Post New

My guess is that Ukraine is toast but something has to be "offered " by Russia to allow Trump to claim success. Perhaps starting Nuclear Non Proliferation talks so Trump can claim the world is safer. What ever it is, the offer will have no real value for Russia and easy to give.

The "Art of the Deal " how to fool the base.

Aussi

Are the Ukrainians winning in your mind? Do they have enough wherewithal to seize all their territory back?

My guess is that Ukraine is toast...

Not necessarily. The lack of US aid would be a setback, for sure. But we're not the only ones giving them aid. I believe Zelensky already told someone in this administration to go pound sand (with respect to giving up territory).

And Russia is having issues of their own. They're starting to import DPRK soldiers (who, evidently, really suck...the Ukrainians are slaughtering them). Their "bone yards" are almost empty (they've been reactivating equipment from the era of Khrushchev).

On paper, the Russians already should have won. But, through various factors including incompetence, their advance was halted early on. It's been a slow meat grinder ever since. It's really a question of attrition at this point. The Russians will be out of inventory within 18 months (estimates vary, and it does depend on whether you're talking armor or artillery). And they are suffering far more casualties. They do get shells from DPRK, but some reports say that about 30% of them misfire or don't work.

It is not a sure thing that Ukraine can last another 18 months, but it is possible. They have shown tenacity, and innovation, and adaptability. And they're getting a lot of support from the EU. The Russians have yet to be able to retake Kursk.

There's a YouTuber called "Perun" that does weekly deep-dives into this stuff. Really deep. And occasionally he interviews people from military-oriented thinktanks. He cites his sources, and usually does very conservative estimates. If you're really interested in this sort of thing, check out his content. In addition to this sort of analysis, he's really into the defense economics angle, which you generally don't get in an article of 2000 words.

Here's Perun's latest submission. Seems very on-topic for this thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja6-espHVSE

Listening to it as I type, so should have more updated info than I just provided in my previous post.

It is not a sure thing that Ukraine can last another 18 months, but it is possible. They have shown tenacity, and innovation, and adaptability. And they're getting a lot of support from the EU. The Russians have yet to be able to retake Kursk.


You can be sure that if Ukraine does last this out, the White House will be selling it as "See. They didn't need our help."

--Peter

You can be sure that if Ukraine does last this out, the White House will be selling it as "See. They didn't need our help."

Probably. But I think that's a small price to pay for a Russian loss, or at least a Russian not-win.

Are the Ukrainians winning in your mind? Do they have enough wherewithal to seize all their territory back? - Dope

----------------------

Ordinance we can give them, but they are running out of infantry, not all casualties either. There are lots of reports of desertions, military age men hiding from the draft, low morale, nowhere near ready to kick Russian ass.

I watched an interview, on the network that shall not be named, with a pundit discussing Ukraine and prospects for various outcomes. He seemed to know his stuff. One observation he dropped was that Ukraine has suffered so many casualties already, that an entire generation has been effectively wiped out. Whatever peace they arrive at will necessarily require security guarantees by third parties, not NATO, because Ukraine is so depleted demographically they will be unable to defend themselves for quite a while, if ever.

...because Ukraine is so depleted demographically they will be unable to defend themselves for quite a while, if ever.

Perun covers that also. In fact, in the video I linked today. Their population pyramid, and the Ukrainian one, look very similar. So I don't think that's an issue for one and not the other. Both have more older females than older males, but those aren't child-bearing ages.

If you want to know about Ukraine and Russia, don't rely on any of the conventional media (and especially nothing on the right-wing propaganda channels). Find a source like Perun who will spend more than two minutes on a topic (his videos are an hour or so each). Very deep dives. The good, the bad, and the ugly. He doesn't try to paint a rosy picture, or a dismal picture. It is what it is, and that's what his videos tell us.

I think Ukraine would be crazy to settle for a deal that didn't allow them to join NATO. They need that. Neither Russia nor Ukraine will be up for another war anytime soon, but Russia already has the larger population. So they could regenerate faster. With no sign of democracy in Russia for the foreseeable future, Ukraine needs to assume the worst. So, yes, I agree that they need NATO to defend themselves longer-term.

One observation he dropped was that Ukraine has suffered so many casualties already, that an entire generation has been effectively wiped out. Whatever peace they arrive at will necessarily require security guarantees by third parties, not NATO, because Ukraine is so depleted demographically they will be unable to defend themselves for quite a while, if ever.


Exactly this. What all the libs here who are cheering for more people to be stacked fail to realize is that the Ukrainians don’t have very many more to give.

Their list for war was never about Russia invading Ukraine. If that were the case they would have been screaming since Putin seized the Crimea from them when Obama was President.

Instead we got silence. Why was that? It makes an odd contrast to the war list they have now.

The answer is pretty simple: it always goes back to their Trump hate - since they allll knowwww Putin is Trump’s master only now is it a religious fervor for them to see Russia pay.

You, me and the board righties have been calling for stiffer sanctions and more things against the Russians for a long time. The left? Not so much.

Says a lot about them and their “convictions”.

It is not a sure thing that Ukraine can last another 18 months, but it is possible. They have shown tenacity, and innovation, and adaptability. And they're getting a lot of support from the EU. The Russians have yet to be able to retake Kursk.


You can be sure that if Ukraine does last this out, the White House will be selling it as "See. They didn't need our help."

Or will Trump start shipping arms to Putin? Only sort of kidding.

may consider russia has seriously turbocharged their own demographic collapse, w/ considerable higher fled and dead men <40.
this impact is the dominant factor on who\where putin may expand next, far outweighing all strategic blunders combined. (yes, even the famed 2-week police action conquest of ukraine)
[biggest strategic win : trump]

decades of corruption in russia's military has forced a very non-economic transition to a war economy, but waste here is ignored as long as sanctions are weakly enforced. interweb has a hilarious note on russian counterfeit\knock-off brands now the main consumer option, so the ruble fragile but useful there.

personally, i think the EU will support ukraine, allowing them not to concede to trump negotiating on putin's behalf. hegseth is too stupid to realize any escalated 'nato' spend will be in a form that allows resources to flex for europe acting for themselves.
quite a contrast to the blind loyalty shown for both Bush's fake middle east fiascos.

(his videos are an hour or so each).

That's why I can't watch Perun. Hard to get me to watch an hour long video.

That's why I can't watch Perun. Hard to get me to watch an hour long video.

I'm interested in that situation, and the far-reaching ramifications. So I watch. Often while I'm doing other stuff (like balancing the accounts in Quicken, or paying bills). It's not for everybody. His deep dives are very detailed, and well-sourced.

Probably the next best is reading articles in reputable papers. The worst is relying on a two-minute segment on any of the talking-head programs, which many people seem to do. Many of them are just propaganda tools. In the case of the poster I was replying to, one that wants us to say "it's hopeless, so capitulate to Russia now". It's smart to support Ukraine on so many levels, and you just don't get that depth from a talking-head segment.

Right now, Ukraine has taken one of our longest adversaries off the table. They have all but neutralized the Black Sea fleet (despite having no navy), they have forced Russia to empty their boneyards, the Russian economy is being impacted (which means the common Russian is starting to feel the pain, and eventually there will be internal strife within Russia), their army has lost a lot of its professional soldiers...and we didn't have to fire a shot.

We even saved a bit of money...it's not free to decommission and scrap outdated military hardware. For the cost of shipping it to them, we were able to send them our outdated (never to be used again) hardware. (Slightly oversimplified, but that's the basic idea.)

Which frees us up to focus on China, and their territorial expansion dreams. Or it would, if we had a competent administration in office.

Right now, Ukraine has taken one of our longest adversaries off the table.

It seems from the meeting in Saudi that Russia is now longer an adversary, but a long lost friend on Mr Trump. I can see the next step will be that Ukraine has to pay for the damage caused in Russia.

Aussi

Right now, Ukraine has taken one of our longest adversaries off the table. They have all but neutralized the Black Sea fleet (despite having no navy), they have forced Russia to empty their boneyards, the Russian economy is being impacted (which means the common Russian is starting to feel the pain, and eventually there will be internal strife within Russia), their army has lost a lot of its professional soldiers...and we didn't have to fire a shot.

I'm in a place where if I listen I annoy my wife most of the time. So the videos I do watch are captioned. Agree with all of the above. So it takes an hour to balance Quicken? Can you download transactions? I do play some short music videos, but way down low. :)

So it takes an hour to balance Quicken? Can you download transactions? I do play some short music videos, but way down low. :)

Sometimes 10 minutes, sometimes an hour or two. Depends on if I have to track down a charge I don't recognize, and whether I have to pay bills in any given session. I clear all receipts, but sometimes 1poorlady will have ordered something and not told me (or not given me the receipt). Plus, being retired, I have to be certain the checking accounts can handle the outflow of bills every month. They pay squat interest, so we keep the bulk of the monies in other accounts, and I have to transfer some funds every two or so months to fund the checking accounts.

Never watched Perun captioned, so don't know how well it works. Sometimes I put on my headphones, especially if she's engaged in a different activity that requires her to listen to something.

...decades of corruption in russia's military has forced a very non-economic transition to a war economy,...

It's been maybe a year since Perun did a corruption video, and it's effects on military preparedness. It was very interesting. He really favors defense economics, so that was right up his alley.

It would be difficult to summarize, but I'll try a bit. Corruption saps funds from defense in several ways. One of them is reporting that something works (because you're incentivised to report that) when it doesn't, and no one in the chain wants to say "it doesn't work", so when it reaches the top, they implement it. That doesn't even include direct pocketing of funds that were supposed to be used for materiel. It really was a mire that needed a full hour to explain. But Russia had it in spades, so when called into action, a lot of things didn't work properly, or training didn't get done, or whatever. Reducing the combat readiness of their forces.

They didn't expect to have to transition to a war-time economy, but through various circumstances -including corruption-, they are now three years into a 2 week campaign, and having to do it. Which is taxing their economy greatly, and I'm sure Russian mothers are getting tired of body bags coming home, and Putin is having DPRK send thousands of their -poorly trained- soldiers to use as cannon fodder. Though, as a bonus, Russia is able to shutter several of their prisons because those prisoners volunteered for release to fight in Ukraine, and most promptly died.

OK...two years. For those interested, a deep-dive into corruption and its effects on military readiness. Also, in-built incentives not to report failure contributes to damaging a military, and is a form of corruption. Without listening to it again, I seem to recall his scenarios involving (I think) "Private Conscriptovich" and "Colonel Kleptovsky" illustrative and amusing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9i47sgi-V4

The Felon may not be shipping arms to Putin, but I think I see now why they are holding meetings. The one thing the US can influence is admission of Ukraine into NATO. For Putin that is a no-go. I'm sure Zelensky, after all this, very much wants that option. So Zelensky doesn't need to be in the room for the US to agree to veto any attempt at joining NATO. In fact, he'd just get in the way.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/europe-says-committed-u...

As the 4-1/2-hour meeting in the Saudi capital was underway, Russia hardened its demands, notably insisting it would not tolerate the NATO alliance granting membership to Kyiv.

Also, for the record, someone mentioned Crimea. I can't speak for all, but I was not happy with the Obama response to that (which was anemic, IMO). Even then I was thinking "Rhineland, Ruhr, and Sudetenland". I won't say I saw the invasion of Ukraine coming, but it was clear that if we let Putin get away with taking Crimea, he would be emboldened to further belligerent activities. Which, it seems, he was. It is just very fortunate for us that he has mostly failed in this latest escapade, seriously degraded his military, harmed his economy, and motived two new members to NATO. A Trumpian-level fustercluck that worked out for us.

And now the Felon is going to blow it.

I did look Perun up and he has a great reputation. I think I'll make an exception - maybe buy headphones too. :) I've got sooo mcuh to do though. :)

Also, for the record, someone mentioned Crimea. I can't speak for all, but I was not happy with the Obama response to that (which was anemic, IMO).

I agree the response wasn't nearly appropriate. But Putin didn't start with Crimea. Georgia invasion in 2008 was when he started. Very little world response.

Aussi

But Putin didn't start with Crimea. Georgia invasion in 2008 was when he started. Very little world response.

True. That was during BushII (I had to look up the date). I don't recall that he did much, but neither did the world. It was almost like seizing the Rhineland, though in that case there were no shots fired. That wasn't true in Georgia.

Though, Bush did contemplate using our military, we just ended up sending humanitarian aid. Based on this article, the world seemed to know what was going on with pro-Russian separatists. Though it wasn't until 2021 that a court officially said that Russia had been controlling the separatists, and some warrants were issued in 2022. Hungary has it most correct when they likened Russia's actions to the crushing of the 1956 Hungarian revolt. The world says today that those are occupied territories, but does nothing else.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War

Unlike in the 1930s, this is being spread out. First Georgia. Now Ukraine.

Not to Godwin this thread, but Hitler used lame excuses to move into the Rhineland, the Ruhr, and Austria. Then Sudetenland. Then the big move into Czechoslovakia, that alarmed people enough that they sent Chamberlain (who believed Hitler's BS, and agreed to annexation of the Sudetenland. [Most of this is from memory...I may have the order of things mixed a bit, but it's close.]

The world responded very weakly, so Hitler kept going, with the lame excuses. Even in 1939, he had an excuse for going into Poland. Though -finally- nobody was buying it. As I recall, he claimed he was stopping the persecution of ethnic Germans.

History rhymes.

Fortunately for us, Ukraine has seriously mangled Putin's ability to do something like this for a long time. If I ignore the Ukrainian side/suffering, and look at it from a purely US-centric viewpoint, this has been great for the US. Putin removed himself as a serious threat to us, his ability to meddle in the affairs of other regions is severely damaged, NATO is bigger and stronger than before...it's a win-win-win for the USA. You MAGA people want to "Make America Great Again"? Continue to support Ukraine. One of our longest opponents is degraded, and will keep being degraded. Russia won't be a serious threat to anything for probably a generation. There really is no up-side for the USA in selling-out Ukraine, or not continuing to supply them.

Another bit of history rhyming...the USSR was supporting the NVA. No downside for them, and they kept us mired in that conflict for 10000 days (hence "the 10000 Day War"). Our military was degraded for over a decade afterwards, as well as the affect on public opinion about the military and overseas adventurism.

Also, for the record, someone mentioned Crimea. I can't speak for all, but I was not happy with the Obama response to that (which was anemic, IMO).

I agree the response wasn't nearly appropriate. But Putin didn't start with Crimea. Georgia invasion in 2008 was when he started. Very little world response.

Yes, the tankies were backing Putin, and Putin had shipped in a bunch of Russies, installed a Russian gov, then held referendum which naturally favored Russia. The Muslims there left.

Our military was degraded for over a decade afterwards, as well as the affect on public opinion about the military

It definitely affected my opinion about the military.

Most of my father's family served in the military, from his eldest brother who was a Navy pilot right at the end of WWII (which ended before he got his wings and was offered to leave, but he chose to stay because "the boys who have been serving need a break") down to my father - the youngest - who spent two years in the Army as a helicopter mechanic shortly after the Korean War ended. That even included my Great Aunt, who was already an MD and joined the Navy as a doctor during WWII.

But I grew up during Vietnam, and saw it on the news almost daily. Two neighbors' sons (one next door and one two doors down) were a little older than me and both had to register for the draft in the late 1960s or very early 70s. I recall their mothers talking to my mother about how scared they were. The war ended before either were drafted, but that fear of the military was already instilled in me.

--Peter

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.