Political Posts

[cubsfan]

^^^ I find this very difficult to believe. We have no control over Russia's means of production of munitions. How do we in the West even know what is going on with Putin's armament industry??

It seems implausible that the industry is not ramped up to 100%.  If Putin wants to win this

war - it's his only hope.

 

And there in lies the problem - if you can not take out his means of production - by going 

into Russia - then 100% victory becomes very difficult.  By that I mean, 100% victory defined as the recapture of Crimea and the occupied territories.

[shhughes1116]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

^^^ I find this very difficult to believe. We have no control over Russia's means of production of munitions. How do we in the West even know what is going on with Putin's armament industry??

It seems implausible that the industry is not ramped up to 100%.  If Putin wants to win this

war - it's his only hope.

 

And there in lies the problem - if you can not take out his means of production - by going 

into Russia - then 100% victory becomes very difficult.  By that I mean, 100% victory defined as the recapture of Crimea and the occupied territories.

 

 

We can get a good sense from the battlefield.  What markings do we see on the cases?  How many fires do we see on FIRMS?  What types of artillery do we see on the battlefield?  Reported shelling.  And so on.  

 

You are painting the munitions industry with a broad stroke, instead of acknowledging that different munitions have different lead times and different complexities of production.  
 

It is easy to produce small arms ammunition.  It is not easy to produce artillery shells.  The Soviet Union produced VAST quantities of 152 and 122 artillery munitions in the Cold War.  After the Cold War, most of those munition operations were shut down - they couldn’t justify producing more when they had huge stockpiles.  To paint a picture, they had so much that they literally had to store rows and rows of 155 and 122 artillery shells outside, exposed to the elements, for years.  This is a big part of why they’ve had multiple catastrophic explosions at munition depots in the last decade. 
 

When they closed those munition operations, they lost the skillset also.   Making artillery shells is not menial labor - it actually requires some skill, in addition to the infrastructure and machinery.

 

We are having a similar problem in the United States with ramping up 155mm production.  But we have more existing facilities that do this work, and other Western countries also have similar facilities.  

 

 

[cubsfan]

^^ Well , that's what I'd be worried about - production.

 

I'd be surprised if the Soviets aren't all full steam with production.

 

What about the West?  You worried about them?  Are we just drawing down are inventories and storage of munitions?   Is the West on full production mode?

 

If the Western Allies are worried about Russia AND China - who gets the production?

[no_free_lunch]

6 hours ago, shhughes1116 said:

you are suggesting that Russia is out-producing conventional munitions?  As in, they are producing more than the West?

 

Please provide a source for that statement, because it contradicts what is and has been widely known about the Russian munitions industry.  
 

At this point, most Russian munition production is “re-processing” of existing munitions that have reached the end of their usable life.  Their ability to produce new munitions is pretty limited, especially 152mm and 122mm shells.  Producing artillery shells is deceivingly hard. 

 

 

 

It's widely reported, even by Ukrainian sources. The ones I follow on telegram.  However here is one link, not sure of the source,  just a Google result. 

 

https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-03-01/ukraine-outgunned-10-to-1-in-massive-artillery-battle-with-russia.html

 

I will restate though and say that Russia is outfiring Ukraine.   It's possible they are drawing down inventory.  I can't say for certain it's all production.

 

One more link:

 

According to Estonia’s math, a sevenfold increase is needed in output capacity among European suppliers to reach a production rate of 175,000 shells per month, up from 20,000-25,000 now. That would put Ukraine on a path within six months to replace the estimated 60,000-210,000 shells currently fired by its forces every month.

 

For comparison, Russian artillery averages 20,000-60,000 shells fired per day, according to the Estonian paper.

 

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/03/02/eu-mulls-billions-in-funding-to-quicken-artillery-shell-production/

 

 

Edited March 3, 2023 by no_free_lunch

[Parsad]

China has stunning lead in most fields of study in critical or emerging technology:

 

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/china-stunning-lead-over-us-052630482.html

 

Cheers!

[Dinar]

1 hour ago, Parsad said:

China has stunning lead in most fields of study in critical or emerging technology:

 

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/china-stunning-lead-over-us-052630482.html

 

Cheers!

Well, they are funding science and we are funding welfare!  In addition, we select scientists based on diversity, commitment to racial quotas and such, and the Chinese foolishly do not!

Edited March 4, 2023 by Dinar

[no_free_lunch]

20 minutes ago, Dinar said:

Well, they are funding science and we are funding welfare!

In china, most of the senior government leaders have science or engineering backgrounds,  so I have read. In the US it's a bunch of lawyers, actors and less. 

[Parsad]

5 hours ago, Dinar said:

Well, they are funding science and we are funding welfare!  In addition, we select scientists based on diversity, commitment to racial quotas and such, and the Chinese foolishly do not!

 

I imagine the U.S. reception of scientists, doctors, engineers and technology experts from every part of the world is what partly has lead to the exceptionality of the U.S. in the last 100 years...from Einstein and Oppenheimer to Elon Musk and Andy Grove.

 

https://startalkmedia.com/20-immigrants-refugee-scientists-who-made-america-greater-part-1/

 

The Chinese are simply spending more money on research and development.  Diversity and racial quotas have nothing to do with it.  Higher wages, more funding for research, less red tape for development, and easier immigration would probably continue to attract more doctors, engineers, scientists and other experts.  Cheers!

 

 

[Dinar]

5 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

I imagine the U.S. reception of scientists, doctors, engineers and technology experts from every part of the world is what partly has lead to the exceptionality of the U.S. in the last 100 years...from Einstein and Oppenheimer to Elon Musk and Andy Grove.

 

https://startalkmedia.com/20-immigrants-refugee-scientists-who-made-america-greater-part-1/

 

The Chinese are simply spending more money on research and development.  Diversity and racial quotas have nothing to do with it.  Higher wages, more funding for research, less red tape for development, and easier immigration would probably continue to attract more doctors, engineers, scientists and other experts.  Cheers!

 

 

https://mcusercontent.com/ea8e8120d9fd32d5e5e17bf67/files/afe24bc1-df56-67e8-6751-9af50a254189/4.American_universities_are_hiring_based_on_devotion_to_diversity.pdf

[no_free_lunch]

8 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

I imagine the U.S. reception of scientists, doctors, engineers and technology experts from every part of the world is what partly has lead to the exceptionality of the U.S. in the last 100 years...from Einstein and Oppenheimer to Elon Musk and Andy Grove.

 

https://startalkmedia.com/20-immigrants-refugee-scientists-who-made-america-greater-part-1/

 

The Chinese are simply spending more money on research and development.  Diversity and racial quotas have nothing to do with it.  Higher wages, more funding for research, less red tape for development, and easier immigration would probably continue to attract more doctors, engineers, scientists and other experts.  Cheers!

 

 

Wages are higher for engineers in China than the US?  I doubt it. Maybe higher in China relative to other wages in China. 

 

I don't think it's just diversity,  it's relative to other career paths, say being a unionized almost anything you make the same or more than an engineer or PhD scientist.  Not just talking smack either, seen it.

 

North America is broken. Part of the problem is we don't want to admit it.

Edited March 4, 2023 by no_free_lunch

[Parsad]

5 hours ago, Dinar said:

https://mcusercontent.com/ea8e8120d9fd32d5e5e17bf67/files/afe24bc1-df56-67e8-6751-9af50a254189/4.American_universities_are_hiring_based_on_devotion_to_diversity.pdf

 

Advocates see no conflict between dei and academic excellence. “It’s hard to imagine being a good teacher if you don’t know how to actively engage all students,” says Sharon Inkelas, an associate vice-provost at Berkeley. Nor is it a matter of political belief. These statements “are descriptions of things that people have done that have enabled them to be successful in the classroom,” says Professor Inkelas. A referendum has already outlawed affirmative action in California, so state institutions cannot give preferential treatment on the basis of race or sex. A separate law bans employers from “controlling or directing” the political activities of their employees. “There is no litmus test attached to diversity statements. All that it’s asking is, ‘What are you going to be able to add to our campus? How are you going to deal with the diverse student body and faculty?’” says Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of Berkeley’s law school and a well-known First Amendment scholar. “The absence of lawsuits so far, despite threats, is an indication that the diversity statements are legal. They don’t violate the First Amendment.”

 

They aren't dictating on how to hire...only that applicants have furthered diversity and inclusivity when dealing with the hiring process.  In other words, give all candidates a fair shot regardless of race and gender!  Cheers!

[Parsad]

2 hours ago, no_free_lunch said:

Wages are higher for engineers in China than the US?  I doubt it. Maybe higher in China relative to other wages in China. 

 

I don't think it's just diversity,  it's relative to other career paths, say being a unionized almost anything you make the same or more than an engineer or PhD scientist.  Not just talking smack either, seen it.

 

North America is broken. Part of the problem is we don't want to admit it.

 

This whole North America is broken position always makes me laugh!  Broken perhaps in how much debt the governments are carrying and not balancing their books, but in terms of innovation and economic dominance in technology...the U.S. remains as relevant as ever. 

 

These things run in long-term cycles.  But the U.S. free-market system always resets and powers back up.  I remember how everyone thought the Japanese would dominate the U.S. when they were buying up all the golf courses in Hawaii.  How did that turn out?

 

Now it's China.  I guarantee that the U.S. will reset again, and pour money into research and development in the next cycle.  Cheers! 

[RichardGibbons]

2 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

"How are you going to deal with the diverse student body and faculty?’” says Erwin Chemerinsky

 

They aren't dictating on how to hire...only that applicants have furthered diversity and inclusivity when dealing with the hiring process.  In other words, give all candidates a fair shot regardless of race and gender!  Cheers!

 

To me, it sounds like they're filtering to ensure they can hire racists. Essentially, it reads like they want to hire people who will treat people differently based on race, gender, sexuality, etc.

 

The best answer for society to Chemerinsky's question is, "I'm going treat diverse people as I treat everyone--fairly, with respect and kindness." But I think that's not at all the answer he wants, and wouldn't get you the job.

 

The first half of the 20th Century showed how deeply problematic it was treating people differently based on these innate but irrelevant characteristics, while the second half was focused on righting those injustices. The 21st century seems to be focused on the idea that race is the most important thing about a person, and you should definitely think about people differently because of their race, and treat them differently as well.

 

Once again, people just want to justify racism. I wish, as a species, we could get over that. Deliberately encouraging racism isn't a good way to create a diverse and compassionate society where everyone has the best chance to build their best life.

[Spekulatius]

3 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

They aren't dictating on how to hire...only that applicants have furthered diversity and inclusivity when dealing with the hiring process.  In other words, give all candidates a fair shot regardless of race and gender!  Cheers!

Furthering diversity and giving every candidate a fair shot are two very different things.The diversity angle will lead to the diversity candidate (per the institutions guidelines) getting preferred over the more capable one. Think Hispanic gay women candidate getting preferred over almost any white straight male candidate because she ticks right diversity boxes. Looks like a total racket to me.

 

Some colleges have jumped the shark here very far, like Yale who decided to drop out of comparison ranking for good reasons most likely.

Edited March 4, 2023 by Spekulatius

[Gregmal]

I can’t wait to see the eventual blowing up of the US collegiate/academic bubble world. It’s a racist, indoctrination driven world of excess and unaccountable creeps. It’s funded by government spending and bs student loans that make the GFC subprime stuff look tame. These folks parade around doing little actual work, many teaching a few hours a day at best and then lounging, mingling with young kids, and pursuing hobbies, while making salaries deep into the 6 figures with golden benefit packages. It’s despicable and the only thing worse is how often the good teachers simply end up average Joes because they choose not the have fun in the deviant carnival system that exists.

[Viking]

Do people want to get into the US? Yup. Desperately. Do lots of people want to get out of countries like China. Yup. Desperately.
 

Is the US perfect. No, of course not. It never has been. Go back and watch some videos from the 1960’s and 1970’s. What a mess… What about the 1920’s or 1930’s? Even worse.
 

Despite all the hand wringing, the US is and will be fine. It will prosper and its people will prosper. The winners and losers will change at the margin. Just like always. 
 

I am finding one of the great challenges of getting old is to not become that ‘crazy old uncle’. Angry. Unable to handle change.

[Sweet]

On the diversity topic.

 

I know there were some Universities in the UK adverting grants only for women.  I believe it was a L’Oreal women in science scheme, promoted by the Universities.

 

Wonder if Gillette sponsored a men in science scheme, and only men could apply, how long it would take to make the BBC news front page.

[rohitc99]

1 hour ago, Viking said:

Do people want to get into the US? Yup. Desperately. Do lots of people want to get out of countries like China. Yup. Desperately.
 

Is the US perfect. No, of course not. It never has been. Go back and watch some videos from the 1960’s and 1970’s. What a mess… What about the 1920’s or 1930’s? Even worse.
 

Despite all the hand wringing, the US is and will be fine. It will prosper and its people will prosper. The winners and losers will change at the margin. Just like always. 
 

I am finding one of the great challenges of getting old is to not become that ‘crazy old uncle’. Angry. Unable to handle change.

+1

reminds me that old quote from churchil i think - Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others

 

[Spekulatius]

10 hours ago, rohitc99 said:

+1

reminds me that old quote from churchil i think - Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others

 

The US will be fine, there is competition between states and colleges for once. However some colleges may ruin their reputation over time. I call out Yale as the Ivy league University that is most likely to do so. I think a College like University of Chicago may run circles around them in ten years.

[Spekulatius]

LOL, Roach motel:

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/mark-mobius-china-investing-capital-restricting-outflows-markets-strategy-jinping-2023-3

 

[Dinar]

2 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

The US will be fine, there is competition between states and colleges for once. However some colleges may ruin their reputation over time. I call out Yale as the Ivy league University that is most likely to do so. I think a College like University of Chicago may run circles around them in ten years.

I agree.  As a Yale alum, it pains me to admit it.  Funny, I was accepted to U Chicago as well, and I remember their core curriculum being a strong draw.  Oh well.

[Xerxes]

Some interesting parallels between the Crimean War of the 1850s and today. Few interesting excerpts on then different points of views, as seen from their capitals.  

 

First excerpt explains the overwhelming role the Tsar played most of all in the conflict. But not just him. Everybody played a role and wanted to have their pound of flesh. 
 

Think of then Turkey as Ukraine, both victims of Russia.
 

Think of today’s Russian oriented Donbas (Ukrainian territory) as then pro-Russian “Wallachia and Moldova” that were formally part of the Ottoman territories. Moscow coveted both then and now. 
 

 

The next except, is the rise of anti Russian political views, in London that started to shape its foreign policy. It was the epoch of the “Great Game”. 
 

 

The Queen point of view that Britain foreign policy was being held hostage by a blank check provided to the Ottoman court by the British Parliament. 
 

 

Even after the earlier Russian defeat in the Balkans, the “war party” needed to have its war. The full course. 
 

Invasion of Crimea was launched soon after. 
 

 

 

Ref: https://www.amazon.ca/Crimean-War-History-Orlando-Figes-ebook/dp/B004QGY3YI/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=21MWP0FQRPBO1&keywords=crimean+war&qid=1678032962&sprefix=crimean+war%2Caps%2C118&sr=8-1

 

Disclaimer: This post is for entertainment purposes only, no need to reply that the two wars are actually different etc etc

 

 

Edited March 5, 2023 by Xerxes

[Xerxes]

From The Economist 

 

[no_free_lunch]

Im no expert but it appears to be a big problem xerxes.  Nothing new either as the article suggests. I know in the Korean War they had a lot of issues as there was no investment in conventional weapons.  Everyone assumed any future war would be nuclear, it wasn't.  Up until last year the west assumed it will be only limited conflicts with smaller countries.  

 

I would really like to see a comparison of US defense spending relative to China or Russia that factors in relative cost. I have to think these countries,  China in particular get a lot more bang for the buck.  Higher wages in the US affect everything, the cost of personnel to production wages.

 

This issue is really hitting the social media space the last day or so.  Hopefully it triggers people. I'm trying to trigger people. Complacency will lead to loss. If we , the west, go around assuming that we are just the best we will be defeated. Guaranteed. 

Edited March 5, 2023 by no_free_lunch

[Spekulatius]

On 3/3/2023 at 4:42 PM, cubsfan said:

^^ Well , that's what I'd be worried about - production.

 

I'd be surprised if the Soviets aren't all full steam with production.

 

What about the West?  You worried about them?  Are we just drawing down are inventories and storage of munitions?   Is the West on full production mode?

 

If the Western Allies are worried about Russia AND China - who gets the production?

I think Germany for once is ramping up ammunition production significantly. Rheinmetal alone builds two new plants - one in Hungary and one in Germany if I recall correctly.

I don’t think producing artillery shells is that hard. It’s the more complex stuff like smart ammo (Excalibur) that has complex supply chains and takes longer.