acrashb

Don't know if "GENERALL SVR" is credible, but if so, bad day for Putin: Telegram: Contact @generallsvr

One assumes this is a joke, but for clarity - it could not be more wrong. The US' foibles loom larger on the world stage because they matter more; Canada's foibles get regional coverage, partly because of the much smaller economy and partly because Canada seems non-threatening to other parts of the world and so is discounted. But 'reason' is in short supply with our leaders and commentariat as much as elsewhere. If the US seems more 'out there', in addition to the above, and to deliberate gridlock built into the US political system, there is the issue of gerrymandering, a pox on democracies everywhere. Schwarzenegger's core legacy in California is, and will be seen as, attempts to dampen this. Back to lurking.

If we shift "pointy stick" to "weapons generally", was this to defend against / take resources from everyone, or just from other social groups (tribes) aka "the Other"? If it was from everyone, then you get one big Thunderdome / crabs in a bucket / etc. I think it would have been mostly from the Other, which is quite different, no longer Hobbesian, and appears to be how societies evolve. Every social group / tribe has criminals, but most are defensively- and offensively-oriented outwards. At least I think so, I'm not a trained anthropologist, just a guy who reads a lot.

At the pace of the internet this is an old statement, but I've been thinking about it since (and before, just more so now). On the natural born killers, this is a Hobbesian view. We do not, and I do not wish to, live in a Hobbesian world. Locke was much more accurate, and his views create a world worth living in - as it happens, his views strongly informed the US constitution (and others). Both spoke of man in a natural state, before society takes hold, and while Hobbe's views have some traction - members of primitive societies live in constant fear of disease, starvation, and violence, the latter supporting Hobbes' "nasty, brutish and short" - overall Locke was correct. Having said that, if we summarize Hobbes' views, Russian society tends in that direction. In this table we see echos and outright images of Russia under the Czars until and including now. Which leads us to the slippery slope. The angle and length of that slope would, I think, depend on the starting point. Further, if humans are natural born killers, more would shoot during combat. Modern training leads to a higher active rate in modern armies, but during WWII it was three out of ten doing the shooting, even after becoming combat veterans. Rather than being natural born killers, isn't it reasonable to say that the horrors of war brutalize away natural restraints? If the horrors are worse and the starting point worse, the slope is short and steep. Perhaps Russian society pre-brutalizes residents. If the horrors are moderated (through training, medevac, micro-social structures aka "band of brothers", etc.) then the slope would be longer and shallower - allowing more time to catch soldiers before they slip right off the slope. Or I'm talking out of my butt; but I like to think that my neighbours aren't ready to kill me because I don't cut my grass regularly.

1) in other words, it is incontrovertible ancient wisdom, laid down at a time when C-----u itself stepped gingerly out of the way of a rampaging P--g. Thank you for recognizing that. 2) you can lead a horse to water, hold the cup unto its lips, and still, it is all mere pearles before swyne. On this issue I shall renew my vows of silence and perambulate up and down the cloister awaiting revelations. 3) and a hearty balderdash and poppycock to you, sir! PS: given that only 7% of communication is carried by text, as one would know if one had navigated my tortuous battle with Mr. P--g, please postpend a ";)" to each of the above statements.

Breaking my vow of silence, you are wrong, as was Mr. Peng on the same subject. In earlier, simpler times we called them emoticons: The "Guest aaronb" ... that was me.

From the recent ISW report: " on November 4 that Russian forces have tripled the intensity of hostilities in certain sections of the front with up to 80 daily assaults" So that's up to 800 casualties. The UA numbers may be somewhat inflated - it would be surprising if they weren't - but they aren't in a different universe.

CM needs a shoot-and-scoot command for at least anti-tank squads. Why would an RPG gunner hang out around the corner of a building after firing a rocket at a tank 200m away? Because of the up-to-60-second delay on turn based. Ideally the same thing for armour and, for that matter, regular infantry. Pop up over a hilltop, a few seconds of automatic fire, and crawl / run away before every asset on the other side of the hill spots, turns and returns fire.

"In stunning comeback, Netanyahu poised to return as Israel PM with a majority" Stunning is right, and a majority in Isreal - with its proportional representation system - would be nearly as stunning and no doubt a welcome change, for the electorate, from the last four years. https://nationalpost.com/news/world/israels-netanyahu-appears-to-edge-toward-victory-after-vote Relevance: Netanyahu Shows Dramatic Change in Stance in Favor of Ukraine | Asharq AL-awsat (aawsat.com)

Speaking of drones: " Canada's Sea-Doo powered the Ukrainian marine drone used against Russian fleet: analyst The Sea-Doo brand of jet ski may be at the heart of Ukraine’s latest weapon against Russian invaders, a marine drone that could play a growing role in naval warfare " https://nationalpost.com/news/world/canada-sea-doo-ukraine-marine-drone-russia

Nature solves it by hunkering down in inclement weather. Birds don't fly in storms or even heavy rain. I'm not sure we have any truly all-weather aircraft. Maybe something like this, flying above the weather:

Serbian mortar rounds showing up. Serbia is in the Russian sphere, so how to those rounds get to Ukraine?

After the war we'll find out if the range accident involved a bullet to the back of the head or something more credible. My money is on door number 1 - with reasonable safety precautions shooting at a range is safer than flying model aircraft. Of course, Russian shooting range culture may differ from Canadian. Thank you for the on-the-ground view into artillery production - really helpful. I expect that the Russo-Ukraine war will be like the pandemic. When it is done, our governments and populations will forget many valuable lessons-learned. In this case, keep ammo next to the masks Another threat for carrier groups to worry about. Is it "are tanks dead" or is it "is anything large and expensive dead"? Because large things can be destroyed by small precision things at great distances. Sometimes it's like you don't know anything. To avoid damage to and gas leaking by the driving bands, the thigh hairs are removed with a hedge trimmer

You can empty and refill them with explosives, and same with the fuzes. The steel and other metal bits don't age in proper storage. And you don't do it all at once, it's like MREs - you do ten percent a year for ten years. Smart rounds are another matter - electronics have shelf lives (e.g., tin solder whiskers). Once the chips are out of production, you just can't get them. So modularity - chip not available? Redesign the board and plug it into the fuse through your milspec / unchanging interface.

Agreed that we can't and Russia lies. So what does this mean? Is it to prepare Russians for exiting Ukraine because nukes are the only way and now they are off the table? Is it setting conditions for a false flag attack? Is it backing away from previous statements to create strategic ambiguity, only to ratchet up later? Is it for Russophile consumption so they can say "you see, Russia is reasonable and NATO is an aggressive alliance"? Either way it is a climb-down from previous statements; the only question is why. On that, I have no insight. I do know that every statement is deliberate and purposeful. You're so right. Part of my professional life is business continuity planning - I take my own advice and keep a few week's basic supplies. For once, my government agrees with me. People laugh when they hear about my modest cache of MREs - but when they get old you just eat them, and a few years ago when an ice storm cut our little village off from the rest of the world for a few days (trees down on roads) and power off for more than a week, we ate like kings. Camping stove and copious propane cylinders helped Regards your "It's interesting...", this is a well-studied phenomenon of risk management. Most people overestimate tiny risks (plane crashes) and underestimate common risks (automobile crashes). Schneier has a neat summary: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/03/fear_and_the_av.html

Putin rules out nuclear strike on Ukraine (msn.com) " We do not need a nuclear strike on Ukraine, there is no point - neither political nor military" Assuming that we can finally take him at his word, good news. Of course, this could be laying the ground for a false flag - but regardless, it is a significant climb-down from previous broad / obvious hints that nukes were on the table. So put your MREs up on eBay, you won't need them

Outside of needing eye bleach because of the lack of your traditional warning, my key takeaway is this paragraph: “Russian officers described companies in the Kherson Sector as consisting of between six and eight men each. Companies should deploy with around 100 personnel.” One cannot manoeuvre a company with 8 men. You can't even coordinate their efforts, because they aren't integrated into a larger whole. If in fact companies are down that far, AFAIK the only solution is to fold the remaining men into an actual company-sized unit.

So in addition to Russia Sucks™ we may now layer in Ukraine Rocks™. I think the summary of your lengthy and interesting posts on this is that both are a too-low-resolution way of examining actions and predicting outcomes. Sloppy use of these now-tropes - in real life, not here - gets people killed without cause. Both phrases should be consigned to the bin except when reacting to video of things blowing up. What's really interesting is the collision - parts of it look like adaptive rock-paper-scissors, with one side adapting much more quickly. Pay no attention to the heathens. Keep providing the warning, it is both informative (a bit) and fun - part of your personal brand

Partly because cyber attacks famously spread beyond the intended area. The satellite communications terminal attack I linked earlier was supposed to be isolated to Ukraine, and it leaking into Europe. The Iran centrifuge attack has now leaked everywhere - "Stuxnet" is now purchasable or just plain downloadable from hacker websites. And/or because Russian cyber capabilities are overestimated, under-directed and generally a shambles like other elements of their side of the war. "Russia SucksTM" It will be more than one factor.

1) this is a good point. Right now we have a clear idea as to who did the Colonial Pipeline attack. However, everyone pretty much knows who blew the Nordstream pipeline(s), and that didn't stop or apparently deter Russia. 2) maybe. I don't know about military cyber capabilities or more specifically the overall military cyber security posture, but I can tell you that the last ten years, accelerating in the last five, has seen huge strides in industry. I'd say that on the whole on a 1-5 scale of a capability maturity model, industry has moved one or one and a have points forward (that's gut, not research). There are of course still gaps, especially in Operational Technology (OT) as shown in the Colonial Pipeline attack, but speaking as someone who has responded to NERC requirements, it gets better every year.

For the next game (CMTS aka CM Taiwan Strait, which will need to model an opposed landing), not just UGV but air-dropped UGV: (CONSERVATIVE SITE, ENTER AT OWN RISK) Shocking video shows Chinese robot attack dog with machine gun dropped by drone | Fox News "A Chinese military contractor created a video showing off its terrifying new military technology, revealing a robot attack dog that can dropped off by a drone." And more directly related to the strategic element of the Russo-Ukraine war: (LIBERAL SITE, ENTER AT OWN RISK) Putin has been watching and waiting for this moment in Washington | CNN Politics "For months, Russian President Vladimir Putin has waited and watched, hoping for a fracturing of the remarkable Washington consensus built by President Joe Biden on the need to do everything it takes to defend democracy in Ukraine."

There have been some effective attacks, for example: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/viasat-internet-hack-ukraine-russia, but overall I agree that the whole arena has been underwhelming. Why? Cyber is a use-it-once family of weapons. Attack someone, and they harden up not just the immediate code base but the processes to retain hardening - and almost all successful attacks are easy to defend against, just patch your equipment to remove known vulnerabilities. Zero-day attacks, like the Iranian centrifuges, are rare and require high end capability and resources if they are even possible - contrary to popular belief, not all software is vulnerable and hackers can't just press the magic "crack this" button to break things. Of course there are non-technical attacks that rely on human carelessness (e.g., phishing) and coercion (bribery, blackmail, etc.) but to do things at scale it's technical attacks. About six weeks before the ground assault, cyber attacks, almost all directed against critical infrastructure, were significantly elevated against baseline, and this was maintained for months into the conflict. I don't know where it is now, because the lack of overall success has led my attention elsewhere. Russia has capable hacking groups, for example Fancy Bear. Continued action of these groups has, as noted above, upped the investments made by critical infrastructure owners - as has an increasing mesh of legislation, regulation and industry associations (e.g., https://www.nerc.com/AboutNERC/Pages/default.aspx ). While it is possible that RA-affiliated hackers have something up their sleeves, if so they are waiting for a decisive moment, which IMO will not arrive. For those who are interested, CISA is very well regarded, here is the entry page into their russo-ukraine war (a phrase I use that is not catching on - yet) guidance: https://www.cisa.gov/shields-up

And yet we see pictures like this all over the place (granted not at high noon): I expect there is a difference between "flashless" and "low-flash". Just like "smokeless" powder actually does create smoke, just a lot less than black powder.

Russia sucks. Or they are decoys like inflatable S-300s. Or Russia sucks. Or both.

People like me did not. I work in tech, and my exposure to Russians - going back to the early '90s - has been people who were educated and urban, which I assumed reflected the general population. I expect that this would be similar for analysts like ISW, and while they have less excuse, this type of exposure would skew the thought process. This goes beyond sloppy / easy macro quantitative vs. harder-work micro-qualitative and into cultural assumptions. I'm still trying to build a full picture of why (almost) every analyst was wrong.