Sequoia

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/trump-administration-broke-law-in-withholding-ukraine-aid.html
I'm sorry but that's an absurd statement. Russia didn't decide to invade because Biden was weak kneed on Ukraine. In fact, Biden has been seen as a hawk in DC on the topic since at least 2008 or so. Russia invaded because before his administration Putin had successfully out maneuvered Bush and Obama while Trump was fairly actively his acolyte. The good times were over, American military aid was about to ramp up and the Ukrainian government was no longer as amenable to pressure. In short, Ukraine was about to become much harder to swallow up (if not as easy as the FSB imagined).
 

China attacking Taiwan is an utterly insane, self destructive choice for China.  They are dependent on trade and world is dependent on them.  Attacking Taiwan wrecks all that.  There is simply no cost-benefit that is in 1000 miles of making sense.
And so maybe China will actually do that.  considering it was insane for Putin to make this move.  Actually Putin's move was less insane than Taiwan attack would be -- Putin was staging a coup that went sideways.  China would be full on war.  I guess insane cost-benefit ratio doesn't really mean a dictator won't do actually pull the trigger.

Heh China has a couple aircraft carriers they are still learning how to use.  Japan had 6 fleet carriers and the most experience using them of any Navy.  To counter them the US had 5 fleet carriers and now has 11 and over 75 years of experience.  
Taking Taiwan would make the Normandy landings look like child's play.  The channel from Portsmouth to Normandy is 100 miles.  The Germans were restricted to pretty much the mk 1 eyeball and were mislead as to where a landing might take place.  The US had experience doing multiple amphibious landings.  China has never done one.  The moment a fleet even starts organizing we'll know and Taiwan can reach pretty far out into that strait. 
Militarily it is a suicide mission.

A really great article about France's position during the war, concentrating mostly on the failures of Macron's mediation attempts. A little excerpt to give you a taste:
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/macron-must-avoid-immolation-french-influence

That's a take. I doubt if you asked the Irish if they enjoyed the famines, the answer would be positive. India, I'm sure their famines and deindustrialization aren't taken as a positive. I could go on, but that's some silly stuff, imperial conquest is good, jeez.

It's true that every war, occupation and colonization brings developments in infrastructure, governing model, cultural additions, lots of good things as well. The Romans also invaded Britain and brought some good things too, walls, forts, aqueducts, ways to count etc. Even Brittania was a word of theirs. One can say it was in a way part of the evolution of human race. But you wouldn't want the Romans above your head all the time, would you? . It still was an occupation that involved a lot of violence, suppression and humiliation of natives. Colonial powers didn't set those countries free because they matured but because there were bloody unrests and weren't strong enough anymore to handle them . Cricket and driving on the left is fine but they had been also killing people as recently as in the late 50s in Cyrpus for instance...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/07/tortured-to-death-the-14-cypriot-men-killed-by-british-in-50s-uprising
 
 

Hmmm . . . looks like it drove up on the guard-rail and got high-centred. Mobility kill?
Edit: The driver rolling up on a well marked verge might have something to do with the 420 stencilled on the turret side

You know, had the invasion not occurred, i would have largely agreed with you, but....since the invasion has occurred, and suddenly everyone in Europe (aside from the Balkans), must confront the idea of war and military conflict once more, with EE feeling pensive about the faithfulness of its Western European allies, NATO serves to defend Europe, and especially Eastern Europe. 
For all the idea of Russia suffering massive damage in Ukraine, lets not underscore the fact Ukraine has been severely damaged. No state in EE wants to suffer any of that, and NATO remains the best guarantee at warding off Russian threats. 
The damage Russia is inflicting on a nation of 44 million people, with hundreds of millions suffering side effects from the economic damage of the food conflict does not endorse your viewpoint. 

Thanks ) Just became some more of work, my wife turned back and often occupies PC because her work, also it's hard to live three months 24/7 as war news translator, so I took small vacations 

why I remember the day when your news came on a piece of paper - you could write all the comments you wanted... but nobody could read them... you youngsters.  Then we'd started yelling at the TV....

I've been trying to think of ANY modern war (WWI and on) movies that shows combat realistically. Perhaps the one scene that's an exception that comes to mind is in Band of Brothers where they attack the artillery emplacement in Normandy. Short ambushes sometimes are portrayed alright, but that's about it. 
Most movies still have attackers line up in some sort of skirmish line and advance upright in the open. Suppression is almost never represented. I suppose real life combat isn't very cinematic as you usually only see the heads of the enemy at best most of the time. 
List your exceptions and let's see if we can dissuade you that they are realistic.
 

Agreed, although there is one horrible full colour sequence I won't link from Saipan 1944 ("Hell in the Pacific" series), where a Japanese hetai emerges on fire from his bunker and runs around for a bit before lying down in a ditch to expire. The poor guy's body language expresses less agony than embarassment, as if he had been caught outside naked.
And then there's this non-explicit but nonetheless poignant sequence of a US tanker on Okinawa, a young skinny kid, likely sole survivor of his crew. His body language alone tells the tale.
....These are the kinds of stories a good friend of mine at USVA hears on a daily basis from veterans ever since they began offering extra PTSD benefits.
The stories invariably begin, "I always thought I'd take this story with me to the grave with me, because who the hell would want to hear it, except my wife who wonders why I wake up screaming at night."
We are all human.

Yeah, nah. He shouldn't be *doing* "stuff like that."
Is it understandable? Yes.
Is it illegal? Also yes.
Does the first negate the second? No.

1 agreed - a war crime is a war crime
2 Ukraine needs POWs.  Russia has been kidnapping civilians.  Force them to trade including the guys from Mariupol.

boiling the frog slowly. little by little push the envelope of equipment. at the start of the conflict we were sending AT weapons, now armed drones 4 months later. is it slow? yes, but Russia is still acting like it can win, and if they think they can still win, they will be less likely to hit the panic button and dare NATO to call their bluff. Important to also emphasize, as each tier of equipment is reached, NATO's more flighty members will be very cautious, so matching and illustrating that Russia is not going to respond, is essential for smoothing their feelings and accommodating their concerns but clearly the direction is heading towards more and more advanced equipment. 
 

Hey all, wasn't trying to get political.  I posted it as an example of the kind of talking points that will probably be used to undermine the US efforts to support the war going forward.  Note that Chomsky & Caldwell are both on the same page.  The message is "the US is at fault for setting up the causes of the war and for making the war continue, and this is nothing but a proxy war for the US" -- which, as I mentioned, ignores the reality of what Russia has clearly stated it would do to a conquered Ukraine and its people. 
But these talking points are a way forward for undermining US popular support and will probably be amplified.

Ukraine needs to trade Crimea for Russia agreeing to Ukraine joining the EU, and NATO. I realize nobody likes this idea, but short of taking Moscow, and doing something medieval with Putin's corpse this is the thing that would create a stable peace. The other issue with taking back Crimea is that I don't think Ukraine can deal with an unhappy populace that size and retain uncontested Western support. Putting down riots inherently looks bad on TV. The FSB most certainly knows this, and I am sure they have a plan. EU/NATO membership and the 2/24 frontiers as absolutely inviolable international borders make Ukraine a prosperous, UNIFIED, successful country. Sometimes living well really is the best revenge. 

Chomsky and his ilk tend to see the messaging that confirms their priors or see messaging as having a malign intent almost by definition. Did the Biden administration shape public opinion in both Europe and the US before Russia invaded? Sure. By making sure that a truthful account of what was happening out competed the propaganda emanating from Moscow. Is that 'manufacturing consent'? I'd argue not. It's leveling with your voters. 
PS: I should add that what Schneider is specifically discussing is the coordinated messaging that was being done before the war began. That made sense then because it was necessary to actively escalate attention to Russian actions that were indicating what was coming. Now, it's here. Russian misdeeds are dominating the news every day and thus the need for what he's describing has waned. Not offense to Schneider but what he's describing is a fairly banal reassessment of need and action.
 

Sorry Poesel but I don't buy that diagram. It has several issues, including listing the Eastern European countries other than the Soviet Union as losing the Cold War.

The first rule of White Club is don't talk about White Club.

The first rule of White Club is don't talk about White Club.

The first rule of White Club is don't talk about White Club.

The first rule of White Club is don't talk about White Club.

I'm stealing this post from someone else on another forum as I thought it was excellent. If the person from the other forum is also here (though I don't recognize the name) I hope you don't mind the theft.
 
Just my opinion, but, imagine being the one honest general in a corrupt army. You live on your pay rather than looting supplies (and your pay scale was determined by people who assumed you’d be looting your supplies and your men’s pay).
You try hard to force your subordinates to do the same to the extent that you can.
Then the auditors come in, every other general has plenty of money to bribe the auditors, you don’t. Every other general has hand picked subordinates whose gravy train depends on the general helping to claim everything is in order. Your subordinates know that you are the main reason they’re actually having to try to live on inadequate army pay….
After the audit, the army no longer has one honest general, instead it has zero.
Audits work when almost everyone is honest, and you’re trying to root out a few bad apples before they rot the entire barrel. I’m not sure what works when almost everyone is rotten and you’re trying to find and promote the handful of capable people. Public accountability has a small chance, but needs to start a the local level (so people are close enough to know who’s doing their job) and needs generations to build, and isn’t something a dictator wants.

I'm stealing this post from someone else on another forum as I thought it was excellent. If the person from the other forum is also here (though I don't recognize the name) I hope you don't mind the theft.
 
Just my opinion, but, imagine being the one honest general in a corrupt army. You live on your pay rather than looting supplies (and your pay scale was determined by people who assumed you’d be looting your supplies and your men’s pay).
You try hard to force your subordinates to do the same to the extent that you can.
Then the auditors come in, every other general has plenty of money to bribe the auditors, you don’t. Every other general has hand picked subordinates whose gravy train depends on the general helping to claim everything is in order. Your subordinates know that you are the main reason they’re actually having to try to live on inadequate army pay….
After the audit, the army no longer has one honest general, instead it has zero.
Audits work when almost everyone is honest, and you’re trying to root out a few bad apples before they rot the entire barrel. I’m not sure what works when almost everyone is rotten and you’re trying to find and promote the handful of capable people. Public accountability has a small chance, but needs to start a the local level (so people are close enough to know who’s doing their job) and needs generations to build, and isn’t something a dictator wants.