Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)

Take a look at the polling data here (from May 2022; you have to download it):


Nowadays even southern and eastern Ukrainians are extraordinarily hostile towards Russia, with support for Eurasian Economic Union membership not even reaching 10% in both of these regions. And even in both southern and eastern Ukraine, nowadays a majority of the population would vote to join NATO by double-digit margins.

With that level of hostility towards Russia, if Russia will actually succeed in conquering huge parts of Ukraine, most of the population in those regions will enter emigrate or become fifth columnists and thus become a perpetual problem for Russia. When a whopping 80% of Ukrainians support EU membership over EEU membership, any Ukrainian who will want an immediate improvement in their quality of life would obviously prefer to live in the EU than to live under Russian or under Russian puppet rule.
 
With that level of hostility towards Russia, if Russia will actually succeed in conquering huge parts of Ukraine, most of the population in those regions will enter emigrate or become fifth columnists and thus become a perpetual problem for Russia. When a whopping 80% of Ukrainians support EU membership over EEU membership, any Ukrainian who will want an immediate improvement in their quality of life would obviously prefer to live in the EU than to live under Russian or under Russian puppet rule.

If Russia does somehow end up conquering large sections most of Ukraines fighting age males will be dead, That makes any sort of fifth column activity or insurgency unlikely.
 
there will be no serious insurgency. Ukraine lacks the demographics, terrain and social structure for a serious insurgency.

Elaborate on the social structure part here, please?

As for the terrain:

Topographic-Map-of-Ukraine.png


As for demographics, total population also matters, not just the total fertility rate.

And was Northern Ireland conductive for an insurgency during The Troubles? Because that I think is what is most likely here. Well, that and/or mass emigration from Ukraine to the West.
 
All of those are Muslim countries, That religious imperative for resistance doesn't exist in Ukraine.

What about Northern Ireland? And FWIW, Ukrainians are now a separate religion from Russians, if you want to get really specific:

 
What about Northern Ireland? And FWIW, Ukrainians are now a separate religion from Russians, if you want to get really specific:



The troubles in Northern Ireland was almost entirely done by men not women barring a few exceptions. And those churches breaking ties is pretty meaningless given modern Christians for the most part aren't exactly radical and willing to blow themselves up or die for their beliefs.
 
The troubles in Northern Ireland was almost entirely done by men not women barring a few exceptions. And those churches breaking ties is pretty meaningless given modern Christians for the most part aren't exactly radical and willing to blow themselves up or die for their beliefs.

I didn't say that you have to blow yourself up. You could simply plant a bomb and then leave. You don't actually have to become a martyr for the cause.
 
I didn't say that you have to blow yourself up. You could simply plant a bomb and then leave. You don't actually have to become a martyr for the cause.

Regardless when you have a prolonged conventional conflict all of the people who have the will to fight that sort of insurgency generally die in the conventional part. Most people will just keep their heads down and continue on trying to eek out whatever existence they can.
 
Regardless when you have a prolonged conventional conflict all of the people who have the will to fight that sort of insurgency generally die in the conventional part. Most people will just keep their heads down and continue on trying to eek out whatever existence they can.

I think that most Ukrainians would prefer to move to the EU (or the US/Canada/Australia) than to cooperate with and work for Russia, though.
 

If a western media makes this report are they admitting the conclusion of the war?

The Heritage foundation is also showing reluctance towards the Ukraine aid package.
Look at Kherson and how slow the Ruskies are advancing.
Kherson is getting closer and closer to being surrounded by a Ukrainian counterattack, since Russia went for a Easterm front Ukraone focused on a southern
 
Regardless when you have a prolonged conventional conflict all of the people who have the will to fight that sort of insurgency generally die in the conventional part. Most people will just keep their heads down and continue on trying to eek out whatever existence they can.
You reckon? So far the war has killed probably something in the vicinity of say 50,000 people of all demographics. From a population of over 40 million people. That's horrendous, but unless we imagine the war stretching for a very long time indeed or the Russians somehow finding a way to escalate the conventional conflict, it seems unlikely for ukraine to suffer the kind of losses you're talking about.

The troubles in Northern Ireland was almost entirely done by men not women barring a few exceptions. And those churches breaking ties is pretty meaningless given modern Christians for the most part aren't exactly radical and willing to blow themselves up or die for their beliefs.
There's also examples of resistance to Nazi and Soviet rule featuring women in both direct action and intelligence gathering roles. The French resistance being a particularly notable example, but hardly alone.

Honestly, it doesn't seem like any of your claims about the impossibility of resistance formation are actually grounded in any historic backing and they don't stand up to scrutiny. Can you point to any foreign occupation that didn't engender a resistance movement?
 
You reckon? So far the war has killed probably something in the vicinity of say 50,000 people of all demographics. From a population of over 40 million people. That's horrendous, but unless we imagine the war stretching for a very long time indeed or the Russians somehow finding a way to escalate the conventional conflict, it seems unlikely for ukraine to suffer the kind of losses you're talking about.

That depends on just how long Russia wants to and is actually capable of dragging this out. After all, the Iran-Iraq War lasted for eight years.
 
The American post-WWII occupation of Japan would like to have some very stern words with you.
Hey, I didn't say there wasn't any. I asked if he could point to one. Since, the few that I'm actually aware of are so self evidently different in situation that they make the point for themselves. Your example being a good one, because it followed on from litterally the most destructive war the world has ever seen, lasting 5 years, and culminating in the first ever atomic bombings. When we also consider the highly disciplined, regimented and authoritarian nature of Japanese culture at the time, and the presence of 430,000 US armed forces... Well, it's a wildly different scenario than anything we're likely to see in Ukraine and those differences are specifically the kind of thing inclined to disincentivize resistance.
 
The American post-WWII occupation of Japan would like to have some very stern words with you.

Post WWII Germany as well, Assuming there will always be an insurgency is foolish. The US has just rolled over everyones conventional forces so quickly of late that no one had time to suffer horrendous losses to its fighting age males.
 
Look at Kherson and how slow the Ruskies are advancing.
Kherson is getting closer and closer to being surrounded by a Ukrainian counterattack, since Russia went for a Easterm front Ukraone focused on a southern
I won't. I look at what everyone else says off the forum and interpret that.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top