Lots of cope here.
>Russia currently occupies around 20% of Ukraine since war started
>Said territory is easily the most energy rich /resource rich in the country
>US prognosis is low Ukraine can take it back
>Russia is a garrison state with near limitless capacity for war production
>Ukraine is taking casualties at a 3:1 ratio of Russia even on defense
>Russia has not engaged any of their active Military units
>Main front line units to date are Donesk peoples units, SMO consctipts and Wagner forces.
>Russia does not care about total air superiority over all of Ukraine, only over near front line forces if which they have near uncontested superiority
>Shahed drones cost $20k. Ukraine air defense missiles cost $100k each to shoot down. Ameritards think this is a winning strategy.
>Russian artillery is superior to Nato is every way. HIMARS are exception but are difficult to repair, replace and scale.
>Russia sees this war rightly as existential (NATO does not)
>Russian population is staunchly behind Putin on this. Any wish thinking of Putin being assassinated would only result in more bellicose replacement.
>Ameritards on this thread think war success is defined by land coverage; Russian strategy from the start is to destroy the Ukrainian army. I.e. 100 Ukrainian troops die per day on average during war to 20-30 Russians.
>Ukrainian goals are to provoke NaTo into the war. While NATO will change everything in this war, it is difficult to see long term support for a war where 100k+ NATO casualties will occur even without nuclear war happening.
> Despite all the /k/ knowitalls no American soldier has fought in a war of this intensity since Korea. None. Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan have all been safari rides by comparison to the current conflict in Ukraine now.