Butschi

Generally decentralizing the power grid would be the way to go. So, yes solar panels everywhere. Well, we've kind of been in the process of doing that for years, so that is not going to happen in half a year. Much less so keeping in mind that China is the no. 1 supplier...

I speculate that they "follow the book" to reduce the chance of corruption.  Not an easy problem to solve.

Generally decentralizing the power grid would be the way to go. So, yes solar panels everywhere. Well, we've kind of been in the process of doing that for years, so that is not going to happen in half a year. Much less so keeping in mind that China is the no. 1 supplier...

I'm no expert on the French system but as far as I understand it, the French president has the same or more executive power than the US president.

I'm no expert on the French system but as far as I understand it, the French president has the same or more executive power than the US president.

First results for the election to the EU parliament. With a strengthening of right wing parties (many of which are... less than opposed to Russia), things may get "interesting" in the near future.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/european-parliament-poised-rightward-shift-after-final-voting-2024-06-09/
In France, Le Pen's party clearly won the election. As a result Macron has dissolved the parliament.
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-european-election-results-2024-emmanuel-macron-dissolve-parliament-france/
Edit: Note that EU institutions are the second largest donor for Ukraine, so the outcome of this election may be a similarly big deal for our discussion here as the next Presidential election in the US.

There are some for different time periods but the ones I know are more on a grand strategy level than tactical. Compared to wargames where at least parts of the simulation aspect are physics (and thus calculable) a real small scale simulation seems difficult. You'd have to model lots of psychology and social interactions. And frankly, psychology is one of the weaker parts of CM (not that I know of other games that do it better).

This. The way some here have started treating Macron as the Second Coming always makes me raise an eyebrow. Remember that Macron was called out for not doing his part - by Scholz no less. And for good reason, French aid to Ukraine is nowhere near what others have given, neither in relative not absolute terms. It is very clear that this is about France's position, power and influence in the EU and NATO and probably related to upcoming elections.

This. The way some here have started treating Macron as the Second Coming always makes me raise an eyebrow. Remember that Macron was called out for not doing his part - by Scholz no less. And for good reason, French aid to Ukraine is nowhere near what others have given, neither in relative not absolute terms. It is very clear that this is about France's position, power and influence in the EU and NATO and probably related to upcoming elections.

Worth pointing out that we actually know Russia seriously considered using nuclear weapons: 
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/02/us/politics/russia-ukraine-nuclear-weapons.html
And we know that the US got India and China to help forestall it: 
https://www.businessinsider.com/us-asked-non-allies-prevent-russia-using-nuclear-weapons-report-2024-3?op=1
So, while I do not in any way get the vapors about escalation, it's clearly a real and extremely dangerous possibility and we shouldn't pretend otherwise. 
 
 
 
 

This right here.  You (and a few others) have framed this war in absolutist terms, early from the outset.  So if I hold that Ukraine is not worth a global nuclear war, this somehow means my position is that “Ukraine isn’t worth it to NATO to fall”.  Before I expressed frustration with Ukrainian Western bashing and was accused of promoting genocide.
Pure and utter BS.  You and others are substituting thought and analysis with dogma.  You over inflate this war to the point that there is no room for negotiation.  And then swing that stick around like a zealot.
My position was never that “Ukraine is not worth it to NATO.”  Considering the expense NATO nations are going to keep Ukraine in this war that statement is patently false and you should apologize for trying to assign it to me.  My position is that Ukraine is not worth uncontrolled nuclear escalation and here NATO very much agrees with me.  In fact nothing in France’s position reflects a shift towards this either.  However, to you, the US being nervous about Ukrainian strikes in Russia…on Russian nuclear infrastructure no less, is somehow “weak tea.”  You have lost the ability to see this war objectively - this much is very clear.
And now you appear to be supporting French incremental escalation, but for pages have been foot stamping against US incrementalism along the exact same lines.  Macron may be embarking on ramping up pressure, so is the US in green lighting strikes into Russia - this proves my point not whatever yours is (which frankly is not clear).
And here again.  We have already seen escalations - hell Baltic states are talking about troops on the ground in Western Ukraine. Nor have I ever said further escalation is off the table.  Your inability to see the difference between incremental escalation and dangerous reckless escalation is frankly astounding.  You have made the leap between Ukraine striking Russian nuclear tripwire infrastructure, and Macron threatening to send in trainers and support.  I would say you have lost the bubble but you are clearly inside one.

So that is how you are translating Macron’s position?  That France is so invested in Ukraine that it is willing to risk nuclear war and direct French involvement in this war rather than let Ukraine fall?
Well first off that is simply not true. Macron, who btw in a liberal democracy does not represent all French people everywhere, is proposing we take another rung up an escalation ladder to shore up Ukraine and demonstrate resolve.  If he were so invested in Ukraine to the point that this war is indeed existential to France then we would likely be seeing French formations in Ukrainian already. 
This war definitely has an impact on European security.  In fact it is pretty clear that European security has already been destabilized by Russia violation of international order.  However, your argument is also sucking and blowing at the same time.  You argue that Russia winning in Ukraine is existential, but that threat will somehow fracture the alliances designed to counter that threat.  That is not how things work.  Russia success, which frankly is a pretty long shot, would drive nations together within NATO because of the increasing insecurity, not pull them apart.  We have seen this effect already with Sweden and Finland.
Further Macron is not right - you are immediately saying that he is because it supports your position (somewhat).  Nor are his motives pure.  Macron is playing the French power card for domestic consumption.  He is making a move to be seen as a leader within Europe in this perpetual echo of the 20th century.  He is using this war as an opportunity.  Again of France was truly “all in” then as a free nation, there would already be French troops in Ukraine in force.  Macron is posturing and signaling to effect.
The fact that you somehow translate this as “Hey France is ok with nuclear brinksmanship over Ukraine” really demonstrates where your thinking is at in this matter.  You are free to have and express your opinion but my position is that you are wrong.  Ukraine is very important.  The West still has escalation room and may use it.  But we are not going to risk a full on direct war with Russia over Ukraine without a concomitant direct attack by Russia on NATO.  We already did WW1 - where the world got pulled into a conflagration over a small power - in the nuclear age this is not an option.
Macron is free to posture and even escalate unilaterally.  But Ukraine does not pose an existential threat to either Europe or NATO, no matter what rhetoric is employed.  In fact the existential threat Macron refers to is a loss of security guarantees from the US, which is a whole other thing.  The threat is a global power vacuum if the US contracts due to domestic politics - the leading Republican candidate is a convicted criminal FFS. This entire thing is no longer even about Ukraine, it is about European security in a post-US world. That is a much larger problem that a glorious victory in Ukraine will not solve, but a defeat may create a forcing function.
My honest opinion, and has been for some time, is that you are staring far too hard at this one war.  It has become unhealthy and bordering on obsession. From your comments for some time now, the future of all humanity seems to hang on this conflict.  This has skewed your logic into very dangerous waters but if the only lens you apply to international relations is Ukraine then it probably makes sense.  My honest advice is to maybe take a break from this and look up and around. There are other things happening in the world other than this war. The primary strategy of every major power has been to contain it, manage it and push for the best outcome we can - not full on direct involvement which would come with expansion.

(evidently, this too is a UL)
Steve @Battlefront.com can you special flag that post somehow so folks don't miss it?

Fair enough. I for one just feel that my knowledge is somewhat inadequate compared to some people here with an actual military background. Which obviously doesn't prevent me voicing my opinion.

To be fair, that is true for most of us here who are mere armchair generals. Which usually doesn't keep us from judging military operations on a daily basis and with a lot of passion.
 

Or it was an ATACMs strike, or on the outer edge of GMLRS and the UA did some quick repositioning. I have a serious problem with the “Russia Sux” line of thinking.  It is a lazy heuristic that gets tossed around far too often to explain phenomenon.  Sometimes it may be a simple screw up but Ukrainian targeting has been profoundly improving over the last year, as a bunch of burning scrap metal at very long ranges demonstrates.
Russian complacency is far too convenient in this case with so little actual evidence of what happened. Regardless, the UA spotted and struck a HVT that was likely 10s of kms inside Russia.  They did so before the target could move, so likely first salvo.  Let’s not write the whole thing off to “Russia Sux” just yet.

I swear to God, the Ukraine or Death extreme thinking is as bad as pro-Russian narratives for providing insights. The Ukraine is Always Right and Total Victory or the West will Fall narratives are dangerously delusional.  It traps us into a forever war with zero negotiation room or off ramps.  Honestly if this was the case, a fast first nuclear strike on Russia makes the most sense…and worse some of these extreme views might actually be on side with this.
There are days where I wonder if there is any sane ground left. We have diplomats and politicians treating this like an upgunned trade dispute. Russians thinking it is 1905 and time for Imperial ambitions, quoting doctrines centuries old as justification for gross violations. Pro-Ukrainian extremes that if Russia does not lose this war unconditionally all Western democracies will collapse into anarchy and we should be ready to risk full on nuclear war.
And we are a moderate forum by any metrics.

I disagree.  Ukrainian genocide is a given.  In ‘22 it would have likely been cultural with a dose of brutal oppression.  After the last two years, I do not want to think about the level of vengeance that would be visited upon the Ukrainian people if Russia somehow prevailed.
As to Western collapse…nonsense.  You have pinned NATO, EU and Chinese expansion on this one war.  To the point the entire western world depends upon it.  This is simply not true.  First off, we could win this war and still see NATO and EU fold up, they were under intense political pressure before this war even started.  I think it more likely we will see western powers rally closer together in an Ukraine losing situation.  Some may decide to jump but a dangerous Russia and China are a “united we stand” mechanism, not an “every one for themselves”…and I will raise you Sweden and Finland to prove it.
As to the “Fall of Western Democracies” if we lose in Ukraine…again utter nonsense. Western voters are not absorbed by this war. In fact western ennui and apathy is the major challenge in keeping up political support for this war.  If Ukraine falls and bad things happen, western powers will embrace refugees (for awhile) and quickly change the channel, like we have for a long list of “troubles over there” for the last thirty years. Western democracies are more likely to tear themselves apart over a myriad of internal issues than a war most North Americans can’t find on a map.
Oversubscribing this war is bad as undersubscribing.  Because if you are framing this war as existential for the entire western world well then risking a full on Russian collapse or even nuclear war makes perfect sense…but it is factually wrong.
So, you may “know” but you clearly do not understand.

....Which so far have been 100% pure drive-by opinion, untainted by any documentation.
At least meme or something.

To be fair, that is true for most of us here who are mere armchair generals. Which usually doesn't keep us from judging military operations on a daily basis and with a lot of passion.
 

To be fair, that is true for most of us here who are mere armchair generals. Which usually doesn't keep us from judging military operations on a daily basis and with a lot of passion.
 

To be fair, that is true for most of us here who are mere armchair generals. Which usually doesn't keep us from judging military operations on a daily basis and with a lot of passion.
 

??  Which one?  The first was over 100 pages long before annexes.
I want it put in a wine cellar so that I may drink quality in peace before I fade into the dark.
Come back in a decade or two.  The problem with generations older than us is that they are trying very hard to forget/erase their mistakes. And the one behind us have not made any that they can see yet.  We do not have either luxury.

Unsurprising.  For the record I am a Gen X, caught between two overly entitled and self-righteous generations - one we are putting into homes, the other through university.
We have tolerated breaches of "non-aggression and potential genocide" before (see Rawanda, Yugoslavia, Syria and Sudan), so before one climbs on the soapbox, check your history books. 
You are free to hold onto your position all you like, but do not come in here and "missionary" someone who has been playing these games a lot longer and a lot closer to the heat that you ever will.  I am as free as you are to cast cautious eyes on Ukraine for every reason we did not pull them into NATO before 2022.  On this thread alone I have seen: antisemitism, xenophobic anti-immigration, continual western shaming, possible violations of LOAC, reckless targeting and reports of corruption. 
Ukraine is a nation worth fighting for and supporting, but high minded principles will only carry so far.  Our interest align..to a point. And always keep an eye on partners and never pretend that they are just like us in every way.

Sentiments like this make we wonder why we are bankrolling this whole thing.  FFS we could have saved ourselves a couple hundred billion and dropped a new Iron Curtain if this is what we can expect from partners.