poesel

Pope's message is directed to BOTH countries. He does not even mention the words "Russia" or "Ukraine" as countries. He speaks of the "war in Ukraine" as a geographical location. "Raise the flag to negotiate" can be understood as an expression which means that both countries should negotiate rather than fight a war until the end.
 

The way this is phrased could mean either Ukraine or Russia. Most people do just assume he meant Ukraine.
Very well phrased in the sense of "a great empire will fall".

The way this is phrased could mean either Ukraine or Russia. Most people do just assume he meant Ukraine.
Very well phrased in the sense of "a great empire will fall".

The hanger was certainly struck, atvleastvtwo drones,but any damage inflicted inside is unknown. Lack of fire signatures (no smoke, no discoloration in roof, no damaged/burnt debris outside, no significant EMS presence) raises questions. Still, damage can be significant without fire but currently unknowable. 
UPDATE, Official Claim but no visuals yet:
 

Some good vision here of Challenger 2 on the training range.  Includes an example of one of the things that the reporter says is an issue fielding this vehicle in Ukraine when it gets bogged in a ditch.  He comments at the end re mobility and maintenance being the main problems they've been facing.
 

Mother Of All Bowel movements 
 

Is this quite accurate? Microwave emitters are a form of EW. Broader than lasers,  more of a zone/volume effect weapon, correct? Depending on the power, modulation and sustainment of the effect you can sweep the skies in a certain arc to fry all UAV, or focus on individual units to scramble and drop them. 
Would Autonomy not be just as vulnerable to fried electronics as it is "invulnerable" to classic radio attack?
Eg
From The Crows Nest, podcast ep Feb 14th
From The Crows Best, ep. Feb 28
No shielding is perfect or invulnerable. Everything has a finite quality and bell curve of effectiveness., no? 
As I always say, and my wife hates to hear:
There's more than one way to skin a cat. 
Of course, there's also this:
 
 

Japanese have a lock on that.  If you don't have one of these you don't know what you are missing.  
UltraMax® II 1G One-Piece Toilet, Elongated Bowl - 1.0 GPF - WASHLET+ Connection (totousa.com)
 
When the Russians invade Japan, they'll be shooting each other to send one of these home.

I've been thinking about this post most of the day, and keep coming back to "Neat. Now what?"
Which got me thinking about how other step changes in military capability were handled. The two obvious ones that come to mind are tanks in WWII, and airpower during the Cold War. Now, clearly, in both cases they existed early, but they only really became effective/worrisome/"game-changing" some decades after their entree to the battlefield.
For the infantry, in both cases, the response became basically the same: very small infantry units became fully capable of anti-ing the other thing, either anti-tank or anti-air.
During WWII anti-tank rifles, bazookas, fausts, shrecks, Piats and hearty grenades gave platoons and sections an ability to defend against or attack against tanks, pretty explicitly at the detriment to the nominal role of the infantry, which was to oppose and defeat enemy infantry. That trend was significantly enhanced during second half of last century with things like RPGs and M-72s. This is at the point now where with weapons like Javelin tanks perhaps have more to fear from infantry than the vice versa, even though lugging Javelin around is a royal PITA especially for light infantry.
The introduction of air power, and especially effective CAS, started us on the road to the fully illuminated battlefield, where nowhere is safe and to be seen is to die. During WWII the only real counter that the infantry had was to dig on, or hide, or both. But during the Cold War a lot of effort went into MANPADS, resulting in the Stinger in the 1980s and with other systems following soon after. Just like their anti tank weapons, lugging around anti-aircraft missiles is a PITA which detracts from the nominal role of engaging enemy infantry, not to mention the drain on budgets and training schedules. But on the other hand now every platoon and section is capable of destroying any tank or aircraft that wanders into it's little tactical AO. And once the air and armour battle is won - either locally or globally - then the rest is just mopping up. The degradation of the infantry platoon and section's ability in the infantry-battle doesn't really matter, since while that bit remains hard and unpleasant, it is incredibly harder and more unpleasant in the absence of either air or armoured support.
So you can probably see where this is going.
Assuming UAS remains in play (and why wouldn't it?), then the role of infantry platoons and sections will change again. Instead of being little nodes of anti-tank and anti-air goodness,with some residual anti-infantry capability, they will become little anti-UAS nodes, with the weapons, training, mindset and purpose to defeat enemy UAS in their local area, and also protect or project friendly UAS capability around themselves. If an enemy tank or aircraft turns up then the section or platoon mightn't be able to deal with it themselves, but they will be networked to someone who can - guns, missiles, friendly armour or air, or friendly UAS. And they'll still, you know, carry rifles. Mainly out of habit and tradition, as well as giving the NCOs something to inspect every day. But most of their weaponry, and sensors, and just the general claggage they're carting about will be geared towards winning the UAS fight, because winning that will mean that the rest is just mopping up.
In other words, the infantry will be able to concentrate physically and cognitively on the UAS battle because it won't be their role any more to win the tank, infantry, or local airspace battle.

There seem to be two critical items US provides that Europe can't - C4ISR and Patriots. For almost everything else there is a European equivalent or better (Brad /CV90s, HARM /Meteor, NASSAMs, etc).
I'm not saying CV90s is better than Brad's, but they are certainly equivalent; if UKR swapped every single Brad for a CV90 would there be a drop in effectiveness? Dump the token Abrams and Leos for a fleet of Korean K2s and you're still rolling. 
EU arms production rates and quality of machines can absolutely match US. 
The best (and worst) thing about EU support is that it's non-binary. If the wrong dipsh*t wins the US election then aid drops like a drunk Ivan. EU is slower to get to a point but also slower to leave, and even then intra-member agreements are par for the course. 
Edit-There is a third US item : world wide logistics...damn. 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/hungary-president-signs-swedens-nato-membership-ratification-2024-03-05/

"Sergey Kotov" according to interceptions of radiochat was attacked by 5 drones. Together with a ship Russians lost her onboard helicopter Ka-29
And again Budanov developed own sense of humor. Soviet rear-admiral Sergey Kotov has died in 1999 in Ukrainian Feodosia. Near Feodosia reportedly the ship "Sergey Kotov" was sunk
 

Havent seen the news here yet but russia officially ended Armata development, citing its high cost as  mine clearing vehicle

Germany never showed "every intention". We have discussed that at length, and we are in line with most of the rest of the West, unfortunately.
The economy is declining as it sometimes does. "no end in sight" is a bit over the top IMHO.
The interest in Ukraine has declined. Of course, modern society is easily bored. The amount of newsworthy items has gone down. But look at us: downing an A-50 has even us only occupied for a few days until we derailed again.
But: the amount of support given by Germany is pretty stable, and I don't see that changing (see below).
That may not be necessary. The political constellation is currently, that the biggest supporters of Ukraine are both in the government (greens & liberals(*)) and the opposition (conservatives).
The next government will most likely include one or two of those parties. Thus, it is most unlikely that support for Ukraine will falter.
 
(*) not 'liberal' in the US sense of the word

Germany never showed "every intention". We have discussed that at length, and we are in line with most of the rest of the West, unfortunately.
The economy is declining as it sometimes does. "no end in sight" is a bit over the top IMHO.
The interest in Ukraine has declined. Of course, modern society is easily bored. The amount of newsworthy items has gone down. But look at us: downing an A-50 has even us only occupied for a few days until we derailed again.
But: the amount of support given by Germany is pretty stable, and I don't see that changing (see below).
That may not be necessary. The political constellation is currently, that the biggest supporters of Ukraine are both in the government (greens & liberals(*)) and the opposition (conservatives).
The next government will most likely include one or two of those parties. Thus, it is most unlikely that support for Ukraine will falter.
 
(*) not 'liberal' in the US sense of the word

Germany never showed "every intention". We have discussed that at length, and we are in line with most of the rest of the West, unfortunately.
The economy is declining as it sometimes does. "no end in sight" is a bit over the top IMHO.
The interest in Ukraine has declined. Of course, modern society is easily bored. The amount of newsworthy items has gone down. But look at us: downing an A-50 has even us only occupied for a few days until we derailed again.
But: the amount of support given by Germany is pretty stable, and I don't see that changing (see below).
That may not be necessary. The political constellation is currently, that the biggest supporters of Ukraine are both in the government (greens & liberals(*)) and the opposition (conservatives).
The next government will most likely include one or two of those parties. Thus, it is most unlikely that support for Ukraine will falter.
 
(*) not 'liberal' in the US sense of the word

Germany never showed "every intention". We have discussed that at length, and we are in line with most of the rest of the West, unfortunately.
The economy is declining as it sometimes does. "no end in sight" is a bit over the top IMHO.
The interest in Ukraine has declined. Of course, modern society is easily bored. The amount of newsworthy items has gone down. But look at us: downing an A-50 has even us only occupied for a few days until we derailed again.
But: the amount of support given by Germany is pretty stable, and I don't see that changing (see below).
That may not be necessary. The political constellation is currently, that the biggest supporters of Ukraine are both in the government (greens & liberals(*)) and the opposition (conservatives).
The next government will most likely include one or two of those parties. Thus, it is most unlikely that support for Ukraine will falter.
 
(*) not 'liberal' in the US sense of the word

Germany never showed "every intention". We have discussed that at length, and we are in line with most of the rest of the West, unfortunately.
The economy is declining as it sometimes does. "no end in sight" is a bit over the top IMHO.
The interest in Ukraine has declined. Of course, modern society is easily bored. The amount of newsworthy items has gone down. But look at us: downing an A-50 has even us only occupied for a few days until we derailed again.
But: the amount of support given by Germany is pretty stable, and I don't see that changing (see below).
That may not be necessary. The political constellation is currently, that the biggest supporters of Ukraine are both in the government (greens & liberals(*)) and the opposition (conservatives).
The next government will most likely include one or two of those parties. Thus, it is most unlikely that support for Ukraine will falter.
 
(*) not 'liberal' in the US sense of the word

To buy? Would Germany really agree to sell them in that time, when in 2014 they rejected to supply engines for BTR-4, because "it may cause more civilian deaths". And even in 2022 there were half years of discussions "will Russia nuke us if we give Leos?"

Mobilization campaign failed + Russian PsyOps trageted on mobilization is working. Zelenskyi substitued all chiefs of oblast enlistment centers and appointed there mostly wouded officers from frontline. But this was bad decision. Corrupted chiefs didn't forget about opwn pocket, but on other hand mostly performed mobilization plan. They were "bureacrats", which knew all theses 100500 regulation papers. New chiefs not "bereaucrats", they are "warriors". They need a many time to understand all this inner "kitchen" how mobilization process is working. And substitiution didn't change such disgusting happens of abduction of people from the streets by enlistment offices patrols. 
These stories as well as stories from frontline about higher command doesn't carrying on about lives of soldiers, about typical soviet army "dolboyebizm", about enlistment offices, who don't interest that mobilized man would be effective soldier and send for example good specialist in radioelectronic as usual infantryman, protracted war, which contrasted with "stupid Russians" stories on TV, powerful Russian PsyOps cmapaign against government and mobilization - all this gave on fruits. Government really don't know what to do and where to take a people in order to do not cause social explosion. 
Now is upgrading for mobilization law is preparing, but from enough radical and tough project deputies removed many things, which can be dangerous for power stability. 
As a good news and right direction - military units themselves started to attackt motivated people on service via recruiting offers on different work finding boards. Some "new-type" and media-known units already have own recruitment centers ("Azov ", 3rd assault, "Da Vinci Wolves" etc) and wow - people come to them without forcing! And many young people go, which by the law can't be mobilzed (18-26 y.o), except own will. But on other hand we havn't recruitment law. And often enlistment offices and recruitment centers hadn't communication. 
So, now we started a way of enlistment tarnsformation, but now we at the point, when old Soviet type syetem already showed own insolvency in modern conditions, and new system is just appeared and can't maintain 100 % of army need in manpower. 
Other aspect - despite we have 880 000 in Defense Forces (jourmalists "rounded this number to million") - Army, National Guard, Border Guard, Police, SBU, GUR, State Special Transport Service, State Special Communication Service,  many of personnel never have seen frontline. Of corse we don't talk about AD crews or techniclal specialists, or logistic service. But now the audit started in Armed Forces and already spotted 8000 servicemen, which just mobilized "as disposal of General Staff", but in real they don't serve anywhere. And this is only beginning. There are also enough units, which never (!!!) were on frontline or were there for short time and more time sit in the rear or guarding Belarus border, than fighting with Russians in that time when the same 110th brigade spent 1,5 years without rotations in Avdiivka. And this probably was another reason to substitute Zaluzhnyi.   

This answers some of your questions:
https://publications.bof.fi/handle/10024/53281
I included one graphic from the report, but there is more data.
TL;DR: a mobik dying in his 30s might earn more by his death than he would during the remainder of his lifetime, including pension.
 
Where do Russia’s mobilized soldiers come from? Evidence from bank deposits
Solanko, Laura (21.02.2024)

 
Forgot: I got this through this paywalled article:
https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/russland-geld-fuer-tote-soldaten-wie-der-krieg-einen-makabren-vermoegensboom-ausloest-a-a35d1548-1e7c-4481-b798-0a5fae6dc3e4

I'm afraid we are way past the argument stage wrt Scholz and Taurus...
There are also quite a few people in his party who still very much agree with him on that issue. Add to this that in East-Germany, the population is split on sending arms to Ukraine at all. I mentioned the three upcoming votes there? There is zero chance that anything will happen before these are through, and it won't get much better afterward. The last of these votes is September 22nd. And the next national vote is a year after that.
So nope, I ain't seeing that happening as much as I wish it.

This has been officially verified as being genuine. And I had no doubt about it. It was like hundreds of project meetings I had had to enjoy.
Of course, our government is not amused and there are lots of critics. But OTOH, the way these guys discuss the matter is very pragmatic and down to earth. They discuss the political and technical ramifications and search for solutions (and find them). Kraft has summarized this very well, although the English subs are quite bad.
The things got hacked because one of the guys was in Singapore and probably didn't use a VPN.
 
 

This has been officially verified as being genuine. And I had no doubt about it. It was like hundreds of project meetings I had had to enjoy.
Of course, our government is not amused and there are lots of critics. But OTOH, the way these guys discuss the matter is very pragmatic and down to earth. They discuss the political and technical ramifications and search for solutions (and find them). Kraft has summarized this very well, although the English subs are quite bad.
The things got hacked because one of the guys was in Singapore and probably didn't use a VPN.
 
 

This has been officially verified as being genuine. And I had no doubt about it. It was like hundreds of project meetings I had had to enjoy.
Of course, our government is not amused and there are lots of critics. But OTOH, the way these guys discuss the matter is very pragmatic and down to earth. They discuss the political and technical ramifications and search for solutions (and find them). Kraft has summarized this very well, although the English subs are quite bad.
The things got hacked because one of the guys was in Singapore and probably didn't use a VPN.