>>512254918
>"I think russia is losing"
>"why?"
>"idk, I'm throwing shit out here"
Based retard. I'll explain it like you're a normalfag
>Has Russia not lost captured territory since the beginning of the war?
In the first 6 months or so, the Russians didn't have enough troops to hold that frontline. Russia wanted Ukraine to stay out of NATO, without even laying claim to the separatist provinces, that were to reunite with Ukraine under a federalized government that would give them a greater degree of autonomy. First, they tried to achieve that diplomatically, and when that didn't work, they went into Ukraine with a limited contingent of some 120 - 200K. That continent is not enough to lay siege to one 1.000.000 city, much less "take over all of Ukraine", this is glownigger alarmism. The objective was to bring the Ukrainians to the negotiating table. This succeed (first Istambul talks), but Zelensky was approached by the UK and US governments and told that he should walk out of the talks because he would get enough support to beat the Russians militarially without having to make concessions, or that if he kept fighting, Ukraine's negotiating position would improve. When the Russians realized that they would be stuck in a long conflict, they reorganized the frontline. Specifically, they retreated from the right bank of the Dnieper, shortening the frontline and retreating from Kiev (again, the troop contingent on that area was not nearly enough to even try to take the city in earnest, but Ukrainian supporters sold that as a victory). Ukraine also took advantage of their numerical superiority to counterattack in Kharkov and part of Luhansk. Ever since then, things have gone downhill for Ukraine and they failed to take back any territory in 2.5 years, instead resorting to "mediatic" operations like Kursk, that take back no claimed territory.
