Changes

''[[The Economist]]'' reported on November 7, 2023:

''[[The Economist]]'' reported on November 7, 2023:

{{quotebox-float|“General Zaluzhny’s assessment is sobering: there is no sign that a technological breakthrough, whether in drones or in electronic warfare, is around the corner. And technology has its limits. Even in the [[first world war]], the arrival of [[tank]]s in 1917 was not sufficient to break the deadlock on the battlefield. It took a suite of technologies, and more than a decade of tactical innovation, to produce the [[German]] [[blitzkrieg]] in May 1940. The implication is that Ukraine is stuck in a long war—one in which he acknowledges Russia has the advantage. Nevertheless, he insists that Ukraine has no choice but to keep the initiative by remaining on the offensive, even if it only moves by a few metres a day.”<ref>[https://consortiumnews.com/2023/11/07/is-an-end-game-in-sight-for-ukraine/ Is an End Game in Sight for Ukraine?], By Tony Kevin, ''Consortium News'', November 7, 2023. consortiumnews.com</ref>}}

{{quotebox-float|“General Zaluzhny’s assessment is sobering: there is no sign that a technological breakthrough, whether in drones or in electronic warfare, is around the corner. And technology has its limits. Even in the [[first world war]], the arrival of [[tank]]s in 1917 was not sufficient to break the deadlock on the battlefield. It took a suite of technologies, and more than a decade of tactical innovation, to produce the [[German]] [[blitzkrieg]] in May 1940. The implication is that Ukraine is stuck in a long war—one in which he acknowledges Russia has the advantage. Nevertheless, he insists that Ukraine has no choice but to keep the initiative by remaining on the offensive, even if it only moves by a few metres a day.”<ref>[https://consortiumnews.com/2023/11/07/is-an-end-game-in-sight-for-ukraine/ Is an End Game in Sight for Ukraine?], By Tony Kevin, ''Consortium News'', November 7, 2023. consortiumnews.com</ref>}}

==References==

==References==