Political Posts

[Spekulatius]

1 hour ago, aws said:

Putin doesn't need to save face. He doesn't care at all what the west things about him, and his propaganda machine in Russia can spin whatever outcome into some heroic victory. Give Ukraine as much as they can use to defend themselves for as long as they have the will to do so.

Yep, thats it in a nutshell.

Who cares what Putin thinks at this point. His nukes are useless - using them even on tactical level will get NATO involved (likely with a massive conventional response ) and makes him lose the war very quickly.

 

Just remember that  we had wars between nuclear armed parties before, it is nothing new.

[maplevalue]

18 hours ago, shhughes1116 said:

Ukraine’s problem is that they are struggling to outfit units with all the stuff needed for the front lines - helmets, boots, NVGs, etc.   By the end of the Summer, Ukraine will likely have 750k mobilized troops, most of whom will already have combat experience from the Donbas. 

 

This is very interesting. Do you have a source for this?

[Spekulatius]

5 hours ago, maplevalue said:

 

This is very interesting. Do you have a source for this?

Several blogs talk about this including the war in Ukraine youtube channel.

 

Here is a CBS article. Many of the ukrainian volunteer/conscripts units take heavy losses upon contact with the enemy due to lack of heavy weapons and training. Keep in mind that most casualties are due to artillery right now  and while Ukraine has received some from the west, it isn't enough to counter Russian firepower. Those conscript units often have no artillery whatsoever.

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/ukrainian-forces-lacking-essential-equipment/

 

We should be producing hundreds of Howitzers right now, so we can sent them to Ukraine. Enough artillery in Ukrainian hands and the Russians become mincemeat. They are very good at using them, but they don't have enough and in addition ammunition for their Russian made (which is still the vast majority of their existing material) are running out, because it's only produced in Russia.

Edited June 17, 2022 by Spekulatius

[shhughes1116]

5 hours ago, maplevalue said:

 

This is very interesting. Do you have a source for this?

A bunch of sources, yes.  At the beginning of the war when they started conscription, they were moving guys through the system in a couple of days.  They had equipment on-hand, and clearly a need for numbers.   Now I am hearing that it is taking more than a month - they are waiting around for equipment and the need for numbers is not as desperate.  
 

People get really focused on the heavy equipment like HIMARS and tanks and IFVs.  Clearly those are important, especially in the South.  But people forget about the small stuff - body armor, helmets, secure radios, small-arms and NVGs.  The NVGs are pretty crucial.  In some areas of the front, can’t go toe-to-toe in a conventional fight with Russians right  now given the disparity in artillery.  But the Ukrainians have a lot of NVG gear compared to the Russians, and some really incredible NVG stuff for their relatively large force of SOF guys.  So from what I am hearing, the Ukrainians are doing a lot of fighting at night.  The Russians don’t have a lot of working NVG equipment, don’t have much working thermal optics, and so they are basically blind (and sometimes drunk) at night.  

 

 

[no_free_lunch]

5 hours ago, maplevalue said:

 

This is very interesting. Do you have a source for this?

I don't have a source handy but I have heard similar numbers.   It is possible. 100k troops in Donbass a year since 2014 when the war started, so 8 years worth.  I don't think there is a problem with equipping these types of numbers with basic infantry equipment.

 

It's more about having the heavy equipment than number of men, from what I can tell.  Tanks, drones, artillery, aircraft.  This in true in particular in the open areas.  So it will really come down to the west supplying the equipment.  There is no doubt they have the manpower to use it.

[shhughes1116]

5 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

Several blogs talk about this including the war in Ukraine youtube channel.

 

Here is a CBS article. Many of the ukrainian volunteer/conscripts units take heavy losses upon contact with the enemy due to lack of heavy weapons and training. Keep in mind that most casualties are due to artillery right now  and while Ukraine has received some from the west, it isn't enough to counter Russian firepower. Those conscript units often have no artillery whatsoever.

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/ukrainian-forces-lacking-essential-equipment/

 

We should be producing hundreds of Howitzers right now, so we can sent them to Ukraine. Enough artillery in Ukrainian hands and the Russians become mincemeat. They are very good at using them, but they don't have enough and in addition ammunition for their Russian made (which is still the vast majority of their existing material) are running out, because it's only produced in Russia.

if we were serious about ending this, we would send ~500 M109A6 Palladins.  An upgraded version of the M109s that Norway recently sent and the M109s that the British are about to send.  We bought almost 1000 back in the 90’s before the production line closed.  Great weapon for shoot and scoot, very accurate, and when combined with the counter-battery radars that we’ve given to Ukraine, the Russian artillery would be toast in about a week.  
 

 

 

 

[Gregmal]

Nah haven’t you seen how important the excuses of Putin and the War are to Bidens entire schtick right now? Before the war even really got going I said how he rather have an excuse and a scapegoat for $125 oil than have it at $90 and no one but himself to blame. 

[Spekulatius]

Severodonetsk has become another Stalingrad. Absolutely nuts. If you ever watched the movie with Jude law and Ed Harris, at the end this will look like the “impossible shot scene”. Supposedly one guy did not make the gap, but it’s not shown.

Similar to Stalingrad for the Germans, the city is sort of worthless strategically, but has become a trophy price for the Russians. The Ukrainians using this to draw in the Russian resources in a meat grinder (at least that what it looks like)

 

Edited June 18, 2022 by Spekulatius

[mcliu]

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/ukrainian-military-unit-russia-artillery-1365021/

 

A big part of the problem in defending this part of Donbas, Ostap believes, is that the people who have stayed behind — the people who haven’t fled — don’t really believe they are part of Ukraine. In his view, the civilians who remain are all separatist sympathizers. He says they help the Russians navigate backcountry roads that aren’t on the maps.

“Yeah, they’re all waiting for Russkiy mir,” Mace says, laughing when I ask his opinion about the locals. Russkiy mir, or “Russian world,” is the revanchist concept that Russia needs to restore its central role in the affairs of its neighbors, and its borders, to what they were at the height of the Soviet empire.

He asserts there have been instances of local collaborators getting caught providing information about Ukrainian troop movements or locations. Indeed, Slovyansk fell to Russian separatists in 2014: The retaking of the city by the Ukrainian military later that summer was the first major battle in Donbas.

“Almost everyone here is pro-Russian. But you can’t arrest people just for that,” Mace says. In any case, the police and the SBU —Ukraine’s internal security service — were doing what they could. “The SBU even arrested a couple of people in our brigade,” he says.

[Spekulatius]

Looks like the Ukraine will join the EU sooner than I expected:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/eu-united-support-ukraines-candidacy-083757335.html

[aws]

It's been a good week for charity auctions. First Buffett's lunch sells for $19 million, and now a charity auction to benefit Ukranian refugee children reached over $100 million. The auction was for Dmitry Muratov's Nobel Peace Prize, with 100% of the proceeds benefitting UNICEF. They did a live stream of the auction, which if you watch starting from around the 50:00 mark is behaving like a normal auction with 100k and 200k incrementing bids, until one bidder goes straight to 103.5 million.

 

 

[Xerxes]

From an article from The Economist on nuclear taboo. depending how brainwashed you are, you may have different perspective. 
 

[Blugolds]

wow @Xerxes....I find that shocking and disturbing. Its hard to believe, not only Americans, but the Brits, French and Israelis...I guess the Israelis dont really surprise me...but the fact that the use of Nuclear weapons would be socially accepted in general, and that 20k lives justify 2M deaths..

 

Without looking into the study for more detail my initial questions would be details on the subjects polled. Age, socioeconomic, education etc. Size of the group. Explanation of "nuclear weapons" given to the subjects. Are we describing another Hiroshima scenario, or were these "tactical" nukes like we have heard about recently that are nuclear in nature but conventional in damage (not that it makes a difference in MY answer). 

 

Interesting thought...if Zalensky had access to a nuclear weapon do you think HE would use it? Would he be justified?

[Dinar]

53 minutes ago, Blugolds11 said:

wow @Xerxes....I find that shocking and disturbing. Its hard to believe, not only Americans, but the Brits, French and Israelis...I guess the Israelis dont really surprise me...but the fact that the use of Nuclear weapons would be socially accepted in general, and that 20k lives justify 2M deaths..

 

Without looking into the study for more detail my initial questions would be details on the subjects polled. Age, socioeconomic, education etc. Size of the group. Explanation of "nuclear weapons" given to the subjects. Are we describing another Hiroshima scenario, or were these "tactical" nukes like we have heard about recently that are nuclear in nature but conventional in damage (not that it makes a difference in MY answer). 

 

Interesting thought...if Zalensky had access to a nuclear weapon do you think HE would use it? Would he be justified?

Just out of curiosity, why British, French or American response is shocking but Israel's is not?

[Xerxes]

Actually I do sympathize with the Israeli. Deterrence: holocaust to prevent a holocaust. 
 

The French and others would not be out of nessacity but rather out of pride. But then again we have seen the French lose a fight in indochina in an era where nuclear was not so taboo, but yet they didn’t use it. 
 

French fight to keep its colony in indochina was not so different than Moscow’ bid for Ukraine. 

[no_free_lunch]

I think you seriously underestimate the hurdle to use nuclear weapons.  To try to compare some street survey to what a super-power will do is just silly.

[Gregmal]

Slightly different take than what most here are deepthroating 

Edited June 29, 2022 by Gregmal

[Xerxes]

12 hours ago, no_free_lunch said:

I think you seriously underestimate the hurdle to use nuclear weapons.  To try to compare some street survey to what a super-power will do is just silly.

You are not wrong, except that we are not talking about government’ hurdle which is pretty high as you said. 
 

we are talking what an average Joe thinks in the West. We all talk about what an average Ivan thinks in Russia. Their support (or rather silence) for Moscow’ savage war. 
 

But that I can understand. Russian society is not exactly an open and free society where you expect the Ivans to have a balanced view. 
 

But average Joes in the West don’t have that problem. They are free to consume whatever media they like. Yet …

[Spekulatius]

12 hours ago, no_free_lunch said:

I think you seriously underestimate the hurdle to use nuclear weapons.  To try to compare some street survey to what a super-power will do is just silly.

Furthermore , it is important to note that Russia officially is not in a war yet. We are still talking about a "special operation here", per Russia's official messaging. So there is zero risk of a nuclear escalation right now.

[Xerxes]

22 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

Furthermore , it is important to note that Russia officially is not in a war yet. We are still talking about a "special operation here", per Russia's official messaging. So there is zero risk of a nuclear escalation right now.

totally irrelevant. 
 

McArthur was ready to go nuclear in Manchuria, yet no state of war existed between PRC and the US. 
 

That said in the current situation, unlikely, …. until the day it isn’t. 

[Spekulatius]

47 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

totally irrelevant. 
 

McArthur was ready to go nuclear in Manchuria, yet no state of war existed between PRC and the US. 
 

That said in the current situation, unlikely, …. until the day it isn’t. 

Mc Arthur was not president. I am sure the Russians are playing all sort of war games in their operations room, including nuclear strikes. Those are irrelevant as well.

 

Anyays, Putin screwed himself - NATO has no expanded to Finland and Sweden, which are very capable.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/29/russia-ukraine-live-updates.html

 

With Finland (North) , the Baltics, Black Sea under NATO can easily throttle any Russian fleet movements except from Vladivostok on a moments notice.

 

The long range rockets that were given to Ukraine have enough reach to get to Snake Island where  the Russians intent to block the Odessa port traffic. So the Russian should not get too comfortable there.

 

Donbas is tough for the Ukraine as the Russian now wear them out with artillery. So west needs to supply the Ukraine with enough artillery to match. US/ NATO artillery has 2x the reach of Russian artillery and have guided ammo, so should be possible to counter it, given enough quantity.

 

FWIW, I expect Russian arms exports to drop substantially because they can't deliver spare parts and the performance  of their weapons is abysmal on the battle field.

 

 

[Xerxes]

I don’t disagree with paragraph 1-6

 

Except that Mcarthur, while not president, was very much the proconsul reigning over Asia and his ideas were beyond war games.
 

If I recall he got fired for getting under Truman skin … but not because Truman feared some sort nuclear holocaust in Manchuria or the morality of it. 

[Spekulatius]

This makes sense. Germany needs all the LNG tanker they can get:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/06/29/ftse-100-markets-live-news-inflation-prices-russia-gas/

I guess we call this a lease cancellation.

 

@Xerxes As for the Mc Arthur story - the job of a general is a different one than as politician. A general / commander in chief needs to lay the options out there.  If he got A, B and C at the disposal, and A is a nuclear strike, it's probably his job to present this scenario.

 

It's up the the politician to decide which of the options is viable. I think this happens pretty much every conflict. I bet Eisenhower as general had different thought process than Eisenhower as a president.

[Xerxes]

Agree on jobs being different in a normal situation involving normal people. That is why Eisenhower was able to make the transition to civilian life into the highest office. 

 

contrast that to a character like McArthur, who reigned like a sovereign, over Japan and Korea. if I recall it was close to 10 years after he set foot back in the U.S. after being fired. That is how much he didn’t care about. 
 

McArthur was so powerful that even his direct solid line boss General Bradly who was the chairman of Joint Chiefs had no control on him. I may remember wrong but i believe Bradly was promoted to a five-star general when he became chairman so that he was not outranked by Mcarthur (a technical subordinate) also another five-star general.  

all this to say that Mcarthur was a character and his powers were immense. 

[Spekulatius]

10 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

Agree on jobs being different in a normal situation involving normal people. That is why Eisenhower was able to make the transition to civilian life into the highest office. 

 

contrast that to a character like McArthur, who reigned like a sovereign, over Japan and Korea. if I recall it was close to 10 years after he set foot back in the U.S. after being fired. That is how much he didn’t care about. 
 

McArthur was so powerful that even his direct solid line boss General Bradly who was the chairman of Joint Chiefs had no control on him. I may remember wrong but i believe Bradly was promoted to a five-star general when he became chairman so that he was not outranked by Mcarthur (a technical subordinate) also another five-star general.  

all this to say that Mcarthur was a character and his powers were immense. 

I think the Hardcore history podcast has some anecdotes about him. Quite some  characters in the US army with McArthur and Patton. There was a reason why the otherwise unremarkable Bradley was commander in the European theatre and not Patton.