Kusk? Did you already forget about Donetsk, Luhansk, Kharkiv, and other "Russian" regions partially occupied by Ukrainian troops? This just underlines my point that certain areas seem to be more Russian than others, despite being part of the Russian Federation. It seems even Russia forgets they annexed the areas.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You mean places where Russia is actively advancing right now? https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/08/europe/ukraine-military-morale-desertion-intl-cmd/index.html

This just underlines my point that certain areas seem to be more Russian than others, despite being part of the Russian Federation. It seems even Russia forgets they annexed the areas.

The only thing this underlies the fact that you're utterly clueless on the subject you're attempting to debate. Russian military strategy is to defeat the Ukrainian army, this will involve letting go of territory when it makes strategic sense to do so. Even western media openly admits that Kursk incursion isn't going to last long.

[–] sweng@programming.dev 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure people in the affected areas would rather not be evacuated and have their lived destroyed, don't you? Is Russia unable to accommodate that? Why?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago

Because it's a war, and saving lives of thousands of troops can take priority over accommodating people living in a few villages. You should let Russian general staff know of your brilliant military strategies though.