I'm sorry I just feel like you're trolling me at this time point. Russia occupies 1/5 of Ukrainian territory, including most of the coastline, which is vital to Ukraine's economy and prosperity. Furthermore Ukraine's entire industrial capacity was based in the eastern sector, now gone.
The Zaparizhia nuclear power plant is the largest in Ukraine providing 20% of the electricity for Ukraine. Russia is now severing that electricity from Ukraine and connecting the power plant to its own grid. Ukraine just sent grain to Lebanon. The buyers rejected it since the grain is 3-4 months old at this point and flour only has a 6 month shelf life. Now the ship is going to Syria to beg Assad to buy their grain.
Russia didn't even mobilize. If Russia had mobilized with 1 million + men instead of 150-200,000 they would have easily won. They simply did not expect Ukraine to put up a fight. US intelligence also thought that Kiev would fall in 3 days. Intelligence is not always 100%, it just is what it is at the time.
Russia is fighting not Ukraine but NATO through Ukraine. By the end of this war, Ukraine will be cut off from the entire coastline and after that if they don't want to negotiate Kharkiv will be surrounded. It's not a matter of if but when.
Are you forgetting about the disastrous American blunder in Afghanistan recently. 3 TRILLION down the drain, for what ? for nothing. They trained an army for 20 years, it lasted 1.5 months. What do you call that glorious ? victorious ? War is not always straightforward. Stop buying into US made video games and Hollywood movies.
The US went into Iraq in 2003 after bombing and starving the country for 12 years. They sent 375,000+ men into a 300-400 KM frontline. A very Straightforward frontline going from south to north. In an alternate universe if the US had sent in 170,000 troops into Ukraine and Ukraine had the same support and weapons do you think the US would have performed much better ? Abrams would have done better against Javelins ?
The truth is that the Russians tried to do something that goes directly against American / NATO doctrine. They tried to avoid mass casualties, keep everything intact and make the war as painless as possible. That's how they did it in 2014 in Crimea. Don't forget that in Iraq the US killed 1 million civilians.
Again war is not straightforward. WW2 was an absolute disaster for the Soviets at first but in the end they came out on top as a global superpower. You realize that out of 15 German Pzh 2000 howitzers, only 5 are still operational ? Why because of maintenance issues. Apparently firing the howitzer 100 times a day puts too much of a strain on its internal mechanisms.
>It's quite clear that Russia has failed to topple the Ukrainian government, and will not be able to >make any worthwhile territorial advances that would prevent Ukraine from posing any threat to >it.
By all means put it simply because you clearly lack the coherence and strategic insight to make it intelligible or sophisticated.
I'm not going to list all the military blunders that have exposed Russia's military as an extremely archaic, corrupt and inept institution.
But Russia underestimating Ukrainian capabilities and preparedness is going down as one of the most consequential intelligence failures in the history of conflict studies. You can't simply overlook the extreme incompetence of the entire Russian security apparatus ever since they decided to invade their neighbouring country. Which makes it even more disgraceful because Ukraine should have been effectively penetrated by Russian intelligence considering the fact that Russia is familiar with its territory, entire political system and the close ethnic/linguistic ties it holds with its fellow Slavic brethren.
The US simply outplayed Russia post-2014, as it effectively and clandestinely organized Ukrainian defence and intelligence forces to resist an expected Russian invasion. And now Russia is bogged down in an highly unpopular operation that has united the West, enlarged NATO and gave Ukraine its own Iran-Iraq War that will eventually mould a fairly young nation into one with extreme anti-Russian sentiments. Who cares if Ukraine suffers from it? It's quite clear that Russia has failed to topple the Ukrainian government, and will not be able to make any worthwhile territorial advances that would prevent Ukraine from posing any threat to it. And in the meanwhile, what is left of Ukraine is quickly going to be integrated with the West - politically, economically and militarily.
Russia has failed big time, and I'm sure this understanding is slowly making ways in Moscow.
But as I said, this isn't necessarily bad for Iran. On the contrary, Russia's receding power will eventually force Moscow to stop looking at Iran as a junior partner which it can occasionally use as a negotiating card in its dealings with the West. And we're already seeing an outright Russian charm offensive vis-à-vis Iran that demonstrates this.
