Political Posts

[Spekulatius]

The hypersonic Khinzal missile is probably just as useful than the V1 was in WW2, it’s more propaganda than anything else. It does not matter much if they have it - it’s a very expensive weapon to use in any case, considering that the Russian don’t seem to even have a lot of conventional precision guided missiles.

[Spekulatius]

Looks like we are  at a stalemate know:

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

 

Interesting interview regarding Belarus. Belarus  has been a staging ground for the Russians, but have not joined th. Their army is tiny too. Lukoshenko has a difficult choice. Appetite to join from the population seems low. I do think the Ukrainians believe he will join:

 

State of the Russian army:

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by Spekulatius

[Xerxes]

On 3/19/2022 at 8:14 AM, Spekulatius said:

@formthirteen great summary. I think 3 & 4 are the biggest issues. So far Belarus has not been involved, but could be, The goal for this vector would be to cut of supplies from the west.

 

This Austrian officer assessment is pretty good. They also have another video up on YT on how a Russian battalion operates.

 

When you listen to Putin’s soccer stadium rally and the other talk yesterday it’s clear he won’t let go. He sacked some generals and I guess there were some new guys now in charge that come up with Plan B (Plan A was Blitzkrieg and it clearly failed ) which might be what the Austrian officer described. This war is going to take quite some time - more than 4 weeks from here  is my guess.

I don’t know what you define as blitzkreig.

But a Heinz Guderian-style blitzkreig would be (in my mind) Russian armour closely supported by air dashing ahead past Kiev and cities looking to outflank, encircle enemy military formation. Thereby bypassing the cities. 
 

once enemy military formations are obliterated then you would get the towns and cities through negotiations and political settlement. as oppose to first going for the cities.
 

Pre-Bonaparte, Europe was also big on “capturing cities” but Napoleon (to some degree influenced by Prussia) demonstrated that it is far important to destroy enemy military formations and get the cities through settlement. 

 

I am not sure I have any clue on what Plan A was suppose to be with Putin. Perhaps he truly believe the people would raise up to overthrow their own government. If that delusion was Plan A, so plan B would be what we know: moving the siege guns and battery rams into position.
 

either way no blitzkrieg IMO.
 

Also there is the element that in Putin’z mind, he was actually waging a limited war to “encourage peasants to march on Kiev and overthrow their own government”. that limited war has morphed into something he can no longer control. 

 

War cannot be limited. You go all in with clear objectives. 

[Spekulatius]

Another interesting tidbit I learned form twitter. Some of Ukraine drone's are using Starlink:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/03/starlink-helps-ukraines-elite-drone-unit-target-and-destroy-russian-tanks/

 

Raised my respect for Elon Musk a bit.

[Xerxes]

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-03-22/niall-ferguson-putin-and-biden-misunderstand-history-in-ukraine-war
 

great read by Niall Ferguson. 
Glad to see he is not delusional and not in the “lets fight the Russian to the last Ukrainian crowd” 
 

[no_free_lunch]

Xerxes, it's a good read.  I agree with so much of it. In particular that the war is not won and Russia may prevail.  However what is the solution, just let Ukraine burn?

 

The way I see it, they want to fight. They are desperate for weapons. Help them out. 

 

Read the Ukrainian history. A few thousand dead is bad but the Russians killed millions of Ukrainian citizens in the 30s.  There's no going back to that.  This is the huge fact that the author ignores. What will happen if Ukraine loses the war.  How many will die in that case.

 

 

[changegonnacome]

Think Ferguson nailed it and wrapped it up well in his summary:

 

"Ukraine is not Afghanistan in the 1980s, and even if it were, this war isn’t going to last 10 years — more like 10 weeks. Allowing Ukraine to be bombed to rubble by Putin is not smart; it creates the chance for him to achieve his goal of rendering Ukrainian independence unviable. Putin, like most Russian leaders in history, will most likely die of natural causes."

 

1 hour ago, no_free_lunch said:

The way I see it, they want to fight. They are desperate for weapons. Help them out. 

 

I disagree......unless the West has plans to 'put boots on the ground' it is prolonging the inevitable defeat while Ukraine's major cities are turned to rubble and its economy returned to 1940's. Ukraine one way or the other will end up at the negotiating table the junior crippled defeated party.......the most likely 'peace deal' available now with Russia versus what may be available in 10 weeks time is about the same in my estimation. Between now and 10 weeks ungodly amounts of misery will be inflicted on the Ukrainian people & damage done to its cities/infrastructure.

 

I'm from Ireland and we had a conflict in Northern Ireland (part of the UK)  that older folks here might remember........the history of that conflict is that 'help' by way of donations from well meaning Irish-American's fueled the conflict way past the point of when it might have ended naturally.....some historians estimate the violence may have ended a full decade earlier if it weren't for the 'help' sent by good intentioned people helping with the fight against the British imperialists but who had no real sense of the complexity on the ground...........interventionism has unintended consequences (hasnt the USA learned this lesson yet?). Zelensky's social media savvy & communications skills in influencing & engaging the West, while admirable, may prolong the inevitable while in reality greatly increasing the cost to 'his' nation. He has no good choices that I can see..........choosing the least worst option & explaining it to his people is what great leaders do & he should use his considerable & superior communication skills to sell a comprise solution to his people while ensuring the West is a party to or guarantor of whatever is agreed with Russia.

Edited March 23, 2022 by changegonnacome

[Viking]

4 hours ago, Xerxes said:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-03-22/niall-ferguson-putin-and-biden-misunderstand-history-in-ukraine-war
 

great read by Niall Ferguson. 
Glad to see he is not delusional and not in the “lets fight the Russian to the last Ukrainian crowd” 

The problem with Fergusons article is he does not shed a flicker of light on the most important question in this conflict: what Putin actually wants today from Ukraine to end the conflict? Ferguson assumes there is a deal to be made that is acceptable to Putin. Really? OK. Great! But… what is the deal?
 

But of course Ferguson can’t suggest what Ukraine would likely have to agree to (it will be far worse than the worst thing anyone on this board can come up with). Or what Putin would do to Ukraine once he is firmly in control of the country (if Putin is openly willing to kill Russian’s who oppose him imagine what he will do to all the Ukrainians are killing Russians by the thousands right now). Yes… it will not be pretty. How many thousand Ukrainians does Ferguson estimate Putin will kill once he is back in control of the country? 10,000? 20,000? Maybe 3 or 4 Ukrainians for every Russian who was killed? 
 

Instead, all Ferguson wants to talk about is how the Ukrainian situation is hopeless. And the US (and Europe) are doing all the wrong things and so should stop before any more people get killed. Now maybe we will learn in the coming years that the West totally screwed up in Ukraine. And that Putin is not such a bad guy (for a dictator). But today, Ferguson sounds to me like he could have been a speech writer for Neville Chamberlain back in the day.

—————

Ferguson is one of my favourite historical/financial authors. Putin is the central character in the Ukraine play (Ferguson assumes Putin is a rational actor and won’t use tactical nuclear etc). And Zelenski/Ukraine. And Europe. He might want to talk more about them in his next article. 

 

 

Edited March 23, 2022 by Viking

[Xerxes]

Putin is a rational actor. He will not push the red apocalyptic button as that would be MAD but will use tactical nuclear, if the foundation of Russia (=> his regime really <=) is threatened. This prolonging war & sanctions threaten the very core of his regime, so that is a real possibility, and I am not in the ‘that would never happen’ camp when it comes tactical nukes. 

[Xerxes]

5 hours ago, Viking said:

But of course Ferguson can’t suggest what Ukraine would likely have to agree to (it will be far worse than the worst thing anyone on this board can come up with). Or what Putin would do to Ukraine once he is firmly in control of the country (if Putin is openly willing to kill Russian’s who oppose him imagine what he will do to all the Ukrainians are killing Russians by the thousands right now). Yes… it will not be pretty. How many thousand Ukrainians does Ferguson estimate Putin will kill once he is back in control of the country? 10,000? 20,000? Maybe 3 or 4 Ukrainians for every Russian who was killed? 
 

Instead, all Ferguson wants to talk about is how the Ukrainian situation is hopeless. And the US (and Europe) are doing all the wrong things and so should stop before any more people get killed. Now maybe we will learn in the coming years that the West totally screwed up in Ukraine. And that Putin is not such a bad guy (for a dictator).
 

But today, Ferguson sounds to me like he could have been a speech writer for Neville Chamberlain back in the day.

————

 

 

if there is some sort of peace, Putin entire focus will shift back to Russia to shore up his regime and find those “traitors” who had mislead him. Killing Ukrainian would mean unleashing an insurgency in himself a day later the conventional fighting ended, and turning this into his Afghanistan. 
 

I happen to believe that while they had plans to decapitate the Ukrainian regime (Zelensky) at the onset of the conflict, as the conflict unfolded they probably came to the conclusion that he is needed to be the person alive as the president making peace given his popularity. 

Same way Tokyo was not nuked in 1945 but two other cities were. 
 

this is Iran-Iraq war all over again with two exhausted boxers, fighting to stalemate, but one side may decide to use a pistol if push comes to shove. 

[Spekulatius]

No one can predict how a war ends and many things can happen. War creates it's own dynamic where more and more resources and countries can get sucked in.

Putin can't let go because a defeat is unthinkable for him, so he always doubles up on losing hands. US can't drop Ukraine like a hot potato or there is no credibility left with any ally in the future. it would be LT suicide for US foreign politics as well as for Biden and the next election.

 

So I can easily see an escalation where the Genocidal Russian siege tactics cause the US to give more and heavier weapons to the Ukraine to defend itself or bombing of civilians trying to get out or supply lines in Western Ukraine cause NATO to create a no fly zone in western parts of the Ukraine which again is close to declaring war directly on Russia.

 

Many ways this can escalate and getting the NATO involved in some way. We are already at war with Russia (imo) just are dancing around some more or less imaginary marks.

 

As for hoping for a regime change in Russia, while possible, I think it's unlikely and in any way shouldn't be counted upon. I think the goal of the sanctions need to be to destroy the Russian economy to such an extend that they can't support the military any more (as shabby as it is right now even) posing much less of a threat in the next few years. Every war starts with money and resources and while Russia has resources, their economy is pitiful and making it even more so should further defang them.

 

Russia can pivot to China, but if the West reduces NG dependency, they need to spent billions to build new pipeline infrastructure for NG delivery to China and China likely will pay far less than the Europeans. I think in the end, it's just business for the Chinese. They will do what makes sense to them, but not more to help the Russians.

 

 

[james22]

6 hours ago, Viking said:

But of course Ferguson can’t suggest what Ukraine would likely have to agree to (it will be far worse than the worst thing anyone on this board can come up with). Or what Putin would do to Ukraine once he is firmly in control of the country

 

For defeat brings worse things than any that can ever happen in war.

[Spekulatius]

11 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

For defeat brings worse things than any that can ever happen in war.

Does anyone here really have delusions what "de-nazification" means for the Russians as it pertains to Ukraine?

[Xerxes]

No one is under any illusion that a permanent cease fire would mean swaths of eastern Ukraine de-populated either by choice or by Moscow, to give the re-drawn map more permanency. Living under Russian yoke, or anywhere proximate to it, is not a life worth living. 

I ll push back on the Chamberlain/Munich comment (re: how Neil would be a good speech writer). I get it. Who doesn’t want to pound their chest and be Churchillian, all day long, in face of adversity. But that is the version of history where that scenario played itself out. This is not Lord of the Rings, where it always have a good ending, no matter how many times you watch it.  
 

Can you imagine Emperor Hirohito getting all Churchillian as the atomic bombs were being dropped in 1945. “We will fight to the last man, we will fight in the mountains” It is not like he knew that post-war Japan would thrive economically. At moment in 1945, Hirohito needed to be a Chamberline not a Churchill, while full knowing they were being subjugated and the post war economic prosperity being unknown to him.
 

Btw And there were 2 atomic explosions because Americans had only 2 bombs. If they had 15, they would have nuked every city (saving Tokyo for the last) from south to north and north to south, all day long and every day. That is what that war was. Eradicating the Japanese race from the face of the planet unless unconditional surrender is tendered. 
 

Edit : before anyone gets excited and points out Pearl Habour etc. it doesn’t matter … that is what the war evolved into. Unconditional surrender means only one thing. Subjugation or destruction.  

Edited March 23, 2022 by Xerxes

[Viking]

2 hours ago, Xerxes said:

No one is under any illusion that a permanent cease fire would mean swaths of eastern Ukraine de-populated either by choice or by Moscow, to give the re-drawn map more permanency. Living under Russian yoke, or anywhere proximate to it, is not a life worth living. 

I ll push back on the Chamberlain/Munich comment (re: how Neil would be a good speech writer). I get it. Who doesn’t want to pound their chest and be Churchillian, all day long, in face of adversity. But that is the version of history where that scenario played itself out. This is not Lord of the Rings, where it always have a good ending, no matter how many times you watch it.  
 

Can you imagine Emperor Hirohito getting all Churchillian as the atomic bombs were being dropped in 1945. “We will fight to the last man, we will fight in the mountains” It is not like he knew that post-war Japan would thrive economically. At moment in 1945, Hirohito needed to be a Chamberline not a Churchill, while full knowing they were being subjugated and the post war economic prosperity being unknown to him.
 

Btw And there were 2 atomic explosions because Americans had only 2 bombs. If they had 15, they would have nuked every city (saving Tokyo for the last) from south to north and north to south, all day long and every day. That is what that war was. Eradicating the Japanese race from the face of the planet unless unconditional surrender is tendered. 
 

Edit : before anyone gets excited and points out Pearl Habour etc. it doesn’t matter … that is what the war evolved into. Unconditional surrender means only one thing. Subjugation or destruction.  

Great discussion. i am not trying to be ‘Churchillian’. @james22 quote hits the nail on the head: “For defeat brings worse things than any that can ever happen in war.”  WHAT A BEAUTIFULLY SOUNDING PLAY ON WORDS. That is a Disney statement if i ever heard one. It is something only an dreamy eyed ACADEMIC would write. 

 

I’ll ask it again.
1.) what is it Putin actually wants today from Ukraine to end the conflict?

2.) what will he do to Ukraine once he has it firmly in his control? How many Ukrainians will die AFTER the Russians have control? +10,000? How many Ukrainians will be displaced/forced to leave their country/live in a different part of Ukraine? Millions?
 

If you can’t answer these 2 questions with a high degree of certainty THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN SUGGEST THROWING IN THE TOWEL IS THE BETTER OPTION for the Ukrainian people. 
—————

Bottom line, i have no idea how this situation will play out. And i hope Ukraine finds a way through it  

 

 

Edited March 23, 2022 by Viking

[Xerxes]

I don’t have an answer either on those two questions. 
 

the only thing that I can think of as a tangible Russian “ask” is the control of the Black Sea coast and related cities (Odessa, Mariople). Everything else they don’t need anymore (I.e Kiev) they will pound & burn and inact such a high cost on the poor Ukrainian, and forever keep the city under the spectre of threat as a “hostage”.  
 

that is the only think I can think of. 
 

fully agree with Spek, that we are now in war with Russia, in all but name. 

[Lazarus]

Putin set out his demands to end the war on multiple occasions. Most recently, he set out his demands in a phone call with the leader of Turkey (who passed on the message). Putin is asking for (1) no NATO in Ukraine,  Ukraine stays neutral; (2) recognize Crimea as Russia, plus various other smaller demands (get rid of "nazis", some demands for Donask or wherever, and some other stuff).

 

The big demands relate to NATO and Crimea, and Zelensky has already acquiesced to giving up on NATO and Crimea is already a done deal. So they will haggle over the minor stuff and make concessions so that they can both save face and claim victory. This conflict is almost over. 

[Xerxes]

To be fair, I think Viking meant what Putin really wants. I.e what will really bring closure. Not just the formal demands.  

[Viking]

10 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

Putin set out his demands to end the war on multiple occasions. Most recently, he set out his demands in a phone call with the leader of Turkey (who passed on the message). Putin is asking for (1) no NATO in Ukraine,  Ukraine stays neutral; (2) recognize Crimea as Russia, plus various other smaller demands (get rid of "nazis", some demands for Donask or wherever, and some other stuff).

 

The big demands relate to NATO and Crimea, and Zelensky has already acquiesced to giving up on NATO and Crimea is already a done deal. So they will haggle over the minor stuff and make concessions so that they can both save face and claim victory. This conflict is almost over. 

“This conflict is almost over” i hope you are right. 
 

i wonder what land Putin now wants to carve out of Ukraine. I think he wants all of south Ukraine to Odesa. And also a big swath of Eastern Ukraine (not just the 2 regions from 2014).
 

I also wonder what military he will allow Ukraine afterwards. My guess is he will demand they demilitarize. Which of course would allow Putin to come back in a few years and finish the job.

[Xerxes]

On 3/20/2022 at 1:10 PM, Spekulatius said:

The hypersonic Khinzal missile is probably just as useful than the V1 was in WW2, it’s more propaganda than anything else. It does not matter much if they have it - it’s a very expensive weapon to use in any case, considering that the Russian don’t seem to even have a lot of conventional precision guided missiles.

If we are doing analogies I ll go with V2, in terms of being fast making it invincible. 
 

The hypersonic dagger goes as fast as 6,000 km per hour. God that is fast ! This was just a opportunity to test it without its nuclear warhead. 
 

another Russian doomsday weapon that is scary (it’s name escapes me) is a nuclear torpedo that detonates near coastal era, unleashing a tsunami …. Or so the legend goes !

 

there is yet another one which is fully classified. But we have a picture. 
 

[changegonnacome]

27 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

To be fair, I think Viking meant what Putin really wants. I.e what will really bring closure. Not just the formal demands.  

 

Closure IMO will involve further destruction of the major cities...........I made a comment up thread that you should think of the Russian army as not an invading force or an occupying one........you should think of them like a demolition crew..........the question then with this framework is what level of destruction will Putin deem sufficient such that Ukraine is crippled & hobbled for a generation.

[Gregmal]

The answers to most issues/problems are out there. The truth isnt hard to see if you want to. You just have to find it. There will always be differing nonsense available to feed ones biases, the internet in general and MSM assure this. Same as all the question marks with China, the Fed, Russiagate 2017, etc. There were people who hoarded cash and gold through the most glorious decade in investing history because they had sources they got duped into believing were credible feeding them what they wanted to hear for the entirety of it. They insisted on relying on those sources either out of fear or out of pride; but bottom line is they could have realized their thesis was shit when it didnt work for the first few years but they chose to stick with it rather than change course and start making money.

 

Nonetheless you know you are getting taken for a ride when things just never quite seem to work out the way they're advertised. And its why people so often end up selling when they should be buying or buying when they should be selling. In a certain way, everything is kinda rigged. 

[Xerxes]

@changegonnacome

 

 admitingly I think most of us (me anyways) had our central tenet of belief turned upside down when it comes to Russian military in 2022.  
 

NATO reigns supreme, while the emperor has no “conventional” clothes (except for 6,000 km/h Dagger and other Doomsday machines).
 

Even the massive $600 billion FX/gold didn’t help it if there was no market to trade FX.
 

I think there is possibility sometimes from now, that this war will be seen as a trap set for Putin by the globalists with poor Ukraine as a bait. Once Putin walked in …. “Look at the crumbs on his jacket. He did it !!” 
 

 

[Xerxes]

Greg

sorry what is MSM. I have seen this few times. Do you mean MSNBC?

[Gregmal]

Mainstream Media. NYT, Wapo, Fox, CNN, MSNBC. Under that is the smaller but even more insidious offshoots. Stuff like Huffington Post or Atlantic. Basically the storytellers who have 90% marketshare because of the herds/tribes. The truth is almost NEVER what these guys are peddling. Its either somewhere in between or often THE EXACT OPPOSITE. This matter is only made worse and compounded now by the censorship of big tech.