NamEndedAllen
-
Posts
661 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by NamEndedAllen
-
-
12 minutes ago, billbindc said:
It looks to me more like there is an internal reaction from the Chinese military to burn any attempt of rapprochement before it gets traction. We'll see.
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.'"
-
44 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
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/ -
2 hours ago, The_Capt said:
If you want boom-boom at 100s of kms by the end of next week just jump over the line and send in ATACMS.
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.
-
1 hour ago, cesmonkey said:
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/
“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.
-
2 hours ago, Lethaface said:
The 'only' thing UKR needs to do is convince the average soldier that 'further resistance is futile'. While some/a bunch local tactical victories are indeed probably not enough, another wave of the Russian rear HQs/ammo dumps blowing up followed by another large strategic setback is a different casus. Everyone has his limits.
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.
-
5 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Based on what we're seeing I think the most plausible chain of events for 2023:
- this winter offensive fails to achieve anything even close to what Russia feels it needs
- Russia will not surrender, but instead continue to fight defensively
- Ukraine will have some successes in the coming months, perhaps not spectacular like the Kharkiv or Kherson operations, but still obvious and damaging (see separate point below)
- whatever negative things are going on within Russia that Putin is worried about will get worse. Especially if losses are so bad that a large desperation mobilization is once again required to keep the front from collapsing
- someone will make a move to take power away from Putin. This need not be an outright coup. It could be something negotiated, as I've just speculated about Gazprom's entrance into the PMC arena
- Russia's maximalist demands for a peace deal will soften, at first only superficially, but as things get worse there will be meaningful concessions
- Ukraine may reject negotiations, but it might also decide a pause has more advantages than disadvantages
- whether the war ends this year or extends into next year depends on Putin's continued ability to wage war, both politically and militarily
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.
-
49 minutes ago, Wartime said:
Thanks NEA!! Tonight I just got CMBN up and running with the help of Redwolf and staff. Runs great, very smooth panning. It is CM2 so that's one good reason why.
I'll adjust the Windows Display and Nvidia settings as suggested for a trial.
For $6 I just might download the GOG version, play in Win10 as it allows, and see if the clunkiness is a CM1 issue or my newer system issue. It would be nice not needing the CD's for license!
Thank you again!
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.
-
17 minutes ago, dan/california said:
Or is this a place to stash the children of the rich and/or privileged where they can claim to be legally unavailable for service at say, the Bakmuht front?
That’s a very interesting speculation!
-
6 hours ago, Wartime said:
It's been over 5 years and a couple of computer rebuilds since I played CM games. Just reinstalled and went through the pain of making them work in a Win10 environment. Thanks to this forum I found the major fix was to right click on app, go to Properties then Compatibility and used Run by Admin, Set mode to Windows 7 and Override high DPI scaling.
I have two monitors, one a 4k and one a HD. When I start the game the first time (deleted pref file) I don't have many options for resolution on HD monitor, mainly 1280 x 1024 at various refresh rates: 120, 119, 100, 75 and 60Hz. If I skip 60Hz, game freezes. I use 1280x1024 at 120Hz and the game runs.
Now that it's running my gripe is with Panning. It does so in a clunky way, not smooth at all. It's playable but a bit annoying. I don't remember if this is standard fair or something to do with newer systems running in compatibility mode?? Maybe there is a fix for this too?? Thanks for any advice!
My system:
i7-12700K 3.61 GHz ASUS ROG Strix Z690-F MB CORSAIR Vengeance DDR5 32GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 1080 Ti Nvidia 528.24 Driver 1/24/2023 Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD 2TB NVMe M.2 AOC C32G1 32" Curved Frameless Gaming Monitor, FHD 1920x1080 I am not currently accelerating any components
I know my Video Card is old but it still works pretty great! lol
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!
-
28 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
I argue that this, if it was a surveillance platform, was a pretty big mistake, not some deliberate strategic machinations by the unknowable Chinese grand strategy. Sure Chinese have been poking and prodding, intel gathering and playing reindeer games around the globe, so were the Russians...we get it, you guys are flexing.
But this stunt is way above a lot of thresholds. An incursion into NA airspace with intent (assuming the thing isn't just a weather balloon and all this is so much theatre) is not a small escalation. Further to do it with a blatantly overt platform, which is now causing all sorts of diplomatic pain does not track along with Chinese methods to date.
So it looks more like a weird error that is going to end up costing China, as their best play was - like Russia - to keep us all divided on the actual threat. For example, China is still Canada's second largest trading partner. So we talk tough and make noise but how much are we really willing to sacrifice here if we are not entirely convinced China is really a threat? Well plopping balloons all over the place over NA soil, which we shoot down and then show all the evidence to the planet, is just about the worst way to keep us divided on the issue. So China either decided to throw down and escalate for "reasons" or it was an embarrassing screwup.
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.
-
1 hour ago, The_Capt said:
we are going to see why it is a terrible freakin idea as the US military collects all the evidence and equipment.
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.
-
3 hours ago, The_Capt said:
So a big, fat, highly visible and extremely slow moving balloon is a terrible platform for strategic ISR. With the satellite threat it is not like one can leave your “sensitive sites” uncovered anyway. And the reaction time to something flying at the speed of a good Cessna at the strategic level is in days, so if you need to reposition something well you can break for coffee.
But it will get everyone excited and maybe isn’t a bad way to poke NORAD. Beyond that, well there is the entertainment value.
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 -
2 hours ago, cesmonkey said:
Nice to see:
Fox News Poll: Bipartisan support for sending funding, weapons to Ukraine
https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls/fox-news-poll-bipartisan-support-for-sending-funding-weapons-ukraineYes!
Thin margin though on the Independent and Republican side.
-
2 hours ago, The_Capt said:
Well there are about a dozen possible explanations. It is a weather balloon of some sort. It is military and experimental but went off course. They are simply screwing with us to see what happens. Or maybe it isn’t even Chinese. This thing has a whole Foo Fighters feel to it given that everyone is a bit edgy.
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.
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. -
7 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
Man these guys definitely have something for balloons. So 1) slow…glacial compared to a LEO satellite, 2) highly visible with radars - big *** bag of gas, 3) at mercy of winds.
For operational ISR and GPS back up sure. As a strat ISR platform…man I am not entirely onboard.
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. -
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
unless there's a negotiated settlement that is designed to ensure Ukraine is the one that is able to restart this war at an advantage, then negotiating should not be contemplated until Ukraine says it wants to negotiate.
Steve, I wish you would pin this statement so that it displays at the top of every page here!
-
1 hour ago, Artkin said:
I found the series by googling pc war games and I came across an article on PCmag or whatever with a tiny screenshot of the abrams from CMBS. I knew I was looking at something special.
The only reason I found this series was because I was fed up with the mainstream.
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.
-
5 hours ago, The_Capt said:
So coming back to this part. What makes this war very different is the whole “paternalistic” part. In this war the direction has gone the other way. In almost all of our wars of intervention or proxy we have had to do the pushing and shoring. We have pushed partners to our tempos and timelines because they have become more about us than the people fighting them.
In Ukraine the entire thing has gone the other way. Ukraine is leading the dance on this thing. They are the ones pulling us into their tempo and timelines - they are shoring us. We are not pushing them, we are barely keeping up. In fact the major concern now is that they may accelerate away from us into escalation. That is fundamentally different than just about every other morass we have been pulled into as we try and solve for humanity in the 20th and 21st century.
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.
-
1 hour ago, Kinophile said:
For some reason for me your copy paste comes out as oversized text...
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.
-
1 hour ago, Vet 0369 said:
My knowledge base and background is based on the fact that I worked for the U.S. Executive Branch for 22 years. My job was as a Senior Technical Writer for Policy and Regulations. Virtually everything I wrote had to be approved by our legal staff and published in the Federal Register.
“Congress passes laws. The Constitution states it’s the President’s job to “ensure those laws are faithfully executed.” So, Presidents often use Executive Orders to direct federal workers on how to enforce existing laws, sometimes changing direction during times of war or other emergencies.
Executive Orders do not create laws or give the President new powers.
“They are going back to the original documents, back to the statutes, back to the Constitution,” explained Gillespie. “Presidents can’t execute any laws that don’t already exist.””
In each “new” Administration, every Executive Order (E.O.) must by signed (reissued) by the new President or it no longer exists.
Bolding is mine. I hope this is seen as an attempt to educate, and not as derailing this topic. Nough said. I will not respond to this subject any further.
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”
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
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.