However, saying that the offensive should just charge gung-ho into Russian defense lines to "show progress" to the west is stupid. Why waste resources Moscow-style when they can just keep bleeding out Russian resources with a slower pace?

A war of attrition is much more than blowing up each other's tanks until one side is out of them. If the numbers are correct about the number of anti-war protesters arrested in Russia (~20k), this is a significant part of destroying the resolve of the people and part of the "attrition war" as a whole. We need all Russians to get sick of having their sons killed for no reason and see what their government is doing.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

That's not what the article is arguing for, at all.

On the contrary, it's mostly agreeing with you. The main argument is that the EU should stop hoping solely on a quick end of the war, but start planning for a long war.

The key point is to start building the Ukranian economy right now, through improved air defence, reforms and a prospect to EU membership.

And while us EU citizens are grateful to the US and UK support, this is ultimately our responsibility and our risk. Ukraine and Russia border the EU and Putin wants EU territory, too.

[–] Edgelord_Of_Tomorrow@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Yes, it would be foolish to try and take back the annexed territories.

By hammering Savastopol they make it worthless. By hammering the land bridge they force all supplies to go by the Kerch bridge, and that bridge is not long for this world.

When Russia has no strategic value in Savastopol, and cannot supply their troops or population in Crimea, all Ukraine has to do is wait.