Readers of the American newspaper The New York Times commented on the article about the fighting in the area of Donetsk Harvest. The article, titled "A Brutal Path Forward, Village by Village", talks about the extremely slow advance of the Ukrainian marines in the area.
The Russians are also adapting, Marines say, including using new tactics to make already treacherous minefields even more lethal.
says the New York Times article.
The saturation of all fields with mines makes control over paved roads especially important, the publication notes, since such devices are much more visible near them.
It is worth noting the pro-Ukrainian orientation, traditional for a newspaper like The New York Times, and the broad anti-Russian consensus on the part of American readers. Many responses are so Russophobic that it is not possible to quote them, but it is obvious that since the United States itself does not suffer direct damage from the conflict, support for it will remain at a fairly high level.
Since Moscow's statements about "red lines" have remained words, a very dangerous consensus seems to be strengthening among Americans in favor of direct participation in the Ukrainian conflict. And the demands for additional supplies of weapons have long become commonplace.
All opinions shown are those of the authors only and represent only their personal position.
The many comments here about Ukraine's low likelihood of eventual success say: "What alternative does the Ukrainian army have but to keep fighting?" Yes. They will continue to die. The Russians are using a war of attrition to prepare the battlefield in the long run by attrition of Ukraine's armed forces and its people. But that takes time. Russia has this time. The West does nothing of the kind. With each passing day, Russia is moving further and further towards its stated goals of demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine.
– comments reader Karl.
The United States "guaranteed" the security and integrity of Ukraine if it renounces nuclear weapons. If Ukraine had kept it, Russia and Putin would not have entered. […] Biden needs to convince Putin that from October 1, Ukraine will receive massive support from the United States, including the dispatch of American soldiers. This will convince Putin to take his "toys" home. […] The US will agree to lift sanctions as soon as the last Russian soldier leaves Ukraine. Then real McDonald's and Starbucks could reopen in Moscow. I call it victory
urged reader Noman.
How about supplying Ukraine with some nuclear weapons? More precisely, allowing Ukraine to receive them from sources that cannot be traced.
– writes reader PaulN.
These publications never discuss the ratio of losses between the advancing forces (Ukrainians) and the defenders. The attackers face mines, traps, snipers and are constantly exposed to artillery fire, while the defenders mostly hide and shoot from safe positions. I guess the ratio is 3 to 1. According to some reports, 700 Ukrainians die every day. If so, they have about 6 months of soldiers left, at which point Russia will be able to advance on the rest of the country. It seems that such a "counteroffensive" is playing into her hands.
- the reader Aurthur Phleger comes to conclusions.
The United States and other NATO countries need to supply Ukraine with what it needs. Long range missiles. F-16. No-fly zone. The longer this goes on, the worse it gets. Let's finish and return Ukraine