Without getting deeper into it, that accords with what I’ve been hearing up here in Mordor. They think they’re going to drag this out for at least two years, and bleed Russia white. Can you imagine the effects of 90,000 heavy artillery shells a month on a nation? Those are the big boy shells used by platforms like our Paladins.
12 comments:
Ukraine will not last 2 years. They may not last 1.
I’ve been warning that I think there’s a danger of precipitous collapse— and really for both sides— but it’s not a sure thing. People regularly underestimate how long a war will drag out. Famously people brought picnic lunches to watch the first battle of Manassass (also known as first Bull Run). That war lasted four long years after their picnics were ruined.
You've heard about the purge in Kiev, right?
https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/p/the-vietnamization-of-ukraine
(Just hit the 'try it first' button if you encounter it.)
The material addressed in that substack is NOT the Brit/Neocon happy-talk, meaning that you may not be popular in DC if you mention it.
I don’t know that source. I’ll ask around about his claims, but he himself admits that the big push he reported by Russia did not come. I don’t think they have any reason to push while the cold is working for them.
Methinks we are "led" by fools and grifters who never have had to pay a consequence due to skill at manipulation and top cover from other fools and grifters.
All the backstabbing political crap goes out the window when encountering an enemy who perceives an existential threat.
Anyone who thinks Russia will let itself be crushed without going full on is a poor student of history, IMO.
The US is now committed to providing Ukraine with M1A1 Abrams tanks (about 30 initially) and Patriot anti-aircraft and anti-ballistic missile systems. Germany has just agreed to provide Leopard tanks to Ukraine, and Poland and other NATO countries will follow suit. These weapons will have to be accompanied by US/NATO troops, if they are to be of any use before next fall.
The tanks will also require tank transporters and tank recovery units, pontoon bridges, APC's for infantry support, self-propelled artillery for fire support, and A-10's and F-16's for air defense. Biden claims that such aircraft will not be provided, but the tanks cannot survive without them. Again, NATO troops will be required to operate them.
All of this amounts to a multiple armored brigade or armored division intervention by NATO.
We are on track for a very large-scale (WW I/II level) war in both Europe and North America. Russian leadership has promised to attack "decision making centers" in the event of war with NATO. That means Warsaw, Berlin, Paris, London, and Washington. Several very high-ranking Russian leaders like Putin and Medvedev have promised that Russia will use nuclear weapons to avert defeat.
It is hard to see how an all-out nuclear war can be prevented, given the recklessness of the West's leadership.
I'm curious about that Kiev purge. If we were planning to ship more sensitive stuff, or had just gotten tired of weapons going astray, it would be critical that we tighten up the pipeline. OTOH, if we wanted to fight to the last Ukrainian, as the substack site proposes, it might look the same. I suspect the former represents the situation better, but either makes some assumptions about how in-control Zelensky is--can he really do without some of those supporters?
Maybe. We kept the Afghan government propped up for as long as we were willing to keep arms and money flowing. The Taliban couldn't be beaten, but they had to wait until we decided to leave.
On the other hand, we were doing the fighting. I'm not sure how well it works if you're expecting Ukrainians to show up for intense and extended combat, which seems to require some basic political loyalty to the project. If you purge the government of the people to whom the ordinary guy felt loyal -- even if that loyalty was only because of a purchased/financial-support relationship, which you can call 'corruption' or 'tribalism' as you prefer -- you run the risk of significant desertion.
The Russians seem to be deploying a lot of criminals to the front line to use as disposable cannon fodder, which doesn't require loyalty so much as a second line that is better armed and ordered to shoot anyone trying to retreat. That's definitely not a long-term solution, though.
I think both sides are a lot closer to collapse than they (or their supporters) want to admit. American policymakers want the war to drag on for years and many, many more Russian casualties and the great devastation of Russian infrastructure. That fits their schedule and their plans, but I doubt it's going to happen that way.
How many cells does Russia have in the US right now? How many would it take to shut the lights out in the US by targeting non defended infrastructure? How many allies of Russia have cells here? Like Iran, for example? Why on earth would anyone think this will be contained "over there"?
It is reported that the Russian 58th Infantry is now deployed, replacing the Wagner Group, the prisoner brigades and the reservists. Apparently the 58th is "real Army" and poses a real threat.
If you're not familiar with MacGregor, here's an hour's worth. It'll fill some of the time you will not have on the Hog....
https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/p/macgregor-on-where-nato-is-headed
The Russians no longer have a "real army", if they ever did, after losing all those men, officers and equipment in the last year.
There appears to be no operational Russian air force anymore, not that the Ukrainians ever had one, and the Russians have no idea what to do to either win or stop fighting.
As was noted it looks like the idea now is to prop up Ukraine, but NATO doesn't have a choice anymore.
Post a Comment