How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Letter from Prague]

Just "Breaking Red Army" isn't going to work.

The Red Army is Russia. These aren't separable from each other. Russians love Putin. Russians want the war. Millions of Russians can turn into mobiks on moments notice. Millions of Russians are fine with working in factories to make tanks and artillery shells and most importantly drones for terror strikes. Red Army is Russia and Russia is Red Army.

There is no breaking the Red Army without breaking Russia.

(And of course China is always willing to sell them what they need, and Iran is always willing to exchange drones for nuclear secrets.)

The deeper and more fanatic Russia gets, the less realistic it is that there are any other options than 1) Ukraine capitulates 2) Forever war in different degrees of frozenness 3) Destroyed Russia in free fall.

The world will have to chose, sooner or later.

[Haiduk]

20 hours ago, Jiggathebauce said:

The same answer from me they should have all been tried and punished accordingly. 

 

Also, the much quoted ridiculous "Hard times make strong men" thing is a meaningless mystical fantasy. If hard times made strong men made good times, Russia would have been a much better place at some point in the last 600 years. Seems to me they've had nothing but hard times and horrible men, and maybe  a lot of dead good men who didn't get to make a difference as a result.

Heh... Is just a participation in World War "on wrong side" is equal to crime?

I think, then, these two US pilots have to check their German friend before meet with him - maybe he shot out columns of refugees? Or covered bombers, striking UK cities? Or killed Allied pilots in combat?

And maybe these US pilots bombed German cities and killed hundreds of civilians? 

About good times in Russia. I very doubt Socratos told about usual people prosperity to the last shepherd. Under strong people and good times he mostly meant ruling elites, who capable to respond adequately on inner and outer challenges, to keep own realm in strenghts - economical, political, military growth. 

Do you really think ruling of Putin didn't make Russia "better place" before 2014? So, judge yourself:

- After two lost Chechen Wars by Yeltsyn, they could supress uprising in Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan and turned their enemy on ally (this is costly for budget, but...). And this ally now whatchdog of Cauacasus loyalty to Kremlin

- Russian authorities, using high prices oт oil and gas got super-incomes, what contributed to rising of economy and population incomes, especially in big cities. Despite povtery of small towns and villages beyond Ural and to the north many Russian cities in European part got enough respectable look. Russia was in leader of luxury goods import. Not only Russian oligarchs, but many of Russian middle class were capable to buy real estate in Turkey, Bulgaria, Montenegro and even in Emirates. Russia achieved enough in "comfort life" and IT technologies, involving many educated youth, giving them opportunity to grow up to teh same middle class. Ten years before even in Moscow people stood in lines for "Bush thigs", how they called US humanitarian chicken thigs. 

- catching mood of most Russians "make Russia great again", they formed new ideology of expansionsm and revachism, mixed with radical orthodoxia and militarism. They created effective propaganda machine. And population liked it. Weak leader couldn't do this. 

- Russian received own place in Big 8 and Big 20 and became influent political force after pathetic conditions of 90th. 

- Russia successfully waged war in Georgia and their propaganda/diplomacy convinced many in the world that their action wasn't aggression, but "forcing to peace of agressor". And West swallowed it.

- "Reboot" policy of Obama gave Russia access to many western technologies, i.e. military. So, Russia rapidly became to grow up quality of own military manufacturing and weapon. Success of diplomacy. 

- Russia could strengthen own influence on post Soviet space. Even in Baltic States. 

- Russia bought many politics and political movements on the West from different political spectres. Before 2014 Russia started consultations about visa-free trips to EU for own citizens. 

- All this became possible, because, it's almost coinceded - start of Western democracies strenghth declining and ramping up of Russian authocraty, masking in democracy clothes. 

So. this is answer why Russians either support Putin ot at least indifferent to his regime. They got comfort life and don't want change anything ("I'm out of policy, I'm just coding and get good money"). For those, who exists in dirt, povetry and semi-criminal of deep provinces, life also good in own manner, because they proud how "Putin raised Russa from knees and forced world to respect and fear our country". Strong leader  and good times indeed.

Edited October 2, 2023 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

Until ATACAMS coming.... Though too few examples when these converted SAM missiles inflicted significant damage. Russian AD mosty shot down them.

 

[Haiduk]

Russian resistance group "Skrepach" (I can't explain this game of words %) ) claimed they set on fire large storage of military uniform in Rostov-on-Don

 

[dan/california]

54 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

Just "Breaking Red Army" isn't going to work.

The Red Army is Russia. These aren't separable from each other. Russians love Putin. Russians want the war. Millions of Russians can turn into mobiks on moments notice. Millions of Russians are fine with working in factories to make tanks and artillery shells and most importantly drones for terror strikes. Red Army is Russia and Russia is Red Army.

There is no breaking the Red Army without breaking Russia.

(And of course China is always willing to sell them what they need, and Iran is always willing to exchange drones for nuclear secrets.)

The deeper and more fanatic Russia gets, the less realistic it is that there are any other options than 1) Ukraine capitulates 2) Forever war in different degrees of frozenness 3) Destroyed Russia in free fall.

The world will have to chose, sooner or later.

I pick number three, with a dump truck full of salt down the hole afterwards.

18 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Heh... Is just a participation in World War "on wrong side" is equal to crime?

I think, then, these two US pilots have to check their German friend before meet with him - maybe he shot out columns of refugees? Or covered bombers, striking UK cities? Or killed Allied pilots in combat?

And maybe these US pilots bombed German cities and killed hundreds of civilians? 

About good times in Russia. I very doubt Socratos told about usual people prosperity to the last shepherd. Under strong people and good times he mostly meant ruling elites, who capable to respond adequately on inner and outer challenges, to keep own realm in strenghts - economical, political, military growth. 

Do you really think ruling of Putin didn't make Russia "better place" before 2014? So, judge yourself:

- After two lost Chechen Wars by Yeltsyn, they could supress uprising in Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan and turned their enemy on ally (this is costly for budget, but...). And this ally now whatchdog of Cauacasus loyalty to Kremlin

- Russian authorities, using high prices oт oil and gas got super-incomes, what contributed to rising of economy and population incomes, especially in big cities. Despite povtery of small towns and villages beyond Ural and to the north many Russian cities in European part got enough respectable look. Russia was in leader of luxury goods import. Not only Russian oligarchs, but many of Russian middle class were capable to buy real estate in Turkey, Bulgaria, Montenegro and even in Emirates. Russia achieved enough in "comfort life" and IT technologies, involving many educated youth, giving them opportunity to grow up to teh same middle class. Ten years before even in Moscow people stood in lines for "Bush thigs", how they called US humanitarian chicken thigs. 

- catching mood of most Russians "make Russia great again", they formed new ideology of expansionsm and revachism, mixed with radical orthodoxia and militarism. They created effective propaganda machine. And population liked it. Weak leader couldn't do this. 

- Russian received own place in Big 8 and Big 20 and became influent political force after pathetic conditions of 90th. 

- Russia successfully waged war in Georgia and their propaganda/diplomacy convinced many in the world that their action wasn't aggression, but "forcing to peace of agressor". And West swallowed it.

- "Reboot" policy of Obama gave Russia access to many western technologies, i.e. military. So, Russia rapidly became to grow up quality of own military manufacturing and weapon. Success of diplomacy. 

- Russia could strengthen own influence on post Soviet space. Even in Baltic States. 

- Russia bought many politics and political movements on the West from different political spectres. Before 2014 Russia started consultations about visa-free trips to EU for own citizens. 

- All this became possible, because, it's almost coinceded - start of Western democracies strenghth declining and ramping up of Russian authocraty, masking in democracy clothes. 

So. this is answer why Russians either support Putin ot at least indifferent to his regime. They got comfort life and don't want change anything ("I'm out of policy, I'm just coding and get good money"). For those, who exists in dirt, povetry and semi-criminal of deep provinces, life also good in own manner, because they proud how "Putin raised Russa from knees and forced world to respect and fear our country". Strong leader  and good times indeed.

All the West wanted was to ignore Russia and make money, as you eloquently point out the RUSSIANS were making good money, and winning some small victories they could propagandize about. For reasons that remain incomprehensible on some level, they gambled all of that and lost. We are all far less well off for Putin's little three day SMO adventure, but come he!! or high water Russia is going to be a lot sorrier than the rest of us. Sorry enough to stay educated on being sorry for three or four generations.

[Jiggathebauce]

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

 

Quote

Heh... Is just a participation in World War "on wrong side" is equal to crime?

I think, then, these two US pilots have to check their German friend before meet with him - maybe he shot out columns of refugees? Or covered bombers, striking UK cities? Or killed Allied pilots in combat?

I don't have to do the mental gymnastics that you do by simply taking the position that Hitlers regime was evil, and anyone who fought for it or aided it was complicit and criminal. A few scattered instances of kindness by individuals in service of the third Reich does not excuse the horror that they were unleashing on the world. And likewise, anything done to defeat it was justified, every bullet and every shell. 

Quote

About good times in Russia. I very doubt Socratos told about usual people prosperity to the last shepherd. Under strong people and good times he mostly meant ruling elites, who capable to respond adequately on inner and outer challenges, to keep own realm in strenghts - economical, political, military growth. 

1. The hard times strong men meme is not from Socrates, it is not even ancient,much less mystically insightful . It was from a fiction book from 2016 by Michael G Hopf called Those Who Remain, and then morons like Joe Rogan and fans of Jordan Peterson have been taking it as gospel ever since. 

2. I see from your response our difference in fundamental ideas. You seem to take it as a given that these strong elites  are justified to exist and are the reason for good times.  I completely disagree and do not think human history has justified them to anyone except Themselves, those in their circle,  and their lackeys. To believe they have anyone's best interests in mind but themselves and trust them not to let us become statistics is naive and sad. 

Quote

Do you really think ruling of Putin didn't make Russia "better place" before 2014? So, judge yourself:

 Honestly confused by this entire segue. for one it reads like praise  of Putin  right up until 2014. This caveat of time frame in and of itself is an admission that these Strong Men(the oligarchs and crime bosses)who arose out of the Soviet collapse and shock therapy in the 90's(hard times), who created these (good times)-very questionable; good for very few and to the detriment of most- far from ending because of Weak Men, the Strong Men caused it and were really the weak ones all along! They have doomed their country to poverty, isolation, and reactionary authoritarianism, and humiliated their armed forces and any good reputation they had as a world power.

Where I agree with you is that they have managed to coerce and manipulate their people into believing that things were great and will again be good under their leadership. So it goes with putting faith in elites and not ourselves

Edited October 2, 2023 by Jiggathebauce
Typo

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

Russian resistance group "Skrepach" (I can't explain this game of words %) ) claimed they set on fire large storage of military uniform in Rostov-on-Don

 

 

That is really interesting.  May not sound like much but what if RU logistics put a bunch of effort over many months into making sure there was abundance of good winter clothing.  And what if they stored a very big percentage of that clothing at a single supply hub in rostov-on-don because that would make things easy from a logistics standpoint.  And then all the supply was burned up.   I am hoping that's what occurred here.  That could make a real mess as RU soldiers at front line might spend weeks or months of bad weather without proper kit.  

I am sure hoping this is what happened here.  I real morale and combat effectiveness disaster IF that's what happened.

RU probably thought it was a low value target that would never get hit.  

[kimbosbread]

24 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

That is really interesting.  May not sound like much but what if RU logistics put a bunch of effort over many months into making sure there was abundance of good winter clothing. 

Again, creativity fail. Imagine if they had left a barrel of cat piss or cadaverine in there first. The whole city would have to be evacuated.

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, kimbosbread said:

Again, creativity fail. Imagine if they had left a barrel of cat piss or cadaverine in there first. The whole city would have to be evacuated.

They would start screeching about it being poison gas. The highest form of resistance in Russia is railroad sabotage. Every control box or piece of switch gear that gets burnt is a problem. Enough of those problems at once could be a very big problem. Clearly if someone in shell or missile factory wants to have a smoking accident, that would be good too. The Ukrainians seem to be improving quickly at having drones attack both targets, happily.

There are two things everyone in Russia can claim are innocent if they are searched, cigarettes and vodka. Conveniently they make fire...

Edit: My typing really is inconceivably awful...

Edited October 2, 2023 by dan/california

[alison]

6 hours ago, dan/california said:

Taiwan should also be working a non-nuclear missile that could crack that dam, it might be the best guarantee they could get.

I don't really follow this logic. What makes you think that having a weapon that theoretically could crack a big dam is going to stop an authoritarian government from its expansionist goals? The CCP has proven time and time again that they are willing to suffer huge economic hits and lose tens of millions of lives in pursuit of their political objectives. And the people of China have spent almost a century living under this regime, developing a fatalist worldview that sounds similar to how Russia watchers on this thread describe the people of Russia.

There is no critical mass of disgruntled citizens sitting on a knife edge, just waiting for a single catastrophic event to have them storm Zhongnanhai and boot out their great leader. Protests in the country are small and localized and rapidly squashed. News of them - or any kind of activity that undermines the party line - is suppressed. Dissent is largely kept behind closed doors, expressed only in close social circles. The focus for most people is staying under the radar, trying to get rich (but not so rich it will attract attention) and - for some - to get their family out. Anyone who legitimately cares about the broader success of the country and not just their own personal advancement has necessarily bought into the current political structures and thus will not challenge them in any significant way.

My current feeling is that China definitely under Xi, and probably under the CCP more broadly, is going to push Taiwan till the very end. I do not see any face-saving escape hatch at this point. Even if they cannot win the war, if they start it, they will keep fighting it, just as Russia appears to be doing in Ukraine. But for Taiwan the pre-war status quo is worse, because nobody formally recognizes it as the independent country it clearly already is, so it's already excluded from being an active player in global affairs, thanks to the overwhelming economic pressure China is able to apply to the rest of the world. Is there any wunderwaffe Taiwan could point across the Strait that would nullify that pressure? I don't think so.

In standing up to China, I think the pen will be mightier than the sword. But, of course, the CCP knows that, which is why they have invested so much into controlling the public discourse and exchange of ideas - not just in the country they govern but increasingly around the rest of the world too.

[billbindc]

32 minutes ago, alison said:

I don't really follow this logic. What makes you think that having a weapon that theoretically could crack a big dam is going to stop an authoritarian government from its expansionist goals? The CCP has proven time and time again that they are willing to suffer huge economic hits and lose tens of millions of lives in pursuit of their political objectives. And the people of China have spent almost a century living under this regime, developing a fatalist worldview that sounds similar to how Russia watchers on this thread describe the people of Russia.

There is no critical mass of disgruntled citizens sitting on a knife edge, just waiting for a single catastrophic event to have them storm Zhongnanhai and boot out their great leader. Protests in the country are small and localized and rapidly squashed. News of them - or any kind of activity that undermines the party line - is suppressed. Dissent is largely kept behind closed doors, expressed only in close social circles. The focus for most people is staying under the radar, trying to get rich (but not so rich it will attract attention) and - for some - to get their family out. Anyone who legitimately cares about the broader success of the country and not just their own personal advancement has necessarily bought into the current political structures and thus will not challenge them in any significant way.

My current feeling is that China definitely under Xi, and probably under the CCP more broadly, is going to push Taiwan till the very end. I do not see any face-saving escape hatch at this point. Even if they cannot win the war, if they start it, they will keep fighting it, just as Russia appears to be doing in Ukraine. But for Taiwan the pre-war status quo is worse, because nobody formally recognizes it as the independent country it clearly already is, so it's already excluded from being an active player in global affairs, thanks to the overwhelming economic pressure China is able to apply to the rest of the world. Is there any wunderwaffe Taiwan could point across the Strait that would nullify that pressure? I don't think so.

In standing up to China, I think the pen will be mightier than the sword. But, of course, the CCP knows that, which is why they have invested so much into controlling the public discourse and exchange of ideas - not just in the country they govern but increasingly around the rest of the world too.

Well said. This tracks with everything I hear and if anything, the people who follow the PRC the most closely now seem the most certain that the scenario you posit above is most likely. Xi's regime has realized that they aren't America in 1940, they are Germany in 1913. They've peaked as a power too early and their moment is passing. They are not the sort of regime that will take that philosophically. 

I would add, however that things are not hopeless for Taiwan. China has managed to deprive itself of any friends in the world and has united its neighbors as enemies. South Korea, Japan and the United States have clearly concluded that this is a war they mean to fight. 

[cesmonkey]

While good for the current circumstance, it makes you wonder why the Biden administration did not already provide this aid to Ukraine:

 

[dan/california]

2 hours ago, alison said:

In standing up to China, I think the pen will be mightier than the sword.

I stopped believing that on 2/25/2022. I think if Taiwan had a non-nuclear way to hit them that hard it might be one more thing for them to have to weigh. Of course you don't officially call it the dam-buster that would be against the rules. You call it most excellent new heavy bunker buster. Let them read the spec and figure it out. When you are down to one aging guy with absolute power, things just get unpredictable. We have to be ready to put more of their navy and air force on the bottom of the South China Sea, than they sink of ours.

The near continuous Chinese temper tantrum exercises are also what they would do if they were planning a real attack. The only way to avoid a war that will wreck the world economy, and be far worse for Taiwan is to make the price so obviously catastrophic someone might shoot XI instead of following orders. That didn't work in Ukraine, because Putin thought it would be short, and the West would just get over it. All we can do is make it absolutely clear to Xi nether of those things is the case.

 

1 hour ago, billbindc said:

Well said. This tracks with everything I hear and if anything, the people who follow the PRC the most closely now seem the most certain that the scenario you posit above is most likely. Xi's regime has realized that they aren't America in 1940, they are Germany in 1913. They've peaked as a power too early and their moment is passing. They are not the sort of regime that will take that philosophically. 

I would add, however that things are not hopeless for Taiwan. China has managed to deprive itself of any friends in the world and has united its neighbors as enemies. South Korea, Japan and the United States have clearly concluded that this is a war they mean to fight. 

.Well said Bill, it is a time to be ready, not to give up.

Edited October 3, 2023 by dan/california

[dan/california]

22 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

While good for the current circumstance, it makes you wonder why the Biden administration did not already provide this aid to Ukraine:

 

The good reason that they did it this way was because they wanted a cushion for exactly this circumstance. The bad reason is that they are still trying to get to a negotiated settlement instead of just beating the Russians until they can't take it anymore. What is the balance between those two? We will have to wait for the books to find that one out. hopefully the Republican Party will finish imploding quickly and we can get everything back on track.

I am however extremely unhappy with a report that they let a couple of billion in spending/drawdown authority expire at the end of last year. Although I am not sure that is actually confirmed. I am still sort of losing my mind daily over not shipping ATACMS, and the M26 cluster bomb version of MLRS that the HIMARS can also use. Both of those have near zero additional training, and the ATACMS especially would not take that much shipping capacity.

Edited October 3, 2023 by dan/california

[Battlefront.com]

7 hours ago, Letter from Prague said:

Just "Breaking Red Army" isn't going to work.

Yup.  I for one have been saying this since the war started.  The only real solution for Ukraine is for Russia to collapse politically to the point of republics successfully breaking away.  Such a dramatic change of structure is probably only possible if both the Red Army is defeated, the economy completely collapses (i.e. 1990s level), and the regime's security apparatus breaks down.

The reason many in the West don't grasp how long this will take, if it even happens, is because they are not viewing things from the Russian perspective.  In the West we see problems coming in part because we have freedom of expression (especially media companies) and we are predisposed to take action to head off the worst consequences.  Well, when it suits our short term interests that is.  We are horrible at addressing anything long term (cough-cough-climate change-cough-cough).

We in the West can see where Russia is headed in ways Russians can not.  Worse, the Russians that do sense where things are headed are apathetic to the point of fatalism.  The nastiest hardcore Russian nationalists even see this as a good thing because it will cull the weak from the heard.  It's like someone in the West yelling "if you go down that path you'll fall off a cliff" and Russians responding with a mix of "there is no cliff", "if there is a cliff, not a problem because we can fly", and "if there is a cliff and we can't fly, then that's good because the fall will make us stronger".

Steve

 

[Battlefront.com]

27 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

While good for the current circumstance, it makes you wonder why the Biden administration did not already provide this aid to Ukraine:

It's fairly normal.  There's usually a lot of unspent money from large allocations even though the problems they're designed to address aren't "fixed".  The latest is unspent money to tackle COVID related disruptions.  Bureaucracy is one reason, however the bigger one is money is allocated without a firm spending plan. 

Think about it this way.  If I set aside $1000 for you to spend on groceries this month, do you think you could?  For sure you could if the time period was longer, but for a month maybe not.  So where did I come up with the $1000 if you really can't spend it down within a month?  Clearly it's because I made it up, not because you gave me a grocery list of everything you wanted to buy and how much it would cost.  If you had done that I would have allocated that amount, but you were caught by surprise and you only gave me a partial list.  Then factor in the paperwork I need you to fill out and how many times I'm likely to reject any one piece of it because of inadequate/incorrect documentation.  There is also the big problem of what happens when the items you want aren't in stock.  You can't buy what doesn't exist. 

All the while the clock is ticking.

The money set aside for Ukraine is not cash, as some on the right and left seem to think it is.  Nope, it is accountable and that means it's complicated.  That's just the way it has to be.

Steve

[kimbosbread]

2 hours ago, alison said:

I don't really follow this logic. What makes you think that having a weapon that theoretically could crack a big dam is going to stop an authoritarian government from its expansionist goals?

You lack sufficient imagination. Let me go all Mr Rogers for a second and take you to the neighborhood of make-believe...

In the world of make-believe, there is a country that decided to build an epic dam. The dam to end all dams, the biggliest and yugest of all time. It's upstream of two major cities; one the world center of pharmaceutical manufacturing and a major center for disease research, the other, a major financial center, whose financial district is built entirely on reclaimed land in the river delta. And there are several other important cities, including the traditional imperial summer capitol downstream. Obviously there are various military bases, and naturally some nuclear plants. And the river that is dammed splits the country in half, neatly. Roughly speaking, downstream of the dam is a quarter to a third of this countries population (say 300 million inhabitants to be conservative), and half the fish production, and over half the rice. And this is for a country that is not self sufficient in food.

Obviously in the world make-believe the rules are different, but I believe they also have the concept of a single point of failure.

[Battlefront.com]

Article in Politico about leaked White House document showing there's a lot more going on behind the scenes to help Ukraine shed it's Soviet systems of corruption and institutional weaknesses.  The recent Ukraine MoD purge is most likely a direct result of this strong talk by the Biden Admin behind closed doors (where, frankly, it should be):

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/biden-admin-ukraine-strategy-corruption-00119237

Steve

[dan/california]

 

Quote

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/02/opinion/columnists/maga-republicans-ukraine.html#commentsContainer

The answer is, unfortunately, obvious. Whatever Republican hard-liners may say, they want Putin to win. They view the Putin regime’s cruelty and repression as admirable features that America should emulate. They support a wannabe dictator at home and are sympathetic to actual dictators abroad.

 

The only thing he leaves out is that the MAGA will cheerfully betray Ukraine to Putin, and then turn around and campaign against Biden for "letting Russia win".

[Battlefront.com]

20 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:

You lack sufficient imagination. Let me go all Mr Rogers for a second and take you to the neighborhood of make-believe...

In the world of make-believe, there is a country that decided to build an epic dam. The dam to end all dams, the biggliest and yugest of all time. It's upstream of two major cities; one the world center of pharmaceutical manufacturing and a major center for disease research, the other, a major financial center, whose financial district is built entirely on reclaimed land in the river delta. And there are several other important cities, including the traditional imperial summer capitol downstream. Obviously there are various military bases, and naturally some nuclear plants. And the river that is dammed splits the country in half, neatly. Roughly speaking, downstream of the dam is a quarter to a third of this countries population (say 300 million inhabitants to be conservative), and half the fish production, and over half the rice. And this is for a country that is not self sufficient in food.

Obviously in the world make-believe the rules are different, but I believe they also have the concept of a single point of failure.

The point Alison was making, I think, is that the same sorts of arguments were made prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.  And yet, Russia still invaded Ukraine.  Why?  Because autocracies are prone to hubris, blindness to reality, and abject stupidity.

There's all sorts of reasons why China should abandon its stated goals of taking Taiwan, this dam one not even being the most important (trade with the West is).  Yet China is not doing it and is in fact investing huge amounts of its economic power to making it more able to take and hold Taiwan.  At the same time its domestic economy is slipping into a dramatic downward tailspin.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, dan/california said:

 

The only thing he leaves out is that the MAGA will cheerfully betray Ukraine to Putin, and then turn around and campaign against Biden for "letting Russia win".

I don't know what you're going on about.  It's not like that has ever happened before or in 2020 specifically.

Steve

[danfrodo]

superfluous

 

Edited October 3, 2023 by danfrodo
superfluous

[kimbosbread]

52 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

The point Alison was making, I think, is that the same sorts of arguments were made prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.  And yet, Russia still invaded Ukraine.  Why?  Because autocracies are prone to hubris, blindness to reality, and abject stupidity.

Absolutely, it’s a lose lose for Red China, but there’s a difference. Russia has no single point of failure like the Three Gorges Dam that Ukraine can straight up destroy, and doesn’t have a long range missile program nor enough time to cobble together or straight up buy a few nuclear warheads. Russia unless we help push a bit harder will take years to collapse.

On the other hand, Taiwan has the proverbial Sword of Damocles over the mainland. They have a missle program, and they can surely get some plutonium. If the dam goes, minimum 10% of the population goes with it, at least 4 nuclear power stations, several major cities and the country is cut in half. Oh, and you lost 2/3 of the rice harvest. Not to mention all your cargo ships got sunk so there’s no food.

[dan/california]

6 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:

Absolutely, it’s a lose lose for Red China, but there’s a difference. Russia has no single point of failure like the Three Gorges Dam that Ukraine can straight up destroy, and doesn’t have a long range missile program nor enough time to cobble together or straight up buy a few nuclear warheads. Russia unless we help push a bit harder will take years to collapse.

On the other hand, Taiwan has the proverbial Sword of Damocles over the mainland. They have a missle program, and they can surely get some plutonium. If the dam goes, minimum 10% of the population goes with it, at least 4 nuclear power stations, several major cities and the country is cut in half. Oh, and you lost 2/3 of the rice harvest. Not to mention all your cargo ships got sunk so there’s no food.

I like him, he is my friend!  

Make it very clear this will hurt you more than it will hurt us. Because that is what deterrence actually means. I would still love a missile that could do it without conventional explosives. That might or might not be possible, but the math needs doing. I would feel bad about writing this if what China has done in Xinjiang was not exactly what it wants to repeat in Taiwan. It is also the near exact model of whole country gulag Russia want want to inflict on Ukraine. 

[Aragorn2002]

On 10/1/2023 at 8:46 PM, Haiduk said:

It's easy to judge about situation with contemporary knowledges, dividing all to white and black. As I told in Baltia and Ukraine were many grey shades and it wasn't obvious who is good guy and who is bad in conditions of war "all against all" (yes, we had more than two sides here and had even inner war inside national resistance for control). So, the choice of many, who were under Stalin's power even two years was obvious, that even Germans appeared more "civilized" (since "Distrikt Galicia" hadn't so hard occupation regime and terror, like on other part of Ukraine). Service in Waffen SS was a single chance to establish national regular armies for fight with Sovites. With future goal "when Allies will come we will uprise" or "let Soviets and Germany exsanguinate each other and we will take power and claim own existance as a state and nation". And here was main differense between OUN wing of Bandera (main social base - rural and small towns population), who were strictly against idea of UKR Waffen SS and OUN wing of Melnyk (main social base intelligentsia, students, population of cities, enterpreneurs). Latter didn't believe in capability of let even numerous, but usual partisans in forests to defeat regular armies and seize power. Balts also went by this way.  

The same hopes had Polish Army Krajowa, in Warsaw uprising - "to claim own rights on power after expelling of Germans", though they had own legitimate government in exile. And how to be with Finns, Romanians, Italians who initially fought for Axis, but then crossed on Allied side? They never did warcrimes?    

EVERYBODY did warcrimes. Those who deny that fact know nothing about war.

Edited October 3, 2023 by Aragorn2002