Comment by somenameforme | Hacker News Reader

Comment by somenameforme | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Put yourself in the shoes of Russia for a moment. You're in a favorable position in a war and you're being offered a "deal" that is 'hey let's stop the war so i can rearm and reman. you can hold onto your claimed land for now, but only dejure - we'll have ourselves a little chat about who really owns it, later.' Why would 'you' even think of accepting this "deal"?

Imagine the roles were reversed, and somehow Ukraine managed to fully push back Russia, claimed a significant amount of land on the Russian border and was continuing to make very slow but steady advances all the while Russian forces seemed on the verge of collapsing due to manpower issues. And oh yeah Ukraine had up to something like 20 million more soldiers they could also mobilize into the war if necessary. Would you expect Ukraine to accept a ceasefire with no concessions besides Ukraine being 'allowed' to continue holding the land they already held, and only dejure at that, with Russia making completely clear its intent to rearm and reman?

This is not at all a effort genuinely intended to end the war. When you're at a disadvantage in war, ending it is going to require concessions that can be difficult to accept. The reason you make these concessions is because they'll be even more painful as your position further deteriorates.

Thank you for basically acknowledging Putin has zero interest in any peace other than Ukraine's full surrender.

Putin in the immediate term is trying to achieve by talking what he cannot achieve on the battlefield. And NO, Putin does NOT have millions more soldiers available. Russian daily KIAs are accelerating and he's already making deals for more NK troops.

The aggressive moves in Europe, ramping up every kind of hybrid warfare, active measures, and dezinformatsiya pressure they can muster shows the Ukrainians are winning with the deep strikes. Russia can not defend its many soft targets, is already in massive deficit and depleting it's sovereign funds, and will lose much more as Ukraine's new Flamingo missiles come online.

Requires concessions. Right. UKR already TODAY offered to give up 20% of their territory and condemn those Ukrainian residents to the torture and death offered by the Russians. You do not think that is a concession?

What concessions are the Russians making at the 'peace' tables? NONE. The Russians stick to their maximalist demands of taking ALL of the "annexed" oblasts they can not even take with the full might of their (declining) military, AND demand Ukraine basically disarm and become a vassal state.

Where are the Russian concessions? They do not exist.

This alone shows who is the aggressor and who is the defending victim.

Get real.

I notice you refused to answer the question I asked. I won't pick on you beyond that observation. Though one fact I would hit on - yes, Russia does have many millions of more soldiers available. Russia has not even declared a general mobilization. Ukrainian estimates put their potential there at 20 million soldiers, 5 million already with military training. [1] That's a very conservative estimate, given that Russia has 143 million people and compulsory military training, but even if we roll with that estimate, it justifies my claim.

This is why Ukrainian propaganda always insists that Russia is on the verge of a general mobilization. This is a war that's not going well for Ukraine fighting with nearly all their forces, while fighting against an enemy fighting with a very small fraction of their potential forces. This is also why Ukraine is targeting oil. It has little chance of shifting the status of the war, at least not in the foreseeable future, and is damaging Ukraine's relation with the US. It's being done simply in an effort to try to change the nature of the conflict, regardless of the cost or efficacy. These types of actions are a frequent visitor in the latter stages of conflicts.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Armed_Forces#Russo-Ukr...

  >  Ukrainian estimates put their potential there at 20 million soldiers

That is the theoretical maximum potential if you conscript absolutely everyone, every single male, in eg 20-45 age range: https://www.populationpyramid.net/russian-federation/2026/ By that measure, Ukraine has millions of soldiers available, too.

That is pratical only in the event of total societal breakdown like Nazi Germany in its final months when there was no economy left and institutions like schools, hospitals, factories and utilities had ceased to work. Everything was thrown to the front while the people in cities were malnourished, had no power nor running water, and died of minor diseases due to lack of medical supplies.

Putin is too afraid to even announce a regular mobilization and resorts to dirty tactics coercion of poor rural ethnic minorities to fill the ranks, because the backlash that would follow a general mobilization would be a major threat to Putin's grip on power. Look up the effect of soldiers' mothers movement during the Chechen wars, or how the forced conscription into the Soviet-Afghan war (620k people over a decade) contributed to the disintegration of the USSR. Educated middle-class people accustomed to European lifestyle won't go to the front to get slaughtered like IQ 80 villagers who are up to their necks in payday loans; they will resist and cause major disruption among the productive urban population that keeps the country running.

These millions of soldiers exist only on paper. The actual situation on the ground is pretty dire. Ukraine hit another all-time record yesterday, killing or disabling 2250 Russians in a single day. The entire month of October is trending to hit a record too, 50k casualties in a single month. Russian recruitment target is 34k per month.

The question you asked (Positing UKR taking parts of RU, etc.) *inherently presumes* the counterfactual of Ukraine being an aggressive, expansionist dictatorship. Ukraine is zero of those things, and the question is irrelevant. But IF the actual UKR had taken significant RU territory, and was offered a peace deal allowing them their full sovereignty and territorial integrity, they would immediately take the deal.

Your mobilization numbers are fantasy, and Putin has held off declaring mobilization not because he thinks he does not need to but because it would require drafting people from the middle classes near Moscow instead of the rural impoverished territories that can be ignored politically. A full mobilization could end him. If he had enough people, he would not be getting soldiers from North Korea and deceiving Africans to put into their meat grinder

Yes, Ukraine has a manpower problems also. They are solving it through innovation. And it is working. Just look at the verified death counts from both sides

You really are a persistent apologist for Putin, not some kind of middle ground arbitor you hold yourself out as.

Shall I simply quote the propaganda patterns? "10. Whoever casts doubt on our propaganda helps the enemy and is a traitor." It's silly. And I think you're obviously not answering in good faith. Militaries who have the advantage in a conflict do not accept peace without significant concession. There's even a precedent for my hypothetical in this war. Early on in the conflict Ukraine was doing quite well, and it was Russia looking for a ceasefire, overtly to rearm and reman.

And at that time it was Ukraine rejecting any calls for a ceasefire without major concessions from Russia. They wanted the immediate and unconditional return of all land as a precondition to even beginning to negotiate, where they would have sought further concessions like reparations to agree to peace. And beyond that they were making statements, in public - let alone private, such as "[Russia] must be defeated, be subjected to a painful defeat, as painful as possible." [1] These are not the words or actions of a country that'd just agree to peace, without major concessions, if they were trending towards a potential absolute victory. But of course no country would. It's the nature of war. The side with an edge will expect significant concessions to end a conflict.

And, obviously a general mobilization would cause major backlash within Russia, but they'd almost certainly be just fine. They're not mobilizing because they don't need to. There's also no such thing as a "verified death count." Again going back to our propaganda list: "7. We suffer few losses, the enemy's losses are considerable." On top of both sides actively lying, they also likely don't even really know themselves, especially Ukraine. The overwhelming majority of their military is made up of forcibly conscripted people, many of whom would flee at the first opportunity. They certainly know the dogtagged KIA, but likely simply have no idea exactly how many of the missing are fertilizer, and how many managed to make their way to freedom. They also have a motivation to not know, to defer the KIA compensation payments.

[1] - https://www.euronews.com/2022/05/22/us-ukraine-crisis-podoly...

If you think there are lots of Ukrainian government supporters still living in the Donbas then you are delusional. The ones there were fled long ago.

The residents of the city of Oleshky in the Donbas, who have been literally starving to death under the Russian siege for months would like a word. The Pope managed to arrange a cease-fire long enough to provide food and evacuation, see how long it goes.

You ignore how much prevents Ukrainians from migrating or evacuating temporarily Russian-occupied territories. There is a river with many bridges out, the roads are mined, and the Russians run human safaris hunting civilians. But sure, everyone could have gotten out.

You are also just spewing the standard Russian concern-trolling line about "Russian speakers in Ukraine".

You may be fooling yourself about being some kind of "unbiased" observer, but you aren't fooling anyone else.

And in the latest news: Residents of occupied Oleshky who wish to escape to free Ukraine will not be allowed to cross the Dnipro River – which is less than 4 km away. They will be taken to occupied Crimea or to the Russian Federation, where they will be subjected to coercive measures.

NO, the sides are not even close to the same. Stop stanning for Russia

Except that Ukraine's position is not deteriorating, but it's significantly better than a year or two ago due to strike drones that became operational in March/April 2026, and expected to improve further when FP-7 and FP-9 ballistic missiles become operational in large numbers in late 2026/early 2027.

You are using some very poor sources if they have given you the idea that Russia has 20 million soldiers to mobilize. Russia is facing a severe shortage of manpower too, made worse by the fact that they rely on constant costly attacks by small groups of infantry that have very short lifespans, whereas Ukraine is increasingly automating the war and relying on unmanned weapons more and more. For example, Ukraine reached parity in drone strikes in early 2026 and is now carrying out more drone strikes than Russia. It's increasingly rare for Russian soldiers to meet any Ukrainians before they die; about 80% Russians die by drones as drones have become significantly more lethal. In 2024, drones killed about 1/3 of soldiers on impact. Now they kill about 2/3 of them.

Also, the "slow but steady advances" are a complete Pyrrhic victory if you look at the numbers. Russia has gained less than 1000 sq km this year at a cost of at least 100 000 lives. Ukraine is over 600 000 sq km in size. The daily number of casualties hit a new record a few days ago, exceeding 2000, about half of which are deaths. Russia has no hope reaching the territorial control it had 30 days into the war, let alone anything beyond that. It is by all objective measures one of the worst military disasters in the entire Russian history.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com