Ok, what about that they took part of the Ukraine 8 years ago? Wouldnt that suggest that they want it whole?
Not necessarily, because that would create more of a border with NATO countries which they kind of want to avoid. If Ukraine joined NATO it would put Moscow within range of a potentially hostile force to itself, not to mention missiles of any sort. And seeing how the West has been using the Zelensky regime as a springboard to fuck with Moscow, I can't imagine that the Russkies would have wanted to take any chances. The other scenario, if Ukraine was annexed and reintegrated back into the Russian Federation, it would border several Eastern European NATO members and would defeat the purpose of the invasion to begin with. A buffer state that neither side controls, at least in name, is more ideal for their purposes.
The main objective of taking Crimea was to secure a warm water port and naval base at Sevastopol. A new government in Kiev would not have necessarily honored the agreement to continue allowing use of the port in the future, which would have left their black sea fleet in a precarious position.
There is also the issue of paying royalties to the Ukrainian government for the use of its pipelines for natural gas and oil, but that's an entirely different story. A government that is hostile to their interests could rescind Russia's permission to use those pipes and cripple their economy. Hence the construction of the Nord Stream pipelines.
If they had no intention to take the entirety of Ukraine, they could've just pushed for the remaining areas of Donetsk and Luhansk and then stopped once they got there. You know, like they did in 2014-2015. Your logic does not add up.
If he wanted the whole country he could have probably taken it then and there, when the Ukrainian government was in shambles and fighting to reorganize itself in around 2014-2015.
Only Crimea was worth the cost/benefit deal as far as annexation goes. Plus it's a common tactic for them to leave behind frozen conflict zones and breakaway regions, as it often impedes countries from joining NATO, among other things, and gives them a sphere of influence in which to base troops or do other things if necessary.
They could have annexed Georgia in the late 2000s but they decided not to because it wouldn't have been worth the upkeep in occupation and would have been a much more serious international incident than it already was. Ukraine would be a nightmare to control, especially in the western regions. Plus they took some fairly serious losses in Georgia considering. The story is sort of repeating in Ukraine due to faulty logistics and incompetent command structure.
Not a shill for Russia, just trying to understand their overall goals and the drawbacks of all possible scenarios. What your opponent thinks is key, whether in war or business, or even in hand to hand combat or when dealing with a vindictive co-worker. Yeah I paraphrased Johnny Lawrence but it's true.
Their propaganda is aimed at Western bugmen who are very active on social media. They have been very effective in that regard.
Social media propaganda would make @_Yuri proud.
The US didn't annex Iraq or Afghanistan. The days of imperial clay gobbling are largely over. It's just too expensive when there are cheaper methods. The notion of colonialism only became repugnant when it became obsolete and unfeasible. It's much cheaper to just have a puppet government to handle the day-to-day management of the state, then you pay them off to extract the country's natural resources. China has been notorious for pulling this off in Africa.
Russia may get some clay out of this, as the breakaways may just join Russia. But if the Russians really get their way on this, they'll install a puppet government east of the main river.
Honestly this scenario makes a lot more sense, install a government friendly to their interests, maybe annex the breakaway states, but leave a buffer of sorts between themselves and currently existing NATO countries.
For the thinking impaired: there's no reason to stay for long line.
They need to decapitate their enemy first i.e. by taking Kiev. That doesn't mean they intend to keep all of the Ukraine; they could install a vassal regime and then go back to Russia.
This, America basically did the same with Iraq and Afghanistan. Well those didn't work out as intended but it's a more viable objective than trying to pull a World War II style blitzkrieg and occupy/annex an entire country, especially one full of people who hate you.
Stop falling for it mes amis
View attachment 3068535
Gotta admit it's still fun to fuck with the blue and yellow heart crowd. If you're not begging to suck Zelensky's corrupt oligarch loving dick, you might be a
Russian Spy
