Political Posts

[Xerxes]

10 hours ago, Gregmal said:

Slightly different take than what most here are deepthroating 

Thanks for posting. I read the whole thread, but my understanding of what is happening (in my limited ability to discern) seems to be different than this guy. 
 

He seem to suggest that the Russian army performance is like the German panzer divisions slicing through the Ardennes forest, surprising the allies in their mobility and audacity. 
 

The strategic ambitions of Kremlin was surprising but so was their shortcomings. Granted they are an artillery-based army, so incrementally they are doing much better now than they did back in March. 

[Xerxes]

24 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

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.

They needed a Tim Cook and not a Steve Jobs at that stage … lol

[no_free_lunch]

5 hours ago, Xerxes said:

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 …

 

To get in the specifics of the poll and just based on the terse article I saw, I question whether it's the same as Ukraine Russia.   The poll was around how America would respond to a pre-emptive attack on a nuclear aircraft carrier.  Those things have 5000+ personnel.  It would be the equivalent of a pearl harbor.  Not the same as Ukraine siding closer to NATO at all, in my opinion.

[Xerxes]

33 minutes ago, no_free_lunch said:

 

To get in the specifics of the poll and just based on the terse article I saw, I question whether it's the same as Ukraine Russia.   The poll was around how America would respond to a pre-emptive attack on a nuclear aircraft carrier.  Those things have 5000+ personnel.  It would be the equivalent of a pearl harbor.  Not the same as Ukraine siding closer to NATO at all, in my opinion.

 

it doesn’t matter how a war starts. Once started it takes a life of its own. What the hell a U.S. aircraft carrier is doing in the Persian Gulf ... anyways … you can comment on technicality how they are different I don’t see it. Western average joes can be as bloodthirsty as eastern Ivans. Only difference is the Ivan’s doesn’t know better whereas the average joe is just deluded and brainwashed. 

 

Iran-Iraq war was started with a full scale Iraqi invasion but Iran played a role in extending that war and is as guilty as Iraq. So does it really matter if technically Iraq started the war. 
 

Will file this under our “agree to disagree” bucket. 

[Spekulatius]

1 hour ago, Xerxes said:

Thanks for posting. I read the whole thread, but my understanding of what is happening (in my limited ability to discern) seems to be different than this guy. 
 

He seem to suggest that the Russian army performance is like the German panzer divisions slicing through the Ardennes forest, surprising the allies in their mobility and audacity. 
 

The strategic ambitions of Kremlin was surprising but so was their shortcomings. Granted they are an artillery-based army, so incrementally they are doing much better now than they did back in March. 

Russian are grinding it out mostly with overwhelming artillery, they are not slicing through anything. The slow progress is proof of this. The Russians tried the Blitzkrieg when trying to take Kiev, but instead it sort of evolved into a bum rush.

 

For good analysis, try Michael Clarks analysis in Sky news (available on youtube):

https://news.sky.com/video/ukraine-your-questions-answered-by-professor-michael-clarke-12629662

 

Give the Ukrainians enough artillery and the russians will get anhillated.

 

Note that the artillery wars tipped in Russia's favor because the Ukrainians are running out of 152mm artillery shells. Even the NATO stockpiles that were supplied to the Ukraine ran out as those are only produced in Russia.

So the Ukrainian native artillery is mostly not active any more since it ran out of ammo. The West has replaced some of this with qualitatively better one but it's not enough.

 

This WW1 without artillery on one side. Even fortified positions will eventually been ground down under prolonged barrages. That's what the Russians are doing.

 

The west needs to supply hundreds of artillery pieces to the Ukraine not dozens.

Edited June 29, 2022 by Spekulatius

[shhughes1116]

18 hours ago, Gregmal said:

Slightly different take than what most here are deepthroating 

Amazing.  I just read a puff-piece from an Indian defense “journal” and the content is identical, down to the grammatical errors. 
 

Ukraine did not have a large standing army. About 90k active duty guys in the Donbas right before the war started, serving a one year stint, along with “8 classes” of reservists who served their one-year stint in the Donbas between 2014 and 2022.  Takes time to mobilize troops, re-train them,  get them equipment.  Their posture in the Donbas reflects this situation - they needed a way to soak up Russian pressure while they mobilize the population to fight back.  And how do you soak up pressure?  Heavy  on fortifications and fixed positions,  multiple lines of defense, willingness to trade territory for time, and fight your enemy in places where you take away their advantage (i.e. urban areas where the use of artillery creates even better defensive opportunities, and where you can cuddle up right next to the enemy line so he can’t bring in his heavy artillery).

 

You know the problem with being an artillery-heavy army that uses very imprecise weapons?  You need lots of 152mm shells and 122mm rockets - mountains of them.  And given how military logistics work, you need to stockpile those shells and rockets about 15km - 30km behind your lines, and for Russia, close to a rail head.   And to move those munitions to your forward firing positions, you need lots and lots of trucks.  Lots and lots of trucks are hard to hide - makes it easy to find munition dumps.  Have you noticed a number of videos recently of explosions at munitions dumps behind the Russian lines?  Easy to identify given the secondary explosions - you can literally see the 122mm Grad rockets firing off like fireworks.  An artillery tube without shells is worthless.  Infantry attacking fixed fortifications without artillery support are either dead, or soon to be dead.  
 

You know the other problem with being an artillery heavy army?  You need lots of replacement barrels.  Each barrel can fire a certain number of shells before it degrades.  As it degrades, it looses accuracy.  Eventually, it will likely cause a shell to detonate in the tube, killing the crew.  Specialized industrial machinery is needed to build replacement barrels.  You need lots of trucks to move these barrels to the front.    You need specialized equipment at the front to replace these barrels.  And these barrels are shipped with the munitions.  So when the munitions dump goes boom-boom-boom, what do you think happens to the replacement barrels?

 

But don’t take my word for it on this.  Why do you think Russia is rolling out T-62s from long-term storage and using them for indirect fire?  Could it be because they are running out of everything but 1960’s era 105mm barrels and shells?   Why do you think Russia is mobilizing stocks of Soviet-era 152mm shells and 122mm rockets from Belarus?  Could it be because they have less than expected in storage and a lack of industrial capacity to produce enough?  
 

While this is going on in the background, Ukraine is using the new M142s and M270/ to hit Russian C&C locations.  
 

Don’t get me wrong. There is plenty more dying to happen on both sides.  And there is plenty of propaganda BS on both sides.   But the Ukrainians are hitting the exponential curve upwards on mobilization.  This will go even faster now that the UK has agreed to train two brigades of troops per quarter.  Every strike on civilians creates a new father or mother that has nothing to live for but death and destruction to the Russian invader. Every kidnapping and torture in Russian-occupied Ukraine creates a new partisan willing to slaughter Russian soldiers in the rear areas and collaborators.  
 

Before this is done, I suspect we are going to see the Russian army fall apart.  

 

 

[aws]

It's hard to take anyone talking about Russian military might seriously. All you have to do is look at a map and you see they control much mess Ukrainian territory than they did three months ago. What they have managed to do is bumble their way into a strategy that temporarily plays into their strengths. They have more artillery and can outrange the Ukrainians, so by staying at maximum firing range they can completely level the towns they are trying to eventually occupy, and by grinding attrition they make small gains. And then they play it off like this was all part of the master plan, where going for a direct assault on Kyiv was all a feint, even though it cost them thousands of troops and hundreds of tanks.

 

While they are taking some towns in the Donbass, but it's not even clear whether they are making net progress, or if they are losing more in the south than they are taking in the east. And with more advanced weaponry evening the playing field, it's tough to imagine this dynamic continuing for much longer.

 

And even if it does, how much does it play to their advantage to completely destroy the hometowns of the most Russian leaning areas of Ukraine? Not only does it make later administration much more difficult, but they are surely turning many people that were sitting on the fence into lifelong haters of the Russians. I've seen more reports lately of partisans attacks in the occupied areas, which is yet another thing for the Russians and their collaborators to worry about.

 

You have 40 million Ukrainians fighting against 200,000 invaders. Obviously they aren't all soldiers, but subdivide it anyway you want and it's still a huge discrepancy. 20 million men, 10 million fighting age, some smaller number with military training and equipment, but anyway you look at it this invasion force seems incapable of winning the long fight as the numbers will get more and more skewed. Ukrainians will be able to reinforce and grow their fighting force over time while Russia's will be depleted. 

[Spekulatius]

On 6/29/2022 at 10:12 AM, Spekulatius said:

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.

 

 

 

 

That didn't take long. Snake Island becomes indefensible for the Russians with the delivery of some HIMARS rocket system. Snake island is about 60 km away from the Ukraine mainland and these rocket systems go for 70km (the longer range version goes 200km. game over for the Russians on Snake Island. Not a huge win right now, but is important to keep Odessa from staying blocked longer term potentially.

 

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1108855805/russia-withdraws-snake-island-ukraine

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-long-range-rocket-systems-arrive-ukraine-minister-2022-06-23/

 

If we give the Ukraine rocket weapons systems that go somewhat further (~300km) then Russia can not safely move ships into Sebastopol harbor any more (distance  from Sebastopol harbor to Ukraine mainland is ~280km). At that point, Crimea and Sebastopol would become more or less strategically worthless as a naval base during war times.

 

Russia has been firing nilly willy with rocket bases from Crimea and with their Ships on the Ukraine mainland and that cannot be allowed forever.

[shhughes1116]

2 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

That didn't take long. Snake Island becomes indefensible for the Russians with the delivery of some HIMARS rocket system. Snake island is about 60 km away from the Ukraine mainland and these rocket systems go for 70km (the longer range version goes 200km. game over for the Russians on Snake Island. Not a huge win right now, but is important to keep Odessa from staying blocked longer term potentially.

 

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1108855805/russia-withdraws-snake-island-ukraine

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-long-range-rocket-systems-arrive-ukraine-minister-2022-06-23/

 

If we give the Ukraine rocket weapons systems that go somewhat further (~300km) then Russia can not safely move ships into Sebastopol harbor any more (distance  from Sebastopol harbor to Ukraine mainland is ~280km). At that point, Crimea and Sebastopol would become more or less strategically worthless as a naval base during war times.

 

Russia has been firing nilly willy with rocket bases from Crimea and with their Ships on the Ukraine mainland and that cannot be allowed forever.

I don’t think the US will provide Ukraine with the ATACMS.
 

But I think this might be used as leverage over Russia to unblock the Black Sea.  “We will unblock Kaliningrad, and you will unblock the Black Sea and let Ukrainian ships sortie out of Odessa with grain.  Otherwise, we will give Ukraine enough ATACMS to wipe Sevastopol off the face of the Earth.”

 

i think the entire reason train and vehicular traffic to Kaliningrad was restricted was in order to create a bargaining chip for Ukraine.  Kaliningrad and Sevastopol are Russia’s only two deep water naval ports that are ice free all year.  If Kaliningrad is blocked by land, and inbound naval traffic can’t reach Sevastopol via the Bosphorous Strait, Russia has big problems with their fleet at sea for almost 50% of the year.   

[shhughes1116]

2 minutes ago, shhughes1116 said:

I don’t think the US will provide Ukraine with the ATACMS.
 

But I think this might be used as leverage over Russia to unblock the Black Sea.  “We will unblock Kaliningrad, and you will unblock the Black Sea and let Ukrainian ships sortie out of Odessa with grain.  Otherwise, we will give Ukraine enough ATACMS to wipe Sevastopol off the face of the Earth.”

 

i think the entire reason train and vehicular traffic to Kaliningrad was restricted was in order to create a bargaining chip for Ukraine.  Kaliningrad and Sevastopol are Russia’s only two deep water naval ports that are ice free all year.  If Kaliningrad is blocked by land, and inbound naval traffic can’t reach Sevastopol via the Bosphorous Strait, Russia has big problems with their fleet at sea for almost 50% of the year.   

One other point here.  They don’t need ATACMS.  They are about to get a bunch of 40ft patrol boats from the US.  I’ll bet they mount Brinstone Missiles on the back of those boats, just as they did with small trucks.  Not as lethal as a Harpoon, but likely painful enough to keep Russian boats in or near Sevastopol.  And hitting a surfaced submarine would be lethal for the sub. 

[Spekulatius]

12 minutes ago, shhughes1116 said:

One other point here.  They don’t need ATACMS.  They are about to get a bunch of 40ft patrol boats from the US.  I’ll bet they mount Brinstone Missiles on the back of those boats, just as they did with small trucks.  Not as lethal as a Harpoon, but likely painful enough to keep Russian boats in or near Sevastopol.  And hitting a surfaced submarine would be lethal for the sub. 

You could be correct. I do think it's huge strategic value to unblock Odessa harbor and there are various means to do so.

[Spekulatius]

On 6/30/2022 at 4:05 PM, Spekulatius said:

You could be correct. I do think it's huge strategic value to unblock Odessa harbor and there are various means to do so.

That Odd lots shows a solution:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/odd-lots/id1056200096?i=1000568476294
 

The US/NATO navy would escort freights ships through international waters  like thry did in the late 80‘s in the Street of Hormuz during the tanker wars.

 

I think digits the Ukrainians some longer range rockets (which fit on the rocket launchers deliver to Ukraine I think) would make a lot sense. 300km Range gets from thr Ukrainian coast line to Sebastopol. Destroying some Russian warships right in Sebastopols harbor (if possible) would would be nice victory and likely chase them away where they can’t threaten the shipping routes to begin with. Just taking  Putins toys away or make them worthless has a huge strategic value, Imo. It also makes breaking the blockade of Odessa harbor much easier.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Spekulatius

[Xerxes]

The good admiral Starvidis has been making the rounds in the media on this idea. I think I heard it on Bloomberg Surveillance last week where he is a regular. 
 

what stops the Russian from totally destroying the grain siloes and farm lands & achieving the same objective as blockade etc.

 

Turkey needs to be onboard and allow passage through the straight. 

[Spekulatius]

15 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

The good admiral Starvidis has been making the rounds in the media on this idea. I think I heard it on Bloomberg Surveillance last week where he is a regular. 
 

what stops the Russian from totally destroying the grain siloes and farm lands & achieving the same objective as blockade etc.

 

Turkey needs to be onboard and allow passage through the straight. 

Turkey is a NATO ally. As for the Russians destroying grain silos and harbor infrastructure, I think Odessa has a reasonable air defense and it also takes quite a few rockets to do enough damage. It’s not like hitting a fuel tank that is going to explode. The Russians have been using their cruise missiles fairly sparingly indicating that don’t have that many to spare.

 

In addition, the 300km medium range Rockets would bring most of their Rocket bases on the Crimea within reach, so the Ukrainians could pot. wipe them out. Others were fired of from ships ( they got about 40 ships left in the Black sea), so if we can get rid of those by chasing them away from Sebastopol , then they are not a factor either.

 

Russia has some longer range stuff, but they are even more expensive and probably low on those as well.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Spekulatius

[Xerxes]

Quick read on the Russian command & control plane. Similar to the NightWatch in the U.S.A.F.

 

I believe the reason why the Doomsday plane was absent in the May Parade in 2022 was meant to be a signal to help the rules of engagement.
 

 

[Spekulatius]

@Xerxes The part obout the  theft of electronic components in Taganrok is pretty hilarious.

[aws]

7 hours ago, Xerxes said:

The good admiral Starvidis has been making the rounds in the media on this idea. I think I heard it on Bloomberg Surveillance last week where he is a regular. 
 

what stops the Russian from totally destroying the grain siloes and farm lands & achieving the same objective as blockade etc.

 

Turkey needs to be onboard and allow passage through the straight. 

 

Russia at least maintains some plausible deniability when they say something like "We have no problem with grain exports, but the Ukrainians will need to demine their harbors in order to allow commercial ships to enter". Then they can say that it is Ukraine causing the lack of grain exports. Ukraine obviously cannot trust any Russian statements that they will not exploit any removal of defenses, so there is a standstill until an external security guarantee is made. If Russia's bluff is called and such a guarantee is made, and then Russia turns around and starts destroying grain deliberately, it gets a lot harder to maintain their narrative and their goal of winning allies in the third world.

 

But with an unwillingness to impose a no-fly zone, it seems unlikely there will be a naval version in time for it to really matter. If they're already harvesting grain and it has nowhere to go, then it's probably too late for any type of good solution to the problem, and Russia will win battles in their wars for world hunger and PR.

[no_free_lunch]

Aws, I see your point but I don't think narratives matter.  To countries outside of Europe, why would they care, they don't.  They just want cheap food.  They will continue to transact with whoever can get them the best price.  If they don't care then we shouldn't care about these countries either.  Clearly not our allies.  Let's just sell our food for max dollar and make the best of this messed up situation.

[Spekulatius]

No fly zone does apply to the Ukraine but not international waters, where this plays put. The US can sent warships to protect convoys in international waters and warplanes as well.

 

Even if we don‘t care  about other countries , we care about Ukraine. Grain exports are a large part of their economy, which Putin want to wreck. We should not allow him to do that.

 

Still think we should give Ukraine  enough rockets to soften up Crimea and Sebastopol ahead of this but priorities are probably elsewhere right now.

[mcliu]

https://www.france24.com/en/video/20220704-ukraine-withdraws-from-battered-lysychansk-russia-claims-major-victory

 

 

https://www.dw.com/en/ukraines-envoy-to-germany-irks-israeli-polish-governments-with-wwii-comments/a-62335288

 

Andriy Melnyk,Ukraine's outspoken ambassador to Germany, drew the ire of Poland, Israel, and Jewish groups on Friday when he defended Ukrainian nationalist leader Stepan Bandera in an interview.

...

"The statement made by the Ukrainian ambassador is a distortion of the historical facts, belittles the Holocaust and is an insult to those who were murdered by Bandera and his people," the Israeli embassy said.

Polish deputy Foreign Minister Marcin Przydacz wrote on a local online platform that "such an opinion and such words are absolutely unacceptable."

 

https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/why-is-a-monument-commemorating-a-nazi-ss-division-still-standing-outside-of-toronto

The ‘Banderists’ in particular saw Jews as the “vanguard of Muscovite imperialism,” and were openly willing to commit barbarous crimes against them, as they believed it would lead to Ukraine’s independence from Russia and the Soviet Union. In 1941, under the OUN-B’s command, the Ukrainian People’s Militia spearheaded pogroms which led to the massacre of more than 6,000 Jews in Lviv.

[Xerxes]

15 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

@Xerxes The part obout the  theft of electronic components in Taganrok is pretty hilarious.

yeah. And I thought Middle East was bad with corruption. 

[changegonnacome]

4.......nearly 5 months into this and the "peace deal" on the table in February.......is effectively the off ramp where this conflict ends up in the end.....I havent heard a credible alternative. This is:

 

(1) Ukrainian commitment to neutrality / No NATO membership

(2) Minsk-esque agreement for Eastern Ukraine/contested territories

 

Difference now however is that it's a proxy war between the US & Russia...with all those dynamics......and the US (aligned with the Ukrainian right, not Zelensky) will decide when & what the optics of victory for the US political players 'make sense'.......for an embattled UK Prime Minister Ukraine & Zelensky is a positive PR story he wheels out to try and save his administration, for the embattled US president its one place he can appear Presidential while domestically his presidency falls apart. In the process Ukraine gets increasingly destroyed such that whats left will be husk & millions globally are likely to go hungry due to grain shortages. Its time for a shitload of pragmatism in regards to this situation and a concerted effort at 'peace talks'. Suspect there is no interest in this now until after November. 

[aws]

Couldn't possibly disagree more with that cynical take. Ukraine is fighting for their lives and sovereignty against an invader that doesn't acknowledge their right to exist. They aren't fighting to help the democrats win the midterms.

 

Putin has shown his cards, that he thinks he's Peter the Great and will reclaim the former empire. Russia's pretext for the invasion was a lie, and any concessions given to them to stop the fighting just strengthen Russia's position in the future when they will make up some new excuse to expand further.

[Spekulatius]

I am with @awshere. If you study even tiny bit of history, you will see that the likely hood of solving this situation with a peace deal coming from a position of weakness is very low.

 

My thinking is that we are at war with Russia and the sooner we acknowledge the fact the better. It’s the Ukrainian that are fighting for us (and themselves ) so we don’t have to. If we supply them with the weapons to make a stand and even push the Russians back, it will be a crushing defeat for Putin.

If not and Ukraine is lost , we better get ready for another fight somewhere else where we don’t have others to fight for us.
There is now a new iron curtain going up in Europe again and elsewhere that will remain in place  and determine geopolitics for a long time - think a decade rather than a year.

Edited July 7, 2022 by Spekulatius

[cubsfan]

16 hours ago, aws said:

Couldn't possibly disagree more with that cynical take. Ukraine is fighting for their lives and sovereignty against an invader that doesn't acknowledge their right to exist. They aren't fighting to help the democrats win the midterms.

 

Putin has shown his cards, that he thinks he's Peter the Great and will reclaim the former empire. Russia's pretext for the invasion was a lie, and any concessions given to them to stop the fighting just strengthen Russia's position in the future when they will make up some new excuse to expand further.

Awesome - yup...