This sort of thing is why I usually don’t report on the ups and downs in Ukraine
It’s because the fog of war is unusually thick in Ukraine.
One thing I have noticed almost from the start is that the only constant is the war itself. So I tend to especially discount any reports that say it’s about to be over.
Other than that, though, we have this sort of thing, which is typical:
Russia’s main mercenary group announced plans on Friday to pull out of the eastern Ukrainian city of Bakhmut, but Ukraine said the group’s fighters were reinforcing positions to try to seize it before Russia marks victory in World War Two day next week.
He said, he said.
If you want to know more about Bakhmut, there’s this by Stephen Green:
Russian forces — all three varieties [one of which is mercenary groups like the one mentioned in the above quote] — have been trying to take the town of Bakhmut since last summer. In the process, the town is almost entirely rubble and virtually all of its 70,000 or so residents fled long ago. Bakhmut is of no real operational importance. It’s only being fought over so hard because Russia’s leadership decided to peg their prestige to taking it, and Ukraine’s decided it was worth making a stand to take Russia down a notch.
As I was reading Green’s piece, I started thinking of WWI trench warfare. And then, towards the end of the article, he makes a similar comparison.
As the Wagner guy can bail when he feels like it, Vlad has no control over him. Wonder what resources he can round for internal squabbles.
The fog of war does create endless opportunities for propaganda from all sides, without question (and of most importance to the future of this republic) from our own. One of the many reasons to lament Fox’s stupidity in launching its strike against the most powerful voice in American (non-GOPe) conservatism is that he, quite literally, was the only “talking head” anywhere on cable asking hard questions about our ill-advised support of Kiev’s “Welfare Queen”. It is noteworthy that on AmericanThinker opinion regarding this issue continues to be divided, but the commenters are more likely to disbelieve, with good reason, any statement on the war from 1600, the Pentagon, or State.
I read today about a number of GOPe Congressmen/women whose remarks about the Tucker Carlson controversy included “He was pro-Russian.” And “Now we can really aid Ukraine.” I wonder how their bank accounts vote ?
About Bakmut WWI trench warfare and what is the same and diefferent:
The same IMO:
Fire kills (firepower Petain WWI)
Digging in keeps you alive
Terrane (geography topography) matters
If they can see you they can probably kill you
Shovels and spades still do the job (at close quarters)
Mud
Weather
Russian indifference to losses (Current Russian slang “200” = KIA, “300” = WIA)
Different IMO:
Communications at the squad, unit, sector that work and are timely
Precision fires (down to dropping grenades into specific foxholes/trenches)
Drones
Night vision devices
Thermal sights
Effective body armor
No chemical warfare
Ubiquitous reliable automatic weapons for the infantryman
Optical sights on individual automatic weapons
Bakhmut vs World War 1 – Similarities & Differences – Military History Not Visualized
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rldz7PyzKZQ&t=50s
je:
“Kiev’s Welfare Queen” How quaint, original, and discerning.
One other contemporary addition to yer list om: multi-story steel reinforced concrete
buildingstrenchesI’d say that Prig’s threat is moderately important, given how tied to the battle Wagner is and how them abandoning the front would be immensely symbolic and also cause a practical problem for other Kremlin-aligned forces to take up their sectors near the center, but
A: He hasn’t openly committed to doing anything YET.
B: He hasn’t even claimed he would do anything before “Victory Day.”
C: Bakhmut is of more symbolic importance than concrete. Losing it for either side would suck but it is mostly empty strategic depth now, and the Ukrainians had intended to give it up after a gradual fighting withdrawal.
But the Ukrainian offensives this Spring might be changing a lot. But time will see.
@Richard Aubrey
Can’t entirely agree. Wagner as a PMC is nominally illegal in Russia, and so if Putin wished he could cut the thin cord holding of the Sword of Damocles and try to purge the company after “Suddenly” recognizing it is a Private Military Company. Of course that would be an utterly risky move since it would basically mean either Prig goes or Putin does, but it is one he can make. Especially since he is in control of Wagner’s supplies (as Prig has complained about) and he can gamble that the rank and file of the forces are more loyal to the Rodina than to Wagner Leadership.
(Especially since the rank and file are or were recruited prisoners, who have no love for the leadership that routinely tortures and murders them in order to use them as rather bloody meatshields for screening and probing actions while saving their more elite – if still ravaged – shock detachments for the core).
More likely we’d see a game of internal positioning and battle for supremacy behind the scenes, with neither wanting it to become a life or death battle but with the intention of making the other cow.
A lot, and he hasn’t been shy about throwing it around. Though the problem with Wagner is that it is almost all “Teeth” and little “Tail” logistics wise; it is dependent on the same Russian MoD that Prig openly conflicts with for its ammo and supplies, so Putin and his army chiefs very much have the whip hand. To say nothing of the need for air support!
Moreover, Wagner is ultimately a shadow of what it once was militarily; Bakhmut and the surrounding battles bled them white (not helped by bad PR reaching their recruiting demographics along with some political wrangling closing off their convict supplies) and they have been actively ceding sections of the Bakhmut Front to the Russian regular military and other groups. The fact that Prig went all in on Bakhmut and staking his reputation on advances doesn’t help.
But Wagner also has a certain kind of political capital that is hard to equal, since they have generally been among the hardest fighting and most successful of the forces fighting under the Kremlin’s umbrella, and while the Kremlin can and has censored them to greater or lesser degrees word of mouth travels even in an authoritarian kakistocracy like Russia (or for that matter our own US). So openly shunning or screwing with him too much is rather impolitic. Especially with the offensives going on from the Ukrainians across the Dnieper and the general manpower shortage the Kremlin is facing.
@j e
They’re vast but they aren’t endless.
Can’t agree. Without Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine and spark the conflict, there either would be no war (and thus none of the accompanying risks conflated with it, such as the nuclear Armageddon) or (if we subscribe to the more “local” and regional perspective as some like Brian E do and assume it was likely we’d see a Donbas/Crimea War) it’d be one of several guerilla conflicts on a much lower ebb.
Without the Kremlin actively justifying its illegal, vile nonsense things would be vastly different, and even the Dems would be back to having to resort to more indirect Russia-baiting assuming they didn’t go full Detente mode with Putin like they tried at the start of Biden’s term.
I’m sorry, but What the H—?
My relation with Tucker is lukewarm to say the least, but I have generally tried to give him his due and concluded that he has done more good than bad (especially given the nature of our domestic politics), concluded he is better than Bill O’Reilly, and condemn what Fox did to him.
But “the most powerful voice in American (non-GOPe) conservativism”?
What the hell are Trump, DeSantis, and co? Chopped Meat?!?
Tucker’s up there, but he isn’t the most powerful voice. Honestly he’s likely not even in the top three.
Ok j e, I’ll bite.
How is our decision to support Kyiv “ill-advised”? Especially since your wording indicates you object not to the nature of the aid or to the degree but to it being given at all. Which is baffling to me.
Ok, Pardon my French but this is fucking lunacy on multiple levels, and I say this as someone who DOES NOT Have a very rosy picture of Ukrainian politics or economics, has worked to intentionally keep a jaundiced eye towards what our aid is doing (and what it likely isn’t), and so on.
Almost every single concept of it is either shortsighted, or objectively FALSE. Including the singular.
Firstly: About that singular, “Welfare Queen.” That’s stupid and inaccurate precisely because it is ignorant of Ukrainian politics and tries to make this something that it isn’t: something personal about Zelenskyy.
The truth is, just about every US Administration since HW has provided some degree of aid and cooperation with Ukraine, and this unsurprisingly intensified after 9/11 (when Ukrainian troops fought alongside us, albeit on a limited degree). The restarting of lethal aid to Ukraine happened under Trump, to the Poroshenko Administration in 2016-2017. Around the time when the MSM and talking heads were talking about Trump possibly causing a world war by doing things like killing Solemani and cratering Baathist and Russian Air strips in Syria.
Indeed, what a lot of the people rambling about “Kyiv’s Welfare Queen” ignore is that Zelenskyy was one of the MOST DOVISH political figures in Ukraine prior to 2022, and that he was political rivals with Poroshenko.
So even under the most unflattering (and in my opinion historically and strategically illiterate) of Paleocon or far leftist hot takes, this wouldn’t be about aid to “Kyiv’s Welfare Queen”, but to Kyiv’s Welfare QueenS. Because if Zelenskyy were pushed out tomorrow or killed, the Ukrainians would almost certainly replace him with someone at least as committed to carrying the war on to victory or at least survival.
And who would probably ask for even more aid while citing the instability caused by the transition.
So trying to make this all about Zelenskyy is ignorant.
Secondly: Most governments are “Welfare Queens” when they are fighting a war, especially an existential one. The US was dependent on the Bourbons and Dutch to supply us with things as basic as gunpowder during our long struggle for freedom from the British, both sides traded and borrowed extensively during the Civil War, and of course one of the key pillars of US strength is that we got pretty much every great power on the hock for aid during the world wars and had the others crushed (though the Soviets backstabbed us and reneged on most of theirs).
I doubt you would call the likes of Winston Churchill a Welfare Queen, but that is objectively what he is.
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t consider the degree of our aid or that good, competent people can’t argue against it (indeed, I’ll note that the immense costs of financing our revolution helped plunge Ancien Regime France into its own cycles of revolution). But it’s hardly the killshot you treat it as.
Thirdly: Like it or not, the US made a good number of commitments to support the Ukrainians against exactly this kind of attack, along with the UK and ironically Russia, in 1994. I have yet to see much acknowledgement of that, or the damage of reneging it (especially just after the clustereff that Brandon did in Afghanistan).
If you want to argue we should renege, you are welcome to make that argument. But you’re going to have to do a lot better than this. Especially since we’d need to acknowledge the reason this aid is being given is because of the Kremlin’s perfidy in order to regain control of nuclear weapons.
Frankly, Tucker’s alternatively naive, immoral, and stupid opinions on foreign affairs were one of the main reasons I stop short of giving him too much praise. I will always be indebted to him for things like helping to torpedo the January 6th narrative to the extent he did, but the Republic, Americans, and American Conservativism. benefits nothing from vouching for Sy Hersh’s incoherent, dishonest bullshit, or peddling regurgitated CCP Agitprop about DeDollarization (which I addressed elsewhere, and while there is some lurking threat there from the Rupee it is hugely overstated, primarily because the Yuan and Ruble are vastly less desirable than the USD, and for most of the reasons people justifiably complain about the USD but on totalitarian crack cocaine).
Unfortunately I’ve encountered a hell of a lot of lunacy on AmericanThinker, and some outright disgusting blood libel and Kremlin propaganda (including a hideously inaccurate map that claimed the Zaphorizian Host held a fraction of the territory it actually did, including omitting many of the key fortresses in it, precisely in order to regurgitate the idea that Ukraine is a thoroughly artificial state created by Vladimir Lenin, thoroughly in line with Kremlin propaganda and thoroughly out of line with historical reality).
I also stopped going there on the whole after AmericanThinker betrayed its readership by knuckling down to Dominion’s blackmail (rather like how Fox did) rather than standing their ground, and then disabled comments for the longest time.
By all means, disbelieve stuff coming from 1600. I do. But the sad fact is that they have a much greater accuracy rate than those coming from the Kremlin, let alone most of its various Western language mouthpieces.
Neo addressed one of them in the form of Douglas MacGregor in a dedicated blog post, and I addressed a couple others (including the vile and idiotic Scott Ritter) in some coments.
I’m actually a little surprised that the Ukrainian counter offensive is evidently going to be happening fairly soon. I expected that it might not happen until like July or even August based on how long I imagined it would take for Ukraine to physically get the tanks they were promised from various NATO countries as well as the training on said tanks not to mention all the necessary support equipment for the tanks. Tanks need tank transports to get them great distances across country. They need ammuntion. They need parts for repair and maintenance.
As of March 29 Germany has sent 18 Leopard 2 tanks. Spain said they’re going to send 10 Leopard 2s and Finland 3 (some or all of these may have arrived in Ukraine by now). The UK has evidently sent 10 Challenger II tanks.
So the Ukrainian army will have this crazy heterogeneous MBT force, with old Soviet T-72s, Ukrainian made T-84s, German Leopard IIs, UK Challengers IIs, and perhaps eventually even M1A1 Abrams.
@Nonapod
I’m not. Indeed, the “betting money” in general was that we’d see major offensives during the Winter, but for various reasons (including the mildness of the Winter making it less than useful for large scale maneuvers), largely put the kibbosh on that. Which generally favored the Ukrainians because they could economize their forces and build up, and particularly forming assault units in the reserve that have been waiting.
And I say this not as a major flex, because I’ve been wrong before, often greatly (such as on Putin actually escalating the invasion and making it official). But while both sides need more, more, more, in the short to medium term both sides can fight offensively.
You’re right in all of those things, but tanks were only part of the equation and not even particularly the most important part. This has largely been an infantry and artillery war more than anything, and tanks have not had a spectacular success record in this war (as Vuhledar showed). There’s also still quite a few WarPac vintage weapons around as well as the first of the Western ones.
It’s also worth noting that Ukrainian artillery has generally been increasingly competitive (and even the Russians acknowledge this).
If there’s a weak part to this, it’s the Air Defense system, which is slowly bleeding at unsustainable rates. Which further incentivizes offensives. Both to try and wrangle more support, and also to limit the ability of Russian Aerospace forces to strike at it.
Yup. And worse, the Poles have said “Hold my Wodka” and are bringing in things from as far afield as South Korea.
I agree with much of what Turtler says.
As aside, I have met several Ukrainian Expats recently while carp fishing.
They love their carp. Most of those I have met live in the Hollywood area, although I presume not the more exclusive sections, as Hollywood varies.
I have found them to be cordial, and in some cases charming. Some have families still in country; others say “only friends”. One common characteristics is that they are not inclined to talk much about the war, other than an occasional expletive directed toward Putin.
Before Putin’s folly I was not well disposed toward Ukraine, as I periodically read about the historic endemic and systemic corruption (to repeat a term that is overused in a different context). Now, I am decidedly pro-Ukraine. I pray each night for the successful defense of their homeland, and for those who have suffered grave losses.
Odd that a term such as “welfare Queen” would be applied to a Leader who is begging for help to defend his country against a much larger aggressor, while standing fast himself in the war zone. I wonder if anyone so characterized Churchill in 1940? de Gaulle? Or for that matter Josef Stalin throughout WWII?
How is our decision to support Kyiv “ill-advised”? Especially since your wording indicates you object not to the nature of the aid or to the degree but to it being given at all. Which is baffling to me.
Point one, it is not our war. We are getting closer and closer to direct confrontation with Russia.
Point 2, our regime is weakening our military nearly as rapidly as we are depleting military stocks we no long have the ability to quickly replace. This is not the WWII USA.
Point 3, nobody trusts our politicians anymore. Lots of money is changing hands, most of it invisible to the voters.
Point 1: Russia wants. History teaches lessons about expansionist dictators in Europe. But, but, but NATO.
Point 2: Ukraine isn’t ruining our military. See walking and chewing gum concept. Ruination of our military is part and parcel of the Democrat party, IIRC, they predate Putin.
Point 3: And this wasn’t a feature before Feb. 24, 2022?
@Mike K
Correct, it is Vladimir Putin’s war.
However, it is a war against a nation we have significant ties with, as well as diplomatic and legal obligations to support against territorial aggrandizement and aggression. Both of which are in evidence here.
AND WHOSE GODDAMN FAULT IS THAT?!?!?
The answer is remarkably simple. The Kremlin’s.
We can all wax poetic about NATO expansion (which was always a crock of crap that was underlined by the decision of the rest of Scandinavia to join, and which was never a legal justification for war), or whether or not we should have treated Putin or the various Russian governments better. Those can all worthy discussions. But none change the fact that ultimate blame and ultimate responsibility lie with Putin and his inner circle, and on multiple levels. Whether it was by invasively interfering in Ukrainian domestic policies on a level that make Nuland etc. al. look benign (up to and including sanctioning the poisoning of Yuschenko and advocating Yanukovych use domestic terrorism to try and break his opposition), or that this was largely caused by his abusive relations with the nations in his “Near Abroad.”
Moreover, some of us remember world history prior to 2014.. In particular I remember Georgia ’08. I fail to see how rewarding the Kremlin’s aggression against its outlying nations with lack of resistance will not lead to further aggression and heighten the risk of direct conflict – and further West – in the future.
If you want more of something, subsidize it. The “Reset” Appeasement under the left during Georgia helped encourage this and other fiascos down the line. I don’t know about you, but I’d rather subsidize Ukraine’s defense than further Russian aggression further afield.
Correct, but it would be a push to help increase military production to help compensate for that. Especially given how we are not used to producing on this level of high attrition (and neither are the Kremlin). It also makes it harder for the Dems to justify gutting the military and our production ability to the same degree.
Edit: And as om pointed out, the left wants a weakened US military anyway.
Moreover, this would not address NON-MATERIAL support, such as smacking the Kremlin’s puppets with the Stimson Doctrine and sanctions.
Correct. To which I would say: “And abandoning a nearly 20 year old commitment that received at least nominal bipartisan support across administrations from both parties would do What? Restore faith and confidence in America’s word?!?”
I think not. Especially given Kabul and Saigon.
I’ve always made my stance clear. If I thought throwing Ukraine to the wolves would help us deal with our domestic tyrants and corruption, I would advocate for that. But I do not see it. And indeed given Putin’s love for green energy in Western countries and the left’s use of him as a boogeyman to justify repression, I think it would do worse.
And in any case, there’s something to be said for standing up to thuggish, anti-American bullies that think they can capitalize on our weakness. Especially when it can be outsourced to a client that actually has to provide most of the blood.
The WSJ news page today says that Ukrainian authorities question the Wagner Group leader’s ultimatum.
They may have a good point. I am cautious about accepting information from either side without some kind of corroboration. However, a great deal of blood has been shed over Bakhmut, which is mostly in rubble by now, indicating that it is a symbol for each side, which neither is willing to give up.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/wagner-ukraine-russia-withdraw-6df13ff?mod=hp_lead_pos5
@Kate
Makes a lot of sense, and fits with both Prigozhin’s power and lack thereof, as well as his political ambitions. I think even he knows that if Putin truly, utterly wants to avoid Wagner pulling out of Bakhmut he has ways to do that, and many are not polite. It also doesn’t help he is in an even greater trouble. He staked so much of his fortune and reputation on Bakhmut, and now the costs are at risk of coming due.
I imagine there are “nicer” Neo-Nazi enablers it could happen to, but he is up there.
they pulverized bakhmut like grozny or aleppo, it doesn’t matter what magic words are said to salvage the situation, if one studies a little Russian history, about the region one isn’t surprised, now is land taken retained for any great period, that is the story of the caucasus,
A reminder to Mike K and others who say “it is not our war”.
The United States, and ironically Russia, assured Ukraine’s security in return for giving up their nuclear weapons.
True, in a legalistic sense, assurance does not carry the obligation to militarily intervene as would be the case if we had “guaranteed” their security.
Still there is some moral obligation to provide robust support, as well as a geopolitical consideration if the issue of assuring someone else’s security in return for some concession should come up in the future.
BTW, surely Carlson knew all of this even as he railed against our support for Ukraine. That is a major reason why he lost credibility with me.
@miguel cervantes
But they didn’t take Bakhmut like they took Grozny or Aleppo.
Hell, they haven’t even pulverized Bakhmut like Grozny and Aleppo because they were never able to cleanly cut it off and besiege it and thus pound it from all sides and begin tearing up the belowground infrastructure.
That’s an important difference.
Here’s another one. Grozny was and is the capital of Chechnya. Aleppo is one of the oldest cities on Earth and was a key point in Syrian history from pretty much the start.
Bakhmut was either a large town or a small city of moderate strategic importance unto itself, save for the fact that it is the lynchpin of a defensive line.
The fact that you are comparing it to the other two as if they are comparable speaks volumes about how unsuccessful the Kremlin has been in this war.
Correct, miguel.
In the same way it does not matter what magic words are said to try and doom the situation.
What matters is the situation and what actions are done.
And at present, Bakhmut the borderline nothingburger town (or if I'm REALLY generous small city) has given the Kremlin more trouble than *GROZNY* has.
While the Ukrainians are now back on the Southern Bank of the Dnieper.
Correct miguel. But I would challenge you to claim you have studied more Russian history than I have.
The truth is that Russian will and resources are not infinite. Nor is their willingness to take casualties in an offensive war they do not see the reason for. Nor is it easy even for the Kremlin and whatever White or Red Tsar is in power to take all of Ukraine in one fell swoop when the likes of Ivan Grozny, Alexei Mihailovich, and Lenin failed to do so and instead had to divide and conquer. Usually with much more powerful local collaborators than what we see here.
@oldflyer
Well said.
I’d also note: to elaborate on the “welfare queen” narrative (and show what a laughable piece of nonsense it is), how many of us would blame someone in Chicago for trying to acquire a gun legally in order to defend themselves against repeated home invasions by a violent gang like the Bloods or Crips or some Mexican Cartel’s local franchise?
How many people would even blame them if they tried to cut corners or obtain one illegally due to Chicago’s corrupt and unconstitutional in spirit if not in law gun grabbing? The right to self defense against unprovoked attack is an innate human right (in my opinion and that of the Founders endowed by our Creator). It does not disappear because you live in a bad neighborhood.
Hell, I will go even further. How many would condemn such a person for doing so even if they were a welfare queen with a proven and negative track record, but with a clear and very real danger to themselves?
It’s a fucking stupid and immoral comparison and it always has been. You might want to scrutinize the Welfare Queen’s behavior and make sure the funds they have go to what they actually need or are used for, and you probably would look on it if they redirected funds they got from Welfare to buy a gun to defend themselves from unprovoked assault. But are you seriously going to argue they have no rights and must lie down and die or otherwise submit to whatever the local Crips want?
That made me disagree with him. But his idiotic endorsement of Hersh’s fairy tale about the Nordstream Pipeline apparently without bothering to check told me he was either unspeakably credulous or a bad liar.
we are being doomed right here right now, our cities couldn’t do worse if they were invaded by a Russian army, our food and fuel is being seized by former earth firster taryn manning at land management our military is a laughing stock being filled with degenerate chimera, paid with out tax dollars, Christians are murdered on school yards and the party hack cheers, and the oprichniks at the bureau bury the evidence,
the Russians will level one city and then the next because that is their way of war, maybe they learned from genghis,
@miguel cervantes
Which is always why I insist we avoid open involvement in the conflict and tend to our own first.
Miguel my friend, if you truly think that then it appears you have some more innocence to lose. If you think the Squad, CAIR and the Minneapolis Islamists are bad – and they unquestionably ARE – please research modern Chechnya and imagine how much worse it can be with direct, armed patronage from Kadyrov.
It can always be worse.
Agreed, and that requires our attention first. Especially since it might determine the fate of the aAmerifan West:
This is true but it also applies to the Russian military and the CCP’s
Again another reason why I want us to focus on the home front, and for Russia to spend bloody years in an attritional slog that will largely monopolize its military and political efforts.
Only if they can secure the logistics chains to keep leveling those cities. Which is obviously in doubt as Kyiv shows.
Nah. They razed the suburbs of Constantinople a couple of times befor Chingghis even came close.
But as even Chingghis and his ilk learned in Ossetia and then on the Wild Plains, razing cities alone is no guarantee of victory.
ee cervantes:
Is there some justification in Ukrainian’s using the term “orcs” for Vlad’s special military operators?
It’s just the Russian way of war?
let me put it this way, if the Cold war had been settled differently would the Soviets have put anyone like biden as their puppet,
@miguel cervantes
They would have considered it, alongside true believers like Gus Hall and mixtures of both like Bernie.
All the more reason our own house comes first. I just do not think cutting back in Ukraine helps.
ee cervantes:
Try again. Brandon is a cloth headed corrupt dummy but you haven’t made a point in “this way” or any other way.
Destruction of churches, corruption of the young, exhaustion of our resources, imposing near starvation and then denying it, disarming the people which part wouldn’t a soviet viceroy impose on this country,
I sense I may be in the wrong place now. I am absolutely convinced that the present regime (ours) is intent on the destruction of our country. It is already not one I recognize except locally. Luckily for me, I am old and will not have to live through the aftermath of what is coming, but I have children and grand children. I fear for them. You folks keep up your enthusiasm for funding and arming Ukraine and I will take a pass.
The apparat is doing a fine job of ‘burying us’
I ask myself, what would President Trump have done? The answer is clear, Russia would never have attacked Ukraine.
One thing I appreciate about the war in Ukraine is that it convinced western governments that perhaps “climate change” isn’t quite as important as energy security. I mean, they haven’t quite stopped pushing for inefficient means to produce energy. Still, they have decided that drilling for oil and gas isn’t all that bad an idea.
The above doesn’t include the Biden administration or the Dutch.
ee cervantes:
You forgot dogs and cats living together.
Mike K, by the short hairs. Russia won’t stop if they aren’t stopped in Ukraine. Your progeny won’t like the world of your Ukraine-free fears. IIRC your daughters aren’t conservative, your hopes are in the grandchildren?
Putin isn’t going to be around forever. What comes next may not be Western-style democracy in Russia, but Russia isn’t likely to be a major threat to the West either.
FYI https://ussanews.com/2023/05/05/breaking-u-s-supreme-court-finds-right-to-an-adequate-national-defense-biden-to-send-troops-to-ukraine/
As OUR border gets overrun…
cb:
That ain’t The BabylonBee.
Re: Trench warfare
____________________________________
If you mean, “Are we all going to get killed?”
Yes.
Clearly, Field Marshal Haig is about to make yet another gargantuan effort to move his drinks cabinet six inches closer to Berlin.
–“Blackadder — Season 4 — World War I”
Comedy and reality. I would suggest dipping your toes into the many lectures presented by The Western Front Association on youtube.
huxley:
Here is a link to The Western Front Association
https://m.youtube.com/@WesternFrontAssoc
When I was a child Hogan’s Heroes was on TV. My father, Army combat infantryman wounded in France in 1944, didn’t think it was funny, but let us watch it. He knew a survivor of Japanese POW camps. But Black Adder is nearly 100 years after WWI, so all in good fun. And of course Haig is the biggest donkey of the “Lions led by Donkeys” myth.
The Slavic Spring in Obama/Biden’s World War Spring series that started with a violent overthrow of the democratically elected government, sustained with violence, progressed with violence, funded by Obama/Biden et al by way of proxies (e.g. Iranians in the second Iraq war, Taliban in Afghanistan, sociopaths in Libya, etc).
Turtler, how about a few words about: The USA has lost 3 wars in the last 70 years at great expense. To what do you attribute this failure? Follow up with why we should think this time will be different.
@n.n
Time to first bullshit lie: 0.5 sentences.
Not even in our system is the President the entire government, and that’s particularly true in parliamentary systems. Yanukovych was democratically elected, but so was the legislature that removed him. Which you “conveniently” ignore precisely because it does not fit you propaganda narrative.
As is the case for WHY he was removed, namely egregious violations of his countrymen’s rights and the law (such as the use of anti-semitic shocktroops in the form of Berkut). There’s a lot of reason to be suspicious of that (and others such as Brian E have rightfully raised questions about the holiness of his opponents) but the fact that you won’t even TALK about it is staggering and reveals your bad faith.
Ironic how the exact same thing can be said of Yanukovych’s government, up to and including the attempted assassination of his opponents. Why don’t you mention that?
And whose side are the Iranian Mullahs on in this war, pray tell?
@Mike K
Fair.
Oh on that much I agree. Or at least that the “Present Regime” is headed by kleptocrats who are following the pied piping of radicals that wish to do that. It is why I do favor limiting our involvement in Ukraine and dealing with our issues on the home front. We might not survive otherwise, especially in a pitched conflict. While I am one of those few remaining “Neocons” that didn’t sell their soul because of the Great Cheeto Devil (TM), and a foreign policy hawk by nature t have admitted we will need to draw down for quite a while.
But that doesn’t mean we can abandon them all together, and I’d much rather have our major enemies be bogged down as we were for a good portion while it plays out.
Indeed. I admit I am much younger and so have girded for that. I was fairly young when 9/11 happened but I realized very soon after it that we were in a war that would last well after my own life in a clash of civilizations. I fear for that result and think we are losing it here.
Fair enough, but the way I look is: We have our own problems and threats within, and if we go down the world likely faces a new dark age. But should we grudge others fighting their own kinetic struggle to save their nation that?
Especially since while our aid is quite extensive it is fairly cheap in both money and blood compared to a direct confrontation with the Kremlin. One Putin has been risking for years by attacks on our allies (see: Georgia) and his longstanding anti-Western alliance with the CCP.
If that becomes at cross purposes to saving our own country and helping save your children and us, then I will be the first to advocate cutting the cord and leaving the Ukrainians to the wolves, ugly as I may find that. But until then I take some pleasure in seeing Biden and co having to trip over the contradiction of supporting a nation at arms (including armed citizenry) humiliating a conventional great power’s military while Biden etc. al try to dodge around things like Obama and Clinton’s Reset.
@JackWayne
Firstly: I don’t think we “lost” Iraq. So that’d be two wars.
Secondly: Ultimately, commitment aversion. The race does not always go to the swift but to the persistent, and that has been an Achilles Heel of the West in general and the US in particular for decades, since at least Vietnam if not Korea. Especially since we’ve actively suffered a decline in our willingness to fight dirty, long running wars since WWII (in comparison to our previous track record in places like the Philippines, Nicaragua, and so on).
Ultimately, no longstanding change was going to come unless we were willing to fight and stay for the long term in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, and yes I am talking about long term in terms of “Longer than the twenty years we actually spent in those godforsaken messes.” Longer term as in the time we spent occupying the former Japanese Empire’s Pacific half and West Germany. Because it was inevitable we would make some mistakes, F-ck Ups, and the like as I’ll cover now, but we’d have to stay around to fix them or at least come close.
And indeed we to greater or lesser degrees have in Iraq, which is why for all of that place’s MANY problems (including creeping Iranian influence) it still has a government that is recognizably descended from the one we put in place, and a solidly pro-American Kurdistan. It’s a sharp rebuke to what we see in Afghanistan (which Obama claimed was the “Good War”).
I resigned myself that we the US, the American People, and the West as a whole were in it for the long term in a clash of civilizations, and while we can try to limit the damage and demands that places on us we have to do it.
Beyond that, our “Nation Building” Policy sucked, and acted as if we could just throw money at a problem until those problems went away, not realizing that will make some problems worse. Afghan government corruption is iconic there. In particular we didn’t put as much focus on winning the countryside and villages, with what that meant (both good and bad, which risks me diverging into my rather spicier thoughts about counter-terrorist fighting and law and order).
Thirdly, the war was over-covered and over-lawyered, and the Left generally had its say too much. I still have people on the right ignorantly repeating their cliches such as that Saddam had no cooperation with Al Qaeda (in spite of how this involves shitting on the hard work and sacrifices of “brown people” in the Philippines, India, and elsewhere who proved things such as Saddam Hussein’s diplomatic staff collaborating extensively with groups like Abu Sayyaf that were direct vassals of Osama Bin Laden for things like terrorist attacks) or that Saddam kept no WMDs (because apparently dozens of thousands of chemically laced artillery shells don’t count). The impotence of Bush in particular in defending his own conduct and the reasons why helped beget Obama, and it is one reason why I no longer look at him as fondly as I once did, especially after his petty spat with Trump showed how vocal he COULD get.
(What’s the matter Dubya? Was being called Literally Hitler and our troops being vilified as Babykillers not enough to get you to bitchslap the press about lying about WMDs, but Orange Man was?).
That needs to change and we will need “Why We Fight”s to explain the nature of the war and government while we try and fight the equivalent of what Abrams and the USMC did in South Vietna,.
Next, we need to treat terrorists as terrorists and illegal combatants as illegal combatants. Liable to torture and summary execution. We need to remember that reciprocity is an integral part of international law and to not be bogged down b the press. This failure helped make us be viewed as the “Weak Horse” in the fight, with terrible consequences.
Fifth, We need to hold feet to the fire and cut ties with several regimes, chiefly Pakistan, who have shown themselves to be unworthy of our trust. We also need to make more inroads with some others, chief among them India (and frankly our failure to aggressively court India as an ally is one of the great failures in American diplomatic history).
Sixthly and perhaps most difficulty, we need to be much more honest about the nature and ideology of our enemies, both there and at home. Which is difficult precisely because of the Left’s narrative control and the consequences it would have for American political society, but it’s hard to do otherwise if we insist Islam is a Religion of Peace on the whole.
Better idea: Why on God’s Green Earth do YOU Think a conventional war by a hostile government invading a previously nonaligned one and facing intense resistance from its people would be SIMILAR to our forays in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam?
Because this is the Kremlin making the mistakes we did on crack cocaine and then doubling down with many of its own, such as godawful tactics (say what one will about the War in Terror, but not many people can fault our troops’s tactical prowess and the enemy certainly doesn’t), naked brutality against civilians, and poor logistics.
Most of the irregulars and partisans in the Ukrainian war are on “our” side, at least for now. So this feels rather like a kneejerk written without actually looking at the situation.
In any case, one of the US’s greatest powers and advantages (as well as weaknesses) is the ability to act as financier, supplier, and sugar daddy to allies or other proxies. It’s what dominated much of our roles in the three great world conflicts of the 20th century and had sizable effect elsewhere in the 19th century. We should exploit this.
@Abraxas
Agreed, but Putin was always more of a symptom of the problems and pathologies in the Russian “Deep State” and the “Organs” than the cause of them. It’s telling he has been either a “Chekist” or tied to them for essentially his entire life and gained power by a mixture of embezzlement and hobnobbing with the politically and economically connected, mixed in with a bit of surgical terror.
It’s also worth noting that he has actively been devolving power to some degree, which is most evident and horrifying in Chechnya, where he has basically allowed the Kadyrov Clan to turn the place into a slightly-more-loyal version of what it was under Dudayev (one of the most grotesque insults to the Russian and Loyalist dead that fought in the Chechen Wars imaginable).
Which is why I have usually referred more to “The Kremlin” than to Putin. Because while Putin is the chief mover in the war, he could not have done what he has without the support and acceptance of a sizable chunk of the Russian military, security, and political apparatus (including many otherwise opposition figures such as Navalny, who was never particularly our friend in comparison to the likes of Kara-Murza).
If and when he loses power, whether by stepping down, revolution, or death, the issue is making sure people like him do not remain in power.
Can’t agree. For starters, even if this scenario you describe does happen, “what comes next” will likely still be an anti-Western autocracy that is inclined to continue Putin’s previous policies of alignment with the PRC in a broad coalition against the West. That’s a major danger to American interests, especially due to the power of the Russian WMD stockpiles and the creeping Islamicization.
I don’t want Kadyrov or even someone like Medvedev or Prigozhin or the like to be in control of Russia’s resources and assets, since in many ways they might be worse than Putin is.
In any case, the Siloviki and the wider apparatchiks in Russia are a problem much like our own deep state, only more openly authoritarian/totalitarian. They’ll need to be dealt with, preferably indirectly. Which is another reason I have generally been supportive of support to Ukraine. No nation takes losses in excess of Afghan War ones well, and while the Russians have done better than most for so far we’re already starting to see some cracking. Ideally, we need to make it unacceptable for “whoever comes next” in Moscow to follow Putin’s positions too closely, especially vis a vis aggression to the West.
@cb
I tried copying and pasting the wording that the article claims is from the Supreme Court, but got maybe two hits from mirrors of this. Nothing at all from the Supreme Court. Which makes me conclude it is probably disinformatsiya.
Which isn’t that surprising since the wording doesn’t sound much like the Supreme Court.
“the first instance it is up to Congress to define the parameters of an adequate national defense, the scope of the duty clearly encompasses defending the Ukraine from Putin” REALLY!?!?
From Putin specifically? Not “the Russian Federation” or “The armed forces of the Russian Federation”? The Supreme Court has many flaws but it tends to word its decisions much more carefully than we do here precisely because the world and America care more about it than they do our posts here.
Moreover, the idiot here doesn’t mention WHAT case this “unanimous decision” was on. Precisely because that’d make it easy to check up.
In light of this, I am inclined to believe “This is bullshit disinformation, and until and unless I see either a source for it or enough verifiable information about the alleged case to check, I will operate under the assumption that this is exactly what it is.”
@mistersurefire
To be fair, Putin and Russia had already attacked Ukraine before Trump got into office, and the war had been ongoing since 2014. But Trump successfully deterred Putin from making it official or escalating while supplying Ukraine with aid, including lethal aid.
So I do think this probably would’ve continued as the ignominious kind of attritional frozen conflict with territory going back and forth (mostly forth, as the Kremlin’s proxies and false flagged troops generally lost land steadily from about 2016 on). Which is admittedly the exact sort of situation that would’ve been ideal for an American First policy.
Further.
Thanks for the detail. To put my question another way, after casualties among various levels of military competence, who has more first-line guys left?
Putin has to defend all of Russia, spreading out his forces, not just the Kremlin.
For logistics, you just take what you need as you move, which can’t be done on a battlefield but can in the interior.
You can’t win a war when the enemy has a sanctuary. You just pay the monthly butchers’ s Bill to stay …wherever. Or not.
We haven’t gone after a sanctuary since 1945. You may recall various arguments about “going north” ( VN or Korea). Won in Iraq, but Zero gave it back.
Very few wars have been won as thoroughly as WWII. Be nice if we’d done the same elsewhere, but the cost….
See Fehrenbach, This Kind of War. Discusses the issue in the context of Korea.
The only thing we know for certain is that Russia, once considered a superpower, can’t defeat little old Ukraine.
Biden is pouring our treasure into Ukraine to cover his corruption there and to cover up DOD bio warfare labs.
the Court failed in its obligation to stop this fraudulent election, (I know they was the hint of violence) and has committed another act of dissolution, by not upholding title 42, the political class are fine with the murder of the two upstanding members of the court, you ask us to care about a 400 year old blood feud, where China is the only winner,
Mac Siccar:
DOD bio weapons labs?
Seriously.
Why not add Brandon must cover up the CIA creating AIDS, or Neil Armstrong never landimg on the Moon, or Tucker’s latest; 9/11 and Building 7?
we forgot about the one in the sudan already, the black sea is where the plague came to europe from,
@Mac Siccar
Agreed there.
Agreed on the former.
But if there were DOD “biowarfare labs” we’d almost certainly have the Russians be able to provide with more proof. While the agreement was inked with Yushenko, it continued straight on through Yanukovych’s time in power. So I’m supposed to believe that Yanukovych and/or Putin never bothered to check what was going on at those labs (in spite of the explicit info we have of Russian scientists doing exactly that) and that they never noticed the “Anti-Slavic Bioweapons” or whatever the hell was supposedly going on?
Yeah, no. There’s a reason why when the Kremlin tried to push this nonsense, the Ukrainians and US hit them hard with the reports of their own researchers and scientists, as well as asking them why the hell they were lobbing missiles and bombs so close to “Bioweapon laboratories.”
There WAS Almost certainly something skeevy going on, but it was probably the DoD and Fauci cutting a deal to conduct research outside of and without Congressional oversight. Again. Which is bad but very different from “Ukraine is hosting an anti-Slavic bioweapon (for some reason).”
Alas many of the comments on this are germane and meaningful only if one assumes the history of the Ukraine and the rationale for the conflict post date 2014.
Me, I don’t think Russia is THE evil empire (Sadly not, in my opinion, in this day and age, eviler than ours.), or that Putin is the devil incarnate or the guy who played piano with his penis is a hero or a saint, or supporting the Ukraine is more important than protecting our Republic.
Far too many are willing to fiddle away our money and armament in the Ukraine as criminal invaders surge across our own borders.
The DOD bioweapons labs was a useful “Look! Squirrel!” for Vlad and Tucker.
And ee cervantes finds Sudan. Is that the old Bill Clinton air strike on the drug factory? Don’t be shy, ee cervantes.
Jim in Alaska, I could not have said it better.
@Jim in Alaska
@Mike K
Pray tell, what is that supposed to mean?
I’ve been quite open about discussing the historical roots of the conflict before 2014 (and indeed how 2014 is so important in part due to egregious mishandling by Putin and Yanukovych flipped Ukraine’s fraught internal divides on their ear and united all but the most fervently pro-Russian/Pro-Yanukovych against them). I’ve also talked a great deal about the previous history of the region and involved history. Indeed, one time I condemned another typical Kremlin whitewash trying to claim Ukraine was only the successor state of the Zaphorizhian Host and putting forth a bullshit map because I noted that the “map” didn’t feature the Host controlling one of the cities it had control of.
So my comments remain germane and meaningful and absolutely acknowledge Ukrainian history and the roots of this conflict predate 2014.
Agreed, at the moment I’d say that distinction belongs to the CCP in China, with Iran being a runner up.
Both of whom, I note, Putin has made a policy of aligning with for decades, as noted by people like Mark Steyn back near the turn of the millennium.
If you think that, please research Kadyrov and Prigozhin.
Let’s not mince words. The situation in the US is quite dismal. Especially now. January 6th makes me angry every time I think of it and how we quite literally have political prisoners held without charge in inhumane conditions for years, ironically like the exact reason we condemned Putin in the Magnitsky Act. And it will likely get worse before we can hope it gets better.
But I’ve worked in Russia years ago and still have some friends in or around there. And as bad as things in the US are, we don’t have a powerful Narcoislamist nutjob in official control of the equivalent of a US State (and a BIG one given the size of Chechnya) openly murdering Orthodox Christians (ie the people who are the majority in Russia as a whole and are deeply tied to Russian history, culture, and identity) and financing terrorism; can you imagine if Ilhan Omar was caught providing bomb parts to Hezbollah?
Likewise, the woke Left is not at the point of openly filming themselves murdering their own people by bashing their brains in with sledgehammers, as Wagner Company have. And throwing people in prison for a dozen years for calling a military conflict a war.
I’m not saying we can’t get get worse or that bad. We absolutely can, and that’s something to keep in mind. But it’s worth noting how much worse things can get, especially with nations that are already worse than even our situation is.
Strawman.
I’ve never claimed that Putin is the devil incarnate, indeed compared to Xi or Solemani he looks mild. But if worldly action sand fruits are indications of one’s stance (as we are told is so in the scripture), then he is certainly a member an acolyte of the Devil. A remorseless, corrupt, murderous Chekist who seized power, razed much of his own country and neighboring ones to the ground, and simultaneously sold out his supposed countrymen and co-ethnics to the likes of Kadyrov in Chechnya and Nazarbayev in Kazakhstan in order to maintain power, and who has helped foster another KGB goon as Patriarch of the Moscow Patriarchate, where he quite literally as spewed sacrilege in ways that are new and horrible even for the long and often-sordid history of the Moscow Patriarchate in hundreds of years under the Tsars and Soviets.
I have every reason to believe that if the Beast from the Sea emerged tomorrow Putin would happily cast his banner with him in an attempt to maintain his power for just a few more days.
And as if all of this wasn’t bad enough, the fact that he has been consistently opposed to the US for decades and aligned with XI is another point.
I’ve never claimed that either. Though at most I will say he has been quite the brave man. But I’ve repeatedly stated that I don’t know what to make of him and that I could quite honestly believe many of the worst rumors about him given the depraved, corrupt nature of Ukrainian politics (which I might add are FAR from the worst we’ve supported, as even a cursory look at the KMT’s long and ugly history shows).
I just believe obsessing with him is – as I pointed out in no uncertain terms to j e in this exact thread – ultimately counterproductive to actually learning about this conflict or understanding it. He was not President for most of the conflict. This war started under the caretaker Yatsenyuk governments (with the invasion timed in part to exploit their weakness). Most of it has played out under Poroshenko, “penis piano guy”‘s predecessor and political rival, under whom Trump re-authorized the lethal aid Obama cut.
So Zelenskyy himself is frankly important but nowhere near as important or *irreplaceable* as he’s been made to be. And the fact that he is one of the most dovish of Ukrainian leaders before 2022 is also something that tends to get missed.
For better and for worse, if he died, was disgraced, or had to go into hiding he’d be replaced with someone with similar policies and stances on the war. Because Ukrainians recognize they are fighting for their lives against a regime that is still worse than what we face at home.
As well they should. It is their country in a way it isn’t for ours. And I’ve always made it clear where our priorities should be.
Well, regardless of what others might say I have never, Ever claimed that.
Indeed, I’ve even said as much here. Multiple times.
https://www.thenewneo.com/2023/05/05/this-sort-of-thing-is-why-i-usually-dont-report-on-the-ups-and-downs-in-ukraine/#comment-2678489
https://www.thenewneo.com/2023/05/05/this-sort-of-thing-is-why-i-usually-dont-report-on-the-ups-and-downs-in-ukraine/#comment-2678553
And indeed I imagine most here would agree.
But in this case I think having one of our most powerful and mortally opposed strategic enemies being bogged down in a war that’s even bloodier and more disastrous than Afghanistan at its worse will help us sort things out.
Ok, you want to play this card?
Please tell me: how would we use that money and especially armament to stop said criminal invaders across our own borders?
Especially since most of those tend not to be so polite as to show up in paramilitary dress and flying assorted Russian, Soviet, and Nazi flags (and yes I wish I were joking).
De Santis and several others like Abbott have worked heartily to try and manage the issue, and I support them there. But they can only do so much from state capitals, and even Trump struggled with the Deep State and RINOs.
And also: Do you think that a Kremlin unencumbered by the hot war in Ukraine and able to support the Hispanic American Bolivarians like the PSUV in Venezuela (Chavez and Maduro’s people) and our old “Friend” Commandante Ortega in Nicaragua will make the criminal hordes thing on our border Better or WORSE?!?
Because I sure as hell know where I’d put my money on.
Border reform and protection is going to be far more important for the fate of our Republic than even Ukraine, but it’s also going to be much longer and harder. And I hate to say it but HIMARS are only going to help so much on that. I fail to see how they would help us better on the South than in Ukraine.
Edit: Also, it’s “Ukraine”, not “the Ukraine.” Leaving aside how they refer to two separate but overlapping things, the latter’s both less accurate and more typing for no gain. It’s also (correctly in my opinion) viewed as insulting to the extreme.
@miguel cervantes
Agreed, which is unfortunately an old problem. And another reason why I do think the role of the Supreme Court is one of the great structural flaws in the US, and how it has typically failed the US badly in many of the most crucial moments such as Dred Scott, “Fire in a Crowded Theater”, Roe v. Wade, and now this.
I’m at the point of arguing “Marbury v. Madison was a mistake and needs to be overturned.”
Of course.
You’re not being very consistent.
A: China obviously is not acting as if it were “the only winner” given the need to tone down its threats to Taiwan and the other South China Sea countries (even if shipbuilding continues). As well as having to try and maintaining its support for Putin without undermining its own leverage.
B: The conflict has roots going back but it hardly is “400 years old.” Indeed 400 years ago the political ancestors of both Moscow and Kyiv were fighting on the same side against Poland-Lithuania.
C: And yes, yes you should care about it, even if not as much as events at home. Precisely because as a certain Arab Construction Heir showed, just because you don’t care about something doesn’t mean the wider world doesn’t care about it or you.
Which “one” in Sudan already?
Sure, and the relevance of that?
It’s also here I’ll note that the Black Death started in the greater Chinese Empire, at least in the “Great” 13th/14th century outbreak.
DOD bio weapons labs?
Maybe. NIH bio labs a la Wuhan.
the history of the Ukraine and the rationale for the conflict post date 2014
It started in Kiev and developed in cooperation with Russians against the invasion of Western empires. The coup in 2014 was in response to an EU-certified democratic election. The violence was an extension of the ethnic Spring series funded and provoked around the world during Obama/Biden’s administration, past and present.
bio weapons You do know the difference between research and weapons?
It seems not. Look! Squirrel!
Sometimes one leads to the other, basic research to weapons, but a weapons program that leads to positive benefits is the exception, an example being the discovery that mustard gas exposure (in WWII Italy) led to chemotherapy for cancer.
In this case the Ukraine bio-research labs gets distorted to bio-weapons labs.
Vlad approves.
n.n is forever there for Mother Russia.
@n.n.
That’s more likely, and the diplomatic agreements we know indicate the DoD and Fauci were trying to get around Congressional oversight in Ukraine. So there’s almost certainly something that isn’t on the up and up, and Nuland lying clinched it.
But – and I have to emphasize this – those aren’t Bioweapon Labs, in the same way the areas we had access to at Wuhan weren’t. They still contain a lot of dangerous stuff, but they aren’t weaponized. Which is separate from what the Kremlin and its shills claimed when they started blathering about biological weapons in Ukraine, and on the more absurd level “Anti-Slavic Bioweapons.”
Nice propaganda, but the truth is a lot more complicated. In particular Ukraine as a national concept descended from the Registered Cossacks of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth rebelling.
You’re not even trying to be a good liar anymore, you fucking idiot.
The Democratic Election that brought Yanukovych to power ALSO brought in the Rada that would ultimately remove him from power. Euromaidan started out as a conflict over the EU Association Agreement and trade but escalated after Yanukovych resorted to downright Jan 6th style oppression, like using Berkut to torture and imprison people without trial or charge.
That got to be too much even for his peers.
Nice try, doesn’t work. Please research the poisoning of Yuschenko and the violence that accompanied Yanukovych’s previous (rigged) election and the Orange Revolution it sparked, though it was more polarized and less extreme than what we saw in 2013 and 2014.
Related:
Amid rising threat, US arms shipments to Taiwan lag as Biden prioritizes Ukraine
Supply chain issues again
Also related:
Putin Retaliates For Assassination Attempt By Misgendering Admiral Levine
War is hell
Okay, it’s not Putin, it’s the Kremlin.
Can we back up fast enough not to make the Kremlin mad?
“…arms shipments to Taiwan lag…”
Hmmm. Sounds “suspiciously” like:
“US quietly shipping ammo to Ukraine from massive stockpile in Israe…”—
https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-quietly-shipping-ammo-to-ukraine-from-massive-stockpile-in-israel-report/
“Unease In Israel As US Depletes Reserve Stockpiles To Fuel Ukraine War”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/military/unease-israel-us-depletes-reserve-stockpiles-fuel-ukraine-war
The “lag” part is particularly delicious.
But, hey, maybe “Biden” is REALLY telling Taiwan to “go negotiate with the Taliban”…
(Hold on! Did I say, “Sounds…like”? “Suspiciously”?
Actually, think of it like a trend and it all begins to make sense!)
meanwhile xi plays for keeps
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/05/where_is_the_missing_biden_witness_gal_luft.html
Very sinister.
But alas not at all surprising.
Just hope “the powers that be” got Luft outta Cyprus before “Biden” got to him.
(OTOH, can one even be sure that “the powers that be” truly understand what “Biden” IS…and what “he” represents…and what “his” interests really are…the—seeming—current confusion in Israel being what it is…)
now maybe it’s the turks or the qataris who got him, but its striking how its the dog that doesn’t bark
Speaking of depleting Israel’s and Taiwan’s weapons stocks, Lee Smith asks…
“… is Biden purposefully disarming US by further depleting munitions stocks?”—
https://twitter.com/LeeSmithDC/status/1653832508855795712?cxt=HHwWgIC-hfH5y_MtAAAA
There are “conservatives” that will abandon Tiawan and Israel at the drop of a hat.
Information warfare.
@Richard Aubrey
We can’t hope to appease people who gain power by being perennial grievance mongers. This is a commonly accepted concept when we deal with grifters on the street or the schoolroom peddling DIE and reparations and whatnot, but apparently we tie ourselves into knots thinking that a violent Chekist thug who has never really liked us, certainly not since we told him he couldn’t jump the line and get special treatment for NATO application, will be our friend if only we sacrifice the “right” nations.
Like we did with Obama and Clinton with Georgia.
Moreover, the Kremlin at least formally acknowledged in the past there is no legal or ethical grounds for us to “back up.”
Turks? Qataris?
But he was arrested in Larnaca (i.e., Greek Cyprus).
@Banned Lizard
Unfortunate but also not too surprising and probably not catastrophic. The CCP knows it will not be ready to invade Taiwan conventionally for a year or two, hence why they time it for the mid to late 2020s.
Levine’s a contemptible figure and an easy target, especially when Putin wishes to distract from the “attempt” requiring either staggering incompetence in airspace security or the kind of active connivance that would indicate it is an inside job.
grievances are what are for breakfast lunch and dinner in the balkans, in the caucasus, in the middle east, that’s why al queda built its brand, on those pieces of territory,
I also agree that it’s high time we take the Babylon Bee uber-seriously…
But um….
Oh the hell with it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naOzftxOKig
Oh noes, Ukraine may be able to go back on the offensive again. Will Vlad feint from other areas like he did from Kiev, Kershon, and Kharkhiv. Crimea doesn’t start with a “K” so he is safe there.
Vlad’s vehicles are marked with “Z” and Vlad may be feinting from the Zaporizhzhia
region back to Crimea, so there is that.
But on to more pertinent information, Sunday Russo-Ukraine war analysis:
Ukraine’s Planned Counteroffensive – force readiness, leaks, politics & expectations – Perun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIYC_WUSw4c
Timestamps:
00:00:00 — The Counteroffensive
00:01:59 — What Am I Talking About?
00:03:08 — Assessing the April Fighting
00:09:33 — The Intel Leaks
00:22:11 — Casualties & Force Quality
00:34:36 — Initial Actions
00:39:53 — Expectations & Implications
00:47:43 — Replacements & Support
00:54:26 — Towards a Longer War?
00:58:35 — The Why
01:07:57 — Conclusions
01:08:46 — Channel Update
But enough serious stuff, here is some dark humor, Cope Cages Version 2
Cope Cage 2.0 With ERA! Can FGM-148 Javelin And NLAW Defeat it? – EngineerReact
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JbW5I6dmKQ
He is from Sweden, but may not be a chef.
ee cervantes:
Good thing Latin America is not prone to grievances.
the babylon bee is about 20 minutes ahead of the cycle,
in point of fact, upper class cubans didn’t like batista, a mulatto army sgt who became kingmaker for the next 20 years, fidel had the right pedigree, even though he was a bastard, (literally) the son of the maid, his brother was like the beast rabban, who was decidedly nonbinary, but he married the daughter of a bacardi exec, hence the company accepted her bonafides,
@miguel cervantes
Agreed there. The Bee is practically prophetic. Certainly better quality news than most others.
Sure, but we shouldn’t and mostly DON’T center our policies around trying to appease the grievances of AQ or the Jordanians, and frankly we should do it less.
Indeed. I don’t know what to make of Luft or his claims yet, but just about nothing Biden is tied up with can be trusted. Ditto Xi. Fortunately XI is going to be struggling to keep control of his home front for now. But Trump was right that we should push de-tangling.
xi has little opposition and he’s bought the stage over here, could you imagine a kgb station operating openly here is a major us city, or the bogus indictment against I don’t know walter krivitsky, (the gru general, that made whittaker chamber get out of the cold)
@miguel cervantes
This is manifestly untrue, and the fact that the CCP has been so successful in downplaying the level of opposition XI personally and the regime as a whole face is probably one of their greatest successes. Dozens of major protests happen every single day in the PRC, but they are largely kept under control by censorship and divide and conquer.
But the “Zero Covid” policy has pushed that to the breaking point.
He’s certainly tried and had a good amount of success.
Yes, yes I absolutely can. Look at basically any Soviet Embassy or Consulate; those by design had GRU and “Chekist” attaches and usually full blown stations. The justifiably infamous “Washington Station” is the most well known in today’s day and age but you also had a host of underground ones. I’d suggest looking through Venona Records; they’re a tough read and are dense but give you some idea.
It wouldn’t be the first time. FDR flat out quasi-exiled people who did research showing Katyn was done by the Soviets, though most were never actually charged. And that’s before we get into the intricate networks of double agents and triple agents.
Unfortunately some that is old is also new, even in current year.
Turtler.
Obviously, if you encourage…whatever it is, you get more of it. That would include making Vlad’s invasion of Ukraine successful by bailing now. Not likely to mellow him out when it came to the Baltics or Finland. In this case, though, the next line of victims would be tentative about our help. So, since losing is guaranteed, maybe they could just surrender, save all the aggravation.
Then, without much more time, you get to the old NATO.
Then what?
The previously recommended Fehrenbach may not have literally used the chessboard as an analog, but you can sacrifice pawns all day long, none of them is worth a fight be itself. But then it’s Check, and, to avoid Mate, you kick over the board, which is to say, go nuclear. There’s a lot more to “This Kind of War” than this, but Korea—-bang up history of the war and many historical references and the first use of “jihad” I’d seen is the centerpiece.
But that’s better than shipping weapons to a regime whose immediate history rewards historical prospectors with…something or other…to justify abandoning it.
Right?