How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[sburke]

23 minutes ago, Holien said:

Hmmmm this didn't age too well. I will await my morning coffee to see where the clown show goes next. (BTW the UK clown show is also in full swing...)

Bill give me some hope that the numpties have a plan...

Please....

Night Night

Not necessarily. Kind of depends on how things go this week. If the GOP is unable to come together to restore the speakership, they will eventually have to start looking for options.  However one of those options could be voting in Trump as speaker.  Not sure there is anything to prevent that. 

[dan/california]

3 minutes ago, sburke said:

Not necessarily. Kind of depends on how things go this week. If the GOP is unable to come together to restore the speakership, they will eventually have to start looking for options.  However one of those options could be voting in Trump as speaker.  Not sure there is anything to prevent that. 

Dems need to get in a room with five or six sanest GOP guys, and have discussion about ambassadorships and pretty much any other job they might want in 14 months.

[Ultradave]

24 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Dems need to get in a room with five or six sanest GOP guys, and have discussion about ambassadorships and pretty much any other job they might want in 14 months.

The dynamics of a Democratic House Speaker with a Republican House majority could be....  interesting. Basically nothing happens that the Speaker doesn't want to happen, and yet, he wouldn't have the majority votes without some help (which might be part of the bargain I suppose, if, and BIG if, you trust the agreement made to get there). 

Plan? I don't think there is a plan. Has anyone heard any member of Congress say "once we get rid of McCarthy, we'll nominate Rep. XYZ for Speaker?"  Hah, now that they have him out, getting someone else in is going to be tough. McCarthy only got in by the skin of his teeth as the candidate they could hold their noses and vote for after he promised them the Moon. Now what? Someone similar who will have to do the same thing.

Meanwhile the budget clock is ticking, and no Ukraine aid bill until there is a Speaker (for those not in the US, no business can be conducted until a Speaker is elected). 

Dave

[paxromana]

9 hours ago, Rokko said:

Somewhat ironic.

Killing civilians: Highly illegal

Killing all the civilians: Well, that's a legal grey area.

Well, as I understand Geneva/Hague it is a war crime to deliberately and specifically target civilians and civilians only.

If you are (and prove otherwise) targetting legitimate military objects then the fact that civilians are killed incidentally to that is not a crime.

In fact, much diplomatic effort was expended in the inter-war years over attempts to find a way to deem some locations 'protected' but no-one was able to come up with a solution that couldn't, and obviously couldn't, be gamed ...

All the Russian hits on civilian targets ... well, inaccurate weapons and bad intel could be used to defend them if it came to trial and, unless you had actual written orders to deliberately and specifically hit those civilian targets,, well, the defense would probably succeed.

[Phantom Captain]

9 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

If you Galeeeeev / they put a man on the moon (man on the moon)

(btw for my money, THE best song lyric of all time, utterly Joycean)

https://nitter.net/kamilkazani/status/1708491834253615405#m

Oct 1

1. There is a high chance of the US getting into a military conflict with China

2. Likely resulting in a drastic collapse in the living standards

3. The only plausible scenario for the conflict *not* to happen is China thinking it can’t win

4. Improve your military efficiency

Improve your military efficiency = improve your production capacities

You will pay dearly unless you learn to produce a lot, quickly, and at a low cost

(I think there was something similar once, written in Latin)

...Or alternatively, be able (*and* ready) to enforce your will on your globalised supply chain (said enforcement can be 'carrot' as well as 'stick', btw, which it always was in truly successful and long-lived empires).

****

P.S. This is 95% OT, but anyone here play these boardgames?

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/692317/war-too-serious-matter-entrust-military-men-and-wa

Primitive accumulation (and top hats), ftw!

 

Haven't played that one but, on top of my CM addiction, I do love a bunch of the new and modern tabletop wargames and there are some really excellent ones out there.  If you haven't heard of or tried any of the GMT Games COIN (Counter Insurgency) series you are really missing out. Fire in the Lake, the Insurgency in Vietnam is beyond excellent!

Sorry for the brief OT post!

Edited October 3, 2023 by Phantom Captain

[The_Capt]

16 minutes ago, paxromana said:

Well, as I understand Geneva/Hague it is a war crime to deliberately and specifically target civilians and civilians only.

If you are (and prove otherwise) targetting legitimate military objects then the fact that civilians are killed incidentally to that is not a crime.

In fact, much diplomatic effort was expended in the inter-war years over attempts to find a way to deem some locations 'protected' but no-one was able to come up with a solution that couldn't, and obviously couldn't, be gamed ...

All the Russian hits on civilian targets ... well, inaccurate weapons and bad intel could be used to defend them if it came to trial and, unless you had actual written orders to deliberately and specifically hit those civilian targets,, well, the defense would probably succeed.

There is a threshold of due diligence.  Otherwise one could carpet bomb neighbourhoods while trying to hit a single military target.  Whoopsies happen but it is on the targeting commander to demonstrate that all reasonable attempts to mitigate civilian casualties were made.  If one accidentally drops bombs on civilians but is found negligent on controls and targeting procedures they may face prosecution.

I am pretty sure there is evidence of criminal negligence on the part of the RA based on the number of non-military targets hit.

[billbindc]

2 hours ago, Holien said:

Hmmmm this didn't age too well. I will await my morning coffee to see where the clown show goes next. (BTW the UK clown show is also in full swing...)

Bill give me some hope that the numpties have a plan...

Please....

Night Night

Sure didn't. What happened is that McCarthy went on tv all weekend and blamed the Democrats for everything...including claiming on Sunday that Democrats wanted a government shutdown after they almost unanimously saved us from the last one with less than half of the GOP votes. He then refused to even talk to them until his underlings raced all over the Hill this morning offering things Democrats knew he couldn't deliver. Even then, if McCarthy had tried just a little bit he could have managed to get some 'present' votes from Democrats to save his seat. He didn't bother and continued to publicly attack them. 

So...my mea culpa is that I had expected McCarthy to show just a bit of nous to save his job. 

Alas.

P.S. Of relevance to this board is something you won't read about much...McCarthy was trying to tie Ukraine aid directly to the most MAGA border package possible. There's no chance in hell such a bill could pass the Senate. 

Edited October 3, 2023 by billbindc

[Vanir Ausf B]

Update from Tatarigami_UA

• Russian military is expected to deploy at least a brigade-sized force with enhanced offensive capabilities in the near future.
• Russian forces made multiple unsuccessful attempts to reclaim positions south of Bakhmut, resulting in significant losses.
• Russians are currently facing challenges with their artillery barrels, but they are actively pursuing solutions to address them.
• Recent Ukrainian forces' attacks deep into russian territory have necessitated adjustments to russian logistical routes and methods, leading to added challenges.
• Russian command appears to maintain confidence in their ability to defend Tokmak and its surrounding areas.
• At the same time, it continues to struggle with communications and the supply of high-quality communication devices to its units.

https://twitter.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1709291611539087368

 

[dan/california]

16 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Sure didn't. What happened is that McCarthy went on tv all weekend and blamed the Democrats for everything...including claiming on Sunday that Democrats wanted a government shutdown after they almost unanimously saved us from the last one with less than half of the GOP votes. He then refused to even talk to them until his underlings raced all over the Hill this morning offering things Democrats knew he couldn't deliver. Even then, if McCarthy had tried just a little bit he could have managed to get some 'present' votes from Democrats to save his seat. He didn't bother and continued to publicly attack them. 

So...my mea culpa is that I had expected McCarthy to show just a bit of nous to save his job. 

Alas.

P.S. Of relevance to this board is something you won't read about much...McCarthy was trying to tie Ukraine aid directly to the most MAGA border package possible. There's no chance in hell such a bill could pass the Senate. 

You just can't keep bleeping the side you are relying on for most of the actual must pass votes.

[MSBoxer]

1 hour ago, Ultradave said:

Meanwhile the budget clock is ticking, and no Ukraine aid bill until there is a Speaker (for those not in the US, no business can be conducted until a Speaker is elected). 

I am not sure that is true, the speaker pro tempor takes over immediately upon the speaker vacating the position to ensure that normal operations of the house continue.

You may be thinking of what happens when there is a change in power and the new house cannot conduct business until a speaker is elected.  For the last few decades a vacancy during a term is handled through the speaker pro tempor.

[Jiggathebauce]

7 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Yes, they accumulated fabuloes profits for own clanes, when many of their compatriots never had normal toilets, but they really raised Russia in world policy, economy and military. 

 

Does this matter for the person with no plumbing, just because it could be worse economically, politically and military for the people that do have the toilets and aren't put in prison?

 

You could argue that the Athenian slaves of rich, wise, kind men should have been grateful that they weren't spartan helots or the servants of worse men. You're right, but what a pitiful bar to judge by. There are better options, and I stand by that.

Quote

Democracy" indeed is a just a opportunity to raise up one of several elites, backing with some financial-industrial groups.

A very convenient definition that takes for granted the way things are and the people who benefit.  So political equality is impossible?

Quote

Citizens can only guard "social agreement" between ruling elite and them (if level of the civil society allows to do this) and gradually decade by decade "nurture" their elites that they took carry properly of internal development.    

How's that been working for our friends in Russia?

Edited October 4, 2023 by Jiggathebauce

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, billbindc said:

So...my mea culpa is that I had expected McCarthy to show just a bit of nous to save his job. 

Two possibilities for this failure to be reelected came to mind (aside from McCarthy being a self serving wuss, as that is a matter of record )

1.  He thought he could squeak by like he did after the record breaking 15 votes it took to get him into the seat in the first place.  This would make him an absolute idiot, but there's no indications that possibility should be ruled out.

2.  He was pragmatic and realized that getting any Dem help would require compromising with the Dems and that would lead to even more GOP knife sharpening.  The result could have been endless attempts to oust him until he was ousted, which is what would have happened.

So, McCarthy was doomed since he got the gavel and he wasn't up to the challenge of changing his fate.

What this means for Ukraine is uncertain, but it isn't good.  Not that the state of affairs yesterday was very good either.

And tonight I read that it seems that the German taboo about seeing AfD votes has been decisively broken.  Which means AfD might have more power than it used to and that is also not good for Ukraine.

Most of us here knew it would come to this eventually.  Russia obviously did too.  With all this disorder in the West, Russia has every incentive to keep the war going because this is the only way Russia will get anything out of this stupid war.

Steve

[Tenses]

I don't know, if anyone is interested but 10-year treasury yields are skyrocketing in US. This is already a serious crisis, nothing good will come from indebted country having so high price to borrow more money. Markets(global) are also in a World of hurt, if this trend continues or even stabilises on this level(4.84% at the moment).

I would say that geopolitics are starting to show up on the bill. True battle for $ hegemony is about to start. 

Edited October 4, 2023 by Tenses

[Carolus]

18 minutes ago, Tenses said:

I don't know, if anyone is interested but 10-year treasury yields are skyrocketing in US. This is already a serious crisis, nothing good will come from indebted country having so high price to borrow more money. Markets(global) are also in a World of hurt, if this trend continues or even stabilises on this level(4.84% at the moment).

I would say that geopolitics are starting to show up on the bill. True battle for $ hegemony is about to start. 

And the unfortunate part is that this is mostly self-made.

A lot of things could be done to mitigate the current crisis and stabilize the global situation. This should be the era for a new generation of Churchills and Roosevelts to step up, but instead we got Coolidges and Mussolinis. 

[Holien]

On 10/2/2023 at 12:34 PM, TheVulture said:

Shapps has now backed out of both of these ideas on the quiet. 

It's Conservative Party annual conference time in the UK, so this is now looking a lot like "announce loudly, gather the plaudits, slink off quietly" to try and boost his standing within his party.

Just seen him say on BBC news this morning that he never said that and that he has not flip flopped. Apparently journalist misunderstood him which is possible.

[Butschi]

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

And tonight I read that it seems that the German taboo about seeing AfD votes has been decisively broken.  Which means AfD might have more power than it used to and that is also not good for Ukraine.

What do you mean by "taboo about seeing AfD votes"?

[Ultradave]

11 hours ago, MSBoxer said:

I am not sure that is true, the speaker pro tempor takes over immediately upon the speaker vacating the position to ensure that normal operations of the house continue.

Can't find any link to actual rules but this short article lays it out pretty clearly.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/03/us/politics/kevin-mccarthy-house-speaker.html

[poesel]

8 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

And tonight I read that it seems that the German taboo about seeing AfD votes has been decisively broken.  Which means AfD might have more power than it used to and that is also not good for Ukraine.

3 hours ago, Butschi said:

What do you mean by "taboo about seeing AfD votes"?

I guess he means that thing in Thuringia. That is a German state in former East-Germany. The state is ruled by a minority of left wing parties (3). The majority right wing consists of the conservative CDU and fascist AfD. Those parties do not work together, and the CDU has declared a 'firewall' towards the AfD and vowed to never work together with them.
Now, there has been a vote about a small tax reduction on buying real estate. This vote went through parliament with the votes of both right parties. So CDU has worked together with AfD to pass this law - a thing they explicitly said wasn't going to happen, and now the CDU is getting quite some flak for it.

The influence on German foreign policy is zero. Since we have so many parties, a small minority of nut jobs cannot take the rest as hostage (at least not that easily). Also, the AfD has failed to participate in any state or federal government so far, and I don't see it happening.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, poesel said:

I guess he means that thing in Thuringia. That is a German state in former East-Germany. The state is ruled by a minority of left wing parties (3). The majority right wing consists of the conservative CDU and fascist AfD. Those parties do not work together, and the CDU has declared a 'firewall' towards the AfD and vowed to never work together with them.
Now, there has been a vote about a small tax reduction on buying real estate. This vote went through parliament with the votes of both right parties. So CDU has worked together with AfD to pass this law - a thing they explicitly said wasn't going to happen, and now the CDU is getting quite some flak for it.

The influence on German foreign policy is zero. Since we have so many parties, a small minority of nut jobs cannot take the rest as hostage (at least not that easily). Also, the AfD has failed to participate in any state or federal government so far, and I don't see it happening.

Yes, this is what I meant.  Sorry, auto correct ("seeing") butchered whatever word I was trying to type

You are likely correct that the AfD is unlikely to have major influence on national policy.  The point though is that if the AfD scores more seats a precedent, even if a small and isolated one, has possibly been set.  At least that was the tone of the article I wrote.  It could be "jumping at shadows", but then again people dismissed other alliances as "unthinkable" until they became reality.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, Ultradave said:

Can't find any link to actual rules but this short article lays it out pretty clearly.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/03/us/politics/kevin-mccarthy-house-speaker.html

Yup.  Apparently the only two powers vested into this temporary position are to facilitate the vote for a new Speaker and to take Nancy Pelosi's office for his own.  Now that he's accomplished the most important priority (taking Pelosi's office), it's time for him to get to the less important stuff like restarting government.

Steve

[A Canadian Cat]

10 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

He was pragmatic and realized that getting any Dem help would require compromising with the Dems and that would lead to even more GOP knife sharpening. 

I'm not saying that is incorrect but I do think it is irrelevant. My guess would be that the Dems looked at McCarthy backing out of the negotiated deal to pass the required spending bills that he himself made with the President and Senate leadership and figured what would be the point in negotiation with McCarthy for anything else?

[Ultradave]

45 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup.  Apparently the only two powers vested into this temporary position are to facilitate the vote for a new Speaker and to take Nancy Pelosi's office for his own.  Now that he's accomplished the most important priority (taking Pelosi's office), it's time for him to get to the less important stuff like restarting government.

Steve

Very petty, that.

[Battlefront.com]

42 minutes ago, IanL said:

I'm not saying that is incorrect but I do think it is irrelevant. My guess would be that the Dems looked at McCarthy backing out of the negotiated deal to pass the required spending bills that he himself made with the President and Senate leadership and figured what would be the point in negotiation with McCarthy for anything else?

For sure there's no reason the Dems should have trusted McCarthy.  In fact, I read some behind-the-scenes talk that what he proposed to Dems made it clear he had no intention of giving them anything they really wanted.  "If you vote to keep me as speaker, I'll give you this can of baked beans I found in the back of my cupboard".  Or something like that   Which is to say that McCarthy apparently was up front about not giving the Dems anything of value instead of making promises he never intended to keep. 

Steve

[billbindc]

10 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

For sure there's no reason the Dems should have trusted McCarthy.  In fact, I read some behind-the-scenes talk that what he proposed to Dems made it clear he had no intention of giving them anything they really wanted.  "If you vote to keep me as speaker, I'll give you this can of baked beans I found in the back of my cupboard".  Or something like that   Which is to say that McCarthy apparently was up front about not giving the Dems anything of value instead of making promises he never intended to keep. 

Steve

McCarthy did a lot worse than that.  He actually attacked Dems on Sunday on Face the Nation claiming they tried to shut down the government when it is only open bc Democrats provided 2/3rds of the votes. 

This wasn’t a murder, it was a suicide.

[kimbosbread]

Yeah, I don’t think the Democrats thought McCarthy was workable long-term. If he was a strong speaker and had some ability to deliver bipartisan stuff sure, but the guy is a wuss, doesn’t control his own party etc. Obviously this could turn into a more unstable situation, but I imagine Hakim + centrist Republicans are trying to figure out what’s even workable right now.