~
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/7/9/trumps-latest-ukraine-russia-u-turn-why-is-the-us-resuming-arms-supplies
Quote
Monday’s resumption followed Russia’s intensified attacks. In recent weeks, Ukrainians have endured hours-long overnight drone and missile assaults on key cities that have killed and wounded civilians – and kept millions awake.
“We’re going to send some more weapons. We have to [so that Ukrainians] have to be able to defend themselves,” Trump told a news conference in Washington, DC.
“We’re going to send some more weapons. We have to [so that Ukrainians] have to be able to defend themselves,” Trump told a news conference in Washington, DC.
As advice, make sure you do not interpret future news with excessive optimism. Trump is a slow learner, but now has achived a pass grade on Ruzzian Diplomacy 101, and understands a bit better the difference between what Putin says, what Putin does and what happens in the real world of the war in Ukraine.
Why cite yahoo's reprint instead of original the Kyiv Independent at https://kyivindependent.com/russias-war-fueled-economy-is-running-on-empty-central-bank-chief-warns/ do you believe that it somehow adds objectivity to Ukrainian story?
So the same old story, Russia will collapse financially/politically/militarily any second now, you just keep hanging in there and use this story to find more troops for the frontlines, that's being told for the last 3 years. Getting pretty boring. It's either that or some genius analysis that Russia cannot sustain something for eternity, or breaking news that Putin is apparently mortal and surely must die sometime in the future. Blah blah blah thought we all established that what's important here is not whether something can be sustained indefinitely but what's the weakest link and what will collapse first.
Financially Russia is surely struggling but how's Russia's debt level and outlook compares to Germany/UK/EU... How hard would it be for Russia to raise few more billions just by issuing more debt say against resources in its 4 new regions? Any recent news from China that would indicate whether China would prop Russia up financially?
Politically, apparently we're already on a 3rd or 4th? Putin clone and guessing Russia has many more in store next to Lenin? so seems pretty stable there. US has for the second time paused weapons delivery in last few months.
Militarily, well, seems to be the Achilles' heel for Ukraine, we all see what's happening on the front lines. Who could've possibly known that Russia has 3x population of Ukraine.
According to your univeristy levels how many more levels Trump needs to pass to see whatever it is that you're seeing? How long do you estimate it'll take him and can UA military hold on until then?
The simple answer is, and why paxmao can't understand it is, Russia operates on a completely different system than the West. The things that look like failure for Russia in Western eyes, are really great successes and powerful operations in Russian eyes.
If people don't stop looking at Russia through Western eyes, and start understanding Russia for what it is, they'll be dead before they know that Russia even hit them.
Da, Do you doubt that Nabulina said what those sources say? In your view did Nabiulina say that the Russian Economy is exhausting critical assets that enable the war to continue or not?
Do not hide from this question, it is simple and it is yes or no.
My advice is that you consider how accurate was your previous "analysis" regarding the position of the US before answering this one. You are getting quite a few wrong in a row... such as your best ever "Ukraine will retire from Belgorod in a couple of weeks, it is just a small incursion".
BTW, I never spoke about "collapse" those are YOUR words. I do not think Ruzzia will "collapse", I think that people would leave the country or simply die because they have lost any hope of having a properly governed country ever.
What may perfectly happen that it is unable to continue any form of high-intensity conflict.
Here, have some though material here:
Quote
"High Rate Is Not a Whim of the Central Bank!": Nabiullina on the Real Reasons for Tough Policy
https://youtu.be/K_35m_xgIik
I have no reason to doubt that Nabulina said that. Once again, I don't believe anyone thinks that Russian economy can sustain current trend until the end of times. So no, and yes. I don't hide from questions, unlike you. But confirmation bias is only good for propaganda, what's important is to considering all other financial resources and avenues available to Russia, than after taking everything into consideration, estimating how much longer can Russia financially sustain the current rate of military expenditures? Will 5 years from now you still be saying how now Russia is about to default any day now because they took on too much debt and their debt to gdp is higher than Japan? Or will Russian economy give up 3yrs, 2yrs, 1yr, 6 month from now? Once one answers that question, the final and the most important step is to estimate how long can Ukrainian military continue to burn through their reserves to plug holes in order to sustain their current controlled retreat, before some front completely collapses? Thus the game is what will give out first. Plus don't forget that Russia is the one controlling the temp here, meaning they can always scale back launching expensive missiles, freeze or end the conflict completely at current lines whenever they please. The fact that Russia continues to lead as they advance, implies that RU believes they have the resources to outlast Ukraine, where Ukraine's has no option but to just follow RU's lead while pretend that everything is fine and just hope that Russians miscalculated.
Morale is one if not the most important factors for the military. How do you think freezing some aid and than unfreezing some "defensive weapons, primarily" and saying Ukraine is "getting hit very hard" and "so many people are dying in that mess." second time play on UA and RU morale? And do you really think that Trump is not realizing what he's doing? vs Biden's US is with UA for as long as it takes approach.
My analysis regarding the position of the US on this is pretty spot on. Considering your analysis of the effects of the first packet of sanctions, second...17th, switchblades, HIMARS, M777, ATACMS, patriots, leopards, abrams, taurus, F16s, Russian grills on tanks, Russians on bikes/golf carts, etc etc etc... I believe I'm doing much better. Regarding Belgorod (guessing you mean Kursk?) I still stand by my position that it made no military sense, sure I underestimated the stupidity of UA politicians pushing their military for such much larger scale than what i've anticipated, but now UA is paying for it by having yet another active front and loosing more territory now in Sumy region. That is, now I can say that Ukraine won't attack Belarus because it would make no military sense as they cannot even hold current lines, but then if Ukrainian politicians with their infinite wisdom push Syrskyi to redirect troops from Donbas into Belarus, i would technically be wrong, but for such a hilarious boondoggle I would gladly accept being wrong there too.
People leave the country and die on both sides every day, you just cherry picking, once again what's relevant is which side reaches a critical mass in any one category first.