Decision Time in Ukraine

 

In the Land of Confusion podcast covering the six-month anniversary of the start of the Ukraine War, I stated that the behavior of the Ukrainians over the last six weeks struck me as consistent with their shaping the battlefield for an offensive around Kherson. The types of strikes that Ukraine had been making were designed to isolate Russian forces in Kherson by cutting supply routes, destroying ammo and fuel dumps, and forcing the Russian aircraft out of Crimea.  I thought it would start in September, likely mid-September.

It appears I was off by a week or two. Both Ukrainian and Russian sources are reporting that such an offensive has begun.  At this point, both sides are declaring they are winning. That, too, is to be expected.

I will make another prediction: This offensive probably means the war will end within the next ten weeks. I am not predicting who will win — just that this battle will likely settle the war. If the Ukrainians succeed, the Russians will be playing the British at Yorktown. If the Russians succeed in stopping the Ukrainians, the Ukrainians will be playing the Germans in the Ardennes. In short, the loser will lack the military assets to continue the war.

We will know better in a week who the likely winner is.

Published in Military
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 202 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    Zafar (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):
    I guess what I mean is something more like “what do ‘sanctions’ even mean to the Biden regime?” That they’re still using Russia as a cutout for enabling Iran doesn’t seem to be in the spirit of “sanctions.”

    Perhaps they’re trying to find a climb down, having found that sanctions which push the other half of the West into decline may be to the US’ disadvantage? I mean wouldn’t you? I would.

    Re: Iran……meh. I know they’re supposed to be wild eyed crazy people who thirst only for kaffir blood regardless of the consequences, but India is the Ur Kaffir nation and the Indian state has had excellent relations with the Islamic Republic from 1979, and there is no fear of an Iranian Bomb in India. I frankly think that Trump crashed the JCPOA because it was a real Obama achievement, even if crashing it harmed concrete American foreign policy (as opposed to domestic electioneering) interests, but that is jmnsho.

    In fairness they Don’t chant Death to India once or twice a year.   They do chant Death to America.   I realize Obama thought that was just a rhetorical excess.  Trump was more inclined to take people at their word.

    • #91
  2. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    We have quite a factual disconnect here, Seawriter. I’m not sure about your sources of information.

    You seem to suggest that the Ukrainians have artillery superiority over the Russians. My impression is that the Russians have overwhelming superiority, about 15:1. If I recall correctly, this is what the Ukrainians said in early June, when they were begging for more weapons — which they didn’t get. They asked for 3oo rocket launchers, and it appears that they got 15.

    So my impression is that your engaging in a bit of wishful thinking. I don’t know, though, because I’m not very confident in any sources of information.

    The Russians do have a massive superiority in in numbers of tubes. Truly massive. But the Russian artillery has a much shorter range and is an order of magnitude less accurate. So they need that numeric superiority over the Ukrainians to win an artillery duel. In a set piece battle where the Russians can choose the range and have sufficient ammunition – such as a creeping advance in the Donbas, they can crush the Ukrainians to dust.

    But that depends on having sufficient ammo to pull that off. In the Donbas they were close to their source of supplies and conducting a set piece battle. In Kherson they are at the end of a long supply line that runs through Crimea. And the Ukrainians have been assiduously chopping up that supply line. Those are the bridges that have been knocked out – the ones used to supply Kherson. Can they get ammo to Kherson without those bridges? Maybe. But that probably triples the length of the trip. Which puts more strain on the trucks- which have proved unreliable. (Remember all those stuck supply trucks in the war’s opening days?) So, no. They are not going to have Donbas-scale artillery barrages.

    Besides, I doubt this will be set piece. If it comes to mobile warfare, inaccurate artillery is of limited use, especially if it is outranged and the opponent has artillery that is two orders of magnitude more accurate. You fire. They counterbattery. You lose some guns. They lose none (because you cannot reach them).

    It’s hard to determine the numbers the Ukrainians really have. But however many they do have of course they are going to insist they need more. Because more is always better. Unless it is more jezails against the Maxim gun. As Hilaire Belloc put it in The Modern Traveller, “Whatever happens we have got / The Maxim gun and they have not.”

    I am struck by how bad the Russians appear to be at logistics.  Am I wrong about this or is the US just so good at logistics that I have an unrealistic view of how logistics should work?   Also it appears to me that the Russian’s have not be using their advantage in Airpower very effectively.  Do you have any thoughts about this.  Is it fear of manpads? Do the Ukrainians have some other air defense capability that is backing off the Russians?  Are their logistics problems to blame?  Any theories?

    • #92
  3. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    We have quite a factual disconnect here, Seawriter. I’m not sure about your sources of information.

    You seem to suggest that the Ukrainians have artillery superiority over the Russians. My impression is that the Russians have overwhelming superiority, about 15:1. If I recall correctly, this is what the Ukrainians said in early June, when they were begging for more weapons — which they didn’t get. They asked for 3oo rocket launchers, and it appears that they got 15.

    So my impression is that your engaging in a bit of wishful thinking. I don’t know, though, because I’m not very confident in any sources of information.

    The Russians do have a massive superiority in in numbers of tubes. Truly massive. But the Russian artillery has a much shorter range and is an order of magnitude less accurate. So they need that numeric superiority over the Ukrainians to win an artillery duel. In a set piece battle where the Russians can choose the range and have sufficient ammunition – such as a creeping advance in the Donbas, they can crush the Ukrainians to dust.

    But that depends on having sufficient ammo to pull that off. In the Donbas they were close to their source of supplies and conducting a set piece battle. In Kherson they are at the end of a long supply line that runs through Crimea. And the Ukrainians have been assiduously chopping up that supply line. Those are the bridges that have been knocked out – the ones used to supply Kherson. Can they get ammo to Kherson without those bridges? Maybe. But that probably triples the length of the trip. Which puts more strain on the trucks- which have proved unreliable. (Remember all those stuck supply trucks in the war’s opening days?) So, no. They are not going to have Donbas-scale artillery barrages.

    Besides, I doubt this will be set piece. If it comes to mobile warfare, inaccurate artillery is of limited use, especially if it is outranged and the opponent has artillery that is two orders of magnitude more accurate. You fire. They counterbattery. You lose some guns. They lose none (because you cannot reach them).

    It’s hard to determine the numbers the Ukrainians really have. But however many they do have of course they are going to insist they need more. Because more is always better. Unless it is more jezails against the Maxim gun. As Hilaire Belloc put it in The Modern Traveller, “Whatever happens we have got / The Maxim gun and they have not.”

    I am struck by how bad the Russians appear to be at logistics. Am I wrong about this or is the US just so good at logistics that I have an unrealistic view of how logistics should work?

    I think that Russia is that bad at logistics and we are that good.  Also, there appear to be two more factors.  First, Kherson is some distance from Russia, so the logistic lines are very long already.  Second, the Ukrainians have been using HIMARS from us to take out all of the bridges across the Dnieper River which is a substantial fiver.

    Also it appears to me that the Russian’s have not be using their advantage in Airpower very effectively. Do you have any thoughts about this. Is it fear of manpads? Do the Ukrainians have some other air defense capability that is backing off the Russians? Are their logistics problems to blame? Any theories?

    I think that those are good points.  Russian aircraft cost some $25 million to $35 million, and the manpads cost a fraction of that.  Russian pilots shoot their munitions quite quickly before turning away.

     

    • #93
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Nohaaj (View Comment):

    Nohaaj (View Comment):
    The only thing that would totally alter that trajectory in the next 10 weeks is Europe totally abandoning support of Ukraine, because Russia fully chokes off their energy supply.

    Russia abruptly cuts off France’s gas line…

    https://www.dailyfetched.com/russia-cuts-off-gas-supply-to-france-as-country-faces-energy-disaster/

    Now the Frogs can’t even boil themselves!

     

    • #94
  5. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I think that Russia is that bad at logistics and we are that good.  Also, there appear to be two more factors.  First, Kherson is some distance from Russia, so the logistic lines are very long already.  Second, the Ukrainians have been using HIMARS from us to take out all of the bridges across the Dnieper River which is a substantial fiver.

    But the US is able to conduct multiple offensive operations half a world away from our shores.  In multiple different theaters.   I get that Afghanistan and Iraq aren’t exactly Ukraine but the distances are much more significant.  I guess I expected something more from a military that was touted as near competitor of the US.  It does appear that Russia has a great deal of problems with resupply any amount of distance from their occupied territory.  That having been said it has appear to me that they have been making incremental progress along the entire line of contact (I tend to only go by maps now)  I realize that doesn’t tell as much of a tale but it is the least subject to propaganda/ my own wish casting.  It will be interesting to see if the Ukrainians can roll any of that back.  

    • #95
  6. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I think that Russia is that bad at logistics and we are that good. Also, there appear to be two more factors. First, Kherson is some distance from Russia, so the logistic lines are very long already. Second, the Ukrainians have been using HIMARS from us to take out all of the bridges across the Dnieper River which is a substantial fiver.

    But the US is able to conduct multiple offensive operations half a world away from our shores. In multiple different theaters. I get that Afghanistan and Iraq aren’t exactly Ukraine but the distances are much more significant. I guess I expected something more from a military that was touted as near competitor of the US. It does appear that Russia has a great deal of problems with resupply any amount of distance from their occupied territory. That having been said it has appear to me that they have been making incremental progress along the entire line of contact (I tend to only go by maps now) I realize that doesn’t tell as much of a tale but it is the least subject to propaganda/ my own wish casting. It will be interesting to see if the Ukrainians can roll any of that back.

    The US rarely if ever has a choice about deploying forces across oceans, which Russia hasn’t faced before.  But even just crossing over (mostly) land they don’t seem to be doing very well.

    • #96
  7. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):
    The writer seems tos think that military escalation and conflict resolution are two different things, and that weapons and public well-being are also two different things.

    Well, they aren’t necessarily the same thing. But in this instance I think the US maintaining (somehow, how?) the US dollar’s current position as global reserve currency is vital to US public’s well-being. However it goes in Ukraine I think that’ll be difficult at this point.

    Yes, but it’s good to see that despite all the delays and circuitous routes involved in sending aid to Ukraine, this writer at least things there will be military escalation, which is what is needed for the Ukrainians to drive the Russians out of their country.

    Or to keep them fighting there indefinitely. Also an option. There may be others as well.

    I don’t think we have the ability to keep them fighting there indefinitely unless they feel they need to resist the Russian invasion indefinitely.

    The Ukrainian DeepState has been waging war on the eastern portion of their nation since 2014. It seems like they don’t mind extended wars.

    Of course maybe having to engage with an actual military adversary will affect the neo-Nazis differently, than their shelling and bulldozing their way through residential areas of the eastern Ukraine has over the last 8 years.

    One citation:

    Ukraine Merges Nazis and Islamists
    July 7, 2015

    Exclusive: Ukraine’s post-coup regime is now melding neo-Nazi storm troopers with Islamic militants called “brothers” of the hyper-violent Islamic State stirring up a hellish “death squad” brew to kill ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, on Russia’s border, reports Robert Parry.

    By Robert Parry

    In a curiously upbeat account, The New York Times reports that Islamic militants have joined with Ukraine’s far-right and neo-Nazi battalions to fight ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine. It appears that no combination of violent extremists is too wretched to celebrate as long as they’re killing Russ-kies.

    The article by Andrew E. Kramer reports that there are now three Islamic battalions “deployed to the hottest zones,” such as around the port city of Mariupol. One of the battalions is headed by a former Chechen warlord who goes by the name “Muslim,” …
    Full article can be found at:

    https://consortiumnews.com/2015/07/07/ukraine-merges-nazis-and-islamists/

     

    • #97
  8. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):
    I guess what I mean is something more like “what do ‘sanctions’ even mean to the Biden regime?” That they’re still using Russia as a cutout for enabling Iran doesn’t seem to be in the spirit of “sanctions.”

    Perhaps they’re trying to find a climb down, having found that sanctions which push the other half of the West into decline may be to the US’ disadvantage? I mean wouldn’t you? I would.

    Re: Iran……meh. I know they’re supposed to be wild eyed crazy people who thirst only for kaffir blood regardless of the consequences, but India is the Ur Kaffir nation and the Indian state has had excellent relations with the Islamic Republic from 1979, and there is no fear of an Iranian Bomb in India. I frankly think that Trump crashed the JCPOA because it was a real Obama achievement, even if crashing it harmed concrete American foreign policy (as opposed to domestic electioneering) interests, but that is jmnsho.

    In fairness they Don’t chant Death to India once or twice a year. They do chant Death to America. I realize Obama thought that was just a rhetorical excess. Trump was more inclined to take people at their word.

    See my reply right above this one, in which the 2015 Consortium News article details Islamic extremists teaming up with the Deep State “official government” and military of the Ukraine against the civilians in the eastern part of that nation..

    • #98
  9. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    In a curiously upbeat account, The New York Times reports that Islamic militants have joined with Ukraine’s far-right and neo-Nazi battalions to fight ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine. It appears that no combination of violent extremists is too wretched to celebrate as long as they’re killing Russ-kies.

     

    Maybe they learned from us allying with Russia during WW II.

    • #99
  10. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    kedavis (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    In a curiously upbeat account, The New York Times reports that Islamic militants have joined with Ukraine’s far-right and neo-Nazi battalions to fight ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine. It appears that no combination of violent extremists is too wretched to celebrate as long as they’re killing Russ-kies.

     

    Maybe they learned from us allying with Russia during WW II.

    Could you insert the matter that the words you are using as my words are actually quoted material from the article I cited. (Copyright matter.)

    • #100
  11. MiMac Thatcher
    MiMac
    @MiMac

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Biden has failed in so many ways. But in Ukraine, he has succeeded. Ukraine is fighting for its independence, again. This time they are going to win.

    I wonder if Biden’s assistance hasn’t been successful in spite of Biden. I wish there was more information on arms that are actually getting to Ukraine in comparison to promises that were made, and on what schedule. Of course, we wouldn’t want the Russians to have all that information, too, so I suppose we’ll have to wait to find out.

    You will note that I edited out the two sentences about Biden. This is not about Biden, this is about Ukraine. A large majority of Republicans supported arms for Ukraine.

    Yes, supporting Ukraine is good.

    However this situation was created by the loud and public insistence that Ukraine would become a member of NATO. This is a non starter for the Russia foreign policy establishment – not just Putin. Any Russian leader would have eventually attacked Ukraine to prevent it from joining NATO. This war was predictable and preventable.

    It also highlights the folly of the 1990’s Ukrainian government giving Soviet nuclear weapons back to Russia. The Ukrainians where given assurances by the Clinton administration that if they gave up the nukes the west would defend Ukraine. They should have insisted on full NATO membership then, to give up the nukes. IF in either case – they’d kept the nukes or got NATO membership the war would not be happening today.

    Ukraine was given assurances by both the US & Russia- do not forget that. It only reinforces the maxim that you cannot trust Russia to honor an agreement unless they face overwhelming force. That is why Ukraine doesn’t want a negotiated end of the conflict with Russia still on Ukrainian land- they rightly suspect Putin will just rearm and be back in a few years.

    • #101
  12. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    In a curiously upbeat account, The New York Times reports that Islamic militants have joined with Ukraine’s far-right and neo-Nazi battalions to fight ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine. It appears that no combination of violent extremists is too wretched to celebrate as long as they’re killing Russ-kies.

     

    Maybe they learned from us allying with Russia during WW II.

    Could you insert the matter that the words you are using as my words are actually quoted material from the article I cited. (Copyright matter.)

    I had to guess which words were yours and which quoted, since you didn’t separate them yourself.

    • #102
  13. MiMac Thatcher
    MiMac
    @MiMac

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Somehow people seem convinced that Ukraine suddenly ceased being the world’s money laundromat the moment Russia attacked. No, dude, the laundering simply accelerated. And now there was a made-to-order excuse for throwing more money into the machine.

    No the real corruption king is Russia-that has become glaringly obvious to all who care to see:

    https://www.usnews.com/news/world-report/articles/2022-08-31/how-russian-corruption-is-foiling-putins-army-in-ukraine

    • #103
  14. DonG (CAGW is a Scam) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Scam)
    @DonG

    I wonder if this is legit…

    • #104
  15. MiMac Thatcher
    MiMac
    @MiMac

    Unsk (View Comment):

    I have rarely seen more stupid comments at Ricochet.

    Doctor-heal thyself….

    Russia’s goal was to decimate the Ukrainian government & install a puppet- they failed miserably.

    Ukraine’s “recent nasty behavior”? You mean having the temerity to fight back effectively?

    Russia profiting? You lack the accounting skills to factor in the tremendous loss of life & material Russia has suffered- thousands of armored vehicles etc

    addendum-
    https://theins.ru/en/politics/254573

     

    • #105
  16. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    In fairness they Don’t chant Death to India once or twice a year.

    And why is that?

     They do chant Death to America. 

    And why is that?

    [Hint: it isn’t about religion.  Compare and contrast with their behaviour towards (proudly “kaffir”) India.]

     I realize Obama thought that was just a rhetorical excess.  Trump was more inclined to take people at their word.

    When it was convenient, sure.  Still think America could have built on that to the benefit of Americans instead of the Administration playing politics with it to their detriment.

    • #106
  17. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    In fairness they Don’t chant Death to India once or twice a year.

    And why is that?

    They do chant Death to America.

    And why is that?

    [Hint: it isn’t about religion. Compare and contrast with their behaviour towards (proudly “kaffir”) India.]

    Here’s another hint:  When someone/country is in trouble, how often do they say “Quick, get India on the phone!”?

     

    • #107
  18. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    DonG (CAGW is a Scam) (View Comment):

    I wonder if this is legit…

    Yes, I think it probably was legit – in April 2022.

    • #108
  19. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    The Reticulator (View Comment):
    I don’t think we have the ability to keep them fighting there indefinitely unless they feel they need to resist the Russian invasion indefinitely. 

    All you need to do is to empower a critical mass that wants to do that.  Not necessarily a majority, in fact it’s probably even more controlable if it isn’t a majority.  I think that’s how proxy wars work.

    • #109
  20. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    In fairness they Don’t chant Death to India once or twice a year.

    And why is that?

    They do chant Death to America.

    And why is that?

    [Hint: it isn’t about religion. Compare and contrast with their behaviour towards (proudly “kaffir”) India.]

    Here’s another hint: When someone/country is in trouble, how often do they say “Quick, get India on the phone!”?

    That’s why they chant Death to America?  Don’t see the logic, but okay.

    • #110
  21. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Zafar (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    In fairness they Don’t chant Death to India once or twice a year.

    And why is that?

    They do chant Death to America.

    And why is that?

    [Hint: it isn’t about religion. Compare and contrast with their behaviour towards (proudly “kaffir”) India.]

    Here’s another hint: When someone/country is in trouble, how often do they say “Quick, get India on the phone!”?

    That’s why they chant Death to America? Don’t see the logic, but okay.

    But that can be the result of it.

    Call America to get help, America helps, some people don’t like it – especially if America stops them from destroying some other country like maybe Israel, which is what they want to do – and so they hate America.

    Why would they hate India?  Has India been stopping them from destroying Israel?

    • #111
  22. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    In fairness they Don’t chant Death to India once or twice a year.

    And why is that?

    They do chant Death to America.

    And why is that?

    [Hint: it isn’t about religion. Compare and contrast with their behaviour towards (proudly “kaffir”) India.]

    Here’s another hint: When someone/country is in trouble, how often do they say “Quick, get India on the phone!”?

    That’s why they chant Death to America? Don’t see the logic, but okay.

    But that can be the result of it.

    Call America to get help, America helps, some people don’t like it – especially if America stops them from destroying some other country like maybe Israel, which is what they want to do – and so they hate America.

    Why would they hate India? Has India been stopping them from destroying Israel?

    Actually I thought about it, and I think America’s current relationship with Iran is indeed the result of someone calling up America to get help. 

    That country was the UK, which called America when Iran (under its first democratically elected Government) nationalised its oil fields and required the British to pay a fair price for the oil.

    This was hard to bear, after losing India, so the Brits called the US.

    The result was a 1953 CIA backed coup that overthrew the democratically elected Government of Iran, installed a puppet regime (the very not democractically elected Pahlavis) all of which resulted, in the fullness of time, in the Islamic Revolution, the punitive freezing of Iranian assets by the US, the hostage crisis, the Iran-Iraq war which devastated the country (in which the US helped Saddam), impoverishing sanctions, and so on till today.

    Anyway, that is at the root of Iran’s perception of the United States today.

    Israel may be central to the US’ perception of the Middle East, but I don’t think it’s central to a lot of the Middle East’s perception of America.  At least not Iran’s.

    • #112
  23. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Zafar (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    In fairness they Don’t chant Death to India once or twice a year.

    And why is that?

    They do chant Death to America.

    And why is that?

    [Hint: it isn’t about religion. Compare and contrast with their behaviour towards (proudly “kaffir”) India.]

    Here’s another hint: When someone/country is in trouble, how often do they say “Quick, get India on the phone!”?

    That’s why they chant Death to America? Don’t see the logic, but okay.

    But that can be the result of it.

    Call America to get help, America helps, some people don’t like it – especially if America stops them from destroying some other country like maybe Israel, which is what they want to do – and so they hate America.

    Why would they hate India? Has India been stopping them from destroying Israel?

    Actually I thought about it, and I think America’s current relationship with Iran is indeed the result of someone calling up America to get help.

    That country was the UK, which called America when Iran (under its first democratically elected Government) nationalised its oil fields and required the British to pay a fair price for the oil.

    This was hard to bear, after losing India, so the Brits called the US.

    The result was a 1953 CIA backed coup that overthrew the democratically elected Government of Iran, installed a puppet regime (the very not democractically elected Pahlavis) all of which resulted, in the fullness of time, in the Islamic Revolution, the punitive freezing of Iranian assets by the US, the hostage crisis, the Iran-Iraq war which devastated the country (in which the US helped Saddam), impoverishing sanctions, and so on till today.

    Anyway, that is at the root of Iran’s perception of the United States today.

    Israel may be central to the US’ perception of the Middle East, but I don’t think it’s central to a lot of the Middle East’s perception of America. At least not Iran’s.

    Somehow I think if you polled a lot of people in Iran, that’s not the answer they would give you.

    What YOU think the reason is, is irrelevant.  You’re not the one saying “Death to America!”  At least I hope you’re not.

    • #113
  24. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I think that Russia is that bad at logistics and we are that good. Also, there appear to be two more factors. First, Kherson is some distance from Russia, so the logistic lines are very long already. Second, the Ukrainians have been using HIMARS from us to take out all of the bridges across the Dnieper River which is a substantial fiver.

    But the US is able to conduct multiple offensive operations half a world away from our shores. In multiple different theaters. I get that Afghanistan and Iraq aren’t exactly Ukraine but the distances are much more significant. I guess I expected something more from a military that was touted as near competitor of the US. It does appear that Russia has a great deal of problems with resupply any amount of distance from their occupied territory. That having been said it has appear to me that they have been making incremental progress along the entire line of contact (I tend to only go by maps now) I realize that doesn’t tell as much of a tale but it is the least subject to propaganda/ my own wish casting. It will be interesting to see if the Ukrainians can roll any of that back.

    I think that Russia is doing the incremental progress by simply bombing the heck out of the next couple of miles and trying to advance if they have wiped out everything in their path.  If they can’t advance, they obliterate the ground even more, and try again.  That tactic is working in the east and north.  But Kherson looks to be different, as they are not able to restock their ammo.  I understand that the UK, the US and other countries like Germany and Poland may be training up Ukrainian soldiers in the NATO way of war, which is not three yards and a cloud of dust.  

    The Dnieper River is a really big river, the biggest in Ukraine.  The bridges have been put out of commission for heavy trucks and tanks.  Right now pedestrians can cross them, but that is about it.  The Russians are frankly trapped, and the HIMARS are wiping out the ammo dumps and supply dumps west of the Dnieper River.  I think that we will start to see some mass surrenders as the Russians literally run out of food, especially in the area west of the Dnieper River and well north of Kherson.  This could well cause a cascade effect, or at least so I hope.   

    • #114
  25. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    MiMac (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Biden has failed in so many ways. But in Ukraine, he has succeeded. Ukraine is fighting for its independence, again. This time they are going to win.

    I wonder if Biden’s assistance hasn’t been successful in spite of Biden. I wish there was more information on arms that are actually getting to Ukraine in comparison to promises that were made, and on what schedule. Of course, we wouldn’t want the Russians to have all that information, too, so I suppose we’ll have to wait to find out.

    You will note that I edited out the two sentences about Biden. This is not about Biden, this is about Ukraine. A large majority of Republicans supported arms for Ukraine.

    Yes, supporting Ukraine is good.

    However this situation was created by the loud and public insistence that Ukraine would become a member of NATO. This is a non starter for the Russia foreign policy establishment – not just Putin. Any Russian leader would have eventually attacked Ukraine to prevent it from joining NATO. This war was predictable and preventable.

    It also highlights the folly of the 1990’s Ukrainian government giving Soviet nuclear weapons back to Russia. The Ukrainians where given assurances by the Clinton administration that if they gave up the nukes the west would defend Ukraine. They should have insisted on full NATO membership then, to give up the nukes. IF in either case – they’d kept the nukes or got NATO membership the war would not be happening today.

    Ukraine was given assurances by both the US & Russia- do not forget that. It only reinforces the maxim that you cannot trust Russia to honor an agreement unless they face overwhelming force. That is why Ukraine doesn’t want a negotiated end of the conflict with Russia still on Ukrainian land- they rightly suspect Putin will just rearm and be back in a few years.

    I think that you are right.  The last thing Ukraine wants now is a cease-fire which would allow Russia to restock and refresh its troops.  

    • #115
  26. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Somehow I think if you polled a lot of people in Iran, that’s not the answer they would give you.

    What YOU think the reason is, is irrelevant.  You’re not the one saying “Death to America!”  At least I hope you’re not.

    Of course I’m not.  But I don’t think most people in Iran are either.

    • #116
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Zafar (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Somehow I think if you polled a lot of people in Iran, that’s not the answer they would give you.

    What YOU think the reason is, is irrelevant. You’re not the one saying “Death to America!” At least I hope you’re not.

    Of course I’m not. But I don’t think most people in Iran are either.

    Well then maybe, as with Al Queda etc and other muslim terrorist groups, the “peaceful” ones need to be doing something to control the ones that aren’t.

    • #117
  28. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Somehow I think if you polled a lot of people in Iran, that’s not the answer they would give you.

    What YOU think the reason is, is irrelevant. You’re not the one saying “Death to America!” At least I hope you’re not.

    Of course I’m not. But I don’t think most people in Iran are either.

    Well then maybe, as with Al Queda etc and other muslim terrorist groups, the “peaceful” ones need to be doing something to control the ones that aren’t.

    Hey, come on.  You did Iran wrong in 1953 and since in ways that damaged them deeply and which had nothing to do with Israel.  They don’t trust you as a consequence – or should I say, they don’t trust your government although they do actually seem to like you as people.  And perhaps one reason they don’t trust your intentions is that you take no responsibility for your Government’s actions – in fact many of you seem determinedly ignorant of these.  So wrt asking the peaceful ones to reign in the violent ones….I’m sure you see the irony of the demand.

    • #118
  29. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Zafar (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Somehow I think if you polled a lot of people in Iran, that’s not the answer they would give you.

    What YOU think the reason is, is irrelevant. You’re not the one saying “Death to America!” At least I hope you’re not.

    Of course I’m not. But I don’t think most people in Iran are either.

    Well then maybe, as with Al Queda etc and other muslim terrorist groups, the “peaceful” ones need to be doing something to control the ones that aren’t.

    Hey, come on. You did Iran wrong in 1953 and since in ways that damaged them deeply and which had nothing to do with Israel. They don’t trust you as a consequence – or should I say, they don’t trust your government although they do actually seem to like you as people. And perhaps one reason they don’t trust your intentions is that you take no responsibility for your Government’s actions – in fact many of you seem determinedly ignorant of these. So wrt asking the peaceful ones to reign in the violent ones….I’m sure you see the irony of the demand.

    Overall, the countries that nobody hates, are the ones that can’t really do anything all that wrong even if they tried, because they aren’t big enough/strong enough to matter.

    • #119
  30. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    I think maybe a little more ‘nuanced’:

    Some business activities inevitably fall in a gray zone…This may turn out to be the case with the five Chinese companies identified for U.S. export restrictions on June 28 for their alleged “support to Russia’s military and/or defense industrial base.” All five are electronics firms without global name recognition… based on the Department of Commerce language and the scope of the firms’ business, it’s possible the companies were providing Russian industrial enterprises with critical parts that could be used in the defense sector—an activity Washington interprets as supporting Moscow’s war effort, while Beijing may see as normal trade relations.

    Hmmm. I just don’t see China as being afraid of potential sanctions from the Biden administration.

    I think that the Chinese are afraid not of US sanctions, but sanctions by American companies.

    Wut?

    The problem is American companies are dependent on China. There’s not a chance any of them will unhook themselves from China. The Biden administration is never going to force that issue because Your President is one of their puppets.

    DNFTT.

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.