Vic4

Another interesting article haven't seen posted here yet. 
US weapons exports up 50 percent in 2023 as Washington challenges Russia, China
"The Russian defense industry is failing and continues to fail," said a top State Department official.
Read in POLITICO: https://apple.news/AcumTh4SiRpmY0NrPqH7meA

After all the political disappointment about when, how and why to arm Ukraine over the last two years, I still have the hope that there is one guy who will not let me down:
The almighty dollar

Another interesting article haven't seen posted here yet. 
US weapons exports up 50 percent in 2023 as Washington challenges Russia, China
"The Russian defense industry is failing and continues to fail," said a top State Department official.
Read in POLITICO: https://apple.news/AcumTh4SiRpmY0NrPqH7meA

Well you may be correct on the first count but I do not fully buy into the second.  And we are back to Uncertainty.  A slow bleeding lose allows for reorientation and adaptation which we may be able to shape somewhat.  The uncertainty is more manageable.  Of course the counter to this argument is the human ability to ignore and delude ourselves into thinking something is not happening, if it happens slowly…right up until the point it happens fast anyway, but let’s tackle on mess at a time.  Fast is a bow wave of uncertainty that becomes auto-catalytic and in humans creates panic.  When we panic we lose the capacity to effectively process information and begin to act on programming, even if it is totally misaligned with reality - this is how people in a fire manage to clog up doorways and everyone dies.
Rapid escalation of uncertainty in the Russian system will very likely see the total collapse of macro-social structures, plenty examples of this throughout human history.  Once that happens micro-social takes charge and a couple hundred people who go tribal and feral start to act in their own interests pretty quickly.  That would normally be hilarious except for the part where those couple hundred people could get their hands on some very powerful weapons.  The macro-social structures that control those weapons no longer exists so we basically have the power of gods in the hands of scared primates…what could possibly go wrong.  Micro-social exist in a state of relative rationality, which means what may look totally insane from the outside, makes perfect sense inside.  This means a level of macro-anarchy, which is just really micro-rationality.
In a slower descent theoretically the macro-social structures have time to adapt and retain a level of control - we saw this at the end of the Cold War.  People can try and downplay the problem (it won’t really happen that way, but don’t they need expertise to use those weapons?) or skew/mitigate it (well surely the Russian or Western governments will swoop in and focus on securing these systems).  But the reality is that once the macro-social structure fails pretty much everything is up for grabs and we have never had a P5 nuclear power completely fail before.  If we are going to, I would prefer for that failure to be in slow motion than fast.  It absolutely sucks and is unfair to Ukraine to have to live with this, but here we are.

Speaking of money, mafia state players and Putin's current instability: 
Any thoughts on some entity/faction within Russia casting a keen eye on Putin's personal fortune? Rumored to be in the $3-400 billion range I believe.
Do you think they're going to let him keep it, er.. along with his head?  

I think you've hit a nail on the head, there, in the bold bit and answered your own question. Being seen to be "actively involved" is important to Kadyrov, probably both personally, and in the maintenance of the image of the  mighty warrior that helps him stay in charge in Chechnya. So he's happy to play (emphasis on play) along so long as he doesn't have to sacrifice any of the other thing that keeps him in power: the brute force of his men.

It's after 7am in Moscow. If we don't have a statement by the time I wake up in 8 hours or so, I'm with you on this.

I'll repeat myself, but my bet is that he had a stroke or something, and the unfolding mess is Death Of Stalin 2.0.

Ukraine war: Partisan attack kills police chief in Russian-occupied Melitopol
 
https://apple.news/APFvHewYuQ4yUBT2ujC0Rpw
Don’t think his has been posted yet. Good to see some partisan activity/support in one of the main strategic sectors. 

Never has a cancelled agent been welcomed home with such open arms. 
Tucker Carlson is out at Fox News but welcome on Russian TV
https://apple.news/AmuE4mC7HSbCubQOjGWYy7A

I read an interesting article from the Washington Post relating to Tucker and the war in Ukraine. Apparently Murdoch was not happy with Carlson's anti-Ukrainian position and it was one of the reasons he removed him.
Source: For the Murdochs, Tucker Carlson became more trouble than he was worth (The Washington Post)

I get that US partisan politics is generally frowned upon here but unfortunately the sad truth is that it is the bull in the china shop, elephant in the room, (insert tired cliche here); in regards to the war and the literal future of Ukraine. As such the magnitude and weight that hinges upon the ’24 election in regards to Ukraine is crushingly pivotal. A second Trump presidency serves as the greatest threat to the viability of Ukraine being able to maintain its military advantage, receiving reparations, or prosecuting war crimes just to name a few of the most strident issues. As has been stated by more than a few of the forum’s European members, NATO is primarily based on US hegemony. Whether that in itself is good or bad or if US hegemony is good or bad is irrelevant. Thankfully as has been noted here, the current trajectory is stable, even on a partisan level in a majority support for Ukraine. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Trump: 2.23.2022
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”
Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/trump-putin-ukraine-invasion-00010923

I get that US partisan politics is generally frowned upon here but unfortunately the sad truth is that it is the bull in the china shop, elephant in the room, (insert tired cliche here); in regards to the war and the literal future of Ukraine. As such the magnitude and weight that hinges upon the ’24 election in regards to Ukraine is crushingly pivotal. A second Trump presidency serves as the greatest threat to the viability of Ukraine being able to maintain its military advantage, receiving reparations, or prosecuting war crimes just to name a few of the most strident issues. As has been stated by more than a few of the forum’s European members, NATO is primarily based on US hegemony. Whether that in itself is good or bad or if US hegemony is good or bad is irrelevant. Thankfully as has been noted here, the current trajectory is stable, even on a partisan level in a majority support for Ukraine. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Trump: 2.23.2022
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”
Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/trump-putin-ukraine-invasion-00010923

I get that US partisan politics is generally frowned upon here but unfortunately the sad truth is that it is the bull in the china shop, elephant in the room, (insert tired cliche here); in regards to the war and the literal future of Ukraine. As such the magnitude and weight that hinges upon the ’24 election in regards to Ukraine is crushingly pivotal. A second Trump presidency serves as the greatest threat to the viability of Ukraine being able to maintain its military advantage, receiving reparations, or prosecuting war crimes just to name a few of the most strident issues. As has been stated by more than a few of the forum’s European members, NATO is primarily based on US hegemony. Whether that in itself is good or bad or if US hegemony is good or bad is irrelevant. Thankfully as has been noted here, the current trajectory is stable, even on a partisan level in a majority support for Ukraine. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Trump: 2.23.2022
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”
Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/trump-putin-ukraine-invasion-00010923

I get that US partisan politics is generally frowned upon here but unfortunately the sad truth is that it is the bull in the china shop, elephant in the room, (insert tired cliche here); in regards to the war and the literal future of Ukraine. As such the magnitude and weight that hinges upon the ’24 election in regards to Ukraine is crushingly pivotal. A second Trump presidency serves as the greatest threat to the viability of Ukraine being able to maintain its military advantage, receiving reparations, or prosecuting war crimes just to name a few of the most strident issues. As has been stated by more than a few of the forum’s European members, NATO is primarily based on US hegemony. Whether that in itself is good or bad or if US hegemony is good or bad is irrelevant. Thankfully as has been noted here, the current trajectory is stable, even on a partisan level in a majority support for Ukraine. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Trump: 2.23.2022
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”
Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/trump-putin-ukraine-invasion-00010923

I get that US partisan politics is generally frowned upon here but unfortunately the sad truth is that it is the bull in the china shop, elephant in the room, (insert tired cliche here); in regards to the war and the literal future of Ukraine. As such the magnitude and weight that hinges upon the ’24 election in regards to Ukraine is crushingly pivotal. A second Trump presidency serves as the greatest threat to the viability of Ukraine being able to maintain its military advantage, receiving reparations, or prosecuting war crimes just to name a few of the most strident issues. As has been stated by more than a few of the forum’s European members, NATO is primarily based on US hegemony. Whether that in itself is good or bad or if US hegemony is good or bad is irrelevant. Thankfully as has been noted here, the current trajectory is stable, even on a partisan level in a majority support for Ukraine. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Trump: 2.23.2022
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”
Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/trump-putin-ukraine-invasion-00010923

I get that US partisan politics is generally frowned upon here but unfortunately the sad truth is that it is the bull in the china shop, elephant in the room, (insert tired cliche here); in regards to the war and the literal future of Ukraine. As such the magnitude and weight that hinges upon the ’24 election in regards to Ukraine is crushingly pivotal. A second Trump presidency serves as the greatest threat to the viability of Ukraine being able to maintain its military advantage, receiving reparations, or prosecuting war crimes just to name a few of the most strident issues. As has been stated by more than a few of the forum’s European members, NATO is primarily based on US hegemony. Whether that in itself is good or bad or if US hegemony is good or bad is irrelevant. Thankfully as has been noted here, the current trajectory is stable, even on a partisan level in a majority support for Ukraine. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Trump: 2.23.2022
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”
Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/trump-putin-ukraine-invasion-00010923

I get that US partisan politics is generally frowned upon here but unfortunately the sad truth is that it is the bull in the china shop, elephant in the room, (insert tired cliche here); in regards to the war and the literal future of Ukraine. As such the magnitude and weight that hinges upon the ’24 election in regards to Ukraine is crushingly pivotal. A second Trump presidency serves as the greatest threat to the viability of Ukraine being able to maintain its military advantage, receiving reparations, or prosecuting war crimes just to name a few of the most strident issues. As has been stated by more than a few of the forum’s European members, NATO is primarily based on US hegemony. Whether that in itself is good or bad or if US hegemony is good or bad is irrelevant. Thankfully as has been noted here, the current trajectory is stable, even on a partisan level in a majority support for Ukraine. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Trump: 2.23.2022
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”
Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/trump-putin-ukraine-invasion-00010923

That is not the issue.  Of course out of control escalation of this conflict is a worry.  What a lot of people in the “must not start WW3” side of things tend to forget is that Russia is just as afraid of WW3 as we are.  Proof: despite severe setback and bleeding at historic levels, Russia has not turned to WMDs in this war.  Now we know that they do have red lines and we cannot forget that; however, we should also remember that we have red lines too.  
There are lines that are worth escalation and Russia (as well as ourselves, apparently) need to be reminded of that.  Controlled escalation to be sure, but if we’re are too terrified to act in a measured response to escalating Russian aggression we basically cede the strategic initiative.  This would give Russia de facto escalation dominance in this conflict.  FDR was right, the thing we need fear the most is our own fears.
A measured but clear escalation to this drone nonsense is required and while we are keeping this war in a box, we also cannot let our fears - nor forget that they are just as nervous as we are - hold back deliberate action.
”But why are we not imposing a no fly zone/boot on ground/striking Moscow”.  Couple reasons - all war is negotiation .  Escalation ladders have  rungs one can only use for the first time once, after that they become de-escalation options or norms of conflict.  So we want to keep strategic options open.  If we jump straight to no fly zones, we have a lot less escalation room before things get to a nuclear exchange threshold.  
Second one is trying to avoid inducing strategic panic on our opponent through miscommunication.  A no-fly zone over the Black Sea may seem reasonable to us but rationality is relative.  Russia may see this as a prelude to establishing air superiority for an invasion and panic.  Putin needs a centralized and functioning control system on his own escalation and panic is toxic to that.  So in this responses must be clearly communicated and demonstrated through signalling.
So, for example, if one is going to employ offensive cyber to shut down Russian military airspace control, unlike in a Grey Zone/Subversive context, this action would have to be more clearly a communication of action - all war is communication.  The primary mechanisms of that communication are cause and consequence.  Attribution would need to be clear and message needs to be received that buggery out over the Black Sea against US assets has consequences.
This speaks to the reality that the west needs to accept, this war is as much ours as it is Ukraines.  With China now communicating along with Iran it is becoming clear that this entire thing is becoming a global decision point in just how the global order will proceed.  We are not supporting Ukraine because Russia is bad (they are in this), or “the children!”.  We are doing it because this war is an attack on the global order that demands a response or we risk losing that order itself.  In many ways this war is already moving towards a global conflict as power poles invest in it as a proxy conflict - it is becoming an indirect WW3.  And while we must do what we can to avoid a direct WW3, we cannot let that fear drive us to losing the war we are already in.

A seemingly comprehensive though pessimistic article that is relevant to the current conversation. Interview with a commander at the front... Hopefully these headlines will be eclipsed by a successful counteroffensive. 
Ukraine short of skilled troops and munitions as losses, pessimism grow
Ukraine’s military has been degraded by a year of heavy casualties. Front-line units are now struggling with new, poorly trained troops and a shortage of ammunition.
Read in The Washington Post: https://apple.news/ARmuLouubT82YY5BNmh8GKg

The posts of your experience and knowledge are invaluable. Vet of the 82nd, Phd nuclear physicist, kicked cancer to the curb —- you set a high bar few achieve. Much respect $

The posts of your experience and knowledge are invaluable. Vet of the 82nd, Phd nuclear physicist, kicked cancer to the curb —- you set a high bar few achieve. Much respect $

The posts of your experience and knowledge are invaluable. Vet of the 82nd, Phd nuclear physicist, kicked cancer to the curb —- you set a high bar few achieve. Much respect $

The posts of your experience and knowledge are invaluable. Vet of the 82nd, Phd nuclear physicist, kicked cancer to the curb —- you set a high bar few achieve. Much respect $

The posts of your experience and knowledge are invaluable. Vet of the 82nd, Phd nuclear physicist, kicked cancer to the curb —- you set a high bar few achieve. Much respect $