Politics

[Red Leg]

Yeah, I've seen some similar buzz on Twitter. We shall know soon enough I suppose.

The latest from ISW. Exactly what you noted. Rolling them up along the north/ west bank of the Dnieper.

Institute for the Study of War

Ukrainian forces continued to make substantial gains around Lyman and in Kherson Oblast in the last 48 hours. Ukrainian and Russian sources reported that Ukrainian troops made significant breakthroughs in northern Kherson Oblast between October 2 and 3.

www.understandingwar.org

https://twitter.com/x/status/1577014490935091200

 

[steve white]

View attachment 492765

I thought diesel particulate in the upper atmosphere was "bad" for shading the atmosphere from the sun. With this new train of thought we should all be driving diesels and rolling coal!

 

[1dirthawker]

has anybody else noticed that none of the contestants in the russia/ukrain conflict are using any kind of electric vehicles?!! hmmmm. wonder why?

 

[Alistair]

has anybody else noticed that none of the contestants in the russia/ukrain conflict are using any kind of electric vehicles?!! hmmmm. wonder why?

Maybe the Russians should start. Their tanks still wouldn't make it to the front lines, but at least the Ukrainians would have a tougher time of fixing them up and driving 'em all the way back to the border.

 

[BSO Dave]

What frustrates me is that he doesn't make that case.

Interesting that you should say this.. In my opinion, nobody in favor of direct US involvement has made the case either. You and I have exchanged opinions on this before and I asked for you to make that case for me so I could better understand how risking war with the Russians is in the USA's immediate, tangible best interests.

You were kind enough to provide me with long term prognostications and suppositions given by the "experts" that certainly could ring true, but nothing to justify the immediate benefits especially given our current domestic state of affairs on so many fronts, and the very real risk of direct conflict with Russia.. On this, I kinda still align with Carlson's general view that our current and future escalated Ukraine involvement in that the risk doesn't seem to support the reward given how it's been sold so far..

Carlson compares our spending on Ukraine and "protecting its border" to the southern border. I get his frustration with the fiasco Biden has created on the Rio Grande, but the one has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

Come on RedLeg, your a smart guy. You know perfectly well that Carlson's border comparison is a metaphor used to openly mock this Administration's current "priorities" or lack thereof of our own national security. It's perfectly justified to question the reasoning for our Ukraine support when one of the main arguments being made by this Administrations is that we are helping defend a country over the sanctity of their "sovereignty" when we are completely willfully ignoring our own..

Clips of Tucker have become a staple on the Russian state propaganda TV channels. That is not good company to keep.

Not good company to keep by what measure or who's opinion? The US government's? It's certainly been fodder for the pundits on the left attacking Carlson as an "agent of Putin" just like they did with Trump, but beyond that where's the harm and who cares? I doubt Tucker cares. In fact, he's probably getting good laugh knowing it drives his critics crazy. As far as it's effectiveness as propaganda for the Russians, it doesn't seem to be having its intended effect judging by the protests against the war.

 

[spike.t]

BBC News - Ukraine war: Liberated town shows human cost of Russia's defeat

Ukraine war: Liberated town shows human cost of Russia's defeat

The BBC's Orla Guerin finds desolate scenes in Lyman, a town Ukraine recaptured from Russia.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[BSO Dave]

Those of you who fish will get this..

 

[BSO Dave]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=500273684989295

 

[Red Leg]

Another very short clip that speaks volumes about the deteriorating state of Russian deployed forces.

The tank is a T-62. Some Russian soldier's grandfather used it. Nevertheless, it has been taken out of storage and sent to the front. The cage on top is a bit of wishful coping. I assume it was done to give the crew some confidence with respect to ATGMs. The idea would be to cause a Javelin to pre-detonate and not penetrate the turret top. Due to a modern ATGM's tandem warhead, it is about as effective as wearing a medicine bag to stop a bullet.

More importantly, the weakest anti-tank weapons on the battlefield will easily crack open a T-62. It has no night vision, no thermals, or even a laser range finder. The gunner uses a range finder similar to that on an old SLR camera to determine an aiming point. An absolute museum piece.

This one is missing the last third of is barrel and may well have killed itself when an equally ancient round blew up when fired.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/xvcicw

The advances along the right bank of the Dneiper and east of Lyman continued overnight and through today.

 

[Foxi]

even a laser range finder. The gunner uses a range finder similar to that on an old SLR camera to determine an aiming point. An absolute museum piece.
ay.

you may not believe it, we hunters are still better equipped
Sometimes I have the impression, that Russia is a run-down gas station with nuclear weapons.

 

[mdwest]

Another very short clip that speaks volumes about the deteriorating state of Russian deployed forces.

The tank is a T-62. Some Russian soldier's grandfather used it. Nevertheless, it has been taken out of storage and sent to the front. The cage on top is a bit of wishful coping. I assume it was done to give the crew some confidence with respect to ATGMs. The idea would be to cause a Javelin to pre-detonate and not penetrate the turret top. Due to a modern ATGM's tandem warhead, it is about as effective as wearing a medicine bag to stop a bullet.

More importantly, the weakest anti-tank weapons on the battlefield will easily crack open a T-62. It has no night vision, no thermals, or even a laser range finder. The gunner uses a range finder similar to that on an old SLR camera to determine an aiming point. An absolute museum piece.

This one is missing the last third of is barrel and may well have killed itself when an equally ancient round blew up when fired.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/xvcicw

The advances along the right bank of the Dneiper and east of Lyman continued overnight and through today.

I wonder what all of this means in the long term... Clearly Russia's armor is depleted (as well as artillery, and other assets).. it will take decades at their current defense spending rates to rebuild their forces even if they do end up "winning" the war at some point in Ukraine..

Which means other than the nuclear threat... what leverage does Russia have at this point to do anything about Ukraine or any other country choosing to enter NATO? Or NATO choosing to accept any additional nations?

And.. for that matter.. if the Russian threat is truly minimalized.. how much of a purpose does NATO continue to serve? (I understand other global threats like China.. and rogue states like North Korea, etc.. but do we really believe if the US ends up in a conflict with NK that NATO is going to join in the fray?)..

As noted earlier.. Its not only the developed world that is watching.. Its the developing world.. Orders for russian arms are likely going to come to a screeching halt.. Certainly the demand for Russian training and following Russian doctrine is going to be minimized for quite some time.. So not only is their military decimated.. but their ability to sell their military wares on the global market becomes decimated..

Countries like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, etc.. have been very careful to make large scale weapons purchases from all countries represented on the UN security council.. There is a reason the Kuwaitis for example selected US main battle tanks, Brit armored personnel carriers, French helicopters, Russian surface to air and surface to surface missiles, and Chinese general purpose vehicles... They very much want to be a "friend" to all of the big boys on the block and to be known as a good and loyal business partner.. The next time a regional threat like Iraq threatens to roll across their borders they want to make sure the entire world panics at the thought of loosing billions of dollars in sales if they don't come to their rescue...

So moving forward.. what motivation do the Kuwaitis (and dozens of other nations) have for purchasing russian wares? (and all of the training, maintenance, support, etc that go with it?)...

Its not like they were purchasing Russian stuff in the past because they believed it to be the absolute best option available.. the were purchasing it because its significantly more affordable than buying the US (or Euro) option.. and they were buying an additional friend that they thought they could count on in a time of need...

Now that the Russians don't really have the ability to be these developing nations military "friends" for a good while into the future.. I wonder what the greater impact on the Russian economy and its military will be...

 

[Doug3006]

I wonder what all of this means in the long term... Clearly Russia's armor is depleted (as well as artillery, and other assets).. it will take decades at their current defense spending rates to rebuild their forces even if they do end up "winning" the war at some point in Ukraine..

Which means other than the nuclear threat... what leverage does Russia have at this point to do anything about Ukraine or any other country choosing to enter NATO? Or NATO choosing to accept any additional nations?

And.. for that matter.. if the Russian threat is truly minimalized.. how much of a purpose does NATO continue to serve? (I understand other global threats like China.. and rogue states like North Korea, etc.. but do we really believe if the US ends up in a conflict with NK that NATO is going to join in the fray?)..

As noted earlier.. Its not only the developed world that is watching.. Its the developing world.. Orders for russian arms are likely going to come to a screeching halt.. Certainly the demand for Russian training and following Russian doctrine is going to be minimized for quite some time.. So not only is their military decimated.. but their ability to sell their military wares on the global market becomes decimated..

Countries like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, etc.. have been very careful to make large scale weapons purchases from all countries represented on the UN security council.. There is a reason the Kuwaitis for example selected US main battle tanks, Brit armored personnel carriers, French helicopters, Russian surface to air and surface to surface missiles, and Chinese general purpose vehicles... They very much want to be a "friend" to all of the big boys on the block and to be known as a good and loyal business partner.. The next time a regional threat like Iraq threatens to roll across their borders they want to make sure the entire world panics at the thought of loosing billions of dollars in sales if they don't come to their rescue...

So moving forward.. what motivation do the Kuwaitis (and dozens of other nations) have for purchasing russian wares? (and all of the training, maintenance, support, etc that go with it?)...

Its not like they were purchasing Russian stuff in the past because they believed it to be the absolute best option available.. the were purchasing it because its significantly more affordable than buying the US (or Euro) option.. and they were buying an additional friend that they thought they could count on in a time of need...

Now that the Russians don't really have the ability to be these developing nations military "friends" for a good while into the future.. I wonder what the greater impact on the Russian economy and its military will be...

The need for cheaper military hardware will be satisfied by China no doubt.

 

[Red Leg]

I wonder what all of this means in the long term... Clearly Russia's armor is depleted (as well as artillery, and other assets).. it will take decades at their current defense spending rates to rebuild their forces even if they do end up "winning" the war at some point in Ukraine..

Which means other than the nuclear threat... what leverage does Russia have at this point to do anything about Ukraine or any other country choosing to enter NATO? Or NATO choosing to accept any additional nations?

And.. for that matter.. if the Russian threat is truly minimalized.. how much of a purpose does NATO continue to serve? (I understand other global threats like China.. and rogue states like North Korea, etc.. but do we really believe if the US ends up in a conflict with NK that NATO is going to join in the fray?)..

As noted earlier.. Its not only the developed world that is watching.. Its the developing world.. Orders for russian arms are likely going to come to a screeching halt.. Certainly the demand for Russian training and following Russian doctrine is going to be minimized for quite some time.. So not only is their military decimated.. but their ability to sell their military wares on the global market becomes decimated..

Countries like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, etc.. have been very careful to make large scale weapons purchases from all countries represented on the UN security council.. There is a reason the Kuwaitis for example selected US main battle tanks, Brit armored personnel carriers, French helicopters, Russian surface to air and surface to surface missiles, and Chinese general purpose vehicles... They very much want to be a "friend" to all of the big boys on the block and to be known as a good and loyal business partner.. The next time a regional threat like Iraq threatens to roll across their borders they want to make sure the entire world panics at the thought of loosing billions of dollars in sales if they don't come to their rescue...

So moving forward.. what motivation do the Kuwaitis (and dozens of other nations) have for purchasing russian wares? (and all of the training, maintenance, support, etc that go with it?)...

Its not like they were purchasing Russian stuff in the past because they believed it to be the absolute best option available.. the were purchasing it because its significantly more affordable than buying the US (or Euro) option.. and they were buying an additional friend that they thought they could count on in a time of need...

Now that the Russians don't really have the ability to be these developing nations military "friends" for a good while into the future.. I wonder what the greater impact on the Russian economy and its military will be...

I think you have that exactly right. Though, I would note NATO was a partner in Afghanistan (Ukraine even provided troops).

I think Russia has another set of issues that could begin to boil over at any moment, and perhaps the first tremors are starting to be felt along the Caucuses as we discuss this. Russia really is the world's last traditional empire. It is a "nation" composed of a polyglot of languages, cultures, and formerly independent states, kingdoms and peoples. It has been largely held together by military might and the security services exercised and controlled by the Great Russians of European Russia.

This imperial reign of the Rus extends across the economy and culture. How many Asian features, for instance, have we seen on any of the clips from Russian Television or among the political military leadership in Moscow? Vast areas of non-European Russia exist in physical conditions little different than under the Tsars.

Like the Soviet Union, the remaining bits and pieces that form the modern federation also have the potential to spin off on their own trajectories. Whatever the result of the war in Ukraine, the ability of Russia to deal with such nationalistic movements has been gravely weakened - materially and morally.

The moment the special military operation changed from a coup de main to a drawn out war one would have to assume those latent forces of independence had to be taking notice. For instance, it is likely as many Chechens are fighting in Ukrainian uniform as are serving in the Russian Army.

I assume a debate is going on among Putin and his advisors with respect to how long they can sustain this level of attrition without decisively weakening the state itself. "Things fall apart; the center cannot hold" William Butler Yeats

 

[VertigoBE]

I think you have that exactly right. Though, I would note NATO was a partner in Afghanistan (Ukraine even provided troops).

I think Russia has another set of issues that could begin to boil over at any moment, and perhaps the first tremors are starting to be felt along the Caucuses as we discuss this. Russia really is the world's last traditional empire. It is a "nation" composed of a polyglot of languages, cultures, and formerly independent states, kingdoms and peoples. It has been largely held together by military might and the security services exercised and controlled by the Great Russians of European Russia.

This imperial reign of the Rus extends across the economy and culture. How many Asian features, for instance, have we seen on any of the clips from Russian Television or among the political military leadership in Moscow? Vast areas of non-European Russia exist in physical conditions little different than under the Tsars.

Like the Soviet Union, the remaining bits and pieces that form the modern federation also have the potential to spin off on their own trajectories. Whatever the result of the war in Ukraine, the ability of Russia to deal with such nationalistic movements has been gravely weakened - materially and morally.

The moment the special military operation changed from a coup de main to a drawn out war one would have to assume those latent forces of independence had to be taking notice. For instance, it is likely as many Chechens are fighting in Ukrainian uniform as are serving in the Russian Army.

I assume a debate is going on among Putin and his advisors with respect to how long they can sustain this level of attrition without decisively weakening the state itself. "Things fall apart; the center cannot hold" William Butler Yeats

This argument has been circling a few weeks on the floor already, how and on what fracture lines Russia might split, once the Moscow’s Center of gravity loses its pull.

It also means that a lot of the non-European Russian peoples that currently live mostly in those regions of great natural resources, will be much weaker (if Russia splits up) to keep their hold on their heimat. And that’s where Beijing might be getting ideas.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

I think you have that exactly right. Though, I would note NATO was a partner in Afghanistan (Ukraine even provided troops).

I think Russia has another set of issues that could begin to boil over at any moment, and perhaps the first tremors are starting to be felt along the Caucuses as we discuss this. Russia really is the world's last traditional empire. It is a "nation" composed of a polyglot of languages, cultures, and formerly independent states, kingdoms and peoples. It has been largely held together by military might and the security services exercised and controlled by the Great Russians of European Russia.

This imperial reign of the Rus extends across the economy and culture. How many Asian features, for instance, have we seen on any of the clips from Russian Television or among the political military leadership in Moscow? Vast areas of non-European Russia exist in physical conditions little different than under the Tsars.

Like the Soviet Union, the remaining bits and pieces that form the modern federation also have the potential to spin off on their own trajectories. Whatever the result of the war in Ukraine, the ability of Russia to deal with such nationalistic movements has been gravely weakened - materially and morally.

The moment the special military operation changed from a coup de main to a drawn out war one would have to assume those latent forces of independence had to be taking notice. For instance, it is likely as many Chechens are fighting in Ukrainian uniform as are serving in the Russian Army.

I assume a debate is going on among Putin and his advisors with respect to how long they can sustain this level of attrition without decisively weakening the state itself. "Things fall apart; the center cannot hold" William Butler Yeats

Ironically the very forces at play in weakening Russia's hold or purpose amongst it's member states is probably also at play strengthening NATO and the desire to come in under the collective umbrella.

 

[Aaron N]

This argument has been circling a few weeks on the floor already, how and on what fracture lines Russia might split, once the Moscow’s Center of gravity loses its pull.

It also means that a lot of the non-European Russian peoples that currently live mostly in those regions of great natural resources, will be much weaker (if Russia splits up) to keep their hold on their heimat. And that’s where Beijing might be getting ideas.

I wouldn’t doubt that if this were to happen, Beijing would be quick to reclaim the territories that were signed over to Stalin.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

Does Musk's peace plan have any merit? The problem is, as I see it, there is nothing to prevent Moscow having another go at war in the future if they lose the supervised reforendum. The West can hold Ukraine to a deal, but who binds Russia?

 

[CoElkHunter]

Does Musk's peace plan have any merit? The problem is, as I see it, there is nothing to prevent Moscow having another go at war in the future if they lose the supervised reforendum. The West can hold Ukraine to a deal, but who binds Russia?

Under Putin, Russia has been running amok for years now, while the world has looked the other way. Georgia, Syria, Crimea and now Ukraine. I say no deal with Putin, because as you pointed out, he won't stop given his mental instability and there will be NOTHING that binds Russia to any long term agreement.

 

[SaintPanzer]

You were kind enough to provide me with long term prognostications and suppositions given by the "experts" that certainly could ring true, but nothing to justify the immediate benefits especially given our current domestic state of affairs on so many fronts, and the very real risk of direct conflict with Russia.

OK, I'll play silly games.

One-half the world's neon supply comes from Ukraine. While our first thoughts when it comes to neon is that we need it to make Budweiser signs for your local pub, that's really not the point. The primary use for all that neon is to etch microchips. The shortage you're seeing in new cars (and other places) can be traced (along with other causes) to this.

Then there is the Ukrainian supply of grain. Not only has that limited grain sales in Africa, India and other places, it also is an example of grain being a worldwide commodity. Yes, the US also supplies a lot of grain to the world, but while the demand has not changed, the supply has seen a sharp cut. This means prices have gone up.

Those are two examples. Others will occur to you. Of course, one could argue the supply would still be there, you'd just be paying someone else for it, but that way lies madness...

 

[fourfive8]

First, nothing new about the natural resources in Ukraine. I remember clearly learning about and studying that in my college Economic Geography class- ‘69 IIRC.

Second. who gives a rat’s butt about what Tucker Carlson thinks or says. I never have liked the guy. I pay zero attention to his stuff. Early on I watched a couple of his segments and IMO he has no core or anchor and that tells me he’s just a talking head prostitute. Nothing more than a Fox version of any idiot on CNN hawking ratings.