In the event of a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine any Turkish guarantee of Ukraine’s maritime trade lines would likely be superfluous, as both sides would presumably cease attacks on each other’s shipping.
Without a peace agreement Russia can continue attacking the Odessa Port Cluster and destroy the specialised infrastructure that permits Ukraine to export its agricultural surplus (silos, grain elevators, conveyor belts, bulk handling systems and transport links, etc.) which it appears already to be doing.
Russia could also mine harbours and impose a virtual blockade of the entire Black Sea coast without running the risk of a confrontation with the Turkish navy.
If Russia thought it necessary, it could reinforce its Black Sea fleet without transiting either the Dardanelles or the Bosphorus by moving corvettes and conventional submarines from the Baltic via rivers and canals (with a bit of dredging).
Thanks for another interesting and insightful post.
Defense treaties between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, and Turkey and Ukraine make the world a more dangerous place. They create a pre-WWI type network of tripwires, which will be what the Epstein Empire wants...
Well, Turkey could also offer to escort Russian ships in order to prevent Ukrainian drone strikes ?
Turkey under Erdogan is a very complex partner for any power. But it also looks overextended in its policies (caucase, syria/israel, northern africa…) given its fragile economy and social political balance.
On the other hand, Putin clearly said recently that Russia would takeover the whole Novorossia.
I tend to consider seriously such déclaration.
Perhaps Russia would demand a referendum in Odessa region !
That Novorossiya quip was dishonestly misportrayed by many top influencers. While it historically refers to more territory than Russia officially claims, in domestic political parlance since September 2022's referenda, it's become an offhand remark by Putin and those below him to refer to Kherson and Zaporozhye.
Even that goal of obtaining full control over these two regions, however, is very difficult to imagine at present given how challenging it's been for Russia to obtain full control over Donbass. Those two regions have territory on the other side of the Dnieper, which is more difficult than ever to cross with today's drone-enforced kilometer-wide "kill zones".
They already were confirmed, you just didn't hear about it since the top "Non-Russian Pro-Russian" (NRPR) influencers who you evidently rely on for guidance didn't inform you of this nuance that Putin himself:
21 September 2022:
"I want to stress the following. We know that the majority of people living in the territories liberated from the neo-Nazis, and these are primarily the historical lands of Novorossiya, do not want to live under the yoke of the neo-Nazi regime."
"Today I would like to address our soldiers and officers who are taking part in the special military operation, the fighters of Donbass and Novorossiya, those who went to military recruitment offices after receiving a call-up paper under the executive order on partial mobilisation, and those who did this voluntarily, answering the call of their hearts."
"This is well understood by the residents of Donbass and Novorossiya who, under the most trying circumstances, voted during referendums on unity with Russia and will make their choice now as well."
There are many, many other examples where he contextually indicates that his reference to "Novorossiya" refers to Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, not the entirety of the historical region known as Novorossiya.
As for the Black Sea, it doesn't matter what the facts are or what you think since Putin time and again disappoints those NRPRs who project their wishful thinking expectations onto him and assume that he sees things the same way.
I don't know why this is so important to you that you're arguing about it. Are you an ethnic Russian, a non-ethnic Russian citizen of Russia, or somehow connected to Odessa, even if by ancestry? If not, then why do you care?
That recent speech didn’t recontextualize what he said, it simply reaffirmed that he envisages full Russian control over the entirety of Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, which he’s on record multiple times collectively referring to as “Novorossiya” despite the historical region going beyond those two.
You’re setting yourself up for an incredible disappointment, as are many, but Russia’s “soft power supervisors” prefer for foreigners to like Russia on false premises even if those same premises are easily — and ultimately — debunked and then make its supporters resentment and disappointed to the verge of defecting and turning against Russia.
I’ve seen it play out from 2015 onward after Putin was dishonestly misportrayed as an anti-Zionist. Most former supporters who now hate him, and there’s a growing number, usually fell for this lie.
Keeping Odessa Ukrainian would have some advantages for Russia, too. If Ukraine was reduced to a rump, landlocked state - that is a whole set of unpredictables in and of itself. If the Russian Army approached Odessa and looked capable of taking it, that would change Moldova and probably NATO's calculations on the war.
Maybe Russia did not really want to take Kramatorsk in the past four years. Maybe it takes Russia to wear down NATO's ammo inventory. Before Stalingrad, the Germans did not know that the Russians could launch such offensives. Maybe even Russians themselves did not know.
What Turkiye is posid to do is only a temporary act, R ussia is the power that controls the entire region. Why countries mess with Russia is hard to understand. Russia is the worlds nuclear Super Power.
Andrew, the post you masked for me was a routing error. It wasn't meant for you, but was a reply to Doctor Hubris. I'm very surprised that you took it as being directed at you.
"Turkish Foreign Minister and former spy chief Hakan Fidan confirmed during a joint press conference with his Ukrainian counterpart that Turkiye will ensure Ukraine’s maritime security after the ongoing conflict ends."
Maritime security is an interesting concept for a landlocked (to be) pseudo-country.
I don't expect Ukraine to become landlocked at all: Russia has made absolutely zero attempts to capture Odessa, and given the pace at which it's advancing in Donbass, crossing the Dnieper and holding ground on the other side after all the drone-driven "kill zone" developments since it left that part of the river in Kherson Region in late 2022 makes it extraordinarily difficult to imagine a new front being opened there.
Unless this becomes the new "Forty Years War" or some other extremely extended time frame of conflict. It doesn't seem likely - but the SMO could become a generational war.
It's never been in the cards and that's a fact. The only reason that it was wildly talked about by top influencers was as a morale-boosting rhetorical device, at least among those who knew the aforesaid fact and weren't indulging in wishful thinking (like quite a few and it became contagious for some years).
The only means for capturing Odessa would be overland ones since the Black Sea fleet is unfortunately a shadow of its former self due to Western-backed Ukrainian air and naval drone advances over the past nearly half-decade.
Crossing the Dnieper would already be a formidable enough task, let alone breaking through the kilometers-wide drone-enforced "kill zone" that nowadays characterizes much of the front, not to mention maintaining logistics across the river to pursue a full-fledged offensive towards Odessa.
I genuinely don't see that happening. The costs would be astronomical and risk a catastrophic collapse of Russia's military logistics that might then be followed up on to push back its hard-earned advances elsewhere. Putin won't authorize that.
Then there's the conventional NATO intervention scenario to consider given French troops in Romania, possibly also in Moldova, and a bunch of foreign forces (including French and British) in Poland.
In the far-fetched scenario of Russia steamrolling beyond the Dnieper towards Odessa, it can't be ruled out that they'll conventionally cross the border and race it to wherever they end up meeting.
The purpose would be to draw a line in the sand for de facto partitioning Ukraine. Despite Russian rhetoric about targeting foreign troops in Ukraine, I very much doubt that Putin would risk WWIII over Odessa.
He wouldn't even do that after the West helped Ukraine hit his nuclear triad several times, the Kremlin on one unforgettable occasion, and allegedly tried to assassinate him at his home in Valdai.
Precedent therefore very strongly suggests that while the risk is always there, so long as Putin remains in charge, Russia wouldn't risk World War III over Odessa. That city isn't in play, at all, never has been nor likely ever will be.
What is hoped for by the NRPR crowd (me included) is for Russia to have a more serious mobilization, not just manpower, but also more parts of the total economy. I don't see that coming even after the coming Russian elections. Of course, I have no clue about Russian domestic politics. Maybe the election results would convince Putin to change the course somewhat, but that is a fairly remote "maybe".
It's been nearly half a decade and the costs of attempting to take Odessa at this point would be way too much for Putin to accept given how cautious he's proven himself to be throughout the course of this conflict:
Half-right and half-wrong, but I really don't like the sarcasm so please check it, thanks:
1. No, the conflict isn't over, and Ukraine hasn't "won"
2. Putin isn't "afraid" so much as he never even planned for it as the facts prove, and at this point, he's not going to throw away untold thousands of Russian lives for this vanity project that only the fringe here in Russia are demanding but which has become the object of obsession for many "Non-Russian Pro-Russians" (who have absolutely zero stake in the future of the city)
3. Russia has yet to obtain even a single one of its explicitly stated objectives in full as declared at the beginning of the conflict, therefore, Russia won't have "lost" if the conflict ends with its full control of Donbass for example but it wouldn't have "won" either
4. There's no indication that Ukraine will surrender, literally nothing of significance suggests that this is a realistic option that Zelensky is considering nor that Putin is willing to authorize his armed forces to resort to employing the means that could possibly coerce him to do so since he's made up his mind to "stay the course".
As an aside, I've been tracking the proliferation of fake news in Alt-Media and especially among "Non-Russian Pro-Russians" for some years already, so I'd like to know which top NRPR influencers you follow who convinced you that Putin wants Odessa, can get Odessa, etc., thanks.
I wouldn't be worried about EU, they will shatter soon enough... besides Russia doesn't need them... for what actually? What does EU have that Russia needs? Fiat currency?
India is probably a vampire indeed... but China is an ally, at least in the foreseeable future just because they are under attack by the same forces.
As for the ex-Soviet countries, their managers (can't call them "leaders") are bought off by the American Empire; at some point, the dollar (and euro) Ponzi will end, and so will the foreign influences in those countries. Ideally, because I am afraid that the financial overlords will prefer the path to Armageddon to the path to defeat.
So what I am saying, Buddy is that the future will likely be bright; bright like 10k suns.
"Not quite everything needs to be solved on the battlefield."
That is Russia's problem right there. Russia desperately wants to avoid having to fight, having to fight the Ukrainians that they see as sadly misguided brethren, having to fight the West that they still see as a shining city on a hill.
By contrast, the West sees Russian dithering and weakness and smells blood. Hell, this war is the best thing ever to happen tot he Ukrainian leadership class. They are positively itching to solve this on the battlefield.
"Ukrainian leadership class" - LOL! They are *not* leaders but owners... and they have their own owners in the West.
Believe whatever you want - we will see if you are right (or not, if it goes nuclear).
One thing is sure though: Zele will not make it out of this alive (although he is nothing but an actor); somehow I doubt dying is "the best thing ever" that happen to him (from his perspective - of course).
I think there were at least two major counter offensives by USSR failed before Stalingrad. Both were due to deep concentration without proper flanking protection and being unable to enlarge the breach because of the Germans' successful defense of the shoulders. Stalingrad is the first success counter attacks causing large enough German casualties, especially in prisoners caught. Something attempted does not mean something is an understood art. In Wang Yang-Ming's philosophy, you know only when you can do it. Tried but failed? Well, then one likely did not know enough.
The counter offensive in front of Moscow in December 1941 pushed Germans away 150 km and cost them 750 000 men ( killed, wounded, prisoners. ) more than every battle of the WW1, included Verdun, the deadliest. Verdun 1916, not the healthy hike of Verdun 1918.
yes. But that was mostly a counteroffensive with multiple thrusts to achieve a general pushback of the front line. The German casualties were mostly due to attrition, including local repeated counter-offensives by both sides. So was the Rezev Meat Grinder. The USSR paid a high cost to push the Germans back from a protrusion the Germans wanted to defend at high cost. In comparison, the USSR counterattacks after German exhaustion in the Battle of Kursk and Operation Bagration were all pincer attacks with a large chunk of "enemy destruction" through bagging prisoners.
Trying to loop back to the original post: I was saying that unless Russians can cross the Dnieper, it is very difficult for Russians to reach Odessa. My point is that Russians have not done much of a big offensive so far. So far, the battleground reality argues against that kind of action, but that is insufficient to argue that Russians are unable to do that. As for Türkiye being part of the Western containment, I did not address that. I am sorry that I branched off too far.
I wonder what use war ships are anyway. Seeing the state of the art possibilities of drone and missile warfare, what frigate is going to protect anything?
It's like the small european fortresses in middle age. They are not here necessarily to fight but to show their flag and say: "I'm hear, in this ship, if you dare attacking this ship you attack me and it's war". So, they can protect civil convoys or prove that every straight is clear for their country( in time of peace)
Then, they can carry drones and missiles far from their country and increase their range.
As I've been explaining to other commentators, that's "copium" as they say for boosting morale among Non-Russian Pro-Russians (NRPR) and has absolutely zero basis in factual reality whatsoever at all since Russia hasn't ever tried to take Odessa.
China is indeed complying with most Western sanctions, though, and has been since the get-go: I can personally confirm this since a state-owned enterprise client of mine in 2022 made every excuse in the book not to continue making deposits to my sanctioned Sberbank account (including absurdly bringing up COVID!!!), only finally transferring the funds once I opened up a non-sanctioned account.
Going back to what I was talking about, however, these types of NRPRs are very unstable people as proven by them concocting kooky and super convoluted conspiracy theories on the spot to account for "politically inconvenient" facts like Russia never making any attempt on Odessa or Putin agreeing to mostly leave Ukraine as it is in spring 2022's draft peace treaty.
The best example concerns Russian-Israeli relations, which the vast majority of NRPRs believe are characterized by some secret blood feud, with Putin supposedly being a diehard anti-Zionist allied with Iran against Israel.
That's totally discredited by all of his praise of Israel from 2000-2018 that I meticulously documented here and which has continued in the years since, none of this being part of a "5D chess master plan to psyche out the Zionists":
I'd venture to guess than easily over half of NRPRs would turn on Putin in an instant if they truly believed that he didn't hate Israel since they only worship the false image of him that they've been brainwashed to believe is real.
The actual Putin, just like the actual Russia, largely isn't what most NRPRs believe that they are: all of that was just a psy-op by NRPRs to generate clout, push an ideology, and/or solicit donations. Few little of it was ever true.
For the most part, yes, but remember that Russia’s “soft power supervisors” keep at least a casual eye on top NRPR influencers but never discreetly nudge them into gradually recalibrating their claims to realign them closer with actual Russian policy.
They allow these false declarations about Russian policy to proliferate without impediment because they’d rather foreigners like Russia on false and ultimately debunked premises than feel blasé towards it due to the truth of its actual policies.
In the event of a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine any Turkish guarantee of Ukraine’s maritime trade lines would likely be superfluous, as both sides would presumably cease attacks on each other’s shipping.
Without a peace agreement Russia can continue attacking the Odessa Port Cluster and destroy the specialised infrastructure that permits Ukraine to export its agricultural surplus (silos, grain elevators, conveyor belts, bulk handling systems and transport links, etc.) which it appears already to be doing.
Russia could also mine harbours and impose a virtual blockade of the entire Black Sea coast without running the risk of a confrontation with the Turkish navy.
If Russia thought it necessary, it could reinforce its Black Sea fleet without transiting either the Dardanelles or the Bosphorus by moving corvettes and conventional submarines from the Baltic via rivers and canals (with a bit of dredging).
Thanks for another interesting and insightful post.
Defense treaties between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, and Turkey and Ukraine make the world a more dangerous place. They create a pre-WWI type network of tripwires, which will be what the Epstein Empire wants...
Well, Turkey could also offer to escort Russian ships in order to prevent Ukrainian drone strikes ?
Turkey under Erdogan is a very complex partner for any power. But it also looks overextended in its policies (caucase, syria/israel, northern africa…) given its fragile economy and social political balance.
On the other hand, Putin clearly said recently that Russia would takeover the whole Novorossia.
I tend to consider seriously such déclaration.
Perhaps Russia would demand a referendum in Odessa region !
That Novorossiya quip was dishonestly misportrayed by many top influencers. While it historically refers to more territory than Russia officially claims, in domestic political parlance since September 2022's referenda, it's become an offhand remark by Putin and those below him to refer to Kherson and Zaporozhye.
Even that goal of obtaining full control over these two regions, however, is very difficult to imagine at present given how challenging it's been for Russia to obtain full control over Donbass. Those two regions have territory on the other side of the Dnieper, which is more difficult than ever to cross with today's drone-enforced kilometer-wide "kill zones".
Your interprétation of Putin’s words remains to be confirmed. Indeed, Novorossia is a quite clearly defined perimeter.
And facts show that keeping an Ukrainian access to Black Sea would have many disadvantages long term for Russia.
They already were confirmed, you just didn't hear about it since the top "Non-Russian Pro-Russian" (NRPR) influencers who you evidently rely on for guidance didn't inform you of this nuance that Putin himself:
21 September 2022:
"I want to stress the following. We know that the majority of people living in the territories liberated from the neo-Nazis, and these are primarily the historical lands of Novorossiya, do not want to live under the yoke of the neo-Nazi regime."
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/69390
30 September 2022:
"Today I would like to address our soldiers and officers who are taking part in the special military operation, the fighters of Donbass and Novorossiya, those who went to military recruitment offices after receiving a call-up paper under the executive order on partial mobilisation, and those who did this voluntarily, answering the call of their hearts."
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/69465
14 March 2024:
"This is well understood by the residents of Donbass and Novorossiya who, under the most trying circumstances, voted during referendums on unity with Russia and will make their choice now as well."
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/73650
There are many, many other examples where he contextually indicates that his reference to "Novorossiya" refers to Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, not the entirety of the historical region known as Novorossiya.
As for the Black Sea, it doesn't matter what the facts are or what you think since Putin time and again disappoints those NRPRs who project their wishful thinking expectations onto him and assume that he sees things the same way.
I don't know why this is so important to you that you're arguing about it. Are you an ethnic Russian, a non-ethnic Russian citizen of Russia, or somehow connected to Odessa, even if by ancestry? If not, then why do you care?
Many thanks, but I am refering to a very recent speech of Putin. It was a breaking news, as it was différent from everything he Said since 2022.
That recent speech didn’t recontextualize what he said, it simply reaffirmed that he envisages full Russian control over the entirety of Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, which he’s on record multiple times collectively referring to as “Novorossiya” despite the historical region going beyond those two.
You’re setting yourself up for an incredible disappointment, as are many, but Russia’s “soft power supervisors” prefer for foreigners to like Russia on false premises even if those same premises are easily — and ultimately — debunked and then make its supporters resentment and disappointed to the verge of defecting and turning against Russia.
I’ve seen it play out from 2015 onward after Putin was dishonestly misportrayed as an anti-Zionist. Most former supporters who now hate him, and there’s a growing number, usually fell for this lie.
"And facts show that keeping an Ukrainian access to Black Sea would have many disadvantages long term for Russia."
Of course. What is Russia going to do about it?
Keeping Odessa Ukrainian would have some advantages for Russia, too. If Ukraine was reduced to a rump, landlocked state - that is a whole set of unpredictables in and of itself. If the Russian Army approached Odessa and looked capable of taking it, that would change Moldova and probably NATO's calculations on the war.
Odessa is vital for Ukraine, not for Russia.
Russia doesn't need to take Odessa.
Russia is not destroying Odessa, it's drying Odessa. All the traffic between Nikoleav and Odessa is reduced to almost nothing.
There is interest for Odessa. But if Odessa can't be reach, all its capacity of traffic can be destroyed for month, years and even decades.
Unless Russia can set up a defensible bridgehead across the Dnieper, the chance of Russia capturing Odessa is slim.
Russia is unable to take Kramatorsk since 4 years and half. How can it be able to take( and keep) Odessa?
Maybe Russia did not really want to take Kramatorsk in the past four years. Maybe it takes Russia to wear down NATO's ammo inventory. Before Stalingrad, the Germans did not know that the Russians could launch such offensives. Maybe even Russians themselves did not know.
I think you're wrong. Before Stalingrad, in January 1941, Russians launched a massive winter counter offensive that push Germans away 150 km.
And it's only thanks to German's genius and resilience ( and also methamphetamines...) that Wehrmarcht survived this winter.
There was also a big Russian offensive toward Kiev but it failed.
Longtime before that, in 1938, Joukov did a massive blow to Japanese army in Eastern Siberia.
Today, we are rather in 1915, when the technology had forbidden the massive offensives for three years.
Only tanks and planes allowed offensive again.
Today, it's drones which stuck the ground forces.
I think that Russia can't put boots on the ground everywhere in Ukraine but it can suffocante Ukraine to death.
And it's probably what we'll see next.
It's even what we are seeing.
What Turkiye is posid to do is only a temporary act, R ussia is the power that controls the entire region. Why countries mess with Russia is hard to understand. Russia is the worlds nuclear Super Power.
It is not hard to understand. Russia's poor performance lately is interpreted as weakness.
Turkey wants to get with the winning side, the side with power.
Russian dithering and indecision have led to this.
Andrew, the post you masked for me was a routing error. It wasn't meant for you, but was a reply to Doctor Hubris. I'm very surprised that you took it as being directed at you.
By the way, I found out how to turn off the new AI “moderation” so hopefully the problem won’t happen again!
I saw earlier today that it once again “hid” your comment under a different post so I looked for a solution.
It was extremely annoying that the setting was automatically selected. They shouldn’t have done that in my view.
It was an automated AI decision per this new method that Substack has automatically added to newsletters. I unhid it once I saw what happened.
"Turkish Foreign Minister and former spy chief Hakan Fidan confirmed during a joint press conference with his Ukrainian counterpart that Turkiye will ensure Ukraine’s maritime security after the ongoing conflict ends."
Maritime security is an interesting concept for a landlocked (to be) pseudo-country.
I don't expect Ukraine to become landlocked at all: Russia has made absolutely zero attempts to capture Odessa, and given the pace at which it's advancing in Donbass, crossing the Dnieper and holding ground on the other side after all the drone-driven "kill zone" developments since it left that part of the river in Kherson Region in late 2022 makes it extraordinarily difficult to imagine a new front being opened there.
Unless this becomes the new "Forty Years War" or some other extremely extended time frame of conflict. It doesn't seem likely - but the SMO could become a generational war.
If it wasn't in the cards before (doubtfully), it surely is now, after Turkiye's commitment.
It's never been in the cards and that's a fact. The only reason that it was wildly talked about by top influencers was as a morale-boosting rhetorical device, at least among those who knew the aforesaid fact and weren't indulging in wishful thinking (like quite a few and it became contagious for some years).
The only means for capturing Odessa would be overland ones since the Black Sea fleet is unfortunately a shadow of its former self due to Western-backed Ukrainian air and naval drone advances over the past nearly half-decade.
Crossing the Dnieper would already be a formidable enough task, let alone breaking through the kilometers-wide drone-enforced "kill zone" that nowadays characterizes much of the front, not to mention maintaining logistics across the river to pursue a full-fledged offensive towards Odessa.
I genuinely don't see that happening. The costs would be astronomical and risk a catastrophic collapse of Russia's military logistics that might then be followed up on to push back its hard-earned advances elsewhere. Putin won't authorize that.
Then there's the conventional NATO intervention scenario to consider given French troops in Romania, possibly also in Moldova, and a bunch of foreign forces (including French and British) in Poland.
In the far-fetched scenario of Russia steamrolling beyond the Dnieper towards Odessa, it can't be ruled out that they'll conventionally cross the border and race it to wherever they end up meeting.
The purpose would be to draw a line in the sand for de facto partitioning Ukraine. Despite Russian rhetoric about targeting foreign troops in Ukraine, I very much doubt that Putin would risk WWIII over Odessa.
He wouldn't even do that after the West helped Ukraine hit his nuclear triad several times, the Kremlin on one unforgettable occasion, and allegedly tried to assassinate him at his home in Valdai.
Precedent therefore very strongly suggests that while the risk is always there, so long as Putin remains in charge, Russia wouldn't risk World War III over Odessa. That city isn't in play, at all, never has been nor likely ever will be.
What is hoped for by the NRPR crowd (me included) is for Russia to have a more serious mobilization, not just manpower, but also more parts of the total economy. I don't see that coming even after the coming Russian elections. Of course, I have no clue about Russian domestic politics. Maybe the election results would convince Putin to change the course somewhat, but that is a fairly remote "maybe".
Mobilization is needed, but it also is one thing that would surely turn the public against the war.
"Russia has made absolutely zero attempts to capture Odessa," - so far
It's been nearly half a decade and the costs of attempting to take Odessa at this point would be way too much for Putin to accept given how cautious he's proven himself to be throughout the course of this conflict:
https://korybko.substack.com/p/turkiye-is-poised-to-open-up-a-new/comment/298674598
I see... so the war is over and Putin is afraid to take Odessa it right?! Ukraine won - huzzah huzzah?
Ukraine will eventually surrender and the Russian Federation will dictate the conditions. Not quite everything needs to be solved on the battlefield.
Half-right and half-wrong, but I really don't like the sarcasm so please check it, thanks:
1. No, the conflict isn't over, and Ukraine hasn't "won"
2. Putin isn't "afraid" so much as he never even planned for it as the facts prove, and at this point, he's not going to throw away untold thousands of Russian lives for this vanity project that only the fringe here in Russia are demanding but which has become the object of obsession for many "Non-Russian Pro-Russians" (who have absolutely zero stake in the future of the city)
3. Russia has yet to obtain even a single one of its explicitly stated objectives in full as declared at the beginning of the conflict, therefore, Russia won't have "lost" if the conflict ends with its full control of Donbass for example but it wouldn't have "won" either
4. There's no indication that Ukraine will surrender, literally nothing of significance suggests that this is a realistic option that Zelensky is considering nor that Putin is willing to authorize his armed forces to resort to employing the means that could possibly coerce him to do so since he's made up his mind to "stay the course".
As an aside, I've been tracking the proliferation of fake news in Alt-Media and especially among "Non-Russian Pro-Russians" for some years already, so I'd like to know which top NRPR influencers you follow who convinced you that Putin wants Odessa, can get Odessa, etc., thanks.
"Ukraine will eventually surrender and the Russian Federation will dictate the conditions. "
We've been hearing that one for years now, but it never comes.
"I intend to live forever; so far so good"...
Hey Buddy, you're perfectly right. But not as you think
Russia is indeed winning on the Ukrainian battlefield but loose every where else: Finland, Sweden, UE, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Syria.
And is probably loosing in Belarus and Kazakhstan.
Indian and Chinese vampires are sucking its blood.
Stop dreaming
"Buddy",
I wouldn't be worried about EU, they will shatter soon enough... besides Russia doesn't need them... for what actually? What does EU have that Russia needs? Fiat currency?
India is probably a vampire indeed... but China is an ally, at least in the foreseeable future just because they are under attack by the same forces.
As for the ex-Soviet countries, their managers (can't call them "leaders") are bought off by the American Empire; at some point, the dollar (and euro) Ponzi will end, and so will the foreign influences in those countries. Ideally, because I am afraid that the financial overlords will prefer the path to Armageddon to the path to defeat.
So what I am saying, Buddy is that the future will likely be bright; bright like 10k suns.
"Not quite everything needs to be solved on the battlefield."
That is Russia's problem right there. Russia desperately wants to avoid having to fight, having to fight the Ukrainians that they see as sadly misguided brethren, having to fight the West that they still see as a shining city on a hill.
By contrast, the West sees Russian dithering and weakness and smells blood. Hell, this war is the best thing ever to happen tot he Ukrainian leadership class. They are positively itching to solve this on the battlefield.
"Ukrainian leadership class" - LOL! They are *not* leaders but owners... and they have their own owners in the West.
Believe whatever you want - we will see if you are right (or not, if it goes nuclear).
One thing is sure though: Zele will not make it out of this alive (although he is nothing but an actor); somehow I doubt dying is "the best thing ever" that happen to him (from his perspective - of course).
"Maritime security is an interesting concept for a landlocked (to be) pseudo-country."
Until Russia actually does it, it's just idle talk.
I think there were at least two major counter offensives by USSR failed before Stalingrad. Both were due to deep concentration without proper flanking protection and being unable to enlarge the breach because of the Germans' successful defense of the shoulders. Stalingrad is the first success counter attacks causing large enough German casualties, especially in prisoners caught. Something attempted does not mean something is an understood art. In Wang Yang-Ming's philosophy, you know only when you can do it. Tried but failed? Well, then one likely did not know enough.
The counter offensive in front of Moscow in December 1941 pushed Germans away 150 km and cost them 750 000 men ( killed, wounded, prisoners. ) more than every battle of the WW1, included Verdun, the deadliest. Verdun 1916, not the healthy hike of Verdun 1918.
yes. But that was mostly a counteroffensive with multiple thrusts to achieve a general pushback of the front line. The German casualties were mostly due to attrition, including local repeated counter-offensives by both sides. So was the Rezev Meat Grinder. The USSR paid a high cost to push the Germans back from a protrusion the Germans wanted to defend at high cost. In comparison, the USSR counterattacks after German exhaustion in the Battle of Kursk and Operation Bagration were all pincer attacks with a large chunk of "enemy destruction" through bagging prisoners.
Trying to loop back to the original post: I was saying that unless Russians can cross the Dnieper, it is very difficult for Russians to reach Odessa. My point is that Russians have not done much of a big offensive so far. So far, the battleground reality argues against that kind of action, but that is insufficient to argue that Russians are unable to do that. As for Türkiye being part of the Western containment, I did not address that. I am sorry that I branched off too far.
My apologies to Mr. Korybko and others; my answer was meant for one of Darras' comments.
Turkey is truly at sea...
I wonder what use war ships are anyway. Seeing the state of the art possibilities of drone and missile warfare, what frigate is going to protect anything?
It's like the small european fortresses in middle age. They are not here necessarily to fight but to show their flag and say: "I'm hear, in this ship, if you dare attacking this ship you attack me and it's war". So, they can protect civil convoys or prove that every straight is clear for their country( in time of peace)
Then, they can carry drones and missiles far from their country and increase their range.
They are the weapons of countries of the sea.
the opposite is more true.
black sea security will be enhanced if ukraine has no ports.
this is signal that turkiye prefers russian security architecture more and nato eu architecture much less.
As I've been explaining to other commentators, that's "copium" as they say for boosting morale among Non-Russian Pro-Russians (NRPR) and has absolutely zero basis in factual reality whatsoever at all since Russia hasn't ever tried to take Odessa.
andrew
it's not so much denial and dysfunction, it is anti-propaganda propaganda.
consider this by euobserver today:
"Putin’s war is going badly — and China, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkey are quietly walking away"
https://euobserver.com/229423/putins-war-is-going-badly-and-china-kazakhstan-azerbaijan-armenia-and-turkey-are-quietly-walking-away/?euobservercom_lock=0
"China Declines to Supply Equipment for Russian Northern Sea Route Fleet"
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/80572
and from bloomberg:
EU weighs options to keep its new Russia LNG sanctions alive
https://www.luxtimes.lu/europeanunion/eu-weighs-options-to-keep-its-new-russia-lng-sanctions-alive/158979887.html
couple that with the delusional zelensky meeting recently heroising biletsky and the other overt zelensky-isms on his own official telegram:
https://t.me/V_Zelenskiy_official/20013
Доповідь командира 3-го армійського корпусу оперативного командування «Схід» Сухопутних військ ЗСУ Андрія Білецького
(19 july 2026)
and from the bbc:
"Russian warship carried out firing exercise off Plymouth coast"
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce970jryrk3o
Unremarkably the EU bemoaning the loss of Russian Gas:
"The EU's struggle with Russian LNG sanctions and what it means for energy markets"
https://www.brusselstimes.com/1040594/energy-rundown-lng-on-the-radar
I am not sure how psychologists evaluate these in context and are able to entertain that western europe is sane.
China is indeed complying with most Western sanctions, though, and has been since the get-go: I can personally confirm this since a state-owned enterprise client of mine in 2022 made every excuse in the book not to continue making deposits to my sanctioned Sberbank account (including absurdly bringing up COVID!!!), only finally transferring the funds once I opened up a non-sanctioned account.
Going back to what I was talking about, however, these types of NRPRs are very unstable people as proven by them concocting kooky and super convoluted conspiracy theories on the spot to account for "politically inconvenient" facts like Russia never making any attempt on Odessa or Putin agreeing to mostly leave Ukraine as it is in spring 2022's draft peace treaty.
The best example concerns Russian-Israeli relations, which the vast majority of NRPRs believe are characterized by some secret blood feud, with Putin supposedly being a diehard anti-Zionist allied with Iran against Israel.
That's totally discredited by all of his praise of Israel from 2000-2018 that I meticulously documented here and which has continued in the years since, none of this being part of a "5D chess master plan to psyche out the Zionists":
https://web.archive.org/web/20231008133800/https:/orientalreview.su/2018/05/10/president-putin-on-israel-quotes-from-the-kremlin-website/
I'd venture to guess than easily over half of NRPRs would turn on Putin in an instant if they truly believed that he didn't hate Israel since they only worship the false image of him that they've been brainwashed to believe is real.
The actual Putin, just like the actual Russia, largely isn't what most NRPRs believe that they are: all of that was just a psy-op by NRPRs to generate clout, push an ideology, and/or solicit donations. Few little of it was ever true.
I would not say the image of Putin is a psy-op, just projection and wishful thinking.
For the most part, yes, but remember that Russia’s “soft power supervisors” keep at least a casual eye on top NRPR influencers but never discreetly nudge them into gradually recalibrating their claims to realign them closer with actual Russian policy.
They allow these false declarations about Russian policy to proliferate without impediment because they’d rather foreigners like Russia on false and ultimately debunked premises than feel blasé towards it due to the truth of its actual policies.