fireship4

Haha true to some extent. But look at the context there- it was Smuta, Time of Troubles, when axis mundi collapsed and forces of modernity literally tear Russia apart. Probably worst of similar times in Russian history. Lenin was an anomaly within wider context of Russian history.
Playground was so levelled and power vacuum so...well emtpy that it was this rare moment when decided guy with solid support (and he didn't came out of nowhere, mind you...) could almost took the crown out of the street. Also, revolutionaries of all sorts were alredy working hard to take power before his arrival. Crucialy he was by no means common guy, neither; rather I would describe him as priest of new era; that means- he represented deeper manifestation of order (may sound strange, but this is in fact one of the oldest manifestation of power in human anthropology, and could work in such crazy times). He more resembled Khomeini than commoner like Girkin.
Now those massive, generations long historical processess that lead to Lenin are simply not there. Russians will fear another Smuta, so will try to find somebody rational. And the  are accustomed by at least several generations to strong, already connected leaders with solid past.
Yes, we are building hypothesis on hypothesis on hypothesis now. It is hard to believe those several wholes in Ukrainian bridge will lead to fall of entire Russian system, but who know?
You described quite plausible scenario, will read in detail it tomorrow. For now, I simply don't see any Ultranationalists in Kremlin or close by. Or if they are there, they are fake.

Forgive me but I am going to refer back to Lenin again.
Lenin came to power through a vanishingly unlikely series of events, but he managed somehow not to get messily dead, and seized the reins with both hands when the chance came. Specifically he realized that the only people whose opinion mattered were those of the military forces around St Petersburg. Those forces wanted peace with Germany at any price, because they believed that being sent to the front was a death sentence. So in complete defiance of elite public opinion, that is what Lenin promised them, and they made him Czar. I realize this is a gross simplification but it isn't wrong. 
Now I don't really have a deep understanding of what the people with guns in and around Moscow count as their hearts desire. I will however bet a case of VERY good whiskey that Girkin at least thinks that he does. If he is correct he is a very dangerous man. 

Or that says Girkin himself...he is endlessly attacked by Russian official propagandists and some other former collegues (hard to call them "companions" in this orkish envirenment of early Donbas militias) that his inactivity lead to de facto defeat of operation. I'll need to dig more into topic of early Donbas "patriots", but proper (unbiased) sources are had to find.
Overall, I am not entirelly convinced he is perceived by larger RU population as "honourable warrior"; rather, he may be viewed as a looser. And this is no-no when talking about taking power.
I have very similar feeling regarding the guy- he stood out of the crowd of Donbas militimen like some smart big Uruk-hai from host of moronic goblins (damn, just can't escape Tolkien comparisions...;) ). But this lead me to exactly opposite conclusion:
1. He is too dogmatic, radical and stiff in his views to lead the country size of Russia, with its 11mln magalopolies, complex web of politics, atomic arsenal and absurd paradoxes of state administration. He is not elastic enough to travel maze of corridors of power; not even entering a lobby, frankly. That is why Nats were always underdogs of Russian politics- of course I mean real nationalists, not state-sponsored funny clowns like narodno-bolsheviks.
2.He is low figure (just a colonel), and outsider of siloviki apparatus. What more, I think he is percepted as influencer, not a soldier. Not our guy. Unless there is hidden serious -and I mean serious- group in security/FSB/military that will support such uprising and put their balls into it (sorry for colloquialism - that they will endanger themselves, their families and careers) just for heroic idea of waging massive total war against entire world order- it is hard to imagine such nationalistic revolution. Everything we know about Russian siloviki branch points to conformism as most prevalent quality.
3. I always had a notion (perhaps I am wrong, but I think it is rather solidly grounded in history) that in country like Russia if you really want power, you cannot allow yourself to get bogged in endless, public blaming games, pages-long grudging and angry influencing. It takes away your charisma and levels you with other actors. Girkin may even be on point every time, common people liking his arguments, treating as one of them, he may have millions of followers etc. And that is precisely why he will not become a new Tsar.
At unconcious level, power is sacred - not for guys like this:
 

(I hope you @Grigb will not find it as overly primitivizing your countrymen. I just always tried to figure out why system of power there works very differently to what is considered "logical" in Europe. And we are all collectivelly very strange creatures driven by our cultural heritage as much as bare necessities, like @TheCaptain said).
Yep, 100% agree, that is probably the only reason Navalny is still alive at all (if he is- just prison conditions are slowly killing him anyway or make him unhealthy enough to take power). The guy was always fishy for me btw, especially that he heavily courted the same nationalists we speak about something like a decade ago. Perhaps it was valid tactics by then.
But with those 2 binary personalities in Russian politics, we still need to answer the fundamental question- WHERE is a political force to connect them, finance them and annoint them as "leaders". With Navalny it is reasonable to assume such forces exists and will even grow in case of power vacuum at Kremlin. With Girkin I just don't see them.
On other side, this is Russia. One can expect everything.
But bloody, ideological 1917-20 scenario does not seem plausible for now. So if (and remind you gentlemen, this is BIG IF) Putin will suddenly somehow turn into pile of bones and botox, I would vote for 1990's style of successive power struggles within narrow group of guys that are already at Kremlin. With possibilities of later some of the Republics trying to have more autonomy, but it is dubious that they would try it by force.
 
Uff, a long post, sorry guys for not responding to other arguments (especially @Battlefront.com about real numbers and power of read-to go- Nats. I think they will be crushed within minutes unless having massive support in siloviki, but that is longer story).

Fresh Girkin assessment: the pause is over with RU started assaulting of Avdiivka.

Girkin recommended another article. This time it is from Regnum. Girkin says Regnum linked to Hawks from Presidential Executive Office of Russia and shows their opinion. It can be summarized: There is Dove party that want peace deal and spreads thesis that RU tired of war. But nobody, RU or West, wants this peace deal. Everyone wants victory. So, Doves must shut up or else.  
Article is somewhat lengthy but not all part as interesting (Girkin jokes author as paid by lines). So, i will explain boring parts in the list below:
 
Last part I translated in full as this is the essence of RU Hawks view from Presidential administration. sorry, do not have time to write a summary. 
.[UPDATE] Adding a few important points
The fight between Doves and Hawks intensifies. They can be called Liberals and Nats of RU gov. As I previously said this looks like a split of future RU Civil War.  RU society demands reform so, simple coup with simple heir will not satisfy anybody now. RU Nats want to fight till the end. But they do not control Putin Death of Putin will cause RU Nats to try to grab the power. This is how I believe the Civil War will start. Even if Putin is replaced with RU Nat he will try to force Mobilization and that will cause major rebellion and RU Civil War I am bit pessimistic today - I do not see how RU will avoid Civil War. RU Nats want to fight to the victory or death. They will not accept Dove/Liberal ruler peacefully. The question is whether they have the required strength. But it is my personal opinion and I might be wrong.

Ok, big article incoming. It is written by infamous RU Nat writer and opinion journalist Maxim Kalashnikov. Girkin strongly recommends to read it. I can summarize it - Big Storm [1917 alike] is coming because everything looks worse than RU gov say. But if you are interested in the point of view RU Nats leadership, I recommend reading it in full.
 
 
Enemy plan for RU is mobilization trap
RU troops are experiencing fatigue and losing capability to conduct any offensives The strength of RU defenses is highly uneven and full of holes static fighting and failures at front line will lead to major breakdown of RU war machine To win RU has to mobilize but RU gov is scared to start it due to swift drop of popularity and difficulty  
RU battlefield state is bad
There is a huge problem of mass refusniks. It is really disturbing for RU Unlike Kiev RU apparently do not have strategic reserves By the autumn the issue will come out [explode]  
RU armed forces capabilities are bad
RU Armed Forces could perform several critical tasks While they had enough missiles there were critical failures with drones, ammunition, comms, recce, targeting and control These problems must be resolved are quickly as possible  
RU economy front is bad
RU did not use gas blackmail enough to bring Eu on its knees RU gov is not doing anything to prepare to mitigate bad state of RU industry    
RU external and internal position is worsening
RU is losing respect outside RU gov is acting irresponsibly harshly inside  
Kremlin Endgame is wait till EU Armageddon
The Kremlin is counting on the fact that the strongest socio-economic and political crises will begin in the West in the autumn and winter of 2022 It will cause the West to negotiate with RU lifting sanctions and force Kiev to accept peace deal However, the above is not given. Also, a global crisis will threaten RU as well. So, RU must expect the worst.  
Prep talk for the coming Winter RU civil war - summer is last period of calm before the storm.
 
Discussion: RU state is always worse than you think - Art of Anti RU War.   
As we all remember, back in April-May there was a lot of expectation of impending RU collapse due to mass desertion. It was the right conclusion for a Western-type Army. But as we discussed RU is a pressure cooker. It can hold intact longer than you expect, then it explodes. RU could hold on with tricks until August. Probably it can hold even august as well. But 500ths chickens are coming home to roost RU.  Finally, I need to note that our field agent Murz correctly reported that RU will face major manpower crisis in July-August. There are a lot of talks about stalemate and long war. All while neither kremlin nor general RU public are preparing for long war. RU has no appetite for a long war. This is not a narrative but cold hard fact RU Nats are fully sensing social explosion as soon as current Autumn. Simple coup is not a big deal now because even if it happens it would not satisfy neither RU Nats nor Liberals (general RU public will simply move to one or another side). It can tear RU apart if RU Nats are strong enough.  However, at this stage we do not know RU Nats real strength and their ability to convert RU social explosion into a full-scale civil war. Remember that RU heart - Moscow is liberal stronghold. USSR military could not handle an uprising there in 91. On other hand RU Liberals are pussies not fighters without appropriate leader.

Cossacks don't surf!
 

Something occurs to me about the longer logistical routes - I have little knowledge on the subject and would be happy to be corrected.  I get the impression that this should affect the ability of the logistics system to respond to changes, but not necessarily affect throughput except where transport vehicles are a limiting factor.
If there are plenty of vehicles and demand stays the same, then the supply will arrive at the same rate: the rate at which they are sent out (allowing for mistakes along the way which will increase with more distance).  The journey time will be longer but this will have more effect if units use their own (likely more limited) number of vehicles to go and collect what they need from supply points, as they will be able to make fewer trips in the same amount of time.
Am I on the right track and does anyone know how resupply is handled in the Russian system?

HIMARS is really spooking RU.  Girkin advises to read the article HIMARS – just MLRS, [or] a new generation weapon, or a Doomsday machine?
Reference to article describing HIMARS Confirming conclusions of the article Claim that current RU artillerymen are incompetent  
The article itself. It is just an educational article. Funny - it took them multiply HIMARS missiles to the face to realize that it is not just MLRS and to start respecting it. 
 

Another batch of videos on the training of Ukrainian soldiers in the UK.  This time, the new recruits:
 
 

I ask your forbearance as I summarise some of the discussion over the last few pages.  I don't have much to add. 
[EDIT: It turned out longer than my arm so I have put it all in a quote box.]
 

I ask your forbearance as I summarise some of the discussion over the last few pages.  I don't have much to add. 
[EDIT: It turned out longer than my arm so I have put it all in a quote box.]
 

I ask your forbearance as I summarise some of the discussion over the last few pages.  I don't have much to add. 
[EDIT: It turned out longer than my arm so I have put it all in a quote box.]
 

Grigb, if I am correct, you have provided some interesting translations, for which I thank you.
Your points against @Slaughterhouse-Five :
The first I think is a misunderstanding of what he wrote - he said there is no such thing as RU nationalists, only RU imperialists.
The second was apparently entirely a quote from a RU forum of some kind.
The third is ascribing intent without evidence.
 
The purpose of any real RU propaganda would be to create division, in fact to denegrate the idea of truth itself.  It would be instructive to know if someone was a propagandist of course, but this is not something that will be obvious, and making accusations of this sort with no evidence only serves it's purpose.  I believe in fact I was suspected of the same simply because I have a 'Russian' quote as my signature.
In the end, the origin of any specific idea does not matter - they should be critiqued on their own merit.  Of course the technique of the 'firehose' of random stories with truth mixed in is also a propaganda strategy, and things that are true can be grouped together to serve a narrative if received uncritically, but the solution is in the way you assimilate, critique and sort through it, how you choose and create sources etc.
This is why I find the idea of 'useful idiots' etc. damaging if carried too far.

Grigb, if I am correct, you have provided some interesting translations, for which I thank you.
Your points against @Slaughterhouse-Five :
The first I think is a misunderstanding of what he wrote - he said there is no such thing as RU nationalists, only RU imperialists.
The second was apparently entirely a quote from a RU forum of some kind.
The third is ascribing intent without evidence.
 
The purpose of any real RU propaganda would be to create division, in fact to denegrate the idea of truth itself.  It would be instructive to know if someone was a propagandist of course, but this is not something that will be obvious, and making accusations of this sort with no evidence only serves it's purpose.  I believe in fact I was suspected of the same simply because I have a 'Russian' quote as my signature.
In the end, the origin of any specific idea does not matter - they should be critiqued on their own merit.  Of course the technique of the 'firehose' of random stories with truth mixed in is also a propaganda strategy, and things that are true can be grouped together to serve a narrative if received uncritically, but the solution is in the way you assimilate, critique and sort through it, how you choose and create sources etc.
This is why I find the idea of 'useful idiots' etc. damaging if carried too far.

Let me guess, having not listened to the podcast nor looked up the guest... is it about forcasters not having skin in the game?  About putting their money where there mouth is making for much better prediction?  I say so because I think I listened to an advocate of something similar on EconTalk some time ago.  A great podcast by the way.
Here you go: https://threadreaderapp-com.translate.goog/thread/1540963832096608256.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp

🇺🇦General Staff of Armed Forces of Ukraine, morning report, 25 June 2022:🇺🇦
📍Kharkiv area :
"Ukrainian military repelled attack of Russians saboteur group near Udy, - General Staff of Armed Forces of Ukraine says in the morning report"
https://t.me/lumsrc/1939
 
📍Sievierodonetsk area :
"Russian forces conducted assault actions at Metyolkine, Syrotyne and Voronove, - General Staff of Armed Forces of Ukraine says in the morning report"
https://t.me/lumsrc/1944

📍Bakhmut/Popasna area :
"At Bakhmut direction Ukrainian military repelled Russian offensive at Volodymyrivka-Pokrovske direction. Ongoing battle at Pylypchatyne - Pokrovske. At Roty-Vershyna direction Russian forces advanced 1 kilometer, - General Staff of Armed Forces of Ukraine says in the morning report"
https://t.me/lumsrc/1945

📍Donetsk area :
"Russian forces attempted to advance and seize part of the road Yasynuvata-Kostyantynivka, and at Vasylivka-Kamianka direction, - General Staff of Armed Forces of Ukraine says in the morning report"
https://t.me/lumsrc/1946

📍Kherson area :
"Russian army attempted to advance at Potyomkyne-Vysokopillia direction in Kherson region, - General Staff of Armed Forces of Ukraine says in the morning report"
https://t.me/lumsrc/1947

Probably many already know this channel, if not it is worth to check- as lately they finally get profesionally translated english captions. Ukrainian journalist Vlodymyr Zolkin makes interviews with POW's from Russian army. Good source to know the mental state of those people. They don't seem to fake a lot, their stories are believable and generally confirms sorry state of whole military.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwWArPXqGLslRWaP-zKYiXg/videos
Also small cameo from Dmtri (not embedded, click the link). Soldier complains about Western MD being shot to pieces- of course he exagarates, but worth to note anyway:
https://twitter.com/mdmitri91/status/1539618506576207874
 

My backup has moved here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fdgcyjxwy99csp5/AAB2HVemThOm9vyqdj2lj_I8a?dl=0

A whole lot of Russian officers have been telling too many lies for too long to quit now. I am sure there is an entire racket built on getting soldiers they never had "KIA" in order to explain their absence when someone finally comes to check. I fully expect there is a secondary scam to collect the death benefits for these soldiers that never existed.
Taking Kherson back as the number one priority makes sense for a LARGE number of reasons. The three simplest being that it is the only Russian presence on that side of the river, It is the largest Ukrainian population under Russian control, and it brings the Ukrainians much closer to Crimean land bridge.
Aragon2002 has come around! 💪
There is no logic, the Russians aren't escalating because even they can do math and it says they either they don't have an army in three days, or they don't have a country in a week. Tens of thousands of Russian casualties is inflicted with NATO supplied weapons all the casus belli any country in history has ever needed, if they wanted one. They clearly don't.
Yes, but real analysis of it English is EXTREMELY lacking. For that matter neither of the regimes involved were noted for their introspection.
Boris has a PANAMAX cargo ship worth of flaws. But I will give him this, he understands that once you have picked a side the best answer is to ensure that they actually bloody win.
I am going to let the politics of the last twelve years go, for now. The inexcusable mistake that the entire civilized world has been making since AT LEAST 1973 is the refusal to bite the bullet and do what is necessary to quit buying hydrocarbons from absolutely awful regimes/governments. Oil and natural gas consumption could be less than half its current level if rational polices had been implemented decades ago. We have not been willing to take the short term economic pain of doing it rationally, So we are caught in doom loop of crises when these god awful regimes do something god awful. And then we learn NOTHING. Bleep me I hope this time is different....

Murz published another rant. Interesting part is his discussion of conversation between Girkin and Kvatchkov (another infamous nationalist). Both of them are former officers. And considered wise men. Well, Kvatchov is a crazed antisemite but calm one. 
According to them federal mobilization is not called because it would show dramatic degradation of RU military system. [As if it was not apparent 20 years ago]. Current LDNR are idiotic and showed dramatic lack of many things.  
The specific example - there is no plan to provide PCs and MF printers to HQs of reserve formations. So, officers either have to buy everything themselves (but the prices are hiking due to sanctions) or fight using pen and paper. It is worse than in WW2 because there are no typewriters. Back to WW1 for LDNR reserve formations.
Nice Murz quote about the System I talked about (I will write about when I have little bit more time):
BTW, it was always like this even during SU period. Especially during SU period. 
another interesting quote 
As you can see the one way to collapse RU army is to kill/degrade artillery. It holds everything in place.

It would indeed be an incredibly stupid move for Ji to pull the trigger on an invasion of Taiwan. But there are several reasons to think he might do it anyway.
1. The rhetoric supports it: China has claimed Taiwan as an integral part of its territory for decades. But the intensity of that rhetoric has been stepped up in intensity in recent years. It is likely that the purpose of this rhetoric is to appease an increasingly nationalistic population, more than to justify a premeditated war. But it creates a positive feedback loop, because the rhetoric feeds the nationalism of the population, and the increasing nationalism of the population demands increasingly intense rhetoric. If the loop isn't broken, it is possible that at some point the rhetoric alone may no longer be enough to appease the population.
2. The demographics support it: This one is more statistical in nature than it is based on the specific facts on the ground in China. But historically, countries with an overinflated male population are more likely to go to war than countries with a balanced ratio between males and females. I'm not sure that the cause of this tendency has been nailed down (they could both be caused by a third factor, rather than having a direct causal relationship), and it doesn't guarantee war by any stretch, but it does seem to nudge up the probability by a non-negligible margin (there is a correlation). China currently has an overinflated male population thanks to decades of the One Child Policy. 
3. The timing supports it: China's economy and military are still growing more powerful every year. But that boon time is coming to an end very soon. Demographic realities will catch up with China sometime this decade, and their economy will begin shrinking (and inevitably, their military strength will begin shrinking with it). The mid-2020s will represent their peak power relative to the United States, and therefor their best chance of successfully taking Taiwan. I believe the 2020s represent a "now or never" moment for China. If they do not attack Taiwan in the 2020s, they will lose their chance forever. This sort of "now or never" mentality may have echoes throughout history, with it being a possible motivating factor for the aggressing side in WW1, WW2, and even the current war in Ukraine.
4. China's military structure and spending supports it: China's military hasn't had equal growth in all areas. Growth has been disproportionally concentrated in the PLA Navy and PLA amphibious capabilities. Particularly capabilities that have no use but to invade Taiwan.
5. Xi's parallels to Putin support it: Xi may not understand just how stupid it would be to invade Taiwan, because he isn't being fed good intel about how difficult it would be, because he is every bit as isolated as Putin. Both Putin and Xi have surrounded themselves with yes-men who tell them what they want to hear, rather than what they need to hear, because the most important quality of an advisor in an autocracy is loyalty, not competence.
None of this guarantees war, but the probability of war is definitely way above normal "background" levels.

In addition to those links provided by @cesmonkey there is this picture also linked by Kamil Galeev:

EDIT: You can use this site to help translate the text (you might want to use this version of the image as it is bigger without the English notation).

In addition to those links provided by @cesmonkey there is this picture also linked by Kamil Galeev:

EDIT: You can use this site to help translate the text (you might want to use this version of the image as it is bigger without the English notation).

This website is cited as a source for casualties by region, if you can get someone to translate the charts and tables for you:
https://zona.media/casualties 
Actually, look at the graphics on this one:
https://zona.media/translate/2022/05/20/casualties_eng

And here are some, rather dated, news articles:
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220517-young-poor-and-from-minorities-the-russian-troops-killed-in-ukraine
https://www.bbc.com/russian/features-61638530