Joe Blow decides to call me stupid for stating that the Ukraine/Russia war is a stalemate. Normally, comments attacking me like that wouldn’t make the blog, but Joe is a long time commenter and has earned a bit of grace. He just needs some facts.
The fact is that Russia only controls 19% of Ukraine, and about a quarter of that was the territory in the Crimea that was taken a decade ago. The fact is that the front lines have been largely in the same place for the past three years. This is where the lines were in November of 2022:
Now look to see where the front lines are now:
Nearly two and a half years later, and there is virtually no difference. In fact, in terms of territory held, there have been no gains since the first year of the war.
You can see that the Russians made huge gains in the initial two months of the war, then Ukraine won back some territory within six months, then the lines have remained virtually stable since. That’s called a stalemate. In the meantime, over one million lives and half a trillion dollars have been lost, and for what?
I see absolutely no US national interest in this war. None. The “oh, we need to defend Ukraine or the Russians will take over Europe like Hitler did” is simply a weak imitation of the domino theory, a stupid holdover from the Cold War that has been used as justification for every stupid useless war that the US has been involved in for the past 80 years.
There is not a reason to spill a single drop of American blood, nor waste a single American dollar on a war that simply isn’t our problem. Let Europe worry about this one. I don’t think that Russia is going to go to war with the European Union unless the EU keeps beating war drums and trying to start one. We need to stop letting France, Britain, Russia, and Germany drag us into the wars that they have been fighting in Europe for over 1,300 years. If they want to keep fighting, let them, but there is no reason for us to be involved.
The fact that members of the EU have been refusing to allow US military units to purchase supplies is beyond the pale. For example, a Norway company recently refused to allow a US submarine to purchase diesel fuel for their backup generator, and called for other companies to do the same. The Norwegian government quickly backed away from this boycott, which is good for the EU, because if I were Trump, my first step would have been to pull all nuclear weapons from EU bases. All of them. It’s something that is quick and easy to do, and sends an unmistakable message to the EU: our military cooperation with your country can disappear overnight, if you want to fuck around.
The US is NATO and the EU has been taking advantage of the US security guarantee to increase social spending while ignoring defense. The number of main battle tanks in EU member states has decreased from 15,000 in 2000 to 5,000 today. The US has 4,657 main battle tanks in NATO territory, meaning that the US is 50% of NATO’s military strength. Even THAT statistic is misleading. Italy, for example, has about 200 Ariete tanks, but only 50 of them are fully operational, with the rest of them being in various stages of disrepair. If this is typical of NATO member states, the US forces in Europe make up 80% of the entire NATO force. What do we get in return for that?
This is why the EU has so much money to spend on social programs. The US military has 100,000 troops in Europe. That equals ten percent of our entire military, costing the US about $200 billion a year. What do we get in return for that?
The message being sent by Trump is unmistakable- the days of Uncle Sugar being exploited are over. The EU can screw around with Russia, but at the end of the day, they don’t have the forces to take on a large war.
26 Comments
Anonymous · March 2, 2025 at 11:21 am
” We need to stop letting France, Britain, Russia, and Germany drag us into the wars that they have been fighting in Europe for over 1,300 years. ”
Amen and Amen! I am so sick of endless wars, destroying our people and our financial well being. Europe is fun and educational, but I am sick of hearing about Hitler. It is always the ELITES OF EUROPE that benefit the most from another war. And the Elites have sold Europe for no compensated reason other than trying to outfuck each other.
Tanfj · March 2, 2025 at 12:31 pm
To paraphrase Kim Du Toit, Let Europe sink.
Russia just wants to be left alone, but the Horde of Hats in Brussels keeps poking the Bear. How about this time, we /don’t/ save them from the inevitable consequences of their actions.
What’s in an invasion of Europe for Russia? Europe is pretty scarce on resources having been mined for eons. People? Untold numbers of uneducated immigrants from Muslim countries make poor engineers and technicians.
What’s in it for America? We get told daily that we Americans exist to carry the wallet for Our Betters. If you disagree you are a Racist Anti-Semitic Raper of the Environment. Given how Europe has treated Americans for most of the 20th and all of the 21st, I wouldn’t give them the residue left from my last fart.
old geezer · March 2, 2025 at 11:27 am
fwiw, ivan’s objective has been to remove the ukies manpower. sorry for the sterile description. territory has not been the primary objective. as you know, massing troops and supplies is no longer viable for either side. therefore with the addition of drone based tactics, territorial progress is minimal. until it isn’t anymore. that occurs with collapse. my guess is uncle sam is about to pull the plug. nato will likely “ evolve “ or perhaps evaporate. and the laughingstock that is europe, well their cultural suicide can either continue to accelerate, or their indigenous people will revolt. no one with any sense will hold their breath on that last issue. i hope i’m wrong.
lastly, it can be argued by a dispassionate observer that ivan has been quite restrained, compared to what he could have done. the last group at 1600 pennsylvania ave effectively kept daring them to go for ww3. like they effectively dared people like us to revolt.
try to put yourself in ivan’s shoes. you’d be foxtrotting furious. pray for putin’s health. the next guy to run the show over there will not follow the same strategies, imho.
Michael · March 2, 2025 at 11:48 am
Putin’s Special Militarty Operation (SMO) did what it needed.
Protected the Russian’s living in the recovered areas (aside from NATO terror attacks with long ranged drones) and destroyed what 3 NATO Trained and Equipped Armies.
Call it a stalemate, I’m good with that.
Once Ukraine’s defanged and NATO abandoned in the dustpan of History the situation will resolve.
Unless a “False Flag” dirty bomb or such tries to FORCE the “Russian Asset” Trump like the last time Trump was president to support Ukraine, the neocons are shut down for now.
TJ · March 2, 2025 at 1:00 pm
Always worth the read AO. I think the comment about Ivan looking to kill Ukes rather than to take and hold territory is valid. But you’re right about the stalemate situation. It does feel like the tension is just about ready to be released. Ukraine implosion seems likely in the near future. NATO maybe too. EU as well? Politics is downstream from culture. Culture is downstream from religion. Europe will either return to its Christian roots or be Islamized. Looking at history in Egypt, the Middle East and North Africa makes the later seem the most likely. Lord have mercy!
Danny · March 2, 2025 at 1:02 pm
The US has had military bases all over the world since the end of WW2. Why? Yeah — I know it’s all water under the bridge but it has been something I have disagreed with my entire life. Time we mind our own business. Doubt it will ever happen.
And speaking of things that never made sense, why did we not have Cuba as one of our “territories” — actually why Hawaii and not Cuba — and as a state? Yeah, yeah I know …
wojtek · March 2, 2025 at 2:29 pm
An interesting post and I would like to make a sensible comment later, but let me note for now that EU member states in reality do not have 5000 tanks, regardless of whether they are operational or not. These official statistics that add up to 5K include T55s in Romania and Slovenia, and M48s in Greece and Portugal. These can perhaps count as stationary artillery pieces these days. But not as tanks.
To give an example from my own backyard:
– before 2022 Poland had: ~247 Leo2, ~233 T91, ~580 T72 – these numbers include wrecks.
– at the end of 2024, we had: 116 M1A1, 84 K2, ~233 Leo2, and no more than 170 T91s – among these, L2A4s and T91s are mostly inoperational.
So today we have 370-380 operational tanks – across 4 different types – all heavily used (Leos bought from Germany, K2s from Korea, and M1s from the US). And this represents one of the most powerful armor forces in EU (there should be an irony emoticon here).
Vlad the non-Impaler · March 2, 2025 at 3:16 pm
What’s this? The giant titty that sucks the blood out of every taxpayer might actually be shut off? OH MY!!
The stinking leaches in Brussels might have to do something!! Like run their own freaking wars, climate scam and fag parades all without the help of USA money stolen at gunpoint. OH MY!!
JimmyPx · March 2, 2025 at 8:18 pm
As others have said gaining territory has never been a Russian aim in this conflict. Goal #1 is the destruction of the Ukrainian Army.
What better way than a WWI stalemate where Ukraine is very low on artillery but Russia has plenty and shells the shit out of them daily ?
Eventually the Ukraine will run out of manpower and their trained troops will all be KIA or WIA and that time is now.
Also the Ukrainians are fellow slavs and Russia doesn’t WANT to totally destroy and devastate them. Ever wonder why Russia didn’t day 1 drop all of the bridges over the Dneiper River ? The Russians have air superiority, why isn’t Kiev a smoking ruin ?
Putin has a ton of troops in BelloRussia aimed like a knife at Kiev, why hasn’t he attacked ?
Putin wants to avoid Russian casualties and is hoping that they can negotiate an end to this. If not, he’s ready and willing to launch a massive assault and settle it on the battlefield but he’d prefer not to if he can help it.
Meanwhile the Cocaine Cowboy and his buddies along with asshole European elites want WAR WAR WAR as long as the money grift continues. Zelensky thinks that before the end he’ll zip off to a life in luxury somewhere. I suspect the he’ll either get the Mussolini or Diem of South Vietnam treatment.
wojtek · March 2, 2025 at 8:52 pm
It is a stalemate which is due to a very specific reason: Ruskies chose an unusual (in the 21st century) approach to war in view of their early failures.
Gen. Komornicki recently wrote an extensive analysis, and he thinks – just like a couple of commenters above – that one of the goals is to wear out the Ukrainian forces, while wearing out the stockpiles and patience of supporting nations. The other reason is, something that the commenters might not know, that the terrain where the most intense fights continue is the most difficult terrain, which is further complicated by the industrial infrastructure (and the waste) existing there. One sqm is not the same as another sqm. And Ruskies do not care about land in general – that they have plenty of. They care about value of the land. And it just so happens that the most valuable land in Ukraine is also the most difficult.
Interestingly the land where the fights continue is the land that Z. promised to Trump. And to EU. And, according to some gossip, which has already been sold to some very powerful interests.
Finally, Soviets had always this interesting theory that close contact fighting will protect them from more technologically advanced opponents. As we could clearly see in the early stages of the war, they could not execute manoeuvre in the open terrain up north. So instead they decided to go through the multiple lines of prepared defences in the south. Takes more time. And lives. But that’s what their doctrine dictates.
So if the US removes itself from the picture, in about a year or two, they will go through the last of these defences in the south and will again have the open fields in their sight. But this time from two directions. Support from EU won’t matter – most of what could easily be donated already has. The rest will be used up as well. And the military industrial capability of EU is nonexistent at the moment, so it can’t deliver anything of real value in the near future.
So the stalemate that you see is only a stalemate b/c the US has been involved. Remove the US from the equation and the stalemate disappears.
Veeshir · March 2, 2025 at 11:25 pm
There was a time when what happened in Europe was important.
That time ended decades ago.
Let them get back to killing each other and leave us out of it.
Except…. next time, whoever takes France has to kerp it.
Rick · March 3, 2025 at 1:38 am
Land area is one metric. By that metric, the war does look like a stalemate.
A war of attrition may involve gaining not one foot of ground, yet there is a victor.
Aesop · March 3, 2025 at 3:25 pm
Truly.
In exactly the same way Britain and France were “victors” in 1918.
Get back to us on how that Somme Campaign played out, and the aftermath of all that “winning”.
JimmyPx · March 3, 2025 at 6:54 pm
In WWI the truth is that in 1918 the British and French were low on manpower and with the Bolsheviks overthrowing the Tsar and pulling Russia out of the war a WHOLE ton of German and Austrian troops were shipped to the Western Front. Thus began the Ludendorff offensive. It was the arrival of the Americans that turned the tide otherwise Germany would have won the war.
Unless the Ukrainians get a fresh influx of troops, ammo and supplies they will not last until the end of the year.
JJ · March 3, 2025 at 8:47 am
NATO with the 100,000 American military members and $200 billion a year of taxpayer money exists to fight the Soviet Union bogeyman that hasn’t existed in decades. Bring all of our people, equipment, weapons, ammunition (including nucs), intelligence and money back home. Leave NATO. Then tell the UN to get out of the country.
Aesop · March 3, 2025 at 3:22 pm
DM: You’re right, and you’re also wrong.
Right:
There is no reason to send a single American troop, of any sort, into Ukraine, for any reason whatsoever, Amen. (That isn’t the point at issue, however, nor ever should have been seen as such. We’ll get to that anon.)
And yes, despite the earnest fanboys from Rootin’ For Putin Inc.™, and their house-organ organ grinders at Any Day Now™ Press (and you can get odds on which organ – the musical instrument, or their nether-region Little Buddy – they’re grinding when they’re talking about Vladpoleon), the Russian Army has been stalemated by a yappy little dog military 1/4 it’s size and 1/10th its strength, to no discernible improvement in their initial position. Kudos for being one of the few to recognize the obvious 800 pound gorilla that’s been there all along.
Wrong:
Once upon a time, the US military was the same size, strength, capability, and utter incompetence of the current version. And populist isolationism became the order of the day.
Two countries with delusions of grandeur – Germany and Japan – immediately sought to fill the resultant power vacuum, and a world war resulted which dwarfed the size and scope of the previous one, with one WMD eclipsing – by a magnitude of SPF 30,000 – the horrors of the previous World War’s WMD of choice.
Insanity is imagining we can now follow the exact same course, and expect a different result, when Russia and China – with 10X the strength and capability of 1930s Germany and Japan – follow the exact same course of action as we retreat.
We tried isolationism.
It got us Pearl Harbor.
This time, we’re substituting Ukraine and Taiwan for Poland and Manchuria.
Anyone want to speculate on where that’s headed?
Anyone?
Beuller?
Ferris Beuller…?
Oh, and in the bargain, our diplomatic “assurances” of Ukraine’s future integrity, being casually discarded because they’re inconvenient, are literally pouring a supertanker full of av-gas on nuclear non-proliferation arguments as a concept, and throwing a lit road flare atop the idea.
And when any 30-50 other countries see what American agreements are worth when we discard them like a used tissue, one can take a wild guess what they’ll perceive to be the worth of every other piece of paper backed by America’s full faith and credit.
Starting with NATO itself, and moving on to those finely engraved pieces of toilet paper currently regarded with affection worldwide and called “greenbacks”, including the digital 1s and 0s.
So when any ten nations, spotting Ukraine’s asinine folly in ever giving up ICBMs and nuclear weapons, decide to shed their illusions regarding our willingness to stick out necks out for their survival start joining the nuclear club, and the price of everything available locally starts going up 3000%, thank Trump for pissing on Zelensky’s head, and repeat “USA!USA!USA!” to drown out the noises from your children’s bellies.
The price then for giving Putin a good nose-bloodying by spending only paper will suddenly take on the patina of a missed bargain, long after that horse has fled the barn, but only among those with the wit to recall that option from days gone by, as the opportunity cost of the road not taken.
And mind the bright flash that follows, remembering to bend over, and kiss your ass goodbye.
I hope the orgasmic delight apparently derived from throwing Ukraine under the bus to appease Putin now, are as valuable on that day as they seem to be worth today, judging by current sentiment.
I suspect not, but when realization dawns like Canned Sunshine -EXACTLY like that, in fact – I daresay it won’t matter for long anyways.
Divemedic · March 3, 2025 at 3:46 pm
This isn’t WW2, and people need to stop living in the past. Your argument is no different than the left screaming “Trump is literally Hitler”- it’s an argument based not in logic, but emotion. Case in point- if this REALLY were about stopping a nation’s imperial ambitions, then why didn’t the US get involved in defending the Uyghurs? How about Crimea? Why didn’t we get involved in this war 11 years ago when it first began? India’s invasion of Pakistan?
Are we ignoring the fact that the US has invaded more nations since the fall of the Soviet empire than has any other? The US is, in fact, the most violent nation on the planet.
Aesop · March 3, 2025 at 8:58 pm
Which of those nations are our current vassals?
Now compare and contrast Russia and China.
Putin is literally Stalin, and Xi is Mao and then some.
And arguing that we’ve missed opportunities to stop them both before, so we should continue to do so now, is an argument to let each of them annex the Sudetenland and rampage in Manchuria scot-free in return for “peace in our time”.
Everyone has seen this movie before.
The idiots too stupid to learn from it are dooming us to repeat it.
Almost like they were checking boxes or something.
The trouble is, 1920 always leads inexorably to 1939, and 1941.
The trouble is, with current toys, it doesn’t last 5-6 years.
More like 5-6 days.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrpmv_zOa0k
Divemedic · March 4, 2025 at 6:34 am
How many nations have seen their governments replaced by the actions of the CIA? Whose governments rule because we allow them to?
That isn’t our place.
Aesop · March 4, 2025 at 6:23 pm
From 1991 to 2014, Ukraine’s government was put in place by the Russian FSB.
So it’s their place?
This is a zero-sum game.
And the CIA generally just provides a nudge to a situation that’s already about to fall apart. They’ve little more influence than that.
How has our CIA influence worked out in Iran?
South Vietnam?
Venezuela?
Cuba?
Libya?
Anywhere?
Russia reforming the former Soviet empire is not in our national interest.
At some point, acting in our national interest with regard to that is going to cost us something.
We, exactly like Europe, are unwilling to do what national interest dictates, and we’re paying for that.
And will continue to do so until either that changes, or we ultimately lose.
Everybody wants to be gangster, until it’s time to do gangster shit.
Trump, clearly, is no exception, at least internationally.
If this were 1992, we could afford a president who only excelled at national policy, or dealing with peaceful allies.
But it’s 2025, and we need someone as good overseas with the troublemakers as he is domestically.
Trump is failing that measure with flying colors in regard to Ukraine.
But he’s proving that the quickest way to end a war is to surrender.
Since he can’t get Putin to do so, he’s going to beat Zelensky into submission.
That’ll play well, once the low-IQ cheers die down.
He’s going to own that worse than Biden owned pulling out of Afghanistan, but the consequences of him seeking to chickenshit his way out of our now-clearly-phony diplomatic “assurances” to Ukraine are going to haunt American foreign policy and nuclear non-proliferation for 100 years, if we can even avoid global thermonuclear war for that long.
That’s a big shit sandwich to eat all at one sitting, but Trump is taking the task on with gusto. More’s the pity.
Divemedic · March 4, 2025 at 6:42 pm
We as a nation are bankrupt. We can’t afford to be the righter of all wrongs. We can’t save the entire world, and trying to do so will destroy us.
See tomorrow’s post.
JimmyPx · March 3, 2025 at 7:10 pm
Aesop, FDR was in no WAY isolationist ! He was doing everything he could to get us into the war.
He had US destroyers escorting British convoys across the Atlantic full of American armaments that we GAVE them. The Japanese said repeatedly to keep our nose out of China and if you cut off our oil supplies from the US we have no choice but war. What did FDR do ? Both things.
So this “see what happens when you’re isolationist” is Neocon bullshit along with every negotiation 1938 Munich Conference is dredged up
Russia today is NOT the Soviet Union and Putin isn’t Stalin. Is he a nationalistic Russian strong man ? Of course but he is reasonable. The start of the war was in 2014 when the Obama Administration with Victoria Nuland (she admitted this) used $5 billion of USAID money and overthrew the democratically elected government of Ukraine and installed literal Nazis. They then started attacking the Russian Oblasts in the east, signed and then ignored the Minsk Agreements and then with US and European help armed up and trained the Army (Angela Merkel admitted Minsk was a stalling tactic). The final straw was saying Ukraine would join Nato and the US would station missiles on Ukrainian soil. Russia said this was an existential threat to them and either stop or they would be forced to attack. Zelensky told Putin to pound sand. Putin attacked but a month later tried to have a peace deal in Istanbul but Biden and Boris Johnston told Zelensky to refuse.
Thus over a MILLION Ukrainian troops are dead or wounded and for what ?
This is about trying to hurt the Russians but instead it made them stronger.
Zelensky and his pals haven’t heard a shot fired in anger and have stolen millions while the Ukrainian troops barely get enough to eat.
**** that Neocon noise you’re saying and **** Zalensky and the European leaders are showing that they are no friend of ours so **** them too.
Aesop · March 3, 2025 at 9:26 pm
1) I don’t recall naming FDR as isolationist.
Which is moot, since the entire effing COUNTRY was (at least, the ones who weren’t arguing for outright collaborating with every enemy we eventually faced from 1941-1991), right up until Pearl Harbor.
You could look it up.
2) The start of the war was Russia crossing their fingers in 1994, biding their time until the moment arose when they could take advantage of Ukrainian inner turmoil to invade three times in three regions inside of a year’s time. And a quick look at the map shows those to be Ukrainian oblasts, not “Russian” ones. Unless you want to tell me that El Paso and San Diego belong to Mexico, you might wish to consult a map on that point.
And the turmoil in Ukraine came when Russia’s then-latest (of every one since 1991) puppet regime in Kiev was overthrown by the Ukrainians themselves. (Our contributions in that respect are neither germane, nor noteworthy.)
Finally, Zelensky had the temerity to tell Putin “F*** you!”, and mean it, and Russia had no other options but sheer thruggery, to take by force what they couldn’t subvert from within. Only that didn’t work out like their press releases and army readiness reports told them it would. Boo frickin’ hoo.
3) Please do a list of all the honest governments we have supported from say, 1900-present. Then all the virtuous US arms dealers and defense contractors, same era.
4) If Russia gets any “stronger” from this, they’re going to melt away like the Soviet Union did in 1991. China waits, and licks its chops dreaming of Siberia, and Vlad has a date with a bullet behind the ear the minute he tries to get off this lit powder keg, turn tail, and return to his original borders. Everything he’s done since 2022 has been one form of suicidal ideation or another.
4) Nice pivot at the end to the very isolationism I pointed out is informing the current global myopia.
We tried that tack in 1920.
It’s one of the most epic failures in world history.
But I guess you figure that wasn’t real isolationism…?
Please, write this down somewhere you’ll remember it: Countries don’t have friends. They have interests.
A militarily formidable and adventuristic Russia is not in our interests.
Period. Ever.
A hobbled, humbled, and broke-dick one: decidedly more so.
Then they focus, out of necessity and national survival, on their actual and millennia-old enemy: China.
When we can screw two rivals simultaneously and play them off against each other endlessly for decade upon decade, the rest of the world becomes a very pleasant place to live. Especially for anyone with a US passport.
Then, when Americans are traveling abroad, they’re doing it in Hawaiian shirts, rather than in camouflage fatigues and carrying rifles.
All this is like Poli Sci 101, and the highlights of all of Sun Tzu and Machiavelli on an index card. Which goes a long way why it’s hard to get it through the thicker heads on the Right, many of whom never met a book they wouldn’t skip until it became a comic.
Please, don’t be That Guy.
wojtek · March 4, 2025 at 12:10 am
“spotting Ukraine’s asinine folly in ever giving up ICBMs and nuclear weapons”
C’mon, not this childish theory that Ukraine gave up nukes in exchange for eternal peace.
Ukraine gave up nukes in exchange for independence and to avoid immediate destruction. This was the only option on the table. And this decision was made much earlier than you imagine.
But if you really want to try a legalistic route, try to explain why you think that 2014 coup in Kijow did not violate art. 1 of the Budapeszt Memorandum. Good luck.
Aesop · March 4, 2025 at 6:37 pm
Buy a calendar.
Ukraine had been independent for three years before they gave up the nukes.
And even then, we had to pay them to do so, as well as issue the now-obviously mendacious security “assurances”. And Russia signed on, because they were in no position to militarily threaten anyone, save by initiating a nuclear exchange. When the range was liable to be hot in both directions, they opted out of that choice.
Then explain how Russian interference in every Ukrainian election and the installation of Pro-Moscow puppet governments non-stop in every election from 1994-2014 didn’t violate the Budapest Memorandum first. And second, third, fourth, fifth, etc.
Russia overplayed their hand in Kiev. It ultimately cost them. So they took their ball, and then invaded instead. Four times in the last 11 years. The last outing didn’t go as well as the first three. The Russian term for that is toughski shitski.
Michael · March 4, 2025 at 8:39 am
An interesting article, well written by a military man that actually served for decades.
https://armedforces.press/nato-time-to-turn-out-the-lights/
A counterpoint to our resident military-political poster who has never told us exactly how much military experience he has.