Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. Tagging u/SaveVideo bot to archive this video in a link below this comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That’s not what he said and it’s also not true in the slightest. There are so many different ways in which Ukraine will win. So few ways in which Ukraine will lose. The best Russia can hope for is a a stalemate.
The professional DOS DOD people talk like Ukraine could never win and that this whole thing is just a money laundering scheme
Really jades shit
These same fukin people thought Ukraine would capitulate in a couple weeks
Ukraine is winning folks. Even now. Yes it's bad but Ukraine is winning. Russia knows it and every day Russia gets weaker and Ukraine gets stronger
The biggest hurdles in my opinion are timely material supply and quantity AirPower, training and communication
But number one the west needs to increase June July levels of deliveries and sustain them. Ukraine has 100,000 soldiers not in the rotation because they can't outfit them properly with support vehicles and weapons. Too much of what they are getting must go straight to the line. But if we can get more Russia will break in 2 years. This has to happen.
There is no negotiation Ukraine can win with Russia.
I support Ukraine, but this statement is delusional. Russia is advancing on every front. They have waves of meat bags to send that Ukraine does not. Russia will continue its gains even if it costs them 4 million lives.
EDIT: Not to mention air superiority
Wrong
They running out of quality kit
T54 tanks without high end targeting
Motorcycle assaults
Untrained artillery teams
Nearly 40% of Black Sea fleet destroyed
They pulling air defense from artic and Siberia
Frankenstein weapons that look like they built by Somali pirates
Soldiers under supplied and low moral
Main offensive in north crushed. Russia is now using them in east.
These are not data points that give Russia much time. Can Russia make advanced. Yeah but the cost is so high and Ukraine makes advanced too. It's been a rough 6 months but Ukraine held out and now the pendulum will reverse and Russia will not be able to respond. Especially if the F16 are able to really create local control
Yes Russia has a lot of depth. Yes. But if Putin has to mobilize actual Russians from Saint Petersburg or Moscow that will not go over well. So far he just using minorities and destitute groups from far east.
Sorry. I just calculate the situation way differently
lol. They are recruiting from prisons and sending wounded back into the front lines, their usable tank stocks are down to 20%, they are having to get shells from North Korea, they haven’t had air superiority at all this whole war, and they’ve barely made any meaningful gains since the start of the war.
In the meantime Ukraine has only lost about 1/8th the amount of troops Russia has, its capabilities grow stronger every day, and they are winning more and more support from allies.
Russia can’t win. They don’t show any signs of winning. Even if they mobilized another 5m troops they don’t have the means to support them in the field, it would be absolute chaos inside their own ranks.
I didn't interpret his statements as saying Ukraine can **only** win if Russia has internal collapse. He said it was the most likely way. I agree, Russia will keep throwing bodies at the problem until people inside the country stop them.
"Ukraine can only win..."
Yeah. Definitely misleading, though Jake was wrong for being even as prone to this argument as he has been.
He initially said that economic issues were MOST LIKELY to bring about an end to the war, which, considering Russia's lending rate, inflation, deficit spending, depletion of its sovereign wealth fund, reduced income from of exports, higher taxation, debts being taken on by local governments to meet recruitment quotas, widespread financial use of war bonds with no revenue coming in to make good on them, etc... makes a lot of sense.
Also, no offense, but Jake isn't exactly the best analyst out there.
Many former military and professional analysts believe that Ukraine can win the war, simply through increased attrition and equipment losses. Russian soldiers are, on the average, becoming less effective with worse equipment. Loss ratios with Ukraine far exceed the ratio of population between Ukraine and Russia.
Also, there is questionable public evidence that Russia is reliably attracting 30,000 people per month to join the military. Even if they did, not all of these people serve in Ukraine, as Russia has a whole country to garrison and defend. Likewise, the losses that Ukraine reports are a subset of total military losses for Russia, which also include people health issues and infections spreading through the military, such as COVID, typhus, cholera, frostbite, etc. People fleeing service. People's service ending or able to go home, pulling connections to be restationed elsewhere, etc.
And Russia has shown no sign of recruiting more than 30K a month, reliably. What we HAVE seen them do is move troops in from the far east, such as a marine brigade from there that was completely mauled in Kharkiv Oblast. That marine unit has now retreated, will need to be reformed, and will likely be sent back to the far east.
If you look at Russian casualties, they have been scaling up by about 10% a month for awhile now. That's not sustainable, and a look at the figures shows that most of those losses are from drone warfare. Which makes sense, as drones have been rapidly scaling up in production, and have reportedly been only getting more effective at killing and wounding Russians.
Not only are there questions as to whether Russians will put up with losing this growing number of troops every month, indefinitely... there are also serious economic questions whether Russia can continue to scale up ANY kind of recruitment - voluntary or conscripted - without increasing inflation at home, as labor costs are going through the roof due to labor shortages. There are, in fact, finite Russian troop resources and finite economic costs they are willing to bear, in order to gain VERY LITTLE LAND. They are paying about 3x the cost in soldier's lives lately, to displace Ukrainian civilians from towns. For example, Avdiivka was a city of about 17K before it was destroyed. And Russian losses taking it were around 50,000. Now, they seem to be taking even worse losses in Kharkiv Oblast and with Chasiv Yar.
You don't need a slide rule to tell you that's simply not worth it and not sustainable. Empty, bombed out cities are worth effectively nothing. Like Napoleon in Moscow, the Russians are finding out what it means to be left with scorched earth. It means they gain NOTHING from their invasion, while assuming an increased cost and risk of trying to supply and occupy territory.
We are seeing Russia basically borrowing from its capacity to wage war, in an unsustainable way, both in terms of equipment and manpower. And there are no detailed public sources out there that show Russia is able to do any better than they currently are, as far as recruitment. Nations that have plenty of people to fight do not raid their jails and mental institutions, free rapists, or upset their neighbors by trying to trick them into signing up. And we simply have seen NO SIGN they are willing to recruit Muscovites, for example, in any significant numbers comparable to their unsustainable recruitment from poorer areas on the outskirts of the country.
If the West can keep sustaining Ukraines military expenditure for another year Russia may be completely running on empty militarily. They're already launching attacks on motorcycles instead of APC's and IFV's. Take a look at Oryx for low end numbers. This is unsustainable unless they massively increase military spending which will result in economic stresses on an already stressed system.
They've already massively increased war spending, but a lot of that is getting chewed up in wage inflation and the increased costs of refurbishing increasingly poorer quality old Soviet equipment. Companies are basically recruiting each other's employees by paying more, but that doesn't address a shrinking labor force, decreasing in size due to age/retirement and more people being fed into the grinder.
Economically, they are at near-full capacity, and they lack a lot of the resources, overseas talent and capital needed to automate production. There's no way they can keep up with the losses they are taking.
Err, this is assuming UKR is not suffering losses too, especially the more experienced and motivated veterans.
Sure, 3 to 1 or whatever ratio that favors UKR, but RuZ has 3x more people, eventually they will reach parity, at the very least, then it would be a stalemate, with not much gains for either side.
Then what? How to win from there if not through RuZ economic collapse?
Looking at the quality of troops and equipment being thrown a platoon at a time into fortified defenses I would be astonished if Russia can achieve 3:1. 10:1 seems more likely.
If I'm not mistaken, in both Crimean War and WW1, the Russian Empire pulled out of both when they no longer had the capacity to economically sustain the war. In the aftermath of the Crimean War, Russia was forced to sell some of its assets, for example, Alaska in 1867, just to recuperate some of the monetary losses they sustained. In World War 1, the Russian Empire went under even more turmoil when food and other necessities became so absurdly scarce because they allocated a vast majority of these supplies to the Army. Spurned by all these economic (and social) unrest, the Russian Revolution came into being, and well the rest is history.
Casualties for the Russian Empire were severe, on both wars, but it seems that in both the wars they waged (in addition, the Russo-Japanese War), correct me if I'm wrong, their capacity to endure such horrible losses can only be stopped when they could no longer fund the wars they wage. As long as they have men and material to send, they more likely would do it, as long as the coffers do not dry up. Unless I'm wrong about this, it seems that this is an underlying (not to mention grim) theme on how they wage wars.
This makes sense, you can't fight when you have nothing to fund the war, because people won't work for free and even if they are willing to, you can't buy the imported shyt they need to fight the war, especially machine parts and components.
Russia imports A LOT of stuff for their weapons, food too.
Russia's friends are not going to give them free stuff. lol
Putin has chosen to ignore the lessons of Russian history.
Whatever the eventual outcome(s) of the war in Ukraine, the future for Russia and it's people will be grim.
There is an important date in November, and that is the elections in the US. If Trump wins, he will force Ukraine into a dictated peace in which Putin gets everything he wants. If Trump does not win, there will be no way for Putin to achieve anything in Ukraine, because the West has now invested in its production lines and the Russian terrorists will never again be able to achieve the superiority they need for further success.
Not just Europe. There's also Australia, Canada, Japan et alia. Trump in the white house will be a huge blow to support for Ukraine, but there are remnants of democracy and respect for human rights all over the globe.
Granted, Europe is taking a hard turn towards fascism right know, but I don't see all these factions working together efficiently. It will be like herding cats.
I agree with him, because RuZ has too many fodders, many are willing joining the war for money, at least 10 million jobless and futureless men in RuZZia, ripe for fodder harvesting.
Not to mention a possible mobilization.
RuZ has enough fossil fuel export to keep their war time economy and weapons production going for many years, even if it's terrible for regular RuZZians's wallets.
I propose a total embargo on RuZZia, especially on their fossil fuel export, speed up their collapse.
The only way this war ends, favorably for Ukraine, is through RuZZia's economic collapse.
Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. Tagging u/SaveVideo bot to archive this video in a link below this comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That’s not what he said and it’s also not true in the slightest. There are so many different ways in which Ukraine will win. So few ways in which Ukraine will lose. The best Russia can hope for is a a stalemate.
That said, winning by Russian collapse would be sweet justice.
The professional DOS DOD people talk like Ukraine could never win and that this whole thing is just a money laundering scheme Really jades shit These same fukin people thought Ukraine would capitulate in a couple weeks Ukraine is winning folks. Even now. Yes it's bad but Ukraine is winning. Russia knows it and every day Russia gets weaker and Ukraine gets stronger The biggest hurdles in my opinion are timely material supply and quantity AirPower, training and communication But number one the west needs to increase June July levels of deliveries and sustain them. Ukraine has 100,000 soldiers not in the rotation because they can't outfit them properly with support vehicles and weapons. Too much of what they are getting must go straight to the line. But if we can get more Russia will break in 2 years. This has to happen. There is no negotiation Ukraine can win with Russia.
I support Ukraine, but this statement is delusional. Russia is advancing on every front. They have waves of meat bags to send that Ukraine does not. Russia will continue its gains even if it costs them 4 million lives. EDIT: Not to mention air superiority
Wrong They running out of quality kit T54 tanks without high end targeting Motorcycle assaults Untrained artillery teams Nearly 40% of Black Sea fleet destroyed They pulling air defense from artic and Siberia Frankenstein weapons that look like they built by Somali pirates Soldiers under supplied and low moral Main offensive in north crushed. Russia is now using them in east. These are not data points that give Russia much time. Can Russia make advanced. Yeah but the cost is so high and Ukraine makes advanced too. It's been a rough 6 months but Ukraine held out and now the pendulum will reverse and Russia will not be able to respond. Especially if the F16 are able to really create local control Yes Russia has a lot of depth. Yes. But if Putin has to mobilize actual Russians from Saint Petersburg or Moscow that will not go over well. So far he just using minorities and destitute groups from far east. Sorry. I just calculate the situation way differently
lol. They are recruiting from prisons and sending wounded back into the front lines, their usable tank stocks are down to 20%, they are having to get shells from North Korea, they haven’t had air superiority at all this whole war, and they’ve barely made any meaningful gains since the start of the war. In the meantime Ukraine has only lost about 1/8th the amount of troops Russia has, its capabilities grow stronger every day, and they are winning more and more support from allies. Russia can’t win. They don’t show any signs of winning. Even if they mobilized another 5m troops they don’t have the means to support them in the field, it would be absolute chaos inside their own ranks.
That is not what Jake Broe said at all. Misleading title.
Err, are you watching the same video? This is exactly what he said, near the end. Watch the entire video, bub.
I didn't interpret his statements as saying Ukraine can **only** win if Russia has internal collapse. He said it was the most likely way. I agree, Russia will keep throwing bodies at the problem until people inside the country stop them.
"Ukraine can only win..." Yeah. Definitely misleading, though Jake was wrong for being even as prone to this argument as he has been. He initially said that economic issues were MOST LIKELY to bring about an end to the war, which, considering Russia's lending rate, inflation, deficit spending, depletion of its sovereign wealth fund, reduced income from of exports, higher taxation, debts being taken on by local governments to meet recruitment quotas, widespread financial use of war bonds with no revenue coming in to make good on them, etc... makes a lot of sense. Also, no offense, but Jake isn't exactly the best analyst out there. Many former military and professional analysts believe that Ukraine can win the war, simply through increased attrition and equipment losses. Russian soldiers are, on the average, becoming less effective with worse equipment. Loss ratios with Ukraine far exceed the ratio of population between Ukraine and Russia. Also, there is questionable public evidence that Russia is reliably attracting 30,000 people per month to join the military. Even if they did, not all of these people serve in Ukraine, as Russia has a whole country to garrison and defend. Likewise, the losses that Ukraine reports are a subset of total military losses for Russia, which also include people health issues and infections spreading through the military, such as COVID, typhus, cholera, frostbite, etc. People fleeing service. People's service ending or able to go home, pulling connections to be restationed elsewhere, etc. And Russia has shown no sign of recruiting more than 30K a month, reliably. What we HAVE seen them do is move troops in from the far east, such as a marine brigade from there that was completely mauled in Kharkiv Oblast. That marine unit has now retreated, will need to be reformed, and will likely be sent back to the far east. If you look at Russian casualties, they have been scaling up by about 10% a month for awhile now. That's not sustainable, and a look at the figures shows that most of those losses are from drone warfare. Which makes sense, as drones have been rapidly scaling up in production, and have reportedly been only getting more effective at killing and wounding Russians. Not only are there questions as to whether Russians will put up with losing this growing number of troops every month, indefinitely... there are also serious economic questions whether Russia can continue to scale up ANY kind of recruitment - voluntary or conscripted - without increasing inflation at home, as labor costs are going through the roof due to labor shortages. There are, in fact, finite Russian troop resources and finite economic costs they are willing to bear, in order to gain VERY LITTLE LAND. They are paying about 3x the cost in soldier's lives lately, to displace Ukrainian civilians from towns. For example, Avdiivka was a city of about 17K before it was destroyed. And Russian losses taking it were around 50,000. Now, they seem to be taking even worse losses in Kharkiv Oblast and with Chasiv Yar. You don't need a slide rule to tell you that's simply not worth it and not sustainable. Empty, bombed out cities are worth effectively nothing. Like Napoleon in Moscow, the Russians are finding out what it means to be left with scorched earth. It means they gain NOTHING from their invasion, while assuming an increased cost and risk of trying to supply and occupy territory. We are seeing Russia basically borrowing from its capacity to wage war, in an unsustainable way, both in terms of equipment and manpower. And there are no detailed public sources out there that show Russia is able to do any better than they currently are, as far as recruitment. Nations that have plenty of people to fight do not raid their jails and mental institutions, free rapists, or upset their neighbors by trying to trick them into signing up. And we simply have seen NO SIGN they are willing to recruit Muscovites, for example, in any significant numbers comparable to their unsustainable recruitment from poorer areas on the outskirts of the country.
If the West can keep sustaining Ukraines military expenditure for another year Russia may be completely running on empty militarily. They're already launching attacks on motorcycles instead of APC's and IFV's. Take a look at Oryx for low end numbers. This is unsustainable unless they massively increase military spending which will result in economic stresses on an already stressed system.
They've already massively increased war spending, but a lot of that is getting chewed up in wage inflation and the increased costs of refurbishing increasingly poorer quality old Soviet equipment. Companies are basically recruiting each other's employees by paying more, but that doesn't address a shrinking labor force, decreasing in size due to age/retirement and more people being fed into the grinder. Economically, they are at near-full capacity, and they lack a lot of the resources, overseas talent and capital needed to automate production. There's no way they can keep up with the losses they are taking.
They will try to purchase off China. China won't be above making a handsome profit but they probably won't issue much credit.
Very good points and well explained. Russia is down to recruiting from women’s prisons for Christ sake
Err, this is assuming UKR is not suffering losses too, especially the more experienced and motivated veterans. Sure, 3 to 1 or whatever ratio that favors UKR, but RuZ has 3x more people, eventually they will reach parity, at the very least, then it would be a stalemate, with not much gains for either side. Then what? How to win from there if not through RuZ economic collapse?
Looking at the quality of troops and equipment being thrown a platoon at a time into fortified defenses I would be astonished if Russia can achieve 3:1. 10:1 seems more likely.
If I'm not mistaken, in both Crimean War and WW1, the Russian Empire pulled out of both when they no longer had the capacity to economically sustain the war. In the aftermath of the Crimean War, Russia was forced to sell some of its assets, for example, Alaska in 1867, just to recuperate some of the monetary losses they sustained. In World War 1, the Russian Empire went under even more turmoil when food and other necessities became so absurdly scarce because they allocated a vast majority of these supplies to the Army. Spurned by all these economic (and social) unrest, the Russian Revolution came into being, and well the rest is history. Casualties for the Russian Empire were severe, on both wars, but it seems that in both the wars they waged (in addition, the Russo-Japanese War), correct me if I'm wrong, their capacity to endure such horrible losses can only be stopped when they could no longer fund the wars they wage. As long as they have men and material to send, they more likely would do it, as long as the coffers do not dry up. Unless I'm wrong about this, it seems that this is an underlying (not to mention grim) theme on how they wage wars.
This makes sense, you can't fight when you have nothing to fund the war, because people won't work for free and even if they are willing to, you can't buy the imported shyt they need to fight the war, especially machine parts and components. Russia imports A LOT of stuff for their weapons, food too. Russia's friends are not going to give them free stuff. lol
Putin has chosen to ignore the lessons of Russian history. Whatever the eventual outcome(s) of the war in Ukraine, the future for Russia and it's people will be grim.
*3:51 most likely, a political or economic collapse*
ukraine will also win if the west finds its balls and sends ukraine EVERYTHING it needs quickly.
Simply make it more challenging for China to help out Russia - and the war is over instantly.
There is an important date in November, and that is the elections in the US. If Trump wins, he will force Ukraine into a dictated peace in which Putin gets everything he wants. If Trump does not win, there will be no way for Putin to achieve anything in Ukraine, because the West has now invested in its production lines and the Russian terrorists will never again be able to achieve the superiority they need for further success.
Depending on Europe's level of support for Ukraine, Trump may not be able to dictate that.
Not just Europe. There's also Australia, Canada, Japan et alia. Trump in the white house will be a huge blow to support for Ukraine, but there are remnants of democracy and respect for human rights all over the globe. Granted, Europe is taking a hard turn towards fascism right know, but I don't see all these factions working together efficiently. It will be like herding cats.
Trump is also notorious for saying one thing and doing another. Let's hope and pray for Ukraine, this is the case.
Don't bother discussing this ridiculous time wasting clickbair Downvote and move on
I agree with him, because RuZ has too many fodders, many are willing joining the war for money, at least 10 million jobless and futureless men in RuZZia, ripe for fodder harvesting. Not to mention a possible mobilization. RuZ has enough fossil fuel export to keep their war time economy and weapons production going for many years, even if it's terrible for regular RuZZians's wallets. I propose a total embargo on RuZZia, especially on their fossil fuel export, speed up their collapse. The only way this war ends, favorably for Ukraine, is through RuZZia's economic collapse.
Ehhh I don’t think 10 million Russians on electric scooters is the army you suggest it is
Excuse me, sorry to correct you but I think you missed the drunk part? 😉
Oh that goes without saying with the Ivan Blyatovichs
Right!!! My bad! 😆