Define "flatlands that doesnt endanger civilian" please.
A flatland that isnt in a 5-10km radius of any civilians? Because artillery is not as accurate as you may believe, or do you think the Ukrainian army is delibaretely chirurgically bombarding places where no rebels lives?
A war with one or more side fighting in a region that includes civilians is by definition "endangering them".
The only way to stop that would be to politely ask everyone to only fight in no man's land and only out of sleeping/eating/transporting arranged cycles.
Again - I'm not sure how, but when russians started bombarding Mariupol - there was NO evidence of shells/rockets falling IN the city, even if there IS general agreement, that Ukrainian possitions AROUND the city WERE attacked. How is that possible? You tell me. And then tell me, why it is not possible for rebels to arrange, IF they are trying to "save their civilians". And yea yea, this is only an example, and shelling of civilians happened from both sides, etc., and since this is war + shit happens - I don't argue with this. What I want to state and identify is that GIVEN CHOICE of defence locations - Rebels choose populated cities, Ukrainian forces choose outskirts of cities with few if any civilians. Take what you will out of this.
Best quote ever:
That blogger feels the all-out-war president is not the man to lead Ukraine? I guess he's even more pro-war than the pro-warest, or maybe a sore loser, or both.
I sincerely doubt you would consider Poroshenko an all-out-war president, if you were an Ukrainian... As the guy in the article writing about Serbia-Croatia war said - the guy, who said "fuck all, fuck not having weapons, fuck casualties and price we will have to pay,
LETS FUCK EVERYONE WHO ATTACKS US TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILIETIES AND THEN SOME" - thats the guy, who is all out war. Giving all the attempts at diplomacy, lack of full mobilization, lack of declaration of war - he is NOT an all-out-war president.
Read his "manifest destiny" if you want to read the most brutally capitalistic warmongering attitude you could ever summon relative to conducting economy/diplomacy/military as an Ukrainian:
To win this war Poroshenko must focus on Ukraine’s interests and only Ukraine’s interests:
It is in Ukraine’s interest to agree with Russia (for now) that Russia isn’t a part of the conflict in Eastern Ukraine. If Russia isn’t a party to the conflict then it has no right to demand concessions from Kyiv. If Russia insists on its demands for Kyiv to federalize the nation, then Russia must first publicly explain in what ways it is part of the conflict.
It is in Ukraine’s interest to treat Donbas like Gaza – to completely strangle it. Build a fence around the territory occupied by Russia and let Russia rebuild what it destroyed. Ignore the fake republics Putin created and let the criminals he armed and put in charge rule there with their terror regime. Starve the territory economically and let Moscow subsidize its moribund economy. Most of the educated and middle class population fled the fighting- provide housing and work for them in Western and Central Ukraine. It is in Ukraine’s interest to keep the remaining population in Russia’s occupation area as destitute and desperate as possible.
It is in Ukraine’s interest to reform the country rapidly and improve the economy at maximum speed. Radical reforms are key to overcome the current economic crisis. Only with a thriving economy Ukraine can finance the military forces it will need. Furthermore only a thriving, democratic Ukraine will be attractive to the oppressed and impoverished population imprisoned in Putin’s Donbas republics.
It is in Ukraine’s interest to combat corruption with a war-like ruthlessness and resolve.
It is in Ukraine’s interest to sell the national gas pipeline network as soon as possible and use the proceeds to improve the nation’s infrastructure, education system and military.
It is in Ukraine’s interest to ally itself with the nations that fully support it and publicly shame the ones that put pressure on it to surrender in the face of brutal Russian aggression.
It is in Ukraine’s interest to put as much economic distance between itself and the occupied Donbas and Crimea regions, even if that means to engage in economic subterfuge against the two regions. If Ukraine succeeds in improving its economy, while keeping the occupied areas economies blighted, both, in due course, will want to rejoin a prosperous, democratic Ukraine – just as East Germany rejoined West Germany after the fall of the Soviet Union.
It is in Ukraine’s interest to draw Russia into open war with Ukraine. Putin can engage in open war with Ukraine but his regime won’t survive it, therefore Ukraine’s must ensure that when Russia breaks the current ceasefire Russia is forced into open war against Ukraine.
That was the most interesting part in the article actually. Some of these are beyong brutual and openly target civilian populace, but I guess that if they don't want your rule - its up to you to give them no bonuses or support. That's why I was asking what local Ukrainians think about these suggestions. I remember asking, whether it would be acceptable to sacrifice Crimea for a chance to "go west", now the price is higher, but the question is still the same I guess.
Poll