G.I. Joe

For sure, Carolus.  I've read military history my whole life from a detached perspective.  Ukraine war I really feel, I am totally not detached.  It makes me sick -- emotionally, spiritually, every way.  Each UKR death is like helplessly watching some serial mass murderer continually killing people and being helpless to stop him -- and that's exactly what is happening.
On the devil's advocate stuff in some earlier posts today:  Some guy, friend of my daughter (ex friend more accurately), stayed w us for a few weeks recently while he was in town doing clinicals for his phy therapy degree program.  I was watching Davydov video and he said "well, there's two sides to this conflict", some dumb view he probably got from listening to Joe Rogan or some other garbage podcast.  I said "yes, the serial mass murder-er side and the serial mass murder-ee side".  This is the most black & white major war since WW2.  No war is black & white completely but this is as close as it comes.
Would anyone say "oh, well, the serial mass murder probably had some good reasons for killing those 12 women, we should think about his needs?"  F no!

Almost each who lives in village can do this ) In Ukraine each rural homested has own small or large market garden, even families, who are farmers except own fields carry on own market garden or even several. In late USSR homesteads could have from 0,15 to 0,6 ha (0,37 - 1,48 acres) of land. This was enough to supply usual family at least with own vegetables (most popular on our market gadens are potato, tomatoes, cucumbers and onion). Also homesteads, having bigger allotments often have own chickens, ducks, rabbits, pigs, sometime a cow. Many those, who live in cities have own old parents in villages, and help them to grow vegetables, which then they can  eat and these own vegetables are 100 % eco-natural. Also many citizens buy dachas, which also have small piece of land (0.05-0.07 ha), but often some free space all the same are diverted under beds of vegetables. 
Yes, this is survival experience of two wars and especailly Holodomor, which hands over from generation to generation. In last years many young people become to forgot from where they get food, thinking it appears in magical way in supermarkets, many people told "its enough to work hard for this potato, when we can buy it in any time in any place". But Russian invasion again showed that own market garden and "house in the village" is always actual thing. 
During siege of Kyiv in March, there was too few vegetables in city supermarkets, but villagers and farmers were coming to Kyiv on own cars on single free road and traded own vegetables to citizens. Of course, their food costed in 1.5 and sometine in 2 times more, than in supermarkets, but we could buy almost everything ecxept exotic %) 

According to German propaganda (can't really fault you, since German propaganda pretty much dominated western historiography on WW2 through the entire Cold War, and historians have only really been starting to break it down relatively recently). But not in reality.
They definitely had a superior operational level doctrine in the early war (though the Allies generally did better than they get credit for at the tactical level). But by 1944 they didn't have the fuel to carry out their early war maneuver doctrine, and the Allies had gained considerable experience in how to conduct effective operations.
German troops in 1944 were fighting with skill and determination (though in general the quality of the average German soldier had dropped since the beginning of the war as a result of attrition, and there were some very low quality formations mixed in with the higher quality formations), but Allied troops were also generally well trained by 1944. It isn't clear that the quality of the average German soldier was significantly higher than the average Allied soldier by 1944.
Allied forces were fully motorized, while German forces were not (only the Panzer divisions and a handful of mechanized divisions were ever motorized). When Allied soldiers had to redeploy over a long distance they were always carried in trucks, while most German troops had to march on foot. Allied supplies always came in trucks, while German supplies were mostly horse-drawn.
The Allies had lots of tanks, the fuel to run them, and the spare parts to repair them. The Germans had lots of tanks, most of which couldn't be used because they didn't have enough fuel or because they were awaiting repairs (finding a German tank in the front lines by 1944 was not impossible, but they were certainly a lot rarer than they had been a few years earlier).
The Allies had a lot more radios than the Germans (the Americans had a radio in every infantry platoon, given them a degree of communication that most armies wouldn't see until the Cold War). Allied rifles, particularly the M1 Garand, but also the SMLE to a more limited extent, were generally better than German rifles (not enough G43s or Stg44s to tip the balance). German tanks, when they were working, were mostly on par with Allied tanks (most German tanks were not Tigers, and a Panzer 4 is a pretty even match for a Sherman). German machine guns were admittedly better than Allied machine guns (its hard for someone who's played CMBN to maintain otherwise, Lindybeige's stance on the issue notwithstanding). German submachineguns were about on par with Allied submachineguns (honestly not much to choose from between a Sten, an MP40, and a Thompson (they'll all pour 30 rounds out at a pretty respectable rate and do nasty things to anyone in close quarters)). As far as I know, gun for gun, German artillery was about on par with Allied artillery, but the Allies had a lot more artillery (more of which was self-propelled) and a lot more ammunition for it.
German anti-tank weapons were pretty good, probably somewhat better than Allied anti-tank weapons, but not decisively so. The 17 pounder was probably about on par with the Pak-40, while the 6 pounder was still more than adequate to deal with most German tanks. The Panzerfaust had excellent penetration and was produced in large quantities, but was inaccurate and had a short range. The Panzerschreck was certainly, tube for tube, better than the bazooka or PIAT, but there were a lot fewer of them.
Overall I just don't think the claim that the Germans were better equipped holds any water.
It was admittedly pretty intense. But most intense battle of WW2? I'm not sure it was even the most intense battle on the western front. It's probably possible to determine once and for all which battle was the most intense (take the casualties suffered, divide that by the number of troops involved in hundreds of thousands, divide that by the number of days the battle lasted, and see which battle had the highest number of casualties per day per 100,000 troops (I'm betting Normandy would be on the high end of the spectrum, but not the highest)). But for now it's probably sufficient to say that there were some battles on the eastern front that were definitely more intense than Normandy.
And actually I decided to do what I just described for Normandy. I found wide ranging casualty figures for the Germans, so I just did the Allies, which I found more consistent casualty figures for. Over 77 days around 2 million Allied soldiers suffered 226,000 casualties. That gives a figure of around 145 casualties per day per 100,000 soldiers (there is some rounding involved). That casualty rate is no walk in the park, but there were definitely battles with a higher rate.

Let's not forget the stories of how Russian soldiers coming home from Ukraine are treated. From what I've read it's worse than how US vets were treated during the Viet Nam era. On the other hand US vets returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan were judging from my own experience, were treated very well, regardless of people's opinions on the wars themselves.

This is why Ukraine is not gonna loose.
The Russians wouldn't consider such a rescue-effort for one guy. They probably even can't imagine such a thing!
Somewhere in the late '70's of the last century, while the Cold War was raging and the USSR was perhaps at it strongest, my father assured me that he was absolutely adamant that the USSR would collapse. Because, he said, evil empires never last.
My father's long gone, but he would say: Putin's Russia will not last. 
 
 

Normandy wasnt the most intense battle of WW2 by any measure whatsoever.  For example what about Stalingrad?
The Germans weren't 'only overwhelmed by airpower' either.  They did not have superior battlecraft.  Some units did better tactically.  Many did not.  Operationally and above they sucked eggs.  They had a few good units in Normandy - however the average allied unit was as good or better than the average Heer unit.

Great to her from you - stay safe
P

Was going to leave this one but this is rife with risk and we do no service in downplaying them.  First problem will be children born in Crimea since 2014.  A bunch of ten year olds who likely have Russian citizenship who have never lived anywhere else.  I honestly cannot see trainloads of them and their families being forcibly loaded onto truck and trains - being splashed all over the internet by Russian IO - not having a significant risk.  Call it deportation, call it whatever you like but it is going to have blowback.  Yes, it is exactly what the Russian's did, and it will take people about 3 seconds to link the two actions and ask "just who are we supporting here?"
And then there are those who do not want to leave and try to stay by force.  We can hope this is not the case but we cannot wish it away.  The roots of an insurgency are there - a just cause and repression (from their point of view), no political mechanism in which to try and make change in their interests, support and backing from a neighboring nation with a grudge.  How many times do we have to invade a country/region/territory (or be supporting one) and gloss over the fact that some of the population is likely to push back?
I actually support re-taking the Crimea, it will definitely frame this war as a Russian loss. But I also do not recommend waving hands at what could be very serious security issues in that region that could blow up and back.  One Ukrainian solder does one unrighteous shoot, and insurgencies are really good at setting those up, and the whole deal starts to unravel.  Trainloads of deported Russian who have been living in Crimea for ten years with sad music on YouTube is also not really a good thing either.
Like a lot of these liberation theories I am seeing a lot of hope strung together - Hope all the bad Crimeans leave once the RA collapses. Hope those that remain are neutral of supportive of Ukrainian liberation. Hope we don't have to do mass deportations that can start to look like ethnic cleansing, with a sinister far right undertone.  Hope Russia does not arm anyone and everyone who is willing to make trouble for liberation.  Man that is a lot of points of failure.

I agree with Haiduk and Steve that there won't be any pro-russian insurgency in Crimea in case of UKR troops going in hot. But, yes, it is going to be hard to govern, for sure. Something good to look forward to anyway. 
It is quite hard to predict how the events will unfold exactly from now on. That raid was definitely fun though, even if only symbolical.

Long time since we left the old country. But that incidence made our blood boil. Hear lots of bad things about Mr Rutte hear he is doing something right. Saw all the funeral parlor limousines
on the way to a town called Hilversum. 42 F16's a small price to pay. 
 
 

The resilience of Russia's stock market and its economy is a complete mirage masking deeper pain, Yale researchers say (yahoo.com)
Best line
 

https://www.ukrainianworldcongress.org/reznikov-invites-f-16-pilots-to-join-the-ukrainian-foreign-legion/
Well it took about five minutes after the ink was dry on getting the planes to start standing up the flying tigers part two.
 
 

Unknown how true this is
In UK on F-16 will learn pilots-graduates of 2023. 
In Sweden will learn pilots with combat experience, graduates of 2016.
Looks like veterans will continue to fight on Soviet jets. 
 

https://t.me/operativnoZSU/110862
 

It's claimed Russian Tu-22M3 bomber in fire after yesterday attack on Soltsy-2 airfield in 680 km north from Ukriane.


 

The meme template that keeps on giving:

Ukraine officially asked Sweden about JAS-39. So, with very high probability they can fight together %)

If they are combat proven in Ukraine as a good enough solution, with a lower maintenance and training load, I would think Sweden could sell a TON of them. I realize F-35s have a lot more capability, and drones are coming like an avalanche, but there is still a lot to be said a for a manned fighter with NATO standard coms/hardpoints/radar and the ability to land on any decent road.

I didn't fight for the abstract concept of nationhood. But I DID choose to join the military (US Army) as a career. Because I love my friends and family, and being a soldier was my best way to serve THEM. When it actually came to war, I fought for the folks on my left and right. Nationhood sounds good as a thing to fight for, but there are very few people who actually do that.

Ok, I think this is a a pretty common misconception. Yes, there was a smaller chance that Guardsmen both Army National Guard (ANG) and Air National Guard being activated and sent to Vietnam, it wasn’t a sure thing. The Air National Guard actually mobilized 11 units on January 25, 1968, a week before the Tet Offensive. Three more ANG units were mobilized on May 13. ANG units deployed to Vietnam and South Korea. Also on May 13, 34 Army National Guard units were mobilized, with many of their 12,234 members levied to active-duty units. Eight Army Guard units deployed intact to Vietnam, with the first arriving in August of 1968. That was just a few of the deployments.
There were other, less sure ways to avoid being sent to Vietnam, but it came down to being in the “right place at the right time.” Personal example; in 1969, I enlisted just before High School graduation, in the Marine Corps for four years (with an Aviation Guaranty as I had passed the entry tests with a high enough score) so I wouldn’t be drafted into the Army Infantry for two years which would have guaranteed being sent to Vietnam. In Recruit Training at Paris Island, S.C., my general college test scores were high enough to qualify for Aviation and for Marine Officer Candidate School. When I was offered OCS (without aviation) and a two-year extension of active duty (six years), I weighted my options and remained enlisted because I felt sure that I would graduate as a Second Lt. Rifle Platoon Leader and be sent straight to Vietnam, do not pass go, do not collect $200. When I was sent to Fleet Marine Corps, Western Pacific, I received orders in Okinawa. We were in a long line to receive orders and the orders were Chu Lai for about five sets, but mine were for Iwakuni , Japan. Our Phantoms were F-4 J models that were too new to be allowed to deploy to a war zone, so we never were. I simply lucked out on that one even though I tried to transfer to Chu Lai, but didn’t succeed because they stopped split tours.
I personally take exception to the concept that joining an “alternative” Service of any type was done simply to avoid being sent to Vietnam. Anyone could join the Guard if they tested high enough. So the politicians who spouted the “he joined the Guard to avoid Vietnam” were just spouting BS.
For what it’s worth, I actually researched the history of the region, and our involvement there, and will completely agree that the whole thing was a complete travesty and lie fostered by our top politicians.
Sorry for the wall of text Steve, but those types of “observations” tend to infuriate me.

Whoa, there buddy.
Both my wife and I are lifelong runners. She once described my legs to someone else as dangerously sexy. The same can be said of her. Even today at age 68, she has the legs of a 30 year old. (I'm 66 and we both still run). Last week I was halfway through a 5 mile run, passed a lady on the sidewalk, as I moved out into the street to pass her (I don't like brushing past people as they seldom here you coming and you can scare them half to death by saying "On your left"). Got about 50 feet past her, hopped back on the sidewalk, and she yells out "Great legs!!!"  
Still got it. 🙂
So, engineers CAN be sexy. Even retired ones.
Funny thing was I was right near my turnaround point so I got to run back past her face-to-face this time. She did not seem embarrassed in the least, just smiled and waved. 
Dave
PS - Our first date was a lunchtime run. We worked at adjacent companies. I ran to her front gate, we went for a nice run down by Long Island Sound, and chatted a lot along the way. Very public, so very safe. 

Keep in mind the US elections are over a year away,and any policies that would harm Ukraine would take another 3 months or so to have any serious effects on their conduct of the war. Having said that I believe Trump getting back in office is a dangerous thing, but Ukraine still has a decent amount of time before any significant change in US policy can do damage. 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-and-china-sent-large-naval-patrol-near-alaska-127de28b
Sen. Dan Sullivan of Alaska, a Republican member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the patrol was a reminder that the U.S. has entered “a new era of authoritarian aggression” and applauded the robust U.S. response.
Making a sales call for the UA? As if this is going to stop US aid. But still, go practice somewhere else. 

Reportedly both bridges were attacked - Chonhar and Henichesk. Early Henichesk bridge was closed for civilian passing and used for military movement. 

Allegedly damages on Chonhar bridge

Henichesk bridge. Video of impact and photo of results - the flame on background is of gas pipe 

 
A few moments before. A SCALP missile on the bridge with personal autograph of Zelenskiy )

When first modern western armor became to arrive in Ukraine, I've read some indignant posts of "veterane brigades" representatives, why Bradleys got 47th, which "sit on their asses on Belarusian border, when we barely hold the enemy on donated techniclas"
I wonder, who on Kofman's opinion had to hold frontline, when veteran brigades would be leave Ukraine for training on western vehicles? They gave opportunity to train several other brigades instead. Also what he meant under "veteran brigades"? The same 47th brigade has many brigade level commanders transferred from 93rd brigade. Also, there are problem with many veterans, especialy who fought long time in ATO - they have "old warrior" complex and they have a problems to learn new features. About this wrote Roman Donik, UKR volunteer, who established the center of intensive effective training for infantrimen and squad leaders. He told many of "olds" , arriving to the center believed initially their survival under fire and intuition experience is better than field manual tatic instructions. And not all of them could finish the course and some of them were dropped out. Also German instructors told sometime experienced UKR soldiers don't want to listen them and enter to the disputes (though, after "you should bypass minefield" I not wonder). So, in some aspect will be better to teach a soldier from "zero level civilian", then re-train "old" servicemen.