How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Grigb]

On 7/24/2024 at 2:23 PM, The_Capt said:

The thing you are missing is that not all ISR is drone-based.  Ukraine, and to a lesser extent Russia, have layered ISR systems linked into a complex.  Ukraine has tactical drones, ground sensors, operational systems (unmanned and manned) and strategic (space based)…along with OSINT and SIGINT, ELINT and a few “INTs” we are still finding names for.  No major muscle movements are happening in this war without being spotted.  And by “major” I mean Company and above. 

I argue with you, Capt, not because we have different doctrinal views (we are not), but because some of your conclusions sometimes are too extreme and not supported by real world experience.

Here is reality check - Mashovet about Avdiivka pocket collapse

Quote

In my opinion, this was [RU change of main effort direction] the main reason (of course, apart from the significant advantage of the enemy in forces and weapons, resources and vehicles) that "it [UKR defense] fell down" in the Avdiivka area...

In other words, this transfer of the main efforts of the enemy from one direction to another turned out to be, let's say, unnoticeable for the AFU. Although, as far as I understand, tactical and operational-tactical intelligence timely revealed the fact of the regrouping of two separate motorized rifle brigades (OMBSR) of the enemy south of their offensive lines, as well as the deployment of another OMBSR in the second echelon...

So, your conclusion that company-level (and above) maneuvering is no longer possible without the enemy noticing is not supported by evidence. RU was effective in denying operational level UKR ISR by confusing it. Despite the detection of movement, the UKR ISR was entirely confused about what was going on and missed it. 

There are no magical all seeing eyes. There are devices that can be fooled and brains that can be confused. You confuse operational brains and fool tactical devices. This is current reality. 

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Grigb said:

So, your conclusion that company-level (and above) maneuvering is no longer possible without the enemy noticing is not supported by evidence. RU was effective in denying operational level UKR ISR by confusing it. Despite the detection of movement, the UKR ISR was entirely confused about what was going on and missed it. 

There are no magical all seeing eyes. There are devices that can be fooled and brains that can be confused. You confuse operational brains and fool tactical devices. This is current reality. 

We have seen numerous reports from senior UA leadership, field reports and analysis that have all spoken to a fully illuminated battlefield.  We have repeatedly seen evidence on this thread of tactical ISR doing exactly what I describe.  We have not seen any real substantial surprise flanking or envelopments since very early on in this war.  This battlefield is not fluid or one where manoeuvre in any meaningful sense is occurring.  Why?  Because any force concentrations are detected early and engaged, be they mechanized, air, or sea for that matter.

You cite a single source who believes it was a shift in an RA axis of attack…after months of hammering on this town and repeatedly noted UA losses…that suddenly surprised the forces there and led to the loss.  Of course there was no envelopment or scooping of UA PoWs, the withdrawal was fairly orderly and did not lead to a full collapse of the line.

The evidence is staring us in the face. You somehow also seem to think that all ISR is drone-based…this is not true. The ISR complex being employed in this war is layered from ground to space.  We have seen the RA repeatedly employ smaller unit packages to try and get around this and fail. The “all seeing eye” is a fusion of ISR from all these sources, including open source that has made manoeuvre and surprise pretty much impossible.

You basically explain to Tux here how this is happening:

Now there is always room for human error but other than this single point of data, which frankly is pretty weak, you are basically arguing against a mountain of evidence we have seen unfold on this thread and social media for nearly two years.  A theme I have heard repeatedly at military conferences and symposiums.  A theme we saw before this war and will see after it. In fact what evidence do you have of operational surprise in this war? Tactical?  Haiduk just posted a perfect example of what we have seen again and again…RA attack detected early and engaged.

Now some sources:

https://mwi.westpoint.edu/the-return-of-the-tactical-crisis/

“As Zaluzhnyi described, “Modern sensors can identify any concentration of forces, and modern precision weapons can destroy it.” This has prevented both sides from concentrating into sufficiently large formations to achieve a breakthrough in the traditional sense. Instead, it forces units to disperse, dig in, or both, further expanding the empty battlefield.”

https://static.rusi.org/359-SR-Ukraine-Preliminary-Lessons-Feb-July-2022-web-final.pdf

(pg 53 - No Sanctuary)

The capacity to detect and strike targets at ever-greater distances and with ever-growing precision increases the vulnerability of dense troop concentrations, and therefore limits the ability to conduct large-scale sequenced and concentrated operations. As such, in order to enhance survivability, current battlefield conditions are forcing military units to disperse into smaller formations, dig in, or both, unless these conditions are effectively countered. As a result, the battlefield tends to become more fragmented, offering more independent action to lower tactical formations as the depth of the front is expanding to a considerable extent.

https://mwi.westpoint.edu/the-russian-way-of-war-in-ukraine-a-military-approach-nine-decades-in-the-making/ 

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/back-trenches-technology-warfare

Even Kofman gets it:

”First, you have to deal with cheap persistent high fidelity ISR, which is when it comes to maneuver warfare, it's very hard to achieve surprise, and it's very hard to concentrate. This force this war shows that both sides have had to substantially disperse both on the offense and the defense, and you see this increasing tenancy of terrain being held by much smaller unit sizes. This was a trend already observed long before this war. But this war is a really interesting case of a large-scale conventional war with relatively high density of forces where very few units are electing to hold terrain because of the persistence of means of intelligence, surveillance and recons and why it's so difficult to mass either on offense and defense.”

https://schoolofwar.substack.com/p/ep-132-michal-kofman-on-the-battlefield

So the burden of proof is not on me, it is on you.  First, explain the notable lack of surprise in this war.  Second, the continued trend towards dispersion and lack of conventional concentration.  Third, how deep strike has been so effective. And fourth, why manoeuvre above company level is effectively dead. Now try to explain all that without turning to the ISR situation that is shaping these battlefields.  Further, let’s take it beyond the land domain. Explain sea and air denial, if not for pervasive ISR.  

Finally, ask yourself “what happens if the US withdraws all to ISR support?”  The impact of that alone should give you a pretty good idea of where we are at.

[Edit:  And I call utter BS on Adiivka. This was a 4 month grinding nightmare that fell due to old fashion attrition…not some bizarre “surprise” theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Avdiivka_(2023–2024)]

Edited July 26 by The_Capt

[Grigb]

On 7/24/2024 at 4:35 PM, ArmouredTopHat said:

I personally imagine that in the next half a decade we will see a very heavy emphasis on gun based CUAS systems with the goal of denying as much drone ISR as possible. 

Experience has shown that a weapons system capable of physically damaging or destroying a drone is the cornerstone of effective counter-drone defense. Anything else is more or less nuisance for current drones. It's good to temporarily disrupt the drone mission, but that's about it.

So, unless lasers prove their worth (size, bulk, reliability, speed of engagement, affordability requirements) gun based CUAS will be one of the major trends (drone interceptors is other).      

 

On 7/24/2024 at 4:35 PM, ArmouredTopHat said:

but we are already seeing small, purpose made radars and other drone detection systems being made that can readily detect small drones. Said drones are, despite their visually small size quite detectable via noise, emission or heat and this can be exploited. 

For battlefield thermals, noise detection being passive will be primary methods with radars and emission detection supporting them (right now emission is primary and thermals supporting). 

Do not expect to spot all drones. Skilled pilot can exploit terrain, vegetation, and buildings to escape detection. But this would limit his fields of observation. On the other hand, drones are not very pricey. So, if the enemy wants to view something for a short amount of time, it will be difficult to deny it to him.

 

On 7/24/2024 at 4:35 PM, ArmouredTopHat said:

Such proliferation will probably not deny drone based recon entirely, but it could very well heavily constrain operations in the enemy's rear cost effectively

The gun based systems with range 1.5/2 km are not that good against recon drones that make backbone of battlefield surveillance. Generally they are ok at dealing with drones that entered our territory (you can ambush drones). But they will struggle against drones that fly over enemy territory (these are the drones that are responsible for prevalent idea of all seeing eyes)

It is claimed that smaller common recon drones can spot human at 2 km . And bigger, more advanced (but still not that expencive) drone can spot human at 5 km. Obviously they can spot vehicle at greater range. You need specialized bigger caliber guns that will be useless against smaller more agile FPVs.

Still current consensus is that you need Interceptor drones for that job. But personally I would add LMM or APKWS missiles (RU Nats do not have them).  

 

On 7/24/2024 at 4:35 PM, ArmouredTopHat said:

to make heavier concentration at least a bit more of a realistic possibility without immediate detection.

It would work right now. It will work against poor or low-skilled opponents (the majority of Western conflicts are against them).

However, principle of concentration of infantry/AFVs is no longer effective against peers or even low-skilled opponents who know what to do. My own opinion is that concentration of infantry/AFV is no longer feasible, and we need to move away from it (not from DF, as Capt insists).

 

On 7/24/2024 at 4:35 PM, ArmouredTopHat said:

Given the loss rate of drones as it stands in Ukraine, mixing in copious amounts of gun based systems can surely make such an environment even more attrition based for drone units. This is not even considering the more widespread application of drone interceptors as well which we are already seeing to some degree in Ukraine. 

They will dramatically decrease losses from drones. Right now like 90% of RU infantry losses and significant part of vehicle losses are due to Bomber drones. Bomber drones are easy meat from gun based CUAS systems. AFAIR RU are discussing putting HMG with thermals on every infantry vehicle or at least to have 1 per platoon. 

 

On 7/24/2024 at 4:35 PM, ArmouredTopHat said:

As a question, where do you see mines in all this? We have seen some Ukraine units complain about the lack of them being the reason for the initial Kharkiv pushes earlier this year. Are there any attempts to create smart / mobile mines that have been brought up here before, or is the focus on the classic soviet anti tank mine and producing them in as vast a quantity as possible?

• AT Mines are critical. They mitigate biggest advantage of AFVs - speed (infantry is already slow).
• Regarding Kharkiv is just BS excuse. In reality you cannot put proper mine fields in Grey zone (which is around 5 km from the enemy position). So, no proper minefields are possible till Volchansk (which is 5 km from the border). No surprise local units were denied mines.
• Now focus is on quantity of mines. But there are obvious problems with mines. Big one is that it is not easy to put mines in Grey zone without getting unwanted arty or FPV guest. New kind of self-deployed mine is needed. Probably just cheap simple low UGV with Directional mine on top. You bring few of them with you, start it inside of your defensive position. It drives outside and wait autonomously for unlucky bastard. Enemy find sneaky way in? Reactivate it, move to new location and enjoy the show.
• Possibilities are endless - enemy broke the perimeter of the base? Drive out of guard post few of the bad boys with Claymore on top to isolate penetration. Then move them forward once their base section is clear. 
• However, UKR drone pilots do play a lot with dropping single mines in un-expected locations. You can use dumb mines and drone does not need to be electronically advanced (to bypass personal jammers). But putting any serious quantities of mines is time consuming. And pilot time is expensive.  

[The_Capt]

5 minutes ago, Grigb said:

However, principle of concentration of infantry/AFVs is no longer effective against peers or even low-skilled opponents who know what to do. My own opinion is that concentration of infantry/AFV is no longer feasible, and we need to move away from it (not from DF, as Capt insists).

Wait..what?  So if infantry/AFVs concentration is no longer feasible…then tanks are no longer feasible…so what is doing Direct Fires?  All that is really left is unmanned systems shooting at each other.  I guess an FPV is technically “direct fire” but that is stretching just to win a semantic point.

[Carolus]

Ukriane will get the first 1.5 billion of interest / investment return from the frozen Russian assets. 

It took some legislative effort to make this legally robust. A good line to cross.

 

 

Edited July 26 by Carolus

[Beleg85]

https://abcnews.go.com/International/france-train-lines-hit-arson-attacks-hours-2024/story?id=112296820

In case anyone missed news- coordinated arsonist attacks on French railways took place today in several places at once. Fresh news is that incendiary devices were found.

At first glance ekoterrorist could be blamed, but their modus operandi is very different, they have no interest in targeting public transport and there aren't that many of them. Last Generation weirdos in turn usually take their responsibility and do it openly. Islamists on their part prefer direct slaugther, not disruption.

Now let us cautiously point toward possible suspect...perhaps a country that: publically lamented they cannot take part in olympics and openly promised "dire consequences" for organizer (topic was in a time very present in state TV with a lot of "Umph, omph!" revenge taunting), that have interest in "punishing" French military support and is already proved to be behind various arsonists attacks in EU countries?

Edited July 26 by Beleg85

[Billy Ringo]

8 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

https://abcnews.go.com/International/france-train-lines-hit-arson-attacks-hours-2024/story?id=112296820

Now let us cautiously point toward possible suspect...perhaps a country that: publically lamented they cannot take part in olympics and openly promised "dire consequences" for organizer (topic was in a time very present in state TV with a lot of "Umph, omph!" revenge taunting), that have interest in "punishing" French military support and is already proved to be behind various arsonists attacks in EU countries?

Talk about an "us against the world" statement.  Would be a terrible PR mistake for Russia.

[Beleg85]

10 minutes ago, Billy Ringo said:

Talk about an "us against the world" statement.  Would be a terrible PR mistake for Russia.

Naturally, they will never issue that, muscovia by default deny anything, even most obvious acts. But those who are adressed will know. Actual problem for them in this sort of situations is that other lesser actors may jump on the wagon and take credit, so public perception may get twisted. Ofc. it may also be some domestic treat, but it looks too well coordinated for amaterus.

Curiously, French organizers claim they foiled already several attempts of various attacks. And Olympics did not even started.

Edited July 26 by Beleg85

[ArmouredTopHat]

 

[ArmouredTopHat]

With the recent talk about smart mines, this seemed a little fitting. FPV munition landed and lurked next to a concrete shelter until the Russians hiding inside peeked their heads out of it. The result is as expected. 

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, Beleg85 said:

https://abcnews.go.com/International/france-train-lines-hit-arson-attacks-hours-2024/story?id=112296820

In case anyone missed news- coordinated arsonist attacks on French railways took place today in several places at once. Fresh news is that incendiary devices were found.

At first glance ekoterrorist could be blamed, but their modus operandi is very different, they have no interest in targeting public transport and there aren't that many of them. Last Generation weirdos in turn usually take their responsibility and do it openly. Islamists on their part prefer direct slaugther, not disruption.

Now let us cautiously point toward possible suspect...perhaps a country that: publically lamented they cannot take part in olympics and openly promised "dire consequences" for organizer (topic was in a time very present in state TV with a lot of "Umph, omph!" revenge taunting), that have interest in "punishing" French military support and is already proved to be behind various arsonists attacks in EU countries?

 

51 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Naturally, they will never issue that, muscovia by default deny anything, even most obvious acts. But those who are adressed will know. Actual problem for them in this sort of situations is that other lesser actors may jump on the wagon and take credit, so public perception may get twisted. Ofc. it may also be some domestic treat, but it looks too well coordinated for amaterus.

Curiously, French organizers claim they foiled already several attempts of various attacks. And Olympics did not even started.

We are well out over our skis here, but jus how severe would the response be, if there was good proof that a nation state was responsible?

More broadly I come to something that has been a thru line of the last several years. A lot of Western policy is built on the underlying  assumption that _______________ wouldn't dare do something that crazy, destructive, disruptive, or awful. We keep being wrong about that. And people are hanging on to this world view because admitting it is wrong will cost several percent of GDP. Which is a lot, compared to anything except losing a major war.

Edited July 26 by dan/california

[cesmonkey]

 

[dan/california]

36 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

 

This is simply the Wall Street Journal shilling for Trump, trying to keep last EDIT(generation) non MAGA Republicans in side. It is wishful thinking that after selecting Vance as VP that Trump would do anything other than throw Ukraine to the wolves, or rather bears, actually.

 

Edited July 26 by dan/california

[cesmonkey]

10 minutes ago, dan/california said:

This is simply the Wall Street Journal shilling for Trump, trying to keep last non MAGA Republicans in side. It is wishful thinking that after selecting Vance as VP that Trump would do anything other than throw Ukraine to the wolves, or rather bears, actually.

 

Quote

A Trump Peace Plan for Ukraine
Among the essentials are a lend-lease program, real sanctions on Russia, and a revitalized NATO.
By David J. Urban and Mike Pompeo
July 25, 2024 5:14 pm ET

 

[Battlefront.com]

28 minutes ago, dan/california said:

This is simply the Wall Street Journal shilling for Trump, trying to keep last EDIT(generatin) non MAGA Republicans in side. It is wishful thinking that after selecting Vance as VP that Trump would do anything other than throw Ukraine to the wolves, or rather bears, actually.

 

Yup, this is like having all leavers of power held by anti-abortionists and saying "this could be a golden opportunity to strengthen women's reproductive rights".  It's nuts.  Even more nuts that it was co-authored by the guy who witnessed first hand Trump's foreign non-policy of the first term.

Steve

[ArmouredTopHat]

The strain continues to deepen

[MikeyD]

Back in normal times it was often said Russia's economy was roughly on par with Italy's. Imagine Italy trying to wage a two year near-peer full scale war of aggression on a neighbor. Their labor and industrial resources would be exhausted by now too.

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, dan/california said:

This is simply the Wall Street Journal shilling for Trump, trying to keep last EDIT(generation) non MAGA Republicans in side. It is wishful thinking that after selecting Vance as VP that Trump would do anything other than throw Ukraine to the wolves, or rather bears, actually.

 

Considering it was MAGA Republicans that damn near choked off aid to Ukraine at the height of the RA offensive last year…I remain highly skeptical.  Conditions for this thing to end:

Ukrainian territorial integrity re-established - final lines on map subject to negotiations.

Ukrainian long term security guaranteed (and not by Russia…they will try that one again).  This sets conditions for:

Long term reconstruction of Ukraine in a western facing orientation

Rapid entry for Ukraine into NATO (the only thing that appears to keep Russia in check).  Without Article 5, Russia is free to do long range missile buggary.

Plan for renormalization with Russia, which will likely take:

Regime change

War reparations 

War crimes investigations and prosecution

At a minimum there should be a Korean Peninsula solution, complete with western troops on Ukrainian soil.

Russia under Putin will never agree to these conditions so we keep breaking Russian hands until they do.  We should widen deep strike campaigns (note: while avoiding nuclear tripwire infra…sheesh), secure long term aid programs, streamline that aid to fewer types of equipment but deeper capacity.  Logistical and supporting roles for western forces in western Ukraine is not off the table but will need to be done carefully.  Military contractors might be a good solution, which I am sure is already happening.

Now if Trump and his hand flapping admin can come up with that…and carry it off…well we are in a different reality.

[Letter from Prague]

2 hours ago, dan/california said:

This is simply the Wall Street Journal shilling for Trump, trying to keep last EDIT(generation) non MAGA Republicans in side. It is wishful thinking that after selecting Vance as VP that Trump would do anything other than throw Ukraine to the wolves, or rather bears, actually.

 

WSJ is owned by Murdoch, so yes.

15 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Without Article 5, Russia is free to do long range missile buggary.

I'm not sure if that would help. We've seen Russian hit Romania like yesterday and also do brazen sabotage all over NATO countries, to no reaction. NATO isn't even willing to defend itself, much less Ukraine.

Much better reaction to long range missile buggery is Ukraine getting the tech and investment to build their own long-range missiles and respond in kind. With Western support, Ukraine can (already) rebuild faster than Russia, so tit-for-tat would leave Russia broken.

Edited July 26 by Letter from Prague

[Beleg85]

3 hours ago, dan/california said:

We are well out over our skis here, but jus how severe would the response be, if there was good proof that a nation state was responsible?

More broadly I come to something that has been a thru line of the last several years. A lot of Western policy is built on the underlying  assumption that _______________ wouldn't dare do something that crazy, destructive, disruptive, or awful. We keep being wrong about that. And people are hanging on to this world view because admitting it is wrong will cost several percent of GDP. Which is a lot, compared to anything except losing a major war.

That one of reasons pointing towards Russia, just like similar actions- small but nasty fires are ideally suited to its goals, just below next step on escalation ladder. No bloodshed that would enrage Western public opinion too much, yet serious public effects are visible and memo is send where it should. Fires that broke out in several different places-chiefly in Czech Republic and Poland - are already confirmed to be perpetrated by people connected to Russians services, and there was wave of arrests of Russians/Ukrainians/Belarussians under suspition of sabotage several times in just this year. France including.

So it is not theory at all. There is not that much we can do (apart from normal criminal and counterespionage measures) unless it really cost lives of citizens in NATO. But frankly France risk a lot hosting Olympics- reportedly it has very good services and relatively well-developed security apparatus for European state, but is also one of hubs for islamists, far right and even potentially far left movements. And that is on top of Russian geopolitical threats.

[The_Capt]

11 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

WSJ is owned by Murdoch, so yes.

I'm not sure if that would help. We've seen Russian hit Romania like yesterday and also do brazen sabotage all over NATO countries, to no reaction. NATO isn't even willing to defend itself, much less Ukraine.

Much better reaction to long range missile buggery is Ukraine getting the tech and investment to build their own long-range missiles and respond in kind. With Western support, Ukraine can (already) rebuild faster than Russia, so tit-for-tat would leave Russia broken.

If we are talking about this, it is not an attack:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-destroys-25-38-drones-russian-attack-air-force-says-2024-07-25/

Russia may play around on the margins and of course do subversive jackery but they are still deterred by NATO collective security.  If they were not, we would see zero restraint from the Russian military. They would be striking into Poland to disrupt supply lines and very likely would have happily crossed the tac WMD threshold.

As to Ukrainian long range strike…how would that work exactly?  First off we know Ukraine has been waging long range strikes into Russia, hell they are clipping RA soldiers in Sudan…do we see Russia backing off? Russia is a massive country so for Ukraine to truly threaten and pursue a strategy of exhausting, we are into ICBM territory.  No, wild escalation is a sure way for this thing to get completely out of hand.

NATO containment, continuous support and slowly ratcheting escalation is likely the best strategy here.  Not some weird Harold game of chicken with an unstable nuclear power.  Bash NATO all you want but they are a big part of keeping Ukraine in the game right now and keeping Russia in some form of restraint.

[The_Capt]

3 hours ago, dan/california said:

 

We are well out over our skis here, but jus how severe would the response be, if there was good proof that a nation state was responsible?

More broadly I come to something that has been a thru line of the last several years. A lot of Western policy is built on the underlying  assumption that _______________ wouldn't dare do something that crazy, destructive, disruptive, or awful. We keep being wrong about that. And people are hanging on to this world view because admitting it is wrong will cost several percent of GDP. Which is a lot, compared to anything except losing a major war.

This is the problem with these sort of sh#tty plays.  Attribution is hard, even though everyone knows. Damage is small and largely symbolic. It projects un-decision pressure onto an opponent as it simply becomes too hard to come to a decisive response, so invariably nothing gets done.  Proportionality is difficult - should France light fires in Russia? 

The damn game basically plays in the cracks and seams of our own laws and uses them against us.  And we seem incapable of playing dirty back.  So a bunch of FSB hires are lighting fires.  Arrest them, pin some fake evidence on them that makes them a terrorist group and links directly back to Russia. Declare Russia a state sponsor of terror - which they are, even if not in this case.  But no we will flop around and play legalities.

[fireship4]

Can I note that ThreadReader is doing an excellent job at making groups of tweet threads readable for those not registered with the site.  For example the Trent Telenko post linked by @ArmouredTopHat above:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1816610271840071870.html

Edited July 26 by fireship4

[dan/california]

41 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

This is the problem with these sort of sh#tty plays.  Attribution is hard, even though everyone knows. Damage is small and largely symbolic. It projects un-decision pressure onto an opponent as it simply becomes too hard to come to a decisive response, so invariably nothing gets done.  Proportionality is difficult - should France light fires in Russia? 

The damn game basically plays in the cracks and seams of our own laws and uses them against us.  And we seem incapable of playing dirty back.  So a bunch of FSB hires are lighting fires.  Arrest them, pin some fake evidence on them that makes them a terrorist group and links directly back to Russia. Declare Russia a state sponsor of terror - which they are, even if not in this case.  But no we will flop around and play legalities.

Might I suggest an essentially total visa ban, and wide reaching asset seizures? Start with the two hundred billion in central bank funds. Then start auctioning off every villa, town house, condo, and Mercedes that has any association with with Russia whatsoever. It might be great time for some rather severe laws about proof of beneficial ownership while we are at it. Turn the financial screws until they squeal, and then until all they can do is whimper. And every bit of it applies to Belarus as well...

Edit: And reduce the staff at Russian embassies to about six people, including the guard, the cook, and the driver.

 

 

Edited July 26 by dan/california

[The_Capt]

32 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Might I suggest an essentially total visa ban, and wide reaching asset seizures? Start with the two hundred billion in central bank funds. Then start auctioning off every villa, town house, condo, and Mercedes that has any association with with Russia whatsoever. It might be great time for some rather severe laws about proof of beneficial ownership while we are at it. Turn the financial screws until they squeal, and then until all they can do is whimper. And every bit of it applies to Belarus as well...

Edit: And reduce the staff at Russian embassies to about six people, including the guard, the cook, and the driver.

 

 

We simply have forgotten how to play hardball against another great power state. We certainly have shown an ability to do so with terrorist groups, or crappy little states that support terror (Iraq and Afghanistan).  But Russia was in the big boy club - G8, UNSC etc.  Now it has gone full rogue, after years of general shenanigans and we can’t seem to really pin down how to box it back up,

Meanwhile China sits back and takes notes.