I ran into some commentary yesterday that I thought was interesting. Two people I follow and whose opinions I respect. For the first time (that I noticed) their opinion of the situation in Ukraine were completely opposite.

First up is Peter Zeihan. He’s a geopolitical analyst who always seems to have good inside sources and provides comprehensive, behind the scenes analysis of world events. He put out a couple of videos the other day about events in Ukraine. Russia launched a handful of hypersonic missiles at Kiev. Zeihan believes Ukraine shot down some/all of them and this represents a key moment in Ukrainian air defense against Russia.

He also thinks that Russia’s campaign is severely faltering due to a lack of troops and incompetent leadership. The fighting around Bakhmut have devastated Russian troop numbers and depleted ammo and supplies. Ukraine’s spring offensive is about to start, and they will probably conduct several feints to draw the limited Russian troops away from whatever the Ukrainian intended targets are. He seems to be fairly bullish on Ukraine’s chances at the moment, given the material support they’re getting from the US/NATO.

Next is Col Douglas Macgregor. He’s a retired US Army colonel who is a consultant and television commentator. He has consistently provided insight that indicates Ukraine is losing badly. He talks frequently about the devastating loss of Ukrainian troops and that they have run out of enough men to backfill the losses. He has shown video of fighting age males being forcibly abducted and sent to the front. He comments frequently about Ukraine’s battle losses that the mainstream media never seem to cover.

On the subject of the missiles, he said that no country currently has the technology to shoot down a hypersonic missile. He thinks the Russian targeting intelligence is quite good and that they’ve been very successful destroying any new equipment/ammo the west and NATO is sending as fast as it’s staged in-country. He scoffed at mainstream media for accepting Ukraine’s claims that they shot down most of the missiles.

So, what am I supposed to think? Two people whose commentary and analysis has seemed to be pretty spot-on. Now they have polar opposite views. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. When it’s all said and done, who had the better geopolitical analysis? I’m getting my popcorn ready for this one.