Politics

Even US intel sources were saying "conservatively" 7,000 dead. At 3 to 1 typical wound rates, that is another 20K+ wounded - so roughly 30,000 casualties (not counting POWs) in just three weeks of battle. That is far worse daily casualty rate than Okinawa where the battle lasted 81 days and cost roughly 7,000 American dead and 32 thousand wounded.

These are the latest equipment numbers from Oryx.



 
Croatia, my dear friend, @Ray B
I did introduce my country, on the forum. See below link.
I also noticed, that sometimes by typing quickly i make some spelling errors,... mea culpa.. if that makes me apparent non primary English speaker. But more then half of my life time, I spend in English speaking working environment, and i caught myself more then once being able to think in both languages, depending of situation, home or at work

 
ON THE POLAND-UKRAINE BORDER — There were no passport officers on the dirt road, no customs lane, no signs marking this isolated patch of farmland for what it has become: a clandestine gateway for military supplies entering Ukraine.

The convoy was carrying 45 vehicles — retrofitted Jeeps, ambulances, an armored bank truck and an army field kitchen — as well as 24 tons of diesel. It had traveled overnight from Lithuania as part of a swelling supply network racing to catch up with the return of war to Europe. More than a dozen volunteer drivers, including one whose relief work was normally limited to helping motorists stranded on the highway, had driven hood-to-taillight almost around-the-clock to rendezvous with Ukrainian fighters.

While governments negotiate over fighter jets and high-end weapon systems, soldiers on the ground are struggling to fill more basic needs. With Ukraine’s own factories shut down by shelling, its forces rely increasingly on volunteer, pop-up supply chains like this one for vital gear, including body armor, medical supplies and the pickup trucks and SUVs they covet as fighting vehicles.

The journey began hundreds of miles to the north in a warehouse in Lithuania, a country not usually thought of as a military supply hub.

But this tiny Baltic nation has seen a huge outpouring of support for Ukraine, imagining what Russian President Vladimir Putin might have in store for it should he prevail in his current invasion. Vilnius, Lithuania’s small medieval-era capital, is filled with blue and yellow Ukrainian flags.

Much of the donated money and supplies has flowed to Blue and Yellow, a nonprofit founded in 2014 to supply Ukrainians fighting the takeover of eastern Ukraine by Russian-backed separatists. Now the group is the focal point of a country’s yearning to help.

“It has just exploded,” said Jonas Ohman, a Swedish-born filmmaker who started the group.

For years, Ohman said, he took no salary and had no paid staff as he fulfilled direct requests from front-line units with an annual budget of less than $200,000. Since the invasion last month, more than $20 million has poured in from within Lithuania, a country of 2.8 million residents. He is dispatching a convoy to the border every four or five days.

With a cellphone held against a days-old beard, Ohman orders military gear by the ton from around Europe, China, Israel. He argues with customs officials in a half-dozen countries to get the shipments delivered, railing against functionaries who block his way and officers who are slaves to regulation.

“I tell them all the time: 10,000 euros can be more deadly than a million if you know how to spend it,” he growled between phone calls.

 

@Red Leg,

Assuming these numbers are accurate at least in regards to equipment, that seems like a very significant number of tanks, helicopters and planes lost. And that doesn’t even take into account the skills required for effective use of that equipment lost.

But I’ve no idea what Russia started with in total, do you so that those numbers can be put into perspective?
 
@Red Leg
On losses rate.
I could think of worse example: D-day, Normandy landing where allied losses were estimated at 10.000.

The largest battle in history, battle at Kursk, 2 months fighting, casulaties 250.000 on russian side. Gemrans at 160.000. (940.000 germans, against 2.5 million russians)

However, this latest war I find very unusual in many aspects, cannot be compared with ww2 battles. I wonder for how long it will continue with such intensity.
 
Croatia, my dear friend, @Ray B
I did introduce my country, on the forum. See below link.
I also noticed, that sometimes by typing quickly i make some spelling errors,... mea culpa.. if that makes me apparent non primary English speaker. But more then half of my life time, I spend in English speaking working environment, and i caught myself more then once being able to think in both languages, depending of situation, home or at work

Yes you did write a very long and detailed post about Croatia. And since I had spent a year there in 97-98, I read its entirety with great interest.
 
@Red Leg,

Assuming these numbers are accurate at least in regards to equipment, that seems like a very significant number of tanks, helicopters and planes lost. And that doesn’t even take into account the skills required for effective use of that equipment lost.

But I’ve no idea what Russia started with in total, do you so that those numbers can be put into perspective?
That is true. Let me explain why it is even worse math for the Russian combat organization model.

In medium or high intensity combat, the smallest tactical mechanized unit that the Army fights as a self-contained formation is a Brigade. Depending upon the mission, it will be task organized (by the division) as a tank or mechanized heavy force typically built around three maneuver battalions, an artillery battalion, and with significant brigade intel, comms, and logistics assets.

The Russian Army, on the other hand, is built around the Battalion Tactical Group (BTG) - an organization about 1/3 the size of a US Army Brigade. Yes, the US Army has battalions, but the brigade is the focal point for combat organization. The Russians found the BGT organization worked well in low intensity conflicts like the Balkans where speed was important, and where there was no sustained combat. This organization also relieves Army organization of a leadership layer to fill - an advantage that looks good to personnel managers and bean counters, but has always seemed fragile to American observers.

The typical Russian BTG has 600-800 personnel depending on its specific organization and percentage of fill (we think many of their formations are as low as 70% strength, but for this discussion, let's assume 100%.) Around 200 of those troops man the 10 tanks and 40 infantry fighting vehicles of the BGT. The remainder are driving and manning the support structure that keeps that 30% fighting. Except in the Ukraine, that 70% support slice needs security protection from small Ukrainian elements taking a toll on trucks, fuel, etc. I would suspect actual elements in contact actually represent 25% of the BGT. Just to add one more devil to the details, most of the 200 combat soldiers are contract (volunteers and presumably more motivated) while most of the support elements are conscripts.

Open source US analysis estimated there were approximately 120 BGTs within the 200 thousand Russian troops poised outside Ukraine. With 600-800 personnel in a BGT that gives us roughly no more than 72-96 thousand "combat troops." But remember, only at most 30% are manning combat vehicles or serving as infantrymen. That means only around 21-29 thousand would be available for actual combat or local security operations.

It is impossible to know the difference in casualty rates among true combat and support personnel, but it is almost certainly much higher among the elements in contact. If the US numbers are correct about KIA, and assuming the normal wounded to killed ratios are in play, the Russians have nearly 30 thousand casualties to date. I doubt if they have many committed BGTs that the US Army would consider still combat effective.

It is also why every one of their offensive efforts have stalled (though Mariupol may likely finally fall in the next few days). You will notice that both Kiev and Kharkov are only being struck by missile and air strikes (and few of those). It because the Russian Army no longer has the combat power to push their conventional artillery in range of those metropolitan areas.

To try to regain the momentum, the Russians are moving another group of BGTs from the Russian Far East and some from the 1st Tank Guards Army. The latter is potentially significant. The 1st TGA is tasked with regime protection and is located around Moscow. It is the best equipped force in the Russian Army and may deploy with the T-14 main battle tank. However, there is no real indication that they are any better trained in combined arms warfare than the other formations. Deploying them would seem a fairly meaningful roll of the dice, particularly should the Ukrainians also fight them to a standstill as well.
 
I heard on the news that the Russians have slightly more than half a ring around Kyiv and that since it isn't surrounded, the Russian artillery can only reach part of the city. I'm unfamiliar with Russian guns, but I'd expect them to be comparable to US guns- the max range of the 105mm was about 7 miles and the 155 was about 10, 50 years ago and improvements in barrels/powders about double that. Unless the security around the guns is such that they have to remain well within the Russian controlled area, I'm wondering why the entire city wouldn't be within gun range.
 
Last edited:
Getting back to Biden. So this inept person arrives in the White House and in his first year fumbles so many times that it becomes painfully clear to all that there is a problem. But partisan politics result in the Dems turning a blind eye, even spinning it all away. But now there is a war and the stakes are much higher is there a mechanism or a trigger that steps in and ovverides this situation and brings sense to prevail? Surely the leader of the house is tasked with triggering a remedy at some point and if there isn't, shouldn't there be. This is a super power, the leader of the free world.
 
. But now there is a war and the stakes are much higher is there a mechanism or a trigger that steps in and ovverides this situation and brings sense to prevail? Surely the leader of the house is tasked with triggering a remedy at some point and if there isn't, shouldn't there be.
The short, but "unpopular" answer to your question is impeachment. The Constitutional requirement for that is "High crimes and misdemeanors", but those are not defined, meaning they are whatever the Speaker wants them to be. Remember, impeachment is not a criminal process, it is always and everywhere a political process.

Note, I am not advocating this "solution" in this case, I am answering your question. I can think of a host of reasons why in this case it is neither appropriate nor likely. The point I'm trying to make is there is a "remedy". It's just not easy. Nor should it be. It is, however, much more acceptable (even in its limitations) than a palace coup.

And speaking of palace coups, does anyone know the over-under for one in the east?
 

Here are screenshots of the letter, but you can see it inTwitter link that is in the article.

Screenshot_20220319-065006_Chrome.jpg
Screenshot_20220319-065014_Chrome.jpg
Screenshot_20220319-065021_Chrome.jpg
 
Kevin P - the US Constitution has two methods of removing a sitting Pres: Impeachment as already mentioned and the 25th Amendment. The 25th in simple explanation allows the Pres's Cabinet to declare the Pres unfit (mentally or physically).

In both cases the line of succession goes to the Vice Pres and then the Speaker of the House. In this instance it might be a case of jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
 
Every so often I look at the weather in Ukraine. As far as I can tell this country has the nicest weather on the planet. This is typical of what I have seen.
Screenshot_20220319-065825_Weather Network.jpg
 
Every so often I look at the weather in Ukraine. As far as I can tell this country has the nicest weather on the planet. This is typical of what I have seen.
View attachment 457999
I don’t know? They had colder temperatures and snow not that many days ago. Right now at 22F here, I wish I was in the Bahamas? LOL
 
Getting back to Biden. So this inept person arrives in the White House and in his first year fumbles so many times that it becomes painfully clear to all that there is a problem. But partisan politics result in the Dems turning a blind eye, even spinning it all away. But now there is a war and the stakes are much higher is there a mechanism or a trigger that steps in and ovverides this situation and brings sense to prevail? Surely the leader of the house is tasked with triggering a remedy at some point and if there isn't, shouldn't there be. This is a super power, the leader of the free world.

In addition to impeachment, section 4 of the 25th amendment to the Constitution provides a path to removal of the POTUS from office. The section has two provisions for this.

In part of Section 4 of the amendment it states:
"Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide"

The first provision is if the Vice President and a majority of the president's cabinet declare the President is unable to perform their duties. This provides a way to remove the POTUS from office for reason that perhaps only the VP and the cabinet may see and the public does not.

It also however provides a provision whereby Congress can do the same. However this latter provision requires a process, that a law be put into place. See highlighted part above. Her highness, Princess Pelosi ostensibly due to Trump having Covid, visited this latter provision in October, 2020. The legislation being considered would have provided for a commission to determine if the POTUS is "capable" of executing their office.

Why such a commission would be required is questionable. It's important to note that this amendment overall had nothing to do with politics, but is there to clarify how powers transfer from the President to the VP and how. This is truly for the case of when the President is physically or mentally unfit to be in office. The amendment was passed in 1965 after JFK was assassinated as there was actually some confusion as to how the VP would come to now be President. The amendment has also been invoked when Nixon left office and put Ford into place as POTUS and other situations when the POTUS was temporarily incapacitated.

But again, why would there ever be a need for a congressional commission to invoke the 25th amendment? The VP and the cabinet members certainly should be able to handle such situations and in fact have.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
58,861
Messages
1,272,181
Members
106,168
Latest member
jamieheller03
 

 

 

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Monster Free range Common Reedbuck!!
34d2250a-fe9a-4de4-af4b-2bb1fde9730a.jpeg
ef50535d-e9e2-4be7-9395-aa267be92102.jpeg
What a great way to kick off our 2025 hunting season in South Africa.

This beautiful Impala ram was taken at just over 300 yards, took a few steps and toppled over.

We are looking forward to the next week and a half of hunting with our first client of the year.
Handcannons wrote on Jaayunoo's profile.
Do you have any more copies of African Dangerous Game Cartridges, Author: Pierre van der Walt ? I'm looking for one. Thanks for any information, John [redacted]
NRA benefactor, areas hunted, add congo, Mozambique3, Zambia2
Out of all the different color variations of Impala the black Impala just stands out with its beautiful pitch black hide.

Impala is one of the animals you will see all over Africa.
You can see them in herds of a 100 plus together.

This excellent ram was taken with one of our previous client this past season.

Contact us at Elite hunting outfitters to help you make your African safari dream come true..
 
Top