dan/california
-
Posts
7,064 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
20
Posts posted by dan/california
-
-
Lets just say he is unimpressed with his commanders...
-
5 hours ago, cesmonkey said:
This is clearly the biggest crack the Putin regime's facade of unity that we have seen.
6 hours ago, The_Capt said:The counter point to this is that Russia has somehow managed to survive as an inherently unstable imperial state (in its current size) for over 300 years. It has collapsed twice before but always has come back as an imperial state. There are more than a few theories on how this keeps happening; my personal favourite is that Russia exists because geopolitically it has been rejected- not European, not Asian, not Persian. That rejection has become an identity in itself: Russia - the original punk-state.
Regardless of how it happened, one has to admit Russia keeps going long after it should. That quality appears baked into the culture and identity. I also think this war may likely break the current incarnation of the Russian state. Pressures that have been set in motion may unite a people in the short term but will very well break it in the long term. Russia is very likely going to remain isolated from the West for a long time after this war. It will also very likely be pulled into the Chinese power sphere - although that relationship has always been weird.
Bur what is very important here is the speed of a Russian collapse. A slow rattling decline is something we can manage. A collapse that takes 20-30 years can be boxed up and contained. When it hits the tipping point it will still seem dramatic but a slow motion collapse, much like the last one with the fall of the Soviet Union is always the preferred option. It is the fast uncontrolled collapse that must be avoided. A collapse without mitigations in place. Too many unknowns, too much energy released too fast.
The strategic options spaces get far too stark and frankly untenable in this scenario. We will very likely fail to make the brutal decisions required if Russia plummets suddenly. The result risks runaway mechanisms that could wind up making the entire region (if not the globe) much worse. And there has been far too much hand waving on this point - “Ya,ya, whatever…but Ukraine!” This reality is why we are not conducting NATO airstrikes into Russia and putting western troops on the ground.
So we take the slow road. Contain but fuel the conflict. Hoping Russia runs out of gas slowly. Hoping Putin will have a sudden “health crisis”. It is often said in military circles that “hope is not an option”. I always smirk at this one because historically it has very often been the only option. We keep things rolling in the hopes a better option will emerge. Hope is a child of uncertainty, and we are very uncertain right now.
The problem with looking at the last three hundred years of history is that China was weak, almost to the point of irrelevance, that entire three hundred years. China has suddenly become very strong, this is going to effect the equilibrium that has let Russia survive being one the worst run countries on the planet.
24 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:This is why I don't see Russia going away even in the event of a catastrophic internal conflict. To paraphrase some movie I don't remember... Russia is too stubborn to die.
Russia suffered enormously from the dissolution of the Soviet Union. And that came about because it refused to liberalize. Russia bought itself about a decade, maybe two, by tip-toeing down the path of liberalization, but has since pulled further and further away from it. Now Russia resembles the Soviet Union more than it doesn't. The Soviet Union didn't survive that sort of structure, neither will Russia.
As I said, Russia is on a downward slope by all measures. It has no viable plan to address pretty much any of that. The war in Ukraine appears to have been an attempt to address ills by kicking them down the road a bit further. That failed.
What I'm saying here is that Russia, as it is today, is on borrowed time. Putin knows it. When it collapses it will likely rise again, but weaker than it was at it's post-Soviet peak. It will probably have less territory and more enemies, while at the same time having less influence even in the Near Abroad.
Sooooo... time is not on Russia's side as it relates to this conflict.
My concern is that Putin has burned up the opportunities for a slow and contained collapse. If he had continued with the direction he started c.2011 I think Russia could have gone on for many more decades under the current power structure (more than less, anyway). But now? I don't think so. He's cut off too many bridges, internally and externally. He's used up massive amounts of state resources. The demographics problems Russia was facing were bad, now they're significantly worse. And yet, Putin shows no sign of change of any sort.
This won't end well and I don't think it will take 20-30 years for it to happen. I'd wager less than 10.
Steve
See below...
11 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:Additional thought...
Many times we've talked about Putin as a gambler. It's an apt description, so I'm going to use those terms.
We saw Putin as a card or pool shark. Games that required skill and, if played well, could be profitable. Especially against people who weren't all that good, were distracted, or deliberately played down in order to keep him happy. Putin could have kept that sort of thing going for a very long time, even beyond his lifetime if he chose a successor well.
The Putin we see now is a desperate guy in a casino playing games of chance or those with minimal room for skill. He's shooting craps, pulling slot machines, going all in on blackjack, etc. He can still have successes, but if he doesn't cash out and walk away after scoring one then he'll likely piss it away sooner rather than later. The house always wins.
Putin's gambling streak is a net loss and of epic proportions. He went to the casino thinking he'd come out ahead, but he's not only lost what he went in with he's had to mortgage his house and raid the kids' higher education funds. Now each loss he suffers puts him closer to the bring of disaster, whereas each gain is unlikely to do more than allow him to keep gambling. But eventually he'll run out of money and be unable to keep playing. He has no plan B for that.
The reason we've seen Putin make the switch is because the games of skill weren't enough to keep him going. Not all is well back home and he needed to up his winnings to smooth them over.
Analogies are never perfect, but they can be helpful. I am hoping this one is helpful
Steve
Both of these posts are excellent, Putins has rejected the idea trying to manage decline well. He has committed to making a grand imperial comeback, or a crater.
-
1 hour ago, TheVulture said:
Not unrelated, but the UK army started receiving its first Archer artillery systems (L52) from Sweden in early 2023, so yes, they are basically shipping the AS-90s to Ukraine as they are being replaced in active service by new systems.
I believe Sweden have also sent some Archers to Ukraine, so they're getting some more modern systems too, not just stuff that's being retired. Archer I think is on a par with the French Caesars that are getting a lot of praise.
I really look forward to the comparisons between the two systems after the war. The Archer is an amazingly nice system, automated EVERYTHING. . The Caesar though hits a really nice sweet spot of having all of the tech it actually needs, but nothing that it doesn't. The Caesar pays for that with a slightly longer time to shoot and leave. Really interesting comparison to be made there if we ever get any real data.
-
22 minutes ago, FancyCat said:
This totally makes sense, because L39 barrels are all but obsolete. The first tier standard going forward is going to guns that shoot 45 or 50 kilometers with more or less normal ammunition, and double that with the fancy stuff. L52 barrels are just one of the things that are absolutely required to make that happen.
I am not saying they are useless in Ukraine BTW, I am saying all of the vehicles in the general class of L39 barreled SPGs are a rapidly wasting asset, and most of the ones that exist anywhere n NATO ought to be on the way to Ukraine. The manufacturing rate for newer systems obviously needs to go WAY up.
-
Better late than never...
-
8 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
I question stats like this. The paper uses Jack Walting out of RUSSI, who are a pretty good bunch, but the ref in the paper is not a citation, it basically says "Jack said so". So when was this in the war? Excalibur rounds come with inertial guidance for just this reason - GPS jamming. We know there have been continual upgrades and revisions to deal with the EW environment. Are these rounds at 7% now? Where did Jack get this number?
We know EW will remain a thing, but autonomy is the offset and it is accelerating. The Excalibur round started development in the 90s and has been on the battlefield for nearly 20 years:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M982_Excalibur
We need to really remember that a lot of the miltech we are seeing is actually one or two generations old. So this makes predictions even harder. We do not know what is out there with respect to PGM and counters, nor what is on drawing boards. My sense within the business is that cheap precise is accelerating, while the very expensive counters are behind the curve, but time will tell.
All of this conversation reminds me of how the Spanish Civil war was the test bed for so much of what we saw from 1940 to 1945.
-
5 hours ago, FancyCat said:
Guess precision took a hit...ugh. hey, great, a lesson for the future. Can we please just get 3rd party ammo sourced worldwide to Ukraine now? (I will assume with U.S aid unblocked this will resume, but a pox on certain European countries for insisting on EU based manufacturing at the expense of Ukraine.
https://www.congress.gov/118/meeting/house/116957/witnesses/HHRG-118-AS35-Wstate-PattD-20240313.pdf
It will require some real engineering, because gun launched anything requires real engineering, but there are already a ton of other ways to do terminal guidance out there. Furthermore the fact recon drones that can stand off a kilometer or five seem far far less susceptible to jamming makes all of those solution easier. Whether it is laser guidance, or literally passing a terrain image thru to the seeker in the shell, it is all just engineering, not radical scientific breakthroughs. A home on jam version of the Excalibur would seem rather useful as well. All of this more or less exactly parallels the gun vs armor race in WW2. If I am remembering something Steve wrote forever ago correctly, " As the war progressed, tanks that were one year old were at a significant disadvantage, and two year old tanks and guns were effectively obsolete". The more things change, the more they uhm don't.
Hasn't the U.S. already been developing, and maybe even building some multi mode seekers for some air launched munitions? Fitting those to GMLRS doesn't seem that hard.
-
16 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:
If all your opponent has is FPVs, is that not good enough? As I understand, Ukraine simply doesn’t have enough heavy weaponry capable of destroying “shed-on-tracks”. Previously small drones were good enough for wiping out all manner of vehicles, but this requires something with a more substantial amount of boom-boom, which is not available.
I disagree that this is any sort of the victory. The Russians are not stupid, and realize that bolting sheds onto their tanks is a viable strategy for getting infantry to Ukraine’s defensive positions, and that’s all that matters to them. They believe they can seize 50-100m at a time, and make attrit the Ukrainian defenders, while being able to sustain the Russian effort.
EDIT: If it’s a victory at all, it’s for those who fetishize tanks, and point out what happens when you run out of fancy ATGMs.
2 hours ago, The_Capt said:Ok, let’s think about this for a minute. Anyone who has played CM knows that a tank needs to do three things to be effective - move, target and shoot. These giant sheds basically erode all three of those. They can still move but I am pretty sure with some serious impacts as drivers situational awareness is worse and the fact they have a giant metal box on their tank is going to impact mobility. Targeting must be a joke. They cannot swing the gun sights and can only see a narrow window out the front. Situation awareness in that garden shed must be the worst. They are likely blasting nearly blind. And finally shooting. What sort of gunnery are they accomplishing with a giant box over top them? They cannot move the turret more than a few degrees to the front, so they have basically become a mobile field gun….in a big metal box.
What these sorts of developments tell us is that the RA is more afraid of drones than they are of anything else, to the point that they are willing to drastically reduce the effectiveness of armor. The fact they have to put garden sheds on their tanks is already a tactical victory. It demonstrates just how far things have gone. They do not “work” beyond keeping whatever these vehicles have become alive for a few more minutes and raising the number of FPVs it takes to kill them.
I am on The_Capt's side on this one. Armored vehicles that have had to preemptively blind themselves to stay alive the last five or ten kilometers have reduced their effectiveness by 80 or 90%. Also the counters to this are extremely obvious. Drones will get a little bigger, an optimized warhead will be developed, and last but not least all the home on jam experiments that have to be underway somewhere will ramp up into production. What tanks need to do to remain useful in the next turn of the cycle is rather less obvious, because as we have discussed any number of times, the just can't get any heavier, and a practical matter they are ALREADY to expensive
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
I've been saying since this war started that the only way Ukraine would get back it's territory is if Russia has a complete military collapse. Even then, I'm not sure they'd get it all back. Especially Crimea.
If central authority in Russia collapses it will likely be quickly replaced by another group of thugs that will keep the war going. Since the soldiers are complaint, if not comfortable, with the idea of dying for a dead empire dream, they will keep fighting. Even if central Russian authority isn't quickly reestablished, it's entirely possible we might see the repeat of the German Freikorps movement.
Best case for Ukraine after a collapse is they get back a big chunk of land and obligate Russia to limit the war effort to holding the rest.
Therefore, if someone insists (for no justifiable reason) that Ukraine must take back all of its 2022 or 2014 borders in order to "win", then that person has already written off Ukraine as a lost cause without understanding why it's wrong to do so.
Steve
I fully agree it would take some sort of epic crack up in the Putin regime for Ukraine to get it all back. But if the regimes DOES crack their are simply so many ways it could go all anybody will be able to do is try to surf the avalanche.
-
10 minutes ago, Grey_Fox said:
The problem with this is that there are tradeoffs when it comes to strapping larger payloads to UAVs, in the form of size, speed, agility, range, and cost. Mike Kofman and Rob Lee discuss this on recent podcasts.
Strapping a grenade or RPG-7 warhead to a UAV may be feasible for your $500, but a larger tandem warhead will drive up the size requirements of the drone in order to achieve similar performance, which means greater cost and possibly lower survivability. And bear in mind that the FPV drones have a low success rate to begin with.
This is true, but trading even ten or twenty $2500 dollar drones for a multimillion dollar tank or AFV is still great deal. And remember last mile autonomy, and then more or less complete autonomy, are bearing down like an oncoming train. Throw in the fact that tanks can't get any heavier and still move, and my money is on the drones long term.
Just tried to check, and the RPG-29 tandem warhead is essentially identical to the RPG-7VR, and they both seem to weigh about double the basic RPG-7 anti armor round. That isn't insignificant, but it certainly doesn't seem unsurmountable in terms of drone reengineering. A cope cage that stand up to the tandem charge though....
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
Sure, but the point of the cope barn is to protect the thing under it, and that costs a LOT more than a modern AT weapon. So what the Russians are doing is adding cost while the AT weapon stays the same.
The added cost, at the expenses of mobility, is to defeat FPVs. So to the extent it can do that, it's cost effective because a $3000 FPV would otherwise knock out a $1m vehicle. Adding something like $20,000 cost to the vehicle in exchange for not blowing up is a cost effective measure for sure.
Steve
But we have to keep in mind that 99% of the FPV drones out there are made with random RPG-7 warheads from the approximate infinity of them the USSR left lying around. At some point they will start making new tandem warheads for them that approximate an RPG-29. That will instantly make scrap metal cope cages obsolete. Then the whole back and forth cycle will go another round.
-
7 hours ago, Carolus said:
Russian locomotives destroyed by partisans. Haven't seen that before.
Death by a thousand needles is a thing.
I have been saying for a very long time that railroad sabotage is the only effective form of political protest. Maybe it is finally sinking in for a few Russians that you ought to accomplish more than waving a sign around before getting shipped to a labor camp for what might as well be forever.
-
Quote
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - April 12, 2023 – Embraer announced today, during LAAD Defence & Security 2023, the launch of the A-29 Super Tucano aircraft, light attack aircraft, armed reconnaissance, and advanced training, in the configuration of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), with an initial focus on meeting the needs of nations in Europe. The new version of the aircraft, the A-29N, will include equipment and features to fulfill NATO's operational requirements, such as a new datalink and single-pilot operation.
27 minutes ago, Haiduk said:Sounds good, but private Mykola with PKM on second crewman seat is cheaper that R&D and producing of such system )))
Wouldn't Super Tucanos be perfect in the drone hunting role? I realize the IFF is a problem, but otherwise it seems like these thing would be perfect for hunting both Orlan/Zala drones, and Shaheeds.
-
18 minutes ago, billbindc said:
Anything coming from, endorse by Sushko is entirely suspect. Caveat emptor.
I mostly agree with you, but at least one deputy/assistant defense minster is sitting in prison. I am not sure what is more significant, that some other faction has moved against someone at that level, or that the guy in question didn't just fall out a window? Something is happening.
-
2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Let's remember that the sources for all of this information are inherently Russian. Therefore, pinches of salt. That said, I think most of this is likely true.
We can bet our last piece of currency that a) the MoD mafia clan has been enriching themselves to a massive extent, b) Putin was unlikely aware of how bad it was, and c) one or more of the competing mafia clans started to gain some of Putin's ear and the war may have offered an opportunity to buy time. I think we could also afford to bet our houses on Shoigu's clan deliberately squeezing Priggy to get a hold of his lucrative foreign assets, especially because that's exactly what Priggy said was happening and it is how things ended after Priggy went boom.
With that, the only real question is if Shoigu is if Shoigu's clan cooked up this war to distract Putin from cracking down on them. I do not think that stands up to scrutiny.
First off, if this war went according to plan, how much would that have bought the Shoigu clan? According to the premise in the X thread is that Shoigu cooked up the war to get a huge influx of defense money and to get at Priggy's assets. Given that the war was supposed to be over and done with in 3-14 days... well, that just doesn't jibe as neither of these opportunities would have presented themselves, therefore they couldn't have been part of some master plan.
Second, this theory makes it seem like Putin had no interest in attacking Ukraine except for the whispers coming in from Shoigu. This is about as counter factual as one can get in the smoke and mirrors world of Russian palace intrigue. Big fat "no way, Jose" on this one.
Third, this theory also requires us to believe that the rival clans weren't capable of countering Shoigu's moves. Which is counter intuitive because the theory is arguing that they were out maneuvering Shoigu by starting to uncover how corrupt the MoD clan was. Putin is an FSB man and Shoigu's biggest rival is the security clan/s, therefore I doubt they would have allowed Putin to be talked into something clearly designed to benefit Shoigu's people.
The more likely explanation is that Putin wanted this, Shoigu saw an opportunity to use it to his clan's advantage, instead it showed how bad the corruption was, Putin figured it out early on but didn't feel he could rock the boat to much, and so he empowered Priggy to start creating a counter balance to the MoD. But Priggy was out maneuvered by both the security clan (that hated him for their own reasons) and the MoD clan. The security clan allowed Shoigu's buddies to dig their hole deeper, and now we have the reckoning starting to come out.
Steve
It doesn't have to be true, or even believed by Putin, for it to be a useful excuse for the Czar to rid himself of some poorly performing ministers. This is triply true given that we all know the ministers in question are incompetent, and utterly corrupt, even if some or all of the details of the described conspiracy are fiction. It may simply be that Putin has decided it is time to blame someone for the epic, world historical, disaster of this war.
The interesting and important question is whether the new ministers will be any better at their jobs? Or does the snake pit of Putin's system make it impossible for him to put in competent people?
-
Quote
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ukraine-the-latest/id1612424182?i=1000653701880
Today, we discuss the latest news from Ukraine as the Ukrainian armed forces remove American Abrams tanks from the front line. We deep-dive into the capabilities of the ATACMS missiles and we hear from a British volunteer who works in front line villages across the East of Ukraine.
A credible report that Ukraine is pulling its one ~battalion of Abrams out of active combat because current combat conditions are making them ineffective and to vulnerable, especially drones. I am filing this one firmly in the tank is dead file.
-
QUADRUPLE POST, bleep me I was on a roll, sorry.
-
triple post
-
double post
-
5 hours ago, Holien said:
Court politics...
The fact that they are airing it in public makes it very interesting.
Putler getting revenge or some one else?
One to watch...
You are understating how crazy this story is, whether it is true is another question, but back to that in a minute. The story is saying that the ENTIRE WAR resulted form an effort by Shoigu and Ivanov to cover the massive extent of their embezzlement. And then not content with that, they tried to take over Prigozhin's empire exactly the way they he said they did, and THIS resulted in the march on Moscow. Now Putin has finally realized what is going on. This is BEYOND NUTS. Yet Ivanov is sitting in prison for something.
Apparently the Patrushev clan is leading the other faction at the Czars court, and think they finally have the rope to hang their rivals. This doesn't even have to be true, or mostly true, if enough of the Russian elite believe it to start a real power struggle.
I am not sure I believe any of this, but clearly a real argument about something is breaking loose between Kremlin factions. That is not a small thing.
-
1 minute ago, kimbosbread said:
Please, Putin straight up did his previous land grab in 2014 under the current guy’s old boss (both of whom I think are decent people and have done decent jobs). I think Trump absolutely gave people pause just due to sheer uncertainty and capriciousness of his presidency. And then, just as Trump leaves office, Spring 2020 rolls around with a giant kick to everybody’s collective nutsack. And then maybe Putin, sensing his own mortality, decides to roll the dice again, since the US just backed out Afghanistan, and the guys who let 2014 happen are back in town.
And it’s not just the US. Look at France, where the traditional political parties collapsed over the last decade. Or England.
The thing is, Putin could almost certainly done a smaller, less ambitious, version of the "SMO" and more or less gotten away with it. His epic mistake was to make a great show of his intentions to burn down Kyiv and crucify, or worse, anybody who looked at him sideways. This made it impossible for the West to ignore what was going on and continue business as usual. He really did execute the worst plan since at least Napoleon's march on Moscow with a complete absence of competence.
As I have said a number of time a smart autocrat would have declared victory May 1st of 2022, and memory holed the whole thing. Putin is not very smart, he just a psychopath who very unfortunately snuck into the top job.
-
Quote
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/why-you-cant-be-iran-hawk-and-russia-dove
A Russian victory is an Iranian victory. Moscow and Tehran have formed a military bloc with the aim of defeating the United States and its allies in the Middle East, Europe, and around the world. Russian and Iranian military forces have been fighting alongside one another in Syria for nearly a decade. The Russians have given Iran advanced air defenses and access to other military technologies and techniques, in addition to a front-row seat observing their efforts to defeat American and NATO missile defenses in Ukraine.[1] The Iranians in turn have given the Russians drones and access to drone technologies, including assisting with the construction of a massive factory to turn out thousands of Iranian drones in Russia.[2] Further Russian support to Iran has been limited in part because of the setbacks Russia has suffered in Ukraine. A victorious Russia will be free to give Iran the advanced aircraft and missile technologies Tehran has long sought.[3] If Russia gains control of Ukraine’s resources, as it seeks to do, it will be able to rebuild its own military and help Iran at the same time. Those concerned with the growth of Iran’s military power, ambitions, and aggression in the Middle East must recognize the degree to which Iran’s fortunes rise and fall with Russia’s.
ISW doing great stuff, as always.
-
6 minutes ago, omae2 said:
They should only threaten, not only the bridge but across the western part of russia so the russians pull aa systems off the front into the back yard. Similar how the russians is bombing the cities to force the Ukrainians to defend their cities with their scarce aa systems. Oil refineries are good target cause the russians have to defend them. But the main effort should be attacking the frontline supportive units. Weakening multiple spots, closely following where the gaps develop then faint one attack and develop another.
I don't get this whole USA thing. When the European NATO members tried to take control of the aid process they didn't like that. They wanted to be in charge.
Now if Trump get into office he will totally cut Ukraine? It really feels like soap opera. I don't get it why a 500 million population, economic powerhouse relying on an oversea circus to ensure its protection against the russians. We could be a contender to china and the USA yet we still act like some sort of a naive idiot that don't know what to do. Constant bickering about nothing, loud speeches than no actions taken, letting my country to stop the process of giving aid to Ukraine on the EU level. Germany should already work on obtaining nuclear weapons, Poland as well. We should already integrate the member states army into a EU army that has a common language. They should bring back conscription so every young fella can have a basic knowledge about warfare. Not watching the USA if they manage to vote in a senile guy for a second term against an old spoiled brat with narcissistic personality disorder.The EU needs to have this little conversation about whether it is a country or a trade confederation. If it decides it is a country it is certainly the third player on the world stage, perhaps the second. If it decides it is a trade confederation, well your going have to worry about US elections forever, Choose wisely...
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
This should come as no surprise to anyone... the pro-Russian/anti-Ukraine/isolationist wing of the GOP is vowing that Ukraine will never get another penny of aid from the US.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4619185-gop-critics-vow-no-more-us-aid-for-ukraine/
Their threats only matter if they control either chamber in Congress and/or the presidency. As we've seen, controlling the debate is enough to thwart action. As things are going I don't see a Democrat controlled House and Senate having the 2/3rds vote necessary to override a presidential veto from Trump.
So to echo the sentiment a few posts ago... Europe needs to view this new US aid package as a "one off" and keep going with its efforts to support Ukraine better long term.
Steve
10 minutes ago, The_Capt said:It is worse than this re: Trump in White House. If Trump somehow takes the presidency (from a prison cell...seriously best sitcom ever) he can also order all US military support to pull back. This will include operational and strategic C4ISR. This would have a potentially drastic effect on the battlefield as Russia would be on an equal or better C4ISR footing than Ukraine. At that point the entire framework of this war shifts away from precision and back to mass. More simply put, tanks may start to work again.
This makes the next moves for Ukraine very high stakes. Go on defence and make the surge in support try to outlast Russian reserves. Or bulk up and roll the dice one more time on an operational offensive. If the offensive succeeds it may create enough momentum that even Trump could not stand in the way. If it fails, further US Ukrainian support could very well be doomed even if Biden retains the White House.
So, definitely, this war needs an offset strategy. And to my eyes that is the EU and NATO.
To put it plainly, the U.S. election is another front in this war, and perhaps the most important one, certainly the second most important one.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Worth the watch.