——————————————————————-

Newsweek admits the highly promoted Ukrainian counter-offensive has produced “no meaningful progress”, and that Western pundits are being untruthful about the war. Imagine that.
As leading American politicians, generals, and pundits continue advocating for open-ended support to Kyiv in their war against Russia, a sober, accurate analysis of Ukraine’s nearly completed summer offensive reveals that the heroic sacrifice Ukraine continues to make is producing little to no meaningful progress toward the objective of evicting Russia from Ukraine’s territory.

Washington should instead employ a necessary course correction and form a new policy, based on the harsh, ground-truth combat realities in Ukraine. Revising the objectives would give Washington and Kyiv a chance to preserve Ukrainian lives and American interests.
Washington’s current policies do neither.
Despite great hopes for a rapid success, Ukraine’s months-in-the-making offensive has sputtered from the outset. That shouldn’t have surprised anyone in the White House. On April 5, two months before the start of the offensive, I wrote that “Zelensky’s troops—with little to no air power and a dearth in artillery ammunition—could suffer egregious casualties while gaining little.”
Five days later, The Washington Post revealed the contents of a leaked Top Secret U.S. intelligence assessment which likewise predicted the Ukrainian offensive would probably fall “well short” of expectations, and that “enduring Ukrainian deficiencies in training and munitions supplies probably will strain progress and exacerbate casualties during the offensive.” Total Ukrainian deaths in the war at that point were estimated to be as low as 17,500.
About a month before the start of the offensive, I again warned that the odds were stacked heavily against Kyiv. To succeed, I explained, Ukraine would “have to conduct the most difficult task in modern land warfare: a combined arms operation into the teeth of a dug-in enemy force that is prepared for an attack,” complicated by the shortage of artillery ammunition along with “limited airpower and minimal air defense.” Nevertheless, on the eve of battle, some Western analysts remained optimistic.

Blackout USA
Once the offensive began on June 5, however, that optimism quickly evaporated. In the first two weeks of the fighting, Ukraine’s spearhead brigades suffered massive losses in armor and personnel while capturing virtually no territory. By the end of the third week, they had lost an estimated fifth of their strike force, requiring Ukraine to dramatically change tactics. Instead of leading with tanks and other armored vehicles (which were predictably getting chewed up in minefields and by Russian anti-tank missiles and artillery shells), Ukraine moved to an infantry-centric attack system.
While this change did result in producing incremental gains, the cost was exorbitant. On Aug. 29, the BBC reported that new leaked reports suggested Ukrainian battle deaths exploded since the offensive started. Whereas Ukraine was reported to have lost 17,500 troops in the first year of the war, it is presently assessed to have lost a breathtakingly high 50,000 additional deaths, for a total of 70,000 dead and 120,000 wounded.

If it wasn’t clear to Washington before the offensive started that the fundamentals of combat operations and principles of war indicated Ukraine would likely fail, it should now be crystal clear. Although Ukraine appears to have finally penetrated the first line of Russia’s main defense, the most difficult part of Russia’s defensive system has yet to be overcome: the hundreds of kilometers of dragon’s teeth, tank ditches, and yet more vast minefields.
It is unclear at this point whether Ukraine has enough striking power remaining in its offensive forces to reach, much less penetrate, Russia’s second main line—beyond which is a third main line followed by a fortress-defense at Tokmak, which is still 75 road kilometers from the Azov coast. Given these realities, the best Ukraine can likely do for the rest of the year is to hold what they have and prevent the possibility of losing more territory to a potential Russian counteroffensive this fall.
Viral Content: The US Army’s Forgotten Food Miracle
The United States, however, would be wise to adjust its policies to reflect the reality of Ukraine’s slim chances against Russia’s fortified lines. Washington has spent nearly $113 billion over the course of this war, provided Ukraine with an astounding volume of modern arms and ammunition, and delivered an impressive array of training and intelligence support. After almost a year of preparation, it hardly dented the Russian lines.
There is no realistic basis, therefore, to believe that Ukraine has the capacity to attain its stated strategic objective to reclaim all its territory, including Crimea. What is realistic is to continue providing Kyiv with the military wherewithal to defend itself from further Russian incursions. This goal should be combined with shifting an increasing percentage of the burden for additional arms and ammunition to our rich European friends. The U.S. should continue to ensure the war does not expand beyond the borders of Ukraine, and increase diplomatic efforts with all relevant parties to end the war on the best terms possible for Kyiv—all of which are beneficial to American interests.
Rather than repeating over the next year and a half what has already not worked—potentially costing Ukraine yet additional hundreds of thousands of losses—it’s time to try something that has a chance to succeed. In other words, it’s time to acknowledge objective reality and employ policies that can work.
SOURCE: https://www.newsweek.com/we-can-no-longer-hide-truth-about-russia-ukraine-war-opinion-1826532?amp=1
Did you think it was any different? Now they are telling a bit of truth.
LikeLike
So where did all that money go? Jet fighters? Guns? Ammo? LOL, Guess they know they aren’t getting anymore money for support for that war…NEXT…where will they wage it next? Taiwan? Ain’t gonna happen.
LikeLike
They just always want nothing but more, more, more!! “I have, so you can’t”… 😳🌹
LikeLiked by 1 person
And they will, more and more, and more! FINALLY!! Whoop-whoop! 😊🤣😊🎉
LikeLike
Can they afford to fire people? I don’t think that many are interested in working here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You mean for the gooberment? MSM is a arm of the gooberment. They all spew the same thing, like a bunch of bots. There’s no more journalists in MSM at all. They only talk about what they are suppose to talk about, spin the piece of the truth and make things up because they shape the perception of their viewers of what is going on in the world.
It’s usually bad news at that…never anything good going on. None of them actually investigate things, like journalists use to do. While they attack alternative news, journalists that are just independent and not beholden to them.
I found out yesterday that Phoenix is the first 15 minute city they are installing which is why it was so important to steal the election here for the governor. This makes me sick….I wonder if the people of Phoenix know this…do they realize what 15 minute cities really are? They are like in the movie Escape from New York. They will be run by A.I. and supposedly, you will not need to leave them, they will have everything you supposedly need according to them, and never need to leave that area. I know they already started some in Europe. Hopefully people revolt, because they seem to be marching along with their agenda. I think we have too many people working for gooberment. That is the plan, to have a post industrial civilization that really don’t need humans anymore cuz robots will be doing the work, and the few they have will be corralled like animals, into these smart cities, for their Un agenda 2030.
If I could send a message to the old me, I’d tell me to get some land and start working it, get some horses and animals and start growing my own food, start a community of a self sustained environment. Much like in the tv show ‘The Walking Dead’.
Last night I watched an episode of them having a conversation about ‘Are we really the good guys?’ In the eyes of those they fought, perhaps they are the bad guys, so they wondered how many stories of those that they are ‘the bad guys’ in the minds of others. It’s survuval at all costs, makes you wonder why we fight so very hard just to stay alive, do anything we can no matter what, to keep standing our ground. Would we then force others to live the way we want them to? Each would have to do their part, but it’s always a battle to keep things safe and peaceful, kinda an oxymoron.
Are we really the Good Guys?
LikeLike
Thank YOU, Muse for sending this in! Love ya! Whoop-whoop! 😊🌹😊🎉❤️
LikeLike
Fairly soon, jobs (as we know them today) will not be there! The days of economic slavery are ending! Whoop-whoop! 😊🌹💕🎉
LikeLike
Can they afford to fire people?
LikeLike