Ukraine is making massive headway against Russia right now. Putin’s forces are crumbling all over the front line. So my question is this.

Should Ukraine keep hammering Russia even after they have regained all of their territory?

Because all Putin will do is lick his wounds and rebuild. (if his own people haven’t taken him out that is)

I’m not saying stepping onto Russian soil, but simply continue to destroy Russia’s military until they’re so broken they will never recover quickly. If at all.

What do you think?

  • Solumbran@lemmy.world
    112·
    14 days ago

    I mean what Russia needs is a deep change of regime and mentality.

    Frankly, I doubt that reducing the country to ashes or close, would do that, on the contrary: the more a population feels threatened and vulnerable, the more it gathers around it and refuses to accept change.

    A much smarter move would be on the contrary to be specifically kind to russians, why not by offering them asylum, papers, food, etc. Show them that their government is the problem, and that they have no reason to want war.

    If they have military dominance, start forcing open passages within russian territory, protecting anyone who wants to escape. And obviously, be genuine about it, and do try to actually give them a proper life, don’t start packing them in refugee camps and telling them to shut up.

    That would weaken much more the russian government, make it much easier to trigger a regime change, and whoever escaped and wants to go back to Russia can, once the situation improves.

    Feels much better than to just push Putin to force-recruit all civilians and send them to their deaths, with the ones not fighting starving to death instead.

      • Solumbran@lemmy.world
        2·
        13 days ago

        I mean, this is more of a problem with capitalism than anything else. It applies to everyone, people are encouraged to become fucking businessmen and scam everything and everyone for any cent they can. It’s definitely a problem that needs to be solved, but I don’t think it invalidates what I think.

        I mean, the logic applies to a lot of other things, is free healthcare bad because rich people use it to not pay things that they can afford, and don’t pay taxes for it? Nah, it just means that this point needs to be fixed, but free healthcare stays good, because of how it helps the people that actually need it.