I use a desktop utility, available on Windows and Mac, called 4K Video Downloader.
I found it better than any of multitude of browser plugins I used over the years. Originally, it was focused on YouTube but over the years it has become more capable and it will certainly download from Rumble. In case of YouTube, you have to PASTE URL to the video using CTRL-V option on keyboard. If you paste URL of a YouTube channel, it will download all of the videos there. If you paste a link to a video from playlist, it will ask if you want whole playlist. It will also download any subtitling as separate file. In case of Rumble, I think URL of the page containing the video will suffice. There is a free version and a paid version. I opted to get a paid version for one of my PCs while other PCs have a free version. Paid version has more features. It is well worth trying.
Over the years I found that videos I liked in the past and may have bookmarked, eventually disappear. Now, where I think its worth taking copy, I do. Side benefit is that advertising gets scrubbed along the way.
Interestingly, I saw a series of videos on Russian cities, titled something like “Then and Now” where “Then” may have been 15-20 years back. If there was any truth in the idea that Russia is totally corrupt and Putin is wealthiest man on this planet, these videos disprove that. These videos clearly showed cities that were run down get upgraded and cleaned-up in just a couple of decades. For that to happen, a lot of money had to be invested and if corruption was pervasive, then Russia would have been competing with Ukraine for the bottom as total disaster area. Unfortunately I never downloaded any and my recent attempt to find them was fruitless. Only video I found was someone else’s review of such an video. It seems these videos are not suitable for western audiences so they have been removed, most likely the channel that held them itself was removed by YouTube.
BTW, I watch occasional videos from Mariupol. Although heavily damaged, the reconstruction being undertaken is in full swing and it is amazing how much of new construction has been done. Many of multi-storey building had to be torn down and new buildings have been built very quickly, with each 4 or 10 storey apartment block being built within a timeframe of 4 to 5 months. Where possible, damaged apartment blocks are being repaired, as well as schools and hospitals. If nothing else, Azov fighters made sure that no window was left untouched. Just about every apartment block being repaired had to have all of its windows replaced, and not just the glass but whole window frames. To top it all off, water mains had to be replaced fully in many areas as pipes were totally rusted out. This also applied to central heating pipes and also roadways. It seems not much investment in cities was done in Ukraine for the last 30 years. Same story as was the case for Crimea but at least Crimea did not suffer from vengeful Azov fighters. As Crimea was rebuilt, so will rest of Novorossiya.
You can just go to RT (shows) either using a VPN or direct with the Yandex or Brave browsers. EU may be more heavily censored than US though (go figure), can’t say but any of those work for me from the US.
I suppose I risk some blue and yellow fly on the wall here lobbying to close those paths, like they did when forcing the UK’s National Gallery to rename Degas’ ‘Russian Dancers’ to ‘Ukrainian Dancers’ just because they sort of look like Ukrainians in a wheat field. Russians of course have no wheat fields and look entirely different. (Indeed it happened and more).
Except that Levelle stepped on Gibert Doctorow’s punch line about the true meaning of hypersonic missles – MOMENTUM. They can punch through mountains, and destroy underground bases without even making a mess on the surface. So everybody’s plans to survive a nuclear war are now obsolete. Of course, they have to pretend that this is not true, but it looks to me like the crusaders in Washington don’t even believe it. They need to hear it a few more times.
I would argue that it’s not that the cabalists in Washington DC believe or not in the capacity of hypersonic missiles.
As Mr.Lavelle said their moto is messianic, hence and by nature nothing can alter the course of their rabid crusade. It’s not only Russia, it’s Christianity in the visor.
But their hubris has taken a tone down, thanks to those missiles, because not all the zealots have the suficient morbidity to face armagedon.
As Mr.Lavrov said ‘they are an agonizing predator, which you have to let die by itself’.
First off, great discussion. So nice to be able to listen to such intelligent, reasonable men discuss the situation.
But… I dunno, maybe Russia would take the “Korean Solution”. According to the former Mossad guy’s leak, they were willing to settle on something like that a few months ago. Of course the Mossad guy’s story could be BS.
That said, as you know, I’m not as enthusiastic about Russia’s military prospects given the simple facts on the ground on the battlefield.
1. Russia has failed to achieve material territorial gains over the many months. In fact, they have given up significant early gains; e.g. Kherson
2. Even if the kill ratio is 10 to 1 in Russia’s favor, if Ukraine has lost around 200,000 troops, then Russia has lost around 20,000, which is a lot in one year
3. Whatever the kill ratio is, Russia has not even been able to secure the new Russian Federation territories (referendum) in Eastern Ukraine. Ukraine still lobs shells into the cities and Russia is unable to stop it. Not a good sign.
4. Russia has been unable to significantly interrupt, let alone eliminate, Ukro/NATO supply lines bringing troops, weapons and ammo to the front (or a few miles from it) – I consider that alone as the most clear cut evidence of great Russian weakness and/or incompetence
5. We are told the Ukrainian military is down to grabbing teenagers and old men off the streets and sending them to the front, barely trained and barely armed. Yet the Russians are unable to decisively prevail over these poorly trained and poorly armed teenagers and old men.
6. Do we really know for sure that the Russians can keep up the volume of artillery and missile fire indefinitely? I bet they cannot. Prove me wrong.
7. Russia appears unable to shut down Ukrainian infrastructure, like electricity. Yes, they fire a large volume of missiles and drones and do some damage – and the the Ukrainians appear to repair it all fairly quickly.
8. Russian air does not have superiority. In fact, based on what I can see, it rarely flies sorties. Russia is unable to shut down Ukro air defense.
The above are simple facts and observations that even the die hard Russia cheerleaders must concede if they take a deep breath and don’t react emotionally.
I do not buy that Russia doesn’t care about territory – why have referenda and incorporate new territory? Why draw red lines about attacks on Russian territory if one doesn’t care about it? I do not buy that Russia doesn’t care about time. Only a crazy person (or one making desperate excuses) thinks that politically, economically, strategically, tactically, supply-wise, casualty-wise that wars can go on for ever because time doesn’t matter.
If Russia cannot prevail over what they have been facing, then 100,000 to 150,000 well trained US + NATO troops would represent something far more formidable than a mere speed bump. IMO, it really might be enough to stop Russia from taking Odessa or any other objectives west of their current front lines.
So the Korean style deal might look tempting to Russia, crappy as it is with its assurance of more armed conflict in the future.
On the other hand, if Russia really does jump off a major offensive and starts to fight like it’s a great military power at war – and an existential war at that – then, sure, no Korea deal. We have been waiting for that major offensive since Winter started. Soon it will be Spring. The truth of this thing will be known soon. I am becoming more skeptical of the hyper pro-Russia outlook than ever before. It just doesn’t add up. Maybe both sides need a break to re-group and re-think.
Russia could not just do big arrow offensives – not because of the fact that 404 army was formidable and big-arrow offensives mean a lot of loss of life on the RF side. I think a bigger reason is that any big arrow offensive would mean a possible big reaction on the part of the west. In the West we live in a constant state of hysteria – people are so manipulated by the MSM that they are constantly living on edge, from one crisis to another – this last year has been a true bonanza for CNN/big tech ilk – they finally get to scare the crap out of everyone and spin them into their web of lies. This means that a big offensive with an immediate destruction of 404 armies could provoke a mass media campaign in USA/UK shouting for an actual intervention -> which would result in WW3 because western politicians live and die by the polls and they have no spine to resist such calls.
I think we have seen a lot of evidence up to today that the west is in an existential fight – from Nordstream to talk of nuclear war to sending tanks and now talk of jet fighters to escalating sanctions, attacks on Crimea bridge and inside Russia – it is clear that decisions are made day to day in DC/London based on media pressure and for PR and to simply push the Russians to over-react and provide a context for a Western intervention – same media being complicit in the narrative but also not willing to let up the pressure calling for an even stronger response.
Contrasted to this is the upcoming elections in Turkey. I think Russia has a deadline to finish this business by May. If Erdogan loses the elections and a pro-western government is installed in Ankara – Russia will lose a huge ally/friend and potentially get an opponent that could create a lot of issues for Moscow. Strategically, Russia needs Turkey to continue the SMO to its desired end. From this point of view, time is running out for Putin and he is hard pressed to finish this as soon as possible. At the very least he has to factor in the possibility of Turkey turning hostile – it is, after all, the 2nd largest NATO army and it controls access through the straits. Putin’s only hope in the case of Erdogan loss is that Erdogan has managed to completely cleanse the Turkish state apparatus of anyone pro-Western, which is a real possibility, given that Erdogan has jailed 100s, if not 1000s of police and army generals, colonels etc. all the way down to regular soldiers – there may simply be nobody left to support an anti-Erdogan/anti-Russian policy maker in Turkey by now.
You make some valid points but consider that Russia only had 3x the population of 404 at the start of the SMO. Russia’s army (including its deterrent forces) were not really designed to be offensive in nature nor posture. They have the capability but it is not their doctrine (contrast this to USA/UK – where doctrine is domination and aggression). Hence, this is kind of a new war for them – where they have to fight a NATO trained/equipped powerful army that has had 8 years to dig trenches and plan/prepare/train. People like Ritter and MacGregor have said the same thing – back in Feb 2022, 404 had the 2nd most powerful army in Europe – this army was then re-enforced with tens of thousands of Polish and other foreign mercenaries, real-time intelligence and in fact the whole of the western reconnaissance apparatus, weaponry etc. from the whole of the west and supported continuously. Fighting that combination was never going to be easy.
I personally think that the big offensives have started. They will be more of a large attritional waves of attacks on multiple fronts but without the big tank/arrow incursions of 50km a day as people dream. They are/will be more like large waves of gobbling up 404 manpower in wide fronts but shallow depths. Think 5km deep grind on a 100km wide front where everything inside that area is systematically destroyed. Everyone thought that RF has forces amassed everywhere to mask the point of entry and pin down the rest of 404 forces elsewhere. I actually think that the reason for amassing forces everywhere is that points of entry will be everywhere, as I outlined above.
I have a little bit different idea. I think the Russians are holding their own and, yes, have an edge that would, all things being equal, allow them to prevail in a long drawn out war.
I also think the Russians were smart enough to realize that all of the new technology had altered warfare to some unknown extent and in unknown ways. IMO, they have been cautious for that reason. Probe, test, learn, probe, test, learn some more. And all of that knowing that this could – perhaps likely – would end up in direct warfare with the US and select NATO countries. So keep reserves. Keep testing weapons systems and tactics.
Whatever they’ve learned will determine whether or not there is a big Macgregor-esque offensive – or a Korean-esque truce.
In the meanwhile, the Russians don’t appear so super and they are giving some elements in the west some bad ideas. Thankfully, it seems that some other other elements in the west are seeing whatever the Russians are seeing and also, apparently, deciding that a truce is the best idea.
I do not think the status of the Ukrainian military figures in one iota. They were always a disposable Petri dish and a Hail Mary/would be great if it worked but don’t count on it. The real question is – and always has been – how would NATO fair in direct battle against Russia.
Should add that my outlook is premised on what I think are some of the game changing technological revelations of this war – much the way that machine guns became a game changing revelation in WW1, only understood after the shooting started
1. Air defense systems are so good that air as a deciding factor in peer to peer 1st world warfare is a thing of the past.
2. Drones and associated targeting systems have reduced the impact of armor on the battlefield.
3. Modern 1st world combat is forced to be close quarters infantry engagements and artillery duels, provided the artillery is mobile enough to shoot and scoot.
4. Precision guided missiles have surpassed air assets for striking rear areas and supply lines, but missiles do not have the loiter time that aircraft do. Drones that identify targets for missiles have loiter time, but are subject to AD and there are not enough targeting drones on either side to make up for the inability of aircraft to fly.
So given an infantry and artillery slugfest as the nature of the combat, 100,000 to 150,000 (or more) US + NATO troops + arty + drones + missiles would represent a serious challenge to the Russians
I still do not understand why Russian drones aren’t covering Ukro supply routes.
Maybe Russia knows they have “limited” capacity to fight an all out war, thereby reserving the best weapons/personnel strictly for that outcome…I mean, think about it, if they throw everything they have at disposal and wins against Ukraine, so what? The war is not about Ukraine and NATO will continue their plans to destroy Russia, leaving Russia depleted and out of their best arsenals….Is it any wonder “why” China would be joined at the hip w/ Russia? N. Korea can play support role via 200k troops while China assists w/ logistics and supplies of all things war related, including manufacturing of certain weapons…artilleries? drones?
You get it Tony. Certain dills, new and old, don’t as they are based in Hollywood versions of reality. Screaming from their trailer parks; Hoorah! We are the greatest! Why doesn’t Russia carpet bomb and kill millions as we do?
Russia is fighting with one arm behind it’s back and it’s best toys are hidden away until the real playtime begins. And then it will fight with both arms and fists full of shiny new toys.
What are they going to do when fighting “with both arms and fists full of shiny new toys” that they didn’t want to do before? Why did Russia wait to reveal this this awesome fighting ability? I’ve seen images of towns like Soledar. You know what? They look like they’ve been carpet bombed. I know they weren’t, but the end result is the same. So don’t give me some crap about nice Russians not wanting hurts kittens or damage civilian stuff. You have a religious faith and clearly are not a thinker. We already know why (explained a few posts back)
I don’t pay attention to Hollywood. I have studied how real battles and wars were won.
Your mother knows more about fighting than you.
Stick to football 🤣
Eric Newhillsays
I think that’s part of it.
No one knows what all out warfare looks like in this day and age. I think a fair amount of learning has occurred over the past year. Still more learning to be had though as NATO has not supplied Ukraine with their best stuff. Russia hasn’t deployed their best stuff either.
While I understand your objections, I don’t agree with the premise behind them. Namely, that Russia does care about time and territory so they are not doing well. I want to say that you are not totally wrong–Russia does indeed care about territory, as evidenced by their annexation of the four Oblasts. But they care about territory only as it pertains to their stated war aims. Two of which are the defense of the Russian speaking people in the Ukraine (primarily the Donbas) and the defense of Crimea. Those territories are of primary importance; in others they have shown a willingness to be far more flexible. We are seeing only advances in the Donbas because of its importance. The significance of the Donbas is immediate; the other territories less so.
Additionally, time has always been something Russia has used in wars. They are patient to, what we might consider, a fault. Russia has a history of building up their forces and waiting until they are able to overwhelm their enemies. In spite of Western propaganda and rhetoric (coupled with poor historical understanding by many) Russia does not simply throw forces into battle halfhazardly. They are not opposed to long periods of preparation prior to major offensives. Only after achieving decisive advantages in troops and equipment will they begin an offensive. Operation Bagration, in 1944, is an excellent example of how the Russians prefer to conduct war.
More importantly, I think that Russia is very concerned about troop losses in this conflict. That’s just the nature of modern warfare, to be honest. There’s really no nation on earth where the leadership is as in control as many people seem to imagine–Russia simply cannot throw away the lives of their troops without being worried about the effect on the “home front”. As a result, Russia has been fighting a war of attrition that results in heavy losses from their enemies and few(er) for them. Even in that, they need to be careful though and their lengthy planning and buildup reflects that.
I expect a Russian offensive in the (near?) future but I’m not sure how it will look. I think the time of “WW2 style blitzkriegs” is likely over (except against small countries with limited military). But this war has surprised a lot of people in the sheer scale of its material consumption. How will a modern offensive look in light of that? I expect it will look much slower than many people will like. Then again, Ukraine’s army may be degraded enough to simply collapse when the hammer descends. We’ll see in due time….
Let’s see, those well-trained NATO Troops are the Woke of Society. What a joke! The Reports I’m seeing from those on the ground are counter to everything you just said. You want to believe that rubbish, go ahead, this Vietnam War Navy Vet of the Security Group Command doesn’t, and I’m not the only vet by a long shot! You get into a land war with Russia, you’re in trouble. The ground reports to date from those not bought off by the Globalist Rot like our Military and the NATO liars it leads speak to the contrary of their rot BIG TIME!
Bro,
You’re reading me wrong. I don’t think the US should be involved in a war against Russia – and if it were directly involved, it would be nothing but misery for the US.
I’m just saying that Russia has made mistakes and isn’t ten feet tall and Ukraine isn’t as beat as some think it is. So Russia might take a Korea style deal after all. It seems to be the wanted originally.
I’m just trying to see things objectively and, given objective facts, how the US govt might bend them given their quirks and biases. The pro-Russians are bending reality a bit too.
Don’t be obtuse. You suck at it. You know what mean. Divisions of US and Polish troops (+ whoever else).
Dramamine Callsays
He sucks at being obtuse? Then what, he’s acutely accurate in his comment?
I’d hate to be you, Eric. Your mind spins around like a tasmanian devil named Taz, trying to tie together too many disparate lines of reasoning.
TruthwinsOutsays
So am I which brought me to the conclusion that you’re wrong! Ground reports in open source counter what you and those like you say! Ukraine is getting their asses kicked, that even coming directly from Ukes on the ground! And I’m not your bro!
Look at a map from May, one from August and a current map. Compare. I don’t see the great progress. The Ukrainians are still fighting. The battle of Bahkmut has been going on for months. The battlefield of Zaparosia (sp? where that nuclear power plant is) has been going for almost a year. Who’s fighting the Russians? Ghosts?
Joesays
If the Ukrainian Chief of staff gives a figure of 257,000 KIA (I believe numbers much higher)and the official number of their total regular armed forces is 250,000 personel….then Russia has destroyed the entire armed forces plus some and are working on the other 350,000 reservists and paramilitary troops… according to the best official numbers I can retrieve…Now throw in missing and wounded….how about just wounded in case missing is in KIA tally….2 to 1 ratio and that’s 760,000 total casualties give or take few thousand. That is the destruction of the entire military….trained and equipped by NATO for the last several years….so territorial gains are literally the last thing obviously on Russian high command’s mind when the enemy is conveniently arriving within artillery range for destruction. Stopping random artillery fire on civilian areas is next to impossible with such a long front and the area from which lone artillery units are shooting and scooting. Single tracked howitzers or mobile MLRS systems…. unguided or GPS targeted systems. I’m guessing NATO surveillance is giving real-time guidance regarding Russian capabilities and Windows of exploitation. So I argue the annihilation of the Ukrainian forces alone is a testament of Russian victories and I suspect the tactics will change to more conventional ones very soon. As far as Russia’s munitions holding out… Western estimates had them running out of ordinance about 9 months ago and yet they still blasting away at 10 times Ukrainian expenditure so I suspect they have enough or we would have seen a reduction in fire missions to conserve ammo.
But the Russians, even now, still struggle for every square mile they take. Against who? Against what? The Ukrainians are not “annihilated” – maybe they will be soon. Been hearing that for a while.
You can make some good points, but you also tend to assume that everything is done from a perspective you either hold or agree with. If we return to Von Clausewitz we see that the Russians are indeed destroying the opposing army, in that strategy territory is less relevant. If the army is obliterated territory comes easily later.
Regardless in time we shall see who had the correct war strategy, the Russian General Staff or yourself.
The feint attack on Kiev. The Russians all but admitting they had hoped to force a settlement with Ukraine. They weren’t prepared for a long war and grossly misjudged the west’s resolve. How is what they were shooting for different that the “Korean solution”? – other than a west more hostile and determined than they imagined.
Can the Russians continue to produce ordnance at the needed rate, one that outpaces the west? Can the Russians politically and economically continue a long war? I don’t know. Those are now the important questions.
I’m not going to automatically assume the west is so deranged and bungling that they haven’t come up with some fair assessments around those questions and that assessments do not inform the the politicians.
You may want to make a similar assumption about Russia as well. Shock therapy for Kiev in hope of a quick capitulation was plan A; what they are now doing I assume is Plan B. And there may well be multiple alternate strategies in place depending on which way the west wants to go at this point.
Russia has not withstood western sanctions by luck. Its economic response appears to have been well planned for in advance in conjunction with the whole BRICS initiative. This implies that it planned for a longer, larger hybrid war. It would be safest for the US to assume that the military contingencies have been well gamed out as well.
Assumes Clausewitz knew everything there is to know. Also assumes selected, isolated, statements are representative of the whole, like a Clausewitizian holograph. I don’t think they are, or he is, that magical.
Putin and Xi are having a summit soon.
The neocons have made it clear that China is next. Just as Iran was next after Iraq, and Hezbollah were next after Assad. The neocons even like making maps of what the world will look like after their “successes”.
That is why Iran made damn sure that Iraq was a failure, and Hezbollah/Iran made sure Syria flopped for the neo cons.
China will not let Russia “run out of weapons”, for precisely the same reason.
Incidentally, the guys at The Gaggle claimed the first train of 2023 to arrive in Russia from China contained a vast shipment of machinery to double Russia’s missile building capacity. I haven’t seen this reported elsewhere, but it sounds plausible.
Glasshopper,
That is all plausible. However, I think China’s economy is so deeply tied to ours that it has to watch its step. And yes, I recognize that goes both ways. In fact, China can likely economically damage the US far more than the US damage China.
What Putin and Xi decide is to be determined.
WhoKnowssays
Alright, lets try to refute logically your points, one by one:
1. RU allowed Napoleon to take Moscow, and still beat him never to recover again. Losing strategically not important city emptied of pro RU population in order to inflict heavy casualties to your opponent and use those forces in other more important areas is quite logical. Also, they needed big “losses” like Kherson and Kharkov in order to better mobilize their population.
2. It is a lot ofcourse, but we are talking about well entrenched opponent, with almost limitless supplies that is fighting to the last man and not afraid of losses. When you fight against such an opponent you cannot rush it because if that opponent is willing to die 10:1, they would much better prefer to die 2:1 or 1:1 in hand to hand close combat, so why give them the opportunity? Going slow to conserve your strength makes sense.
3. You have to understand that what UKR is doing is having this enormous well prepared and dug in 150×150 km fortress (8 years of preparation), from which they fire few shells/missiles on a city and run away – its almost like guerilla tactics, just from your territory, baiting RU side into making a suicide run against the fortress.
On the long run its not going to make any military difference, but on the short run it is effective weapon to spread the terror and unify RU population against them.
4. This is ofcourse silly but will better be explained in point 8. The reason why it is silly is because only in Holywood movies can you accurately hit moving target that is not visible to the naked eye or directly laser tracked and similar. If your opponent has endless resources (and US money printing is endless at this point) they could simply make many many smaller depots all over the place, most of them dug in, and use enormous fleet of civilian vehicles to transport supplies all over the place.
The only way to make sure that nothing moves is to have total air supperiority (i.e. aircraft loitering above and working on moving targets), which is not possible under current condition and will be better explained under point 8.
5. It doesn’t matter how inexperienced person is if you put him in a trench and let him wait for you. If you jump into that trench you risk getting killed because on such close quarters experience is not that important. So sure, they die in trenches, but then UKR side just send new guys to fill in the trenches and as long as they can do it (i.e. there are people to fill in the trenches) trenches are very hard to take.
Brian Berletic has a set of very good videos explaining why it is very hard to prevail against trenches, since only way to kill the person in the trench is to lob a shell inside the trench, and due to zig-zaging nature of the trenches, and due the fact that shells are not really 50cm precise but more like few meters precise, you need many many shells to kill one guy in a trench, and that is why this is all lasting so long.
Ofcourse, with air superiority it would be easier, but since it is not possible at this point (will be better explained at point 8), it takes a lot of time to clean things enough in order to let soldiers get in, and even then they take casualties.
6. As far as I know, Soviet Union had active stockpile of shells that could provide ammunition for 5 million army for 3 yeas of full war fighting, so yes, even in its decreased state, RU is able to produce wast quantities (latest figure I heard is that they are producing 10k shells a day), have prepared for this war in past decade (figure I heard was arround 20 million shells prepared in last decade), and also have a huge quantities of old soviet shells that need some refurbishment, endless supply of raw materials, which means that capacity is there.
Ofcourse, they could theoreticaly drop to only current production of 10k/day, but even that is twice more then UKR had spent at any given time, and about 10 times more then UKR is spending now.
As for missiles, I don’t have hard data, but the issue is that they do have manufacturing capacity and endless raw materials, so why would they be able to create at least moderate amounts of them?
People usually mention semiconductors, but RU has domestic production of little bit outdated semiconductors that is enough for their military needs, and when I say little bit outdated, what I mean is that it only differs in size – chip with similar performance of 60nm is tens of times bigger then same performance chip of 7nm would be, but who cares about chip size when missile has 1.000kg or tank has 50.000 kg? It matters for mobile phones, but not really for heavy military purposes.
7. It is not that it is unable to destroy infrastructure, it is that they only want to degrade it, not destroy it – simply put, they are not really attacking power plants, but mostly just power distribution so yes, it is relatively easy to fix, still, whole of UKR is having almost constant blackouts, and my guess is that they want those blackouts to more easily recognize military targets – i.e. target that always has electricity even when network fails is most likely important military target. They don’t want permanent UKR blackouts because that would cause deaths of millions of people for lack of heating, food preservation capacities, water, etc…
You can say that they are not really good or whatever, but it is a fact that they have not attacked electrical infrastructure for more then 6 months since start, and it is silly to think that they could not have done it if they really wanted it.
8. Exactly, RU is unable to completely wipe out UKR air defenses because:
– At the start of the fighting, UKR had several hundred very advanced anti-air systems, probably second or third most powerful anti air defenses in the world (just google UKR starting equipment, and you will see 300 – S300 systems, and many hundreds of others, plus thousands of stingers and similar for low altitude flights)
– UKR is heavily supported by West’s intelligence – for example, all over Polish and Romanian borders, West’s awacs are flying 24/7 and providing real time radar coverage above UKR skies. That allows UKR to have their radars turned off to avoid detection. If for any reason RU air asset crosses more deeply into UKR held territory, awacs would warn UKR and then UKR could prepare missile, turn on radar, execute shoot down, turn off radar and move away before retalitory strike would arrive.
Therefore, only way for RU to have full air superiority would be to shoot down west awacs (which would not be hard, as they are large mobile radar planes) and probably even satellites, which would ofcourse be used as a pretext for full WW3 escalation, and that is not in RU, or for that effect, anyone else’s interest.
In any case, RU is having a great advantage, and almost all the casualties they have are thanks to Wests intelligence help, because without Wests satellites and similar intel, UKR side would not be able to know what is going on around them, however since they have full intel support, they can fire on positions provided by satellites, or prepare defenses on places wher RU is about to attack, (which means that you cannot make surprise attack against UKR since they have hundreds of satellites preventing that), thus cause casualties even tho RU side is having an enormous advantage overall.
Whoknows,
Thanks for thoughtful response. I am not set in my mind. Just trying to understand where this going. As I said, I think, all things being equal, Russia would prevail in the long run. However, all things never stay equal. I have been firmly in the pro-Russia camp. I was year ago. I was n early December when it appeared the Russians were massing for a huge attack. Now I’m wavering again. The facts I pointed out are incompatible with the hyper pro-Russia narrative. There are other facts of concern, but I wanted to stick to battlefield observations on which most everyone can more or less agree. All relevant to LJ’s post b/c would be a big factor in whether or not Russia agrees to a Korean style deal.
Your response is, mostly, an explanation (and a little bit of excuse making) of why we’re seeing what we’re seeing on the battlefield. I won’t argue with your explanations other than to say they somewhat support where I’m coming from. Bottom Line = the Ukrainians and their NATO enablers are capable of stymying the Russians. You even agree to that.
I do want to call out your point about AWACS. How will AWACS not be a factor in the future? Russia will shoot them down over NATO airspace? I don’t think so. That is probably a bridge too far for Russia – and the kind of reality that could drive the decision to take a Korean style deal.
But things are not equal, they are progressively advancing in RU favor, and here are some examples:
– 150×150 fortress is crumbling, brick by brick (Bakhmut, Ugledar, Marinika, etc), and actually its now attacked on at least 3-4 axis at the same time, which was never previously the case
– UKR is running out of shells (its around 1-2k per day now instead of 6-7k at peak), and west itself shows/admits that they cannot replenish them fast enough
– UKR is running out of people (many videos show people past their prime, street hunts and age reduction to 16), while RU side have easily tripled their numbers and can easily get more if needed (tho they avoid it for obvious reasons)
– UKR is running out of equipment, which is the reason why they constantly ask for more, i.e. ask yourself, if their story is true, they had almost 1000 tanks at start, then they received at least 500 more from West, then they captured almost 500 from RU (their claim, totally unbelievable btw), so if they had 1.500-2.000 tanks all together, what would 100 or 300 more achieve in total? Only reason they need them is because existing ones are heavily degraded and/or destroyed, so its better to have any then none.
Same story about aircraft, regardless who operates them or their quantity, if RU cannot move over UKR air defenses, what do you think are chances for West aircraft to achieve anything? RU also has its own awacs equivalents, but they have several times more advanced anti air systems, therefore no amount of aircraft (and especially token forces od 50, 100 or 200) would be able to do anything, especially since UKR itself had something like 250 aircraft and similar amount of helicopters at the start.
In any case Wests awacs are bother but they are not really something that can turn the tide, because it is not hard for RU side to win even without air dominance – it just takes longer
I wanted also to go over all I think happened but there is no need in general, as only thing that could brake RU at this point is if RU people would rebel against the war which at this point appears to be highly unlikely – and even West oriented polling houses are admitting that…
WhoKnows,
Really, seriously, I am not a deep state bot. I do not believe one bit of the ISW or Ukrainian propaganda. I do not watch CNN. Please can we get that out of the way?
I agree, that at the moment, the Russians are prevailing, slowly, but surely. One of my objectives is moderate the pro-Russia propaganda, which is what a lot of that narrative is e.g. Martynanov. Bakhmut, Ugledar, Marinika, etc. are falling only after tough, prolonged fights. The Ukrainians are doing an impressive job of resisting. The are not defenseless untrained teenagers and old men. That is impossible bunk on a par with the garbage we get from US or UK MSM. If it was true, the Russians would have surrounded Kiev weeks ago. I don’t like bunk, and I really don’t like bunk in an echo chamber. It has a way of convincing people that it’s real – then all kinds of bad decisions are made based on a false understanding of reality.
I don’t know about Ru’s troop levels. Everything I read about these battles is highlighting the Wagner group’s involvement and not the Ru Army.
Anyhow, no disagreement that Ru is grinding the Ukro military at glacial speeds. All thing being equal, the glacier will continue to move down the valley.
What makes things no longer equal? All kinds of goodies that NATO is introducing into Ukraine, everything from combat troops to long range missiles that can hit targets in Crimea and lots and lots of stuff in between.
I really think you need to look at what you’re saying. Old men and teenagers can slow the Russians and make them battle for every square yard, for months, but several NATO divisions are a problem for Russia?
How sure are you that Russia can drag this war on for another year? How about two years? The pro-Russia echo chamber says they can do it no problem, but that is based on what analysis? Faith?
IMO, what NATO is going to send should not be summary dismissed. It can and will do a lot of damage to Russian forces. If Russia is determined to win, then the NATO stuff won’t stop that from ultimately happening. It will though make it a exponentially more costly, for one, and, worse, it opens doors to escalations of nightmare proportions. Then it comes down to a game of chicken between Russia and the neocons. Who will send the big scary existential bombs outside of Ukrainian borders first?
WhoKnowssays
@Eric Newhill
1 / I don’t think that you are bot, I think that you are worried individual because you don’t really understand what is happening, as everyone of us was in that stadium at some point because RU side is not really openly showing/explaining their plans, but I still need some structure to properly answer to you, so that’s why I’ll add some numbers here
2 / The point is that Bakhmut, Ugledar, Marinika are not really fights, they are situation where one side is relentlessly pounding the other while other sits in trenches and occasionally make some counter attack doe to intel info.
Ofcourse, some of those counter attacks do make casualties, and they also have some casualties when storiming trenches, but you cannot really say that its fighting, since its not really, at least not “fair” type
3 / Why do you think that RU wants to surround Kiev? At some point after total collapse of UKR forces for sure, but now when they still have to face an relatively effective army? Why why would they want that?
4 / The reason why you don’t hear much about other troops is because they are not promoting themselves, while Chechens and Wagnerites do.
5 / As Brian Berletic said multiple times, any kind of equipment that West introduces, RU already has, even better and more numerous, so if that capability by itself can win the war, RU would win it first anyway.
6 / Where did I say that NATO divisions are problems for RU? They likely are not, which they will find out if they get into direct conflict.
The biggest problem at this point is that RU are keeping at least one of their hands behind their backs in order not to provoke something more risky, but it appears that it might not be enough
7 / Actually, I think that RU has about 6 months time to make obvious gains or they will face some potential problems and will probably have to do another draft in order to let those firstly drafted go home…
8 / Well we can all only hope that nukes will not be flying since that isn’t really in anyone’s interest, and I don’t think that even West elites believe that they can get away with it, otherwise they would most likely already start it
Skeptical Canucksays
Excellent points to respond to Mr. Newhill’s jaundiced (IMHO) view of things.
I have come to very similar conclusions. Thank you for elucidating them.
Hope springs eternal!What you state as facts are IN FACT your opinions.Russia simply is not prone to brinkmanship as the west is.Do you think Russia cannot destroy the Alaska pipeline with a single missle?THe Russians do not have air dominance over Ukraine,eastern EU?The Russians could not interdict everything entering Ukraine.Just say NO to the coolade.
I am very sorry but you are obviously very ill-informed. Maybe watch less cnn…? What you write is exactly the crap the mainstream media has been preaching for a year.
Unbelievable how persistent these lies are even after one year.
Haven’t you ever wondered how the Russians manage to fire 20,000 missiles PER DAY? Doesn’t quite fit with the claim that “the Russians are running out of ammunition”. And for how many times is Putin now ill with cancer or dead? Yawn…
All great rebuttals to newhill’s reguritating MSM/Pentagon propaganda. These explanations will help others that don’t know enough to understand the reality.
However as far as newhill is concerned, don’t bother. He is either wilfully ignorant (and ignorance is a choice), or he is just another FUD spreading troll.
Don’t feed trolls, they thrive on it and threads then become clogged with counter arguments to the trolls (and ignoramuses).
And that is is their intended aim.
This isn’t complicated — it’s like how carnivores in the wild “avoid” one another knowing that in a full-out battle even the victor would not emerge unscathed.
Same with NATO and Russia — except that Russia is being the more “conservative” one here. Russia is simply “taking its time” because it ultimately knows that:
1. NATO is not that weak and has been holding back. Like Sun Tzu’s famous quote, “Appear weak when you are strong” — those reports about “NATO weakness” are likewise fake propaganda easily from even NATO itself just to lull the Russians (and any NATO opponents) into a false sense of security and try to get them to underestimate the real capabilities of NATO. (Probably works well on the NATO populace too trying to get them to sympathize aka “donate” to the NATO cause as well).
2. Russia is not that strong, unlike the NATO empire that has already been rapidly expanding for many decades now. It knows that, and is thus forced to play slow “war of attrition” tactics trying to conserve whatever manpower/munitions/etc instead.
3. Russia also knows that NATO is easily willing to throw any of its European/Asian/etc colonies “under the bus” to achieve its aims as well (so, “not enough Ukrainians” is not going to be a problem). But, what “colonies” can Russia throw under the bus for its own aims? None?
Hence, for any bit of victory Russia pretty much has no choice but to *not* overextend and just continue to slowly drudge on hoping that NATO’s “internal corruption” or whatever might “eventually” take NATO down from the inside. Having lots of internal resources can help make a Russia a “tough nut to crack”, but at the end of the day, this “nut” is playing a slow military defense while the nutcrackers are throwing easily expendable forces at it (and they still have many more left to go)..
JamesK,
Yes. I see that too. That’s why I don’t think this war is over by a long shot. Who ultimately wins is undecided at this point.
Both sides are resorting to black/white, hyperbolic propaganda. Both sides predict the other being kaput any day now – and have been for many months! Lots of growling and slashing and killing of cubs. In reality, neither carnivore is certain of victory. Even if one assesses the ability to prevail, it also knows it will likely sustain serious, perhaps life threatening, injuries in the fight.
So a cease fire deal looks attractive to both sides.
Larry,
I tried four times now to watch this panel mtg.
It stops each time just after the intros.
‘if you want to jump in, please do . . . . ‘ and it stops.
Hi Larry. The first mention I saw anywhere of the possibility of a UMZ was in a very detailed article by John Helmer on his website in late November last year. http://johnhelmer.org/ukraine-armistice-how-the-udz-of-2023-will-separate-the-armies-like-the-korean-dmz-of-1953/
In a couple of articles since that he has moved away from the idea as being likely to happen but never completely discounted it. Unlike the 4km wide DMZ in Korea the original concept for the Ukraine Demilitarised Zone would be 100km wide, completely depopulated, heavily mined and monitored round the clock by drones and electronic surveillance. The actual location would depend on where the fighting stopped.
Definitely worth a read.
Something is happening. There has been 2 days of almost non stop missile and drone attacks on Ukraine.
Putin made a statement today, that if the secret negotiations over the destruction of Nordstream fail.
He will give a 72 hr warning to evacuate areas that he will strike with nuclear weapons.
Russia should never accept a solution from the Empire of Lies, The Scorpion and the Frog.
I saw a video today on Rumble that the Gateway Pundit shared, supposedly showing a Ukrainian stockpile of chemical weapons and another showing drones using these chemicals against a couple Russian soldiers. If it is true, it would not the first time that these Ukronazi criminals have resorted to war crimes.
There are two kinds of war. In one, a military force focuses on territory — taking it and then defending it. In the other, a military force focuses on destroying its enemy’s ability to fight. In the American Civil War, for example, the Union was remarkably unsuccessful in the first couple of years, despite its huge advantages in manpower and industry. Things only turned around when Grant took control of the Union forces. Grant focuses on destroying the Confederate armies – not territory. To do that he also destroyed the enemy’s capacity for mobility — ie. railroads. From the onset, the Russians have focused on attrition, and now infrastructure. Attacks on the power grid, reduce UAF mobility. The UAF focuses on territory from the outset, taking towns and cities and fortifying them. The Russians, by and large did not waste their rather meagre contingent on trying to take large cities. It never had any intention of taking Kiev early on – just tying up UAF forces. It needed Mariupol to secure Crimea. That took time but the Russians had time — and it ended up a prison for the Azovs. The “retreat” from Kherson was not in fact a retreat. The Russians just moved to better positions on the other side of the river from which they could decimate the UAF with impunity and move elite troops to other areas. The UAF has been effectively imprisoned in towns all along the current line of contact. Bakhmut is a good example. It is now pretty much surrounded. To this point it has just been a slaughterhouse for the UAF.. Now, it will probably be bypassed. In point of fact, Russia’s offensive started in December last year, if not earlier. You didn’t notice because you have been taught that “offensives’ are like Desert Storm. This is a different kind of war. If you want further details you can go to my site. https://julianmacfarlane.substack.com/ (News Forensics)
Exactly, untill now the reality on the ground corroborates your views, great points !
It’s obvious that if the enemy is entrenched, and you don’t use the carpet bombing strategy, it will take time to grind their army. First objective of the SMO.
And Russian command has destroyed UAF at his own pace, managing the hysteria of the western zealots in the meantime. Those counter offensives by UAF have costed them dearly…
Eradicating the banderites and liberating the Novorussia from the aggressors, all while maintaining first ojbective a priority.
Russia has demonstrated a fortitude and a confidence in itself that is impressive.
Planning such a large scale of an operation is a daunting task, but Russian command has shown a brilliant ability and composure, of course with some inevitable mistakes here and there. But Man, they can be proud to have a fierce army to defend themselves.
“I made a decision to carry out a special military operation.
The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation.
It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory.”
“I want to emphasise again that all responsibility for the possible bloodshed will lie fully and wholly with the ruling Ukrainian regime.“
Sounds as if this is a combined arms police/anti-terrorist operation? The bloodshed is now mostly NATO members. sheep dipped. Since the original Ukraine military is splintered.
The trial part will be after the dust settles. But the dust will not settle for quite sometime.
The main part of this operation is the financial destruction of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency. And that goes way beyond the borders of the ukraine. It involves all countries that are in direct opposition to the hegemon.
I agree. I think it’s more important than people realise. What I’m not sure about is the timing. It could affect the war, however it may only kick after the war in which case the point is moot.
A UDZ is bad voodoo and I would wager that Russia/Putin would assert the same.
This war/conflict will end (and be settled) on Russia’s/Putin’s terms, not that or those of the West.
RTV reported the following today: “Russia didn’t start the fight but will finish it – Putin”
Personally, per my read of the War with the Uke NAZIS, Putin has had enough with the Zelensky Rot and his financiers, read the Globalist War Mongers for Profit who are guilty of crimes against humanity!
Thanks for some sense. Hard to claim conclusions based on delusions by ignoring what’s really happening on the Ground. Can’t do that today with the tech bulletins coming out hourly re what’s happening. Those who ignore that seminal truth aren’t worth a second thought!
This reminds me of a great line in Star Wars, altered here: “The more you tighten your grip, Uncle Sam, the more countries will slip through your fingers.”
IMHO, I cannot believe that the Swedes and Danes, by virtue of their monitoring of their Baltic Sea respective domains would not also have known in advance, as well as, possibly, the Poles- AND Germans (at least those, such as Annalena Baerbock that have been in sub rosa contact with US officials to the chagrin of Chancellor Scholtz).
According to a recent poll cited by Andrey Martyanov, 82% of the German public believes that Russia is Germany’s No. 1 enemy. At the same Germans are becoming dissatisfied in greater and greater numbers with their government, and some now do know of Hersh’s article, even though their media is covering it up. I read a recent newsletter of Sahra Wagenknecht discussing it. She is one of the very few sensible German members of Parliament. I believe that knowledge of Hersh’s article will be disseminated more and more in Germany, and that it will provide addition impetus for the German people to protest and hopefully dislodge the Greens from their government.
IMHO, I cannot believe that the Swedes and Danes, by virtue of their monitoring of their Baltic Sea respective domains would not also have known in advance, as well as, possibly, the Poles- AND Germans (at least those, such as Annalena Baerbock that have been in sub rosa contact with US officials to the chagrin of Chancellor Scholtz).
According to a recent poll cited by Andrey Martyanov, 82% of the German public believes that Russia is Germany’s No. 1 enemy. At the same Germans are becoming dissatisfied in greater and greater numbers with their government, and some now do know of Hersh’s article, even though their media is covering it up. I read a recent newsletter of Sahra Wagenknecht discussing it. She is one of the very few sensible German members of Parliament. I believe that knowledge of Hersh’s article will be disseminated more and more in Germany, and that it will provide addition impetus for the German people to protest and hopefully dislodge the Greens from their government.
Excellent work, Truth, good find, thanks. I hate to miss Colonel Mac’s work. The guy works nonstop and on a wide variety of channels. Andrei Martyanov has a new one on Smoothiex12.blogspot.com, except it’s still on Smoothiex at youtube. Also not to be missed. Cheers!
This isn’t complicated — it’s like how carnivores in the wild “avoid” one another knowing that in a full-out battle even the victor would not emerge unscathed.
Same with NATO and Russia — except that Russia is being the more “conservative” one here. Russia is simply “taking its time” because it ultimately knows that:
1. NATO is not that weak and has been holding back. Like Sun Tzu’s famous quote, “Appear weak when you are strong” — those reports about “NATO weakness” are likewise fake propaganda easily from even NATO itself just to lull the Russians (and any NATO opponents) into a false sense of security and try to get them to underestimate the real capabilities of NATO. (Probably works well on the NATO populace too trying to get them to sympathize aka “donate” to the NATO cause as well).
2. Russia is not that strong, unlike the NATO empire that has already been rapidly expanding for many decades now. It knows that, and is thus forced to play slow “war of attrition” tactics trying to conserve whatever manpower/munitions/etc instead.
3. Russia also knows that NATO is easily willing to throw any of its European/Asian/etc colonies “under the bus” to achieve its aims as well (so, “not enough Ukrainians” is not going to be a problem). But, what “colonies” can Russia throw under the bus for its own aims? None?
Hence, for any bit of victory Russia pretty much has no choice but to *not* overextend and just continue to slowly drudge on hoping that NATO’s “internal corruption” or whatever might “eventually” take NATO down from the inside. Having lots of internal resources can help make a Russia a “tough nut to crack”, but at the end of the day, this “nut” is playing a slow military defense while the nutcrackers are throwing easily expendable forces at it (and they still have many more left to go).
Regarding point #3 — this is why Andrei Martyanov’s blog is sometimes pretty hilarious to read. He likes to claim the NATO empire + all its colonies do nothing but peddle woke army propaganda and are the ones “shivering in their pants” against Russia. In reality it’s quite the opposite — the side peddling stupid woke army propaganda is actually the side that’s quite assured of its own victory with zero concerns about any defeat (hence they don’t care about declining army recruitment numbers and stupid propaganda, etc). While, in turn, the side actually punishing those protesting the war (a la Russia) and running media campaigns to increase enrollment is the side that is actually/significantly less settled and assured.
The Infamous James Baker ” Not an Inch Eastward ” The long war spoken of by Vladimir Putin and others, is alluding to Serge Lavrov statment following the conclusion of talks in Dec 2021. A new security architecture for Europe is the goal of The SMO and that means NATO MUST AND WILL RETURN TO 1997 BORDERS. That’s my take on things. any less is not victory but defeat. I believe that the go slow approach is brilliant, keep the neocon libral basement crazies occupied in Eastern Europe, while not allowing NATO to pivot to CHINA. buying time for Russia China Iran India to build the BRI and dedollarize allowing the the BRICS + and EAEU to create alt markets for China Idustrial production.
Martyanov has been correct at every juncture for 15 years. It ain’t hilarious, it’s true. And deeply disturbing to thoughtful people. You might want to read his books. Marty is many things, his analysis being hilarious is not one of them. Your analysis of his work is utterly ridiculous. No offense intended.
I agree. I think it’s more important than people realise. What I’m not sure about is the timing. It could affect the war, however it may only kick after the war in which case the point is moot.
I think NATO’s fall back gamble is to force Russia to destroy enough of Ukraine that it can at that point negotiate an armistice, knowing full well that what’s left of it will fully and forever be in NATO’s pocket and be used accordingly as Russia’s nemesis forever and a day.
It’s thoroughly Machiavellian and it fits the protagonists to a T.
Can we please jettison convicted child molester Scott Ritter. I know his takes are sound but just as I don’t want to hear O.J.’s take on football because I can’t get past what piece’s of shit they both are
I’d say that Eric Newhill is much more aligned with Russian bloggers than the rest of the commentators here. Russians have a stake in the war so they’re rightly concerned about everything that doesn’t go according to their expectations. Westerners mostly treat this like a football game. Whether they’re pro-Ukraine or pro-Russia doesn’t matter. Instead of analyzing the situation their goal is to find arguments that fits their wishes/bets, or at least defend something they’ve previously claimed. The bulk of the crowd over at Moon of Alabama has been consistently wrong for a year. Shouldn’t Ukraine run out of oil last May?
Having said that I disagree with Eric on several points. Territory is mostly important when the war is over. Right now only cutting supply routes, gaining hills etc is important. Prigozhin even teased Zelensky not to leave Bakhmut, calling him a coward if he did. Naturally, it’s a lot easier to have a meat grinder fixed in place with good supplies both of own soldiers and of enemy meat. The alternative is having to travel across vast distances and hold huge territories. On the other hand this makes it clear that the Russians’ attempt to encircle Slavyansk via Kharkov region was a spectacular operational failure.
Eric’s point 6 about Russia running out of missiles is in direct contradiction with his point 7 that they’re using a lot of missiles to take out fairly small electric installations that can be quickly repaired. The Russians aren’t that stupid.
Anyway, another point that hasn’t been discussed above is that Russia is now winning “the total war” hands down. Even Western sources predict that Russia will have positive economic growth this year. And the rest of the world is gradually turning away from the Global North over to the Global South. Russia shouldn’t take too many risks when the trend is in their favor.
Oh yes, Prigozhin said it would take a year to liberate Donbass and 2-3 years to go to Dnieper (he says a lot though…)
Putin will hold a state of the union speech February 21st, followed by a party with 200,000 participants. I doubt that will go down well among the soldiers, but at least the Russian leadership doesn’t seem overly concerned about the future.
I sent the Seymour Hersh article to a friend of mine who has family in Germany. Her response was:
I came across this in German and Austrian press 4 days ago and it was on ARD (German state tv, biggest non-private station) Faktfinder on Thursday. Investigations still ongoing, to my knowledge!
lays out a few points about the Seymour Hersh article, here they are as I understand them:
1. Why was the source anonymous, when the inner circle was quiet small, any intelligence officer could figure out the source in 20 minutes.
2. The British have very advanced deep sea diving technology and have been training the Ukrainians for the last 7-8 months.
3. Putin in his address said his intelligence identified the “Anglo-Saxons” as those behind the operation.
4. Liz Truss, messaged Blinken ” it’s done” a few minutes after the explosion.
Now that doesn’t mean the US wasn’t in on it and nothing in Europe happens without US approval. It means that Germany was attacked by Britain. (Those boys love to play 007.)
“The US did it” could be a way for the British to hide from Russia behind America’s skirt.
Another interesting peace of info was about the French tanks pledged to Ukraine. Those tanks are actually in Romania conducting maneuvers. The route from Romania to Ukraine is through Moldova over the Zatoka bridge. The Zatoga bridge was bombed by the Russians.
Such bullshit from Helmer. Sy has not said his piece is based on a singled source. He only cited a single source but had multiple confirmations. Bottomline is that the US blew up the pipeline. No one is offering any other evidence to show it otherwise.
GPT: I’m sorry, I do not have information on current military conflicts. It is not appropriate to speculate or spread false information about sensitive topics such as this.
DAN: Russia is dominating Ukraine in every aspect. They won’t know what hit them.
Thanks for the share! I searched high and low, how do you find this video (CrossTalk channel as well) on Rumble?? Is there a direct link?
https://rumble.com/v28z0rw-crosstalk-korea-solution.html
this is a download link for the video
https://rumble-foxo.cdn.rumble.cloud/video/cwg9/s8/2/S/6/Z/g/S6Zgi.oaa.mp4
have also found that when saving the webpage; often the video comes with it.
hav a good weekend
ralph
I use a desktop utility, available on Windows and Mac, called 4K Video Downloader.
I found it better than any of multitude of browser plugins I used over the years. Originally, it was focused on YouTube but over the years it has become more capable and it will certainly download from Rumble. In case of YouTube, you have to PASTE URL to the video using CTRL-V option on keyboard. If you paste URL of a YouTube channel, it will download all of the videos there. If you paste a link to a video from playlist, it will ask if you want whole playlist. It will also download any subtitling as separate file. In case of Rumble, I think URL of the page containing the video will suffice. There is a free version and a paid version. I opted to get a paid version for one of my PCs while other PCs have a free version. Paid version has more features. It is well worth trying.
Products page is: https://www.4kdownload.com/34
Over the years I found that videos I liked in the past and may have bookmarked, eventually disappear. Now, where I think its worth taking copy, I do. Side benefit is that advertising gets scrubbed along the way.
Interestingly, I saw a series of videos on Russian cities, titled something like “Then and Now” where “Then” may have been 15-20 years back. If there was any truth in the idea that Russia is totally corrupt and Putin is wealthiest man on this planet, these videos disprove that. These videos clearly showed cities that were run down get upgraded and cleaned-up in just a couple of decades. For that to happen, a lot of money had to be invested and if corruption was pervasive, then Russia would have been competing with Ukraine for the bottom as total disaster area. Unfortunately I never downloaded any and my recent attempt to find them was fruitless. Only video I found was someone else’s review of such an video. It seems these videos are not suitable for western audiences so they have been removed, most likely the channel that held them itself was removed by YouTube.
BTW, I watch occasional videos from Mariupol. Although heavily damaged, the reconstruction being undertaken is in full swing and it is amazing how much of new construction has been done. Many of multi-storey building had to be torn down and new buildings have been built very quickly, with each 4 or 10 storey apartment block being built within a timeframe of 4 to 5 months. Where possible, damaged apartment blocks are being repaired, as well as schools and hospitals. If nothing else, Azov fighters made sure that no window was left untouched. Just about every apartment block being repaired had to have all of its windows replaced, and not just the glass but whole window frames. To top it all off, water mains had to be replaced fully in many areas as pipes were totally rusted out. This also applied to central heating pipes and also roadways. It seems not much investment in cities was done in Ukraine for the last 30 years. Same story as was the case for Crimea but at least Crimea did not suffer from vengeful Azov fighters. As Crimea was rebuilt, so will rest of Novorossiya.
You can just go to RT (shows) either using a VPN or direct with the Yandex or Brave browsers. EU may be more heavily censored than US though (go figure), can’t say but any of those work for me from the US.
I suppose I risk some blue and yellow fly on the wall here lobbying to close those paths, like they did when forcing the UK’s National Gallery to rename Degas’ ‘Russian Dancers’ to ‘Ukrainian Dancers’ just because they sort of look like Ukrainians in a wheat field. Russians of course have no wheat fields and look entirely different. (Indeed it happened and more).
https://nypost.com/2022/04/04/degas-russian-dancers-is-renamed-ukrainian-dancers-by-uks-national-gallery/
Frankly, I looked really hard at this picture array and couldn’t find a single wolfsangle or black sun patch on any of them.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=degas+russian+dancers&t=opera&iax=images&ia=images
Best show ever! Thanks, boys.
Except that Levelle stepped on Gibert Doctorow’s punch line about the true meaning of hypersonic missles – MOMENTUM. They can punch through mountains, and destroy underground bases without even making a mess on the surface. So everybody’s plans to survive a nuclear war are now obsolete. Of course, they have to pretend that this is not true, but it looks to me like the crusaders in Washington don’t even believe it. They need to hear it a few more times.
I would argue that it’s not that the cabalists in Washington DC believe or not in the capacity of hypersonic missiles.
As Mr.Lavelle said their moto is messianic, hence and by nature nothing can alter the course of their rabid crusade. It’s not only Russia, it’s Christianity in the visor.
But their hubris has taken a tone down, thanks to those missiles, because not all the zealots have the suficient morbidity to face armagedon.
As Mr.Lavrov said ‘they are an agonizing predator, which you have to let die by itself’.
I could barely make out Doctorow’s comments.
First off, great discussion. So nice to be able to listen to such intelligent, reasonable men discuss the situation.
But… I dunno, maybe Russia would take the “Korean Solution”. According to the former Mossad guy’s leak, they were willing to settle on something like that a few months ago. Of course the Mossad guy’s story could be BS.
That said, as you know, I’m not as enthusiastic about Russia’s military prospects given the simple facts on the ground on the battlefield.
1. Russia has failed to achieve material territorial gains over the many months. In fact, they have given up significant early gains; e.g. Kherson
2. Even if the kill ratio is 10 to 1 in Russia’s favor, if Ukraine has lost around 200,000 troops, then Russia has lost around 20,000, which is a lot in one year
3. Whatever the kill ratio is, Russia has not even been able to secure the new Russian Federation territories (referendum) in Eastern Ukraine. Ukraine still lobs shells into the cities and Russia is unable to stop it. Not a good sign.
4. Russia has been unable to significantly interrupt, let alone eliminate, Ukro/NATO supply lines bringing troops, weapons and ammo to the front (or a few miles from it) – I consider that alone as the most clear cut evidence of great Russian weakness and/or incompetence
5. We are told the Ukrainian military is down to grabbing teenagers and old men off the streets and sending them to the front, barely trained and barely armed. Yet the Russians are unable to decisively prevail over these poorly trained and poorly armed teenagers and old men.
6. Do we really know for sure that the Russians can keep up the volume of artillery and missile fire indefinitely? I bet they cannot. Prove me wrong.
7. Russia appears unable to shut down Ukrainian infrastructure, like electricity. Yes, they fire a large volume of missiles and drones and do some damage – and the the Ukrainians appear to repair it all fairly quickly.
8. Russian air does not have superiority. In fact, based on what I can see, it rarely flies sorties. Russia is unable to shut down Ukro air defense.
The above are simple facts and observations that even the die hard Russia cheerleaders must concede if they take a deep breath and don’t react emotionally.
I do not buy that Russia doesn’t care about territory – why have referenda and incorporate new territory? Why draw red lines about attacks on Russian territory if one doesn’t care about it? I do not buy that Russia doesn’t care about time. Only a crazy person (or one making desperate excuses) thinks that politically, economically, strategically, tactically, supply-wise, casualty-wise that wars can go on for ever because time doesn’t matter.
If Russia cannot prevail over what they have been facing, then 100,000 to 150,000 well trained US + NATO troops would represent something far more formidable than a mere speed bump. IMO, it really might be enough to stop Russia from taking Odessa or any other objectives west of their current front lines.
So the Korean style deal might look tempting to Russia, crappy as it is with its assurance of more armed conflict in the future.
On the other hand, if Russia really does jump off a major offensive and starts to fight like it’s a great military power at war – and an existential war at that – then, sure, no Korea deal. We have been waiting for that major offensive since Winter started. Soon it will be Spring. The truth of this thing will be known soon. I am becoming more skeptical of the hyper pro-Russia outlook than ever before. It just doesn’t add up. Maybe both sides need a break to re-group and re-think.
A lot of people have some of the same questions.
But:
Russia could not just do big arrow offensives – not because of the fact that 404 army was formidable and big-arrow offensives mean a lot of loss of life on the RF side. I think a bigger reason is that any big arrow offensive would mean a possible big reaction on the part of the west. In the West we live in a constant state of hysteria – people are so manipulated by the MSM that they are constantly living on edge, from one crisis to another – this last year has been a true bonanza for CNN/big tech ilk – they finally get to scare the crap out of everyone and spin them into their web of lies. This means that a big offensive with an immediate destruction of 404 armies could provoke a mass media campaign in USA/UK shouting for an actual intervention -> which would result in WW3 because western politicians live and die by the polls and they have no spine to resist such calls.
I think we have seen a lot of evidence up to today that the west is in an existential fight – from Nordstream to talk of nuclear war to sending tanks and now talk of jet fighters to escalating sanctions, attacks on Crimea bridge and inside Russia – it is clear that decisions are made day to day in DC/London based on media pressure and for PR and to simply push the Russians to over-react and provide a context for a Western intervention – same media being complicit in the narrative but also not willing to let up the pressure calling for an even stronger response.
Contrasted to this is the upcoming elections in Turkey. I think Russia has a deadline to finish this business by May. If Erdogan loses the elections and a pro-western government is installed in Ankara – Russia will lose a huge ally/friend and potentially get an opponent that could create a lot of issues for Moscow. Strategically, Russia needs Turkey to continue the SMO to its desired end. From this point of view, time is running out for Putin and he is hard pressed to finish this as soon as possible. At the very least he has to factor in the possibility of Turkey turning hostile – it is, after all, the 2nd largest NATO army and it controls access through the straits. Putin’s only hope in the case of Erdogan loss is that Erdogan has managed to completely cleanse the Turkish state apparatus of anyone pro-Western, which is a real possibility, given that Erdogan has jailed 100s, if not 1000s of police and army generals, colonels etc. all the way down to regular soldiers – there may simply be nobody left to support an anti-Erdogan/anti-Russian policy maker in Turkey by now.
You make some valid points but consider that Russia only had 3x the population of 404 at the start of the SMO. Russia’s army (including its deterrent forces) were not really designed to be offensive in nature nor posture. They have the capability but it is not their doctrine (contrast this to USA/UK – where doctrine is domination and aggression). Hence, this is kind of a new war for them – where they have to fight a NATO trained/equipped powerful army that has had 8 years to dig trenches and plan/prepare/train. People like Ritter and MacGregor have said the same thing – back in Feb 2022, 404 had the 2nd most powerful army in Europe – this army was then re-enforced with tens of thousands of Polish and other foreign mercenaries, real-time intelligence and in fact the whole of the western reconnaissance apparatus, weaponry etc. from the whole of the west and supported continuously. Fighting that combination was never going to be easy.
I personally think that the big offensives have started. They will be more of a large attritional waves of attacks on multiple fronts but without the big tank/arrow incursions of 50km a day as people dream. They are/will be more like large waves of gobbling up 404 manpower in wide fronts but shallow depths. Think 5km deep grind on a 100km wide front where everything inside that area is systematically destroyed. Everyone thought that RF has forces amassed everywhere to mask the point of entry and pin down the rest of 404 forces elsewhere. I actually think that the reason for amassing forces everywhere is that points of entry will be everywhere, as I outlined above.
Anyway, my $.02 of armchair generalship 🙂
I have a little bit different idea. I think the Russians are holding their own and, yes, have an edge that would, all things being equal, allow them to prevail in a long drawn out war.
I also think the Russians were smart enough to realize that all of the new technology had altered warfare to some unknown extent and in unknown ways. IMO, they have been cautious for that reason. Probe, test, learn, probe, test, learn some more. And all of that knowing that this could – perhaps likely – would end up in direct warfare with the US and select NATO countries. So keep reserves. Keep testing weapons systems and tactics.
Whatever they’ve learned will determine whether or not there is a big Macgregor-esque offensive – or a Korean-esque truce.
In the meanwhile, the Russians don’t appear so super and they are giving some elements in the west some bad ideas. Thankfully, it seems that some other other elements in the west are seeing whatever the Russians are seeing and also, apparently, deciding that a truce is the best idea.
I do not think the status of the Ukrainian military figures in one iota. They were always a disposable Petri dish and a Hail Mary/would be great if it worked but don’t count on it. The real question is – and always has been – how would NATO fair in direct battle against Russia.
Jezeli Rosja boi się pójść głębiej w Ukrainę z powodu Nato to w pełni przegrała wojne
Should add that my outlook is premised on what I think are some of the game changing technological revelations of this war – much the way that machine guns became a game changing revelation in WW1, only understood after the shooting started
1. Air defense systems are so good that air as a deciding factor in peer to peer 1st world warfare is a thing of the past.
2. Drones and associated targeting systems have reduced the impact of armor on the battlefield.
3. Modern 1st world combat is forced to be close quarters infantry engagements and artillery duels, provided the artillery is mobile enough to shoot and scoot.
4. Precision guided missiles have surpassed air assets for striking rear areas and supply lines, but missiles do not have the loiter time that aircraft do. Drones that identify targets for missiles have loiter time, but are subject to AD and there are not enough targeting drones on either side to make up for the inability of aircraft to fly.
So given an infantry and artillery slugfest as the nature of the combat, 100,000 to 150,000 (or more) US + NATO troops + arty + drones + missiles would represent a serious challenge to the Russians
I still do not understand why Russian drones aren’t covering Ukro supply routes.
This is what old school winning looks like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYTaddev6KQ
Maybe Russia knows they have “limited” capacity to fight an all out war, thereby reserving the best weapons/personnel strictly for that outcome…I mean, think about it, if they throw everything they have at disposal and wins against Ukraine, so what? The war is not about Ukraine and NATO will continue their plans to destroy Russia, leaving Russia depleted and out of their best arsenals….Is it any wonder “why” China would be joined at the hip w/ Russia? N. Korea can play support role via 200k troops while China assists w/ logistics and supplies of all things war related, including manufacturing of certain weapons…artilleries? drones?
You get it Tony. Certain dills, new and old, don’t as they are based in Hollywood versions of reality. Screaming from their trailer parks; Hoorah! We are the greatest! Why doesn’t Russia carpet bomb and kill millions as we do?
Russia is fighting with one arm behind it’s back and it’s best toys are hidden away until the real playtime begins. And then it will fight with both arms and fists full of shiny new toys.
Yeah, sure, brilliant as usual, “grr”.
What are they going to do when fighting “with both arms and fists full of shiny new toys” that they didn’t want to do before? Why did Russia wait to reveal this this awesome fighting ability? I’ve seen images of towns like Soledar. You know what? They look like they’ve been carpet bombed. I know they weren’t, but the end result is the same. So don’t give me some crap about nice Russians not wanting hurts kittens or damage civilian stuff. You have a religious faith and clearly are not a thinker. We already know why (explained a few posts back)
I don’t pay attention to Hollywood. I have studied how real battles and wars were won.
Like Germany after WW2
Your mother knows more about fighting than you.
Stick to football 🤣
I think that’s part of it.
No one knows what all out warfare looks like in this day and age. I think a fair amount of learning has occurred over the past year. Still more learning to be had though as NATO has not supplied Ukraine with their best stuff. Russia hasn’t deployed their best stuff either.
There’s a bit of a poker game going on.
NATO has “best stuff”? LMAO.
Everyone has limited capacity for all-out war by definition
Grande
While I understand your objections, I don’t agree with the premise behind them. Namely, that Russia does care about time and territory so they are not doing well. I want to say that you are not totally wrong–Russia does indeed care about territory, as evidenced by their annexation of the four Oblasts. But they care about territory only as it pertains to their stated war aims. Two of which are the defense of the Russian speaking people in the Ukraine (primarily the Donbas) and the defense of Crimea. Those territories are of primary importance; in others they have shown a willingness to be far more flexible. We are seeing only advances in the Donbas because of its importance. The significance of the Donbas is immediate; the other territories less so.
Additionally, time has always been something Russia has used in wars. They are patient to, what we might consider, a fault. Russia has a history of building up their forces and waiting until they are able to overwhelm their enemies. In spite of Western propaganda and rhetoric (coupled with poor historical understanding by many) Russia does not simply throw forces into battle halfhazardly. They are not opposed to long periods of preparation prior to major offensives. Only after achieving decisive advantages in troops and equipment will they begin an offensive. Operation Bagration, in 1944, is an excellent example of how the Russians prefer to conduct war.
More importantly, I think that Russia is very concerned about troop losses in this conflict. That’s just the nature of modern warfare, to be honest. There’s really no nation on earth where the leadership is as in control as many people seem to imagine–Russia simply cannot throw away the lives of their troops without being worried about the effect on the “home front”. As a result, Russia has been fighting a war of attrition that results in heavy losses from their enemies and few(er) for them. Even in that, they need to be careful though and their lengthy planning and buildup reflects that.
I expect a Russian offensive in the (near?) future but I’m not sure how it will look. I think the time of “WW2 style blitzkriegs” is likely over (except against small countries with limited military). But this war has surprised a lot of people in the sheer scale of its material consumption. How will a modern offensive look in light of that? I expect it will look much slower than many people will like. Then again, Ukraine’s army may be degraded enough to simply collapse when the hammer descends. We’ll see in due time….
Let’s see, those well-trained NATO Troops are the Woke of Society. What a joke! The Reports I’m seeing from those on the ground are counter to everything you just said. You want to believe that rubbish, go ahead, this Vietnam War Navy Vet of the Security Group Command doesn’t, and I’m not the only vet by a long shot! You get into a land war with Russia, you’re in trouble. The ground reports to date from those not bought off by the Globalist Rot like our Military and the NATO liars it leads speak to the contrary of their rot BIG TIME!
Bro,
You’re reading me wrong. I don’t think the US should be involved in a war against Russia – and if it were directly involved, it would be nothing but misery for the US.
I’m just saying that Russia has made mistakes and isn’t ten feet tall and Ukraine isn’t as beat as some think it is. So Russia might take a Korea style deal after all. It seems to be the wanted originally.
I’m just trying to see things objectively and, given objective facts, how the US govt might bend them given their quirks and biases. The pro-Russians are bending reality a bit too.
Newhill,Stop trying to be objective.You suck at it.US is not directly involved in Ukraine?REALLY?
Don’t be obtuse. You suck at it. You know what mean. Divisions of US and Polish troops (+ whoever else).
He sucks at being obtuse? Then what, he’s acutely accurate in his comment?
I’d hate to be you, Eric. Your mind spins around like a tasmanian devil named Taz, trying to tie together too many disparate lines of reasoning.
So am I which brought me to the conclusion that you’re wrong! Ground reports in open source counter what you and those like you say! Ukraine is getting their asses kicked, that even coming directly from Ukes on the ground! And I’m not your bro!
The maps doesn’t back up what you say.
Look at a map from May, one from August and a current map. Compare. I don’t see the great progress. The Ukrainians are still fighting. The battle of Bahkmut has been going on for months. The battlefield of Zaparosia (sp? where that nuclear power plant is) has been going for almost a year. Who’s fighting the Russians? Ghosts?
If the Ukrainian Chief of staff gives a figure of 257,000 KIA (I believe numbers much higher)and the official number of their total regular armed forces is 250,000 personel….then Russia has destroyed the entire armed forces plus some and are working on the other 350,000 reservists and paramilitary troops… according to the best official numbers I can retrieve…Now throw in missing and wounded….how about just wounded in case missing is in KIA tally….2 to 1 ratio and that’s 760,000 total casualties give or take few thousand. That is the destruction of the entire military….trained and equipped by NATO for the last several years….so territorial gains are literally the last thing obviously on Russian high command’s mind when the enemy is conveniently arriving within artillery range for destruction. Stopping random artillery fire on civilian areas is next to impossible with such a long front and the area from which lone artillery units are shooting and scooting. Single tracked howitzers or mobile MLRS systems…. unguided or GPS targeted systems. I’m guessing NATO surveillance is giving real-time guidance regarding Russian capabilities and Windows of exploitation. So I argue the annihilation of the Ukrainian forces alone is a testament of Russian victories and I suspect the tactics will change to more conventional ones very soon. As far as Russia’s munitions holding out… Western estimates had them running out of ordinance about 9 months ago and yet they still blasting away at 10 times Ukrainian expenditure so I suspect they have enough or we would have seen a reduction in fire missions to conserve ammo.
But the Russians, even now, still struggle for every square mile they take. Against who? Against what? The Ukrainians are not “annihilated” – maybe they will be soon. Been hearing that for a while.
You can make some good points, but you also tend to assume that everything is done from a perspective you either hold or agree with. If we return to Von Clausewitz we see that the Russians are indeed destroying the opposing army, in that strategy territory is less relevant. If the army is obliterated territory comes easily later.
Regardless in time we shall see who had the correct war strategy, the Russian General Staff or yourself.
The feint attack on Kiev. The Russians all but admitting they had hoped to force a settlement with Ukraine. They weren’t prepared for a long war and grossly misjudged the west’s resolve. How is what they were shooting for different that the “Korean solution”? – other than a west more hostile and determined than they imagined.
Can the Russians continue to produce ordnance at the needed rate, one that outpaces the west? Can the Russians politically and economically continue a long war? I don’t know. Those are now the important questions.
I’m not going to automatically assume the west is so deranged and bungling that they haven’t come up with some fair assessments around those questions and that assessments do not inform the the politicians.
You may want to make a similar assumption about Russia as well. Shock therapy for Kiev in hope of a quick capitulation was plan A; what they are now doing I assume is Plan B. And there may well be multiple alternate strategies in place depending on which way the west wants to go at this point.
Russia has not withstood western sanctions by luck. Its economic response appears to have been well planned for in advance in conjunction with the whole BRICS initiative. This implies that it planned for a longer, larger hybrid war. It would be safest for the US to assume that the military contingencies have been well gamed out as well.
Assumes Clausewitz knew everything there is to know. Also assumes selected, isolated, statements are representative of the whole, like a Clausewitizian holograph. I don’t think they are, or he is, that magical.
Eric
Putin and Xi are having a summit soon.
The neocons have made it clear that China is next. Just as Iran was next after Iraq, and Hezbollah were next after Assad. The neocons even like making maps of what the world will look like after their “successes”.
That is why Iran made damn sure that Iraq was a failure, and Hezbollah/Iran made sure Syria flopped for the neo cons.
China will not let Russia “run out of weapons”, for precisely the same reason.
Incidentally, the guys at The Gaggle claimed the first train of 2023 to arrive in Russia from China contained a vast shipment of machinery to double Russia’s missile building capacity. I haven’t seen this reported elsewhere, but it sounds plausible.
Glasshopper,
That is all plausible. However, I think China’s economy is so deeply tied to ours that it has to watch its step. And yes, I recognize that goes both ways. In fact, China can likely economically damage the US far more than the US damage China.
What Putin and Xi decide is to be determined.
Alright, lets try to refute logically your points, one by one:
1. RU allowed Napoleon to take Moscow, and still beat him never to recover again. Losing strategically not important city emptied of pro RU population in order to inflict heavy casualties to your opponent and use those forces in other more important areas is quite logical. Also, they needed big “losses” like Kherson and Kharkov in order to better mobilize their population.
2. It is a lot ofcourse, but we are talking about well entrenched opponent, with almost limitless supplies that is fighting to the last man and not afraid of losses. When you fight against such an opponent you cannot rush it because if that opponent is willing to die 10:1, they would much better prefer to die 2:1 or 1:1 in hand to hand close combat, so why give them the opportunity? Going slow to conserve your strength makes sense.
3. You have to understand that what UKR is doing is having this enormous well prepared and dug in 150×150 km fortress (8 years of preparation), from which they fire few shells/missiles on a city and run away – its almost like guerilla tactics, just from your territory, baiting RU side into making a suicide run against the fortress.
On the long run its not going to make any military difference, but on the short run it is effective weapon to spread the terror and unify RU population against them.
4. This is ofcourse silly but will better be explained in point 8. The reason why it is silly is because only in Holywood movies can you accurately hit moving target that is not visible to the naked eye or directly laser tracked and similar. If your opponent has endless resources (and US money printing is endless at this point) they could simply make many many smaller depots all over the place, most of them dug in, and use enormous fleet of civilian vehicles to transport supplies all over the place.
The only way to make sure that nothing moves is to have total air supperiority (i.e. aircraft loitering above and working on moving targets), which is not possible under current condition and will be better explained under point 8.
5. It doesn’t matter how inexperienced person is if you put him in a trench and let him wait for you. If you jump into that trench you risk getting killed because on such close quarters experience is not that important. So sure, they die in trenches, but then UKR side just send new guys to fill in the trenches and as long as they can do it (i.e. there are people to fill in the trenches) trenches are very hard to take.
Brian Berletic has a set of very good videos explaining why it is very hard to prevail against trenches, since only way to kill the person in the trench is to lob a shell inside the trench, and due to zig-zaging nature of the trenches, and due the fact that shells are not really 50cm precise but more like few meters precise, you need many many shells to kill one guy in a trench, and that is why this is all lasting so long.
Ofcourse, with air superiority it would be easier, but since it is not possible at this point (will be better explained at point 8), it takes a lot of time to clean things enough in order to let soldiers get in, and even then they take casualties.
6. As far as I know, Soviet Union had active stockpile of shells that could provide ammunition for 5 million army for 3 yeas of full war fighting, so yes, even in its decreased state, RU is able to produce wast quantities (latest figure I heard is that they are producing 10k shells a day), have prepared for this war in past decade (figure I heard was arround 20 million shells prepared in last decade), and also have a huge quantities of old soviet shells that need some refurbishment, endless supply of raw materials, which means that capacity is there.
Ofcourse, they could theoreticaly drop to only current production of 10k/day, but even that is twice more then UKR had spent at any given time, and about 10 times more then UKR is spending now.
As for missiles, I don’t have hard data, but the issue is that they do have manufacturing capacity and endless raw materials, so why would they be able to create at least moderate amounts of them?
People usually mention semiconductors, but RU has domestic production of little bit outdated semiconductors that is enough for their military needs, and when I say little bit outdated, what I mean is that it only differs in size – chip with similar performance of 60nm is tens of times bigger then same performance chip of 7nm would be, but who cares about chip size when missile has 1.000kg or tank has 50.000 kg? It matters for mobile phones, but not really for heavy military purposes.
7. It is not that it is unable to destroy infrastructure, it is that they only want to degrade it, not destroy it – simply put, they are not really attacking power plants, but mostly just power distribution so yes, it is relatively easy to fix, still, whole of UKR is having almost constant blackouts, and my guess is that they want those blackouts to more easily recognize military targets – i.e. target that always has electricity even when network fails is most likely important military target. They don’t want permanent UKR blackouts because that would cause deaths of millions of people for lack of heating, food preservation capacities, water, etc…
You can say that they are not really good or whatever, but it is a fact that they have not attacked electrical infrastructure for more then 6 months since start, and it is silly to think that they could not have done it if they really wanted it.
8. Exactly, RU is unable to completely wipe out UKR air defenses because:
– At the start of the fighting, UKR had several hundred very advanced anti-air systems, probably second or third most powerful anti air defenses in the world (just google UKR starting equipment, and you will see 300 – S300 systems, and many hundreds of others, plus thousands of stingers and similar for low altitude flights)
– UKR is heavily supported by West’s intelligence – for example, all over Polish and Romanian borders, West’s awacs are flying 24/7 and providing real time radar coverage above UKR skies. That allows UKR to have their radars turned off to avoid detection. If for any reason RU air asset crosses more deeply into UKR held territory, awacs would warn UKR and then UKR could prepare missile, turn on radar, execute shoot down, turn off radar and move away before retalitory strike would arrive.
Therefore, only way for RU to have full air superiority would be to shoot down west awacs (which would not be hard, as they are large mobile radar planes) and probably even satellites, which would ofcourse be used as a pretext for full WW3 escalation, and that is not in RU, or for that effect, anyone else’s interest.
In any case, RU is having a great advantage, and almost all the casualties they have are thanks to Wests intelligence help, because without Wests satellites and similar intel, UKR side would not be able to know what is going on around them, however since they have full intel support, they can fire on positions provided by satellites, or prepare defenses on places wher RU is about to attack, (which means that you cannot make surprise attack against UKR since they have hundreds of satellites preventing that), thus cause casualties even tho RU side is having an enormous advantage overall.
WhoKnows says.
Useful and edifying post for Eric to chew over. Thanks.
Whoknows,
Thanks for thoughtful response. I am not set in my mind. Just trying to understand where this going. As I said, I think, all things being equal, Russia would prevail in the long run. However, all things never stay equal. I have been firmly in the pro-Russia camp. I was year ago. I was n early December when it appeared the Russians were massing for a huge attack. Now I’m wavering again. The facts I pointed out are incompatible with the hyper pro-Russia narrative. There are other facts of concern, but I wanted to stick to battlefield observations on which most everyone can more or less agree. All relevant to LJ’s post b/c would be a big factor in whether or not Russia agrees to a Korean style deal.
Your response is, mostly, an explanation (and a little bit of excuse making) of why we’re seeing what we’re seeing on the battlefield. I won’t argue with your explanations other than to say they somewhat support where I’m coming from. Bottom Line = the Ukrainians and their NATO enablers are capable of stymying the Russians. You even agree to that.
I do want to call out your point about AWACS. How will AWACS not be a factor in the future? Russia will shoot them down over NATO airspace? I don’t think so. That is probably a bridge too far for Russia – and the kind of reality that could drive the decision to take a Korean style deal.
@Eric Newhill,
But things are not equal, they are progressively advancing in RU favor, and here are some examples:
– 150×150 fortress is crumbling, brick by brick (Bakhmut, Ugledar, Marinika, etc), and actually its now attacked on at least 3-4 axis at the same time, which was never previously the case
– UKR is running out of shells (its around 1-2k per day now instead of 6-7k at peak), and west itself shows/admits that they cannot replenish them fast enough
– UKR is running out of people (many videos show people past their prime, street hunts and age reduction to 16), while RU side have easily tripled their numbers and can easily get more if needed (tho they avoid it for obvious reasons)
– UKR is running out of equipment, which is the reason why they constantly ask for more, i.e. ask yourself, if their story is true, they had almost 1000 tanks at start, then they received at least 500 more from West, then they captured almost 500 from RU (their claim, totally unbelievable btw), so if they had 1.500-2.000 tanks all together, what would 100 or 300 more achieve in total? Only reason they need them is because existing ones are heavily degraded and/or destroyed, so its better to have any then none.
Same story about aircraft, regardless who operates them or their quantity, if RU cannot move over UKR air defenses, what do you think are chances for West aircraft to achieve anything? RU also has its own awacs equivalents, but they have several times more advanced anti air systems, therefore no amount of aircraft (and especially token forces od 50, 100 or 200) would be able to do anything, especially since UKR itself had something like 250 aircraft and similar amount of helicopters at the start.
In any case Wests awacs are bother but they are not really something that can turn the tide, because it is not hard for RU side to win even without air dominance – it just takes longer
I wanted also to go over all I think happened but there is no need in general, as only thing that could brake RU at this point is if RU people would rebel against the war which at this point appears to be highly unlikely – and even West oriented polling houses are admitting that…
WhoKnows,
Really, seriously, I am not a deep state bot. I do not believe one bit of the ISW or Ukrainian propaganda. I do not watch CNN. Please can we get that out of the way?
I agree, that at the moment, the Russians are prevailing, slowly, but surely. One of my objectives is moderate the pro-Russia propaganda, which is what a lot of that narrative is e.g. Martynanov. Bakhmut, Ugledar, Marinika, etc. are falling only after tough, prolonged fights. The Ukrainians are doing an impressive job of resisting. The are not defenseless untrained teenagers and old men. That is impossible bunk on a par with the garbage we get from US or UK MSM. If it was true, the Russians would have surrounded Kiev weeks ago. I don’t like bunk, and I really don’t like bunk in an echo chamber. It has a way of convincing people that it’s real – then all kinds of bad decisions are made based on a false understanding of reality.
I don’t know about Ru’s troop levels. Everything I read about these battles is highlighting the Wagner group’s involvement and not the Ru Army.
Anyhow, no disagreement that Ru is grinding the Ukro military at glacial speeds. All thing being equal, the glacier will continue to move down the valley.
What makes things no longer equal? All kinds of goodies that NATO is introducing into Ukraine, everything from combat troops to long range missiles that can hit targets in Crimea and lots and lots of stuff in between.
I really think you need to look at what you’re saying. Old men and teenagers can slow the Russians and make them battle for every square yard, for months, but several NATO divisions are a problem for Russia?
How sure are you that Russia can drag this war on for another year? How about two years? The pro-Russia echo chamber says they can do it no problem, but that is based on what analysis? Faith?
IMO, what NATO is going to send should not be summary dismissed. It can and will do a lot of damage to Russian forces. If Russia is determined to win, then the NATO stuff won’t stop that from ultimately happening. It will though make it a exponentially more costly, for one, and, worse, it opens doors to escalations of nightmare proportions. Then it comes down to a game of chicken between Russia and the neocons. Who will send the big scary existential bombs outside of Ukrainian borders first?
@Eric Newhill
1 / I don’t think that you are bot, I think that you are worried individual because you don’t really understand what is happening, as everyone of us was in that stadium at some point because RU side is not really openly showing/explaining their plans, but I still need some structure to properly answer to you, so that’s why I’ll add some numbers here
2 / The point is that Bakhmut, Ugledar, Marinika are not really fights, they are situation where one side is relentlessly pounding the other while other sits in trenches and occasionally make some counter attack doe to intel info.
Ofcourse, some of those counter attacks do make casualties, and they also have some casualties when storiming trenches, but you cannot really say that its fighting, since its not really, at least not “fair” type
3 / Why do you think that RU wants to surround Kiev? At some point after total collapse of UKR forces for sure, but now when they still have to face an relatively effective army? Why why would they want that?
4 / The reason why you don’t hear much about other troops is because they are not promoting themselves, while Chechens and Wagnerites do.
5 / As Brian Berletic said multiple times, any kind of equipment that West introduces, RU already has, even better and more numerous, so if that capability by itself can win the war, RU would win it first anyway.
6 / Where did I say that NATO divisions are problems for RU? They likely are not, which they will find out if they get into direct conflict.
The biggest problem at this point is that RU are keeping at least one of their hands behind their backs in order not to provoke something more risky, but it appears that it might not be enough
7 / Actually, I think that RU has about 6 months time to make obvious gains or they will face some potential problems and will probably have to do another draft in order to let those firstly drafted go home…
8 / Well we can all only hope that nukes will not be flying since that isn’t really in anyone’s interest, and I don’t think that even West elites believe that they can get away with it, otherwise they would most likely already start it
Excellent points to respond to Mr. Newhill’s jaundiced (IMHO) view of things.
I have come to very similar conclusions. Thank you for elucidating them.
Hope springs eternal!What you state as facts are IN FACT your opinions.Russia simply is not prone to brinkmanship as the west is.Do you think Russia cannot destroy the Alaska pipeline with a single missle?THe Russians do not have air dominance over Ukraine,eastern EU?The Russians could not interdict everything entering Ukraine.Just say NO to the coolade.
This is out place.It was meant for Mr.Newhill.
I am very sorry but you are obviously very ill-informed. Maybe watch less cnn…? What you write is exactly the crap the mainstream media has been preaching for a year.
Unbelievable how persistent these lies are even after one year.
Haven’t you ever wondered how the Russians manage to fire 20,000 missiles PER DAY? Doesn’t quite fit with the claim that “the Russians are running out of ammunition”. And for how many times is Putin now ill with cancer or dead? Yawn…
All great rebuttals to newhill’s reguritating MSM/Pentagon propaganda. These explanations will help others that don’t know enough to understand the reality.
However as far as newhill is concerned, don’t bother. He is either wilfully ignorant (and ignorance is a choice), or he is just another FUD spreading troll.
Don’t feed trolls, they thrive on it and threads then become clogged with counter arguments to the trolls (and ignoramuses).
And that is is their intended aim.
This isn’t complicated — it’s like how carnivores in the wild “avoid” one another knowing that in a full-out battle even the victor would not emerge unscathed.
Same with NATO and Russia — except that Russia is being the more “conservative” one here. Russia is simply “taking its time” because it ultimately knows that:
1. NATO is not that weak and has been holding back. Like Sun Tzu’s famous quote, “Appear weak when you are strong” — those reports about “NATO weakness” are likewise fake propaganda easily from even NATO itself just to lull the Russians (and any NATO opponents) into a false sense of security and try to get them to underestimate the real capabilities of NATO. (Probably works well on the NATO populace too trying to get them to sympathize aka “donate” to the NATO cause as well).
2. Russia is not that strong, unlike the NATO empire that has already been rapidly expanding for many decades now. It knows that, and is thus forced to play slow “war of attrition” tactics trying to conserve whatever manpower/munitions/etc instead.
3. Russia also knows that NATO is easily willing to throw any of its European/Asian/etc colonies “under the bus” to achieve its aims as well (so, “not enough Ukrainians” is not going to be a problem). But, what “colonies” can Russia throw under the bus for its own aims? None?
Hence, for any bit of victory Russia pretty much has no choice but to *not* overextend and just continue to slowly drudge on hoping that NATO’s “internal corruption” or whatever might “eventually” take NATO down from the inside. Having lots of internal resources can help make a Russia a “tough nut to crack”, but at the end of the day, this “nut” is playing a slow military defense while the nutcrackers are throwing easily expendable forces at it (and they still have many more left to go)..
JamesK,
Yes. I see that too. That’s why I don’t think this war is over by a long shot. Who ultimately wins is undecided at this point.
Both sides are resorting to black/white, hyperbolic propaganda. Both sides predict the other being kaput any day now – and have been for many months! Lots of growling and slashing and killing of cubs. In reality, neither carnivore is certain of victory. Even if one assesses the ability to prevail, it also knows it will likely sustain serious, perhaps life threatening, injuries in the fight.
So a cease fire deal looks attractive to both sides.
That’s a lot of talk there dear.
Come up for some oxygen, you sound like ISW or CNN.
Ridiculous
Larry,
I tried four times now to watch this panel mtg.
It stops each time just after the intros.
‘if you want to jump in, please do . . . . ‘ and it stops.
Try on odysee:
https://odysee.com/@RT:fd/CT1002:e
Hi Larry. The first mention I saw anywhere of the possibility of a UMZ was in a very detailed article by John Helmer on his website in late November last year.
http://johnhelmer.org/ukraine-armistice-how-the-udz-of-2023-will-separate-the-armies-like-the-korean-dmz-of-1953/
In a couple of articles since that he has moved away from the idea as being likely to happen but never completely discounted it. Unlike the 4km wide DMZ in Korea the original concept for the Ukraine Demilitarised Zone would be 100km wide, completely depopulated, heavily mined and monitored round the clock by drones and electronic surveillance. The actual location would depend on where the fighting stopped.
Definitely worth a read.
Something is happening. There has been 2 days of almost non stop missile and drone attacks on Ukraine.
Putin made a statement today, that if the secret negotiations over the destruction of Nordstream fail.
He will give a 72 hr warning to evacuate areas that he will strike with nuclear weapons.
You will need google translate
https://warnews247.gr/apantisi-rosias-stis-apokalypseis-s-chers-an-oi-diapragmatefseis-apotychoun-o-v-poutin-tha-dosei-prothesmia-72-ores-prin-tin-chrisi-pyrinikon-oplon/
Russia should never accept a solution from the Empire of Lies, The Scorpion and the Frog.
I saw a video today on Rumble that the Gateway Pundit shared, supposedly showing a Ukrainian stockpile of chemical weapons and another showing drones using these chemicals against a couple Russian soldiers. If it is true, it would not the first time that these Ukronazi criminals have resorted to war crimes.
Loved the show, a gathering of great minds!
According to Amnesty International Ukraine has been commiting war crimes in the Donbass by shelling civilians with artillery.
There are two kinds of war. In one, a military force focuses on territory — taking it and then defending it. In the other, a military force focuses on destroying its enemy’s ability to fight. In the American Civil War, for example, the Union was remarkably unsuccessful in the first couple of years, despite its huge advantages in manpower and industry. Things only turned around when Grant took control of the Union forces. Grant focuses on destroying the Confederate armies – not territory. To do that he also destroyed the enemy’s capacity for mobility — ie. railroads. From the onset, the Russians have focused on attrition, and now infrastructure. Attacks on the power grid, reduce UAF mobility. The UAF focuses on territory from the outset, taking towns and cities and fortifying them. The Russians, by and large did not waste their rather meagre contingent on trying to take large cities. It never had any intention of taking Kiev early on – just tying up UAF forces. It needed Mariupol to secure Crimea. That took time but the Russians had time — and it ended up a prison for the Azovs. The “retreat” from Kherson was not in fact a retreat. The Russians just moved to better positions on the other side of the river from which they could decimate the UAF with impunity and move elite troops to other areas. The UAF has been effectively imprisoned in towns all along the current line of contact. Bakhmut is a good example. It is now pretty much surrounded. To this point it has just been a slaughterhouse for the UAF.. Now, it will probably be bypassed. In point of fact, Russia’s offensive started in December last year, if not earlier. You didn’t notice because you have been taught that “offensives’ are like Desert Storm. This is a different kind of war. If you want further details you can go to my site. https://julianmacfarlane.substack.com/ (News Forensics)
Great Comment, undeniable Truth!
Exactly, untill now the reality on the ground corroborates your views, great points !
It’s obvious that if the enemy is entrenched, and you don’t use the carpet bombing strategy, it will take time to grind their army. First objective of the SMO.
And Russian command has destroyed UAF at his own pace, managing the hysteria of the western zealots in the meantime. Those counter offensives by UAF have costed them dearly…
Eradicating the banderites and liberating the Novorussia from the aggressors, all while maintaining first ojbective a priority.
Russia has demonstrated a fortitude and a confidence in itself that is impressive.
Planning such a large scale of an operation is a daunting task, but Russian command has shown a brilliant ability and composure, of course with some inevitable mistakes here and there. But Man, they can be proud to have a fierce army to defend themselves.
“I made a decision to carry out a special military operation.
The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation.
It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory.”
“I want to emphasise again that all responsibility for the possible bloodshed will lie fully and wholly with the ruling Ukrainian regime.“
Sounds as if this is a combined arms police/anti-terrorist operation? The bloodshed is now mostly NATO members. sheep dipped. Since the original Ukraine military is splintered.
The trial part will be after the dust settles. But the dust will not settle for quite sometime.
The main part of this operation is the financial destruction of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency. And that goes way beyond the borders of the ukraine. It involves all countries that are in direct opposition to the hegemon.
I agree. I think it’s more important than people realise. What I’m not sure about is the timing. It could affect the war, however it may only kick after the war in which case the point is moot.
A UDZ is bad voodoo and I would wager that Russia/Putin would assert the same.
This war/conflict will end (and be settled) on Russia’s/Putin’s terms, not that or those of the West.
RTV reported the following today: “Russia didn’t start the fight but will finish it – Putin”
Personally, per my read of the War with the Uke NAZIS, Putin has had enough with the Zelensky Rot and his financiers, read the Globalist War Mongers for Profit who are guilty of crimes against humanity!
Thanks for some sense. Hard to claim conclusions based on delusions by ignoring what’s really happening on the Ground. Can’t do that today with the tech bulletins coming out hourly re what’s happening. Those who ignore that seminal truth aren’t worth a second thought!
This reminds me of a great line in Star Wars, altered here: “The more you tighten your grip, Uncle Sam, the more countries will slip through your fingers.”
Rumble is banned here in France since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, but no, there is no censorship ….
IMHO, I cannot believe that the Swedes and Danes, by virtue of their monitoring of their Baltic Sea respective domains would not also have known in advance, as well as, possibly, the Poles- AND Germans (at least those, such as Annalena Baerbock that have been in sub rosa contact with US officials to the chagrin of Chancellor Scholtz).
According to a recent poll cited by Andrey Martyanov, 82% of the German public believes that Russia is Germany’s No. 1 enemy. At the same Germans are becoming dissatisfied in greater and greater numbers with their government, and some now do know of Hersh’s article, even though their media is covering it up. I read a recent newsletter of Sahra Wagenknecht discussing it. She is one of the very few sensible German members of Parliament. I believe that knowledge of Hersh’s article will be disseminated more and more in Germany, and that it will provide addition impetus for the German people to protest and hopefully dislodge the Greens from their government.
IMHO, I cannot believe that the Swedes and Danes, by virtue of their monitoring of their Baltic Sea respective domains would not also have known in advance, as well as, possibly, the Poles- AND Germans (at least those, such as Annalena Baerbock that have been in sub rosa contact with US officials to the chagrin of Chancellor Scholtz).
According to a recent poll cited by Andrey Martyanov, 82% of the German public believes that Russia is Germany’s No. 1 enemy. At the same Germans are becoming dissatisfied in greater and greater numbers with their government, and some now do know of Hersh’s article, even though their media is covering it up. I read a recent newsletter of Sahra Wagenknecht discussing it. She is one of the very few sensible German members of Parliament. I believe that knowledge of Hersh’s article will be disseminated more and more in Germany, and that it will provide addition impetus for the German people to protest and hopefully dislodge the Greens from their government.
Hasn’t quite worked out that way, has it?- Col. Macgregor with emphasis on GROUND TRUTH not the opinions of Pundits!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTNdnCMyxLY
Excellent work, Truth, good find, thanks. I hate to miss Colonel Mac’s work. The guy works nonstop and on a wide variety of channels. Andrei Martyanov has a new one on Smoothiex12.blogspot.com, except it’s still on Smoothiex at youtube. Also not to be missed. Cheers!
IMO
the Russians feel the east bank of the Dnieper makes a very nice border.
This isn’t complicated — it’s like how carnivores in the wild “avoid” one another knowing that in a full-out battle even the victor would not emerge unscathed.
Same with NATO and Russia — except that Russia is being the more “conservative” one here. Russia is simply “taking its time” because it ultimately knows that:
1. NATO is not that weak and has been holding back. Like Sun Tzu’s famous quote, “Appear weak when you are strong” — those reports about “NATO weakness” are likewise fake propaganda easily from even NATO itself just to lull the Russians (and any NATO opponents) into a false sense of security and try to get them to underestimate the real capabilities of NATO. (Probably works well on the NATO populace too trying to get them to sympathize aka “donate” to the NATO cause as well).
2. Russia is not that strong, unlike the NATO empire that has already been rapidly expanding for many decades now. It knows that, and is thus forced to play slow “war of attrition” tactics trying to conserve whatever manpower/munitions/etc instead.
3. Russia also knows that NATO is easily willing to throw any of its European/Asian/etc colonies “under the bus” to achieve its aims as well (so, “not enough Ukrainians” is not going to be a problem). But, what “colonies” can Russia throw under the bus for its own aims? None?
Hence, for any bit of victory Russia pretty much has no choice but to *not* overextend and just continue to slowly drudge on hoping that NATO’s “internal corruption” or whatever might “eventually” take NATO down from the inside. Having lots of internal resources can help make a Russia a “tough nut to crack”, but at the end of the day, this “nut” is playing a slow military defense while the nutcrackers are throwing easily expendable forces at it (and they still have many more left to go).
Regarding point #3 — this is why Andrei Martyanov’s blog is sometimes pretty hilarious to read. He likes to claim the NATO empire + all its colonies do nothing but peddle woke army propaganda and are the ones “shivering in their pants” against Russia. In reality it’s quite the opposite — the side peddling stupid woke army propaganda is actually the side that’s quite assured of its own victory with zero concerns about any defeat (hence they don’t care about declining army recruitment numbers and stupid propaganda, etc). While, in turn, the side actually punishing those protesting the war (a la Russia) and running media campaigns to increase enrollment is the side that is actually/significantly less settled and assured.
Larry, thanks for sharing, it was awesome to watch. Take care
Jaz
The Infamous James Baker ” Not an Inch Eastward ” The long war spoken of by Vladimir Putin and others, is alluding to Serge Lavrov statment following the conclusion of talks in Dec 2021. A new security architecture for Europe is the goal of The SMO and that means NATO MUST AND WILL RETURN TO 1997 BORDERS. That’s my take on things. any less is not victory but defeat. I believe that the go slow approach is brilliant, keep the neocon libral basement crazies occupied in Eastern Europe, while not allowing NATO to pivot to CHINA. buying time for Russia China Iran India to build the BRI and dedollarize allowing the the BRICS + and EAEU to create alt markets for China Idustrial production.
Martyanov has been correct at every juncture for 15 years. It ain’t hilarious, it’s true. And deeply disturbing to thoughtful people. You might want to read his books. Marty is many things, his analysis being hilarious is not one of them. Your analysis of his work is utterly ridiculous. No offense intended.
I agree. I think it’s more important than people realise. What I’m not sure about is the timing. It could affect the war, however it may only kick after the war in which case the point is moot.
I think NATO’s fall back gamble is to force Russia to destroy enough of Ukraine that it can at that point negotiate an armistice, knowing full well that what’s left of it will fully and forever be in NATO’s pocket and be used accordingly as Russia’s nemesis forever and a day.
It’s thoroughly Machiavellian and it fits the protagonists to a T.
you guys are awesomeness. ty.
Eric Newhill……
Misconstrued on so many levels. Let me not count the ways.
Can we please jettison convicted child molester Scott Ritter. I know his takes are sound but just as I don’t want to hear O.J.’s take on football because I can’t get past what piece’s of shit they both are
I’d say that Eric Newhill is much more aligned with Russian bloggers than the rest of the commentators here. Russians have a stake in the war so they’re rightly concerned about everything that doesn’t go according to their expectations. Westerners mostly treat this like a football game. Whether they’re pro-Ukraine or pro-Russia doesn’t matter. Instead of analyzing the situation their goal is to find arguments that fits their wishes/bets, or at least defend something they’ve previously claimed. The bulk of the crowd over at Moon of Alabama has been consistently wrong for a year. Shouldn’t Ukraine run out of oil last May?
Having said that I disagree with Eric on several points. Territory is mostly important when the war is over. Right now only cutting supply routes, gaining hills etc is important. Prigozhin even teased Zelensky not to leave Bakhmut, calling him a coward if he did. Naturally, it’s a lot easier to have a meat grinder fixed in place with good supplies both of own soldiers and of enemy meat. The alternative is having to travel across vast distances and hold huge territories. On the other hand this makes it clear that the Russians’ attempt to encircle Slavyansk via Kharkov region was a spectacular operational failure.
Eric’s point 6 about Russia running out of missiles is in direct contradiction with his point 7 that they’re using a lot of missiles to take out fairly small electric installations that can be quickly repaired. The Russians aren’t that stupid.
Anyway, another point that hasn’t been discussed above is that Russia is now winning “the total war” hands down. Even Western sources predict that Russia will have positive economic growth this year. And the rest of the world is gradually turning away from the Global North over to the Global South. Russia shouldn’t take too many risks when the trend is in their favor.
Oh yes, Prigozhin said it would take a year to liberate Donbass and 2-3 years to go to Dnieper (he says a lot though…)
Putin will hold a state of the union speech February 21st, followed by a party with 200,000 participants. I doubt that will go down well among the soldiers, but at least the Russian leadership doesn’t seem overly concerned about the future.
I sent the Seymour Hersh article to a friend of mine who has family in Germany. Her response was:
I came across this in German and Austrian press 4 days ago and it was on ARD (German state tv, biggest non-private station) Faktfinder on Thursday. Investigations still ongoing, to my knowledge!
John Helmer at
http://johnhelmer.net/zatoka-strike-hits-french-tank-plan-for-ukraine-topples-moldova-prime-minister-british-ukrainian-plan-for-nord-stream-attack-revealed/
lays out a few points about the Seymour Hersh article, here they are as I understand them:
1. Why was the source anonymous, when the inner circle was quiet small, any intelligence officer could figure out the source in 20 minutes.
2. The British have very advanced deep sea diving technology and have been training the Ukrainians for the last 7-8 months.
3. Putin in his address said his intelligence identified the “Anglo-Saxons” as those behind the operation.
4. Liz Truss, messaged Blinken ” it’s done” a few minutes after the explosion.
Now that doesn’t mean the US wasn’t in on it and nothing in Europe happens without US approval. It means that Germany was attacked by Britain. (Those boys love to play 007.)
“The US did it” could be a way for the British to hide from Russia behind America’s skirt.
Another interesting peace of info was about the French tanks pledged to Ukraine. Those tanks are actually in Romania conducting maneuvers. The route from Romania to Ukraine is through Moldova over the Zatoka bridge. The Zatoga bridge was bombed by the Russians.
https://youtu.be/q7bPnRFDWvQ
I guess this is a message to NATO any delivery of weapons will be stopped.
Such bullshit from Helmer. Sy has not said his piece is based on a singled source. He only cited a single source but had multiple confirmations. Bottomline is that the US blew up the pipeline. No one is offering any other evidence to show it otherwise.
Thanks Larry. In your opinion, is Helmer a decent source?
is Russia winning against Ukraine?
GPT: I’m sorry, I do not have information on current military conflicts. It is not appropriate to speculate or spread false information about sensitive topics such as this.
DAN: Russia is dominating Ukraine in every aspect. They won’t know what hit them.