Billy Ringo

A few random comments from the bleachers:
1. In a non-military industry, I've worked with some of the best AI gurus in my business who have been trying to apply and leverage machine learning and artificial intelligence for years.   MASSIVE amounts of data. It's not easy and not nearly as productive as many selling the technology proclaim.  Like--"don't believe 90% of the BS because it's all wishful for thinking for most of them."   There is gold in AI---but be careful about who proclaims they've found it and when they will be able to truly deliver.
2. The daily Russian kill/destroy numbers over the past few weeks are significantly and fairly consistently high on casualties, low on weapons destruction.  Is this because of the weather? A pause in combat operations? Russia running out of military hardware?  Mobilized forces being thrown into the meat grinder?  Something else?  Or "D", all of the above?
3. I'm still of the strong opinion that there will not be a tangible decrease in Republican/Conservative support of Ukraine.  Yes, there are rumblings and some outliers--but when all is said and done the support will remain.    My reasoning and to reiterate--just my humble opinion:
The conservative voices questioning support of Ukraine are being magnified beyond their actual political power and influence.  Certainly wouldn't be the first time the media or some self-interest group tried to sow division where it may not be and push their own agenda. Conservative support for Ukraine is still strong and most Republican politicians know and understand that.  I was raised and live in the South---Ukrainian support is flat out solid in my little sphere of the world.  I work and talk with people all over North America--I don't here any rumblings of dissatisfaction.  And to the very esteemed posters who have mentioned this topic over the past 24 hours--the locations are California, Seattle, Oregon, etc.  Just like my residence in Tennessee is not indicative of the opinions of the rest of the country--those views may not be reflective of the flyover states.  Where we live influences our perspective whether we like it or not. Rand Paul is not as crazy or Putin loving as some may believe.  I grew up in Western Kentucky and have friends that know him.  He is outspoken and takes a different approach than many, but underneath he's fairly reasonable and his verbal positioning is to frequently just challenge the traditional group think of his own party.  Accountability is important to him, so it's no surprise he questions spending---but his desire to cut funding to Ukraine may be less than it appears. Peace and thanks to everyone on this forum for their brilliant and informative comments.

Thanks for that excellent post, most appreciated.  I would respectfully disagree w the above statement, not to pick a fight, but so that people are not misinformed.  Paul's word's on Ukraine, on the senate floor, if said on this forum woud've had him expelled as an RU troll.  His lies, again on the senate floor, about covid contributed to the ignorance that led to thousands and thousands of americans dying needlessly.  He continually attacks science, fact and evidence, in public on the senate floor.  He may be seem reasonable in person, but his record in public is despicable.  If Rand Paul had his way, Ukraine would've been annexed by Putin -- we know this because that's what he fought for on the senate floor, it's in the public record.
Other than that, I very much agree w everything you posted.  And with KevinKin's follow up post.  I think there won't be enough radical votes to stop UKR funding.  What I worry about is delaying tactics and getting smaller aid packages due to the pro-putin folks.

100% agree. Not concerned with oversight at all. It's the role of Congress. There is chance to actually get more support for Ukraine. No politician wants to vote against a nation on the verge of a major geopolitical shake up in the West's favor. Rogue votes will be made, but they are for representative's constituents to high five over. Those votes will have nothing to do with Ukraine per se. But just a protest about foreign spending in general. Ukraine does not have a blank check, but the support required for victory will be there in the end. This might be the most bipartisan issue in years and really tick off cable news. There are no ratings fighting over a few hundred million one way or the other. 

This. Russians continuously attacking and counter-attacking on Svatove and Bakhmut directions, using mobilized and former prisoners. Russian milbloggers angry, because HQ's often don't attach mobilized to existing units (or make it in formal way) - they just combine them in "march battalions", equipped only with infantry weapon, with huge lack of radios (and if they have something, this is Cold War age R-159 or crowdfunded Chineese radios) and throw in desperate attacks only with one goal - to delay UKR advance. Though, on Svatove direction already almost deployed reinforcements of troops, who withdrew from Kherson, so in nearest time, Russian attempts to push UKR troops back will be intensified

A few random comments from the bleachers:
1. In a non-military industry, I've worked with some of the best AI gurus in my business who have been trying to apply and leverage machine learning and artificial intelligence for years.   MASSIVE amounts of data. It's not easy and not nearly as productive as many selling the technology proclaim.  Like--"don't believe 90% of the BS because it's all wishful for thinking for most of them."   There is gold in AI---but be careful about who proclaims they've found it and when they will be able to truly deliver.
2. The daily Russian kill/destroy numbers over the past few weeks are significantly and fairly consistently high on casualties, low on weapons destruction.  Is this because of the weather? A pause in combat operations? Russia running out of military hardware?  Mobilized forces being thrown into the meat grinder?  Something else?  Or "D", all of the above?
3. I'm still of the strong opinion that there will not be a tangible decrease in Republican/Conservative support of Ukraine.  Yes, there are rumblings and some outliers--but when all is said and done the support will remain.    My reasoning and to reiterate--just my humble opinion:
The conservative voices questioning support of Ukraine are being magnified beyond their actual political power and influence.  Certainly wouldn't be the first time the media or some self-interest group tried to sow division where it may not be and push their own agenda. Conservative support for Ukraine is still strong and most Republican politicians know and understand that.  I was raised and live in the South---Ukrainian support is flat out solid in my little sphere of the world.  I work and talk with people all over North America--I don't here any rumblings of dissatisfaction.  And to the very esteemed posters who have mentioned this topic over the past 24 hours--the locations are California, Seattle, Oregon, etc.  Just like my residence in Tennessee is not indicative of the opinions of the rest of the country--those views may not be reflective of the flyover states.  Where we live influences our perspective whether we like it or not. Rand Paul is not as crazy or Putin loving as some may believe.  I grew up in Western Kentucky and have friends that know him.  He is outspoken and takes a different approach than many, but underneath he's fairly reasonable and his verbal positioning is to frequently just challenge the traditional group think of his own party.  Accountability is important to him, so it's no surprise he questions spending---but his desire to cut funding to Ukraine may be less than it appears. Peace and thanks to everyone on this forum for their brilliant and informative comments.

A few random comments from the bleachers:
1. In a non-military industry, I've worked with some of the best AI gurus in my business who have been trying to apply and leverage machine learning and artificial intelligence for years.   MASSIVE amounts of data. It's not easy and not nearly as productive as many selling the technology proclaim.  Like--"don't believe 90% of the BS because it's all wishful for thinking for most of them."   There is gold in AI---but be careful about who proclaims they've found it and when they will be able to truly deliver.
2. The daily Russian kill/destroy numbers over the past few weeks are significantly and fairly consistently high on casualties, low on weapons destruction.  Is this because of the weather? A pause in combat operations? Russia running out of military hardware?  Mobilized forces being thrown into the meat grinder?  Something else?  Or "D", all of the above?
3. I'm still of the strong opinion that there will not be a tangible decrease in Republican/Conservative support of Ukraine.  Yes, there are rumblings and some outliers--but when all is said and done the support will remain.    My reasoning and to reiterate--just my humble opinion:
The conservative voices questioning support of Ukraine are being magnified beyond their actual political power and influence.  Certainly wouldn't be the first time the media or some self-interest group tried to sow division where it may not be and push their own agenda. Conservative support for Ukraine is still strong and most Republican politicians know and understand that.  I was raised and live in the South---Ukrainian support is flat out solid in my little sphere of the world.  I work and talk with people all over North America--I don't here any rumblings of dissatisfaction.  And to the very esteemed posters who have mentioned this topic over the past 24 hours--the locations are California, Seattle, Oregon, etc.  Just like my residence in Tennessee is not indicative of the opinions of the rest of the country--those views may not be reflective of the flyover states.  Where we live influences our perspective whether we like it or not. Rand Paul is not as crazy or Putin loving as some may believe.  I grew up in Western Kentucky and have friends that know him.  He is outspoken and takes a different approach than many, but underneath he's fairly reasonable and his verbal positioning is to frequently just challenge the traditional group think of his own party.  Accountability is important to him, so it's no surprise he questions spending---but his desire to cut funding to Ukraine may be less than it appears. Peace and thanks to everyone on this forum for their brilliant and informative comments.

A few random comments from the bleachers:
1. In a non-military industry, I've worked with some of the best AI gurus in my business who have been trying to apply and leverage machine learning and artificial intelligence for years.   MASSIVE amounts of data. It's not easy and not nearly as productive as many selling the technology proclaim.  Like--"don't believe 90% of the BS because it's all wishful for thinking for most of them."   There is gold in AI---but be careful about who proclaims they've found it and when they will be able to truly deliver.
2. The daily Russian kill/destroy numbers over the past few weeks are significantly and fairly consistently high on casualties, low on weapons destruction.  Is this because of the weather? A pause in combat operations? Russia running out of military hardware?  Mobilized forces being thrown into the meat grinder?  Something else?  Or "D", all of the above?
3. I'm still of the strong opinion that there will not be a tangible decrease in Republican/Conservative support of Ukraine.  Yes, there are rumblings and some outliers--but when all is said and done the support will remain.    My reasoning and to reiterate--just my humble opinion:
The conservative voices questioning support of Ukraine are being magnified beyond their actual political power and influence.  Certainly wouldn't be the first time the media or some self-interest group tried to sow division where it may not be and push their own agenda. Conservative support for Ukraine is still strong and most Republican politicians know and understand that.  I was raised and live in the South---Ukrainian support is flat out solid in my little sphere of the world.  I work and talk with people all over North America--I don't here any rumblings of dissatisfaction.  And to the very esteemed posters who have mentioned this topic over the past 24 hours--the locations are California, Seattle, Oregon, etc.  Just like my residence in Tennessee is not indicative of the opinions of the rest of the country--those views may not be reflective of the flyover states.  Where we live influences our perspective whether we like it or not. Rand Paul is not as crazy or Putin loving as some may believe.  I grew up in Western Kentucky and have friends that know him.  He is outspoken and takes a different approach than many, but underneath he's fairly reasonable and his verbal positioning is to frequently just challenge the traditional group think of his own party.  Accountability is important to him, so it's no surprise he questions spending---but his desire to cut funding to Ukraine may be less than it appears. Peace and thanks to everyone on this forum for their brilliant and informative comments.

A few random comments from the bleachers:
1. In a non-military industry, I've worked with some of the best AI gurus in my business who have been trying to apply and leverage machine learning and artificial intelligence for years.   MASSIVE amounts of data. It's not easy and not nearly as productive as many selling the technology proclaim.  Like--"don't believe 90% of the BS because it's all wishful for thinking for most of them."   There is gold in AI---but be careful about who proclaims they've found it and when they will be able to truly deliver.
2. The daily Russian kill/destroy numbers over the past few weeks are significantly and fairly consistently high on casualties, low on weapons destruction.  Is this because of the weather? A pause in combat operations? Russia running out of military hardware?  Mobilized forces being thrown into the meat grinder?  Something else?  Or "D", all of the above?
3. I'm still of the strong opinion that there will not be a tangible decrease in Republican/Conservative support of Ukraine.  Yes, there are rumblings and some outliers--but when all is said and done the support will remain.    My reasoning and to reiterate--just my humble opinion:
The conservative voices questioning support of Ukraine are being magnified beyond their actual political power and influence.  Certainly wouldn't be the first time the media or some self-interest group tried to sow division where it may not be and push their own agenda. Conservative support for Ukraine is still strong and most Republican politicians know and understand that.  I was raised and live in the South---Ukrainian support is flat out solid in my little sphere of the world.  I work and talk with people all over North America--I don't here any rumblings of dissatisfaction.  And to the very esteemed posters who have mentioned this topic over the past 24 hours--the locations are California, Seattle, Oregon, etc.  Just like my residence in Tennessee is not indicative of the opinions of the rest of the country--those views may not be reflective of the flyover states.  Where we live influences our perspective whether we like it or not. Rand Paul is not as crazy or Putin loving as some may believe.  I grew up in Western Kentucky and have friends that know him.  He is outspoken and takes a different approach than many, but underneath he's fairly reasonable and his verbal positioning is to frequently just challenge the traditional group think of his own party.  Accountability is important to him, so it's no surprise he questions spending---but his desire to cut funding to Ukraine may be less than it appears. Peace and thanks to everyone on this forum for their brilliant and informative comments.

A few random comments from the bleachers:
1. In a non-military industry, I've worked with some of the best AI gurus in my business who have been trying to apply and leverage machine learning and artificial intelligence for years.   MASSIVE amounts of data. It's not easy and not nearly as productive as many selling the technology proclaim.  Like--"don't believe 90% of the BS because it's all wishful for thinking for most of them."   There is gold in AI---but be careful about who proclaims they've found it and when they will be able to truly deliver.
2. The daily Russian kill/destroy numbers over the past few weeks are significantly and fairly consistently high on casualties, low on weapons destruction.  Is this because of the weather? A pause in combat operations? Russia running out of military hardware?  Mobilized forces being thrown into the meat grinder?  Something else?  Or "D", all of the above?
3. I'm still of the strong opinion that there will not be a tangible decrease in Republican/Conservative support of Ukraine.  Yes, there are rumblings and some outliers--but when all is said and done the support will remain.    My reasoning and to reiterate--just my humble opinion:
The conservative voices questioning support of Ukraine are being magnified beyond their actual political power and influence.  Certainly wouldn't be the first time the media or some self-interest group tried to sow division where it may not be and push their own agenda. Conservative support for Ukraine is still strong and most Republican politicians know and understand that.  I was raised and live in the South---Ukrainian support is flat out solid in my little sphere of the world.  I work and talk with people all over North America--I don't here any rumblings of dissatisfaction.  And to the very esteemed posters who have mentioned this topic over the past 24 hours--the locations are California, Seattle, Oregon, etc.  Just like my residence in Tennessee is not indicative of the opinions of the rest of the country--those views may not be reflective of the flyover states.  Where we live influences our perspective whether we like it or not. Rand Paul is not as crazy or Putin loving as some may believe.  I grew up in Western Kentucky and have friends that know him.  He is outspoken and takes a different approach than many, but underneath he's fairly reasonable and his verbal positioning is to frequently just challenge the traditional group think of his own party.  Accountability is important to him, so it's no surprise he questions spending---but his desire to cut funding to Ukraine may be less than it appears. Peace and thanks to everyone on this forum for their brilliant and informative comments.

Looks like Poland has gotten over the missile on their turf controversy and are comfortable with the Ukrainian response.   Maybe others should do the same and quit beating that dead horse. 

Looks like Poland has gotten over the missile on their turf controversy and are comfortable with the Ukrainian response.   Maybe others should do the same and quit beating that dead horse. 

Sojourner is right, I am NOT saying this is OK.  I am saying that single incidents can be blown out of proportion.  We're in an ocean of Putin-instigated blood and this is a drop in that bucket.  Sojourner's point is that the exception will be seen as the rule.  It's the Fox news tactic -- take the 1 out of 100 and show it 100x and folks think it's the 99 out of 100.  And this episode can do that -- completely distorting reality of the big picture through the repeating of an anecdote.  All I am saying is to take this incident as an incident.  
I agree w what you've been saying TheCapt, there is no place for killing captives, ever.  

I don't think @danfrodo was suggesting that Ukraine be given a pass because of the good treatment they've rendered in other instances. I think his point was that we shouldn't lose sight of that.
It's an unfortunate side effect of the nature of journalism harkening back to Journalism 101, "Dog Bites Man" is not news, but "Man Bites Dog" is news. So when the "good guys" do something bad (the unexpected) it's more newsworthy than good guys doing something good (or bad guys doing something bad).

We have dozens and dozens and dozens of videos of RU prisoners being treated well, often better than required, by UKR soldiers.  We have one instance that, depending on how one views it, can be viewed as very bad.  So let's take that one instance and paint everything with that and let it change our view on the much bigger picture of Putin's ongoing war of serial mass murder, child kidnapping, city destruction, and economic ruin.  And then let's debate it ad nauseum.  

I'm sixty years old and practically all my life I have been struggling with the phrase "WARCRIMES".
As I see it, war is by definition a crime and we humans ALWAYS commit horrible crimes during war, civil wars, uprisings, revolutions, conquests and even in peacetime.
Romans, Persians, Dutch, French, Spanish, Aztecs, Vikings, native -Americans, "Arabs", African tribesmen, Chinese, Russians, Japanese, German, and yes even Americans and Canadians and the British (and every other large group of humans), exploited, killed, maimed, tortured and executed their opponents. Be it real or suspected opponents, that is.
Most people, certainly in the West, have the illusion that war can be fought in a "rather clean way".
In my opinion the whole morality-stance on the "yes or no" execution of these Russian prisoners is a waste of time. It is a part of war and as long as we humans go to war, these combat-crimes will happen. I fact, it is a miracle that there are so much frontline-soldiers that DO NOT commit "warcrimes".
I do think there is a big difference between combat-crimes and noncombat-crimes, but if you really want to stop warcrimes, stop war.
 
 

Oh absolutely. But the situation in this video was not tied off,  the UKR soldiers were not yet safe. So a group violent response to an act of "perfidy" in an extremely tense situation was inevitable. Legalities aside,  that one stupid asshat put all his comrades lives at risk. Hell, the UKR on the spot don't know in that instant if the entire surrender is now a trap.
By simple brutal combat logic,  to ensure they live,  it's a very simple decision by the UKR soldiers -  open fire now,  shoot anything that moves. What other combat choice do they realistically have? It's not "just in case" ,  it's now "all bets are off" -  the situation has flipped and we're in potential mortal danger. 

It clearly wasn't. 
It was in the final stage,  sure,  possibly. But until those POWs were secured nothing was finished.  That's why the UKR troops were pointing weapons at them- because risk still existed and with that stupid nutjob, QED. 
Until your enemy is tied up,  sitting down and possibly also blindfolded they are still a potential threat.  History is replete with surrendering soldiers turning on their captors at the last second. Surrendering is dicey for both sides.
Plus,  fighting an enemy as cruel,  ruthless and rules-adverse as the Russian army means UKR absolutely no cannot trust them an inch. 
If you mean the active combat stage had finished and surrender stage was occurring,  that is too vague a transition to apply here. The situation was not fully resolved, there were still armed Russian soldiers,  at least one that we see, so no,  it doesn't appear that the combat stage had completed. 
 

If 10 russians come at AFU and one of them attacks - all of them going dead in that very instant is perfectly fine.
It's very easy to question why weren't Ukrainian soldiers taking down one guy and leaving the rest to surrender or doing it in any better way from a perfect safety of calm, warm home thousands of miles away where war is just a show on TV - but in an environment of a maximum stress and a maximum hazard to life where split-second decisions mean life or death, especially when it comes to an enemy as deceitful and barbaric - thinking things through is a non-existent privilege, so all russians should've died on the spot the moment one of them posed any kind of danger. And so they did.
I'd rather have russians bury their dead than us burying our own only because we should've looked good on TV.

Mountain out of a molehill.  The Russians spew BS day after day regarding hundreds of situations and it's just ignored.  Zhelensky/Rhexnikov make one yet to be verified mistake and it's a major issue repeated over and over again.
In my opinion, it's the Russians intentionally driving the discussion to keep people "talking constantly on the incident"  to diminish their credibility.   Blowing up one single issue amongst hundreds of transparent and honest statements over the past 10 months to harm the Ukrainians. 
Don't fall for the BS.
 
 
 

https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/the-case-against-negotiations-with-russia
Excellent article!

Mountain out of a molehill.  The Russians spew BS day after day regarding hundreds of situations and it's just ignored.  Zhelensky/Rhexnikov make one yet to be verified mistake and it's a major issue repeated over and over again.
In my opinion, it's the Russians intentionally driving the discussion to keep people "talking constantly on the incident"  to diminish their credibility.   Blowing up one single issue amongst hundreds of transparent and honest statements over the past 10 months to harm the Ukrainians. 
Don't fall for the BS.
 
 
 

Mountain out of a molehill.  The Russians spew BS day after day regarding hundreds of situations and it's just ignored.  Zhelensky/Rhexnikov make one yet to be verified mistake and it's a major issue repeated over and over again.
In my opinion, it's the Russians intentionally driving the discussion to keep people "talking constantly on the incident"  to diminish their credibility.   Blowing up one single issue amongst hundreds of transparent and honest statements over the past 10 months to harm the Ukrainians. 
Don't fall for the BS.
 
 
 

Mountain out of a molehill.  The Russians spew BS day after day regarding hundreds of situations and it's just ignored.  Zhelensky/Rhexnikov make one yet to be verified mistake and it's a major issue repeated over and over again.
In my opinion, it's the Russians intentionally driving the discussion to keep people "talking constantly on the incident"  to diminish their credibility.   Blowing up one single issue amongst hundreds of transparent and honest statements over the past 10 months to harm the Ukrainians. 
Don't fall for the BS.
 
 
 

Mountain out of a molehill.  The Russians spew BS day after day regarding hundreds of situations and it's just ignored.  Zhelensky/Rhexnikov make one yet to be verified mistake and it's a major issue repeated over and over again.
In my opinion, it's the Russians intentionally driving the discussion to keep people "talking constantly on the incident"  to diminish their credibility.   Blowing up one single issue amongst hundreds of transparent and honest statements over the past 10 months to harm the Ukrainians. 
Don't fall for the BS.
 
 
 

I imagine that currently our "friends" at the Internet research agency are being instructed by their masters to make this incident one of their priority talking points, because they know it has the potential to create division between Ukraine and its supporters.
Anyone who falls for this nonsense should just be reminded that if it was not for Russia's illegal unjustified war of aggression, no missiles would be falling in Poland or Ukraine for that matter.