poesel

Noise. Produce enough fake emissions to drown the real ones. Or, since we are back at WWI anyway, lay cables.

An autonomous drone doesn't have to be autonomous all the way. If an operator flies it towards a point of interest and then designates a target via the drone's sensors, then the drone can do the rest alone. Following a designated target is much easier than identifying one. The designation only needs to be outside enemy EW. That is my guess for the next level of drones we will see in a few months.

1) yes unfortunately, as many other states 2) Kazakhstan: biggest imports come from Russia & China (together 52%), Germany is 3rd with 4.5%, USA 4th at 3.8% https://tradingeconomics.com/kazakhstan/imports-by-country Kyrgyzstan: China & Russia (67%), Kazakhstan 3rd at 7.9%, USA 6th 2.4%, Germany 7th 1.7% https://tradingeconomics.com/kyrgyzstan/imports-by-country Numbers from '22. I don't think the numbers for '23 will change radically. 3) Michael Roth is still MdB and head of the 'Auswärtiger Ausschuß'. What do you mean?

Speech of Scholz on the party congress. I've linked to the essential Ukrainian part. You could scroll a bit backwards for more if you like. Remember that this is the party which tried to be friends with Russia for 50 years. Speech in German, but automatic subtitles work very well. TL;DR: Germany is prepared to support Ukraine for a long time (years...) and will step up its game should others slack off.

If the Russians produce so many more drones than the Ukrainians, where are all those videos of Russian drones blowing up stuff? The Russians were never shy to show their achievements if they managed to have any.

Well, Romania managed to squeeze in through that "North America & Europe" thing. But Georgia is in the US anyway and Morocco has this Greek guy lifting the world - that should suffice.

IANAL but Morocco is not an island: "Article 6: ...or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;" But hey, I think they can amend that when they join.

How to prepare an artillery position in frozen ground (video from last year): and what happens if you don't:

China was the worlds superpower from about 500 (when they took over from the Romans) to about 1750 where they lost it to England. The main reason they lost the spot was self-inflicted isolation. After 250 years of further 'mismanagement' they are a superpower again (not 'the', but 'a'). By its sheer size and cultural homogeneity, China is destined to be a superpower. That it was not during our lifetime is a historical aberration. As to who is threatening whoms way of life, I would guess it is rather the West that is threatening China. Every Chinese I know (all of them living in China) would rather live in a western style China than in the current one, if something like that would be possible. They know it isn't so they are not speaking of that (loud).

Now I'm worried

There is a non-zero chance that DT will be your next president. And if this time there are no adults in the room, he might just do what he promised he would and leave NATO. Then what, Europe? In a perfect world, that scenario isn't going to happen, and we all work together in NATO. If not, we should have a plan B.

An initiative to create a European Army is underway since 1950, which, depending on the specific proposal, would create something similar than yours - except sans NATO. Of course, this has created some criticism from (amongst others) Jens Stoltenberg (obviously) and DT (funnily, as usual). The English article is a bit terse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_army The German one explains it in all its glorious detail: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europaarmee Why hasn't it come into existence? Well, following is a graphic that shows the existing military structures in Europe and I think, this is explanation enough:

The 2% are not a contractual agreement. In a 2014 meeting, NATO members agreed to move(!) toward the 2% by 2024 (for those below 2% of GDP). Not a contract, not even about reaching the 2% - just moving towards it. Btw, the 2% were 'invented' in 2002 when the Baltic States joined NATO, and the other members were afraid, they wouldn't invest enough. For the record: I'm all for those 2%.

Russia was on place 23 as a trade partner to Germany, snug between Brazil & India. If it weren't for the unholy dependency on Russian gas, we wouldn't have noticed if it had vanished from earth. That dependency is a thing of the past and will never come back, even if Russia would retreat tomorrow and hung up rainbow flags on the Kremlin. Will Germany start to trade with Russia after this war is over, and all deeds are paid? Yes, of course. Does it matter? No, because the amount of money behind that effort is way too small for any political influence. Btw, there will be WAY more money being made rebuilding Ukraine than trading with Russia. So much machinery & infrastructure has been destroyed and needs to be rebuilt. Germany will give vast amounts of debt guarantees, so Ukrainian companies can buy from German companies all the stuff they need to rebuild. That is where the money will be made. There's probably quite some bankers who are already salivating about this.

Question: after the Kakhovka dam was blown up, there was a lot of talk about the now empty reservoir becoming passable. At least now with frozen ground it should really be passable. There is of course still a river, but I have heard nothing from that front. Why?

Which would probably be the US which traded $109m until Sep 2023 up from $61m in '22 up from $34m in '21. So the US tripled its trade since the war started. But, but, but, ... things are more complicated than a single number. https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c4635.html

Unfortunately, these systems tend to work right to the end. The Gestapo was operational in the Third Reich in '45, the Stasi worked in East Germany until the wall fell, and I guess that is true for other dictatorships. Avery useful and cheap tool for every oppressive regime and no sign of its upcoming demise.

Detecting something looking up into the sky is probably much easier than looking down or across the ground. There are also fewer obstacles in the sky, your missile has to avoid. The amount of explosives you need to kill a UAS is much lower than what you need against vehicles or probably even troops. I guess you would also have a different type of explosion. If this weapon was available now, both sides would use it, as there is nothing else available against the small copters. In the next war - who knows?

Yes, but only if your company is marketing something for public consumption. Companies like GfM couldn't care less what the public thinks about them because they are selling a very specific product to a niche market. If you need that kind of machine, you buy it. There is no public consumer who could boycott them, no bad PR would hurt their sales.

A few pages back we discussed anti-drone measures. This is a short video of some students (I think) from Nanjing university who build a rocket with a visual sensor. This is not military grade and misses some parts and functions. But if some students can build such a thing, the industry can, too. I think this will be the last war where small drones can roam as freely as they do here. In future wars, it will be much more dangerous for them.

Because neither France nor Austria are at war with Russia. Morale and business do not mix. As long as it's legal, they will sell it. If it's illegal, some will stop, and some will raise the price. That is not nation specific. But some nations have harsher measures which will disincline more businessmen to try to make a profit than others.

Another two of those drone chase video. I feel this makes the killing more personal, and I'm not sure if that's a good or bad thing:

Little story (and I know sample size 1 is not very representative): I have a Russian colleague who started working at our local branch when we closed our Moscow office. He got sick and spent the last three weeks at home in Moscow with his family. Now he's back, and I asked him what people in Moscow really think about the war. He told me it is of not much concern to anyone. It is just something that happens and does not affect the everyday live very much. He is not happy with the situation, but I guess he thinks about this like bad weather: you don't like it, but you can't do anything. My impression from this small interview is, that I better not set my hopes on a revolution from the masses.

Yeah, but those guys are in the send-more-guns camp (thanks Agnes!). At least one thing they do well. I don't think that this war is an existential threat to Europe - at least not as long as Ukraine is not going to lose. We (in Europe) are all in debt to Ukraine, and we know it. Unfortunately, this is not some unknown weirdo on Russia's payroll. He was (!) a respectable journalist who wrote books, made documentaries and often showed up on TV to 'explain' Putin. Really a shame that he could work undetected for so long.

We Germans just loooove recycling