And once again, you prove that propaganda cannot allow for a loosing scenario (craftier propaganda will allow for a downside as long as conditions are unattainable). Whatever happened is already a victory, and the outcome doesn't really matter, well, because this was already a success
And what I'm saying is when you're retreating daily and cannot protect your power infrastructure, pulling your best troops, equipment and desperately needed air-defense into an attack on some villages that don't hold and military strategic value cannot be a successful military operation, but it's not trying to be by design. That is, it's a psyop mission which can be successful if:
1-It brings a political victory i.e. destabilizes Russia from within, RU hawks will demand total capture of Kiev requiring new wave of mobilization, leading to civil unrest
2-Rogue general turns onto Moscow (Prigozhin style)
3-UA manages to hold on to the taken Russian land when negotiations begin, securing themselves some leverage in negotiations
Without achieving these targets this would be a failure. Where propaganda must constantly hedge exposure and ignore the risks. It's already a success even if UA retreats, because then i'll just claim that we managed to get some PoWs which was totally worth it
Surely everyone would ignore the development elsewhere on the frontline and just believe such logic
[...]
And what I'm saying is when you're retreating daily and cannot protect your power infrastructure, pulling your best troops, equipment and desperately needed air-defense into an attack on some villages that don't hold and military strategic value cannot be a successful military operation, but it's not trying to be by design. That is, it's a psyop mission which can be successful if:
1-It brings a political victory i.e. destabilizes Russia from within, RU hawks will demand total capture of Kiev requiring new wave of mobilization, leading to civil unrest
2-Rogue general turns onto Moscow (Prigozhin style)
3-UA manages to hold on to the taken Russian land when negotiations begin, securing themselves some leverage in negotiations
Without achieving these targets this would be a failure. Where propaganda must constantly hedge exposure and ignore the risks. It's already a success even if UA retreats, because then i'll just claim that we managed to get some PoWs which was totally worth it
Surely everyone would ignore the development elsewhere on the frontline and just believe such logic [...]
Dude, you are calling propaganda on facts... unless you choose to disagree in some fundamental facts?? So, you say, there are no Ukrainian troops in Kursk, they have not taken a signigicant chunk of land, they have not taken a large number of PoW and at least two on the convoys sent to repel have not been destroyed? So it is not happening, it is not much faster than anything Ruzzia has been able to pull in the last year? All that is "propaganda"?
Are you trying again and again to divert the attention to what I say, instead of what it is actually happening?? Are you trying to score a "dialectical win" of some short that will give Ruzzia back all the lost territory?
LOL - so in your world this mission is only successful if it collapses Ruzzia
and pretty much ends the war?? That is the equivalent of saying that a chess move is only successful if it check-mates the opponent It is much simpler, this is a good move because it improves the situation of Ukraine and deteriorates the situation of Ruzzia.The mission HAS been successful already within the timeframe of a few days, in terms of land, prisoners, equipment destroyed and political impact. It can be even a greater success if Ruzzia fails to send support to the area and do it fast enough. It gives Ukraine yet another card to play with in the future.
I have no idea of what the Ukrainian command will do - neither do you - all I am saying is that there are significant resources, these were gathered under Ruzzia's nose for a veeery long time, that Ukraine is digging into the taken territory and it is unlikely that they will withdraw like in previous incursions.
I understand it is difficult for you to assume that Ruzzia was so utterly unprepared for this contingency, but... you do not get "victory points" for crying.
You need to work on your reading comprehension skills. Let me highlight the relevant part so you that you'll have to pivot to something else in your silly propaganda attempts
3-UA manages to hold on to the taken Russian land when negotiations begin, securing themselves some leverage in negotiations
"LOL - so in your world this mission is only successful if it collapses Ruzzia"
And there we have it, already a successful mission, regardless if UA can even hold the land. UA then should totally repeat it, pull more troops and air defenses from Donbas into these raid missions on RU, opening even more fronts. As long as we can call them all successful in the first few days it'll be a PR win, and it doesn't really matter what happens with the mission after that
Kyiv blames US aid delays for widening $43bn deficit
...delays in weapons deliveries had contributed to a yawning budget deficit that has left Kyiv scrambling to find money to pay its army.
...
The situation meant the country “will have a lack of money to cover salaries for our troops,” the finance minister said
...
lack of US weapons and concurrent rise in military spending has meant that Kyiv will have to fund the war by cutting spending, selling state assets and raising taxes.
...delays in weapons deliveries had contributed to a yawning budget deficit that has left Kyiv scrambling to find money to pay its army.
...
The situation meant the country “will have a lack of money to cover salaries for our troops,” the finance minister said
...
lack of US weapons and concurrent rise in military spending has meant that Kyiv will have to fund the war by cutting spending, selling state assets and raising taxes.
Nothing surprising just Ukraine’s finance minister openly admitting that UA can't cover salaries of their own troops, and calling on the "west" to send money so the troops can get paid. I can't wrap my mind around why they're not even attempting to hide the fact that west is sending their equipment and paying soldiers to attack Russia
