kevinkin

And over at the War Zone: Update, 7:00 AM PST: As well as the apparent USV attack on the Russian Navy amphibious landing ship Olenegorsky Gornyak, there are reports that other Russian targets have come under recent attack. There are reports that explosions occurred in the area of Yuzhnaya Ozerievka, where the Caspian Pipeline Consortium’s marine terminal is located, close to the scene of the landing ship attack. Once again, drone boats are said to have been used, in this case, to attack oil infrastructure.

Don't worry about it. In the two generations after WW2 there was a deserved stereotype called the "ugly America" based on the hegemony the country enjoyed. But from colonial times through 2 major waves of immigration, America spoke lots of languages at the dinner table. My wife's grandmother only knew Italian. My grandmother spoke German and English. Spanish has always been a part of the American culture. The Immigration Act of 1924 imposed quotas that gave rise to a more English speaking nation even though cities still had pockets otherwise. But English was always the business and academic language. (In chemistry being able to read German was a plus). I remember going to a Catholic wedding mass and the "other" side of the family freaked out at Latin being used. Language remains a touchy subject. Maybe there would be peace on earth if everyone used sign language. But Zepplin's Ramble On would lose all meaning.

To your point, this report is from ISW writers and a long summary of the situation as of 8/3/23. https://time.com/6300772/ukraine-counteroffensive-can-still-succeed/ Last paragraph is as sober as it is a reflection of what is occurring: Ukraine is still very much in the game, and the many structural advantages it has offer good reason to expect that Ukrainian forces will liberate vital lands and the people living on them if only the West holds firm in its support. Have to say, the choice of words seems to be reeling in the expectations of the western reader who is following this God awful war. "in the game" is something the coach tells a youth soccer team heading in the second half down by 3 goals. "vital lands" I think means not all of Ukraine/Crimea is the objective, maybe it never was. They seem to imply it's now all about obtaining defensible borders and economic access to the south. It matters to Ukraine and to the West where the lines are drawn when the fighting stops—and both Western and Ukrainian interests are badly harmed by allowing the lines to remain where they are. In other words, Russia is winning as of today? Go figure. It's coming across as a appeal for more NATO firepower sooner not later. Ukraine’s backers must avoid rushing to premature conclusions about Ukraine’s prospects. It is far too soon to forecast the outcome of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, and there is no basis for assuming that it will fail. The West must internalize the reality that Ukrainian success is likely to be slower and more costly than many had hoped. It will be punctuated by moments of hope and disappointment. The West must therefore prepare to lean in to providing Ukraine with the materiel it will require for a long campaign and focus on getting it all to Ukraine as rapidly as possible rather than dripping it in gradually over time. That's a shot across the bow of western leadership. Or lack thereof. The likeliest path to Ukrainian success in this counter-offensive will be slow and staccato. Ukrainian troops continue to press along the front and with attacks against Russian rear areas until front-line Russian defenders lose the will or ability to continue the counter-attacks required by their elastic defense approach. At that point, Ukrainian forces may begin to grind through the Russian defenses 500 or 1,000 meters a day for a time in several locations, creating a series of footholds in the Russian lines until they reach points threatening the Russians’ ability to continue to hold the areas in between these footholds. This pattern shaped the first parts of the Kherson counter-offensive and led to a rather sudden Russian withdrawal from their initial lines to a much smaller pocket. The Ukrainians would likely follow such a limited Russian withdrawal this time by consolidating their gains, resting, and preparing to renew the effort from positions further to the south. I think we had or have come to a similar conclusion. But the article does not mention there is a finite number within the demographics to maintain warfare endlessly which feeds back into the notion that where the line stabilizes might now be in the forefront of operational planners on both sides. PS: the geometry of war discussion is an interesting presentation.

Is this whole thing with Wagner getting too much attention?: https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2023/08/03/conflict_in_ukraine_tests_natos_borders_970459.html While the likelihood of significant incursions into NATO territory is very low given current scenarios, the hybrid nature of Russian actions in Georgia and in Ukraine in 2014 indicates that that is Moscow’s preferred modus operandi. The longer the Ukrainian conflict continues, the more likely it is that some breach of NATO borders will occur. NATO must be ready to respond in a firm but measured manner. Russian President Vladimir Putin sees hesitancy in the West as weakness. The lack of a unified and strong NATO response to Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and associated hybrid warfare in the Donbas directly contributed to Putin’s calculations in deciding to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine last year.

Been thinking long term related to this war and that has me thinking about training. See my question above about the NTC. Would it be crazy for Ukraine to take a serious look at the way US Marines are preparing to fight in the western Pacific? There is no intent to occupy China; sort of similar to the current war with Russian. Long range fires have been validated combined with UAVs. The Marines have economy of force in their DNA - well at least deploying in small foot prints. Elite, small, and hard hitting. Not everything is applicable since this is a continental war. However, training on the marine's application of force could result in discontinuities vs the traditional mechanized force the RA has. Not thinking about fire bases other they would fire and move fire and move. The marine's are embracing a Distributed Lethality concept that might help defend Ukraine into the immediate future. https://www.sandboxx.us/news/the-marines-new-drone-truck-can-take-out-enemy-ships-from-1000-miles-out/

Does anyone know it the UA has access to something as large as the NTC at Fort Irwin? And if so to what degree are they training for combined arms warfare (with UAVs and deep strikes) using that type of facility? A quick look online has not found any major efforts. But there are training grounds in NATO countries that might be used. One idea would to get high level UA commanders trained in specific tactics related to this war even though they might be commanding stand-ins provided by other countries. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/2022/04/16/us-army-using-lessons-from-ukraine-war-to-aid-own-training/

For me the question is very much complicated by the lack of information on the differential casualty rates. But let's take a swing: 1. Kill RA troops 2. Kill RA troops 3. Kill RA troops For any given period of time and terrain, ask your subordinates to figure out how to Kill RA troops while minimizing attrition on their force. Use gains in territory to foster 1, 2, and 3. Fall back if you can foster 1, 2, and 3. I would also warn against large encirclement operations unless the risks from RA counterattacks is low i.e. contained.

Sort of a report card on Zelenskyy with reassuring conclusions: https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraines-plan-volodymyr-zelenskyy-dies-russia-war/

Again, more reporting on Wagner in Belarus this time more specific: https://www.euronews.com/2023/08/01/wagner-troops-could-cut-off-baltic-states-from-nato-warns-expert An expert has told Euronews that Russia's Wagner mercenary group could stage an attack to sever the Baltic states from NATO, though he questioned if such a "suicidal" step would be taken. Dr Stephen Hall, lecturer of Russian politics at the University of Bath, suggested the assault may involve a small incursion, akin to a provocative false flag operation, to disguise direct Russian involvement. Owing to the fact that "Russia's war in Ukraine is not going well", Hall doubted whether Belarus's President Alexander Lukashenko "would suddenly decide to allow Wagner to attack Poland". "It would be suicide." Slow news day?

Thanks for pointing this out. China has this tendency to play good cop/ bad cop in how it positions itself on some issues. Disciplined but easy to see through if you watch close enough.

Let's just leave it be.

Note the terms used: "seems to be advocating." A perfectly reasonable interpretation of the words the writer used which are pretty darn hawkish. Perhaps the hawkish I have read about this war.

Might want to run that theory by Jews under the elected Nazi govt: Or others persecuted under multiple forms of govt: in the past. Governments almost always spontaneously chose to do the wrong thing by impeding people from doing the right thing in their family's interest except in very very rare cases. Womb to Tomb societies mean the very few dominate the very many. No one wants that. But in the context of Musk, wasn't the the US going to purchase bandwidth? No different than dealing with Boeing? They are not reconfiguring their business (ie Boeing) because some government says so.

Do you think Russia would just love for Poland to shoot down a chopper for PR? This report claims Russian support is increasing. If true, the us vs them mentality being used again. https://www.usnews.com/news/world-report/articles/2023-07-31/ukraine-gains-momentum-as-new-russian-threats-loom

A little bit of something or a lot of nothing? https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1797618/Poland-NATO-Belarus-hybrid-warfare-Russia The latter. But could Belarus have been given a role in distracting NATO to some degree? With Wagner in summer camp and all.

Thanks for the report. I jumped to the conclusion and the writer seems to be advocating pushing Russia to the brink of nuclear war in an effort to call their bluff. Only an overwhelming Ukrainian military victory can deliver what Ukrainians themselves reasonably demand. This can only be achieved with external military support, in particular from the US. The arguments against providing Ukraine with advanced weaponry are spurious. What is needed is a greatly enhanced commitment by all of Ukraine’s backers to providing war-winning materiel as swiftly as it can be delivered and absorbed by Ukraine’s armed forces. This should include more air defence systems, long-range missiles, combat aircraft, advanced main battle tanks, and other such weapons systems as may be identified as essential to victory. Half-measures short of this will prolong the conflict, at a continuing cost in Ukrainian lives and also at great cost to the long-term prospects for the security of Europe. Right or wrong this is a credible position to take and those that are pushing for it should be taken seriously. Unlike other reports, the writer does bring up the key element of time: Most publications of this nature seek enduring relevance, a ‘shelf life’. Not here. US assistance remains decisive, but America is approaching another momentous electoral fork in the road, with a stark choice between an administration currently doing the right thing – albeit hesitantly and with one foot on the brake – and one that would wish to abandon Ukraine or, if possible, Europe altogether. This, then, is the decisive year in which to give Ukraine the necessary military assistance to win, before the 2024 US election distracts from and constrains Western action – or, in the event of a victory for Donald Trump or his fellow travellers, hands victory to Russia. Far too much time has already been lost to timidity and misplaced fears of Russian escalation.120 This delay could well prove tragic. If the recommendations in this report – principally to ensure Ukraine’s military victory and the reduction of Russia as a future threat – are not taken up within months, all is potentially lost. The writer seems to be inferring the US election and results could be a factor. Well yes they are. But that should not drive the overall strategy. I don't think the policymakers in DC are going to "abandon Ukraine or, if possible, Europe altogether". There is too much money to be made. So in my view an analysis of time relates more closely to the rate of losses both side are incurring - not who wins next year's election. POTUS says the good guys are running out of ammo. That does not sound a like of ultra partisan statement to me. It's a sad fact.

A couple of P8s bundled with a flight of F-35s could sink the entire Russian Black Sea fleet if they dared to engage. Not overnight, but quickly. The P8 is wonderful technology. Something ground pounders just can't understand. Why the US is withholding their technological edge is is hard to fathom. This edge is in the air and on the sea. Not the ground. A handful of M1s and Bradleys .. sure that will defeat Russia at it's own game. Window dressing.

I have to say those that take middle of the road positions on all this are not dumb. Kicking the can down the road is a perfectly viable strategy when you are 65 and are financially independent. Why rock the boat? But when you observe a situation that is changeable in your lifetime, why not go for it? That said, the war in Ukraine, as disgusting as it is, only previews the fight the world will have over Africa and South America. We won't see it. But I do see our kids are ill prepared to fight it. They will trade a thumb and a couple of fingers for their cell phone hands down.

I thought so as well. The expectations for Ukraine are being toned down faster than their body bags pile up. Sorry to be so blunt, but throwing devalued US cash at this war is cowardly. Especially when some fairly bright minds can't define what a defeated Russia would look like. "Could" "might" "probably" "maybe" do not bring Ukraine any closer to being a safe and happy place to live. Unless the west acts fast, Putin's gangsters will out last Ukraine's. It's simple arithmetic. Let's stop being jerks about it. Putin holds a nuclear option over the world's head and can do as he pleases until Russians say enough is enough. But that's not happening since the elites have purposely created a zombie state - a cancer culture that has to be excised. I suppose 50 years from now when we are all pushing up daisies we can look down and say we did x y and z. Lazy ineffectual efforts and just watch Russia and Ukraine fight again and again as testing grounds for Raytheon and war gamers. Well that's one hell of a way to fight a war. Thinking like that got McClellan fired. "At that point Ukraine will have opportunities of some sort and abilities to capitalize on them to some degree." Er, what? Here is the point: if Russia is weak and ready to fall or break apart (I do enjoy Portugal BTW), why not force them over the cliff now? It will serve as an example to others like Iran and China. Given the trajectory the west in on, now is the last chance. The US will find any reason to back away from this war. Putin will find any reason to stay in it.

Surviving in China's hip pocket for one with its old elites still humping underage women. Let's get this correct. All Russians know they are losers. They actually love being losers. But their culture has not been defeated. Until they are humiliated, Russia can always spin something someway and continue pumping energy and remain a gangster state. There is nothing in this war that will change that unless the US enters in a major way. Meanwhile the US is graduating youth who can't add or subtract. If someone want's to think Russia is a loser today on July 31, 2023, go grab a weapon and see how long you, the armchair general, survives on the steppe. I believe there is a big difference in the words loser and defeated. A loser can get up off the mat and fight another day. The defeated can't for generations. So all the enumerations above are as cute as they are meaningless.

My point is that some in the US think printing and sending money to Ukraine to keep them in a war is cost effective. I have said many times it is cruel. If it's in the world's interest to defeat Russia, get to done. Nuance kills. But it does sell a lot of books and munitions. So why are the good guys titrating down their weapons stocks instead of just getting to thing over quickly with absolute certainty? Books and other sales? Yep. In the west we are more interested in the biopic of addicted rock star than a role model like say Derik Jeter. And I hate the Yankees. But can recognize good vs evil. In the US, the two are blurred.

You are forgetting the cost the US paid in blood and treasure and sustaining US troops on the ground in a reasonable, confrontable and compassionate way. Fast food and the Super Bowl. Now let's go kill some rag heads. It's difficult to compare expenditures when US citizens are not coming back in thousands of body bags. But there is this trend that the US just prints money to throw at problems. And the authoritarian regimes in China and Russia know that we have become too soft to follow through on anything believing we can reinvent cultures in our own image.

Is the Ukrainian use of S-200s as ground to ground weapons terror? I don't blame them at all. But there is that dumb thing called the "moral high ground" that prevents pretty good cultures from defeating very evil ones just because liberal democracies don't want get their hands dirty. BTW, a few of those themes are in the Oppenheimer movie. You just have to pay attention. Anyway, embrace the inaccuracy of the S-200. If Ukraine needs to pull these out the US needs to take hard look in the mirror.

Stop being so human ... A Single Death Is a Tragedy; A Million Deaths Is a Statistic - Josef (the butcher) Stalin And I am starting to think my own government is leaning in that direction. Sad. Not because they are sinful people doing their individual jobs out of the limelight. But because circumstances are dragging them collectively to that hardened position. Think of the famous scenes and music from The Wall.

There something about an illustration, either moving or a still, that has an important quality that AI can't inject. The human quality. Think of the Claymation Xmas shows like Rudolf. Not accurate representations of anything other than it makes us watch them once a year with a cup of hot chocolate. More real than some perfectly rendered chick on Instagram because people rejoice over the simplicity. Monet would throw up if shown AI generated art.