The US State Department wanted a quick win. Biden said no. He was worried about nukes.

Biden told Putin, "If you invade Ukraine, we will sanction you!" And Putin said, "Sounds like a good deal to me." So here we are, Biden was better at deal making than Trump.

Even if China were to pass its AI tech to Russia, Russia no longer has the industrial base, nor the liquid assets to take advantage of it. And that's not counting the massive brain drain Russia experienced when almost 2 million men (many of them in tech) left at the start of the war.

Ukraine, OTH, hasn't suffered that type of brain drain and, thanks to Western support, it can carry a war economy and build AI-powered drone tech at scale.

This was a war for Russia to win if it hadn't become so incompetent and corrupt under Putin (and thank God for that).

Leadership matters.

How do you know? Russia lost in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Syria, and Mali, and didn't use a nuke. They won't use a nuke.

It's not his mouth that he's opening, though.

News you don't like == propaganda?

Shit is happening on the tech front in the Russo-Ukrainian war with spillovers in the Middle East. We are witnessing a battleshift paradigm shift not unlike the widespread adoption of gunpowder, airpower and/or information technology....

... both sides have been heavily invested in this shit, not just Ukraine...

... and it's tilted the war in Ukraine's favor...

... and Hezbollah has embraced that 100%, giving a technically superior force (the IDF) more headaches than it can handle...

... and it's shaping how technology is going to be developed...

... and you think this shouldn't be covered in a technology-oriented website?

Oh my sweet summer child.

This reminds me of every single management moron that dismantled IT systems monitoring to save money because nothing happens anyway , ignoring that it's not that nothing happens but that the monitoring provides a way to see trends and take preemptive actions before SHTF.

Now this comment is entirely motivated reasoning. Try to see clearly. Don't drink your own koolaid.

It may not be entirely provable, but I entirely blame Bush Jr for the entire debacle. If he had been willing to work with Saddam instead of trying to invade the country, then Putin wouldn't have gone into full militaristic mode. The ideal is that we can have a world where we solve disagreements without killing each other. Russians were largely on board with that until Bush went out of his way to prove it false.

Bush lied people died, and Putin concluded that the world is still one where they need to maintain full security of their surroundings (including Ukraine).

That is their current dilemma. We will see if they can manage to find a solution or not.

If they can't, it will be rather hilarious, in a dark humor sort of way.

Greedy fucks not willing to work, just want their parents to give them everything.

Your writing looks remarkably similar to AI slop. Not concise at all.

Russian is weak. Their weapons are trash. If Ukraine had been supported properly, the trenches wouldn't matter.

In Syria, Russian forces attacked 40 US marines with a force of 500 troops. The Russians lost half their troops. The Americans had a single soldier injured.

The Soviet army mainly oppressed its own people. That's why it's not good.

Nice comment. We now know that Biden didn't want to win the war, because he was afraid of nukes.

In modern war, the side with air superiority wins the war. The side with air superiority has weapons that can attack but can't be attacked back: that's too huge an advantage. The entire reason that Ukraine didn't fall in three months is because somehow Russia failed to establish air superiority. Ukraine managed to shoot airplanes out of the sky if they got too close. So it's a situation where neither side has superiority: a stalemate. Ukraine is building up their airforce. When they've built it up enough to establish air superiority, they will win the war. European industrial production is powerful.

Drones are a challenge for Russia. As you cleverly called them, Wunderwaffen have come up from time to time in the conflict, from HIMARS to Baryaktar. They've presented challenges to the Russian military, but so far the Russian military has found a solution every time. Russia has presented problems to Ukraine as well, such as motorcycles and glide bombs. Ukraine has found an answer for them as well.

Currently drones have halted or maybe reversed the Russian advance. Russia is working on a solution, and we will see if they overcome this challenge. If they can't it will be an embarrassing loss, much like Finland.

The real question will be if Russia can stop Ukraine's growing airforce. Currently Russia is losing anti-air systems faster than they can be replaced. Russia doesn't have the technology to match NATO air weapons, so the answer is no. But it might take until 2030.

Several years ago Ukraine was talking about going all the way to Moscow, so this isn't a new thing. They've always planned on winning.

It's all stupid. With more support, this war would have been over shortly after it began.