Western media have finally change course. They are now admitting that the much promoted Ukrainian counter-offensive has failed. In fact, the acknowledge that it never had a chance to win in the first place.
The Hill, the Washington Post and CNN now agree that the Ukrainian army will never achieve its aims.
western MSM has a rare encounter with reality!
That makes it difficult for the Biden administration to get Congress approval for $24 billion in additional 'aid' to Ukraine. It does not make sense to pay for a cause that is evidently lost.
b seems overly hopeful regarding the rationality of US congress, but i think hes right- why would we throw more money at them, US politicians have made it clear they do not support bringing Ukraine into NATO if they do not win this conflict. of course, US politicians are prone to lying and misleading
Nothing has come from the 'peace conference' which Saudi Arabia arranged on Ukraine's behalf
lol. lmao even. props to big dog MBS for trying
Despite the onslaught of bad news the Ukrainian army is still trying to take Russian positions in the south and east of Ukraine. But it simply does not have enough in men and material to break through the lines.
Even if they would manage to get a local breakthrough there are not enough reserves to push for the necessary follow up. Just one of the NATO trained brigades has still been held back. All others have been mauled in their various deployment zones.
nothing has changed it seems
In the northeast around Kupyansk the Russians have started their own offensive which has the Ukrainians on the run. Ukraine has ordered the evacuation of the area
But Kupyansk is a Russian city and people refuse to leave.
show this to the libs claiming Russians are committing genocide in the regions they capture. curious that these civilians are content with Russian occupation when you believe what western media claims
The Russian campaign is slowly speeding up. As the Ukrainian Strana.news reports (machine translation):
Also in Ukraine, it is recorded that from Kupyansk to Bakhmut, Russia has increased the number of attacks.
"Over the past month, the total number of attacks in the Kupyansk, Limansky and Bakhmut directions has grown significantly. In July, during the week there were 6-6.5 thousand attacks, during the last week-9 thousand attacks, " - said the representative of the National Guard Ruslan Muzychuk.
According to him, the Russian Federation does not experience "shell hunger".
Aviation is also actively used, and over the past few weeks, more than 50 air attacks have been taking place every day, and sometimes more than 80.
That is bad news for the Ukrainian side which lacks the reserves to counter the Russian onslaught. There are also less weapons coming in from the West. F-16 fighter jets will be delayed for another nine months due to training issues. Tanks and other material are in short supply.
these supply issues sure bode well for the west’s performance in WW3 
Strana also report of an interview with a knowledgeable Ukrainian soldier (machine translation):
Continuing the topic of the situation at the front, an interesting interview was given by a Ukrainian sniper fighting near Bakhmut with the call sign "Grandfather". On the air of political scientist Yuri Romanenko, he was introduced as Konstantin Proshinsky (this is a pseudonym).
The fighter spoke in detail about his vision of the situation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the Russian army.
- Mobilization. In his opinion, it is conducted incorrectly. Recruits are sent to the front who have never been trained, and they are often over 50 years old and with a whole bunch of diseases.
- No rotation. The soldier says that "the same brigades" are fighting at the front, and people are not taken out of the front line for six months or more. Whereas by Western standards, they can be kept in a war zone for no more than three months.
- Behavior of mid-and high-level commanders. According to Proshinsky, many of them are trying to arrange a "mini-Stalingrad" on the positions, forcing them to go into frontal assaults on well-fortified Russian positions.
- The Russian Army began to fight better.
- Proshinsky believes that Russia has not yet used much of what it has against Ukraine.
The soldier thinks that the Russians will not move from their positions and that a stalemate peace like in Korea would be the end result.
UAF in real dire times— recruiting the elderly, poor logistics, engaging the enemy at inopportune times, and Russia has yet to waver
I believe that to be wrong. Russia's aim is to liberate at least the four regions that it has claimed for itself. For political reasons it can not stop before that is done.
Should the Ukraine continue to fight after that, Russia is likely to set new aims and take more land.
more editorializing, but it doesnt seem unreasonable. i thought Russia would stick to its original goal of Donetsk and Luhansk, but if Zaporizhzhia and Kherson are receptive to Russian governance, it would be foolish for Russia to give them up
It's not about cheering for a side, it's about seeing reality for what it it.
So what you're saying is, Ukraine is fated to lose, so it's better they lose quickly?
We don't want them to lose, we want the war to end. At the moment, that would mean ending in Russia's favour. Ukraine has been propped up by the west since last year. Without American money and weapons, they would already have collapsed. A staggering number of people have fled, and hundreds of thousands of men have come back from the front with life-changing injuries, which means their economy is going to really struggle for the next few decades. The West will have to pull out eventually, and then Ukraine will have to sign some peace agreement which likely won't be in their favour. However, continuining until the West says "enough is enough" (and after Iraq and Afghanistan, who knows how long that will be) will force more people out of the country and deplete the working population inside the country even further. What does Ukraine have to gain by sticking it out?
I understand your point but why do you think losing the war would be less crippling for them?
In that case, I'm not sure you do understand. They will never get the Donbass or Crimea back (at least not during this conflict); every Ukrainian death that happens now is happening for no reason, and is actively going to make their recovery harder. I'm saying that by packing it in now, they'd be cutting their losses. Do you think losing now would be worse for them than losing further down the line, when their population has been further depleted?
Well... Russia wants to annex far more than just the Donbass, basically all of the south. Less lives would be lost short term, but long term they'd be just as crippled and if they lose they'd be forced to not accept aid or join any spheres other than Russia's... so they'd either have to become another Belarus or recover all on their own, and without any more protection Russia would be allowed to interfere all they want
Also there are a lot of Ukranians in what Russia wants to annex that do not want to be a part of Russia, who also doesn't have a history of treating ethnic minorities very well... They'd get the choice to leave their homes and become refugees or become second class citizens
Can't you look at Crimea to see how Russia is likely to treat Ukrainians in annexed territory? The biggest complaint I've heard from that area is that Russian passports issued in Crimea aren't being recognized by western countries. That's not really Russia's fault.
Crimea is mostly Russian though, from what I understand thanks to centuries of colonization and a couple Tatar expulsions across Russian history, so I'm not sure if they'd behave much the same in a majority Ukranian area
If there is a legit vote on if they want to be part of Russia or not, like everyone makes sure Russia can't interfere with the vote in any way, and the regions still vote to stay a part of Russia, I would respect that