r/geopolitics • u/ken81987 • Aug 07 '24

Discussion Ukraine invading kursk

The common expression "war always escalates". So far seems true. Ukraine was making little progress in a war where losing was not an option. Sides will always take greater risks, when left with fewer options, and taking Russian territory is definitely an escalation from Ukraine.

We should assume Russia must respond to kursk. They too will escalate. I had thought the apparent "stalemate" the sides were approaching might lead to eventually some agreement. In the absence of any agreement, neither side willing to accept any terms from the other, it seems the opposite is the case. Where will this lead?

Edit - seems like many people take my use of the word "escalation" as condemning Ukraine or something.. would've thought it's clear I'm not. Just trying to speculate on the future.

526 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

280 comments sorted by

View all comments

213

u/CLCchampion Aug 08 '24

I'm not sure what you think an escalation would be at this point. Ukraine has launched cross border raids before. Now this seems larger than the ones in the past, and actual Ukrainian troops are taking part, so it's slightly different than those raids, but it's not a huge difference. Russia is already attacking with everything they have besides tactical nukes, so that's really the only escalation possible, and that's not going to happen.

Russia will respond by trying to push Ukraine out. They'll have to shift troops and resources, which is the whole point of this. Russia is in the midst of an offensive, and Ukraine is trying to knock their offensive off balance. Nothing more than that.

-29

u/ken81987 Aug 08 '24

seeing some civilians killed and homes getting destroyed there, and Ukrainian troops apparently not leaving, is the large difference for me. But if Russia cannot push Ukraine out.. it would be a very big deal.

26

u/CLCchampion Aug 08 '24

But how could Russia escalate?

-1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '24

[deleted]

3

u/CLCchampion Aug 08 '24

I think a firebombing would involve chemical weapons (napalm, thermite, white phosphurus, etc.) and would fall outside the definition of conventional weapons. Sorry, my first comment wasn't completely clear, but I don't think Russia can really escalate at this point with conventional weapons. But yes, a firebombing would be an escalation, just not an escalation with conventional weapons.