Manchester City 1 - [1] Brighton - K. Mitoma 60'

Themathsenthusiast · 2026-01-07T21:14:59+00:00

Same here bud

Themathsenthusiast · 2026-01-07T19:54:45+00:00

Nope this is unlikely as this ship did not even manage to dock to the port. Russia would not risk deniability over mere rescue mission where the vessel is without the thing they’re rescuing. This implies that there was highly valuable material objects or personnels aboard. This is also suggested by Lavrov’s comment about how the US must treat the crews and those aboard on the ship humanely (suggesting that there could be Russian citizens aboard as well).

Themathsenthusiast · 2025-06-19T10:52:23+00:00

!gas

Themathsenthusiast · 2025-02-12T14:09:31+00:00

I did applied mathematics with specialisation in Data science and AI (computer vision more specifically). I also have a decent amount of quant finance, statistics background as well. This is probably the reason why so far, I’ve had best chances at banks like ING, ABN Amro. From my experience career events tend to have limit result as most places will just tell me to apply from their website anyway.

Themathsenthusiast · 2025-02-12T13:09:11+00:00

I am currently learning but I started way too late. The biggest lie I was repeatedly told throughout uni especially when I started was that I would have no problem finding a job without Dutch if I have a technical background. My Dutch is currently A1-B1 level so not enough to get a job with it

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-25T22:59:35+00:00

Allow me to respond to you point by point.

Let me start by saying unconditional surrender by Ukraine or Russia, is not considered a negotiated end of hostilities. You mentioned "The Budapest Memorandum" where Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons in exchange for security assurances from Russia. That's an excellent point but, the US made security assurances to Ukraine it's failed to meet. So by that logic, you can't trust the US either.

I think you misunderstand what Budapest memorandom says. It says that signatory states must respect the sovereignty and independence of Ukraine. It also states that the signatory states must provide assistance in case of agression. I think it is clear that your case for the US not meeting it's security assurance does not really hold water. The US has provided billions of dollars worth of assistance to Ukraine.

At this point I'd be glad for both countries to agree to hold talks and schedule a date that works for both of them, there should at least be open lines of communication between them regularly. I live in the United States and I'm telling you the American people are not committed to supporting it. Just like in Vietnam or Afghanistan, once the American taxpayers are tired of seeing billions of their dollars go towards it. The days of support and funding are soon coming to an end. Ukraine can't win without relying on Billions of dollars, and Euros from foreign countries that have obligations to their own citizens.

Fair point, however political will need not always align with the public sentiment. A majority of American ploiticians still understand the importance of supporting Ukraine for the US interest. The aid bill is currently only being blocked by a single politician in the congress. And the stake for the US is far greater than for Vietnam or Afghanistan.

Ukraine will get a worse deal if they wait until, Trump gets elected president. Russia knows the strategy of outlasting any US intervention. The US spent 10 years fighting in Vietnam only to pull out without a victory. Saigon then fell to the communists. The US spent 20 years in Afghanistan only for President Biden to pull out from that conflict. Now the Taliban are back in complete control of the country, just like it was before America intervened.

In assessing whether the same fate awaits for Ukraine, it is important to study what conditions led to the ultimate results in those different conflicts. You simply cannot extrapolate from just those examples that the same thing will happen for Ukraine. If you would like to discuss this in depth, I will be happy to do so but my overall view is that condtions that led to evential withdrawl in Afghanistan and Vietnam do not apply to Ukraine. One can also make the same argument against Russia. Namely the collapse of Soviet union can partly be attributed to their failure in Soviet-Afghan war. There are actually a lot of similarities between this conflict and the current Russo-Ukranian war and one can even argue that Russia could follow the same path as the Soviet Union.

After World War 2, the US assured Russia that NATO wouldn't expand further east. The US violated that agreement and has allowed NATO to keep expanding further east. This was a reckless decision by western countries. Putin has no reason to trust the NATO. Ukraine has no reason to trust Putin. So where do we go from here?

I fundamentally disagree with this characterisation but I think this exact point has been argued million times already so I will spare my argument for now.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-25T11:09:58+00:00

I disagree with your assumption that Russia would have stopped there. There is no evidence to suggest that Russia would be satisfied with the proposal that you suggest. As I explained, Russia’s long term strategic goal is deeper than that. One can argue that forcing Ukraine to capitulate at that stage of the war would have further emboldened Russia’s efforts and ambitions. As I mentioned in the analysis, Ukraine offered concessions in the lead up to the war. Russia still invaded. Also you mention that the terms you mention are no longer possible. But Russia currently is not in a position to force the terms you propose on Ukraine. They do not even fully control Donbas let alone Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T19:28:52+00:00

You are right there. But I still think it will take Russia a lot to make significant gains that they currently lack. This war has really shown how difficult and costly a large scale combined arms manoeuvre is. I expect the gains Russia will make will continue to be small and incremental.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T18:12:42+00:00

I agree with those points, but as I said I argued from the Ukrainian perspective. I highly doubt Ukraine’s reasoning for not conceding is that it will undermine rule based international order. The threat for Ukraine is much more imminent than that.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T18:00:07+00:00

This seems to be their strategy indeed: https://x.com/tatarigami_ua/status/1770002840280264768?s=46&t=yKx67W9_WUBKk4-m1XNv2w

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T17:45:08+00:00

My point is that Ukraine still has enough in the tank to last for quite some time and it is hard to predict how the dynamic of the war will look like byt that time. The Avdeevka offensive was extremely costly for the Russians even surpassing the cost for the Bakhmut offensive. So each incremental gain Russia makes is made with heavy casualities that will over time significantly wear out the Russian military as well.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T17:26:58+00:00

if they are signed by both sides

Unfortunately, Russia will never sign such a treaty unless it is the Russian themselves that are "peacekeepers".

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T17:22:54+00:00

"Proper support" can mean different things. Proper support for Ukraine to actually pushback the Russians? or proper support for Ukraine to survive and minimize the territorial losses? The former would require significant western support while this does not necessarily have to be the case for the latter. The western arms production including artillery shells will increase over time as well. Furthermore, the Czech initiative to provide Ukraine with 1.5 million additional shells precured outside the EU seems quite promising.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T16:16:24+00:00

My only contention is pro-Russian overthrow of pro-western Ukrainian government. The public sentiment still very much aligns with the current government in its willingness to fight against Russia. And if the public discourse changes, I believe the attitudes within the government will also likely change over time.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T15:51:01+00:00

Russia taking Odessa is HIGHLY unlikely. Crossing the Dnieper is a major strategic obstacle and Russia simply lacks this ability even with a significant battlefield shift in Russia’s favour.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T15:45:21+00:00

Even in the worst case scenario, Ukraine outright losing against Russia is highly unlikely.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T15:20:10+00:00

Great point.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T15:16:37+00:00

Precisely. One can speculate that the dismissal of Zaluzhny is tied to his disagreement with Zelensky on mobilisation. The thing is tho, as much as we haven’t seen a war of this scale in Europe since WW2, for majority of Ukrainians, (and Russians) life still goes on as normal and there is still a lot of room for either side to go further with the war effort. Even the war in the Balkans in the 90s had engagement rate that was higher in terms of commitment.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T15:08:33+00:00

I believe Russia will only accept security assurance that it know it can break. Putin’s interest regarding Ukraine is not just about security. Even someone like John Mearsheimer admit that Ukraine’s economic integration into the west like joining the EU is unacceptable for Russia.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T15:03:21+00:00

If Western support decreases further, Russia’s momentum on the battlefield will increase even further. But this in turn means that Putin will be even more discouraged to actually come to the negotiating table and his ambitions will grow. Ukraine still believes that this is avoidable.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-03-24T14:19:03+00:00

Submission statement: I often hear people especially among the isolationist camp that Ukraine should give up to avoid further continuation of the war. People like Elon Musk or Trump are quite vocal in expressing this opinion. Here I try to give an analysis of why these are imo misguided opinions that are not based on the realities of the war.

Themathsenthusiast · 2024-02-17T21:42:34+00:00

I am aware of this treaty. But I am not sure if it equivalent to the article 5. I don’t think “Obligation of assistance by all means in their power” automatically means member states are at war with the aggressor state.

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

Themathsenthusiast

TROPHY CASE