NamEndedAllen

Will be interested in how they plan to avoid the Ukraine/USA intel magic eye(s) and ears, once things start coalescing for each spearhead. Also, the tantrum by Musk about denying Ukraine Starlink use for drones is suspiciously coinciding with this buildup.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f-22-shoots-down-new-object-flying-high-over-alaskan-waters

Re China physical incursions, the USA deciding “No mas”: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f-22-shoots-down-new-object-flying-high-over-alaskan-waters "As an Alaskan, I am so angry. I want to use other words. But I’m not going to," Lisa Murkowsk, a Republican Senator from Alaska, told reporters following a classified briefing on that incident yesterday. "It seems to me the clear message to China is: ‘We got free range in Alaska.'"

Covers much more than desertion. It’s an interesting article covering the challenges of discipline in a hastily expanded army from 250 thousand to over a million in a matter of months. Little vetting of recruits due to time pressures. Sustained war fighting bringing more problems than equipment and strategy/tactics. Some guys avoiding any punishment by paying a sum (to who? Commanding officer?). Others dealt with formally. All sorts of discipline issues. Questioning orders, drunkenness, etc. Of course there is push back, not all entirely unwarranted. “The new punitive rules remove discretion and turn courts into a “calculator” for doling out punishment to soldiers, regardless of the reasons for their offenses, lawyer Anton Didenko argued in a column on Ukraine’s Interfax news agency.” Not surprisingly, not all commanders are especially qualified, and cause some of the issues And: Zelenskyy, in his response to the popular petition asking him to scrap the changes, agreed that disciplinary action against military personnel should take into account their individual circumstances, and promised that the cabinet of ministers would further consider how to improve the disciplinary mechanism — though he did not specify when this work might be done; nor suspend the law in the meantime.” And: “… many discipline problems are rooted in ineffective or careless command, as well as the strain placed on Kyiv’s forces battling a far larger army of invaders, meaning they are not rotated as often as they ought to be. “Fatigue and trauma lead to mental disorders, and bring chaos, negligence and even depravity into a soldier’s life. This strongly affects fighting qualities and obedience,” the officer said.”

Some rumblings and background. https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-zelenskyy-war-military-law/

Please do! And soon. Tanks and jets are fine for the pipeline to the future of a NATO standardized military. But now? More artillery, munitions, communications, training, all the bit less sexy but vital fundamentals, today. Ukraine has earned trust and whatever assurances are necessary should be done and accepted, and the upgrades delivered. The value in disruption of Russian planning and logistics alone will be worth a lot.

Also: https://eurasiantimes.com/in-ukraine-war-russian-su-57-fighters-destroy-targets-punch-holes/ https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/russia-using-new-su-57-jets-against-ukraine/ https://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/news/defense-aviation-news/2022-news-aviation-aerospace/may/8406-analysis-first-use-of-russian-su-57-fighter-aircraft-in-ukraine-s-war.html “According to the source, they are delivering standoff missile attacks. As the source specified, the Aerospace Force started to use Su-57 aircraft two or three weeks after the special operation began. Used also for their more advanced sensors and networking abilities, besides as launch platforms.

The problem is the assumption that “the average soldier” knows as much as we do about the overall shape of the war, moment to moment. Given the depictions of the RA, the careless treating of newly mobilized/seized citizens as practically fodder, and the overall clamp within Russia on factual knowledge about events in the war and the world, I have doubts that average soldier will know about a defeat far away in another sector of the war. I have doubts they even know much beyond their own unit. Whether higher command levels might become radicalized by defeats they do know of is another question. Love of Mother Russia and their military could conceivably come into play if they believe the civilian authority is destroying both. That too would be a big leap. WWII is fresher in Russian minds than 1917, and the military was, as we used to say in Wyoming, whipped like a rented mule - prior to and during that war. Some sort of collapse of some kind will always be a possibility. The difficulty is understanding how likely, and when. The war is only been a year old now.

Steve, can you pin something to just a thread? This should be memorialized for easy reference. Your specific takes for what may develop in what time frame have a good track record. Lots here to use as a scorecard in the unfolding real life drama caused by Russia.

No problem! Glad to hear you have the great CMBN squared away. I went ahead with all three GOG CMx1 versions some years ago, despite having original boxed releases with those fine paper manuals from years ago, as well as the later three game boxed collection release. Because the GOG versions just work. And cost next to nothing. I double checked panning in CMBB earlier, just to make sure. Quite smooth indeed.

That’s a very interesting speculation!

Greetings, Wartime. I run CMx1 on Windows 10 with no difficulties, including extensive modding and Reshade. I had the same video card as yours until recently. Replaced it with the 3060ti, no problems. A much older i7 cpu and nobody. I use the GOG editions, which may be why I have an easy go of it in Win10. I do not use any special Compatibility settings, all boxes unchecked. On the DPI Settings option from the Compatibility window I have *not* checked “Program DPI. Down below in “High DPI scaling override” “Application” is displayed. inthe Windows Display settings window, Ive clicked on “Graphics Settings” and have Hardware -accelerated GPU scheduling “On”. “Graphics Performance” is set to “Desktop app” in Nvidia Control Panel, Manage 3D settings” I needed to make a Program Settings entry for CMx1 sims, not let them use “Global Settings”. I set “Antialiasing FXAA” OFF Also, “Texture filtering Negative LOD bias” is CLAMP. Not sure whether any other settings will be an issue for you or I “Anisotropic filtering” is highest, at 16x. “Antialiasing Mode” is ENHANCE APPLICATION SETTING. In that GOG dxcfg.exe configuration app in the game root directory, I have: Display mode Sme as Desktop Aspect ratio correction Enabled (default) Scaling Method - Screen fit (default) vertical synchronization- Set by app (default) ****** As you can see, I didn’t have to change much at all, except that Nvidia FXAA OFF was critical to get the Menu lettering to display properly. The GOG editions are dirt cheap, and periodically go on sale for even less - if that version might help. Best luck to you!

Those are good points, and plausible. The atmospheric currents where it is operating could well have interfered with a much less aggressive mission. I do think it is worth keeping an open mind about this one - both for your take, and for other versions. The simultaneous appearance of another one over Latin America, reported in multiple sources, plus the track of the North American one seem notable. No matter what, meteorological, weather, airstream data is of course of military value. Nonetheless, your interpretation as an accident is reasonable both for how bizarrely visible and for the political timing. The Chinese have not been proceeding like unintelligible idiots. So either an honest accident, or something got their backs up enough to believe they actually needed to do this for some value we don’t see.

Pretty sure the Chinese were and are well aware of that. Have to think at this stage that we on the outside of DIA and the rest, have very little knowledge of the Chinese intentions with this and the other increased and highly visible surveillance episodes over the past year or more. They’ve swarmed naval assets in the Pacific with drones, sometimes rather close in to the Coast. They’ve had a series of Intel balloons over sensitive sites in the Pacific. I’d bet there are more incidents not public. This aerial surveillance device is a new generation not publicly seen before. What the stepped up non-satellite, unmanned naval/air layer of their Intel collecting means is unknown. Might be triggered by the increasing military and policy talk about the likelihood “war with China”, potential Taiwan invasion concerns due to new USA focus on Ukraine. But we don’t know. The only thing we do know is that China is the single near-peer military threat to the USA, and has publicly announced its intentions to equal or surpass it in all capabilities by 2050. Which suggests they don’t feel it necessary to pretend they aren’t there yet. So why the ramping up of incidents, public or not? As Steve is wont to say, all we have are tea leaves.

Honestly, not debating USA response - just passing on the reporting and the military responses here. I get your opinion that the new generations of surveillance balloons are basically a stunt or something of little value. China though is investing in them and deploying them regularly. Down here the response has been quite…enthusiastic. Perhaps you see it as training exercises, rather than actual security discomfort. Interestingly, the USA Secretary of State just canceled/postponed his visit to China citing the intrusion. And F-22s were added to the intercept/monitoring deployments. The Chinese platform is controllable, and its path has tracked across a number of sensitive sites. “NBC News also reported that F-22 Raptors from Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada, along with at least one E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) radar plane were sent to the area as deliberations were ongoing about whether or not to try to bring it down. Nellis is not home to any combat-coded units equipped with the F-22, suggesting those aircraft may have been diverted from the ongoing Red Flag 23-1 exercise being run from that base. The War Zone reached out to the Pentagon for more information, but was told no additional details could be provided at this time.” https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/chinas-spy-balloon-over-montana-is-part-of-a-larger-more-troubling-pattern

Yes! Thin margin though on the Independent and Republican side.

I was curious because F-35s were scrambled. Turns out the Chinese are doing this a lot. Here, Hawaii, and elsewhere. Also, this: “It is worth noting that the U.S. military is actively testing how it might use similar high-altitude balloons, with the ability to navigate long distances to areas of interest and hold station against prevailing winds, to perform various tasks. This includes intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, but also a range of other potential mission sets like communications relaying and long-range strike, as you can read more about here. “ Companies in the United States and elsewhere have also been developing similar systems for commercial purposes, too. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/chinas-spy-balloon-over-montana-is-part-of-a-larger-more-troubling-pattern AND FOR THOSE IN CANADA: ‘UPDATE: We cannot confirm these details at this time, but there may be another aerial intrusion underway in Canada, which is partners with the USAF in NORAD. Washington Post's Andrew deGrandpré also mentions highly strategic Guam as being a past target area for similar balloons, which is unsurprising. Master aircraft tracking sleuth, Steffan Watkins, also has an interesting thread that may point to Canadian CF-18s having intercepted and tracked this balloon days ago.

So, the Chinese military is ignorant? Or it wasn’t intended for NA, and went astray from a Pacific target location? Also, any idea where it may have been launched from? (Edit - if intended for North America, Washington State…)

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/3841230-ukraine-warns-russia-massing-500000-troops-on-border-for-offensive/ Whatever the accuracy, the actual number, is it a fair assumption that the Russian plan is to launch some sort of large scale offensive during the window between now and when the AFU is able to effectively integrate the new tranches of Western kit along with the relevant training - to launch their own drive(s)? Not assuming a *successful* Russian offensive, simply whatever mass they have cobbled together to inflict as much pain, suffering, new war crimes, and civilian hurt as possible.

Steve, I wish you would pin this statement so that it displays at the top of every page here!

Probably a solid reason Battlefront is taking the painful steps required to be listed for sale on both Slitherine/Matrix (wargamers’ sites) and Steam (wider visibility to the general world of gamers). But still for sale on its own site, here. For Battlefront’s secure and successful ongoing future, The hassles and hurdles for being sold on these sites presumably and hopefully are for a limited period of adjustment, after which Battlefront may be able to achieve more of the developers’ aims and the community’s desire. That seems like a reasonable risk.

This is an excellent summation of the critical distinction and context. It’s a full on conventional war in Europe, started by the country NATO was formed to defend against. Except NATO isn’t the direct target. So, it’s complicated. Maybe the point is obvious - once so clearly stated by @The_Capt - but underscoring the singular push/pull difference to so many other conflicts surely will be central in future histories analyzing the shaping of post WWII conflicts. The Korean War is the only vaguely similar circumstance that comes to mind - really vague, given the bloody UN combat intervention. The Arab-Israeli wars and the proxy roles were each too brief to bear much comparison. Thanks again for the post.

Yes! Agreed, apologies. I’ll work on that. My tablet doesn’t display the “size” drop-down tab - or the quote option either. Don’t know why, but might be related to limitation of window size. I’ll figure out a way to get those,or write post elsewhere and copy it back here.

Tidying up a sense of the past few pages which are a redux of several other sequences in the thread. 1. Russia has already lost. 2. It cannot win. 3. it has insignificant offensive combat power. 4. Whatever technical and equipment replacements Russia may cobble together will only slow the draining away of its ability to wage war. 5. Ukraine grows stronger by the week as massive Western war fighting equipment pours in and more and more troops receive high level training by Western militaries. 6. Ukraine’s current ability to plan and wage successful defense and offensives is already much superior to Russia’s. Only vaguely obscured by the poor weather conditions. 7. Therefore Ukraine may not retake its own territory and should negotiate peace in exchange for all or much of Crimea and the Donbas. Because if Russia loses those Ukrainian Oblastsillegally seized by war, it will implode, collapse into chaos. The West cannot accept that outcome because it is bad. It will ensure that Ukraine negotiates and accepts loss of extensive territory in exchange for an agreement by both sides to end the war, not just for a cease fire. 1 through 6 have a lot of general agreement, with some minor variations. A few posts reasonably push back on 1 and 2. 7. Is far more controversial. Certainly it is one scenario. Many see other outcomes. The future is not written. Yet.

Thanks for your note. I appreciate it and your experience and service. Although we are veering off topic, Presidential Powers are relevant for Ukraine especially over the two years under USA divided government To clarify the formal nature of Presidential Executive Orders, here is the outline of their nature and authority for those who may not be familiar with the specifics of EOs. This isn’t politics! It is civics. While not legislation, they are binding on the government. Congress cannot easily remove them - by passing legislation. They are indeed powerful instruments of policy. Here is an excerpt, fuller details below: “Executive orders are not legislation; they require no approval from Congress, and Congress cannot simply overturn them. Congress may pass legislation that might make it difficult, or even impossible, to carry out the order, such as removing funding. Only a sitting U.S. President may overturn an existing executive order by issuing another executive order to that effect” https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/publications/teaching-legal-docs/what-is-an-executive-order-/ “An executive order is a signed, written, and published directive from the President of the United States that manages operations of the federal government. They are numbered consecutively, so executive orders may be referenced by their assigned number, or their topic. Other presidential documents are sometimes similar to executive orders in their format, formality, and issue, but have different purposes. Proclamations, which are also signed and numbered consecutively, communicate information on holidays, commemorations, federal observances, and trade. Administrative orders—e.g. memos, notices, letters, messages—are not numbered, but are still signed, and are used to manage administrative matters of the federal government. All three types of presidential documents—executive orders, proclamations, and certain administrative orders—are published in the Federal Register, the daily journal of the federal government that is published to inform the public about federal regulations and actions. They are also catalogued by the National Archives as official documents produced by the federal government. Both executive orders and proclamations have the force of law, much like regulations issued by federal agencies, so they are codified under Title 3 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which is the formal collection of all of the rules and regulations issued by the executive branch and other federal agencies. Executive orders are not legislation; they require no approval from Congress, and Congress cannot simply overturn them. Congress may pass legislation that might make it difficult, or even impossible, to carry out the order, such as removing funding. Only a sitting U.S. President may overturn an existing executive order by issuing another executive order to that effect”