Sounds like we are doomed. Not sure about the time frame. But it sounds like there is no way out of this.
Considering the political/coruption processes inside the country, people won't go out to change the top. People just blab but it is not enough critical mass to push people to the street and make another maidan. Okay, some moneys were stolen. But who cares about that much? People write blogs, articles with outrages and big words. But no action.
People on top will not fire themselves by definition. If the "top" is stupid/dumb and do not realize that ZSU is going to crash soon, they will continue this war/corruption on the blood for sure.
Damn... Totally trapped. What is the best action for a simple citizen living here? I have no idea. This is so apocalyptical. ZSU cannot sustain this kind of mis-management anymore. People inside know this and call for action. Nobody listens on the top. They are busy doing their own personal war.
What's worse: almost the entire EU is paralysed by exactly the same levels of political corruption and utmost incompetence.
Our politicians are so incompetent, they're still acting like if the Russian invasion of Ukraine is requiring some sort of negotiations about Dumpf's tariffs. Like if they have all the time of the World. There's absolutely no leadership, no vision, and there are absolutely no solutions. On the contrary: emphasis is on staging, scamming, ignoring reality, and lying at every opportunity.
The total result is likely to become comparable to the downfall of ancient Greece, or the (Western) Roman Empire: both went down due to degeneration to the level where they became unable to reform.
"Staging, scamming . . . " -- is it the degradation of consciousness, to a social media level? All appearance, likes, etc.? As if a war can be won with social media likes?
How did you like Kaja Kallas' "two-point plan"? Is this really the EU's level of strategic thinking?
Tom, if your prediction turns out to be accurate and in 4–10 months the AFU will no longer be able to fight, does that mean that Russian forces will be near Kyiv and that major cities like Kharkiv, Poltava, Sumy, and Chernihiv will be occupied? You wrote in a previous article about how the situation might develop over two years if nothing changes. But in that prediction, Russian troops were expected to advance only about 100 km from the current line of contact. If Ukraine ceases to exist, then what happens next? Will the Russians simply stop, or in 2–3 years will they use Ukrainians to go after the Baltic states?
One of points with my research and resulting posts on this blog is that I'm forced to constantly update my assessments. There's no other way to remain 'current'.
Correspondingly, and in reaction to the feature Evacuation, Retreat, Withdrawal... Defeat (https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/evacuation-retreat-withdrawal-defeat) I've got to hear that the Zele regime has given up on Ukraine 'roughly east' of the line Kharkiv - Dnipro - Zaporizhzhya - Kherson. That they're ready to (or even already in the process of) abandon the same.
Now, whether, 'even if', the ZSU could hold out that line... meanwhile, I doubt that. Of course, the Russians would experience even more massive problems while trying to assault such huge cities like Kharkiv, Dnipro or Zaporizhzhya (it cost them something like 200,000 casualties to take Pokrovsk). However, one must keep in mind the constant degeneration of the ZSU: already right now, this couldn't offer the same 'quality' of resistance like it did during the Battle of Pokrovsk, the last 14 months.
Considering the Russians are proving capable of maintaining pressure, regardless of their massive losses, while that quasi-leadership in Kyiv is proving entirely unable to learn from own mistakes, and staunchly advice-resistant, this is leading to the conclusion that the Russians would find it opportune to continue advancing 'west' of that line.
What happens beyond that point: no idea. Sorry, got no crystal ball: can only assess on basis of available info.
The problem is the people in EU - voters - are voting for that. They do not want any reforms, no change, just comfortable lives. And many of them even refuses even such mild reforms proposed by e.g. Macron or Merz and vote for pro-Russian ass*les paties like AfD or RN which would not only to reform nothing, but increase corrupition 10 folds.
You can find some ideal politician who would propose needed reforms and plans. But such poor person would fail miserably in any EU election. USA is same story. Do not blame politicians, blame people. That's how empires fall. When citizens do not have a will to reform.
Nope, many know what are they voting for. They are voting against any change, they are voting for own comfortability. What they expect is only more comfortability and are unhappy if they do not get it.
Ridiculously why EU even allow ruzz financed ass*les mendacious paties to participate in EU elections with clear aim to seize power with help of propaganda?
Why do you blame people if they trust pro-ruzzian power angry fabulists? They just choose what is better declared regardlles of realism of accomplishment of such declarations.
Will you also blame the same way terminally ill patients who trust scummers to cure their illness with their fabulous medicine but won't blame government regulatory who allowed scammers to enter the market to rob the people?
sorry Tom but you seem out of breath when it comes to the historical comparison, even saying ancient Greece (which?) ever fall is a seriously problematic statement (the avg citizen of Athens was feeling fine until... Ottoman occupation, and even then...), and the fall of Rome (the Western half, of course) is lot more complex than "leadership degeneration".
It also seems odd that he doesn't explain the reason behind "leadership degeneration". As if out of thin air the whole continent went completely mad. He did share some leftish points (like tax the rich, kick the oligarchs, etc.), but he doesn't fully elaborate on his politics.
But I'd like to know - is it better somewhere? Maybe in Asia? Maybe in Australia or New Zealand? Was it better in Europe and USA 30 years ago? 50? When did 'degeneracy' start? How did it spread? Is there a cure at least in theory?
Just see the reaction to the words of the new French Chief of the General Staff...what a shocker,wars require sacrifice,willpower and you have to be prepared to lose people.
Get your country into the EU by all means. Tom says right things about the decline of the EU, but it's UA's best hope. Those institutions, for all their flaws will really help reconstruct internal political processes. Investment will pour in, once you are in the EU. It's kind of unbelievable to me that Putin appears to still be OK with EU membership for UA. Take that deal while it's still available.
Yup, but: there is simply nothing in Ukraine to integrate.
...except one regime of ultimate incompetence caused by endemic corruption is horny about assimilating another regime of ultimate incompetence caused by endemic corruption.
I mean: if it has to be that way, then call the spade a spade. The EU-oligarchy 'must' bring the Ukrainian oligarchy under its control, because it thinks that's going to result in profit.
Beg your pardon, but: if this would really be the case, then it would've happened long ago. Like it happened with Romania, Bulgaria and Cyprus, just for example.
However, somehow, it appears the EU-oligarchy is not interested in doing that. Considering that conclusion, the question is: why?
The only answer coming to my mind is the refusal to reform: the EU-oligarchy is afraid that bringing in the population of 40 million people who tend to go out to streets and protests if they find something unfair, is not a good idea.
Ironically, precisely that's what both of these two oligarchic systems have in common.
If this 'peace plan' is implemented, Putin has little to no obstacles if he decides to launch another invasion. Sanctions maybe re-imposed and new Western weapons will be sent via new lend-lease, which didn't stop Russia before and wouldn't stop it in the future.
There were no obstacles for Russia to take over Georgia in 2008 but they didn't.
They beat the Georgian army, told them in no uncertain terms that NATO membership is out of the question and withdrew. Georgia has been in peace the last 17 years although Russia can invade them at any time. Georgia is no longer a threat so Russia prefers economic cooperation rather than conflict.
Russia is scared shitless of NATO expansion. They don't care too much about Poland or Finland, but they are determined to prevent Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan etc from joining. Every time a missile hits a russian refinery or flies towards Moscow, they are more determined to push any threat as much from their borders as possible. Ukraine can be a very prosperous country but it must be mindful of its geographical position, just like Georgia is. No more NATO aspiration, no more golden toilets but fighting corruption and moving towards EU membership.
lol, they've been using very little heavy armour cause of the drones, while their production is increasing. They have plenty of vehicles, but it is currently suicide to use them en masse.
Meanwhile, during Dacian Fall 2025, NATO is pretending drones do not exist
So they are able to advance faster these days without much vehicles available to them then compared to two years ago when they `still` (according to people like you) had `enough`?
Sure thing you could say that the Ukrainian army was more numerous back then (two years ago) as well but it is using much more drones now (main tool for inflicting losses on the Russians)
So no, it has nothing to do with the number of vehicles the Russians have (not saying they haven`t suffered a lot in this regard though), they don`t mean much when drones represent constant threat, hence the dynamics have to do with inability to use massive assaults because of drone threat.
And you should have figured this out long time ago as someone who is an `expert`...
Also, I would like to address your claim regarding Russia`s losses at Pokrovsk alone - good Lord, 200.000 casualties?
I think that even the most biased Western media doesn`t made such bold claims...
I would really like to know where you come with this figure, based on what?
According to Western estimates Russia fielded some 40.000 troops there (sounds plausible to me) which means they had to replenish their army five times by now???
Now check this out:
``The DeepState analytical project has published data on Russian losses in the settlements of Bilohorivka, Chasiv Yar and Toretsk in Donetsk Oblast between April 2024 and February 2025. The total number of Russian losses has exceeded 20,000 military personnel, including 7,500 killed.``
While these battles ended a few months after, we can estimate that Russian losses in these places combined amount to +-30.000 troops.
And we know how much the Russians have struggled to take these places.
At Pokrovsk however, things were going a bit smoother I`d say, so there is simply no way that the Russians lost much more (if at all) than in Toretsk, Chasiv Yar and Bilohorovka... let alone 200.000 troops.
Sorry for long comment but I wanted to try to clarify few things.
Rusia will have the entire Ukraine on a platter if UAF colapses. So the Russians fight many small actions instead of one big one. UAF is already spread thin, the logistics is a nightmare and recruitment is in shambles.
Current situation is result of the whole period starting from collapse of USSR and independence of Ukraine. For example, look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Air_Force : "...In 1993, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) estimated that the PSZSU had 171,000 personnel with 900 combat capable aircraft plus 440 in storage; 87 reconnaissance, 47 electronic countermeasure, 274 transport, 560 training fixed-wing aircraft, and 142 helicopters...."
Shifting to a historical perspective (perhaps a small escape from the depressing current reality) -- this: ". . . sustained industrial-manpower pipeline that could support long-duration positional warfare.. . . " Sounds a bit to me like the Soviet approach to fighting the Germans -- looking at the entire war effort as some kind of gigantic, unitary industrial process, engineered from beginning to end. Despite vastly inferior military leadership (at first, then only somewhat inferior), they ground the Germans down relentlessly month by month by delivering an unending supply of manpower and materiel, all of it specifically designed to be expendable, and to be expended. Never wavering even when taking horrendous casualties. Therefore, no NCO's developed by years and years of training; rather a much larger officer corps, with manuals for everything. Germans kill one lieutenant (or 10,000 lieutenants) and the Soviets just send another (or 10,000 more) with all his manuals and the fight goes on. Standardization, constant dissemination of learning through the whole force, mass production of everything on Henry Ford principles. Vs. faith in Übermenschen heroics and hand-built superior equipment and knock-out blows.
Does the Russian war effort in Ukraine look kind of -- Soviet? Is there that much institutional memory?
I think Tom has been saying that UA is incorrectly applying non-Soviet doctrine in some aspects of the war.
But I'm not talking about military doctrine so much as the overarching approach to warfare. Tom said that UA failed to produce a: ". . . sustained industrial-manpower pipeline that could support long-duration positional warfare.. . . " which triggered my thought -- that was the Soviet principle in WWII, wasn't it?
Yesno. UA side sincerely tried and indeed succeeded in some apects, like launching FPVs production at dozens if not hundreds small factories. Other somewhat weird example is recruiting system. They catch hundreds of people on the street to get them to army. Cruel but still kind of decision if you wage a total war. Still UA was late to bring criminals from prisons to war. They sent first 10 k to the frontline (a classical Soviet trick) just a year ago, legging behind 2 years from Russia.
However, generally speaking, it's always economy of scale. Not enough population.
You're right, of course, about scale and size. That was always going to be an uphill battle for UA.
But building dozens of different types of drones in hundreds of small factories -- that's not the Soviet way. The Soviet way was to standardize to just a very few types, perfect them, produce them in massive numbers. Look at Soviet tank production vs. German.
The mobilization problem was possibly unsolveable from the moment it became clear that the war wouldn't be over quickly. That's not a Soviet vs. NATO style question, I think. That's pure demographics, exacerbated by mis-managing the process as Tom points out.
I've done a pretty deep study of it. I don't idealise anything -- of course there were all kinds of problems and mistakes. The T-34 had massive problems the first years, for example. But RELATIVELY SPEAKING, that's what they did -- standardization, systematic learning, massive production, very different from the German approach, and this was a big part of how they overwhelmed the Germans. Ironically, there is a huge amount of American technology and production philosophy inside that, brought via American consultants in the 1930's employed as part of the five year plans. There should be a statue to Henry Ford on Red Square.
Lend-Lease also helped A LOT, allowing them to specialise and concentrate production.
Europeans are so afraid to use Russians`s money, that the USA plan is to give most of them back and we pay even more to fill the jar :D
And in the end after max 10 years we will have big war, where the "happy Russia is not an enemy" society will understand how cool is to be under Russian rule. I wonder what super smart according to most people Orban will say then.
I wonder after the war how they are going to explain the defeat, after hundreds and hundreds of posts prasing the AFU and its leadership and portraying the Russians as completly incompetent in all levels, and "Brainless orcs with shovels".
Probably the same way the Germans explains the defeat against the Soviet union, not due to incompetence but "They just had the numbers"
Ha-ha. I would go further with questions. What was the use of Maidan? To change crooks of Yanukovich to the crooks of Zele at the expense of Crimea, Donbass and countless lost lives?
Because the war is not going to end in such catastrophic collapse. It will be a negotiated end where both sides and their supporters can claim victory, and for years to come the narrative battle will slog on people arguing actually my side won - when in practice, both Ukraine and russia suffered vast losses, will never be able to go back to pre-war state and are put on a path of terminal decline due to demographic decline.
Many problems will come to light, western media will no doubt focus greatly on russia's -mind you, very real - issues, most which continue to persist or worsen after the war, like over-reliance on fossil exports.
Probably both countries will get a temporary rebound due to demobilisation's natural effect of bringing home lot of working hands who want to spend money and enjoy life, and Ukraine will get at least a lukewarm reconstruction wave from the EU and US that will give them an x years of better outlook.
Not at all -- It simply won't be called a defeat. That's the answer to your question. It will be called a "heroic defense of Ukrainian statehood, which against all odds and through heroism and incredible feats of arms preserved the nation and prevented the evil Russians from wiping Ukraine off the face of the earth."
If you want to know how that will be done, just look at how the Winter War is viewed today. The Finns, objectively speaking, lost the Winter War, which was the only possible outcome given the disparity in forces. They signed up to dictated terms with no negotiation and gave the Soviets everything they asked for, which was a lot more than what the Soviets had demanded before the war.
Yet today I guarantee you that 99.999% of all Finnish people consider the Winter War to have been a glorious Finnish victory. And, that's not COMPLETELY wrong -- the defense was really heroic, "sisu" and all that, and Finland prospered as a neutral state which had lost 11% of its territory including its second city, and had to coordinate its foreign policy with the Soviets for decades. To frame it as a "victory" all you have to do is postulate (without evidence) that the Soviets really wanted to entirely conquer Finland, and they failed in that, therefore Finnish victory.
The EXACT SAME THING will be done with the Ukraine War. And that's fine. That will help the Ukrainians recover psychologically.
"Trump reposted comments from a Washington Examiner article about the video that called for the lawmakers to be arrested, “thrown out of their offices,” “frog marched out of their homes at 3:00 AM with FOX News cameras filming the whole thing,” and “charged with sedition.” He reposted “Insurrection. TREASON!” and a message from a user who wrote: “HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD !!”
At 9:08 this morning, Trump posted, “It’s called SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL. Their words cannot be allowed to stand—We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET. President DJT”
At 9:17 he reposted the Washington Examiner article with the note: “This is really bad, and Dangerous to our Country. Their words cannot be allowed to stand. SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP??? President DJT”
At 10:21 he posted: “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”
And so an American president called for the arrest and execution of elected lawmakers. "
Yeah, typical Trump "dangerous" nonsense. The really awful thing is that post-Trump (i.e., if there is a "post" to it) the Democratic Party isn't much to brag about either.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Above is a Quote, not opinion about Trump’s statements .
If he does not care about constitution or law, or guarantees given to Ukraine in 1994, why would any gurrantees given now in “peace plan” be anything but worthless?
Tom, what is missing is the starting point. Not sure that anyone else could have done much better in Zele or Yermak situation. Ukraine was not producing much (or rather close to zero) of any of the systems or ammo you mentioned. It never had the population to field a big infantry to withstand Russia with the level of equipment it has, etc…. It never had the guns or the ammo to be even close to Russian expenditures. Easy - to say arrange production - under intense air raids…
'They' didn't do anything at all right. The least of all have they prepared the country and the ZSU for the inevitable, and, since around 19 February 2022, I do not recall them making even one decision that's making sense. (OK... with exception of dispatching a battalion of the 80th to Voznesensk, on 28 February).
It's not 'easy' to say 'arrange production' but then: I didn't wake up some morning and said to myself, 'hey, how about running as candidate for position XY?'
Hello, Tom, thank you for the assessment. ultimate loss of capability to continue resisting - what does it mean exactly on the ground? What will be the fate of Zaporizhia Kharkov and Dnipro, and how far the citizens should plan their evacuation? Thabk you.
As explained to a very similar question above: one of points with my research and resulting posts on this blog is that I'm forced to constantly update my assessments. There's no other way to remain 'current'.
Correspondingly, and in reaction to the feature Evacuation, Retreat, Withdrawal... Defeat (https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/evacuation-retreat-withdrawal-defeat) I've got to hear that the Zele regime has given up on Ukraine 'roughly east' of the line Kharkiv - Dnipro - Zaporizhzhya - Kherson. That they're ready to (or even already in the process of) abandon the same.
Now, whether, 'even if', the ZSU could hold out that line... meanwhile, I doubt that. Of course, the Russians would experience even more massive problems while trying to assault such huge cities like Kharkiv, Dnipro or Zaporizhzhya (it cost them something like 200,000 casualties to take Pokrovsk). However, one must keep in mind the constant degeneration of the ZSU: already right now, this couldn't offer the same 'quality' of resistance like it did during the Battle of Pokrovsk, the last 14 months.
Considering the Russians are proving capable of maintaining pressure, regardless of their massive losses, while that quasi-leadership in Kyiv is proving entirely unable to learn from own mistakes, and staunchly advice-resistant, this is leading to the conclusion that the Russians would find it opportune to continue advancing 'west' of that line.
What happens beyond that point: no idea. Sorry, got no crystal ball: can only assess on basis of available info.
You are expecting too much from a very young, divided and corrupt country run by a comedian and an assortment of media people and ultra nationalists.
That said, they have done incredibly well considering the enemy and Ukrainian economic and military limitations.
Hell, the French can't even get a single mechanised brigade from here to there cause they have to relearn logistics, ie. how to load a tank onto a train.
Currently, the two best European armies are Russian and Ukrainian.
Western soy boy/girl leaders would disintegrate if they were submitted to the same kinds of pressures as Ukrainian ones.
You are too harsh IMO. Even running a football team is very hard, let alone running the second largest country in Europe while being attacked by a million+ army, under constant barrage of missiles and drones, with insufficient resources and under pressure from within and without. Yes the lot of them are corrupt but so are the European bureaucrats. They didn't have to fight. They could have folded like the French, Zelensky could have fled to the West and enjoy his money, but they didn't flee.
Then they should act correspondingly - and not build Luftschlösser and (literally) stage combat operations for attracting more followers and likes in the social media.
That's serious: I do not recall a single decision of theirs that would have made any kind of sense. Even the September 2022 counteroffensive in Kharkiv was an accident. Literally.
Sounds like we are doomed. Not sure about the time frame. But it sounds like there is no way out of this.
Considering the political/coruption processes inside the country, people won't go out to change the top. People just blab but it is not enough critical mass to push people to the street and make another maidan. Okay, some moneys were stolen. But who cares about that much? People write blogs, articles with outrages and big words. But no action.
People on top will not fire themselves by definition. If the "top" is stupid/dumb and do not realize that ZSU is going to crash soon, they will continue this war/corruption on the blood for sure.
Damn... Totally trapped. What is the best action for a simple citizen living here? I have no idea. This is so apocalyptical. ZSU cannot sustain this kind of mis-management anymore. People inside know this and call for action. Nobody listens on the top. They are busy doing their own personal war.
What's worse: almost the entire EU is paralysed by exactly the same levels of political corruption and utmost incompetence.
Our politicians are so incompetent, they're still acting like if the Russian invasion of Ukraine is requiring some sort of negotiations about Dumpf's tariffs. Like if they have all the time of the World. There's absolutely no leadership, no vision, and there are absolutely no solutions. On the contrary: emphasis is on staging, scamming, ignoring reality, and lying at every opportunity.
The total result is likely to become comparable to the downfall of ancient Greece, or the (Western) Roman Empire: both went down due to degeneration to the level where they became unable to reform.
"Staging, scamming . . . " -- is it the degradation of consciousness, to a social media level? All appearance, likes, etc.? As if a war can be won with social media likes?
How did you like Kaja Kallas' "two-point plan"? Is this really the EU's level of strategic thinking?
It's since longer I've ceased listening to all the talking-heads in Brüssel. It's entirely pointless.
Tom, if your prediction turns out to be accurate and in 4–10 months the AFU will no longer be able to fight, does that mean that Russian forces will be near Kyiv and that major cities like Kharkiv, Poltava, Sumy, and Chernihiv will be occupied? You wrote in a previous article about how the situation might develop over two years if nothing changes. But in that prediction, Russian troops were expected to advance only about 100 km from the current line of contact. If Ukraine ceases to exist, then what happens next? Will the Russians simply stop, or in 2–3 years will they use Ukrainians to go after the Baltic states?
One of points with my research and resulting posts on this blog is that I'm forced to constantly update my assessments. There's no other way to remain 'current'.
Correspondingly, and in reaction to the feature Evacuation, Retreat, Withdrawal... Defeat (https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/evacuation-retreat-withdrawal-defeat) I've got to hear that the Zele regime has given up on Ukraine 'roughly east' of the line Kharkiv - Dnipro - Zaporizhzhya - Kherson. That they're ready to (or even already in the process of) abandon the same.
Now, whether, 'even if', the ZSU could hold out that line... meanwhile, I doubt that. Of course, the Russians would experience even more massive problems while trying to assault such huge cities like Kharkiv, Dnipro or Zaporizhzhya (it cost them something like 200,000 casualties to take Pokrovsk). However, one must keep in mind the constant degeneration of the ZSU: already right now, this couldn't offer the same 'quality' of resistance like it did during the Battle of Pokrovsk, the last 14 months.
Considering the Russians are proving capable of maintaining pressure, regardless of their massive losses, while that quasi-leadership in Kyiv is proving entirely unable to learn from own mistakes, and staunchly advice-resistant, this is leading to the conclusion that the Russians would find it opportune to continue advancing 'west' of that line.
What happens beyond that point: no idea. Sorry, got no crystal ball: can only assess on basis of available info.
The problem is the people in EU - voters - are voting for that. They do not want any reforms, no change, just comfortable lives. And many of them even refuses even such mild reforms proposed by e.g. Macron or Merz and vote for pro-Russian ass*les paties like AfD or RN which would not only to reform nothing, but increase corrupition 10 folds.
You can find some ideal politician who would propose needed reforms and plans. But such poor person would fail miserably in any EU election. USA is same story. Do not blame politicians, blame people. That's how empires fall. When citizens do not have a will to reform.
Oh, it's even worse.
The voters in the EU do want comfortable lives. However, they also understand that 'something's wrong' with the system.
And still: they continue re-electing the same gangs of incompetent and corrupt idiots - while expecting entirely different results. 🙄
Nope, many know what are they voting for. They are voting against any change, they are voting for own comfortability. What they expect is only more comfortability and are unhappy if they do not get it.
There are a lots of such, too.
People aged >60 hope the system lasts longer than they do. And people >60 always vote!
Ridiculously why EU even allow ruzz financed ass*les mendacious paties to participate in EU elections with clear aim to seize power with help of propaganda?
Why do you blame people if they trust pro-ruzzian power angry fabulists? They just choose what is better declared regardlles of realism of accomplishment of such declarations.
Will you also blame the same way terminally ill patients who trust scummers to cure their illness with their fabulous medicine but won't blame government regulatory who allowed scammers to enter the market to rob the people?
sorry Tom but you seem out of breath when it comes to the historical comparison, even saying ancient Greece (which?) ever fall is a seriously problematic statement (the avg citizen of Athens was feeling fine until... Ottoman occupation, and even then...), and the fall of Rome (the Western half, of course) is lot more complex than "leadership degeneration".
It also seems odd that he doesn't explain the reason behind "leadership degeneration". As if out of thin air the whole continent went completely mad. He did share some leftish points (like tax the rich, kick the oligarchs, etc.), but he doesn't fully elaborate on his politics.
But I'd like to know - is it better somewhere? Maybe in Asia? Maybe in Australia or New Zealand? Was it better in Europe and USA 30 years ago? 50? When did 'degeneracy' start? How did it spread? Is there a cure at least in theory?
Just see the reaction to the words of the new French Chief of the General Staff...what a shocker,wars require sacrifice,willpower and you have to be prepared to lose people.
"What is the best action for a simple citizen living here?"
Get the war over before the outcome becomes even worse. Stop it by all means. Take this to heart: https://strana.news/ukr/news/495226-vid-choho-zalezhit-vidpovid-kijeva-na-novij-mirnij-plan-ssha.html The word "capitulation" is thrown around, with unrealistic moral outrage. Don't be deceived. If you want to know what a REAL capitulation is, then just let this war continue for another 6 to 9 months.
Get your country into the EU by all means. Tom says right things about the decline of the EU, but it's UA's best hope. Those institutions, for all their flaws will really help reconstruct internal political processes. Investment will pour in, once you are in the EU. It's kind of unbelievable to me that Putin appears to still be OK with EU membership for UA. Take that deal while it's still available.
Yup, but: there is simply nothing in Ukraine to integrate.
...except one regime of ultimate incompetence caused by endemic corruption is horny about assimilating another regime of ultimate incompetence caused by endemic corruption.
I mean: if it has to be that way, then call the spade a spade. The EU-oligarchy 'must' bring the Ukrainian oligarchy under its control, because it thinks that's going to result in profit.
Beg your pardon, but: if this would really be the case, then it would've happened long ago. Like it happened with Romania, Bulgaria and Cyprus, just for example.
However, somehow, it appears the EU-oligarchy is not interested in doing that. Considering that conclusion, the question is: why?
The only answer coming to my mind is the refusal to reform: the EU-oligarchy is afraid that bringing in the population of 40 million people who tend to go out to streets and protests if they find something unfair, is not a good idea.
Ironically, precisely that's what both of these two oligarchic systems have in common.
You are not doomed. The war will end and you will get on with your lives.
If this 'peace plan' is implemented, Putin has little to no obstacles if he decides to launch another invasion. Sanctions maybe re-imposed and new Western weapons will be sent via new lend-lease, which didn't stop Russia before and wouldn't stop it in the future.
There were no obstacles for Russia to take over Georgia in 2008 but they didn't.
They beat the Georgian army, told them in no uncertain terms that NATO membership is out of the question and withdrew. Georgia has been in peace the last 17 years although Russia can invade them at any time. Georgia is no longer a threat so Russia prefers economic cooperation rather than conflict.
Russia is scared shitless of NATO expansion. They don't care too much about Poland or Finland, but they are determined to prevent Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan etc from joining. Every time a missile hits a russian refinery or flies towards Moscow, they are more determined to push any threat as much from their borders as possible. Ukraine can be a very prosperous country but it must be mindful of its geographical position, just like Georgia is. No more NATO aspiration, no more golden toilets but fighting corruption and moving towards EU membership.
Who told you people on top in UA are stupid/dumb, but not intentionally treacherous in enemy's favor?
why is russia not advancing much faster into Ukraine?
It is, actually, accelerating its advance.
The only problem is that its losses are so heavy, that it's left without vehicles enabling it to move faster.
lol, they've been using very little heavy armour cause of the drones, while their production is increasing. They have plenty of vehicles, but it is currently suicide to use them en masse.
Meanwhile, during Dacian Fall 2025, NATO is pretending drones do not exist
https://youtu.be/8DqbsUGT7TA?t=56
So they are able to advance faster these days without much vehicles available to them then compared to two years ago when they `still` (according to people like you) had `enough`?
Sure thing you could say that the Ukrainian army was more numerous back then (two years ago) as well but it is using much more drones now (main tool for inflicting losses on the Russians)
So no, it has nothing to do with the number of vehicles the Russians have (not saying they haven`t suffered a lot in this regard though), they don`t mean much when drones represent constant threat, hence the dynamics have to do with inability to use massive assaults because of drone threat.
And you should have figured this out long time ago as someone who is an `expert`...
Also, I would like to address your claim regarding Russia`s losses at Pokrovsk alone - good Lord, 200.000 casualties?
I think that even the most biased Western media doesn`t made such bold claims...
I would really like to know where you come with this figure, based on what?
According to Western estimates Russia fielded some 40.000 troops there (sounds plausible to me) which means they had to replenish their army five times by now???
Now check this out:
``The DeepState analytical project has published data on Russian losses in the settlements of Bilohorivka, Chasiv Yar and Toretsk in Donetsk Oblast between April 2024 and February 2025. The total number of Russian losses has exceeded 20,000 military personnel, including 7,500 killed.``
While these battles ended a few months after, we can estimate that Russian losses in these places combined amount to +-30.000 troops.
And we know how much the Russians have struggled to take these places.
At Pokrovsk however, things were going a bit smoother I`d say, so there is simply no way that the Russians lost much more (if at all) than in Toretsk, Chasiv Yar and Bilohorovka... let alone 200.000 troops.
Sorry for long comment but I wanted to try to clarify few things.
They prefer to destroy the Ukrainian Army.
Rusia will have the entire Ukraine on a platter if UAF colapses. So the Russians fight many small actions instead of one big one. UAF is already spread thin, the logistics is a nightmare and recruitment is in shambles.
Current situation is result of the whole period starting from collapse of USSR and independence of Ukraine. For example, look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Air_Force : "...In 1993, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) estimated that the PSZSU had 171,000 personnel with 900 combat capable aircraft plus 440 in storage; 87 reconnaissance, 47 electronic countermeasure, 274 transport, 560 training fixed-wing aircraft, and 142 helicopters...."
Sobering but necessary.
Shifting to a historical perspective (perhaps a small escape from the depressing current reality) -- this: ". . . sustained industrial-manpower pipeline that could support long-duration positional warfare.. . . " Sounds a bit to me like the Soviet approach to fighting the Germans -- looking at the entire war effort as some kind of gigantic, unitary industrial process, engineered from beginning to end. Despite vastly inferior military leadership (at first, then only somewhat inferior), they ground the Germans down relentlessly month by month by delivering an unending supply of manpower and materiel, all of it specifically designed to be expendable, and to be expended. Never wavering even when taking horrendous casualties. Therefore, no NCO's developed by years and years of training; rather a much larger officer corps, with manuals for everything. Germans kill one lieutenant (or 10,000 lieutenants) and the Soviets just send another (or 10,000 more) with all his manuals and the fight goes on. Standardization, constant dissemination of learning through the whole force, mass production of everything on Henry Ford principles. Vs. faith in Übermenschen heroics and hand-built superior equipment and knock-out blows.
Does the Russian war effort in Ukraine look kind of -- Soviet? Is there that much institutional memory?
Both sides wage Soviet style war. Have no illusions.
I think Tom has been saying that UA is incorrectly applying non-Soviet doctrine in some aspects of the war.
But I'm not talking about military doctrine so much as the overarching approach to warfare. Tom said that UA failed to produce a: ". . . sustained industrial-manpower pipeline that could support long-duration positional warfare.. . . " which triggered my thought -- that was the Soviet principle in WWII, wasn't it?
Yesno. UA side sincerely tried and indeed succeeded in some apects, like launching FPVs production at dozens if not hundreds small factories. Other somewhat weird example is recruiting system. They catch hundreds of people on the street to get them to army. Cruel but still kind of decision if you wage a total war. Still UA was late to bring criminals from prisons to war. They sent first 10 k to the frontline (a classical Soviet trick) just a year ago, legging behind 2 years from Russia.
However, generally speaking, it's always economy of scale. Not enough population.
You're right, of course, about scale and size. That was always going to be an uphill battle for UA.
But building dozens of different types of drones in hundreds of small factories -- that's not the Soviet way. The Soviet way was to standardize to just a very few types, perfect them, produce them in massive numbers. Look at Soviet tank production vs. German.
The mobilization problem was possibly unsolveable from the moment it became clear that the war wouldn't be over quickly. That's not a Soviet vs. NATO style question, I think. That's pure demographics, exacerbated by mis-managing the process as Tom points out.
"The Soviet way was to standardize to just a very few types, perfect them, produce them in massive numbers."
Do not idealise Soviet WW2 standartisation. There were too many doubling systems introduced, especially aircraft-wise.
I've done a pretty deep study of it. I don't idealise anything -- of course there were all kinds of problems and mistakes. The T-34 had massive problems the first years, for example. But RELATIVELY SPEAKING, that's what they did -- standardization, systematic learning, massive production, very different from the German approach, and this was a big part of how they overwhelmed the Germans. Ironically, there is a huge amount of American technology and production philosophy inside that, brought via American consultants in the 1930's employed as part of the five year plans. There should be a statue to Henry Ford on Red Square.
Lend-Lease also helped A LOT, allowing them to specialise and concentrate production.
Europeans are so afraid to use Russians`s money, that the USA plan is to give most of them back and we pay even more to fill the jar :D
And in the end after max 10 years we will have big war, where the "happy Russia is not an enemy" society will understand how cool is to be under Russian rule. I wonder what super smart according to most people Orban will say then.
Scary but very likely.
Dear Tom .
In addition some new interviews from director of Come Back Alive found .
I suppose with subtitles You could understand all information
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nfUNqsB2ss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9ABnBsB5Qg&pp=ygUF0YPRgjI%3D
There are a lot of in total but it confirms your analysis.
We are walking at full speed towards the oncoming train.
I wonder after the war how they are going to explain the defeat, after hundreds and hundreds of posts prasing the AFU and its leadership and portraying the Russians as completly incompetent in all levels, and "Brainless orcs with shovels".
Probably the same way the Germans explains the defeat against the Soviet union, not due to incompetence but "They just had the numbers"
Ha-ha. I would go further with questions. What was the use of Maidan? To change crooks of Yanukovich to the crooks of Zele at the expense of Crimea, Donbass and countless lost lives?
What was the use of French Revolt then? To change Bourbon empire with Napoleon empire?
Witty try, Vadim. Problem is that Zele has only Napoleon complex without any added value.
We are on the same page regarding that one.
Because the war is not going to end in such catastrophic collapse. It will be a negotiated end where both sides and their supporters can claim victory, and for years to come the narrative battle will slog on people arguing actually my side won - when in practice, both Ukraine and russia suffered vast losses, will never be able to go back to pre-war state and are put on a path of terminal decline due to demographic decline.
Many problems will come to light, western media will no doubt focus greatly on russia's -mind you, very real - issues, most which continue to persist or worsen after the war, like over-reliance on fossil exports.
Probably both countries will get a temporary rebound due to demobilisation's natural effect of bringing home lot of working hands who want to spend money and enjoy life, and Ukraine will get at least a lukewarm reconstruction wave from the EU and US that will give them an x years of better outlook.
But ultimately, the decline can't be stopped.
Not at all -- It simply won't be called a defeat. That's the answer to your question. It will be called a "heroic defense of Ukrainian statehood, which against all odds and through heroism and incredible feats of arms preserved the nation and prevented the evil Russians from wiping Ukraine off the face of the earth."
If you want to know how that will be done, just look at how the Winter War is viewed today. The Finns, objectively speaking, lost the Winter War, which was the only possible outcome given the disparity in forces. They signed up to dictated terms with no negotiation and gave the Soviets everything they asked for, which was a lot more than what the Soviets had demanded before the war.
Yet today I guarantee you that 99.999% of all Finnish people consider the Winter War to have been a glorious Finnish victory. And, that's not COMPLETELY wrong -- the defense was really heroic, "sisu" and all that, and Finland prospered as a neutral state which had lost 11% of its territory including its second city, and had to coordinate its foreign policy with the Soviets for decades. To frame it as a "victory" all you have to do is postulate (without evidence) that the Soviets really wanted to entirely conquer Finland, and they failed in that, therefore Finnish victory.
The EXACT SAME THING will be done with the Ukraine War. And that's fine. That will help the Ukrainians recover psychologically.
They have multiple stories of “Stab in the back” to fill an entire history book:
- UȘ or Trump betrayed them
-EU haș tricked them
-Donbas vatnik babushkas have chatted with the Russians
- China perfidy
- Africans have welcomed Wagnerites
- Muslims are bad
How depressing.
It's a nightmare, but it's true.
jesus... al those casualties ..in wain?
If they agree with only 50% of Dumpf's plan - yes. Entirely in vain.
and it can get even worse...
Anne appelbaum today:
"Trump reposted comments from a Washington Examiner article about the video that called for the lawmakers to be arrested, “thrown out of their offices,” “frog marched out of their homes at 3:00 AM with FOX News cameras filming the whole thing,” and “charged with sedition.” He reposted “Insurrection. TREASON!” and a message from a user who wrote: “HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD !!”
At 9:08 this morning, Trump posted, “It’s called SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL. Their words cannot be allowed to stand—We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET. President DJT”
At 9:17 he reposted the Washington Examiner article with the note: “This is really bad, and Dangerous to our Country. Their words cannot be allowed to stand. SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP??? President DJT”
At 10:21 he posted: “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”
And so an American president called for the arrest and execution of elected lawmakers. "
...'but', 'the West' is 'not degenerating'...
Yeah, typical Trump "dangerous" nonsense. The really awful thing is that post-Trump (i.e., if there is a "post" to it) the Democratic Party isn't much to brag about either.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Above is a Quote, not opinion about Trump’s statements .
If he does not care about constitution or law, or guarantees given to Ukraine in 1994, why would any gurrantees given now in “peace plan” be anything but worthless?
Tom, what is missing is the starting point. Not sure that anyone else could have done much better in Zele or Yermak situation. Ukraine was not producing much (or rather close to zero) of any of the systems or ammo you mentioned. It never had the population to field a big infantry to withstand Russia with the level of equipment it has, etc…. It never had the guns or the ammo to be even close to Russian expenditures. Easy - to say arrange production - under intense air raids…
'They' didn't do anything at all right. The least of all have they prepared the country and the ZSU for the inevitable, and, since around 19 February 2022, I do not recall them making even one decision that's making sense. (OK... with exception of dispatching a battalion of the 80th to Voznesensk, on 28 February).
It's not 'easy' to say 'arrange production' but then: I didn't wake up some morning and said to myself, 'hey, how about running as candidate for position XY?'
There's a reason why you didn't run as candidate for position XY
Yes, there is: I am having no illusions of grandeur.
For example 😉
Hello, Tom, thank you for the assessment. ultimate loss of capability to continue resisting - what does it mean exactly on the ground? What will be the fate of Zaporizhia Kharkov and Dnipro, and how far the citizens should plan their evacuation? Thabk you.
As explained to a very similar question above: one of points with my research and resulting posts on this blog is that I'm forced to constantly update my assessments. There's no other way to remain 'current'.
Correspondingly, and in reaction to the feature Evacuation, Retreat, Withdrawal... Defeat (https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/evacuation-retreat-withdrawal-defeat) I've got to hear that the Zele regime has given up on Ukraine 'roughly east' of the line Kharkiv - Dnipro - Zaporizhzhya - Kherson. That they're ready to (or even already in the process of) abandon the same.
Now, whether, 'even if', the ZSU could hold out that line... meanwhile, I doubt that. Of course, the Russians would experience even more massive problems while trying to assault such huge cities like Kharkiv, Dnipro or Zaporizhzhya (it cost them something like 200,000 casualties to take Pokrovsk). However, one must keep in mind the constant degeneration of the ZSU: already right now, this couldn't offer the same 'quality' of resistance like it did during the Battle of Pokrovsk, the last 14 months.
Considering the Russians are proving capable of maintaining pressure, regardless of their massive losses, while that quasi-leadership in Kyiv is proving entirely unable to learn from own mistakes, and staunchly advice-resistant, this is leading to the conclusion that the Russians would find it opportune to continue advancing 'west' of that line.
What happens beyond that point: no idea. Sorry, got no crystal ball: can only assess on basis of available info.
Yes, maybe Im slow but still need help clarifying what is meant by the capability of continuing resisting
When they cease resisting, then its game over: no more organised resistance by the ZSU.
Thank you
You are expecting too much from a very young, divided and corrupt country run by a comedian and an assortment of media people and ultra nationalists.
That said, they have done incredibly well considering the enemy and Ukrainian economic and military limitations.
Hell, the French can't even get a single mechanised brigade from here to there cause they have to relearn logistics, ie. how to load a tank onto a train.
Currently, the two best European armies are Russian and Ukrainian.
Western soy boy/girl leaders would disintegrate if they were submitted to the same kinds of pressures as Ukrainian ones.
'They' - didn't do anything right. Not one thing since at least 19 February 2022 (if not much earlier).
The 'troops' on the front is who have done incredibly well - tragically: at a terrible price for them.
You are too harsh IMO. Even running a football team is very hard, let alone running the second largest country in Europe while being attacked by a million+ army, under constant barrage of missiles and drones, with insufficient resources and under pressure from within and without. Yes the lot of them are corrupt but so are the European bureaucrats. They didn't have to fight. They could have folded like the French, Zelensky could have fled to the West and enjoy his money, but they didn't flee.
Yes. Hearing that since the Wagner's first break-through at Popasna, back in April 2022.
They are simply fighting a much stronger opponent.
Then they should act correspondingly - and not build Luftschlösser and (literally) stage combat operations for attracting more followers and likes in the social media.
The battlespace is bigger than the Zero Line. Likes matter. It's the world we live in.
I find it surprising that the likes of Klitschko are not beating the drum louder for change.
Klitschko coming out of top is the nightmare scenario worse than anything in the 28 points plan.
Klitschko is the same corrupt as Zele with Yermak, just less amounts
A depressing analysis. Given that Russia is not at the Golden Gate yet, what is your assessment of what the Zelenskyy government has done right?
The spirit of the question being “do more of what works and less of what doesn’t work”. Thanks.
Zele regime: nothing.
That's serious: I do not recall a single decision of theirs that would have made any kind of sense. Even the September 2022 counteroffensive in Kharkiv was an accident. Literally.