The Reikartz hotel in Zaporizhzhia, which was hit by a Russian missile yesterday, was one of the most crowded and booked hotels in the city. In addition, a children’s camp was operating daily on its territory.

UN employees and their colleagues from non-governmental organisations who were providing assistance to war victims also stayed at the hotel.



EXPLAINED: Russia’s Devastating – and Illegal – ‘Double Tap’ Strikes on Ukraine

Specifically used to target first responders and emergency services, Russian forces honed the deadly technique against civilians during the war in Syria.


OPINION: Biden’s Apocalypse in Ukraine?

Biden must embrace a Ukrainian victory and provide them the resources they need to win the war – then he must take that message to the American people.

Mark Toth

Jonathan Sweet

August 11, 2023,

Biden's Apocalypse in Ukraine?

US President Joe Biden pictured earlier this month. (Photo by Jim WATSON / AFP)

Ukraine’s fight on behalf of the Western notion of freedom and democracy is facing a gathering darkness in the United States as its fight against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “special military operation” rages on – and, if left unchecked by Washington, could lead to an apocalypse in Eastern Europe and beyond.

As we enter the Presidential election cycle, US public support for the war in Ukraine appears to be waning. In a new CNN poll, 55 percent of Americans are opposed to new funding in support of Kyiv, 51 percent believe Washington has “done enough” and this, soberingly, is in stark contrast to the 62 percent who supported aiding Ukraine at the start of the war in February 2022.

Even more troubling, the divide in the US is becoming partisan between Democrats who support continued funding – 62 percent, and 71 percent of Republicans who oppose it. Support is also deteriorating among independents; 56 percent now say enough is enough.

This is just one poll. Yet, nonetheless, the downward trend for support to Ukraine is becoming evident. In mid-June, a Pew Research poll found only 47 percent of Americans supporting US aid to Kyiv.

The growing darkness is not just at the grassroots level. More and more politicians, arguably opportunistic in motivation, are exploiting the softening of US support for Ukraine.

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), during an interview on Fox News with Laura Ingraham on Monday, foolishly and derisively dismissed Ukraine’s fight against Putin and likened it to “a junior high team playing a college team.”

Yet, President Joe Biden and his administration bear a good deal of responsibility as well for creating this overall skepticism about Ukraine’s ability to win. Policy-wise, this is a Vietnam redux wherein there is no clear and decisive administration definition of how to win against Putin and the pathway to get there. Only reassurances that the US will stand with Ukraine and continue to provide weapons for their defense.

Absent a winning strategy that is demonstrably clear to the American people, it is not surprising that Biden’s political opponents are seizing on the notion that Ukraine cannot “win.”

This “losing” narrative has been creeping into the mainstream national discussion since Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI.) argued in March that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s fight against Putin is a “lose-lose-lose for everybody” and that “Nobody can win at this point.”

This growing domestic divide in the U.S. could not come at a worse time for Ukraine. Kyiv’s counteroffensive is facing an entrenched Russian resistance. Forward progress is slow and costly in terms of men and weaponry – and Washington knows it.

Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL.), after visiting US bases in Europe training Ukrainians described his briefings as “sobering” and declared “This is the most difficult time of the war.”

That the outcome of the war in Ukraine is now hanging in the balance is not surprising. The Biden Administration’s slow-walking of close air support and precision deep strike capabilities necessary to enable a combined arms offensive is why the West is facing this moment in time.

Ukraine still does not have ATACMS nor F-16s. Despite administration apologists in the media – political and military analysts alike – Biden’s repeated dithering over the winter and spring months afforded Moscow the time it needed to prepare its “multilayered defensive lines in the eastern and southern parts” of Russian occupied Ukraine – including trench networks and minefields in depth. Brady Africk’s graphics depicting this build-up between September 2022 – July 2023 in The Washington Post is telling.

It is also why Ukraine’s counteroffensive is in danger of stalemating. As Ukraine probes for weaknesses in Russian defenses to break through to liberate the Donbas and Crimean Peninsula, they have yet to breachany of Russia’s primary defensive lines in the southern Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions – nor in the Donbas despite some gains in encircling Bakhmut.

The absence of close air support, engineering assets, and precision deep strike capability has forced Ukraine to alter their tactics away from NATO doctrine and fight with the Army they have. Ukraine has shifted towards a strategy of attrition and condition setting.

First, find and destroy Russian artillery, counter battery radars, and ammunition storage facilities. Artillery is the lynchpin to Russian doctrine; it is the number one casualty producer on the battlefield. Degrade this capability – then with dual-purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) clear the trench lines, breach the minefields, and break through the Russian defensive lines.

Concurrently, they are interdicting Russian supply lines and isolating the Crimea Peninsula – making it untenable. Air-launched cruise missiles provided by the United Kingdom and France, along with Ukrainian-made aerial dronessurface and sub-surface naval drones have damaged the Kerch Strait Bridge, Chonhar Bridge, the Olenegorsky Gornyak landing ship, ammunition storage facilitiesfuel depots, and repair depots.

Once the ability to sustain and reinforce Russian ground forces in Ukraine has been defeated – rapid exploitation of Russian defensive belts can be achieved.

F-16s could have provided close air support to expedite the breakthrough and set conditions for the next day’s battle, but the Biden administration wavered on its decision to train pilots and their maintainers. U.S. Air Force officials now assess that Ukrainian fighter pilots could be trained in “four to five months.”

One can only imagine where Kyiv’s counteroffensive would be at this point if the White House had approved Zelensky’s request for F-16s in August 2022 – instead of giving into his administration’s incessant escalation fears.

Then again, one could also imagine where Kyiv’s war effort would be if the White House had approved Poland’s request in March 2022 to transfer their MiG-29s to Ukraine in exchange for F-16s.

We are dangerously entering an “Apocalypse Now” type perfect storm in the making – domestically in terms of declining support for the war and on the frontline battlefields of Ukraine. In Vietnam, the emphasis on fighting a defensive war contributed to South Vietnam losing.

Now, Biden’s straightjacketing Kyiv to, in essence, do the same is also putting Ukraine at risk of losing – as well giving Putin an ideological win against the West.

As the war continues now into its 18th month and the US enters the Presidential election season, Americans are beginning to increasingly look inward.

The pace of the Ukrainian counteroffensive is being portrayed by some as a failure, rather than a tactic to fit the current capabilities of the Ukrainian Army.

Biden must embrace a Ukrainian victory and provide them the resources they need to win the war – then he must take that message to the American people. The second and third order effects of that outcome will likely impact the security environment in the Middle East, Africa, and the Arctic region.

Either Putin’s growing darkness in Ukraine prevails and then spreads globally – or Biden boldly sees the metaphorical light, overcomes his escalation fears and fully enables Ukraine to go for the win.


  1. “Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), during an interview on Fox News with Laura Ingraham on Monday, foolishly and derisively dismissed Ukraine’s fight against Putin and likened it to “a junior high team playing a college team.”

    Yes, this meatheaded bastard really did say that. It can be seen just before the 5 minute mark.
    Russia lovers upset by the loss of Tucker Carlson from Fox can breathe easy: the sour, cynical and evil Ingraham is continuing where he left off.
    Btw, Ingraham is a Russian speaker, a friend of putler groveler Michael Savage and has adopted Russian kids; presumably for adding to putler’s USA fifth column.

    • Be very careful attributing comments to writers at the Kyiv Post that they did not say, Sir Scradge. A reputation is very important in journalism.
      Your “Tuberville’s fatuous comments can be seen here in an interview with ghastly pro-Russia pundit Laura Ingraham:” is not the same as what they said, “Putin, undoubtedly, welcomed Tuberville’s comments as light at the end of his very dark tunnel. Tuberville fails to understand the US is very much up against Russia’s varsity…” which was just fine. Please leave comments for the comment section 🙂
      Slava Ukraini!

      • I editorialize like a sub would in extreme cases like this one. . Most of us do. But is always clear that it is not against the spirit of the article. Unless it’s written by a kremkrapper like Peter Hitchens.
        In fact in comments I praised the article as a very important one.
        I always embed the masthead of the paper or website and always credit the writers.
        It is depressing that you are not outraged by the comment made by that genocide enabling halfwit Tuberville, but think I somehow compromised the integrity of the article, when the opposite is the case.
        The writers only referred to Tuberville’s sick comment in the article. I frankly could not believe that a Senator who actually visited Ukraine during such a terrible war would come up with a comparison like : ‘a junior high team playing a college team.’ Now that is off the scale offensive. Any journalist other than a putinoid skank like Ingraham would have shown their utter contempt.
        So I sought it out and embedded it into the article to show that the writers were not exaggerating. It obviously was Fox , not the KP and the words are obviously mine not theirs.
        Anyway, I deleted my words and left the video.

        • That’s all good, I just don’t want us to get trashed by anyone inside Ukraine. (Maybe use brackets?) RFE/RL gave us a hard time a long time ago but I think we fixed that.

    • Youtube finally did something right, they banned the RT mouthpiece Scott Ritter. They need to start banning more of these Kremlin mouthpieces, like those you mentioned.

      • Very good.
        The loathsome, gloating Douglas Macgregor is still there though.
        No doubt Muskov will them both platforms on his X app, which already needs to be renamed Z.

  2. “Either Putin’s growing darkness in Ukraine prevails and then spreads globally – or Biden boldly sees the metaphorical light, overcomes his escalation fears and fully enables Ukraine to go for the win.”

    I get the feeling that Mark Toth and Jonathan Sweet’s article is very, very important.


  3. “Biden must embrace a Ukrainian victory and provide them the resources they need to win the war – then he must take that message to the American people.”

    Biden has failed in two important spheres. One, he has failed to create a viable concept about how this war should end. Two, he is failing to bring over the importance of a Ukrainian victory to the American people.
    Never mind the pro-mafia pundits like Ingraham, Trump, Gaetz, DeSantis, Gateway Pundit, Breitbart, et al. They are morally depraved, obviously corrupted by the moscow mafiosi and clearly on the wrong side of history.
    Biden should finally decide if Ukraine should win, or if it should not win. We all know the dire consequences if it should not win, so the obvious path to take is the one to victory. Why he is not doing so and just stands around on the crossroads of these two possibilities is a mystery to me. Can it be the fear of a (very unlikely) nuclear response by mafia land? Is it so hard to make it clear to the moscow monkeys that WE ALSO HAVE NUKES?
    No, Biden prefers hiding beneath his desk and trickle-feed Ukraine with this and that but nothing really game-changing. This is prolonging the war, and this alone bears its own dangers and pitfalls.
    One thing is for sure; the American people do not want a Vietnam 2.0. I don’t either. Many are starting to wonder if aiding Ukraine is only wasting our resources. Biden never explains anything to the American people as to why we MUST help the country. How can he? He doesn’t have a plan, and he’s at a loss of how this war should best be ended. Is it his staff, which is too stupid to figure out what to do, or is Biden the stupid one, by refusing to accept viable concepts from them? Does anyone know?
    We are seeing it coming: This constant pussyfooting around by the Yellow House is creating Vietnam 2.0. Dragging out this war could create a bigger conflagration that will spread to other places of Europe.
    Joe, find your spine, for Christ’s sake, and do something to end this war, but in a Ukrainian victory. ASAP!

Enter comments here: