Politics

[Zambezi]

The problem the USA faces right now is 4 more years of demented Joe or 4 years of paralysis under Trump. I love Trump for his MAGA stance but he's a petulant child who has no idea on how to win friends and influence people. He's going to go all out to "drain the swamp" which he can't do without all the Republicans and a few Dems behind him... paralysis. The best he can do is fire or prosecute a few of the top dogs at the FBI/DOJ...

He has no concept on how to get everyone to go along with his vision. Any idiot knows that you slowly entice and nurture everyone into your way of thinking in order to have them support you. Trump is a bombastic narcissist who alienates everyone except those who worship him. He believes he knows everything about everything and refuses to take direction from those who have experience in any given field. His bombastic nature will result in 4 years of paralysis due to everyone, left and right, alienated from him, impeachment efforts and legal action. Yes he might emerge victorious and triumph but bugger all will get done in 4 years.

If only he could learn some soft skills!!

 

[Hunt anything]

Seems to me that Putin has ostracized himself from the majority of the world’s leaders, outside of China, Iran and a few smaller states. He can no longer travel to some countries ( I think he still has warrants outstanding) him being backed into a corner is what is very concerning to me. As for me I think we should fund Ukraine with more oversight of the money but I would think a lot of that money stays here in the states building munitions to send to Ukraine.

 

[Brent in Az]

L

Sorry for the delay, Brent. I haven't been posting much these days because you convinced me that one can't properly engage in discourse if one's handle/avatar is that of a fictional character.

I thought I had arguments I could support with facts, but then I realized I was just part of the swampy hivemind, so I decided to give up. You 4D chess'd me into submission.

Louis, Buddy!
Whenever I argue with MDWEST, and Red leg, you usually pop up out of nowhere. I figured you were overdue for an appearance. Right on que!
I have my theories on that, but I'll respectfully keep that to myself.

You have a nice day just the same.

 

[Brent in Az]

thats just about as laughable as your other posts Brent...

if you want to debate.. then debate.. there are plenty of people (myself included) more than willing to engage you... I am truly curious how you come to many of the conclusions you do and why you seem to think the world is a very different place that is run and managed incredibly different than the overwhelming majority of people (whether on the left or the right) do..

if you want to whine, call names, and then try to claim innocence after ignoring facts and refusing to even attempt to understand anyone elses position (often based on actual facts)... perhaps another audience would be better? this one doesnt seem to buy into it..

Selective memory.....got it
Thanks for the laugh, it made my day!

 

[Hunt anything]

The problem the USA faces right now is 4 more years of demented Joe or 4 years of paralysis under Trump. I love Trump for his MAGA stance but he's a petulant child who has no idea on how to win friends and influence people. He's going to go all out to "drain the swamp" which he can't do without all the Republicans and a few Dems behind him... paralysis. The best he can do is fire or prosecute a few of the top dogs at the FBI/DOJ...

He has no concept on how to get everyone to go along with his vision. Any idiot knows that you slowly entice and nurture everyone into your way of thinking in order to have them support you. Trump is a bombastic narcissist who alienates everyone except those who worship him. He believes he knows everything about everything and refuses to take direction from those who have experience in any given field. His bombastic nature will result in 4 years of paralysis due to everyone, left and right, alienated from him, impeachment efforts and legal action. Yes he might emerge victorious and triumph but bugger all will get done in 4 years.

If only he could learn some soft skills!!

Yep he needs to learn to stop using a sledgehammer when a tack hammer will do just fine.

 

[Dragan N.]

I would love to hear your considered analysis how Putin will achieve "complete victory." I obviously believe that is a uniquely uninformed assertion, but convince me. Show me how Putin or his military has the capability to "take control of Ukraine." And please, don't call me names or toss out a bunch of MAGA slogans. That will simply convince me I was correct with respect to your assertions. Even if Trump were totally complicit with helping Putin achieve his strategic goals, how does Putin actually do it?

In our arrogance, we forget it was Ukraine and its people that aspired to be part of Western Europe rather than be a cog in the Russian machine. It was Ukraine, using their own weapons and spending their own lives who brought the Russian Army to a bloody halt outside Kyiv and Karkiv. It was Zelensky, who on February 26, 2022, when offered escape from the country responded "I need ammunition, not a ride." It was his foreign minister who ended his diplomatic discussions in the US on the 24th to return to Ukraine to help Zelensky build a supportive Western coalition. It will be the Ukrainian people, not Donald J. Trump nor Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin who will have the final say in the fate of their country.

As @mdwest notes above, any meaningful decision by Trump to limit military support to Ukraine is at best 18 months away. He would then have to convince a lot of democrats to agree with him to overcome the majority of his own party who actually understand "America First" should mean jealously protecting our national interests wherever they are threatened - a Reaganesque concept the blindly loyal Trump crowd should mull over a bit before hopping on their candidate's revenge tour.

But I digress. Regardless to what heights Putin's ego may rise, explain to me how he achieves "complete victory."

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/ This article was published in Time magazine, which is not a Putinist or even MAGA source. A few noteworthy excerpts:

"When I raised these claims with a senior military officer, he said that some commanders have little choice in second-guessing orders from the top. At one point in early October, he said, the political leadership in Kyiv demanded an operation to “retake” the city of Horlivka, a strategic outpost in eastern Ukraine that the Russians have held and fiercely defended for nearly a decade. The answer came back in the form of a question: With what? “They don’t have the men or the weapons,” says the officer. “Where are the weapons? Where is the artillery? Where are the new recruits?”

In some branches of the military, the shortage of personnel has become even more dire than the deficit in arms and ammunition. One of Zelensky’s close aides tells me that even if the U.S. and its allies come through with all the weapons they have pledged, “we don’t have the men to use them.”

Since the start of the invasion, Ukraine has refused to release official counts of dead and wounded. But according to U.S. and European estimates, the toll has long surpassed 100,000 on each side of the war. It has eroded the ranks of Ukraine’s armed forces so badly that draft offices have been forced to call up ever older personnel, raising the average age of a soldier in Ukraine to around 43 years. “They’re grown men now, and they aren’t that healthy to begin with,” says the close aide to Zelensky. “This is Ukraine. Not Scandinavia.”

This article paints a grim picture of the state of Ukraine's military. Many of the issues outlined above are likely affecting the Russian military as well. This Russo-Ukrainian war has turned into a WWI style slug fest. The ability to grind down or "out-attrition" the opposing side is a central part of this conflict. Russia has a population 3-3.5x bigger than Ukraine.

What I also find rather interesting as well is that corruption in Ukraine is likely as big of a problem as it is in Russia:

"Now recruitment is way down. As conscription efforts have intensified around the country, stories are spreading on social media of draft officers pulling men off trains and buses and sending them to the front. Those with means sometimes bribe their way out of service, often by paying for a medical exemption. Such episodes of corruption within the recruitment system became so widespread by the end of the summer that on Aug. 11 Zelensky fired the heads of the draft offices in every region of the country.

The decision was intended to signal his commitment to fighting graft. But the move backfired, according to the senior military officer, as recruitment nearly ground to a halt without leadership. The fired officials also proved difficult to replace, in part because the reputation of the draft offices had been tainted. “Who wants that job?” the officer asks. “It’s like putting a sign on your back that says: corrupt.”

This is happening in the middle of a total war. The issues/problems that both Russia and Ukraine are facing in this conflict are nearly identical...

 

[Brent in Az]

Watched a couple of interesting videos on satellite warfare, anti-satellite weapons, and the defense of the Nuclear missile fields.
If the stuff ever hits the proverbial fan, there will be things going on up there, way before anything happens down here on the surface.

men build nuclear weapons, but a mouse would never build a mousetrap.

 

[Ray B]

Just my opinion, BUT Time isn't worth the paper and ink it takes to print it.

 

[CoElkHunter]

Just my opinion, BUT Time isn't worth the paper and ink it takes to print it.

Really? Remember Time voting Putin as "Man of the Year"? Right before he invaded Georgia. This year, it might be the leader of Hamas as Man of the Year? LOL. Seriously though, I wouldn't read a sentence of that left wing Marxist rag that purports to be a journalistic publication. Same with the New York Times and Washington Post. Nothing but left wing propaganda IMO.

 

[Hunt anything]

I try to look at all news outlets but it’s really hard to stomach a lot of the time. I form my own opinions and thoughts but most of the time I don’t articulate my thoughts well but I do have a sense of what is right and wrong even though the lines can get awfully blurry sometimes.

 

[Red Leg]

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/ This article was published in Time magazine, which is not a Putinist or even MAGA source. A few noteworthy excerpts:

"When I raised these claims with a senior military officer, he said that some commanders have little choice in second-guessing orders from the top. At one point in early October, he said, the political leadership in Kyiv demanded an operation to “retake” the city of Horlivka, a strategic outpost in eastern Ukraine that the Russians have held and fiercely defended for nearly a decade. The answer came back in the form of a question: With what? “They don’t have the men or the weapons,” says the officer. “Where are the weapons? Where is the artillery? Where are the new recruits?”

In some branches of the military, the shortage of personnel has become even more dire than the deficit in arms and ammunition. One of Zelensky’s close aides tells me that even if the U.S. and its allies come through with all the weapons they have pledged, “we don’t have the men to use them.”

Since the start of the invasion, Ukraine has refused to release official counts of dead and wounded. But according to U.S. and European estimates, the toll has long surpassed 100,000 on each side of the war. It has eroded the ranks of Ukraine’s armed forces so badly that draft offices have been forced to call up ever older personnel, raising the average age of a soldier in Ukraine to around 43 years. “They’re grown men now, and they aren’t that healthy to begin with,” says the close aide to Zelensky. “This is Ukraine. Not Scandinavia.”

This article paints a grim picture of the state of Ukraine's military. Many of the issues outlined above are likely affecting the Russian military as well. This Russo-Ukrainian war has turned into a WWI style slug fest. The ability to grind down or "out-attrition" the opposing side is a central part of this conflict. Russia has a population 3-3.5x bigger than Ukraine.

What I also find rather interesting as well is that corruption in Ukraine is likely as big of a problem as it is in Russia:

"Now recruitment is way down. As conscription efforts have intensified around the country, stories are spreading on social media of draft officers pulling men off trains and buses and sending them to the front. Those with means sometimes bribe their way out of service, often by paying for a medical exemption. Such episodes of corruption within the recruitment system became so widespread by the end of the summer that on Aug. 11 Zelensky fired the heads of the draft offices in every region of the country.

The decision was intended to signal his commitment to fighting graft. But the move backfired, according to the senior military officer, as recruitment nearly ground to a halt without leadership. The fired officials also proved difficult to replace, in part because the reputation of the draft offices had been tainted. “Who wants that job?” the officer asks. “It’s like putting a sign on your back that says: corrupt.”

This is happening in the middle of a total war. The issues/problems that both Russia and Ukraine are facing in this conflict are nearly identical...

You are correct. The article offers a unique perspective on the war and its leadership. Not unexpectedly, the article has been broadly embraced by Russian propagandist on the various state sponsored channels (Serbs and Hungarians too I assume), and naturally condemned by many in Ukraine. Because the article is such an outlier, it is probably worth a bit of scrutiny.

The article and your quotes focused on recruitment. That is indeed a legitimate concern for a combatant with a third of the total population of his opponent. Zelensky's recruiting efforts have been further hampered by traditional corruption in that area. Like the bounty system during the American Civil War, individuals were buying their way out of service to their country. Zelensky, to his credit, put an end to that form of graft, but this author decided that fact needed to be portrayed as negative. Not surprisingly, he was able to find (or invent?) unnamed sources to support his assertion.

His choice of data to support his casualty claims is equally suspect. Thank you for quoting it. He wrote that "the toll has long surpassed 100,00 for each side." That is, according to US DOD and British MOD literally correct. However, what he failed to note, I assume because it would interfere with his narrative, is that both the US and UK estimated that the Russian total was actually more than 300,000 as of August of this year. And Russian forces have suffered catastrophic additional casualties during the latter half of September and October. So though Schuster was correct to say both sides have had 100,000 casualties, he forgot to note that Russia, as of August, had suffered at least three times as many. I wonder why?

So who is Simon Schuster - the author of this article? He was born in Moscow 1989. His family emigrated to the US and he attended Stanford University. Starting in 2006, Shuster worked in Russia and wrote for publications like The Moscow Times, Associated Press, and Reuters. He focused on covering the political situation in Russia. He joined Time magazine in 2016.

None of this makes him a tool of Russian propaganda. I think the issues he brings up are absolutely worth studying and understanding. However, in doing just that, it is perhaps worthwhile to try and fully understand his motivations, and why the most explosive assertions in his article are supported by anonymous sources.

To be absolutely fair, Schuster might have spent a few paragraphs discussing Russia's efforts to fill its ranks as a result of the enormous casualties it has suffered. For instance, as several respected journalists have noted, the Russian Federation no longer has a prison population problem. That sort of comparative analysis is typically left out when it interferes with a narrative.

 

[JGRaider]

on this we agree...

Ive said it before (in this thread) I believe most that would enter into politics.. no matter their party.. intentionally devoid themselves of ethics and morals before taking the field.

Given the fact that most politicians are lawyers, I'd add lawyers to the bottom feeder list.

Gott say mdwest, I've not got a dog in this fight, but reading through this I'm not sure I'd ever buy a hunt from you.

 

[cash_tx]

Given the fact that most politicians are lawyers, I'd add lawyers to the bottom feeder list.

Gott say mdwest, I've not got a dog in this fight, but reading through this I'm not sure I'd ever buy a hunt from you.

Then you would be missing out. @mdwest is a very stand-up guy and has earned the respect of many around here.

 

[mark-hunter]

However, in doing just that, it is perhaps worthwhile to try and fully understand his motivations, and why the most explosive assertions in his article are supported by anonymous sources.

The article in the Time magazine, and The economist magazine (Zaluzhny, general) came as a surprise to me.

These two articles shows different approach, discourse and vision from official Ukrainian govt policies (followed by western main stream media rhetoric) and general in command.

Any author, not politically influenced will have trouble analyzing realistically Ukrainian situation, if for nothing else, then from fact that there is no official correct casualty reports, and strict censorship of media applied. This is factual for both sides of conflict.

For Russians, no surprise.

For Ukraine:

Ukraine Blocks Journalists From Front Lines With Escalating Censorship

“It’s wild how little of what’s happening is being chronicled,” said one journalist who has covered the conflict in Ukraine.

theintercept.com

 

[Red Leg]

Given the fact that most politicians are lawyers, I'd add lawyers to the bottom feeder list.

Gott say mdwest, I've not got a dog in this fight, but reading through this I'm not sure I'd ever buy a hunt from you.

Because he clearly and carefully articulates his opinions and the factual understanding and experiences that underlie them?

 

[Don458]

View attachment 562167

You need to throw the whole North East in there

 

[WAB]

Then you would be missing out. @mdwest is a very stand-up guy and has earned the respect of many around here.

Agreed, I have a ton of respect for him.

 

[Brent in Az]

Given the fact that most politicians are lawyers, I'd add lawyers to the bottom feeder list.

Gott say mdwest, I've not got a dog in this fight, but reading through this I'm not sure I'd ever buy a hunt from you.

Careful.....the good ol' boys club will pounce on you, and try and ridicule you into conformity.

 

[Red Leg]

The article in the Time magazine, and The economist magazine (Zaluzhny, general) came as a surprise to me.

These two articles shows different approach, discourse and vision from official Ukrainian govt policies (followed by western main stream media rhetoric) and general in command.

Any author, not politically influenced will have trouble analyzing realistically Ukrainian situation, if for nothing else, then from fact that there is no official correct casualty reports, and strict censorship of media applied. This is factual for both sides of conflict.

For Russians, no surprise.

For Ukraine:

Ukraine Blocks Journalists From Front Lines With Escalating Censorship

“It’s wild how little of what’s happening is being chronicled,” said one journalist who has covered the conflict in Ukraine.

theintercept.com

Let me answer you with a bit of history and perspective from the US military’s experience.

By the early seventies and the end of the Vietnam war, the US military had formed a deep and abiding distrust of the press. Historians may disagree, but the leadership of the Army that emerged following the war was convinced the press had undermined the service's battlefield successes to the nation's detriment by actually changing the outcome of the war.

Flash forward to operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, and those young captains and majors were now commanding divisions, corps, and the theater of operations. You will see virtually no footage of US Army units in combat from that period. The theater leadership, led by General Norman Schwarzkopf, simply didn't allow the press anywhere near the front lines for the duration of that conflict.

You would be hard pressed to find a single US military officer who wouldn't agree with that practice to this day.

Though journalists may bemoan the lack of transparency with respect to Ukrainian combat operations, I can not think of a single good reason why Zelensky or his military leadership should offer more access to the press. More importantly, I can list a host of reasons why they shouldn't. This is particularly true when fighting a foe who has total control of the narrative surrounding his perception of and participation in of the conflict.

 

[Dragan N.]

You are correct. The article offers a unique perspective on the war and its leadership. Not unexpectedly, the article has been broadly embraced by Russian propagandist on the various state sponsored channels (Serbs and Hungarians too I assume), and naturally condemned by many in Ukraine. Because the article is such an outlier, it is probably worth a bit of scrutiny.

The article and your quotes focused on recruitment. That is indeed a legitimate concern for a combatant with a third of the total population of his opponent. Zelensky's recruiting efforts have been further hampered by traditional corruption in that area. Like the bounty system during the American Civil War, individuals were buying their way out of service to their country. Zelensky, to his credit, put an end to that form of graft, but this author decided that fact needed to be portrayed as negative. Not surprisingly, he was able to find (or invent?) unnamed sources to support his assertion.

His choice of data to support his casualty claims is equally suspect. Thank you for quoting it. He wrote that "the toll has long surpassed 100,00 for each side." That is, according to US DOD and British MOD literally correct. However, what he failed to note, I assume because it would interfere with his narrative, is that both the US and UK estimated that the Russian total was actually more than 300,000 as of August of this year. And Russian forces have suffered catastrophic additional casualties during the latter half of September and October. So though Schuster was correct to say both sides have had 100,000 casualties, he forgot to note that Russia, as of August, had suffered at least three times as many. I wonder why?

So who is Simon Schuster - the author of this article? He was born in Moscow 1989. His family emigrated to the US and he attended Stanford University. Starting in 2006, Shuster worked in Russia and wrote for publications like The Moscow Times, Associated Press, and Reuters. He focused on covering the political situation in Russia. He joined Time magazine in 2016.

None of this makes him a tool of Russian propaganda. I think the issues he brings up are absolutely worth studying and understanding. However, in doing just that, it is perhaps worthwhile to try and fully understand his motivations, and why the most explosive assertions in his article are supported by anonymous sources.

To be absolutely fair, Schuster might have spent a few paragraphs discussing Russia's efforts to fill its ranks as a result of the enormous casualties it has suffered. For instance, as several respected journalists have noted, the Russian Federation no longer has a prison population problem. That sort of comparative analysis is typically left out when it interferes with a narrative.

Well speaking of casualties we have this article that actually talks about BOTH Russian and Ukrainian casualties.

Troop Deaths and Injuries in Ukraine War Near 500,000, U.S. Officials Say

Ukraine and Russia have lost a staggering number of troops as Kyiv’s counteroffensive drags on. A lack of rapid medical care has added to the toll.

www.nytimes.com

"Russia’s military casualties, the officials said, are approaching 300,000. The number includes as many as 120,000 deaths and 170,000 to 180,000 injured troops. The Russian numbers dwarf the Ukrainian figures, which the officials put at close to 70,000 killed and 100,000 to 120,000 wounded."

Russian casualties are indeed approaching 300K, however Ukrainian casualties are approaching 200K. It's interesting that there is so little talk about Ukrainian casualties given that they seem to be substantial as well. In this article. you can see the status of Ukraine's population/demographics:

‘Russia looks stronger and has a four-fold advantage in manpower’

Ukraine hoped to unleash punishing counterattacks on Russian troops. Experts explain why the push fell short.

www.aljazeera.com

Russia’s population stands at 143 million, but millions of Ukrainian nationals live in annexed Crimea and other occupied areas of eastern and southern Ukraine.

Ukraine’s current population is between 29 and 33 million, according to different estimates.

I would say these articles largely seem to support what Shuster has written. In the article by Al Jazeera, they quote a Ukrainian general Romanenko, who states that there is a serious manpower shortage.

The issue with Zelensky's recruitment "reform" is that according to Shuster it has led to recruitment grinding to a halt now. I don't know how true or not this is, but given the personnel shortages it doesn't seem to far fetched. I imagine many of these sources wish to remain anonymous, because they fear repercussions if they openly speak out.