Politics

[John Wasmuth]

Just out of politeness I’ll answer your post. I was making a point in regards to the previous post above mine that just because it’s on the internet does not make it true. There is no way in hell that we as country supporting another country in a war are going to give said country antiquated and dilapidated arms to fight said war. 1958 missiles my ass. We are giving these people state of the art stuff tat was a gleam in some one’s eye when I was on active duty. It’s so far removed from the description in the article it’s just stupid.
We as a country aren’t giving anybody junk is what my point is.

 

[Red Leg]

Just out of politeness I’ll answer your post. I was making a point in regards to the previous post above mine that just because it’s on the internet does not make it true. There is no way in hell that we as country supporting another country in a war are going to give said country antiquated and dilapidated arms to fight said war. 1958 missiles my ass. We are giving these people state of the art stuff tat was a gleam in some one’s eye when I was on active duty. It’s so far removed from the description in the article it’s just stupid.
We as a country aren’t giving anybody junk is what my point is.

I obviously misunderstood. My sincere apologies.

And you are correct, we are not providing them a 1958 era missile system with a 5 mile range. As I noted above, I am unaware that ever fielded such a thing.

I am simply frustrated that this administration seems to lake any imagination or common military sense when it comes to providing Ukraine the arms it needs to be successful.

Ukraine does not need to take Moscow, they merely need to arrive at the eventual negotiating table less desperately than Russia.

 

[John Wasmuth]

This administration lacks any common sense in its ability to do anything, further adding to the circus are that idiot CJCS and the Moron Austin. Both are afraid to tell President Crapshispants exactly what Ukraine needs to bring Putin to the table. Even in a proxy war Generals need to dictate what and how and not politicians.

I don’t like the fact that it’s like 1953 all over again, first it’s humanitarian aid, then money for arms, then advisers, then more and bigger guns, then “Peace Keeping Troops”, then combat troops…….. do you see where I’m going with this? You as an historian of military encounters, more than likely do. We don’t need to get drawn into another endless war to fight communism somewhere else when we need to be fighting against it here on our own soil.

 

[Mark A Ouellette]

@Red Leg "I am simply frustrated that this administration seems to lake any imagination or common military sense when it comes to providing Ukraine the arms it needs to be successful."

I am underwhelmed with the administration in most regards. If there is any logic behind their limited support for Ukraine could it be to provide only enough ordnance to hold off Russian advances? Maybe this is to avoid any escalation thinking that Russia will run out of ammunition and supplies.

If the above is true, hopefully the administration is considering that the Chinese and North Koreans will eventually provide Russia ammunition, weapons, and other military needs. I won't bet any money on the administration considering this!

 

[Wheels]

 

[Dragan N.]

Really good analysis in interview form of the war and potential outcome.

His biography of Stalin "Stalin: Paradoxes in Power" is really worth the read if interested in that period of history.

How the War in Ukraine Ends

An eminent historian envisions a settlement among Russia, Ukraine, and the West.

www.newyorker.com

Speaking of Stalin's paradoxes, there is one thing I remember reading about Stalin that I think holds relevance today. Stalin set extremely unrealistic targets for industry etc... So the honest managers who reported honestly how much their factory was really producing were penalized for underperformance. As the targets they were given were totally unrealistic. However the managers who were experts at cooking up the numbers and exaggerating where the ones who got rewarded as they had "met" Stalin's targets. This continued in the Soviet system as can be seen by the fact that even Western spies had no idea what was actually happening in the USSR. Now I thought the West's overestimation of Russia was due to Soviet counter intelligence etc... But now I honestly think Soviet leadership themselves over exaggerated their capabilities and believed in these cooked up numbers. I think this same dynamic has happened in Ukraine.

The war in Ukraine has made it quite clear was that the West greatly overestimated Russia's military. But what I think this war also showed is that the Russian leadership also greatly overestimated its own military's capability. Which tells me that the Russian leadership was totally misled about the strength of its armed forces. Which to me would indicate that this desire/motive for managers/officers to over exaggerate the capabilities of their forces continued from the Soviet system. As a result of this system the Russian leadership itself was clueless about the state of the military.

But what confuses me is how didn't the Russian leadership monitor what soldiers themselves are saying about conditions in the military?? I am sure the Russian government could have monitored internet chat boards such as reddit, vkontakte etc... where soldiers talk about their experiences and what conditions in the army are actually like.

Another thing, given the poor training that Russian soldiers have, what were all of these conscripts doing while they where in the army? Russia has mandatory military service for all men and this military service lasts for I think 18 months or so. If these soldiers were receiving minimal training at best, what were they doing in these 18 months?? They must have been talking about how they do nothing in the army or do things completly unrelated to their MOS etc...

 

[rookhawk]

 

[Wheels]

 

[rookhawk]

US Population 330,000,000
Amount of the US population that is registered democrat: 29%
Amount of US registered Democrats 95,700,000
Regardless of party, 110,000,000 Americans are not “fully vaccinated” for Covid-19

Therefore, of just registered Democrats (assuming no other party or ideology shares their beliefs):

52 million Americans want you fined if you are not vaccinated
56 million Americans want to confine 110,000,000 people to their homes
46 million Americans want to imprison anyone that questions vaccine efficacy
45 million Americans want those not fully vaccinated to be tracked by the government
28 million Americans want the unvaccinated to lose custody of their children

Over the past ten years, Democrats have become the party of totalitarianism. Now with their alignment with pharma and defense, they have become the party of fascism. Not hyperbole, the facts derived by data.

What about those moral democrats that have been good neighbors our whole lives? They are forbidden from having any local position that disagrees with the democrat national platform.

 

[John Wasmuth]

Instead of giving billions of dollars to Ukraine to fight a communist take over we should be fighting here at home to stop communism from taking over. But at least the Ukrainians are getting to shoot their aggressors. We should be more worried about the demonrats than Putin.

 

[spike.t]

Medvedev floats idea of pushing back Poland's borders

Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev said on Friday that the only way for Moscow to ensure a lasting peace with Ukraine was to push back the borders of hostile states as far as possible, even if that meant the frontiers of NATO member Poland.

www.reuters.com

 

[Red Leg]

As I mentioned in a previous post, Russia seems to have been attempting its winter offensive and no one noticed. This is an excellent summation of those efforts to date. It is behind a paywall and is copied below.

Russia’s vaunted second offensive is a damp squib

Vladimir Putin is running out of ideas and ammunition

www.economist.com

For months Ukrainian officials had warned that Russia was getting ready to launch a big new offensive. It was mustering forces “beyond the Urals”, said General Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s army chief, in December, and could even once again target Kyiv. Russia had gathered half a million fresh troops and would “try something” around the anniversary of the war, suggested the defence minister, Oleksii Reznikov. In fact, Russia’s offensive began weeks ago. It has underwhelmed.

Since late January Russia’s army has been hurling troops and shellfire along wide swathes of the front lines in the east. To the north, in Luhansk province, Russia is attacking towards Kupiansk, a rail hub, and Lyman, a small city, both of which Ukraine liberated in the autumn. In the south, in Donetsk province, Russia is pressing Avdiivka and Vuhledar, which lie either side of Donetsk city. The focus of its efforts, unchanged since August, remains Bakhmut, an unassuming town that has acquired talismanic status for Russia.

Russia has little to show for this onslaught. Its gains this year have been trifling: 60 square kilometres around Bakhmut and the nearby town of Soledar, estimates Konrad Muzyka, an analyst. Bakhmut is likely to fall in the coming days or weeks. But Ukrainian troops will simply reset along a new defensive line to the west. And such gains will have come at a steep price. On February 17th British defence intelligence said Russian military casualties, including those for the Wagner Group, a mercenary firm which leads the fighting in Bakhmut, had reached 175,000 to 200,000, with 40,000 to 60,000 deaths.

Russia’s attack in Vuhledar epitomises the campaign. The city, in Donetsk province, sits on a high point astride key Russian supply lines running west into neighbouring Zaporizhia province. A Russian effort to seize Vuhledar in November ended in disaster. So too did the latest attempt, which began in January. Russia’s 40th and 155th naval infantry brigades, a pair of elite units, are thought to have suffered enormous casualties, with over a thousand deaths in just two days, according to Ben Wallace, Britain’s defence secretary.

Nor does Russia have much in reserve. Though it has mobilised over 300,000 troops since September, half were sent straight to the front to replace casualties, running to 1,000 a day killed and wounded, reckons another Western official. The rest, says Michael Kofman of cna, an American think-tank, have probably been used to fill out under-strength battalions and build a reserve to rotate front-line units out of Ukraine. A much-rumoured new wave of mobilisation has not materialised. Russia has also held back four brigades of naval infantry around Mariupol, in Donetsk province, and seven brigades of VDV airborne forces in Luhansk province, says Jack Watling of the Royal United Services Institute, another think-tank. “That’s not enough to do some massive offensive that breaks through and starts carving up everything.” Moreover, says Mr Kofman, although these elite units have done most of the serious fighting, their quality has deteriorated as mobilised personnel pad out their depleted ranks.

Manpower is not the only problem. Western security officials say that, come spring, Russia’s rate of artillery fire will be 20% of the level it managed in late 2022—a serious handicap in what has been an artillery-dominated war. Russia’s defence industry, despite being on a war footing, is struggling to keep up, say officials. Military demand for main battle tanks outstrips production by a factor of ten. Precision-guided munitions (pgms), central to Russia’s air campaign against Ukraine’s power grid, are dwindling. Russia’s air force used up half of its air-to-ground missiles in the first month of the war alone. This year Russia is likely to have half as many pgms available as it expended in 2022.

Russia’s army is fragmented after a year of war and increasingly resembles a militia of disparate forces, says Captain John Foreman, Britain’s defence attaché in Moscow until September. Sergei Shoigu, Russia’s defence minister, and General Valery Gerasimov, chief of the general staff, have reportedly feuded with Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of Wagner, and General Sergei Surovikin, his ally, for months. On January 12th General Gerasimov was put in charge of the war army, with General Surovikin demoted to serve under him. On February 21st Mr Prigozhin accused Mr Shoigu and General Gerasimov of treason, claiming they had cut off Wagner’s access to ammunition and air transport.

The question is whether Ukraine can exploit this disarray. One scenario is a repeat of last summer, when Russia’s conquest of Severodonetsk, a town in Luhansk, came at such a high price in casualties that Ukraine was able to punch through Russia’s thinned-out lines in Kharkiv two months later. If Russia expends shells and manpower in pyrrhic victories in Donetsk, that could pave the way for a Ukrainian counter-offensive in the spring or early summer—bolstered by Western armour that is on the way. But there are other forks in the road. In December, General Zaluzhny told The Economist that he was holding back resources to prepare for future offensives. Mr Muzyka says that Ukraine has indeed repelled most, if not all, Russian attacks using only units that were already deployed: “We have seen no indications that the main elements of Ukrainian reserve forces have been utilised.” Mr Watling says he is optimistic about Ukraine’s prospects. But he points to the risk that Russian assaults, if kept up for long enough, force Ukraine to commit these reserves merely to hold the line, which would result in a protracted conflict—one in which Russia could gradually rebuild and recapitalise its forces by turning to China and fixing its defence industrial base. Mr Putin continues to believe that time is on his side, say officials.

Even if Ukraine can keep its powder dry, it faces an ammunition crunch of its own. Moreover, some Western officials who work closely with Ukraine’s army remain sceptical of its ability to conduct complex offensive operations at the level of brigade and above. Many were disappointed that Ukrainian commanders were not bolder in exploiting their successes in Kherson in November. As Russian military power approaches its nadir, Ukraine’s task is to make the most of an opportunity that might not come around again.

 

[Red Leg]

Medvedev floats idea of pushing back Poland's borders

Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev said on Friday that the only way for Moscow to ensure a lasting peace with Ukraine was to push back the borders of hostile states as far as possible, even if that meant the frontiers of NATO member Poland.

www.reuters.com

Apparently the formerly "moderate" Medvedev's key to survival is to have become the bat shit crazy mouth piece of the Russian government. He seems to have now added militarily redrawing the boundaries of NATO states to his threats to nuke London, seize Berlin, and create a Russian World. The propaganda "news" shows echo the same sorts of looney goals.

Meanwhile, back in Ukraine they can't seize the towns of Bakhmut or Kremmina after weeks of suicidal frontal assaults. But they tell themselves that they will march across Ukraine into Poland, Romania, and Germany.

 

[rookhawk]

Apparently the formerly "moderate" Medvedev's key to survival is to have become the bat shit crazy mouth piece of the Russian government. He seems to have now added militarily redrawing the boundaries of NATO states to his threats to nuke London, seize Berlin, and create a Russian World. The propaganda "news" shows echo the same sorts of looney goals.

Meanwhile, back in Ukraine they can't seize the towns of Bakhmut or Kremmina after weeks of suicidal frontal assaults. But they tell themselves that they will march across Ukraine into Poland, Romania, and Germany.

And the irony is "taking" is the easy part, "holding" is the hard part. (Ask Napoleon/Hitler/Et al)

I need to find a video from a CIA advisor I watched last week, about 15 mins. Best explanation of UK/Russia conflict by far. What shortages are and will occur that are shaking global supply chains, why Putin needs the train routes that run through Ukraine. What it will take for Putin to lose (answer: 500,000 military casualties)

What is obvious is that either Putin must be deposed OR the West has to hand him something that looks impressive to his citizens even if a phyrric victory. Crimea annexation, plus independent elections for Donbas and Kherson supervised by the UN. That's about all he's going to get, best case scenario.

Worst case for him, he keeps F'ing around and loses not just this war, but my ancestral homeland of Koenigsburg returns to Western hands. Then he's SOL, presiding over an Asian sh&thole with no arable land to feed his people and no ability to have western military presence nor Euro-trade, all while Georgia, Armenia, and Chechnya have civil wars that eventually have them align to the West Bulgaria-Romania style.

 

[Hogpatrol]

On a less serious note:

 

[CoElkHunter]

Apparently the formerly "moderate" Medvedev's key to survival is to have become the bat shit crazy mouth piece of the Russian government. He seems to have now added militarily redrawing the boundaries of NATO states to his threats to nuke London, seize Berlin, and create a Russian World. The propaganda "news" shows echo the same sorts of looney goals.

Meanwhile, back in Ukraine they can't seize the towns of Bakhmut or Kremmina after weeks of suicidal frontal assaults. But they tell themselves that they will march across Ukraine into Poland, Romania, and Germany.

Then march into France unimpeded. Advance in their rubber dinghys across the English Channel and invade GB in "Operation Fish and Chips".

 

[fourfive8]

IIRC Big O was making deals with Medvedev even before he got elected. The MSM couldn't give a rat's ass and has no memory and apparently the neither does the public who should have. Nothing new with Medvedev being in the middle of Russian inner circle politics.

 

[mark-hunter]

What is obvious is that either Putin must be deposed OR the West has to hand him something that looks impressive to his citizens even if a phyrric victory. Crimea annexation, plus independent elections for Donbas and Kherson supervised by the UN. That's about all he's going to get, best case scenario.

I think you have the point.
I think that this would be "the golden bridge" for the enemy, that Sun Tzu wrote about.

“Build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across.”​

― Sun Tzu

 

[flatwater bill]

Don't often read the "politics" threads, but just watched a YT of Sen Lindsey Graham advocating killing Vlad Putin. I fear backing him into a corner where death is his only option may lead to a nuclear exchange. The wisdom in Sun Tzu's 2500 year old book sounds better to me. FWIW, also watched the July 11, 2018 NATO speech by Pres Trump as he attempts to take action to prevent this war.....democrats, Germans and others laugh at him. Not so funny now. Hoping for peace in 23..............FWB

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

Don't often read the "politics" threads, but just watched a YT of Sen Lindsey Graham advocating killing Vlad Putin. I fear backing him into a corner where death is his only option may lead to a nuclear exchange. The wisdom in Sun Tzu's 2500 year old book sounds better to me. FWIW, also watched the July 11, 2018 NATO speech by Pres Trump as he attempts to take action to prevent this war.....democrats, Germans and others laugh at him. Not so funny now. Hoping for peace in 23..............FWB

I am not a crystal ball type, but you do not reach a compromise, and therefore a cessation, without giving something up. I am sure there are very smart anylists in the Pentagon who have gamed this every which way, but it is so utterly obvious to me that Crimea will have to go, together with a thin land bridge. This should be necessary and sufficient to give Russia the security it wants, Russia has as much as said so. This was more or less achieved in 2014, so why then did Russia attack again? This is just down to Putin and his miscalculation upon the belief that he was on far more solid ground than he actually was. So why then if the 'Golden Bridge' is known is the war being fed, albeit trickle fed by Nato? Because it makes sense to degrade Russia as far as possible firstly to realise how golden that bridge really is, and secondly to minimise the likelihood of a repeat episode. How long should it go on for? I would say not too long. The longer it goes on the higher the likelihood of China getting involved on the supply side at least. There is a sweet spot and it isn't far off. Polish that bridge.