this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024
24 points (90.0% liked)

Ask Lemmygrad

808 readers
19 users here now

A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So far, president Vladimir Putin and top-level Russian government figures have hinted at taking Kharkov, Odessa and 3 other regions. What do you think is going to be their way of solving the crisis in Ukraine, depending on the particular way the West and their fascist puppet in Kiev choose to go? Which way do you think is the most rational?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Well, there are some forests and a bit of mountains in the west (though the most mountainous regions are predominantly ethnically Hungarian where you won't find much support for a Ukrainian nationalist insurgency) with a few marshes in the north, but yeah most of it is fairly open in the center and the east.

But imo the biggest obstacle is the demographics. Even before the war they had way more old people than young people, and the fertility rate was already very low, and now both of those problems have gotten much, much worse. Many of the young men have left or are already dead or injured, and the birth rates are some of the lowest in the world and with little hope of recovery for the foreseeable future. This is a very stark contrast to the kinds of populations that can wage successful insurgencies, those whose demographic pyramids are heavily skewed toward the youth and where people have a lot of children and close knit social and family bonds. Neither Ukraine nor any other European country has that anymore (nor to be fair does Russia but they are not the ones who need to wage a guerilla war). We need to constantly repeat this for the libs who do not grasp this yet: Ukraine is not Afghanistan.