Thousands Of Young Ukrainian Men Trying To Flee The Country To Avoid Conscription And The War

originally posted by: Consvoli

If you believe that everyone can fight or is willing to fight then you made a huge mistake. There are 45 million people but how many of them are not children or elders? How many young men are willing to fight? If SkyNews UK says gives a picture of desperation among young Ukrainian men then imagine what is really happening. SkyNews is a mainstream media.

I'm not here to debate your BS, you say 1000s do not want to fight and there are at least 22 million males, so we can say 18 million or so could fight. You are trying to make something that is nothing.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Consvoli

If you believe that everyone can fight or is willing to fight then you made a huge mistake. There are 45 million people but how many of them are not children or elders? How many young men are willing to fight? If SkyNews UK says gives a picture of desperation among young Ukrainian men then imagine what is really happening. SkyNews is a mainstream media.

I'm not here to debate your BS, you say 1000s do not want to fight and there are at least 22 million males, so we can say 18 million or so could fight. You are trying to make something that is nothing.

I am not.

The news is a blow to the propaganda that has been pushed in the western societies for so long unless you are reading news from all over the world and you can speak a few languages.

The clip I linked talked about how desperate thousands of soldiers are and how the moral of the soldiers has disappeared since the start of the war. That's the British reporters covering the story and not me. At the same time in the clip you will come across more talking on the number of young men who are fleeing the country not to fight against Russia and the realisation by the reporter that if the situation continues this way there would be noy many left to fight for Ukraine. That's in the clip.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Consvoli

So much talk about him being a useful idiot who instead of asking for peace negotiations he is asking for more weapons and money! After so many loses on both sides and after so many dead Ukrainians and many more who don't want to fight any longer with a large part of his country now occupied (probably forever).

So, if Mexico invades America and we hit 100,000 Americans dead would we make a deal and just give them 30% of the country? Once again, the evil side doing the killing and sending 1 million to their death could end this tomorrow.

But you know it is all Zelensky fault....geez

lol, if the United States invaded Canada, do you think Canada would have a chance, militarily?

Ukraine never stood a chance against Russia, it has no weapons, no air support, no shells, no navy.

originally posted by: ghandalf

Ukraine never stood a chance against Russia, it has no weapons, no air support, no shells, no navy.

Great, so what you are suggesting is we make Canada our 51 states then move on to Mexico. That is what Russia thinks...

a reply to: ghandalf

For a country with no weapons and no Navy they seem to have taken out quite a fair bit of Russia's Black Sea fleet, including their flagship.

It looks like the Ukraine is heading for defeat as described in the OP

Here is a very good article by politico. Worth reading

www.politico.eu...

Ukraine is heading for defeat
The West's failure to send weapons to Kyiv is helping Putin win his war

Morale among troops is grim, ground down by relentless bombardment, a lack of advanced weapons, and losses on the battlefield. In cities hundreds of miles away from the front, the crowds of young men who lined up to join the army in the war’s early months have disappeared. Nowadays, eligible would-be recruits dodge the draft and spend their afternoons in nightclubs instead. Many have left the country altogether.

As I discovered while reporting from Ukraine over the past month, the picture that emerged from dozens of interviews with political leaders, military officers, and ordinary citizens was one of a country slipping towards disaster.

a reply to: Xtrozero

It's better if you make comments that are realistic rather than arguing there are 22 millions of Ukrainian males who can serve the army with no training whatsoever and then get killed or injured in the battlefields.

For a long time now we know the war isn't going well for Ukraine despite whatever claims were made in the western media.

The best possible solution is the end of the war and negotiations which may result in Ukraine getting something back in terms of territory but most importantly it will prevent the death of many soldiers and civilians on both sides.

You may want to appreciate why many young soldiers refuse to serve the army and they have her trying to escape to nearby counties.

www.bbc.com...

Ukraine could face defeat in 2024. Here's how that might look

The former commander of the UK's Joint Forces Command has warned that Ukraine could face defeat by Russia in 2024.

General Sir Richard Barrons has told the BBC there is "a serious risk" of Ukraine losing the war this year

This war was a great mistake and it should have never happened.

Sering posters arguing it should continue it's just madness when there are so many people killed on both sides and when Ukraine is heading for a defeat. On the top of this many Ukrainian young males not only refuse to serve the army but they are trying to find ways to escape the country for obvious reasons.

originally posted by: Versioq

For a long time now we know the war isn't going well for Ukraine despite whatever claims were made in the western media.

It is not going well for either side. My point with 22 million is they can have a million when they need it.

The best possible solution is the end of the war and negotiations which may result in Ukraine getting something back in terms of territory but most importantly it will prevent the death of many soldiers and civilians on both sides.

You may want to appreciate why many young soldiers refuse to serve the army and they have her trying to escape to nearby counties.

The best solution is for Russia to stop, why isn't that one of your solutions? We have said many times this is a war of attrition and Russia has been bleeding out of every pore for a long time now what once was supposed to be maybe 3 months.

That bleeding will not stop either even if they take the whole country. For Russia to devastate a country causing a million deaths in the process destroy 10s of millions of families and then what Putin is doing to his own population is not something we just say OK we're all good now.

originally posted by: Versioq

This war was a great mistake and it should have never happened.

Go tell that to Russia...

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Versioq

For a long time now we know the war isn't going well for Ukraine despite whatever claims were made in the western media.

It is not going well for either side. My point with 22 million is they can have a million when they need it.

The best possible solution is the end of the war and negotiations which may result in Ukraine getting something back in terms of territory but most importantly it will prevent the death of many soldiers and civilians on both sides.

You may want to appreciate why many young soldiers refuse to serve the army and they have her trying to escape to nearby counties.

The best solution is for Russia to stop, why isn't that one of your solutions? We have said many times this is a war of attrition and Russia has been bleeding out of every pore for a long time now what once was supposed to be maybe 3 months.

That bleeding will not stop either even if they take the whole country. For Russia to devastate a country causing a million deaths in the process destroy 10s of millions of families and then what Putin is doing to his own population is not something we just say OK we're all good now.

I think that's not true. One side has the upper hand and we are all witnessing the large chapters of this war. Having said that, it is true both sides have suffered massively in terms of losing manpower. But one side is unable to hold any longer and the it loses men at an alarming rate.

The solution is for both of them to draw a peace plan without the west trying to compromise it or use this as a proxy war against Russia. Yes we agree that Russia should stop but as long as they perceive this as a threat to their national security i.e involvement of the west in their area of control, they will delay it. The more they delay it the worse it will be for Ukraine later on in the negation table.

If you see the links above it has been argued that Ukraine is heading for defeat no matter what. But the sooner this tragedy ends the he better it is for everyone and for global peace. It implies the US should not try to take advantage of the situation. We don't need WW3.

originally posted by: Postrenar

I think that's not true. One side has the upper hand and we are all witnessing the large chapters of this war. Having said that, it is true both sides have suffered massively in terms of losing manpower. But one side is unable to hold any longer and the it loses men at an alarming rate.

The alarming rate is Russia...Something like 1500 per day.

You are looking at small gains and not seeing the big picture. Even Russia is saying they cannot take the Kharkiv region. They are now talking about building a buffer zone. The reason why is that they know they need upwards of 2 million to control even that area. Even at 30,000 added per month with losses we are talking 6 years just for that.

The solution is for both of them to draw a peace plan without the west trying to compromise it or use this as a proxy war against Russia. Yes we agree that Russia should stop but as long as they perceive this as a threat to their national security i.e involvement of the west in their area of control, they will delay it. The more they delay it the worse it will be for Ukraine later on in the negation table.

There are two solutions, one is to give Russia whatever they want and the other is to let Russia try something they just can't do unless they want to invest millions and they can't build that level for many years.

BTW what is national security? No one wants Russia, maybe China does, but the EU just wants their energy... There is no threat, so what we are talking about is Putin wants the old USSR back and Ukraine is the main point to do that.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I think you are wrong in your assesment in which sides is 'winning'. There is so much information which you choose to ignore or to pretend that Ukraine has a chance in this conflict. But we all know this isn't true.

www.bbc.com...

Ukraine could face defeat in 2024. Here's how that might look


www.politico.eu...

Ukraine is heading for defeat
The West's failure to send weapons to Kyiv is helping Putin win his war.

I think the picture is clear and there should be an immediate ceasefire and negotiations as one side has no chance of making any gains. In the meantime more and more people lose their lives in this conflict

What you and I want is just irrelevant. The West needs to work with both of the countries to normalise relations and to end the war and not to try to prolong the inevitable at a greater cost to both sides. We cannot reverse history and undo what happened. The same it true in the Gaza war that must stop just like this one asap.

a reply to: Metrodin

Those articles are over a month old. The supplies are gradually arriving. Ukraine has nothing to lose anyway. If it surrendered, it would lose its independence and become a puppet state. Putin will agree to nothing less.

originally posted by: twistedpuppy
a reply to: Metrodin

Those articles are over a month old. The supplies are gradually arriving. Ukraine has nothing to lose anyway. If it surrendered, it would lose its independence and become a puppet state. Putin will agree to nothing less.

You think the situation has become better in the last month or so and it's only a matter of supplies? Can you find me any information online that says in the last 3-4 weeks the Ukrainian Army has made a counteroffensive and is winning the war. Because so far we have heard from the western media that Ukraine is close to victory. But if you see the links the opposite picture is given. Do you think the commentators will change their view 3-4 weeks after the articles were written? Or you think 3-4 weeks is a long period of time?

a reply to: Metrodin

No I meant that the supplies started arriving. That changed over the month. So what do you propose? The surrender? There are still people in this world for whom slavery is worse than death.

Forgive my lateness to the topic, I've actually avoided this topic because I am not sure how to feel on the subject for a variety of reasons. I need to be quick to point out that none of my reasons are pro-Putin.

A couple thoughts have occurred to me over the past few months on this subject; there is no particular order...

- In order for Russia to "win" this conflict they will have to be able to occupy the territory they aim to conquer, will they not? Otherwise, nothing will change, and all of this was for not. Am I missing something here? While Putin 'might' be able to muster the military firepower to defeat Ukraine militarily, he simply doesn't have the resources to 'occupy' his conquest. It would be different if the will of the Ukranian people were on Putin's side, but they are not. So, what's Putin's end-game here? He doesn't seem to have one.

- On the subject of strategy, conquest of Ukraine by Putin makes no sense...other than ego (which is never a strategy). Ukraine's biggest export is agricultural, something Russia already has in spades. There are no major energy reserves there, and no key strategic beachheads; Russia already has ample other ways to access the Black Sea. So, why Ukraine? And,..."Because I can"...is a really bad strategy, one certainly not worth losing millions of lives over.

- Let's say Ukraine capitulates and surrenders; what then? Then Putin will be faced with rebuilding a country he just got done destroying. If he doesn't do this, at his cost, then the entire country will become an enormous liability replete with poverty and starvation. What good does this do for Putin...or anyone for that matter? Russia is already troubled financially, and his war effort has dug that hole even deeper, if Ukraine rolls over that hole becomes a bottomless pit for the Russian economy.

I must be missing something here. So, please feel free to educate me.

edit - One of the stated reasons Putin has used for all of this is Ukraine's desire to join NATO. Okay, that makes a little sense; he doesn't want a NATO country on his border, BUT that's some pretty old-school logic. Long gone are the days when a border nation was the biggest threat. Putin is living in a bygone ideological era if this is what he believes. Any military foe could 'reach out and touch' Russia without residing on their border, and Putin knows this. So, once again, this is foolish. If this was the days of the Roman Empire he might have had a point, but it isn't.

originally posted by: Metrodin
I think you are wrong in your assesment in which sides is 'winning'. There is so much information which you choose to ignore or to pretend that Ukraine has a chance in this conflict. But we all know this isn't true.

No one is winning, but Russia is losing because they cannot take Ukraine. As I said even for the Kharkiv region, we are talking 1.5+ million troops just for there. In the meantime, Ukraine is destroying their energy infrastructure and killing 1000+ per day. We then add the sanctions and so much more and Russia is a world of hurt the longer this goes on.

What you and I want is just irrelevant. The West needs to work with both of the countries to normalise relations and to end the war and not to try to prolong the inevitable at a greater cost to both sides. We cannot reverse history and undo what happened. The same it true in the Gaza war that must stop just like this one asap.

It seems you are the one expressing your irrelevant wants here. I'm just explaining what Russia can or cannot do. Go want world peace all day and then reread your first sentence here.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk

- In order for Russia to "win" this conflict they will have to be able to occupy the territory they aim to conquer, will they not? Otherwise, nothing will change, and all of this was for not. Am I missing something here? While Putin 'might' be able to muster the military firepower to defeat Ukraine militarily, he simply doesn't have the resources to 'occupy' his conquest. It would be different if the will of the Ukranian people were on Putin's side, but they are not. So, what's Putin's end-game here? He doesn't seem to have one.

As I have said just for the Kharkiv region, they would need 1.5 million soldiers, so even not talking 1000 killed per day if they conscript 30,000 a month, we are talking 6 years to get the force there for just that one region. Putin is already talking about a buffer zone instead of conquest.

- On the subject of strategy, conquest of Ukraine by Putin makes no sense...other than ego (which is never a strategy). Ukraine's biggest export is agricultural, something Russia already has in spades. There are no major energy reserves there, and no key strategic beachheads; Russia already has ample other ways to access the Black Sea. So, why Ukraine? And,..."Because I can"...is a really bad strategy, one certainly not worth losing millions of lives over.

The Donbas area has the largest natural gas fields in the EU, so there is that. If Putin could add 44 million people to the Russian population that would boost Russia's world standings which right now is less than Texas. So, they went from No 3 to less than Texas, and that bothers Putin a great deal. He also wants a land bridge to Crimea and not just a bridge along with more Black Sea frontage. If he could take all of Ukraine we are talking a huge buffer zone to the EU with Russia right on their doorstep for any future conquests. Also, direct energy connection to the EU without a middleman in the way. Add on top he sees Ukraine as the Dimond of Russia, just like his fantasy that Crimea was Russia's birthplace from the Greek or Romans.

- Let's say Ukraine capitulates and surrenders; what then? Then Putin will be faced with rebuilding a country he just got done destroying. If he doesn't do this, at his cost, then the entire country will become an enormous liability replete with poverty and starvation. What good does this do for Putin...or anyone for that matter? Russia is already troubled financially, and his war effort has dug that hole even deeper, if Ukraine rolls over that hole becomes a bottomless pit for the Russian economy.

And sanctions are not stopping, the world disowned of Russia will continue. Their only way out is to get rid of Putin and say it was all him, my bad... Even if they took all of Ukraine, Russia is in a world of hurt in dozens of different ways.

Okay, that makes a little sense; he doesn't want a NATO country on his border, BUT that's some pretty old-school logic. Long gone are the days when a border nation was the biggest threat.

He doesn't want NATO on his borders, but due to his constant aggressiveness, he pushes smaller countries into NATO.. No one wants Russia, No one wants to invade Russia, they just want to buy their energy etc. Its Putin who wants the old USSR team back to be great once again, that is it.