Outside Topic Way OT: Ukraine - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Outside Topic Way OT: Ukraine (/thread-23071.html)

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Mick - 01-04-2026

(01-03-2026, 09:19 AM)dabigv13 Wrote:  The only way for a state to maintain sovereignty is possession of nuclear weapons. NK digested that lesson already.

I wonder if Taiwan and Japan have digested that lesson...

Speaking of which, the U.S. military is in the process of improving air bases, and adding or hardening runways at:
Atsugi and Yokota in Japan
Cold Bay Airport (central Aleutians, was AAF in WWII, hosted Marine jets in August)
Eareckson Air Station (far Aleutians, officially closed in 1994, USAF engineers visited in 2024 to evaluate existing pavement)
Eilson Air Force Base (Alaska) completed $600 mms. F-35 expansion, allowing 54 5th generation fighters to serve in rapid response.
Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (Alaska) expanding second runway from 2,900 feet to 10,000 feet
King Salmon Airport (Alaska) began master plan review in May, 2025. Opened in 1943 as WWII satellite field. Scheduled for rehab and resurfacing in 2028. Both USAF and Japanese air forces have deployed F-22, F-16, C-17 and C-130 there.
Mactan-Benito Ebuen Clark Air Base, Subic Bay, Basa (Phillipines) all being expanded to accommodate additional aircraft, tankers, logistics. GENUS also negotiating with India, Singapore and Japan to establish repair spokes.
Northwest Field (Pacific Air Force main air hub) has been rebuilt with two 8,000 foot runways capable of operating strategic airlift aircraft and Marine tactical aircraft. Since 2024, construction has cleared and repaved taxiways and open airparking, adding 27 keyholes for large support planes. Additional hardened bunkers between Northwest Field and Andersen AFB. Ongoing relocation of Marine units from Okinawa. Staging point for Resolute Force Pacific 2025, USAF-wide exercise simulating war with China.
Peleliu Airstrip in Palau (historic WWII airfield). Airfield being refurbished, permanent housing for Marines beign explored, considering prepositiong site in Palau to mirror growing Philippines presence. Also has Tactical Mobile Over-the-Horizon Radar to supplement Chinese ballistic missile detection.
Tinian International Airport. Contractors modifying flight line, adding underground fuel storage and distribution for KC-135 tankers. First phase complete, second phase complete in 2027.
Tinian/North Field was the largest airfield in the world in WWII. Engineering units from Navy, USAF and Marines restored runways, taxiways and parking areas while modernizing facilities for state of the art aircraft, fifth generation jets, drones and large cargo planes
U. S. Marianas. / Full scale reconstruction of North Field started in 2021.
Wake Island, stopover for tactical aircraft, used as advanced base by Marines last month, deployed air defense radar and comm's equipment. Played a heavy role in "Resolute Force Pacific 2025" as stopover point to Andersen AFB. Army tested rapid insertion of HIMARS launchers there. Also being surveyed for large force employment exercise with eight C-17s.
Yap International Airport on Yap Island in Micronesia is getting upgrades to runways, taxiways, parking and ports to support US wartime military ops.

Similar preparations made with Australia and Australian air fields in case of war.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/inside-us-plans-to-reopen-wwii-air-bases-for-war-with-china/ar-AA1TxqGp?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=695a8e39c16a456a8d681a0bb9137d9a&ei=506

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 01-04-2026

(01-03-2026, 10:02 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/31/magazine/ukraine-ai-drones-war-russia.html

This article could be behind the paywall.  Use of AI to go after Russian targets and not having to rely on GPS to do.

A quote from one of the American developers:

“If you think military drone missions are hard,” he says, “try making Steven Spielberg happy.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-65_Maverick
As far as I can tell, the Maverick is capable of doing what these drones are doing, and has been doing it for many, many years. "Locking on" to a target designated by a human operator with a fire and forget missile isn't new. It also isn't really AI, although similar algorithms (and "training" of the software) are used in some cases. IMO, nothing to see here folks. The electronics in a Maverick is quite small, and would easily fit a drone. The sensors are not big either, but in some cases have a wide field of view that would make it harder to fit it in a drone. Again, IMO there is no great innovation involved in this task.
 
Where AI will become very important is in autonomous target recognition and identification. Drones launched that "hunt" either targets of opportunity or a specific target instance on their own without human control or intervention are the sought after holy grail. That is also where the "permissive action" questions arise. As of now, it doesn't appear Ukraine has actually made much progress in that area. Of course, there is a moment where such things go from "not working" to "working", and one often can't predict when (or if) that will happen.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Hurlburt88 - 01-04-2026

interesting opinion on Ukraine future possibilities.   probably behind a payroll for many, unfortunately
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/how-to-read-the-ukraine-talks-67e83601?mod=hp_opin_pos_6

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 01-07-2026

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/01/07/world/venezuela-us-trump?unlocked_article_code=1.ClA.STir.hUkP6WU0UYLb&smid=url-share
Article should be shared to defeat paywall.

Well, we did the "right thing" despite the fact Putin might be offended. I am not sure this wasn't somehow negotiated to make it "OK". The NYT article references UNCLOS and Russia's statement that it forbids stopping a vessel in international waters that is properly registered in another country. However, the "current" interpretation of the "right of visit" that is part of UNCLOS does allow such actions in order to determine if the vessel is indeed properly registered and has indeed followed all appropriate regulations. This interpretation has been legally confirmed in territorial waters, and it has been legally confirmed the right of visit extends to nations that are NOT in their own territorial waters. As I understand it, the "high seas" interpretation has not been legally confirmed (yet), but it makes sense in terms of "hot pursuit" of a vessel flying no flag and not operating its AIS or spoofing its identity/position when it is. Both apply in this case. This interpretation would allow a "visit", and if the visit determined the vessel was not legitimately registered and/or had engaged in illegal activity it can be seized and taken to a port for adjudication. Falsifying your log is of course illegal activity, and one can be sure the ship had done that.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BostonCard - 01-07-2026

Apparently, Russia dispatched a sub to the tanker.  Glad we didn’t blink.

BC

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 01-07-2026

(01-07-2026, 11:19 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Apparently, Russia dispatched a sub to the tanker.  Glad we didn’t blink.

BC

Glad we didn't blink as well. https://news.usni.org/2026/01/07/coast-guard-seizes-russian-flagged-tanker-in-north-atlantic-second-tanker-in-caribbean

Quote:Initially flagged as a Guyanese ship, Bella I changed its registration to Russia and began heading for the North Atlantic. The ship was renamed Marinera while underway and picked up a Russian Navy escort that included at least one attack submarine, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday.
“The U.S. doesn’t view the Russian flag as authentic. I don’t think they buy the registry,” Mercogliano said. “It shows the Russians can’t do a damn thing about it. Submarines aren’t good for escorting ships.”

Mr. Mercogliano is definitely correct. The US has officially declared the ship to be "stateless" and is bringing it back to the US for legal proceedings.
 
How anyone would know a submarine was "escorting" a ship is a mystery. Submarines are designed to be "undetectable". I wonder why the WSJ claims such an escort actually existed. Even if the Russians announced it did, how does one know? Certainly the Legend class USCGC Munro (WMSL-755) didn't know. It has exactly zero ASW capability. Of course, this vessel is the model for our latest "new" Frigate. The "other naval assets" Russia supposedly sent shared the undetectable attribute. Frankly I am surprised they didn't sortie several TU-95s to "observe" the tanker and harass the Munro by making (legal) identification passes every so often. Nothing more than an annoyance, but it would have at least made people aware Russia cared at all. If Russia was actually serious it could have dispatched some small combatants to meet the tanker in the Atlantic as far west as physically possible. These ships would have been a very visible indication Russia cared about this whole deal, and they could certainly harass the Munro quite effectively. Didn't happen.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - fullmetal - 01-07-2026

How many TU-95s does Russia have left to spare from the Ukrainian special operation?  (And I wonder how far from US naval air cover USCGC Munro is currently...)

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 01-07-2026

(01-07-2026, 05:43 PM)fullmetal Wrote:  How many TU-95s does Russia have left to spare from the Ukrainian special operation?  (And I wonder how far from US naval air cover USCGC Munro is currently...)

Russia probably has on the order of 40 TU-95s available and serviceable. They are theoretically rotated through their various roles, but I would guess at any given time they have 10-15 that are intended for "presence patrols". I would guess that US Navy air cover for the Munro is quite limited based on this link. However, land-based air support is definitely available although probably not continuous or instantaneously available. However, TU-95s would only be there to observe the situation, demonstrate Russian interest, and be a nuisance to the Munro. They probably couldn't be considered a "threat" as such. FWIW, there was a P-8 out there "observing" as well.
 
They are allowed to make identification passes/overflights of civilian ships without limits on frequency, but as I recall they are only allowed 2 "free" passes over a warship. The MPA must then exit the area (go over the horizon) before they can do it again. This is an interpretation of the "due regard" part of the statue, which assumes once you have identified a warship you need not do so again. Attempting a third pass could then be considered an attack. Not sure where this sits legally today. If you leave the area, you could conceivably need to "re-identify" the warship.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Mick - 01-13-2026

The new Ukraine proxy war, its demographic effects, and what it means for Russia, Ukraine, Europe, China and the United States...

The New Ukraine Proxy War || Peter Zeihan

Commentary on:

- Military vehicle replacement and change in Russian tactics
- Russian losses, and increased casualty rates, impact on military force (reduced)
- Euro military complex is become more capable as Russian military equipment production degrades. Euros are rearming hard and fast.
- The proxy fight is the Euro military complex vs. the Chinese military complex
- Ergo, Euros want more sanctions on the Chinese

Europeans and Chinese are advancing drone and drone jamming technology. We're falling behind, according to the speaker.

Odd aside: Fewer countries purchase Russian weapons, reducing Russia's international influence; e.g., Sudan purchasing weapons from Pakistan. Russia has long wanted a Sudanese naval base. Unlikely to happen now.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/another-country-turns-away-from-russia-for-weapons-supplies/ar-AA1U3NQG?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=6965d37dee254bc59979a154f849810b&ei=242

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Mick - 01-13-2026

Putin's problem isn't the Ukraine, and his problem isn't the United States. His problem is China...

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ADNEiaoJELg?feature=share

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - fullmetal - 01-13-2026

It's to China's benefit that they don't make themselves a problem imo.  That way they can negotiate Russia over a barrel to maximum effect.  China probably wants to devote their attention to Taiwan right now and not the Russian border, but who knows, maybe they are playing a smarter game by leaving Taiwan alone and going after weaker prey, loaded for bear.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - TrumpCard - 01-13-2026

Four years ago, I would have discounted the possibility of China attacking Russia.  Now, with the mess Putin has made, who knows.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Leftcoast - 01-13-2026

Hasn't Eurasia ALWAYS been at war with East Asia?

(Said while frantically reviewing Orwell's summary of world history)

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 01-13-2026

(01-13-2026, 05:28 PM)TrumpCard Wrote:  Four years ago, I would have discounted the possibility of China attacking Russia.  Now, with the mess Putin has made, who knows.

I think you can still discount it. At some point in the future China may want to "own" some of the resources in that Russian wilderness. However, they have lots of other fish to fry that requires their complete attention. Russian territory would be a side show that is a deviation from their current plans. There is always the possibility that an already weakened Bear may simply resort to nuclear weapons if conventionally attacked. No reason to risk that now. Russia isn't going to get stronger quickly, if at all. When the Chinese can fully claim the resources of the 9 dash line area they MAY consider going North next, but that is a long way from now.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BostonCard - 01-13-2026

(01-13-2026, 07:00 PM)Goose Wrote:  

(01-13-2026, 05:28 PM)TrumpCard Wrote:  Four years ago, I would have discounted the possibility of China attacking Russia.  Now, with the mess Putin has made, who knows.

I think you can still discount it. At some point in the future China may want to "own" some of the resources in that Russian wilderness. However, they have lots of other fish to fry that requires their complete attention. Russian territory would be a side show that is a deviation from their current plans. There is always the possibility that an already weakened Bear may simply resort to nuclear weapons if conventionally attacked. No reason to risk that now. Russia isn't going to get stronger quickly, if at all. When the Chinese can fully claim the resources of the 9 dash line area they MAY consider going North next, but that is a long way from now.

Yeah, the nuclear weapons are a bit of a deterrent, aren't they.  Like, China could attack, and could probably occupy the territory, but from their perspective, is it worth the risk of triggering a nuclear response?  Russia fired a nuclear capable hypersonic missile at Ukraine; it could do that to a China at the onset of an attack as an unspoken warning... the next one could be nuclear armed (of course, would China, not knowing if the hypersonic missile headed in their direction has a nuclear payload wait for it to hit to find out?)

Bottom line, it's unlikely that the Chinese would attack Russia.

BC

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Mick - 01-13-2026

Four perhaps not-so-minor points:

1) Yes, Russia has 4,300 (or so) available nuclear weapons. China has over 400. I don't think Russia would launch against China

2) China has 10x the population of Russia, and 15x when you're talking about military age, fit-for-service people. 

3) I suspect China has the technological edge when it comes to advanced weaponry; drones, etc.

4) As bizarre as Putin's decision-making is, Xi Jinping has isolated himself from senior advisors. They've been removed, essentially. He's been absent from major international events for nearly a year and many critically important internal events. The Atlantic wrote about how Jinping has isolated China from the rest of the world last summer. If he acted precipitously, I wouldn't be surprised. It's worth a read.

China’s Self-Imposed Isolation - The Atlantic

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 01-13-2026

(01-13-2026, 08:21 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Yeah, the nuclear weapons are a bit of a deterrent, aren't they.  Like, China could attack, and could probably occupy the territory,

Depends on what you mean by "occupy". There is a whole lot of land with almost no population, no roads, and lots of natural obstacles. In large measure, Russia doesn't presently "occupy" much of that territory either. Russia and China can fight in that area, but neither side has the logistics to support large armies there for any length of time. China would "win", but then what? Exploiting the resources of the area in question requires massive amounts of money for infrastructure and the relocation of lots of people to that area. It will also take time, lots of it. China has better opportunities  with quicker rewards in the China Sea area enclosed by their "9 dash line". 

Quote:but from their perspective, is it worth the risk of triggering a nuclear response?  Russia fired a nuclear capable hypersonic missile at Ukraine; it could do that to a China at the onset of an attack as an unspoken warning... the next one could be nuclear armed (of course, would China, not knowing if the hypersonic missile headed in their direction has a nuclear payload wait for it to hit to find out?)

I doubt they would wait. This is the European scenario that both NATO and Russia feared. Somebody launches a missile that is nuclear capable. Does it contain a nuclear warhead? Eventually, the side that is losing the war will use one. Perhaps it is only intended as a "message", but is anyone willing to wait and see? Nuclear war by accident.

Quote:Bottom line, it's unlikely that the Chinese would attack Russia.

BC

Agree. It is much safer (as well as potentially much more financially and politically rewarding) to blockade Taiwan. Taiwan doesn't have nuclear weapons, and China can be virtually certain the US would not use one in Taiwan's defense unless China first used one. Victory in Taiwan without a destructive war is orders of magnitude better for China than lots of Russian wilderness (no matter what its "potential" may be).

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - ADPinWDC - 01-14-2026

China would never "attack" Russia.  
China has a surplus of men, millions -- due to the one child policy set in 1980... 
More girl babies were aborted. 

In Siberia and Eastern Russia, alcoholism among Russian men runs well above 50%
Chinese men merely need to migrate into Siberia and find a Russian bride. 

Lancet had a study concluding about one third drank at least THREE bottles of vodka a week.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67361362247-3/fulltext

"Slipping across" (based on orders from Beijing) a vast 4,000 km lightly guarded border into wilderness is not difficult.
Over time, Siberia would slowly turn more Chinese.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Mick - 01-14-2026

(01-14-2026, 03:17 AM)ADPinWDC Wrote:  Lancet had a study concluding about one third drank at least THREE bottles of vodka a week.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67361362247-3/fulltext

I don't think I've had three bottles of vodka in the last ten years...

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Bruce Wang - 01-14-2026

(01-04-2026, 09:15 AM)Mick Wrote:  

(01-03-2026, 09:19 AM)dabigv13 Wrote:  The only way for a state to maintain sovereignty is possession of nuclear weapons. NK digested that lesson already.

I wonder if Taiwan and Japan have digested that lesson...

There is a fascinating story here, which I can not share in a public forum.  My first cousin once removed was the head of this program.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/01/asia/taiwan-cia-informant-nuclear-weapons-chang-hsien-yi-intl-hnk

---