re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict

quote:

---

Today's White House Messages:

@JDVance : Ukraine is doomed

@generalkellogg : Ukraine can win, Russia is losing

@michaelgwaltz : Ukraine is the most corrupt

@realDonaldTrump : I stopped Russia from taking Ukraine

I almost feel sorry for @PressSec Leavitt. Almost.

---

LINK

russian drone terrorism update...

Zelenskyy: Over 100 drones launched by Russia on Ukraine overnight, total hits 375 this week – photos

Anastasia Protz — Wednesday, 30 April 2025, 11:37

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has reported that Russian forces attacked Ukraine with more than 100 attack drones on the night of 29-30 April, noting that Moscow has launched 375 drones, including over 190 Shahed loitering munitions, since the start of the week.

Source: Zelenskyy

Quote: "Kharkiv, Dnipro, Dobropillia and other Ukrainian cities and communities. Over 100 Russian attack drones overnight, 375 attack drones since the beginning of the week, more than 190 of them were Shaheds."

Details: Zelenskyy noted that over 25 people, including two children, had been injured in Russian strikes on Kharkiv. Russian forces also damaged at least 13 civilian infrastructure facilities, including apartment blocks, a hospital and a school. Search and rescue operations continue in the city.



Ukrainska Pravda

quote:

---

One side is attacking a fortified front recklessly with minor successes. These attacks have to be costing more troops than ghd defense is losing, right?

---

That is at least somewhat propaganda. I've seen actually military analysts breaking down attacks that Ukraine propaganda accounts call "Meat Waves" that are just basic military maneuvers. Not trying to suggest that Russia overall isn't fine using high-casualty tactics... they very much are. But the type of assaults they are conducting can be extremely high risk. High risk organized tactics =/= "run toward that location through gunfire until we capture it"

quote:

---

These troops being used are not good fighting men. They rushed through training to the front lines. Again there is an enormous waste.

---

So just like Ukraine

quote:

---

I’ve read that Russia is not getting the numbers of volunteers that they were getting previously. That is having an impact.

---

Number of volunteers during war by month typically drops throughout the conflict. You'd much rather be on the side still taking in some volunteers vs the one dragging people off the street though.

quote:

---

You have to understand the nature of warfare, especially in today’s hyper-political landscape. One of the main weapons of war is propaganda. Basically, you have to sift through the bullshite and use deductive reasoning based on logic and knowledge of military history.

Having said all that, I’d say you should be highly skeptical of any casualty figures released by either side, or even purported by media outlets.

So, what does that leave us? Well, let’s lay out some facts:

The war is in its third year. And it’s been stalemated for almost two years. So, the one definite fact we know about this war is it’s a stalemate. So, what is the nature of a stalemated war? What decides the outcome of such a war? Again, history gives us the answer. And that answer is exhaustion. The side who runs out of men and resources first, will lose.

So, and you’ll have to do a bit of homework here, I suggest if you want really understand how this war will end, look into which country, Russia or Ukraine, has the advantage in manpower and resources.

As for what we’re seeing on the battlefield, I’ll again refer you to the nature of this war, the nature of a stalemated war. As always history can guide us. Specifically WWI, more specifically, the Western Front of WWI. In that war, stalemate descended on the front in 1914. Between 1914 and the end of the war in 1918, the front barely moved. In fact, if you read the daily updates from this war; about how the Russians advance here and take this and that village sometimes the Ukrainians advance a few kilometers and take this or that village, it reads exactly like updates written in 1916.

All that to say, when the end in WWI came, it came suddenly. In summer 1918, it looked as though the war would drag on for at least two more years or longer. Tens of thousands were dying monthly on both sides. Then, in the fall of 1918, the German lines finally started to crack and rapidly began to crumble all together. The Germans had reached their breaking point. That’s how a stalemated war ends. One moment appears that it will go on for the foreseeable future, until it doesn’t. And when that point comes, the losing side degenerates rapidly.

---

Nice to see some actual objective analysis.

The economic piece can throw a wrench in things, but I've been skeptical of that becoming the deciding factor for a while now because countries at war can typically bandaid over economic hardships with a wartime economy for longer than you'd expect as long as their supply chains remain intact. They might be absolutely screwed after the war ends though.

Remember you are in an echo chamber of leftist nuts and neocons that live in their own little bubble world minus common sense and reality while screaming for more.

quote:

---

there’s literally nothing new in his “analysis”.

---

Thats true, what he said has been true the whole time.

But you have a dozen posters in here still denying it

I don't even think all of them are leftists. I think many are cold war kids who grew up scared to death of Russia and never got over it. So to them Russia is this big supervillain when in reality its just a big bully in a gradual decline. Even the peak in Soviet power was almost entirely based around the fact that they had nukes and that they were able to capitalize on a broken Europe after WW2.

Ukraine ready to sign US minerals deal on April 30, source in President's Office confirms

by Tim Zadorozhnyy and The Kyiv Independent news desk April 30, 2025 2:43 PM

Ukraine is ready to sign the long-anticipated minerals agreement with the U.S., which could happen as early as April 30, a source in the President's Office has told the Kyiv Independent.

According to the source, the final version of the deal includes a 50-50 investment structure between the two countries and contains "a lot of good details."

The agreement excludes any provisions related to Ukraine's debt for prior U.S. military or financial assistance, the source said.

This marks a departure from earlier U.S. proposals, in which President Donald Trump had sought to frame the agreement as partial repayment for U.S. military aid, claiming Ukraine owed Washington up to $300 billion.

Since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion, Kyiv has received just over $100 billion in U.S. assistance.

Ukrainian opposition MP Yaroslav Zhelezniak, who has reviewed multiple drafts, wrote on Telegram that "the entire logic of the future fund (which forms the basis of the minerals agreement) will be changed."

Under the revised framework, there will be no immediate payouts or transfers of existing plants, ports, or Ukraine's gas transmission system as previously proposed. Instead, the focus will shift to future joint investment projects and reinvestment of profits, Zhelezniak said.

"Based on the draft document I saw in Washington, it's indeed much better than the one sent to us on March 23," he added.

The Kyiv Independent

quote:

---

Russia has not proven that they would honor agreements and that they would leave their neighbors alive.

---

Which agreements?

So...agreements not to invade Ukraine/"member nations"? K then.

Russia likely views Ukraine as the invaders here. Remember? Most of the area between Crimea and the rest of Russia voted to secede and join Russia. I know this thread is a pro-American involvement in Ukraine love fest, but I also know that has been mentioned somewhere along the way.

ETA: When Russia controls those regions after this is all over, wouldn't that lend credence to Russia's pre-war claim?