8 thoughts on “On Putin’s Speech”

    1. There is a video of some Russian guys heckling the war protesters getting pulled off the street and into a bus but also reports of protesters getting put on buses. I saw another of a sea of men in the Caucasus walking calmly to their free ride to the training camps. It shows the dire straights Russia is in right now but their future failure isn’t certain and the longer this goes on, the more Ukrainians suffer as well. Ukraine very well might kill all of these Russians, but at a price.

  2. “One thing I’m finding interesting is that it is still a special military operation, and Vladimir is making no effort to use strategic bombing or even fully use the Air Force, which says some very interesting things.”

    It says that it isn’t safe for them to do so. We get better visibility on Ukraine’s use of their air force because our media celebrates it but they face a lot of the same problems here that Russia does. Ukraine was still able to carry out their counter offensive without air superiority.

    ““The Russians are now discovering that they’re actually outnumbered locally, and that with all the captured equipment, the Ukrainians actually now have more artillery and more ammo.””

    This was in part why Ukraine was successful with their counter offensive and why Russia has had problems in general. Russia doesn’t outnumber Ukraine and they are not mobile along the lines while Ukraine is.

    I haven’t seen much about Ukraine training their new recruits. Obviously, they are better equipped, fed, and have more time for training in safety but in what numbers? Aside from the other challenges Russia faces, the number of people they conscript might not be enough to give them the numerical advantage they need to wage war and an occupation.

    It isn’t a popular opinion but I wouldn’t count Russia out. Failure is the best teacher and they have adopted some of the tactics used against them. Ukraine can’t count on Russia not learning from mistakes and if Ukraine can make gains without air superiority, Russia could do the same. Recent developments are promising for Ukraine but who knows what next year will look like? Russia faces enormous challenges and so does Ukraine, just different ones. I dislike complacency and fatalism. Regardless of what I prefer to happen, I don’t assume it will even if the current conditions support, or don’t support, the outcome.

    1. Regardless of what I prefer to happen, I don’t assume it will even if the current conditions support, or don’t support, the outcome.
      Agreed. A very pro-active US administration would get in front of the NATO alliance and start working serious parameters for a cease-fire, even if it means handing parts of the Donbas to Russia. Sucks to be Ukraine but the stakes for Europe are just too high. I don’t see how these new Russian recruits get equipped without a major reorg of the Russian economy and even so with no imported technology, except via China. NATO/EU should make it very clear to China what an unstable Europe means for its trading relationships with the West. I don’t think Xi is very eager for Putin to send China’s economy into a tailspin. The thing that pisses me off the most and I know Trump would solve in a heartbeat, is restoration of fracking for natural gas for export to Europe. We could do if we weren’t being ruined by the green weenies.

      1. The stakes for Europe are even higher if Putin gets away with another invasion for conquest. In another few years, he’ll be ready to do it again, and he will. Lather, rinse, and repeat, each time threatening to use his nukes, and each time Europe retreating just to buy a few more years.

      2. A very pro-active US administration would get in front of the NATO alliance and start working serious parameters for a cease-fire, even if it means handing parts of the Donbas to Russia. Sucks to be Ukraine but the stakes for Europe are just too high.

        Trent Telenko points out that, as a result of the Ukrainians’ recent victories north and east of Kharkiv — where they’ve recaptured thousands of square miles of territory (whence the panicking Russian troops, supposedly some of the best-quality Russian forces, abandoned a division’s worth of armor, and a brigade’s [half or a third of a division’s] artillery tubes — plus immense quantities of artillery and other ammunition, which the Ukrainians can also use in their existing stock of many hundreds of artillery tubes that were largely incapacitated early on in this war due to lack of ammunition) — as a result Ukraine no longer really needs the West’s aid in pursuing the war as far as they want to take it. For the first time they can really match the Russians tube for tube. This means that the West’s leverage on Ukraine to compel the latter’s acquiescence into a course that the former wants has largely evaporated.

        1. This means that the West’s leverage on Ukraine to compel the latter’s acquiescence into a course that the former wants has largely evaporated.

          It doesn’t sound like they actually captured that much from what you described. After all, how long was all that going to last the Russians? A few weeks?

        2. Artillery consumes vast amounts of ammunition. Everything Ukraine captured will be consumed in a matter of days. Artillery tubes are only good for a specified number of rounds before they start degrading. First, the accuracy decreases to the “to whom it may concern” level, then the tube integrity goes where the tube itself blows up. Soldiers hate that. It’s very unhealthy. How much of the captured artillery is worth keeping in service?

Comments are closed.