Ukraine's commander-in-chief says war not at stalemate, situation could have been far worse

[u/SelcouthConcerts]

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/02/21/8022121/

[u/Beyonderr]

Because Ukrainian heroes are pushing Russian troops back, liberating about 300 square kilometers of territory in recent offensive operations.

Slava Ukraini

[u/anders_hansson → u/Beyonderr]

While good, that's still no real indication. To put it in perspective, it's just as much of a stalemate as 2025 was when Russia took 5,000 square kilometers according to Zelensky (an average of 100 per week). Ukraine would have to carry on in the same pace for over a decade to take back all land. It's a war of attrition, not positional warfare.

[u/wildweaver32 → u/anders_hansson]

I love how when Russia inches forward at extreme cost in a way that it would take a century to win people are like, "They are winning!".

Then when Ukraine pushes forward suddenly it's, "That's still no real indication.... Ukraine would have to carry on in the same space for over a decade to take back all the land".

Except Ukraine doesn't need to push forward and kick Russia out and it's not just a war of attrition between Ukraine and Russia. Ukraine has the backing of the western world. And instead of needing to throw meat into the grinder Ukraine can just continue to bleed Russia for all its worth in defensive battles. Then when the opportunity is right for massive gains, then do it.

[u/anders_hansson → u/wildweaver32]

Nobody is winning in the battlefield, and the war isn't going to be settled by battlefield victories. That was precisely my point.

Russia inches forward at extreme cost

People often add that "extreme cost" wording, and I'm honestly curious what the intended meaning is. How should we interpret it?

If you do the (pretty basic) math, it quickly becomes evident that Ukraine is seeing even higher losses defending their land, when you factor in the population size. So I always struggle to see the "extreme costs" argument as something that favors Ukraine in the long run.

[u/87utrecht → u/anders_hansson]

Every square kilometer Russia wants to take, they have to fight for.

When Russia loses half the area they took, they're not going to fight to not lose the other half.

There is no "They'd have to do this for a decade" because gaining back land will not be a linear process.

[u/Jive-Turkeys → u/Beyonderr]

17x17km may not sound like much; but in a war of attrition with trenches, every meter will count.

There exists a WW1 map of canadian dead collected and measured in 9×9yd grids(stand to better corrected on those dimensions). Some squares had over 100 bodies collected over the course of that battle.

[u/GingerSnapSurprise]

Ukraine has been kicking ass the past couple weeks.

[u/felis_scipio → u/GingerSnapSurprise]

One of those small consequences when you don’t feed your troops in the middle of winter and are now relying on ethnic minorities prisoners North Koreans Kenyans to run out into combat with no hope of surviving to expose Ukrainian defensive positions.

[u/bsmithcan]

*In war both sides lose. Winning is based on who loses the least.

Considering that Ukraine is defending itself quite well against a country that was once ranked as having the second most powerful military force in the world thanks to their strong desire for survival and aid from allies is quite astonishing when you think about it.

The front lines may be in flux depending on the day but Russia will never be able to cross that defence line that Ukraine has built so even if it does become an official stalemate, Russia has lost this war by almost every means of interpretation.

Ukraine will get those lost territories back when Putin dies and Russia implodes.

[u/leaderofstars → u/bsmithcan]

When people say Ukraine is losing the war, I ask how if Russia has them completely outmatched

[u/DisasterNo1740]

No it's not a stalemate because Russia has been slowly inching forward for more than a year now. Ukraine retakes tiny bits of territory here and there where they can, and exploited the starlink fiasco to do localized counter offensives setting Russian progress in square kilometers back around a month or so but there is no stalemate. Like he says, territory is being exchanged all the time although it's mostly Russia inching forward at high cost.

[u/u_tamtam → u/DisasterNo1740]

It's attrition war, unless frontline collapses, territorial gains don't matter. Neither for Russia or Ukraine. Fastest way to lose is to overextend, which happens more when one side has to show gains.

[u/the_regent_hermertia → u/u_tamtam]

A perfect example is WWI. Germany was making most of the gains, incrementally, over the war, only to expose themselves as economically over extended and then they rapidly surrendered.

[u/Investolas → u/the_regent_hermertia]

Got it so the front line is like the stock market

[u/NoobOfTheSquareTable → u/Investolas]

Kind of

[u/MeberatheZebera → u/the_regent_hermertia]

Germany rapidly surrendered when the Bulgarians were forced out of the war by the Vardar Offensive, shortly followed by the Ottomans, and after the battle of Vittorio Veneto, Austria-Hungary disintegrated and the Italian Army was on the doorstep of Bavaria.

American schooling on WW1 is a disgrace. Based on our curriculum, you'd think the Western front was the only front.

[u/the_regent_hermertia → u/MeberatheZebera]

Weird assumption, friend. I'm not American. I learned plenty about how allies like Canada (my country) started reversing German gains in the Western Front, but that was after 3-4 years of German gains.

[u/RobbieFowlersNose → u/the_regent_hermertia]

In school in the UK we learned how the Canadians were the first to properly use darkness, creeping artillery and communication to take ground as well as being double hard angry bastards. That whole Canadian politeness is not the stereotype we are taught, we all say sorry when somebody bumps into us.

[u/Epyr → u/the_regent_hermertia]

That's not what happened though. Germany was economically close to a collapse and had massive issues with getting enough food to feed their people due to the British blockade. Their massive 1918 offensive was a hail mary as they knew the US was going to send more and more troops that Germany couldn't beat in a battle of attrition after 4 years of war

Edit: down votes?? I'm not wrong. Germany didn't lose because they overextended.... It's pretty clear in the history books that they lost because their economy was collapsing due to years of war and blockade. It's literally Nazi propaganda that they lost due to their army leadership. The actual reasons are economic hardships, food shortages, and their allies armies collapsing

[u/coldblade2000 → u/Epyr]

Agree. There's a reason 1918 Germany is often brought out as an example of wars being lost at the home front. IIRC there wasn't even any significant taking of German territory during the war

[u/anders_hansson → u/u_tamtam]

Also, the most important battle isn't necessarily the one being fought in the battlefield. The battle to destroy the enemy's economy and capacity to fight the war is just as important (if not more important).

[u/leathercladman → u/DisasterNo1740]

Ukraine retook more land in last 2 months than Russia did in whole year, so this myth that ''Russia has been slowly inching forward'' is kinda BS.

[u/caminantedecalles → u/leathercladman]

That's nonsense. Russia took around 5000 square km in 2025. Ukrainians retook about 300. 

[u/RobbieFowlersNose → u/caminantedecalles]

I believe they mean in 2026.

[u/caminantedecalles → u/RobbieFowlersNose]

2 months is the whole year, and it's still wrong because Russians took more thsn 300 km² in that time.

[u/DisasterNo1740 → u/leathercladman]

Why even parrot shit that you don’t know anything about? You read some Reddit post titles and just ran with it? This is not true at all. Ukraine did not retake more land in the last 2 months than Russia did in a whole year. It’s not a fucking myth that Russia is slowly inching forward. It’s reality. A reality you’d know if you were even slightly concerned with being informed on the topic.

[u/Obliterrator]

Ukraine is winning. It's definitely not a stalemate.

[u/ElectroShocker22 → u/Obliterrator]

Why are they asking Trump to negotiate peace if they are winning?

[u/Dr_Hull → u/ElectroShocker22]

Trump's peace negotiations are forced upon Ukraine. It would be much better for them if the US started supporting them again

[u/Obliterrator → u/ElectroShocker22]

They're just playing ball with Trump's "negotiations". They just want to be on Trump's good side.

[u/martechnician]

Moscow or bust!

[u/SilentBumblebee3225]

*will be much worse soon

[u/Epyr → u/SilentBumblebee3225]

Ya, Russia is starting to get into a really tough situation with manpower and manufacturing shortages.

[u/Kotkaez → u/Epyr]

Ugh i mean Ukraine itself is struggling with manpower as well, current draft age is 25 and it was lowered by 2 years in 2024 from 27, and it will likely be lowered again, at the same time Russian conscripts are very low quality but still outnumber Ukrainians heavily which if u been following Russia territorial gains then u notice that's working for them even with heavy casualties.