Because Ukraine has a population 1.5x the size of Iraq and holding Iraq was not exactly easy for a much more advanced military?

 

And that whole Afghanistan thing kind of weights like Vietnam does here.

And that whole Afghanistan thing kind of weights like Vietnam Afghanistan does here.

 

 

More than just the difficulty of holding all of Ukraine, they'd also completely isolate themselves from most of the world economy if they did that. Their economy is already pretty terrible, and the sanctions over Crimea haven't helped.

More than just the difficulty of holding all of Ukraine, they'd also completely isolate themselves from most of the world economy if they did that. Their economy is already pretty terrible, and the sanctions over Crimea haven't helped.

Russia was able to take Crimea and actually have a reasonable claim to it that helped limit the violence. Right now, it's the Ukranian army fighting a resistance in the areas closest to Russia where there is a Russian speaking population, but those areas would be divided even if Russia tried to take them over. If Russia invades, they'll wind up both fighting the Ukranian army for the territory and turning the portions of the local population who are Ukranian into fighters against Russia.

I wasn't trying to say that holding all of Ukraine would be like holding Crimea, just pointing out the huge international economic problems increasingly overt military actions will pose for Russia proper.

Russia was able to take Crimea and actually have a reasonable claim to it that helped limit the violence. Right now, it's the Ukranian army fighting a resistance in the areas closest to Russia where there is a Russian speaking population, but those areas would be divided even if Russia tried to take them over. If Russia invades, they'll wind up both fighting the Ukranian army for the territory and turning the portions of the local population who are Ukranian into fighters against Russia.

 

I was under the impression that the areas closest to Russia were very much pro-Russia over Ukraine. Maybe they don't take the entire country, but they can take the part that considers itself Russian, just like Crimea.

 

If that's not the end game, what's the point of fighting along side the rebels in Ukranian territory?

Keeps the central pro-Western Ukrainian government weak, hopefully leading to an eventual pro-Russian replacement government would be my guess.

I was under the impression that the areas closest to Russia were very much pro-Russia over Ukraine. Maybe they don't take the entire country, but they can take the part that considers itself Russian, just like Crimea.

 

If that's not the end game, what's the point of fighting along side the rebels in Ukranian territory?

 

I've heard a mixbag. The areas are not pro-Kiev, but also don't want Russia to annex them.

I was under the impression that the areas closest to Russia were very much pro-Russia over Ukraine. Maybe they don't take the entire country, but they can take the part that considers itself Russian, just like Crimea.

 

If that's not the end game, what's the point of fighting along side the rebels in Ukranian territory?

It's a big difference. These areas aren't "Just like Crimea". Ethnic russians are a majority in Crimea and an overwhelming majority in Sevastopol. Ethnic Russians are a minority in pretty much every other city/area. The area of the heaviest fighting right now, Donetsk, ethnic russians are a 40% minority. For the Russians to take that part, they're taking on a substantial ethnic majority that won't want to be in Russia.

I wasn't trying to say that holding all of Ukraine would be like holding Crimea, just pointing out the huge international economic problems increasingly overt military actions will pose for Russia proper.

 

Here's an interesting read on the effect of the prior sanctions now and going forward:

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/201...vladimir-putin/