By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Ukrainian forces have liberated over 200 square kilometers of territory in the Dnipropetrovsk region, including the villages of Vyshneve, Verbove, and Ternove. These advances, concentrated east of Zaporizhzhia, may be facilitated by recent disruptions to Russian Starlink access. While some Ukrainian units deny significant operational advances, reporting efforts focused on improving tactical positions, other reports indicate maintained or advanced positions in the Kupiansk direction, evidenced by geolocated footage of Ukrainian units advancing on Pershoho Travnia Street.
Read the original article here
Recent reports from war monitors indicate that Ukrainian forces are making advances in the Dnipropetrovsk region. This news offers a glimmer of hope, especially after what has felt like a long and arduous winter, and perhaps signals the dawn of a more beautiful spring for Ukraine. The idea of Ukrainian troops pushing forward, potentially reclaiming territories and marching towards liberation, brings to mind a specific encounter from the mid-2000s with a young man from Dnipro visiting the US. He was described as a sunflower come to life, full of a bright outlook for the future and a strong desire for progress. He was a journalist, eager to share stories and build a better world. The war, however, intervened, placing him in Kyiv for conscription, and one can only wonder if he will have the chance to march and reclaim his home, a home he so clearly cherished. It’s heartening to think of him and so many others fighting for their country, and the sentiment is clear: kick those occupying forces out for good and keep the momentum going. The goal is to keep the Russians on the defensive, a strategy that seems to be gaining traction.
There are those who, despite the evidence, would have us believe that Russia has somehow “sorted things out” after recent setbacks, a claim that sounds suspiciously like propaganda or misinformation, perhaps even from Russian bots. This situation highlights how the fear of “escalation” from influential figures, like Elon Musk, by withholding crucial leverage against Russia, has inadvertently prolonged the conflict rather than fostering peace. It’s a stark reminder that when certain technological tools, like Starlink, are restricted for Russian forces, Ukrainian advancements become more probable. It’s a pattern of being two steps ahead in strategic thinking, yet four steps behind in decisive action. The sustainability of this conflict is also a concern; the European Union and its resources are not unlimited, and soldiers, both Ukrainian and Russian, are finite.
The narrative that the EU is pushing for a fight “until the last Ukrainian man” is a mischaracterization. The reality is that Ukraine itself is choosing to fight, defending its freedom and sovereignty. This isn’t a war driven by the EU’s desires, but by Ukraine’s determination to repel invaders. The sentiment from the Ukrainian side is more akin to fighting “until we kill the last Russian invader in our lands,” a sentiment that is increasingly being realized as Russian forces appear to be running out of both resources and personnel. Some might even suggest that Putin could end this war tomorrow by simply withdrawing his troops.
There’s a well-known saying that there are no real winners in war, and this conflict is proving to be no exception. Russia’s economy has been severely damaged by Putin’s decisions, and with Ukraine’s counter-offensive pushing Russian forces back, the situation for Russia is dire. The EU has pledged to help Ukraine rebuild, and the question arises: who will help Russia? Historically, relations between Russia and China have been strained, and it’s unlikely China would offer unconditional support. It’s a shame that some individuals, with access to global information, choose to remain subservient to leaders like Lukashenko and Putin, rather than embracing truth and freedom.
The brave Belarusians who are volunteering to fight alongside Ukraine are a testament to the human spirit, offering a stark contrast to those who passively accept authoritarian rule. This “Slavic vs. Slavic” conflict could indeed be ended by a single individual if they so chose, a pointed reference to the man at the helm of Russia. The accusations of Russian bots being filled with “methylene chloride” and spewing “insane takes” reflect the frustration with blatant misinformation. Ukraine is a free and sovereign nation, rightfully defending its existence.
Ukraine’s historical memory of the Holodomor, orchestrated by Moscow, fuels their resolve. Russia’s actions in this war, marked by alleged crimes against humanity, have further solidified this determination. The narrative that Russia’s economy is solely focused on producing and sending young men to be annihilated in Ukrainian fields paints a grim picture of a war initiated and perpetuated by Putin’s ambition. The EU did not compel Putin to invade Ukraine, a point often lost in the noise of propaganda.
The assertion that Putin and his allies are suddenly eager for a peace deal rings hollow, especially when viewed against the backdrop of continued aggression. For some, a “happy future” involves a drastic ideological shift, a rebuilding of borders, and the eradication of opposing viewpoints – a vision that, while presented as optimistic, carries a dark undertone. The idea of “two steps ahead, four steps behind” continues to resonate, with Russia seemingly unable to grasp the full implications of its actions.
The notion of “Russia cannot continue forever and soldiers are not unlimited” is a pragmatic observation, echoing the Ukrainian sentiment of fighting “until the last Russian man.” The justification for this continued fight, as opposed to the notion of fighting “until the last Ukrainian man,” stems from the fundamental difference between defending one’s homeland and waging an unprovoked invasion. The recurring theme of a “Slavic vs. Slavic” conflict, with external powers observing, is a tragic simplification of a complex geopolitical struggle.
The idea that the “main enemy of peace” is in Brussels is a fringe perspective, particularly when compared to the widespread consensus that Vladimir Putin is the primary architect of this war. The suggestion that God, or Putin, will answer prayers is a desperate plea, highlighting a perceived lack of agency and a reliance on a singular, flawed leader. Ukraine, however, has significant international backing, with support from some of the world’s largest economies.
Ukraine is poised to be rebuilt, emerging stronger than ever, while Russia faces the prospect of post-war stagnation. Reports of Russian soldiers deploying with inadequate equipment, such as stolen Ladas and wooden farm wagons, underscore the apparent depletion of their resources, leaving them with little more than “cope” – a coping mechanism fueled by misinformation and perhaps, as some suggest, a cultural propensity for alcohol. The notion that the West drinks more than Russia is a simplistic rebuttal to a complex issue.
The idea that what some perceive as “stress” is simply “typical life” and that individuals “can’t stand to be a man” is a dismissive and misogynistic take, irrelevant to the actual conflict. Propaganda, regardless of its origin, is often “stinky” and attempts to distort reality. While the beauty of Russia as a country is acknowledged, the behavior of some of its people, particularly in the context of this war, is widely condemned. The question posed to those engaging in online disinformation – whether their legs were blown off by Ukrainian drones or if it’s merely a drinking game – serves to highlight the absurdity of their positions and the potential personal cost of their actions or inactions.