How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[ASL Veteran]

 

[Joe982]

1 hour ago, dan/california said:

The placement of this DPICM is 10/10, Rembrandt level artistry.

In my view the footage is so poor that it does not demonstrate anything.

There have been quite a few videos, that are edited, such that each scene, lasts only a split second, so in the end I cannot see what actually happened. 

[dan/california]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/06/19/iran-nuclear-enrichment-fordow/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNzE4NzY5NjAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNzIwMTUxOTk5LCJpYXQiOjE3MTg3Njk2MDAsImp0aSI6ImEzNmE4NTIxLWIwNTMtNDI1ZC1hMmI3LWNhY2YxY2NhOGEwNCIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9uYXRpb25hbC1zZWN1cml0eS8yMDI0LzA2LzE5L2lyYW4tbnVjbGVhci1lbnJpY2htZW50LWZvcmRvdy8ifQ.d0TcdgwRGrMZ-OTCj1BBTSDxSlgGPcxEsynW3UbHYxM

angry_staffer

1h

about an hour ago

 

 

People always ask me which stories to pay attention to.This one. You should pay attention to this one.According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran is undergoing a major expansion at Fordow, its most heavily-protected nuclear facility.Post-expansion, Fordow will be able to enrich enough uranium for a bomb a month, according to experts.There are also plans for further expansion at Natanz.

[LongLeftFlank]

"Among the endless screams and inane babble...."

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-in-nevada

10 June. For what it's worth, DJT's sole reference to the Ukraine war was this....

I was the one that stopped the Russian pipelines called Nord Stream 2. Nobody ever heard of Nord Stream 2. Isn’t it amazing? The biggest project they ever had, they’re building the biggest pipeline in the world. It’s going to Germany and all over Europe. I come in and I stop it, and all you hear is, 'Oh, Trump was so nice to Russia.'

(54:37) There is nothing you could do worse than that. I stopped it. It was dead, and then I sanctioned a lot of sanctions, and yet I got along well with Putin. I mean, it must’ve been hard for him. He actually said, 'If you are nice to me, I would hate like hell to see if you weren’t nice to me.' And remember, he would’ve never, and he didn’t, he would’ve never gone into Ukraine. Israel would’ve never ever been attacked. Iran was broke. Under my administration, Iran was stone-cold broke.

****

As usual, pure stream of, umm, consciousness. The man just says whatever occurs to him, no Telepromter, no talking points, no 'Message: I Care'. He seems proud of that.

So while it may be cold comfort, none of the above babble says to me that Stable Genius has any brief for forcing either Ukraine or Russia to its knees, absent some future opportunity to grandstand brand TRUMP with minimal effort or risk: TRUMP the PEACEMAKER (SO UNFAIR SHOULD GET NOBEL LIKE HUSSEIN OBAMA), etc.

Otherwise, just as before, he won't do much worse than bitch about things, while in practice leaving the despised DC machine to do its thing.

He will also surely enter Term 2 scrambling for sheer survival (he's been there before), facing nonstop lawfare, no popular mandate (beyond a grass roots FU to the status quo), and no upside at all in letting hacks loose on open-ended wingnut crusades overseas. No obvious 'Winningz' at all there for TRUMP, screw furriners.

...As others have noted here, the folks who should really worry about Trump Part Deux: Rudderless Flaming Dumpster, are the Taiwanese.

Again, fwiw.

[zinz]

https://m-en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20240620012200315?section=nk/nk

Quote

The South Korean government said Thursday it will reconsider its stance on arms supply to #Ukraine after North Korea and #Russia signed a treaty that involves a mutual pledge to provide immediate military assistance if one of them is attacked.

https://www.ft.com/content/89fe9d6b-3a0f-42a5-af50-cff7f457a126

Quote

️The US government will halt all open orders for Patriot air defense systems and interceptor missiles until Ukraine has sufficient defenses against Russia's air attacks. This decision, to be announced Thursday, follows President Biden's recent commitment to deliver additional air defense systems, including Patriot missile batteries, to Ukraine. 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/committee-of-swiss-parliament-supports-indirect-arms-exports-to-ukraine/ar-BB1osEse

Quote

Committee of Swiss parliament supports indirect arms exports to Ukraine

These are very interesting developments on the supply side for Ukraine. It seems like the war is being taken more seriously.

Too lazy to look up the link but Argentina is also part of the Ukraine contact group now. 

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

"Among the endless screams and inane babble...."

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-in-nevada

10 June. For what it's worth, DJT's sole reference to the Ukraine war was this....

I was the one that stopped the Russian pipelines called Nord Stream 2. Nobody ever heard of Nord Stream 2. Isn’t it amazing? The biggest project they ever had, they’re building the biggest pipeline in the world. It’s going to Germany and all over Europe. I come in and I stop it, and all you hear is, 'Oh, Trump was so nice to Russia.'

(54:37) There is nothing you could do worse than that. I stopped it. It was dead, and then I sanctioned a lot of sanctions, and yet I got along well with Putin. I mean, it must’ve been hard for him. He actually said, 'If you are nice to me, I would hate like hell to see if you weren’t nice to me.' And remember, he would’ve never, and he didn’t, he would’ve never gone into Ukraine. Israel would’ve never ever been attacked. Iran was broke. Under my administration, Iran was stone-cold broke.

****

As usual, pure stream of, umm, consciousness. The man just says whatever occurs to him, no Telepromter, no talking points, no 'Message: I Care'. He seems proud of that.

So while it may be cold comfort, none of the above babble says to me that Stable Genius has any brief for forcing either Ukraine or Russia to its knees, absent some future opportunity to grandstand brand TRUMP with minimal effort or risk: TRUMP the PEACEMAKER (SO UNFAIR SHOULD GET NOBEL LIKE HUSSEIN OBAMA), etc.

Otherwise, just as before, he won't do much worse than bitch about things, while in practice leaving the despised DC machine to do its thing.

He will also surely enter Term 2 scrambling for sheer survival (he's been there before), facing nonstop lawfare, no popular mandate (beyond a grass roots FU to the status quo), and no upside at all in letting hacks loose on open-ended wingnut crusades overseas. No obvious 'Winningz' at all there for TRUMP, screw furriners.

...As others have noted here, the folks who should really worry about Trump Part Deux: Rudderless Flaming Dumpster, are the Taiwanese.

Again, fwiw.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_2

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/690705/EPRS_BRI(2021)690705_EN.pdf

Good background in that EU one.

[cesmonkey]

 

[cesmonkey]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

 

 

Edited June 20 by cesmonkey
Stupid UI - I didn't quote the Captain

[billbindc]

3 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

"Among the endless screams and inane babble...."

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-in-nevada

10 June. For what it's worth, DJT's sole reference to the Ukraine war was this....

I was the one that stopped the Russian pipelines called Nord Stream 2. Nobody ever heard of Nord Stream 2. Isn’t it amazing? The biggest project they ever had, they’re building the biggest pipeline in the world. It’s going to Germany and all over Europe. I come in and I stop it, and all you hear is, 'Oh, Trump was so nice to Russia.'

(54:37) There is nothing you could do worse than that. I stopped it. It was dead, and then I sanctioned a lot of sanctions, and yet I got along well with Putin. I mean, it must’ve been hard for him. He actually said, 'If you are nice to me, I would hate like hell to see if you weren’t nice to me.' And remember, he would’ve never, and he didn’t, he would’ve never gone into Ukraine. Israel would’ve never ever been attacked. Iran was broke. Under my administration, Iran was stone-cold broke.

****

As usual, pure stream of, umm, consciousness. The man just says whatever occurs to him, no Telepromter, no talking points, no 'Message: I Care'. He seems proud of that.

So while it may be cold comfort, none of the above babble says to me that Stable Genius has any brief for forcing either Ukraine or Russia to its knees, absent some future opportunity to grandstand brand TRUMP with minimal effort or risk: TRUMP the PEACEMAKER (SO UNFAIR SHOULD GET NOBEL LIKE HUSSEIN OBAMA), etc.

Otherwise, just as before, he won't do much worse than bitch about things, while in practice leaving the despised DC machine to do its thing.

He will also surely enter Term 2 scrambling for sheer survival (he's been there before), facing nonstop lawfare, no popular mandate (beyond a grass roots FU to the status quo), and no upside at all in letting hacks loose on open-ended wingnut crusades overseas. No obvious 'Winningz' at all there for TRUMP, screw furriners.

...As others have noted here, the folks who should really worry about Trump Part Deux: Rudderless Flaming Dumpster, are the Taiwanese.

Again, fwiw.

Trump has said he will 'solve' the war in Ukraine if he begins *before* inauguration day. What does that mean? Well, we are not giving aid to Russia and we are already exerting about as much duress as we can short of going to war with Moscow directly. On the other hand, we are providing the lifeblood of military aid, diplomatic support and ISR to Ukraine without which it can only fight in greatly reduced circumstances. 

We both know Trump's track record in making deals. Do we really imagine he'll take the harder road? 

[The_Capt]

16 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Trump has said he will 'solve' the war in Ukraine if he begins *before* inauguration day. What does that mean? Well, we are not giving aid to Russia and we are already exerting about as much duress as we can short of going to war with Moscow directly. On the other hand, we are providing the lifeblood of military aid, diplomatic support and ISR to Ukraine without which it can only fight in greatly reduced circumstances. 

We both know Trump's track record in making deals. Do we really imagine he'll take the harder road? 

Every empire in history 1) knew they were an empire, with imperial aspirations and 2) knew they were an empire by virtue of their vassals/clients. Their central problem was to hold the empire together.

The US has never openly admitted to itself 1) and therefore does not fundamentally understand 2).  It does understand the central problem though because it is living it.

I am wracking my brain to think of a fully democratic empire in human history and cannot think of one.  I am not sure whatever we have been living with constitutes one to be honest.

But here we are.  

[billbindc]

6 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Every empire in history 1) knew they were an empire, with imperial aspirations and 2) knew they were an empire by virtue of their vassals/clients. Their central problem was to hold the empire together.

The US has never openly admitted to itself 1) and therefore does not fundamentally understand 2).  It does understand the central problem though because it is living it.

I am wracking my brain to think of a fully democratic empire in human history and cannot think of one.  I am not sure whatever we have been living with constitutes one to be honest.

But here we are.  

I disagree with you for once. 

Per Jefferson: 

"We shall divert through our own Country a branch of commerce which the European States have thought worthy of the most important struggles and sacrifices, and in the event of peace [ending the American Revolution]...we shall form to the American union a barrier against the dangerous extension of the British Province of Canada and add to the Empire of Liberty an extensive and fertile Country thereby converting dangerous Enemies into valuable friends."

In conception and execution, the American project has been imperial from it's start. Modern America has been at pains to obscure that fact but the United States has been an expansionist empire and a relatively liberal one since 1865. Where it differs from the norm signally is in the 'converting dangerous Enemies into valuable friends' part. Relations with Mexico and Canada are, not coincidentally, quite close and extraordinarily friendly given how things began in both cases. Germany, Japan, Italy, Britain, Vietnam, Spain...it's hard to come up with anyone the US fought a hot war with who has not become an ally on paper or de facto. 

America was and still is an empire but with a big difference...it prefers friends to vassals and exerts more soft power than anyone since perhaps Rome (which makes sense given how obsessed the Founders were with what they understood of the Republic). If American wins this round of the global hegemony sweepstakes, it will be because we have leadership who understands this. If we get Trump, we will be carelessly knocking over a key pillar of our power. 

[The_Capt]

18 minutes ago, billbindc said:

I disagree with you for once. 

Per Jefferson: 

"We shall divert through our own Country a branch of commerce which the European States have thought worthy of the most important struggles and sacrifices, and in the event of peace [ending the American Revolution]...we shall form to the American union a barrier against the dangerous extension of the British Province of Canada and add to the Empire of Liberty an extensive and fertile Country thereby converting dangerous Enemies into valuable friends."

In conception and execution, the American project has been imperial from it's start. Modern America has been at pains to obscure that fact but the United States has been an expansionist empire and a relatively liberal one since 1865. Where it differs from the norm signally is in the 'converting dangerous Enemies into valuable friends' part. Relations with Mexico and Canada are, not coincidentally, quite close and extraordinarily friendly given how things began in both cases. Germany, Japan, Italy, Britain, Vietnam, Spain...it's hard to come up with anyone the US fought a hot war with who has not become an ally on paper or de facto. 

America was and still is an empire but with a big difference...it prefers friends to vassals and exerts more soft power than anyone since perhaps Rome (which makes sense given how obsessed the Founders were with what they understood of the Republic). If American wins this round of the global hegemony sweepstakes, it will be because we have leadership who understands this. If we get Trump, we will be carelessly knocking over a key pillar of our power. 

Well I don't think we are really disagreeing to be honest.  Of course the US is imperial, and definitely at a political elite level they definitely knew it.  In fact, it is right in that quote from Jefferson - in the 18th-19th century one was either an empire, or ruled by one - "Age of Empires".

However, the US at a domestic political level - the space of power, narrative and theatre - it has never been comfortable with the label nor responsibility.  I have had enough interactions within a bi-lateral government context to say that modern US thinking, at least in higher level governmental circles, is that the US is a reluctant empire at best.  "Hegemony" gets tossed around as the favorite word, as "Empire" is too imperial.

I think this creates a natural division within the US political landscape.  During the 90s I can recall push back on the idea of the US being responsible for global rules enforcement, even though they did it in the end.  There is clearly an internally/isolationist impulse held deeply within the US political calculus, and some politicians are exploiting it.  I suspect it has always been there.

In the end, a "Nice Empire" is still an empire.  I think many in the US think they are on top for a whole bunch of reasons, but "imperial" would not be anywhere near the top of that list.      

[cesmonkey]

Quote

Brandtzaeg said Nammo is prepared to open a new 155 mm plant near its Mesa location or in Florida.

“The U.S. has a very distinct and concrete plan for increasing capacity not only for the 155, but also for all the raw materials needed,” he said.

 

[paxromana]

55 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I am wracking my brain to think of a fully democratic empire in human history and cannot think of one.  I am not sure whatever we have been living with constitutes one to be honest.

The Delian League comes sorta close-ish. Athens, the dominant power was an *actual* democracy and not 'just' a republic like most democracies today and it tended to forcibly convert non-democratic members into democracies. And, if Thusydides is to be believed, they had a fair idea of what was needed to maintain it (the Melian affair, for one)

Edited June 20 by paxromana

[Carolus]

52 minutes ago, paxromana said:

The Delian League comes sorta close-ish. Athens, the dominant power was an *actual* democracy and not 'just' a republic like most democracies today and it tended to forcibly convert non-democratic members into democracies. And, if Thusydides is to be believed, they had a fair idea of what was needed to maintain it (the Melian affair, for one)

Well, if close-ish means that at best 1/6th of the population has the right to potentially gain political participation by random chance and slavery was openly practiced, of course. 

But it was an interesting system.

[kimbosbread]

1 hour ago, Carolus said:

Well, if close-ish means that at best 1/6th of the population has the right to potentially gain political participation by random chance and slavery was openly practiced, of course. 

But it was an interesting system.

Not to mention the invention of sex, which was later innovated on by the Romans to include sex with women.

[billbindc]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Well I don't think we are really disagreeing to be honest.  Of course the US is imperial, and definitely at a political elite level they definitely knew it.  In fact, it is right in that quote from Jefferson - in the 18th-19th century one was either an empire, or ruled by one - "Age of Empires".

However, the US at a domestic political level - the space of power, narrative and theatre - it has never been comfortable with the label nor responsibility.  I have had enough interactions within a bi-lateral government context to say that modern US thinking, at least in higher level governmental circles, is that the US is a reluctant empire at best.  "Hegemony" gets tossed around as the favorite word, as "Empire" is too imperial.

I think this creates a natural division within the US political landscape.  During the 90s I can recall push back on the idea of the US being responsible for global rules enforcement, even though they did it in the end.  There is clearly an internally/isolationist impulse held deeply within the US political calculus, and some politicians are exploiting it.  I suspect it has always been there.

In the end, a "Nice Empire" is still an empire.  I think many in the US think they are on top for a whole bunch of reasons, but "imperial" would not be anywhere near the top of that list.      

I think the way to approach it is that the US thinks its hegemony exists because as a nation it has a superior system...not that it has a superior system because it maintains a hegemony. For a contra example, may I suggest Russia? 

[billbindc]

2 hours ago, paxromana said:

The Delian League comes sorta close-ish. Athens, the dominant power was an *actual* democracy and not 'just' a republic like most democracies today and it tended to forcibly convert non-democratic members into democracies. And, if Thusydides is to be believed, they had a fair idea of what was needed to maintain it (the Melian affair, for one)

Interestingly, the founding generation of the American republic actually identified far more with the Spartans...viewing Britain as the epitome of the rapacious, hypocritical Athenian empire. Then we got a navy...

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, billbindc said:

Trump has said he will 'solve' the war in Ukraine if he begins *before* inauguration day. What does that mean? Well, we are not giving aid to Russia and we are already exerting about as much duress as we can short of going to war with Moscow directly. On the other hand, we are providing the lifeblood of military aid, diplomatic support and ISR to Ukraine without which it can only fight in greatly reduced circumstances. 

We both know Trump's track record in making deals. Do we really imagine he'll take the harder road? 

Let's look at Trump's verifiable, factual, no political spin record from his first term for things he said he could easily solve:

1.  North Korean nuke threat

2.  Iran nuke threat

3.  ISIS/Syria

4.  Peace in the Middle East

5.  Southern border security

6  Healthcare system

7.  Infrastructure

There's all sorts of stuff he promised would be "simple", "easy", etc. but I think this is enough to establish a track record.

On some of these issues he did no serious work on at all (Healthcare and Infrastructure), on others he did a lot of theater and not much substance (nuke threat), took credit for incomplete work that he didn't have much to with (ISIS), or implemented policies that didn't fundamentally fix anything (Southern Border and Middle East peace).  In fact, it could be argued that some of what he did made things worse (Middle East peace) or blew opportunities to make things better (Southern Border).

From this we can conclude, very safely, that Trump will not "solve" the war in Ukraine in any real way.  Not even in a way that Russia would view it as a total solution.  At best Ukraine might be like the nuke threat where he does a lot of theater but doesn't produce any substance.  At worst he could do things that make matters worse, such as can be argued about the Middle East.

Steve

[dan/california]

6 hours ago, zinz said:

https://m-en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20240620012200315?section=nk/nk

https://www.ft.com/content/89fe9d6b-3a0f-42a5-af50-cff7f457a126

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/committee-of-swiss-parliament-supports-indirect-arms-exports-to-ukraine/ar-BB1osEse

These are very interesting developments on the supply side for Ukraine. It seems like the war is being taken more seriously.

Too lazy to look up the link but Argentina is also part of the Ukraine contact group now. 

 

2 hours ago, cesmonkey said:

 

Two years in there is at least a twitch of acting like there is a war on. Better late than never.

[dan/california]

13 minutes ago, billbindc said:

I think the way to approach it is that the US thinks its hegemony exists because as a nation it has a superior system...not that it has a superior system because it maintains a hegemony. For a contra example, may I suggest Russia? 

 

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Well I don't think we are really disagreeing to be honest.  Of course the US is imperial, and definitely at a political elite level they definitely knew it.  In fact, it is right in that quote from Jefferson - in the 18th-19th century one was either an empire, or ruled by one - "Age of Empires".

However, the US at a domestic political level - the space of power, narrative and theatre - it has never been comfortable with the label nor responsibility.  I have had enough interactions within a bi-lateral government context to say that modern US thinking, at least in higher level governmental circles, is that the US is a reluctant empire at best.  "Hegemony" gets tossed around as the favorite word, as "Empire" is too imperial.

I think this creates a natural division within the US political landscape.  During the 90s I can recall push back on the idea of the US being responsible for global rules enforcement, even though they did it in the end.  There is clearly an internally/isolationist impulse held deeply within the US political calculus, and some politicians are exploiting it.  I suspect it has always been there.

In the end, a "Nice Empire" is still an empire.  I think many in the US think they are on top for a whole bunch of reasons, but "imperial" would not be anywhere near the top of that list.      

To paraphrase someone, don't compare the U.S., and the world order it tries to uphold, to the a utopia, compare it to the alternative. The alternatives on offer are Russia and China. Both of which barely bother to obfuscate about a literal infinity of crimes against humanity, and their intentions to KEEP doing them. They furthermore are really quite open about their intentions to inflict said crimes on populations that they do not currently control.

[Carolus]

https://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2024-06/rheinmetall-auftrag-bundeswehr-milliarden

 

Something for the Rheinmetall stock brokers, but also for Ukraine:

Germany finalizes 6 year contract with Rheinmetall, order of 8.5 billion € for an unknown number of 155mm shells (probably between 2.5 and 3 million depending on the price deduction they could negotiate), to restock national depots but also for delivery to Ukraine (if we assume that half goes to Ukraine that's ca. 20.000 per month for 6 years).

Planned, but not yet fully financed: 100 Leopard 2s from KNDS to bring the number of active tanks from 300 to 400 and equip the new "Lithuanian Brigade", a German mech. brigade with permanent base in the Baltics that is supposed to act as a deterrence to Russian incursions and part of the enlarged NATO quick reaction forces, Additional Eurofighters for the airforce before F-35 are introduced. Two new frigates for 3 billion € to support missions like those against Iran / Houthis in the Red Sea.  

(economy is looking a bit better and recent tax collections were higher than expected)

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, billbindc said:

I think the way to approach it is that the US thinks its hegemony exists because as a nation it has a superior system...not that it has a superior system because it maintains a hegemony. For a contra example, may I suggest Russia? 

Honestly, most of us in the empire really don’t care.  We want the stability the hegemony affords and are more than willing to remain subordinate to it. Benign is better, of course, but we will take it any way we can get it.

Our fervent hope is that the US remembers that superior system…as opposed to blowing it up.  Which certain frequencies on the US political spectrum seem intent upon doing.  The threat here is not a “nice or nasty” US hegemony choice - it is no hegemony at all.  

[cesmonkey]

 

[dan/california]

 

Quote

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/DroneCombat/comments/1dkf0cb/ukraines_recon_strike_group_hora_hora_group_drone/

Ukraine's Recon Strike Group "Hora" ("Hora Group") drone team continues to clear Russian infantry from occupied territory, including one Russian soldier who inadvisably chose to make rude gestures toward the group's drone pilot. Published June 20, 2024

 

He chose poorly....