Lethaface

Worth to add valid rumours of some non-insignificant intelligence help and unspecified "favours" when comes to global weapon trade, ofc. mediated by USA. I am pretty sure not all Israeli help to UA is known now.
Overall, from military point of view we have interesting example of paramilitaries using quite aray of innovative tactics. Under barrage of kassams, groups of guerrillas on motorbikes, para-gliders (bloody science fiction...) and using tunnels entered border towns in clear aim at sowing terror. We see Merkava's bruning (at least two) plus several likely temporarly captured, probbaly ATGM's in use and copters throwing granades that disable tanks. Worth of note is this hamas campaign of PR warfare- inernet is out of a sudden flood with clips of their fighters preparing themselves, probably partly staged.
Hamas is not regular military and this is very different conflct than Ukrainian, but trends in warfare are clearly visible.
Ofc. Hamas will not hold there (Sderot alone has 20k inhabitants), but it is enough to provoke powerful response from Israel- if last reports are true, the number of hostages taken may be substantial...difficult situation for Israel, they didn't face mass hostage situation except on their soil for a long time.
Given who is their Minister of Internal affairs (and PM looking for score at any cost) it will be a mess for sure. Almost hard to believe they missed preparations for Hamas operation of such scale.

The offensive isn't over so it's too early to judge. Having said that, the most fair bar to measure against is the one the Ukrainians are holding themselves to:
The general (Tarnavsky) conceded that for the counteroffensive to be a success, Ukrainian forces need to at least reach the city of Tokmak.
“Tokmak is the minimum goal,” he said. “The overall objective is to get to our state borders.”
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/23/europe/ukraine-biggest-counteroffensive-to-come-intl-hnk/index.html

I don't think it's really somber, it's just realistic. 

FWIW at times I was probably also over-hopeful regarding the 'offensive', in part because it looked like that Russia was lacking ATGMs / AT assets, the obstacle belt was being ridiculed and defensive coordination / morale seemed lackluster at the time Russia / Wagner was grinding in Bakhmut.
The first days of the counter offensive, before we even knew whether it had really started, already showed that the mine belts combined with drone observation / coordinated fires and deep AT assets were a serious issue and not easily overcome without heavy casualties. 
So, did the offensive fail? That depends where you hold the bar. If you hold it at our unrealistic expectations, then yes it failed. However accounting for the reality on the ground I'm not sure it failed. There is always room for improvement and probably Ukraine made enough mistakes, but as long as they keep learning and maintain their will and capability to fight... 
Is that a failure or is that progress / learning on the job? 

If only for those reasons I expected Ukraine to choose Bakhmut as the main effort (after the first mine belt + artillery / Ka-52 interactions), because the (mostly) Wagner forces who achieved the 'success' there were sort of spend and new units, probably mobiks, would have to hold the line which they didn't have time to really fortify as they did with all the other directions. Plus defeating Wagner would destroy the myth.
A couple of months later and Wagner was indeed destroyed but not necessarily by Ukraine :D. I guess nobody could have really predicted what happened. 
That brings me back to whether or not the offensive failed. If one had a neutral expectation, I don't think it really failed. It surely could have gone better but also could have gone a lot worse. 
So we can all relearn the lesson to keep expectations low; or rather expect the worst but hope for the best. That's not being cynical, just being realistic 😀
And like most/all of us expected, this war won't be over even if Ukraine manages to push Russia back to pre-22 borders. So what they can't manage to push Russia back to pre-22 borders in '23? The war wouldn't been over anyway.

Perhaps the rational ones with the means / option to buy a plane ticket already did so a while ago? 😉

Final death count - 51. 
This is Denys Kozyr and his wife - former serviceman of AFU, who participated in this war, but recently retired by health problems.

His father went to front with him and was killed. The son, returning to home decided to move the grave of father from Dnipo city cemetry to his native village. As this costumary in out villages, many people came to memorial dinner in this cafe and around. Obviously some local taritor sent information to Russia that "funerals of "Aydar" nazi will take place and many nationalists will be expected". This is not in first time. About half year ago Russians launched Iskander at funeral procession of "Azov" fighter in Dnipropetrovksk oblast, but then Russians missed and only several people were wounded. In this time missile hit precisely. 
Almost all Kozyr's families (his and wife) were killed in this strike as well as almost half of current village population. Russian media and TGs initailly celebrating "perfect shot, sending many Aydar nazi to Bandera", but when cadres of dead civilans appeared, Russians as always rebooted in air and became to clame this is Ukrainians launch this missile to have arguments to get more weapon.  
After this and today Kharkiv strike, it's ridiculous to hear from Scholz about "escalation if we give Taurus to Ukraine" and "Taurus is very complicated for target programming" (I remember this "Western weapon is too complicated to Ukrainians, it's nees years to learn it" in first months of war)

FWIW a foresight of possible scenario's with regards to the end of the war and or Putin, aimed at policy makers:
https://www.clingendael.org/publication/after-putin-deluge
The whole article is free to download as a pdf. 

Not necessarily new/groundbreaking stuff but a nice collection imo. Extract from the extract:

"To help policymakers prepare for what might lie ahead, this report draws up a model consisting of 35 variables that will together shape Russia’s future – based on an extensive literature review and scenario workshop with Dutch and international experts. It then builds on this model to construct a scenario framework for the next five years. These scenarios take into account (1) to what extent the Russian regime could change or persist, (2) to what extent this would be accompanied by large-scale instability and violence, and (3) to what extent a future Russian government would pursue confrontation or rapprochement with the West. The report then puts forward six scenarios based on these variables and presuppositions

1. Reluctant reconciliation. After Russia has lost the war in Ukraine, various groups in the Russian elite join forces to oust Putin in a ‘palace coup’. The new president strikes a deal with the West, makes Putin and his loyalists a scapegoat, and enacts limited democratic and economic reforms.

2. China’s propped-up proxy. The war grinds on for years and no end is in sight. Putin is forced to step down due to mismanagement, but the regime itself prevails and a successor eventually secures political and financial backing from Beijing. Russia becomes fully dependent on China.

3. The Empire strikes back. After Western support for Ukraine dwindles, Russia decisively wins the war. Putin’s popularity surges and he is stronger in power than ever before. Russia has international partners that help it keep its economy going, while the West loses its unity.

4. Neo-Stalinist fortress Russia. Putin has made Russia a global pariah state. China, India and others abandon their tacit support and Russia is forced to become almost entirely self-sufficient. The regime continues its reign through brutal repression and propaganda. 2 After Putin, the deluge? | Clingendael Report, October 2023

5. The Wild East. After continued humiliation and a defeat on the battlefield, Putin’s regime loses legitimacy, withdraws from the south and east of Ukraine, and Russia begins to implode. Russia descends into organised chaos with high levels of criminality reminiscent of the early 1990s.

6. Dissolution without a nuclear solution. A catastrophic military defeat leads to the implosion of the Russian Federation, after which regional warlords seize nuclear assets to deter the rump state Muscovy. While some entities are recognised by China or other powers, Muscovy remains revisionist and deeply hostile towards the West"

FWIW a foresight of possible scenario's with regards to the end of the war and or Putin, aimed at policy makers:
https://www.clingendael.org/publication/after-putin-deluge
The whole article is free to download as a pdf. 

Not necessarily new/groundbreaking stuff but a nice collection imo. Extract from the extract:

"To help policymakers prepare for what might lie ahead, this report draws up a model consisting of 35 variables that will together shape Russia’s future – based on an extensive literature review and scenario workshop with Dutch and international experts. It then builds on this model to construct a scenario framework for the next five years. These scenarios take into account (1) to what extent the Russian regime could change or persist, (2) to what extent this would be accompanied by large-scale instability and violence, and (3) to what extent a future Russian government would pursue confrontation or rapprochement with the West. The report then puts forward six scenarios based on these variables and presuppositions

1. Reluctant reconciliation. After Russia has lost the war in Ukraine, various groups in the Russian elite join forces to oust Putin in a ‘palace coup’. The new president strikes a deal with the West, makes Putin and his loyalists a scapegoat, and enacts limited democratic and economic reforms.

2. China’s propped-up proxy. The war grinds on for years and no end is in sight. Putin is forced to step down due to mismanagement, but the regime itself prevails and a successor eventually secures political and financial backing from Beijing. Russia becomes fully dependent on China.

3. The Empire strikes back. After Western support for Ukraine dwindles, Russia decisively wins the war. Putin’s popularity surges and he is stronger in power than ever before. Russia has international partners that help it keep its economy going, while the West loses its unity.

4. Neo-Stalinist fortress Russia. Putin has made Russia a global pariah state. China, India and others abandon their tacit support and Russia is forced to become almost entirely self-sufficient. The regime continues its reign through brutal repression and propaganda. 2 After Putin, the deluge? | Clingendael Report, October 2023

5. The Wild East. After continued humiliation and a defeat on the battlefield, Putin’s regime loses legitimacy, withdraws from the south and east of Ukraine, and Russia begins to implode. Russia descends into organised chaos with high levels of criminality reminiscent of the early 1990s.

6. Dissolution without a nuclear solution. A catastrophic military defeat leads to the implosion of the Russian Federation, after which regional warlords seize nuclear assets to deter the rump state Muscovy. While some entities are recognised by China or other powers, Muscovy remains revisionist and deeply hostile towards the West"

FWIW a foresight of possible scenario's with regards to the end of the war and or Putin, aimed at policy makers:
https://www.clingendael.org/publication/after-putin-deluge
The whole article is free to download as a pdf. 

Not necessarily new/groundbreaking stuff but a nice collection imo. Extract from the extract:

"To help policymakers prepare for what might lie ahead, this report draws up a model consisting of 35 variables that will together shape Russia’s future – based on an extensive literature review and scenario workshop with Dutch and international experts. It then builds on this model to construct a scenario framework for the next five years. These scenarios take into account (1) to what extent the Russian regime could change or persist, (2) to what extent this would be accompanied by large-scale instability and violence, and (3) to what extent a future Russian government would pursue confrontation or rapprochement with the West. The report then puts forward six scenarios based on these variables and presuppositions

1. Reluctant reconciliation. After Russia has lost the war in Ukraine, various groups in the Russian elite join forces to oust Putin in a ‘palace coup’. The new president strikes a deal with the West, makes Putin and his loyalists a scapegoat, and enacts limited democratic and economic reforms.

2. China’s propped-up proxy. The war grinds on for years and no end is in sight. Putin is forced to step down due to mismanagement, but the regime itself prevails and a successor eventually secures political and financial backing from Beijing. Russia becomes fully dependent on China.

3. The Empire strikes back. After Western support for Ukraine dwindles, Russia decisively wins the war. Putin’s popularity surges and he is stronger in power than ever before. Russia has international partners that help it keep its economy going, while the West loses its unity.

4. Neo-Stalinist fortress Russia. Putin has made Russia a global pariah state. China, India and others abandon their tacit support and Russia is forced to become almost entirely self-sufficient. The regime continues its reign through brutal repression and propaganda. 2 After Putin, the deluge? | Clingendael Report, October 2023

5. The Wild East. After continued humiliation and a defeat on the battlefield, Putin’s regime loses legitimacy, withdraws from the south and east of Ukraine, and Russia begins to implode. Russia descends into organised chaos with high levels of criminality reminiscent of the early 1990s.

6. Dissolution without a nuclear solution. A catastrophic military defeat leads to the implosion of the Russian Federation, after which regional warlords seize nuclear assets to deter the rump state Muscovy. While some entities are recognised by China or other powers, Muscovy remains revisionist and deeply hostile towards the West"

FWIW a foresight of possible scenario's with regards to the end of the war and or Putin, aimed at policy makers:
https://www.clingendael.org/publication/after-putin-deluge
The whole article is free to download as a pdf. 

Not necessarily new/groundbreaking stuff but a nice collection imo. Extract from the extract:

"To help policymakers prepare for what might lie ahead, this report draws up a model consisting of 35 variables that will together shape Russia’s future – based on an extensive literature review and scenario workshop with Dutch and international experts. It then builds on this model to construct a scenario framework for the next five years. These scenarios take into account (1) to what extent the Russian regime could change or persist, (2) to what extent this would be accompanied by large-scale instability and violence, and (3) to what extent a future Russian government would pursue confrontation or rapprochement with the West. The report then puts forward six scenarios based on these variables and presuppositions

1. Reluctant reconciliation. After Russia has lost the war in Ukraine, various groups in the Russian elite join forces to oust Putin in a ‘palace coup’. The new president strikes a deal with the West, makes Putin and his loyalists a scapegoat, and enacts limited democratic and economic reforms.

2. China’s propped-up proxy. The war grinds on for years and no end is in sight. Putin is forced to step down due to mismanagement, but the regime itself prevails and a successor eventually secures political and financial backing from Beijing. Russia becomes fully dependent on China.

3. The Empire strikes back. After Western support for Ukraine dwindles, Russia decisively wins the war. Putin’s popularity surges and he is stronger in power than ever before. Russia has international partners that help it keep its economy going, while the West loses its unity.

4. Neo-Stalinist fortress Russia. Putin has made Russia a global pariah state. China, India and others abandon their tacit support and Russia is forced to become almost entirely self-sufficient. The regime continues its reign through brutal repression and propaganda. 2 After Putin, the deluge? | Clingendael Report, October 2023

5. The Wild East. After continued humiliation and a defeat on the battlefield, Putin’s regime loses legitimacy, withdraws from the south and east of Ukraine, and Russia begins to implode. Russia descends into organised chaos with high levels of criminality reminiscent of the early 1990s.

6. Dissolution without a nuclear solution. A catastrophic military defeat leads to the implosion of the Russian Federation, after which regional warlords seize nuclear assets to deter the rump state Muscovy. While some entities are recognised by China or other powers, Muscovy remains revisionist and deeply hostile towards the West"

FWIW a foresight of possible scenario's with regards to the end of the war and or Putin, aimed at policy makers:
https://www.clingendael.org/publication/after-putin-deluge
The whole article is free to download as a pdf. 

Not necessarily new/groundbreaking stuff but a nice collection imo. Extract from the extract:

"To help policymakers prepare for what might lie ahead, this report draws up a model consisting of 35 variables that will together shape Russia’s future – based on an extensive literature review and scenario workshop with Dutch and international experts. It then builds on this model to construct a scenario framework for the next five years. These scenarios take into account (1) to what extent the Russian regime could change or persist, (2) to what extent this would be accompanied by large-scale instability and violence, and (3) to what extent a future Russian government would pursue confrontation or rapprochement with the West. The report then puts forward six scenarios based on these variables and presuppositions

1. Reluctant reconciliation. After Russia has lost the war in Ukraine, various groups in the Russian elite join forces to oust Putin in a ‘palace coup’. The new president strikes a deal with the West, makes Putin and his loyalists a scapegoat, and enacts limited democratic and economic reforms.

2. China’s propped-up proxy. The war grinds on for years and no end is in sight. Putin is forced to step down due to mismanagement, but the regime itself prevails and a successor eventually secures political and financial backing from Beijing. Russia becomes fully dependent on China.

3. The Empire strikes back. After Western support for Ukraine dwindles, Russia decisively wins the war. Putin’s popularity surges and he is stronger in power than ever before. Russia has international partners that help it keep its economy going, while the West loses its unity.

4. Neo-Stalinist fortress Russia. Putin has made Russia a global pariah state. China, India and others abandon their tacit support and Russia is forced to become almost entirely self-sufficient. The regime continues its reign through brutal repression and propaganda. 2 After Putin, the deluge? | Clingendael Report, October 2023

5. The Wild East. After continued humiliation and a defeat on the battlefield, Putin’s regime loses legitimacy, withdraws from the south and east of Ukraine, and Russia begins to implode. Russia descends into organised chaos with high levels of criminality reminiscent of the early 1990s.

6. Dissolution without a nuclear solution. A catastrophic military defeat leads to the implosion of the Russian Federation, after which regional warlords seize nuclear assets to deter the rump state Muscovy. While some entities are recognised by China or other powers, Muscovy remains revisionist and deeply hostile towards the West"

FWIW a foresight of possible scenario's with regards to the end of the war and or Putin, aimed at policy makers:
https://www.clingendael.org/publication/after-putin-deluge
The whole article is free to download as a pdf. 

Not necessarily new/groundbreaking stuff but a nice collection imo. Extract from the extract:

"To help policymakers prepare for what might lie ahead, this report draws up a model consisting of 35 variables that will together shape Russia’s future – based on an extensive literature review and scenario workshop with Dutch and international experts. It then builds on this model to construct a scenario framework for the next five years. These scenarios take into account (1) to what extent the Russian regime could change or persist, (2) to what extent this would be accompanied by large-scale instability and violence, and (3) to what extent a future Russian government would pursue confrontation or rapprochement with the West. The report then puts forward six scenarios based on these variables and presuppositions

1. Reluctant reconciliation. After Russia has lost the war in Ukraine, various groups in the Russian elite join forces to oust Putin in a ‘palace coup’. The new president strikes a deal with the West, makes Putin and his loyalists a scapegoat, and enacts limited democratic and economic reforms.

2. China’s propped-up proxy. The war grinds on for years and no end is in sight. Putin is forced to step down due to mismanagement, but the regime itself prevails and a successor eventually secures political and financial backing from Beijing. Russia becomes fully dependent on China.

3. The Empire strikes back. After Western support for Ukraine dwindles, Russia decisively wins the war. Putin’s popularity surges and he is stronger in power than ever before. Russia has international partners that help it keep its economy going, while the West loses its unity.

4. Neo-Stalinist fortress Russia. Putin has made Russia a global pariah state. China, India and others abandon their tacit support and Russia is forced to become almost entirely self-sufficient. The regime continues its reign through brutal repression and propaganda. 2 After Putin, the deluge? | Clingendael Report, October 2023

5. The Wild East. After continued humiliation and a defeat on the battlefield, Putin’s regime loses legitimacy, withdraws from the south and east of Ukraine, and Russia begins to implode. Russia descends into organised chaos with high levels of criminality reminiscent of the early 1990s.

6. Dissolution without a nuclear solution. A catastrophic military defeat leads to the implosion of the Russian Federation, after which regional warlords seize nuclear assets to deter the rump state Muscovy. While some entities are recognised by China or other powers, Muscovy remains revisionist and deeply hostile towards the West"

FWIW a foresight of possible scenario's with regards to the end of the war and or Putin, aimed at policy makers:
https://www.clingendael.org/publication/after-putin-deluge
The whole article is free to download as a pdf. 

Not necessarily new/groundbreaking stuff but a nice collection imo. Extract from the extract:

"To help policymakers prepare for what might lie ahead, this report draws up a model consisting of 35 variables that will together shape Russia’s future – based on an extensive literature review and scenario workshop with Dutch and international experts. It then builds on this model to construct a scenario framework for the next five years. These scenarios take into account (1) to what extent the Russian regime could change or persist, (2) to what extent this would be accompanied by large-scale instability and violence, and (3) to what extent a future Russian government would pursue confrontation or rapprochement with the West. The report then puts forward six scenarios based on these variables and presuppositions

1. Reluctant reconciliation. After Russia has lost the war in Ukraine, various groups in the Russian elite join forces to oust Putin in a ‘palace coup’. The new president strikes a deal with the West, makes Putin and his loyalists a scapegoat, and enacts limited democratic and economic reforms.

2. China’s propped-up proxy. The war grinds on for years and no end is in sight. Putin is forced to step down due to mismanagement, but the regime itself prevails and a successor eventually secures political and financial backing from Beijing. Russia becomes fully dependent on China.

3. The Empire strikes back. After Western support for Ukraine dwindles, Russia decisively wins the war. Putin’s popularity surges and he is stronger in power than ever before. Russia has international partners that help it keep its economy going, while the West loses its unity.

4. Neo-Stalinist fortress Russia. Putin has made Russia a global pariah state. China, India and others abandon their tacit support and Russia is forced to become almost entirely self-sufficient. The regime continues its reign through brutal repression and propaganda. 2 After Putin, the deluge? | Clingendael Report, October 2023

5. The Wild East. After continued humiliation and a defeat on the battlefield, Putin’s regime loses legitimacy, withdraws from the south and east of Ukraine, and Russia begins to implode. Russia descends into organised chaos with high levels of criminality reminiscent of the early 1990s.

6. Dissolution without a nuclear solution. A catastrophic military defeat leads to the implosion of the Russian Federation, after which regional warlords seize nuclear assets to deter the rump state Muscovy. While some entities are recognised by China or other powers, Muscovy remains revisionist and deeply hostile towards the West"

I was in freshman physics when this happened and looked and my neighbor and said “godammit the bastard got it done on the second try”. He nodded, and then I said “Lemme guess, I bet we will invade afghanistan instead of KSA”. This was followed by “**** I guess that’s it for going off my Lawrence of Arabia adventure next sumer”. We are still good friends. 
Oh, like the whole fake coup where we burned ourselves completely didn’t erode whatever “trust” existed before? There has been zero trust for a long time now.

FWIW in the video and text this subject is addressed; I'd say the complexity of the operation was overestimated / bit of a myth.

According to a dive instructor interviewed in the video, who teaches people to dive at the depths involved (70-80m) in the Baltic sea, this is a complicated dive, but not 'overcomplicated' and well doable for experienced divers. It is his dayjob to train people to do this. He told he was laughing a bit when he heard the same things you post on the news after the attacks.
They mention minimum of ~50kg of explosive per charge. So a group of 5-6 experienced divers with professional diving equipment could in theory very well have done this from a small boat like that sailing boat.
One interesting bit also featured is that one harbour master in the area said that it was quite an achievement to do dives like that without anyone noticing (coastguards, navies). 

According to the research German police have found traces of the same explosive (HMX) that was used for the attack on a table in the ship, which itself was located after info from the MIVD source. Phone numbers / e-mail addresses involved with hiring of the ship point to Ukrainian individuals. 
All in all I think it's safe to conclude that either someone really wanted to make it look like Ukraine did it, or Ukraine/Ukrainians did it. 
The ship involved in the evidence could have well been the ship that did it, but could also be part of a larger effort or just a ruse to make it look like Ukrainians did it.

I agree, but I shouldn't have to. The Wests 'toolbox' is still much 'better' relatively (better institutions for everyone, less poverty, less brutality, etc), but somehow we have lost part of our marketing/PR advantage; mostly because of our own design. 
We don't need Putin's toolbox, or rather what would make us different from Putin & co if we utilized the same type?

That's an interesting opinion on what's going on.  Except that we're spending nearly 800 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR on our military.  OMG we're going broke because we used ~5% of our already spent money to actually try to do something, militarily, that will help the world be a better place.   What cumulative effect on our country??  This is just utter horses-t.  If we had just stood by & let Putin win in UKR would he then decide to not try to poison all the world's democracies?  Would he not use fossil fuels to extort europe every time he wanted to?  This is tankie nonsense.
We have mountains of gear gathering dust and that's a huge portion of what we've sent.
And just because I am on a rant on this:  How about we turn this around by saying "those that want to freeze the conflict haven't given any thought to the cumulative effect on the world of pulling Putin's *** out of the fire".  Gawd this makes my blood boil.  

Yes, we talked about it too before. Especially in the offensive, early phase of this war we saw how their military system...disgraced itself, not other words. And it is true they may die in heaps, even now attacking Ukrainains report ratio of casualties like 1:2 or 1:3...but so what? Muscovy stand by its numbers if nothing else. If transport of new farsh (meat stuffing; term sometimes attributed to recruits in typical dark cynicism ) is unobstructed and countryside provides- we are still in a deadlock, even if Ukraine moves several kms. Or even reconquer entire Zaporizhia. Ofc. lossess in equipment and enablers are our bet, but it is unknown if tempo is enough to outpace Russian production lines; if winter stalls offensive actions, it is likely they will catch some breath.
Also, a lot of things changed from III.2022. Now they are much better adapted overall to this war- at least that is notion I have from almost all interviews I saw with actual fighters on the ground. Take for example drone warfare or that their killchain for big missiles did improved significantly; also air deep strikes themselves are progressivelly more complicated and nuanced.
Oh, perhaps we shouldn't be such harsh across the board. For example they introduced pretty progressive legal codes in XIX century that were way ahead of this time. And liquidated serfdoom, at least formally. There also were talented managers and politicians in Russian history who did raised quality of live a little...probably Krushchev can be called one of them, despite his simple background. Soviet society of late 70-ties was very different than one from Stalin era. Also- let's remember dogs flying in space...
Sure they are, and the post was not intended as promoting doom and gloom. Just both Ukraine and West needs to figure out more innovative ways of defeating Russia, that includdes acceptance that their culture is builded on misery/apathy, which is accepted norm of life, even nurished and something they are proud of, not shy of. If we include influence of propaganda, it can be said that their social fabric is going straight into well...necrophilic direction. That embraces absurdity of life and subsequent "easy" death as a value in itself (albeit not in a way that, for example, Japanese in WWII did, who put much more pressure on value of sacrifice and honour- which were marks of increased social cohesion, not decreased like here).
Therefore, killing as many soldiers as it can be done may not be sufficent to knock them off, even if we reach half a milion or so. Problem is that our toolbox is so limited here, compared to Putin's...

It's Scott Ritter...

FWIW in the video and text this subject is addressed; I'd say the complexity of the operation was overestimated / bit of a myth.

According to a dive instructor interviewed in the video, who teaches people to dive at the depths involved (70-80m) in the Baltic sea, this is a complicated dive, but not 'overcomplicated' and well doable for experienced divers. It is his dayjob to train people to do this. He told he was laughing a bit when he heard the same things you post on the news after the attacks.
They mention minimum of ~50kg of explosive per charge. So a group of 5-6 experienced divers with professional diving equipment could in theory very well have done this from a small boat like that sailing boat.
One interesting bit also featured is that one harbour master in the area said that it was quite an achievement to do dives like that without anyone noticing (coastguards, navies). 

According to the research German police have found traces of the same explosive (HMX) that was used for the attack on a table in the ship, which itself was located after info from the MIVD source. Phone numbers / e-mail addresses involved with hiring of the ship point to Ukrainian individuals. 
All in all I think it's safe to conclude that either someone really wanted to make it look like Ukraine did it, or Ukraine/Ukrainians did it. 
The ship involved in the evidence could have well been the ship that did it, but could also be part of a larger effort or just a ruse to make it look like Ukrainians did it.

FWIW in the video and text this subject is addressed; I'd say the complexity of the operation was overestimated / bit of a myth.

According to a dive instructor interviewed in the video, who teaches people to dive at the depths involved (70-80m) in the Baltic sea, this is a complicated dive, but not 'overcomplicated' and well doable for experienced divers. It is his dayjob to train people to do this. He told he was laughing a bit when he heard the same things you post on the news after the attacks.
They mention minimum of ~50kg of explosive per charge. So a group of 5-6 experienced divers with professional diving equipment could in theory very well have done this from a small boat like that sailing boat.
One interesting bit also featured is that one harbour master in the area said that it was quite an achievement to do dives like that without anyone noticing (coastguards, navies). 

According to the research German police have found traces of the same explosive (HMX) that was used for the attack on a table in the ship, which itself was located after info from the MIVD source. Phone numbers / e-mail addresses involved with hiring of the ship point to Ukrainian individuals. 
All in all I think it's safe to conclude that either someone really wanted to make it look like Ukraine did it, or Ukraine/Ukrainians did it. 
The ship involved in the evidence could have well been the ship that did it, but could also be part of a larger effort or just a ruse to make it look like Ukrainians did it.

Calling 15k troop strength an 'entire army' which had been 'missed', sounds a bit dramatized imo. Although obviously 15k troops reinforcing somewhere where one didn't expect them can be 'problem'.
 

Galeotti linked this article lately, and it is indeed worth to post it here, if someone like to understand why rural Russians, against hopes of some analysts early in the war, are viewing Special Military Operation as something net positive. Not very heartworming but predictable. Urban centers can be different, though.
https://russiapost.info/regions/majority
Also, Shoigu on last conference with General Staff stated that they expect their war to last at least into 2025 and prepare themselves accordingly. There are also reportedly big changes coming in their military structures, namely new military districts are about to be created.

While all media has it's issues with bias at times, even public ones like NOS and Nieuwsuur, I feel it's more farfetched to think they area all (including their European partners) bought by FSB.
FWIW the investigative journalism on the side of Nieuwsuur / NOS is usually of a high level. These are publicly governed and funded news organizations providing among other things the public daily journals in The Netherlands (you know but not everyone here).
The information from the MIVD is also unlikely to be orchestrated by the FSB, unless one believes our military intelligence is compromised. 
Anyway, they don't rule out the Ukrainian assets where in some form used / orchestrated from Russia. Without having access to secrets we don't know how credible the MIVD itself think it's source is. Credible enough to act on it, that is for sure. 
Anyway I think it's dumb to look at this and think 'blablabla Russia is behind it and I won't believe anything else'. At the same time it would be dumb to conclude for certainty, at this time, that the Ukrainian leadership is behind this. There are still many possibilities, but as more information surfaces there is at least some doubt to be cast on the idea 'must be the Russian's. 
Therefore this again proves that it is always imperative to keep an open mind about uncertain things. 
 
Anyway, a 30min video about the findings (some of it is in Dutch):
https://nos.nl/nieuwsuur/video/2491937-nord-stream-hoe-alle-sporen-leiden-naar-oekraine