Politics

True enough. And not a good look for an early 21st century audience who has never experienced or rarely studied a nation under an existential military onslaught. Though, some of our parents and most of our grandfathers experienced something similar.

The American Bund was a late thirties pro-fascist movement. It’s last rally in 1939 drew 20,000 supporters to Madison Square Garden. By late 1941, the organization’s leadership had been arrested and or deported (American citizens) and the party was banned. During the same period, all one had to be was a first generation American of Japanese ancestry in the US or Canada to loose one’s livelihood and be placed with one’s family in a concentration camp for the duration of the war.

The Cold War was also an existential conflict. The House Committee on Unamerican Activities made itself quite infamous for pursuing communists - real and imagined. We forget today that it’s efforts were strongly supported by the American people. Heck, even John Wayne starred in a movie where he was an agent of the committee chasing down a murderous communist in Hawaii - played by James Arness of all people.

In 1940, the British government banned, the British Union Party because it might represent a ”fifth column” supporting Germany.

It may be correct that Zelensky is trying to consolidate his power as a dictator. I think it is at least as likely that the Ukrainian government is acting not so differently than other democracies have during existential conflict.

Most of these pro-Russian parties are small and locally based in the East. The largest of these, is the pro-Russian Opposition Platform for Life which holds a little less than 10% of the seats in the Ukrainian parliament. It is lead by Victor Medvedchuk who has close ties to Putin.

Should he and his government have done so? From our point of view, probably not. If nothing else, he has given additional grist for Tucker’s new neo-isolationism mill. But before we judge Ukraine too harshly as they literally battle for their existence, we should study our own history.
 
Last edited:
I think Tucker's viewpoint also lacks context. Russia annexed part of the country and have been fighting a separationist Civil War in the East for over 8 years.

You have to base his actions of consolidating "power" in that context, or else you are peddling a narrative. Which is exactly why trust in the media is so low, context matters.
 
The Cold War was also an existential conflict. The House Committee on Unamerican Activities made itself quite infamous for pursuing communists - real and imagined. We forget today that it’s efforts were strongly supported by the American people. Heck, even John Wayne starred in a movie where he was an agent of the committee chasing down a murderous communist in Hawaii - played by James Arness of all people.

Didn't the Venona papers vindicate every single accusation made by HUAC as well as Joe McCarthy?
 
I think that is becoming the neo-isolationist mantra, and while there is just enough fact in it to seem truthful, it does an enormous disservice to the emerging democracy that is Ukraine and the effort it is making to maintain its right of self determination.

A similar argument was made in 1938 by a then majority of Americans that Hitler and his aspirations for the Sudetenland and eventually Poland were a European problem and not an American one. Three years later we were front and center the greatest war in human history.

We have ignored Europe twice during the last century to our and the world's great cost. I am certain we eventually would be equally regretful should we ignore Russian ambitions now.

And Covid?!? I can not imagine any informed person truly believes this has anything at all to do with Covid or anyone's policies toward the pandemic. This conspiracy nonsense has become the internet equivalent of reality TV.
We as Americans have very short memories. WW1 MAY have stayed "over there". But, our involvement greatly shortened the war and prevented it from "being here". WW2 was "over there" again and not our problem. It was Europe's problem until it became our "neutral" U.S. NIGHTMARE. Now, we have another "European" problem? Is it really? What about China, Iran and North Korea waiting in the wings? As we have seen in the past, dictatorships know NO geographical boundries. The worst is by far yet to come. We, as FREE Nations, MUST engage the tyrants of the world diplomatically and militarily if needed or we will surely perish. I was never in the military, but I have many friends/relatives and co workers past and present that are/were. The one common theme I have heard from them in conversations, is that we bring the fight to the enemy OVER THERE, so we don't have to fight them HERE.
 
One reason why he is banning those parties.....
IMG-20220321-WA0003.jpg
 
A problem that is apparent in every power grab by a government, generally at times when the delegation of power to the government is justified is that the government never returns that power when the situation has passed. Americans need look no further than the Patriot Act for an example.
 
1647986109591.jpeg
 
Going to piss off the Liberals in my neighborhood :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

467E2FB3-1C83-4C10-80F2-66F19E2DF652.jpeg
 
I was saying this several days ago, but it is always good to see someone like Frederick Kagan reach the same conclusion. Russia's assault has culminated. After all a prestigious analytical group has more to loose than does a retired old soldier musing anonymously on a website. ;)

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/what-stalemate-means-ukraine-and-why-it-matters

Kagan seems to be now predicting stalemate. I hope Ukraine can find a means to avoid that and can use their initial victory as a springboard to seize the initiative.

From my armchair, and assuming the Russian forces have not only culminated, but are also essentially fixed, the Ukrainian Army has the opportunity to potentially pinch off one of the exposed penetrations that were pushing toward Kiev (the remnants of the 40 mile convoy et al that have gone to ground in the northwest looks particularly tempting). An attack at the base of the northwest salient would also have the advantage of exploiting whatever reserves are uncommitted in the western half of the country.

A stalemate will be difficult enough for Putin to navigate politically. The catastrophic defeat and loss of a reinforced division equivalent or more in an exposed salient would likely be catastrophic.

Kiev5.jpg


Such a counter offensive is part of Russo/Ukrainian history. The Russian counter offensive in the winter of 41/42 outside Moscow ended any hope of a quick German victory in operation Barbarossa. The counter offensive that isolated Stalingrad and eventually destroyed the 6th Army in the winter of 43/43 essentially won the war against the Germans. They never regained the initiative.

The Ukrainians know what they need to do. It is just a question whether or not they can generate the combat power.
 
Last edited:
1647986583658.jpeg
 
@Red Leg Do the Russians readly need to take the cities in the north? It seems to me, that if they continue in the south to take all of the Black Sea and then cut off supply routes from Poland and Romania, they can apply starvation warfare and force the Ukrainians surrender. What am I missing?
 
@Red Leg Do the Russians readly need to take the cities in the north? It seems to me, that if they continue in the south to take all of the Black Sea and then cut off supply routes from Poland and Romania, they can apply starvation warfare and force the Ukrainians surrender. What am I missing?
They are going nowhere in the south either. Every available bit of combat power is committed to the battle for Mariupol. They likely will reduce that pocket, but in so doing they have badly used up their best forces (naval infantry) that had been earmarked for the push along the coast. The Russians did not have the logistics capacity to move more than a hundred miles prior to the assault. Why the attempt to take airheads in the vicinity of Kiev and along the Dnieper was so critical in the initial days. Those attacks failed and those forces were also rendered combat ineffective. In other words, short of a Ukrainian collapse, they can't drive to Poland much less fight their way there. There is the possibility of Belarus joining the attack and attempting to drive into Ukraine along the Polish border. Thus far, their enthusiasm for such an attack does not seem high. It is, however, a potential threat.

Otherwise, they have no means to cut off resupply efforts from Poland which are the ones that matter at the moment. Those are overland. Smart missiles are great as long as you have unlimited quantities and pinpoint targeting. They no longer have the former and the latter is extraordinarily difficult in real time.

The Russians have to take Kiev. As long as it and the Ukrainian government survives, the more likely it is that is the Russian operation - taking place for them at the end of long resupply routes - will eventually collapse.

Finally, there has to be a domestic bomb ticking. These casualty rates are something the Russian people haven't seen since WWII.
 
At the east front, and at Kiev battlefields, to me it looks like all is going to stalemate. And russians have probably achieved initital limited territiorial goals: territorial round up of new formed proxy republics.
Pressure and siege on Kiev will continue, but I doubt there is a sufficient russian force to occupy Kiev.
There is not enough forces on both sides to make large and significant manouvers to circle and sorrund the enemy as it was done in ww2.

Areal bombing campaign and missile atacks probably will continue.

But at this point, both of these (bombing campaing and Kiev Siege) I see as a mean to keep pressure on Ukraine.
The true question is what is the real overall damage to Ukraine infrastructure??? We do not have reports on that. Warehouses, roads, railroads, bridges, factotries, communications, weapons and ammo depots.
Neither do we know Ukraine losses on materiel, and personnel. (this part of information war Ukraine controls well)

Stalemate at front lines can reduce daily casualty rate which would be good for both sides, and will give possibility for both sides to regroup.
But stalemate in long term, works against both sides: russians are facing enourmous sanctions crippling their economy, and having rising daily costs of war and they cannot take it for ever.

During stalemate on front, and with daily bombardments Ukraine is loosing vital infrastructure and people and personnel , so they cannot take it for ever, although receiveing aid from other countires, but human lives cannot be replaced.

In such war of attration, the crusial questions is: who can take it longer?

For comparison, NATO bombing campaign in Serbia (1999) lasted 2.5 months, before Serbia retreated from Kosovo, and Nato goals have been achieved.

It is very hard to estimate the progress of the war, not really knowing what was the initial russian strategy, nor what are true current losses of Ukraine, but at this moment to me it looks as follows:
The long columns of Russian tanks and equipment has been stalled at the beggining.
but the objective of that columns was to roll in smoothly to Kiev over night, like the russian did in 1968 in Prague, when Prague citizens woke up and saw russian tanks in the streets. This did not happen, and if I am right, the failure of this army group has changed the course of this war, to Ukraine side.

As it did not happen, this will turn to unplanned siege of Kiev, as we are seeing now.

On east, they probably planned to round up Donetsk, and Luhansk, and make an solid landbridge as connection to Krimea (over Mariupol). More or less, plan achieved.

The political part of Kiev campaign woud be removal of Ukraine govt, and installing puppet govt, which was the assigment of the Kiev group of army units. This part of russian plan failed.

So it is now turning to war of attrition.
How long it will last?
 
At the east front, and at Kiev battlefields, to me it looks like all is going to stalemate. And russians have probably achieved initital limited territiorial goals: territorial round up of new formed proxy republics.
Pressure and siege on Kiev will continue, but I doubt there is a sufficient russian force to occupy Kiev.
There is not enough forces on both sides to make large and significant manouvers to circle and sorrund the enemy as it was done in ww2.

Areal bombing campaign and missile atacks probably will continue.

But at this point, both of these (bombing campaing and Kiev Siege) I see as a mean to keep pressure on Ukraine.
The true question is what is the real overall damage to Ukraine infrastructure??? We do not have reports on that. Warehouses, roads, railroads, bridges, factotries, communications, weapons and ammo depots.
Neither do we know Ukraine losses on materiel, and personnel. (this part of information war Ukraine controls well)

Stalemate at front lines can reduce daily casualty rate which would be good for both sides, and will give possibility for both sides to regroup.
But stalemate in long term, works against both sides: russians are facing enourmous sanctions crippling their economy, and having rising daily costs of war and they cannot take it for ever.

During stalemate on front, and with daily bombardments Ukraine is loosing vital infrastructure and people and personnel , so they cannot take it for ever, although receiveing aid from other countires, but human lives cannot be replaced.

In such war of attration, the crusial questions is: who can take it longer?

For comparison, NATO bombing campaign in Serbia (1999) lasted 2.5 months, before Serbia retreated from Kosovo, and Nato goals have been achieved.

It is very hard to estimate the progress of the war, not really knowing what was the initial russian strategy, nor what are true current losses of Ukraine, but at this moment to me it looks as follows:
The long columns of Russian tanks and equipment has been stalled at the beggining.
but the objective of that columns was to roll in smoothly to Kiev over night, like the russian did in 1968 in Prague, when Prague citizens woke up and saw russian tanks in the streets. This did not happen, and if I am right, the failure of this army group has changed the course of this war, to Ukraine side.

As it did not happen, this will turn to unplanned siege of Kiev, as we are seeing now.

On east, they probably planned to round up Donetsk, and Luhansk, and make an solid landbridge as connection to Krimea (over Mariupol). More or less, plan achieved.

The political part of Kiev campaign woud be removal of Ukraine govt, and installing puppet govt, which was the assigment of the Kiev group of army units. This part of russian plan failed.

So it is now turning to war of attrition.
How long it will last?
I just Googled, "Why did the USSR invade Czechoslovakia?"
The Brezhnev Doctrine
"They feared growing trade links between Czechoslovakia and West Germany would lead to an increase in Western influence in Eastern Europe".
Although no mention of NATO back in1968, I believe Putin had stated several times before he invaded Ukraine, that Ukraine's increased trade with and "leaning" towards the West, was unacceptable to him. So, it appears this present invasion of Ukraine by Russia isn't only about NATO encroaching eastward, but also about trade and influences from the West?
 
@CoElkHunter

I doubt.
Even joining EU by Ukraine - before this war, I dont think that would matter too much.
Former Warsaw pact countries joined EU, without much issues. (Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, etc)

There is history of very good "trade" with west, even with Russia (not to mention gas export to Germany).
Some of it is quite surprising.

This is few years old news, to give example:

This conflict is not economic based, and is not about ideology (communism in Russia is dead)
It is about geopolitical positioning of Russia in next decade.

Later edit:
Culture and trade is not an issue. There are western hotels (like Holliday inn), mac donallds, western brends, german cars on russian streets, hollywood movies in theaters, and more and more english speaking people in russia. This means Russia is not affraid of western cultural influence. Nor trying to stop it. They are consuming it quite well, actually.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that there are two theatres in Ukraine. Mariupol is located very close to Russia which results in very short supply line from supply to the troops. As such The Russians have the convenience of quantities of ammo, food and equipment brought from Russia. Due to the proximity of the Front to Russia, the transport are not exposed to significant risk,
The other theatre is the capital Kyiv which is located several hundred miles from Russia and abot 50 miles from Russias lackey Belarus. To move material and men from Belarus to Kyiv requires several miles of inhospitable terrain and uncooperative Ukrainians,
In the Mariupol situation the Russians have the advantage in that they can cut the services to the town and the inhabitants can only get along for the resources that they have, the Russians can wait them out.
The Kyiv from has the opposite situation regarding logistics .Overland routes from adjacent countries can bring in all sort of supplies to aid the Ukraines while the Russians are stuck in a position a few yards wide and miles long. Attempts to resupply would meet fierce resistance and likely fail to get product to the far end of the line.
It does appear that Putin has three choices: pull the troops from the west and consolidate them in the east with a focus of militarizing that land that he claimed about 5 years ago of the Crimea and Blask Sea shoreline. Then call for a truce.
Option 2 is expand the war with unacceptable weaponry. The path that these action would follow is unpredictable, but would be bad for all.
Option3 Continue with the current plan, pulling men and material from all over Russia in the attempt to over-power Ukraine. This choice would start to resemble a lot of wars that didn't end well for anyone.
 
@CoElkHunter

I doubt.
Even joining EU by Ukraine - before this war, I dont think that would matter too much.
Former Warsaw pact countries joined EU, without much issues. (Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, etc)

There is history of very good "trade" with west, even with Russia (not to mention gas export to Germany).
Some of it is quite surprising.

This is few years old news, to give example:

This conflict is not economic based, and is not about ideology (communism in Russia is dead)
It is about geopolitical positioning of Russia in next decade.

Later edit:
Culture and trade is not an issue. There are western hotels (like Holliday inn), mac donallds, western brends, german cars on russian streets, hollywood movies in theaters, and more and more english speaking people in russia. This means Russia is not affraid of western cultural influence. Nor trying to stop it.
Maybe your right? I do enjoy these discussions here on AH, especially with regards to historical perspectives both past and present. The majority of people I know couldn't point out Ukraine on an unmarked map if their life depended on it! Anyway, interesting article. My buddy works as a commercial satellite controller. He told me the Russians have been using inexpensive rockets powered by kerosene forever and have had relatively few problems with them. Ours tend to blow up now and again.
 
The Russians will win even if they kill everyone and destroy the entire country.
This will be happen.
The Russian leadership has always been indifferent to people, both its own and foreign, since the time of the tsars.
And the brainwashing of the people there has worked for decades.
Putin wants to leave a clear footprint in the history of his country.

Earlier today, Vitali Klitschko, now mayor of Kiev, spoke at the Munich City Council via live streaming.
He said that Russia flies its dead soldiers back home in tons (as a weight unit).Since the bodies are so disfigured by acts of war that they can no longer be matched to the bodies.

What a misery for all the affected people.
a Russian proverb quoted by him ,with regard to Putin
"A wolf may loose its teeth one day, but it never looses its character".
 

Forum statistics

Threads
58,652
Messages
1,266,465
Members
105,452
Latest member
gulveer
 

 

 

Latest profile posts

*** SPECIAL OFFER ***
5400bdb0-f0a7-407a-a64b-61d4966d1a96.JPG

EC Hunting Safaris is offering an "Early Season" Special.
Confirm your hunt by End Feb 2025, and receive 5% DISCOUNT on your Safari package, or tailor-made package, AS WELL AS, FREE RIFLE HIRE & AMMO.
Send us a message and secure your Special Offer
updated available dates for 2025 season,

14-19 March
1-7 April
22-28 April
16-24 May
9-30 June
25-31 July
19-31 August
September and October is wide open

jump on these dates fast, I am about to head out on my American marketing trip and they will go quick,
 
Top