. The major cities comparatively have hardly been touched by the call up. The reason is both obvious and clear, the major cities are large centres of populations, which are also fundamental to keeping the economy going and the hardest to control should there be a revolt.
In numbers Putin has a large advantage, but how much more can he rely on the more distant parts of Russia. A lot of these areas see themselves as independent areas which are controlled by Russia.
Russia's population advantage is in my view the difference between how much he has bled the outlying areas and how much more he can bleed them. Once Putin starts to draw on the resources of the larger cities, the risk to his control will increase rapidly. The size of his personal guard has increased dramatically over the last six to nine months and I cannot help but think that this could be the reason behind that growth.
The size of his personal guard has increased dramatically over the last six to nine months and I cannot help but think that this could be the reason behind that growth.
I recall reading that 80% of Soviet males born in 1923 were dead by the end of the war (a truly harrowing figure...). No way to hide that sort of statistic these days. Not to mention that the Soviret Union was drafting from all the republics, not just the Russian Republic
There were strong protests, bordering on revolts in Moscow and other cities in the Soviet Union prior to its dissolution. That was what forced the end of the Soviet Union. There was also a severe economic collapse. The CCCP simply could not "out-defense-spend" NATO. One can hope (but not expect) for that to happen again. That would be a more important outcome rather than a coup or "decapitation" of Putin.
There was also the issue Imperial Russia had with the public after they withdrew from WWI after suffering roughly 2,000,000 military dead.
Their economy was ruined from the war, there was increasing food shortages along with runaway inflation and we know what happened next.
Putin is setting himself up for a new version of Red October.
Given current events, this was a sound prediction I would say.
I fear it won't even be as good as this - see the comments from Fiona Hill. The implications of letting Putin get away with what he has and the *potential* failure of the West will have long term ramifications...I find it unlikely that Ukraine will gain much more territory before being forced to the negotiating table in 2025. I could then see whatever constitutes Ukraine being granted EU and NATO membership before 2028 in order to deter Russia was taking a third swing at Ukraine.
Life will have to go on for Ukraine with its reduced territory, just the same as Poland, (Territorial evolution of Poland - Wikipedia), Denmark (Borders of Denmark - Wikipedia) and most other countries in Europe and much of the world that faced coerced border changes, List of national border changes (1914–present) - Wikipedia
Agree 100%Appeasement now will result in further problems with Putin in the near future.
As the truism states - those who refuse to learn from history will repeat the mistakes.