>>51692
>prolong the war
I don't see how that is detrimental for Russia.
>But taking Belgorod would never have given Ukraine a bargaining chip...
I do agree taking Belgorod, or attacking that wouldn't have been a good move. I do think it would have been the least bad. But Belgorod is a sidetrack tho, and their (well, Wyatt's) idea in the first place.
My point is, can't beat an opponent if the war cannot be taken to him, and beat him on his land. With attrition the invasion can be stopped, but nothing will stop the opponent invading again at a later point. And attrition doesn't work if it attrites me more - and this is the case with Ukraine. They're losing material and personnel (especially experienced personnel) more quickly than they could replenish it. And now they lose land. And every loss they lose morale, they lose will to fight.