Thank you for all your pieces. Lots of interesting stuff here. Don’t know if it is low level sarcasm or simply that you leave the analysis to us as readers in the last two paragraphs on Us development. Simply outlining their goals goals and logic, leave the evaluation to us. And then the last paragraph: «These goals have many technical and industrial challenges and they cannot be met without creating an organizational structure that efficiently utilizes information and capabilities and has excess capacity and redundancy for resilience in a protracted war.» And if I state I believe they can manage that I am sure Tom has a nice BMW he can sell me. Nice.
I asked a question of Stefan's last post which upset him (and I that it upset him). When one of my questions becomes emotional I start to wonder if it's just obnoxious or there is something no one wants to talk about? So I'm going to ask here. The TLDR is that if Ukraine loses Patriots must it also bomb near-civilian targets in return. (I apologize in advance). But it was said above, no amount of politics can paper over certain realities.
Max: Is there any push within Ukraine's leadership to change strategy? The U.S. and EU they believed were behind them are not. There's no "yes" support Ukraine vs "yes" support Russia in the U.S. There's just apathy. Biden or Trump's administration are the same in have no defined goal. (I don't count Trump's idiotic "deal" to end the war).
Israel too was in this position during the six-day war. Both the U.S. and Russia were placing bets on both Israelis and Arabs to see who would come out on top. (that's my read). Israel decided to force the U.S. to make a choice. They did what Russia is doing now. Honey badger time.
No one talks about Ukraine sovereignty anymore, do they?
I don't know what Ukraine might do. But something to get the U.S. to pick a side for good. Maybe take out shadow fleet tankers in near Europe. Or take out the gas line into Israel. I think the attack on the USS Liberty was beyond disgusting. But I can't argue it didn't work. Is there anyone in Ukraine who wants to force these questions?
Sometimes its a shock to see how presumable intelligent people can come out with such stupid ideeas ... so you are saying that ukr should also bomb civilians if no air defense ? Are u really saying this , like do you not understand this is the whole point to not become like "them" , do you not understand thats why they are fighting to become murdering pieces of shit ? Just amazing ...
My read of WWII is this what everyone did in the end. If the point was "not become like 'them'" the West would have sent troops into Ukraine in the beginning to help it defend its borders. Or it would have set no limits on weapons use. Or it would have ramped up industrial production. Think about it! The U.S. doesn't even want to SELL Ukraine Patriots. I'm not ADVOCATING that Ukraine kill civilians. I am asking what worked, historically, in the past to win wars--despite how they were rationalized or forgotten.
Its not u.s , its trump admin , its not the west , but some fake humanoids called polititians , all of this admins and politicias will change but people supporting ukr will remain. If ukr would start and bomb civilians who would support them ? And why should we ? Let them exterminate eachother .. if you read Dons and Toms articles you can already see how at least (for now , dumpf and his clows will not stay for long) eu is shifting to develow ukr capability to build their own wepons instead of sending ... whatever, just dont understand why would you raise this kind of subject , this a literal figh , just like lord of the rings or some movie , it is good v evil , thar simple.
The U.S. supports Israel killing and starving small fish in a small fish tank called Gaza. I'm not sure what U.S. you're talking about ;) Oh, and by the way, the EU is too! The only ones standing up for those little fish are the fish in Yemen who know what it's like to be in their shoes (a people without fighters, ships, tanks, etc.)
I don't see good and evil. Sorry. I see poor men on both sides being used for their respective country's ethno-nationalist goals. I support Ukraine because Ukraine didn't start the fight. I support Ukraine because I've known Ukrainians and like them. I don't expect Ukraine to fight for MY values. No one should. It is OUR values. We are together. Winning is all the matters. The victors paint-in who was good and who was evil later.
Again, I'm not advocating anything. I'm just putting myself in a Ukrainian strategists shoes. The U.S./EU continue to be a dollar short and day late for 3 years. They think Russia is STRONGER, that it will win, so should be negotiated with. That's a simple unpleasant truth few want to talk about.
People support winners. They're greedy selfish SOBs. What does Ukraine need to do to make is crystal clear to the U.S. that it is STRONGER (and more ruthless?) than Russia? That the U.S. is IN or OUT. FRIEND or ENEMY.
Again, not advocating. I didn't create the world. I don't understand why we're here in the first place. So I try to understand these strangers in a strange land.
Have read all of this exchange and I think that both angles (morality and expediency) have influenced high-level decision-making historically. I would be cautious to use the ethno-nationalist terms you used above, as we are talking about both the right to development of culture and right of association (West or East leaning) - which is being squashed in, for example, Belarus. I do agree that a gloves-off approach may be necessary, but I think it would need to be more focused on war-related (but still grey) things like energy and income-generation means. Not only because of the need to maintain public support in EU & beyond, but also because the culture Ukraine seeks to defend is the one that would restrain itself from bombing civilians.
Hi Cliff, yes "ethno-nationalist" isn't what I think, but I wrote it as an acid to get down to bare metal.
I expected some would answer with, "we haven't reached this point. The existing effort to destroy Russia's economy is working. We just have to give it time." Or maybe, "They've recognized the problems Tom's pointing but need time to implement them then the tide of the war will change."
Obviously, no one from Ukraine is going to touch what I wonder about with the proverbial 10-foot pole.
In 1916 Ida Tarbell wrote:
Sacredness of human life! The world has never believed it! It has been with life that we settled our quarrels, won wives, gold and land, defended ideas, imposed religions. We have held that a death toll was a necessary part of every human achievement, whether sport, war or industry. A moment’s rage over the horror of it, and we have sunk into indifference.
It's part of a book where she talks about how society is moving from viewing humans as expendable (in work or war) to being worth keeping safe. The trend culminated in "The Better Angles of Our Nature."
Russia is obviously turning the clock back 100 years. Are we following along or not? If we knew for sure the whole world is going that way, including us, would it effect Ukraine's strategy?
That's a political question for Ukrainians. If the U.S. was under attack there would be those here that blame the "North" or the "South". Outsiders taking a side would not be helpful ;) Russia invaded. It targets civilians. If you think Kiev "killing donbass" is bad how about Russian buying North Koreans to kill Ukrainians? Again, I can't parse that.
seems to me a large point is that ukraine is not defending its borders at all. russia is not attacking its borders. russia is helping ukraine defend its border: helping donbass ukraine defend its borders with kiev ukraine. there's a happy lunacy goes on here, probably caught it from the home of lunacy: the usa. they say 'help us defend ukrainians and their land' and then use the money they get to attack ukrainians and their land.
that's barmy.
what's even more amazing, to me, is that the whole world accepts that story and never questions it.
Can't we say on the same moral logic (although with flipped circumstances) that Chechnya should not have been repressed but allowed the autonomy it sought?
I don't know the first thing about chechnya and won't go googling and gpt'ing to try to find out. I'm at full stretch now with the issues i do presume to have some knowledge about.
In principle I say that people have a right to independence. Just as the UN charter says, I think?
But that's the people. Not their governance. The people, not 'The State'.
Big difference to my mind. A world of difference.
People die for the State and its a shame and a crime.
That's what they die for in Kiev Ukraine now. For The State.
They are overt about it. It is not hidden. They are proud of it aren't they?
'Fight to the last man'.
Well who wins if they fight to the last man? No one. It is total defeat in all logic, all common sense, all reality.
So how can they say it, think it, perform as though it has some sense, some reality?
Because they fight for that fiction, that 'legal entity', that 'virtual reality' : The State.
But that seems mad, too, for who is there left to enjoy the perks of that legal fiction if all are dead?
Ah.. now here's the nub: the handful of manipulators that's who's left. The agitators, the ideologues, the financiers, the profiteers etc. etc.
Okay? That's how I see it.
So if the Chechnya people want/need/would profit from independence then they should have it. My opinion: they are entitled to it as all people are.
How to get it is an entirely different question.
But if it is a bunch of 'manipulators' seeking to perpetuate or create and perpetuate a 'Chechnya State' for which all Chechnyans must be prepared to die then no, I do not think that has any natural right at all.
All peoples will have 'A State'. This virtual reality. It is their system of governance. All people will have one. By default there must be something, no matter how sketchy, how poor. There is one in poor destroyed, pummelled, murdered Gaza even.
But it goes first: the people, second: their governance.
People change their governances, effectively their 'State'. Every election in the west they notionally destroy the old and raise the new. The King is dead, long live the King. Substitute 'State' for 'King'.
Isn't it so?
That's evidence of the reality: people first, States second.
States serve the people.
Where it all goes wrong is when people are made to serve the State.
Half a million to date have died serving the 'State' of Kiev Ukraine. Famously the most corrupt State in Europe. Famously living off the corpse of the USSR.
Had that State died to serve the people of Ukraine it would have been much better.
We are in agreement about people first before state. As I mentioned before I call nationalism a disease (in fact only certain kinds of nationalism). But my read is that Ukrainians are fighting, on the whole, for their personal reasons/family and this happens to align with the desires of the 'state' - not perfectly but there is alignment. Keep in mind how cynical Ukrainians usually are about their higher leadership. Truly I see Zelenskyy as the people's spokesperson (no matter how criminally incompetent he may be). If he falls out of line, they will sack him and nominate another- perhaps Zaluzhnyi
I will regress some. Sometimes one have to fact check ones perspectives. Emotions are not factful even if ones brains tend to draw some parallels. ‘Fact’ is not only a word but has a meaning. One have to look up what it means. Words without meanings are internet weapon nowadays and that is potentially dangerous for those who don’t know them and make up their own (bizarre) vocabulary and reality frames.
One result of the Second World War was that some primitive reactions in our organism was identified as logically negative for our specie on a large scale. These we call vengeance and hate as these led to mass killings of non-war participating populations. But also a more subtle; ideology. A disruption in the logical cognitive pattern leading to ‘accepted murder’ by change in the cultural framework.
The result here was a western cultural frame based on a social norm involving a ‘moral compass’, and how to upkeep it. A somewhat based on ancient reasoning and foundation from both East Asia philosophy as well as to most Europeans ‘the middle eastern christian/jewish perspective’ (so you have something to relate to): - killing is essentially a bad experience, mostly for a victim that is unable to defend it self (or don’t use animal instincts, use brain).
“Before” most wars by - aggressors - was fought purely by motivated ideology (religion) or emotionally driven; greed, power, misdirected alarming danger, etc. and not modern (possible naive) interventions out of some sort of a moral direction (after getting its principles and identifying responsibility's of the compass).
So by acknowledging, or accepting a potential solution of killing non-combatants for a gain, the person should really start to question its cultural frames (through its perceive and interpret its surroundings emotional or not), ask of why this compass needle start to wiggle, and why does it not for other people. [clarification: I don’t think the question you were referring to exist outside internet in functional democracies.]
One thing I see spreading (or is an inherited basic error) is what I refer to as a ‘faulty premise base’. Western people (and governments) tend to use methods dealing with conflict analyzed out of their cultural frames (and compasses). Western methods would work on other nations with similar frames and compasses but it turns into a bias when attacking problems out side their frames as for example conforming them to clan, religious and authoritarian ideology (that lack compass). Simply, they create a premise that is inherently faulty on how to achieve success.
To wage war one need to ‘get in side the other side’ to find the function (as I believe the Ukrainians out of everyone know best here). So as last notion: Check your premise if one think one have, or perceive, a logical solution to a foreign problem.
Man , already you are all over the place , stated talking whatabout x , whatabout y , im not gonna go in this endless back and forth. You have your point of view and i dont care. Just know that ukr cant become like them , cant start bombing civilians , it cant rape women , it cant kill and steal childrean , it cant torture , it cant terrorize , it just cant otherwise why fight ? Just get a russian passport and thats it . If you dont see this as good v evil , thats your problem and ill end here.
>A Russian report says the technology of Russian drones is at the same level as it was a year ago while Ukrainian drones have significantly improved with aerial repeaters which extend ranges to 20 km, remote detonation and other advances.
It's not a "Russian report."
This is the usual blogger-babble that Russian Telegram is full of. All of his reports are recounts of some rumor. Relying on him isn't serious.
>Recently, 909 of the Ukrainian fallen were returned.
If we write about it, we should write how many bodies Russia returned in this exchange, that is. 41 bodies. About the same proportion as in the previous exchange.
One should already be accustomed to the usual biased coverage of affairs by Don. Gigantic Russian losses, collapse of Russian economy is coming, deliberate killings of civilians, and etc.
As per rate of bodies, of course it does not mean that UA losses are exceeding Russian that much. Russia is on assault, meaning that many Russian dead soldiers are on Russia-held territories. The losses are more or less equal, of course, depending on place and type of the fighting.
The losses are not equal, although the factor in Ukraine's favor is far too low given Russia's greater resources. In other words, Ukraine is losing less than Russia, but it must be losing far less to be able to sustain this long-term. I have the opinion that something else will give on the Russian home front before that becomes critical, though.
Yup. The ZSU would need something like Zimbabwe had in the DRC, during the II Congo War: 27:1 (on average, documented).
Right now, the mass of ZSU units is struggling to reach more than 3:1... What's making the difference are units maintaing soild 15:1. Sadly, such are fare too few...
The quality of soldiers is equal at both sides (same stubborn Slavic people). UA command at mid level could be more flexible, UA drones might score more since RU forces are attacking but this is being offset by RU advantage in the air and in ballistic missiles. A fresh example: combination of Lancet and Iskander destroyed another Himars.
In the modern war, when 95+% of losses are attributed to long-range weapons (missiles, drones, howitzers), the stubborness and readiness to bear the difficulties are the most important.
"moronism"....what a smashing argument....a king of dialectic.)))
Let's do not argue about losses, hopefully the war soon will be over and step by step we will get to know real figures.
One point is the quality of the losses. Certain part of the Russian losses were forcibly recruited prisoners and different outcasts, which were, cynically speaking, lost for society. Of course, Russia also lost a lot of good professional soldiers and volunteers who, sadly, will never reproduce good, healthy and smart kids.
As per Ukraine, officials in Kiev start to recruit prisoners only in 2024 (first batch was 10k, if my memory serves me right). But before that UA was losing best and most motivated troops. Of course, they were brainwashed by the sly Ashkenazi in Kiev for years with the help of USAid (thanx to Mr. Musk for revealing USD 5 bln propagands funds) and others. Still, no matter how brainwashed UA soldiers are, they are the cream of society and also will never reproduce.
Bottom line: both sides are losing a lot valuable people, but thanx to Gulag-era technologies (recruiting the criminals), Russian society takes less pain.
Okay, can you in about the same length as your previous reply explain your view on Zelenskyy and his role in all this? I'd like to understand it properly, even if I suspect i won't agree.
I will give a strange reply. Last two decades there's a mortal combat thruout the world. For the population it's labeled in different manners: democracy vs. dictatorships, traditional values vs. decadence, islam vs christians, and etc. However, it is a war of Globalists (Deep State) vs Conservatives (allied with dictators).
So, in the civil war between Russia and Ukraine Zelensky has its dedicated role. Definetely a very gifted actor, he was handpicked for his current role. Histerical Hitler -style leader who could inspire and fool the masses. A disaster for Ukraine who will leave it for Israel (where his parents live) when become redundant by Deep State.
It's my strong believe that should Poroshenko had stayed at power, the war would never had started. This Ashkenazi oligarkh is much smarter than Zelensky and has much more realistic aporoach. Such people are more business oriented and usually evade the wars. However, for Deep State this war was badly needed and it took all its agents of influence both in Russia and Ukraine to initiate the war.
The things are much more complicated than they are seemed to be. My two favourite samples from this war back in 2022 which have no sane explanations:
1) 30k of best Rusdian troops retreated from Kherson without a single loss at day time without a single launch of Himars
2) Russian unexplainably fast and fightless retreat from Kharkov region with hundreds of preciuos modern equipment units left unscratched for Ukranians.
Thank you for your explanation. I would say that I agree somewhat if the Globalists and Conservatives are *not* organized blocs, and that moreover these are two opposing "forces" which are sometimes present in the same nation - China being a good example.
In regard to the two examples you mentioned above. I have investigated both of these and I believe (1) was in large part due to a well-executed and competent RU withdrawal, and (2) was due to the opposite. So I would have to say that I agree with the traditional explanations for these events and I don't believe there was significant 'secret stuff' going on. But this does not disprove a Globalist-Conservative theory.
One of most ironic facts about this war is the Russian refusal to accept just what a mass of troops is Russia losing in this war.
Sure, there are lots of exaggerations. Especially from officials.
But, I'm talking about documented Russian losses.
And, if you think Ukraine is suffering anything like similar losses: fine. I'm not trying to convince any of religious people about how pointless are their beliefs, so why should I do so in this case...
I found the above discussion about non military targets interesting. I perceive that national morality--if it truly exists--eviscerates over time as the level of desperation deepens. Ultimately, I perceive that nation-states act on their perceived national interests.
Russia consistently has targeted Ukraine's thermal power plants and electrical grids and power stations, especially in the colder seasons. Would then it be legitimate for Ukraine to attack Moscow's and St. Peterburg's electrical power grid and thermal/electrical power stations/plants in retaliation and to "influence" the European Russian population's view of the war and support of Putin? Alternately, would this too be considered a war crime? I am not talking about direct assaults on civilians such as with Russian targeting apartment buildings, schools, hospitals, etc.? However, I am referring to targets that would affect negatively the civilian population such as keeping warm in winter, the Russian WINTER!
I presume that Ukraine's increasing technological development of drones and cruise missiles might bring it the ability to attack Russia at the locus of its governmental decision-making and political influence, Moscow and St. Petersburg. Again, is this a war crime or given the state of things since 2022 a legitimate targeting activity?
I would advise you to simply google just to discover that Ukraine thru the war years attacked a number of electricity stations (in Moscow region, Rostov region, and etc). Still such attacks were not that numerous since UA chose to attack oil refineries and military factories. Russia is bigger and Ukraine simply lacks enough long-range missiles and drones to "cover" all the targets.
As per UA forces not targeting civilians, well, read about Alley of Angels in Donetsk:
Good stuff as always! Excalibur is always a cool thing to talk about. I was at Fort Sill when they were testing and fielding it. Technically, with a really good FDO and some sneaky math you could actually shoot around a mountain with it. Sort of, the explanation is long and technical, but you could still do it and it was wild.
These high-cost munitions like Excalibur (nearly 100K dollars apiece last time) are so pricey that it may be simpler and cheaper to use conventional precision artillery rounds.
Even the US Army is trying to use an add-on to a 1K dollars M777 round instead (M1156 precision guidance kit, which replaces the regular fuse) - like the JDAM bomb kits
Sehr geehrte Herr Cooper,
Frohe Ostern!
Thank you for all your pieces. Lots of interesting stuff here. Don’t know if it is low level sarcasm or simply that you leave the analysis to us as readers in the last two paragraphs on Us development. Simply outlining their goals goals and logic, leave the evaluation to us. And then the last paragraph: «These goals have many technical and industrial challenges and they cannot be met without creating an organizational structure that efficiently utilizes information and capabilities and has excess capacity and redundancy for resilience in a protracted war.» And if I state I believe they can manage that I am sure Tom has a nice BMW he can sell me. Nice.
The industries and armies of Russia, Ukraine and the West have a lot of room for growth in effectiveness and efficiencies.
I asked a question of Stefan's last post which upset him (and I that it upset him). When one of my questions becomes emotional I start to wonder if it's just obnoxious or there is something no one wants to talk about? So I'm going to ask here. The TLDR is that if Ukraine loses Patriots must it also bomb near-civilian targets in return. (I apologize in advance). But it was said above, no amount of politics can paper over certain realities.
Max: Is there any push within Ukraine's leadership to change strategy? The U.S. and EU they believed were behind them are not. There's no "yes" support Ukraine vs "yes" support Russia in the U.S. There's just apathy. Biden or Trump's administration are the same in have no defined goal. (I don't count Trump's idiotic "deal" to end the war).
Israel too was in this position during the six-day war. Both the U.S. and Russia were placing bets on both Israelis and Arabs to see who would come out on top. (that's my read). Israel decided to force the U.S. to make a choice. They did what Russia is doing now. Honey badger time.
No one talks about Ukraine sovereignty anymore, do they?
I don't know what Ukraine might do. But something to get the U.S. to pick a side for good. Maybe take out shadow fleet tankers in near Europe. Or take out the gas line into Israel. I think the attack on the USS Liberty was beyond disgusting. But I can't argue it didn't work. Is there anyone in Ukraine who wants to force these questions?
Sometimes its a shock to see how presumable intelligent people can come out with such stupid ideeas ... so you are saying that ukr should also bomb civilians if no air defense ? Are u really saying this , like do you not understand this is the whole point to not become like "them" , do you not understand thats why they are fighting to become murdering pieces of shit ? Just amazing ...
My read of WWII is this what everyone did in the end. If the point was "not become like 'them'" the West would have sent troops into Ukraine in the beginning to help it defend its borders. Or it would have set no limits on weapons use. Or it would have ramped up industrial production. Think about it! The U.S. doesn't even want to SELL Ukraine Patriots. I'm not ADVOCATING that Ukraine kill civilians. I am asking what worked, historically, in the past to win wars--despite how they were rationalized or forgotten.
Its not u.s , its trump admin , its not the west , but some fake humanoids called polititians , all of this admins and politicias will change but people supporting ukr will remain. If ukr would start and bomb civilians who would support them ? And why should we ? Let them exterminate eachother .. if you read Dons and Toms articles you can already see how at least (for now , dumpf and his clows will not stay for long) eu is shifting to develow ukr capability to build their own wepons instead of sending ... whatever, just dont understand why would you raise this kind of subject , this a literal figh , just like lord of the rings or some movie , it is good v evil , thar simple.
The U.S. supports Israel killing and starving small fish in a small fish tank called Gaza. I'm not sure what U.S. you're talking about ;) Oh, and by the way, the EU is too! The only ones standing up for those little fish are the fish in Yemen who know what it's like to be in their shoes (a people without fighters, ships, tanks, etc.)
I don't see good and evil. Sorry. I see poor men on both sides being used for their respective country's ethno-nationalist goals. I support Ukraine because Ukraine didn't start the fight. I support Ukraine because I've known Ukrainians and like them. I don't expect Ukraine to fight for MY values. No one should. It is OUR values. We are together. Winning is all the matters. The victors paint-in who was good and who was evil later.
Again, I'm not advocating anything. I'm just putting myself in a Ukrainian strategists shoes. The U.S./EU continue to be a dollar short and day late for 3 years. They think Russia is STRONGER, that it will win, so should be negotiated with. That's a simple unpleasant truth few want to talk about.
People support winners. They're greedy selfish SOBs. What does Ukraine need to do to make is crystal clear to the U.S. that it is STRONGER (and more ruthless?) than Russia? That the U.S. is IN or OUT. FRIEND or ENEMY.
Again, not advocating. I didn't create the world. I don't understand why we're here in the first place. So I try to understand these strangers in a strange land.
Have read all of this exchange and I think that both angles (morality and expediency) have influenced high-level decision-making historically. I would be cautious to use the ethno-nationalist terms you used above, as we are talking about both the right to development of culture and right of association (West or East leaning) - which is being squashed in, for example, Belarus. I do agree that a gloves-off approach may be necessary, but I think it would need to be more focused on war-related (but still grey) things like energy and income-generation means. Not only because of the need to maintain public support in EU & beyond, but also because the culture Ukraine seeks to defend is the one that would restrain itself from bombing civilians.
Hi Cliff, yes "ethno-nationalist" isn't what I think, but I wrote it as an acid to get down to bare metal.
I expected some would answer with, "we haven't reached this point. The existing effort to destroy Russia's economy is working. We just have to give it time." Or maybe, "They've recognized the problems Tom's pointing but need time to implement them then the tide of the war will change."
Obviously, no one from Ukraine is going to touch what I wonder about with the proverbial 10-foot pole.
In 1916 Ida Tarbell wrote:
Sacredness of human life! The world has never believed it! It has been with life that we settled our quarrels, won wives, gold and land, defended ideas, imposed religions. We have held that a death toll was a necessary part of every human achievement, whether sport, war or industry. A moment’s rage over the horror of it, and we have sunk into indifference.
It's part of a book where she talks about how society is moving from viewing humans as expendable (in work or war) to being worth keeping safe. The trend culminated in "The Better Angles of Our Nature."
Russia is obviously turning the clock back 100 years. Are we following along or not? If we knew for sure the whole world is going that way, including us, would it effect Ukraine's strategy?
what do you mean : you 'support ukraine' ? I suppose you mean what everyone means when they say it: you support 'Kiev Ukraine' ?
then you should say that, don't you think?
because kiev ukraine is in the business of killing donbass ukrainians and has been for ten years.
that's not 'supporting ukraine', that's supporting destroying it.
That's a political question for Ukrainians. If the U.S. was under attack there would be those here that blame the "North" or the "South". Outsiders taking a side would not be helpful ;) Russia invaded. It targets civilians. If you think Kiev "killing donbass" is bad how about Russian buying North Koreans to kill Ukrainians? Again, I can't parse that.
Arthur, so I guess you support Chechnya's independence?
seems to me a large point is that ukraine is not defending its borders at all. russia is not attacking its borders. russia is helping ukraine defend its border: helping donbass ukraine defend its borders with kiev ukraine. there's a happy lunacy goes on here, probably caught it from the home of lunacy: the usa. they say 'help us defend ukrainians and their land' and then use the money they get to attack ukrainians and their land.
that's barmy.
what's even more amazing, to me, is that the whole world accepts that story and never questions it.
just like they accepted the covid bullcrap.
Can't we say on the same moral logic (although with flipped circumstances) that Chechnya should not have been repressed but allowed the autonomy it sought?
I don't know the first thing about chechnya and won't go googling and gpt'ing to try to find out. I'm at full stretch now with the issues i do presume to have some knowledge about.
In principle I say that people have a right to independence. Just as the UN charter says, I think?
But that's the people. Not their governance. The people, not 'The State'.
Big difference to my mind. A world of difference.
People die for the State and its a shame and a crime.
That's what they die for in Kiev Ukraine now. For The State.
They are overt about it. It is not hidden. They are proud of it aren't they?
'Fight to the last man'.
Well who wins if they fight to the last man? No one. It is total defeat in all logic, all common sense, all reality.
So how can they say it, think it, perform as though it has some sense, some reality?
Because they fight for that fiction, that 'legal entity', that 'virtual reality' : The State.
But that seems mad, too, for who is there left to enjoy the perks of that legal fiction if all are dead?
Ah.. now here's the nub: the handful of manipulators that's who's left. The agitators, the ideologues, the financiers, the profiteers etc. etc.
Okay? That's how I see it.
So if the Chechnya people want/need/would profit from independence then they should have it. My opinion: they are entitled to it as all people are.
How to get it is an entirely different question.
But if it is a bunch of 'manipulators' seeking to perpetuate or create and perpetuate a 'Chechnya State' for which all Chechnyans must be prepared to die then no, I do not think that has any natural right at all.
All peoples will have 'A State'. This virtual reality. It is their system of governance. All people will have one. By default there must be something, no matter how sketchy, how poor. There is one in poor destroyed, pummelled, murdered Gaza even.
But it goes first: the people, second: their governance.
People change their governances, effectively their 'State'. Every election in the west they notionally destroy the old and raise the new. The King is dead, long live the King. Substitute 'State' for 'King'.
Isn't it so?
That's evidence of the reality: people first, States second.
States serve the people.
Where it all goes wrong is when people are made to serve the State.
Half a million to date have died serving the 'State' of Kiev Ukraine. Famously the most corrupt State in Europe. Famously living off the corpse of the USSR.
Had that State died to serve the people of Ukraine it would have been much better.
How all this applies in Chechnya I don't know.
We are in agreement about people first before state. As I mentioned before I call nationalism a disease (in fact only certain kinds of nationalism). But my read is that Ukrainians are fighting, on the whole, for their personal reasons/family and this happens to align with the desires of the 'state' - not perfectly but there is alignment. Keep in mind how cynical Ukrainians usually are about their higher leadership. Truly I see Zelenskyy as the people's spokesperson (no matter how criminally incompetent he may be). If he falls out of line, they will sack him and nominate another- perhaps Zaluzhnyi
I will regress some. Sometimes one have to fact check ones perspectives. Emotions are not factful even if ones brains tend to draw some parallels. ‘Fact’ is not only a word but has a meaning. One have to look up what it means. Words without meanings are internet weapon nowadays and that is potentially dangerous for those who don’t know them and make up their own (bizarre) vocabulary and reality frames.
One result of the Second World War was that some primitive reactions in our organism was identified as logically negative for our specie on a large scale. These we call vengeance and hate as these led to mass killings of non-war participating populations. But also a more subtle; ideology. A disruption in the logical cognitive pattern leading to ‘accepted murder’ by change in the cultural framework.
The result here was a western cultural frame based on a social norm involving a ‘moral compass’, and how to upkeep it. A somewhat based on ancient reasoning and foundation from both East Asia philosophy as well as to most Europeans ‘the middle eastern christian/jewish perspective’ (so you have something to relate to): - killing is essentially a bad experience, mostly for a victim that is unable to defend it self (or don’t use animal instincts, use brain).
“Before” most wars by - aggressors - was fought purely by motivated ideology (religion) or emotionally driven; greed, power, misdirected alarming danger, etc. and not modern (possible naive) interventions out of some sort of a moral direction (after getting its principles and identifying responsibility's of the compass).
So by acknowledging, or accepting a potential solution of killing non-combatants for a gain, the person should really start to question its cultural frames (through its perceive and interpret its surroundings emotional or not), ask of why this compass needle start to wiggle, and why does it not for other people. [clarification: I don’t think the question you were referring to exist outside internet in functional democracies.]
One thing I see spreading (or is an inherited basic error) is what I refer to as a ‘faulty premise base’. Western people (and governments) tend to use methods dealing with conflict analyzed out of their cultural frames (and compasses). Western methods would work on other nations with similar frames and compasses but it turns into a bias when attacking problems out side their frames as for example conforming them to clan, religious and authoritarian ideology (that lack compass). Simply, they create a premise that is inherently faulty on how to achieve success.
To wage war one need to ‘get in side the other side’ to find the function (as I believe the Ukrainians out of everyone know best here). So as last notion: Check your premise if one think one have, or perceive, a logical solution to a foreign problem.
Man , already you are all over the place , stated talking whatabout x , whatabout y , im not gonna go in this endless back and forth. You have your point of view and i dont care. Just know that ukr cant become like them , cant start bombing civilians , it cant rape women , it cant kill and steal childrean , it cant torture , it cant terrorize , it just cant otherwise why fight ? Just get a russian passport and thats it . If you dont see this as good v evil , thats your problem and ill end here.
>A Russian report says the technology of Russian drones is at the same level as it was a year ago while Ukrainian drones have significantly improved with aerial repeaters which extend ranges to 20 km, remote detonation and other advances.
It's not a "Russian report."
This is the usual blogger-babble that Russian Telegram is full of. All of his reports are recounts of some rumor. Relying on him isn't serious.
>Recently, 909 of the Ukrainian fallen were returned.
If we write about it, we should write how many bodies Russia returned in this exchange, that is. 41 bodies. About the same proportion as in the previous exchange.
One should already be accustomed to the usual biased coverage of affairs by Don. Gigantic Russian losses, collapse of Russian economy is coming, deliberate killings of civilians, and etc.
As per rate of bodies, of course it does not mean that UA losses are exceeding Russian that much. Russia is on assault, meaning that many Russian dead soldiers are on Russia-held territories. The losses are more or less equal, of course, depending on place and type of the fighting.
The losses are not equal, although the factor in Ukraine's favor is far too low given Russia's greater resources. In other words, Ukraine is losing less than Russia, but it must be losing far less to be able to sustain this long-term. I have the opinion that something else will give on the Russian home front before that becomes critical, though.
Yup. The ZSU would need something like Zimbabwe had in the DRC, during the II Congo War: 27:1 (on average, documented).
Right now, the mass of ZSU units is struggling to reach more than 3:1... What's making the difference are units maintaing soild 15:1. Sadly, such are fare too few...
The quality of soldiers is equal at both sides (same stubborn Slavic people). UA command at mid level could be more flexible, UA drones might score more since RU forces are attacking but this is being offset by RU advantage in the air and in ballistic missiles. A fresh example: combination of Lancet and Iskander destroyed another Himars.
https://t.me/lost_armour/5059
So, asking for a friend: how could it be 1:3?
The quality of soldiers is gauged by them being 'the same, stubborn Slavic people'?
Man... you've managed to post more of moronism in this and your other two posts than I've read in all of the last year...
In the modern war, when 95+% of losses are attributed to long-range weapons (missiles, drones, howitzers), the stubborness and readiness to bear the difficulties are the most important.
"moronism"....what a smashing argument....a king of dialectic.)))
Let's do not argue about losses, hopefully the war soon will be over and step by step we will get to know real figures.
One point is the quality of the losses. Certain part of the Russian losses were forcibly recruited prisoners and different outcasts, which were, cynically speaking, lost for society. Of course, Russia also lost a lot of good professional soldiers and volunteers who, sadly, will never reproduce good, healthy and smart kids.
As per Ukraine, officials in Kiev start to recruit prisoners only in 2024 (first batch was 10k, if my memory serves me right). But before that UA was losing best and most motivated troops. Of course, they were brainwashed by the sly Ashkenazi in Kiev for years with the help of USAid (thanx to Mr. Musk for revealing USD 5 bln propagands funds) and others. Still, no matter how brainwashed UA soldiers are, they are the cream of society and also will never reproduce.
Bottom line: both sides are losing a lot valuable people, but thanx to Gulag-era technologies (recruiting the criminals), Russian society takes less pain.
Okay, can you in about the same length as your previous reply explain your view on Zelenskyy and his role in all this? I'd like to understand it properly, even if I suspect i won't agree.
I will give a strange reply. Last two decades there's a mortal combat thruout the world. For the population it's labeled in different manners: democracy vs. dictatorships, traditional values vs. decadence, islam vs christians, and etc. However, it is a war of Globalists (Deep State) vs Conservatives (allied with dictators).
So, in the civil war between Russia and Ukraine Zelensky has its dedicated role. Definetely a very gifted actor, he was handpicked for his current role. Histerical Hitler -style leader who could inspire and fool the masses. A disaster for Ukraine who will leave it for Israel (where his parents live) when become redundant by Deep State.
It's my strong believe that should Poroshenko had stayed at power, the war would never had started. This Ashkenazi oligarkh is much smarter than Zelensky and has much more realistic aporoach. Such people are more business oriented and usually evade the wars. However, for Deep State this war was badly needed and it took all its agents of influence both in Russia and Ukraine to initiate the war.
The things are much more complicated than they are seemed to be. My two favourite samples from this war back in 2022 which have no sane explanations:
1) 30k of best Rusdian troops retreated from Kherson without a single loss at day time without a single launch of Himars
2) Russian unexplainably fast and fightless retreat from Kharkov region with hundreds of preciuos modern equipment units left unscratched for Ukranians.
Thank you for your explanation. I would say that I agree somewhat if the Globalists and Conservatives are *not* organized blocs, and that moreover these are two opposing "forces" which are sometimes present in the same nation - China being a good example.
In regard to the two examples you mentioned above. I have investigated both of these and I believe (1) was in large part due to a well-executed and competent RU withdrawal, and (2) was due to the opposite. So I would have to say that I agree with the traditional explanations for these events and I don't believe there was significant 'secret stuff' going on. But this does not disprove a Globalist-Conservative theory.
One of most ironic facts about this war is the Russian refusal to accept just what a mass of troops is Russia losing in this war.
Sure, there are lots of exaggerations. Especially from officials.
But, I'm talking about documented Russian losses.
And, if you think Ukraine is suffering anything like similar losses: fine. I'm not trying to convince any of religious people about how pointless are their beliefs, so why should I do so in this case...
I found the above discussion about non military targets interesting. I perceive that national morality--if it truly exists--eviscerates over time as the level of desperation deepens. Ultimately, I perceive that nation-states act on their perceived national interests.
Russia consistently has targeted Ukraine's thermal power plants and electrical grids and power stations, especially in the colder seasons. Would then it be legitimate for Ukraine to attack Moscow's and St. Peterburg's electrical power grid and thermal/electrical power stations/plants in retaliation and to "influence" the European Russian population's view of the war and support of Putin? Alternately, would this too be considered a war crime? I am not talking about direct assaults on civilians such as with Russian targeting apartment buildings, schools, hospitals, etc.? However, I am referring to targets that would affect negatively the civilian population such as keeping warm in winter, the Russian WINTER!
I presume that Ukraine's increasing technological development of drones and cruise missiles might bring it the ability to attack Russia at the locus of its governmental decision-making and political influence, Moscow and St. Petersburg. Again, is this a war crime or given the state of things since 2022 a legitimate targeting activity?
I would advise you to simply google just to discover that Ukraine thru the war years attacked a number of electricity stations (in Moscow region, Rostov region, and etc). Still such attacks were not that numerous since UA chose to attack oil refineries and military factories. Russia is bigger and Ukraine simply lacks enough long-range missiles and drones to "cover" all the targets.
As per UA forces not targeting civilians, well, read about Alley of Angels in Donetsk:
https://x.com/rusembnz/status/1498796124882497536
or take a look at UA drones deliberately hitting living apartments in Kazan in December 2024:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aaKxNbgb18A
Both sides have no problems in attacking civilians.
It's quite simple actually.
Most Ukrainian KIA are recovered by advancing Russians as well as a lot of Russian KIAs.
This results in Russians exchaning a big number of UA KIA for a small number of theirs which Ukrainians could recover after rare counterattacking.
Good stuff as always! Excalibur is always a cool thing to talk about. I was at Fort Sill when they were testing and fielding it. Technically, with a really good FDO and some sneaky math you could actually shoot around a mountain with it. Sort of, the explanation is long and technical, but you could still do it and it was wild.
I posted links to your post, all four sections of it, on MoonofAlabama.
Got a few angry and disgustingly abusive responses from some of the low life characters that unfortunately infest the place.
Essentially they claim your post is full of impossible claims, utter nonsense. (and they blame me for it :) )
I would like to see a response from you to them.
Here is link to one of their responses to my simple posting of a link to you and asking their opinion:
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/04/ukraine-open-thread-2025-084.html?cid=6a00d8341c640e53ef02e860e83873200b#comment-6a00d8341c640e53ef02e860e83873200b
What about GBU39 HIMARS? Rumours are Ukraine has received some hardened to EW, e.g. see https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2025/us-resumes-glsdb-missile-deliveries-to-ukraine-to-sustain-deep-strikes-on-russian-infrastructure
These high-cost munitions like Excalibur (nearly 100K dollars apiece last time) are so pricey that it may be simpler and cheaper to use conventional precision artillery rounds.
Even the US Army is trying to use an add-on to a 1K dollars M777 round instead (M1156 precision guidance kit, which replaces the regular fuse) - like the JDAM bomb kits
RBS 70 is widely rumoured to have been used by Iran during the Iran-Iraq War. Singapore was well known as a conduit for Swedish arms exports.
Very nice summary. About trump's / Purim’s / organ’s steps explanation - I have read this
https://medium.com/predict/the-evolution-of-krasnov-russian-mafia-associate-kgb-asset-us-president-traitor-32b81bf516b8
Very sad and confirming his behaviour (hopefully you can read whole article… I am not paying and I could).