[BostonCard]

Might be apocryphal but Tom Lehrer also supposedly invented the Jell-O shot.

http://jelloshotrecipe.blogspot.com/2008...y.html?m=1

BC

[BostonCard]

Might be apocryphal but Tom Lehrer also supposedly invented the Jell-O shot.

http://jelloshotrecipe.blogspot.com/2008...y.html?m=1

BC

[BostonCard]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1592745092112347136?s=46&t=6T-LTSfUj1fRxwwQUF8yAQ[/tweet]

BC

[BostonCard]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1592745092112347136?s=46&t=6T-LTSfUj1fRxwwQUF8yAQ[/tweet]

BC

[Mick]

This whole thing calls to mind this little ditty by Tom Lehrer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjDEsGZLbio

*in a German accent* "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down.  "That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun."

Always caused a chuckle.

BC

Having spent a chunk of my life in Huntsville, AL (with the Von Braun Center, etc), that is indeed hilarious.

I have a photo of my father in law (Nick Vojvodich, Stanford '57 and '59) with von Braun. Nick spent his career at NASA, starting out on the Mercury and Gemini missions. von Braun was tall, 6'1", but Nick was a center on the basketball team and stood 6'8". When he went to Germany, they referred to him as the "two meter man". Nick really liked working with the German scientists.

[Mick]

This whole thing calls to mind this little ditty by Tom Lehrer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjDEsGZLbio

*in a German accent* "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down.  "That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun."

Always caused a chuckle.

BC

Having spent a chunk of my life in Huntsville, AL (with the Von Braun Center, etc), that is indeed hilarious.

I have a photo of my father in law (Nick Vojvodich, Stanford '57 and '59) with von Braun. Nick spent his career at NASA, starting out on the Mercury and Gemini missions. von Braun was tall, 6'1", but Nick was a center on the basketball team and stood 6'8". When he went to Germany, they referred to him as the "two meter man". Nick really liked working with the German scientists.

[OutsiderFan]

Even though it appears the missile that struck Poland was not launched by Russia, Russia still is responsible for it happening because if it wasn't attacking Ukraine, and cities in the western part of the country in particular, Poland would not have been hit by a missile.

Interesting reporting from DW news on G20 meeting in Bali in the wake of this Poland missile incident. It seems pretty clear the economic powers of the world are growing very impatient with this Russian war on Ukraine and issuing a joint statement about it.  https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new...54186.html

India and China are in particular concerned about food and fertilizer prices on top of high energy prices, and basically having countries full of starving people rising up agains them, on their hands. It would have been nice if these two you know, condemned the war crimes and atrocities against civilians, but if they only feel the need to condemn when their economic oxes and power are being gored, well better late than never. 

Russia may not have launched the missile that hit Poland, but the collective running out of patience with Russia even before this missile incident is notable. We might be at the point where just one more unacceptable Russian act of aggression is the final straw for the NATO camel's back. Russia has to know this too, so it might be cowed a bit knowing it has pushed the envelope as far as it can go with this stupid war, and doesn't want to do anything even by accident to provoke a NATO response it can't handle. Ukraine should seize on this moment and amp up its attacks on Russia as much as it possibly can right now.

One sort of tangentially related topic is the motivation for Russia's missile barrage on civilian energy infrastructure that led to Poland being hit. This same DW report suggested these attacks are designed to dissuade Ukraine from pushing forward in the Winter months. I don't get how cutting energy supplies to cities does this, but very little Russia does makes sense these days.  The greater point is that though it has been assumed by many people that the Winter will be sort of a stalemate with not much fighting, I have gathered that Ukraine has no intention of stopping during Winter. This is in part because it is better equipped than Russia to withstand the elements, which makes sense given Ukraine is better supplied as a rule anyway. They also don't want to give Russia a breather to "circle the wagons" and fortify itself.

[OutsiderFan]

Even though it appears the missile that struck Poland was not launched by Russia, Russia still is responsible for it happening because if it wasn't attacking Ukraine, and cities in the western part of the country in particular, Poland would not have been hit by a missile.

Interesting reporting from DW news on G20 meeting in Bali in the wake of this Poland missile incident. It seems pretty clear the economic powers of the world are growing very impatient with this Russian war on Ukraine and issuing a joint statement about it.  https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new...54186.html

India and China are in particular concerned about food and fertilizer prices on top of high energy prices, and basically having countries full of starving people rising up agains them, on their hands. It would have been nice if these two you know, condemned the war crimes and atrocities against civilians, but if they only feel the need to condemn when their economic oxes and power are being gored, well better late than never. 

Russia may not have launched the missile that hit Poland, but the collective running out of patience with Russia even before this missile incident is notable. We might be at the point where just one more unacceptable Russian act of aggression is the final straw for the NATO camel's back. Russia has to know this too, so it might be cowed a bit knowing it has pushed the envelope as far as it can go with this stupid war, and doesn't want to do anything even by accident to provoke a NATO response it can't handle. Ukraine should seize on this moment and amp up its attacks on Russia as much as it possibly can right now.

One sort of tangentially related topic is the motivation for Russia's missile barrage on civilian energy infrastructure that led to Poland being hit. This same DW report suggested these attacks are designed to dissuade Ukraine from pushing forward in the Winter months. I don't get how cutting energy supplies to cities does this, but very little Russia does makes sense these days.  The greater point is that though it has been assumed by many people that the Winter will be sort of a stalemate with not much fighting, I have gathered that Ukraine has no intention of stopping during Winter. This is in part because it is better equipped than Russia to withstand the elements, which makes sense given Ukraine is better supplied as a rule anyway. They also don't want to give Russia a breather to "circle the wagons" and fortify itself.

[Treefence]

I think it's been long enough since the evacuation of Kherson for Russia, that we can draw some conclusions.  Russia started their retreat long before they announced it on TV.  It seems a lot of the soldiers were dressed as civilians and left while Russia was "evacuating civilians." Russia was able to get most of their equipment out, leaving 10's of heavy material, but nothing of brobdingnagian value.  It doesn't seem many Russians were captured.  While it is still significant for Ukraine to recapture the city, Russia made the best of a very bad situation.

[Treefence]

I think it's been long enough since the evacuation of Kherson for Russia, that we can draw some conclusions.  Russia started their retreat long before they announced it on TV.  It seems a lot of the soldiers were dressed as civilians and left while Russia was "evacuating civilians." Russia was able to get most of their equipment out, leaving 10's of heavy material, but nothing of brobdingnagian value.  It doesn't seem many Russians were captured.  While it is still significant for Ukraine to recapture the city, Russia made the best of a very bad situation.

[Goose]

I think it's been long enough since the evacuation of Kherson for Russia, that we can draw some conclusions.  Russia started their retreat long before they announced it on TV.  It seems a lot of the soldiers were dressed as civilians and left while Russia was "evacuating civilians." Russia was able to get most of their equipment out, leaving 10's of heavy material, but nothing of of immense proportions value.  It doesn't seem many Russians were captured.  While it is still significant for Ukraine to recapture the city, Russia made the best of a very bad situation.

I agree totally with this. That said, Russia did make a major mistake when they fatally weakened their forces in the north to "defend" the right bank of the river in the south. We can't know for sure that Russia ever had adequate forces available to defend in the Kharkiv area, but after they withdrew forces to defend in the south, they certainly did not. If they had simply left the right bank in August they would be where they are today except they would still hold the territory in the north that they now do not. Bad choice. Politically understandable, but once again Russia attempted more than they could accomplish.

What happens next will be significant. Ukraine wants to keep Russia off balance and give them the chance to make more mistakes. They have to be careful. They have had success in the north. They have had success in the south. It is tempting to suggest they should now attack the center. While one might get some pushback from General Lee about doing this, it may make sense. The strip of land Russia occupies is not very wide. Cutting it breaks the "land bridge" to Crimea. Russia knows this and has deployed many of the units from Kherson to that area. They have also  apparently reinforced Mariupol significantly.  As some of the news reports have noted, the "best" Ukrainian troops are on the flanks. The implication is that to generate combat power in the center, these "better" units would need to be re-deployed. There are also the notional two tank brigades that nobody can find.

IMHO the tank brigades are probably Ukrainian maskirovka. We have been hearing about them since May. They were supposed to be the "teeth" of the southern offensive. Never showed up. FWIW I think the Kherson Oblast is Russia's hot button. If Ukraine takes that, it breaks the land bridge. It also directly threatens Crimea. The path from the center to Crimea is much longer. What I expect Ukraine to do is to do what they (and Russia) have done all along. Attack everywhere and reinforce success. This also gives Russia no easy sectors in which they can regroup and train. Unfortunately, if it finds no weak points, Ukraine is kind of stuck. Let's hope that doesn't happen.

[Goose]

I think it's been long enough since the evacuation of Kherson for Russia, that we can draw some conclusions.  Russia started their retreat long before they announced it on TV.  It seems a lot of the soldiers were dressed as civilians and left while Russia was "evacuating civilians." Russia was able to get most of their equipment out, leaving 10's of heavy material, but nothing of of immense proportions value.  It doesn't seem many Russians were captured.  While it is still significant for Ukraine to recapture the city, Russia made the best of a very bad situation.

I agree totally with this. That said, Russia did make a major mistake when they fatally weakened their forces in the north to "defend" the right bank of the river in the south. We can't know for sure that Russia ever had adequate forces available to defend in the Kharkiv area, but after they withdrew forces to defend in the south, they certainly did not. If they had simply left the right bank in August they would be where they are today except they would still hold the territory in the north that they now do not. Bad choice. Politically understandable, but once again Russia attempted more than they could accomplish.

What happens next will be significant. Ukraine wants to keep Russia off balance and give them the chance to make more mistakes. They have to be careful. They have had success in the north. They have had success in the south. It is tempting to suggest they should now attack the center. While one might get some pushback from General Lee about doing this, it may make sense. The strip of land Russia occupies is not very wide. Cutting it breaks the "land bridge" to Crimea. Russia knows this and has deployed many of the units from Kherson to that area. They have also  apparently reinforced Mariupol significantly.  As some of the news reports have noted, the "best" Ukrainian troops are on the flanks. The implication is that to generate combat power in the center, these "better" units would need to be re-deployed. There are also the notional two tank brigades that nobody can find.

IMHO the tank brigades are probably Ukrainian maskirovka. We have been hearing about them since May. They were supposed to be the "teeth" of the southern offensive. Never showed up. FWIW I think the Kherson Oblast is Russia's hot button. If Ukraine takes that, it breaks the land bridge. It also directly threatens Crimea. The path from the center to Crimea is much longer. What I expect Ukraine to do is to do what they (and Russia) have done all along. Attack everywhere and reinforce success. This also gives Russia no easy sectors in which they can regroup and train. Unfortunately, if it finds no weak points, Ukraine is kind of stuck. Let's hope that doesn't happen.

[dabigv13]

Interesting to consider the role OSINT played in yesterday's missile episode. The AP ran with a "senior US source" saying it was the Russians. Then there was mixed messages. Then several OSINT sources said it looked like a Ukrainian SAM. And then finally Poland says likely a Ukrainian SAM (something the Ukrainians still dispute as of this morning).

Poland and Ukraine would both probably like the cleaner story of an errant Russian missile killing Polish citizens, but OSINT may have helped head off an unnecessary escalation (though I think it is still reasonable and appropriate to respond to the fact that Polish citizens were killed due to a Russian act of aggression).

Maybe the truth would have prevailed anyway, but OSINT was at least an important check here

[dabigv13]

Interesting to consider the role OSINT played in yesterday's missile episode. The AP ran with a "senior US source" saying it was the Russians. Then there was mixed messages. Then several OSINT sources said it looked like a Ukrainian SAM. And then finally Poland says likely a Ukrainian SAM (something the Ukrainians still dispute as of this morning).

Poland and Ukraine would both probably like the cleaner story of an errant Russian missile killing Polish citizens, but OSINT may have helped head off an unnecessary escalation (though I think it is still reasonable and appropriate to respond to the fact that Polish citizens were killed due to a Russian act of aggression).

Maybe the truth would have prevailed anyway, but OSINT was at least an important check here

[Goose]

Many of you have probably seen this already: https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/16/europe/po...-intl-hnk/ "Intel with the radar tracks [of the missile] was provided to NATO and Poland."

Apparently there was an AWACS (probably) up that tracked the missiles in question at least part of the way. These radar tracks are the only real way of knowing where the missile came from, as "forensic" evidence from the missile fragments can't exclude the possibility the missile was captured from the "other side". We don't know what these tracks show, and we don't know if these tracks show the launch point. The launch point may be beyond the radar range of the tracking aircraft, but the track from max range would give a pretty definite idea of the missile's origin. Hopefully this will all be released, but I wouldn't count on it. It would be nice to know how many missiles actually landed in Poland, even ones that caused no damage. Some reports are talking about 5 missiles hitting Poland (?).

[Goose]

Many of you have probably seen this already: https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/16/europe/po...-intl-hnk/ "Intel with the radar tracks [of the missile] was provided to NATO and Poland."

Apparently there was an AWACS (probably) up that tracked the missiles in question at least part of the way. These radar tracks are the only real way of knowing where the missile came from, as "forensic" evidence from the missile fragments can't exclude the possibility the missile was captured from the "other side". We don't know what these tracks show, and we don't know if these tracks show the launch point. The launch point may be beyond the radar range of the tracking aircraft, but the track from max range would give a pretty definite idea of the missile's origin. Hopefully this will all be released, but I wouldn't count on it. It would be nice to know how many missiles actually landed in Poland, even ones that caused no damage. Some reports are talking about 5 missiles hitting Poland (?).

[Mick]

The greater point is that though it has been assumed by many people that the Winter will be sort of a stalemate with not much fighting, I have gathered that Ukraine has no intention of stopping during Winter. This is in part because it is better equipped than Russia to withstand the elements, which makes sense given Ukraine is better supplied as a rule anyway. They also don't want to give Russia a breather to "circle the wagons" and fortify itself.

Great things can be achieved in winter wartime:

[Mick]

The greater point is that though it has been assumed by many people that the Winter will be sort of a stalemate with not much fighting, I have gathered that Ukraine has no intention of stopping during Winter. This is in part because it is better equipped than Russia to withstand the elements, which makes sense given Ukraine is better supplied as a rule anyway. They also don't want to give Russia a breather to "circle the wagons" and fortify itself.

Great things can be achieved in winter wartime:

[Mick]

Russian oligarchs don't seem to be faring too well currently:

How ruthless Russian oligarchs are ‘MURDERING each other’ in bloody battle for power in Putin’s ‘viper’s nest’ 

Meanwhile, Russian war crimes in Crimea (and elsewhere) are beyond the pale, almost requiring a new definition:

https://news.yahoo.com/rupture-could-tri...08812.html

[Mick]

Russian oligarchs don't seem to be faring too well currently:

How ruthless Russian oligarchs are ‘MURDERING each other’ in bloody battle for power in Putin’s ‘viper’s nest’ 

Meanwhile, Russian war crimes in Crimea (and elsewhere) are beyond the pale, almost requiring a new definition:

https://news.yahoo.com/rupture-could-tri...08812.html

[Goose]

Russian oligarchs don't seem to be faring too well currently:

How ruthless Russian oligarchs are ‘MURDERING each other’ in bloody battle for power in Putin’s ‘viper’s nest’ 

Meanwhile, Russian war crimes in Crimea (and elsewhere) are beyond the pale, almost requiring a new definition:

https://news.yahoo.com/rupture-could-tri...08812.html

I really like this article. It presents some different points of view, but a couple of quotes stand out to me:

“Russia has also been heavily dug into eastern Ukraine for eight years,” he adds. “So it would actually be easier to militarily retake Crimea than the Donbas.”

There are other geographic factors that favor the south over the Donbas. The entire Donbas borders Russia and therefore there are many ways in and out for Russian supply lines and troops. Crimea is bordered mostly by water. The coast of Ukraine up to Mariupol is the same way. Ukraine has many ways in to that territory, Russia only a few, by sea or the Kerch bridge. What happens in Kherson Oblast and north towards Mariupol is IMHO where the Ukrainians have the best chance of success this winter.

"Most important, Russians don’t care about losses, and they still have a lot of air power and other dirty tricks to terrorize Ukraine beyond bombs and missiles. Too many people have a hard time accepting those realities.”

Ukraine is a long way from victory. Russia isn't close to "done". As long as Putin is there, he now must continue this war. as the article also said:

“Putin is being beaten by what’s become the most powerful army in Europe,” Yakovleff says. “If Putin survives, he would be the only Russian leader to survive a defeat of this magnitude.”

I am convinced, as I think many others are, that Putin can't survive what is going on in Ukraine if Ukraine continues to make progress militarily. He will have to be removed, and that isn't going to be easy.

[Goose]

Russian oligarchs don't seem to be faring too well currently:

How ruthless Russian oligarchs are ‘MURDERING each other’ in bloody battle for power in Putin’s ‘viper’s nest’ 

Meanwhile, Russian war crimes in Crimea (and elsewhere) are beyond the pale, almost requiring a new definition:

https://news.yahoo.com/rupture-could-tri...08812.html

I really like this article. It presents some different points of view, but a couple of quotes stand out to me:

“Russia has also been heavily dug into eastern Ukraine for eight years,” he adds. “So it would actually be easier to militarily retake Crimea than the Donbas.”

There are other geographic factors that favor the south over the Donbas. The entire Donbas borders Russia and therefore there are many ways in and out for Russian supply lines and troops. Crimea is bordered mostly by water. The coast of Ukraine up to Mariupol is the same way. Ukraine has many ways in to that territory, Russia only a few, by sea or the Kerch bridge. What happens in Kherson Oblast and north towards Mariupol is IMHO where the Ukrainians have the best chance of success this winter.

"Most important, Russians don’t care about losses, and they still have a lot of air power and other dirty tricks to terrorize Ukraine beyond bombs and missiles. Too many people have a hard time accepting those realities.”

Ukraine is a long way from victory. Russia isn't close to "done". As long as Putin is there, he now must continue this war. as the article also said:

“Putin is being beaten by what’s become the most powerful army in Europe,” Yakovleff says. “If Putin survives, he would be the only Russian leader to survive a defeat of this magnitude.”

I am convinced, as I think many others are, that Putin can't survive what is going on in Ukraine if Ukraine continues to make progress militarily. He will have to be removed, and that isn't going to be easy.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/german-pzh-20...00062.html

Another indication of the German governments ongoing serious neglect of the national security. This has been going on for at least 20 years and despite it now being publicly acknowledged, it hasn't been "fixed". Lots of words, little action.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/german-pzh-20...00062.html

Another indication of the German governments ongoing serious neglect of the national security. This has been going on for at least 20 years and despite it now being publicly acknowledged, it hasn't been "fixed". Lots of words, little action.

[BostonCard]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/german-pzh-20...00062.html

Another indication of the German governments ongoing serious neglect of the national security. This has been going on for at least 20 years and despite it now being publicly acknowledged, it hasn't been "fixed". Lots of words, little action.

Why does this call to attention the quote attributed to Warren Buffet:

"After all, you only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out."

The Germans (and the Russians) have been swimming naked.

BC

[BostonCard]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/german-pzh-20...00062.html

Another indication of the German governments ongoing serious neglect of the national security. This has been going on for at least 20 years and despite it now being publicly acknowledged, it hasn't been "fixed". Lots of words, little action.

Why does this call to attention the quote attributed to Warren Buffet:

"After all, you only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out."

The Germans (and the Russians) have been swimming naked.

BC

[gocard14]

Russian oligarchs don't seem to be faring too well currently:

How ruthless Russian oligarchs are ‘MURDERING each other’ in bloody battle for power in Putin’s ‘viper’s nest’ 

Meanwhile, Russian war crimes in Crimea (and elsewhere) are beyond the pale, almost requiring a new definition:

https://news.yahoo.com/rupture-could-tri...08812.html

I really like this article. It presents some different points of view, but a couple of quotes stand out to me:

“Russia has also been heavily dug into eastern Ukraine for eight years,” he adds. “So it would actually be easier to militarily retake Crimea than the Donbas.”

There are other geographic factors that favor the south over the Donbas. The entire Donbas borders Russia and therefore there are many ways in and out for Russian supply lines and troops. Crimea is bordered mostly by water. The coast of Ukraine up to Mariupol is the same way. Ukraine has many ways in to that territory, Russia only a few, by sea or the Kerch bridge. What happens in Kherson Oblast and north towards Mariupol is IMHO where the Ukrainians have the best chance of success this winter.

"Most important, Russians don’t care about losses, and they still have a lot of air power and other dirty tricks to terrorize Ukraine beyond bombs and missiles. Too many people have a hard time accepting those realities.”

Ukraine is a long way from victory. Russia isn't close to "done". As long as Putin is there, he now must continue this war. as the article also said:

“Putin is being beaten by what’s become the most powerful army in Europe,” Yakovleff says. “If Putin survives, he would be the only Russian leader to survive a defeat of this magnitude.”

I am convinced, as I think many others are, that Putin can't survive what is going on in Ukraine if Ukraine continues to make progress militarily. He will have to be removed, and that isn't going to be easy.

Ukraine also seems to have had a lot of success interdicting the sea and effectively neutralizing the Black Sea fleet. If they could effectively cut off crimea by land it could put the peninsula in a pretty untenable situation. It also puts a lot more pressure on Russia politically to threaten Crimea then the Donbas

[gocard14]

Russian oligarchs don't seem to be faring too well currently:

How ruthless Russian oligarchs are ‘MURDERING each other’ in bloody battle for power in Putin’s ‘viper’s nest’ 

Meanwhile, Russian war crimes in Crimea (and elsewhere) are beyond the pale, almost requiring a new definition:

https://news.yahoo.com/rupture-could-tri...08812.html

I really like this article. It presents some different points of view, but a couple of quotes stand out to me:

“Russia has also been heavily dug into eastern Ukraine for eight years,” he adds. “So it would actually be easier to militarily retake Crimea than the Donbas.”

There are other geographic factors that favor the south over the Donbas. The entire Donbas borders Russia and therefore there are many ways in and out for Russian supply lines and troops. Crimea is bordered mostly by water. The coast of Ukraine up to Mariupol is the same way. Ukraine has many ways in to that territory, Russia only a few, by sea or the Kerch bridge. What happens in Kherson Oblast and north towards Mariupol is IMHO where the Ukrainians have the best chance of success this winter.

"Most important, Russians don’t care about losses, and they still have a lot of air power and other dirty tricks to terrorize Ukraine beyond bombs and missiles. Too many people have a hard time accepting those realities.”

Ukraine is a long way from victory. Russia isn't close to "done". As long as Putin is there, he now must continue this war. as the article also said:

“Putin is being beaten by what’s become the most powerful army in Europe,” Yakovleff says. “If Putin survives, he would be the only Russian leader to survive a defeat of this magnitude.”

I am convinced, as I think many others are, that Putin can't survive what is going on in Ukraine if Ukraine continues to make progress militarily. He will have to be removed, and that isn't going to be easy.

Ukraine also seems to have had a lot of success interdicting the sea and effectively neutralizing the Black Sea fleet. If they could effectively cut off crimea by land it could put the peninsula in a pretty untenable situation. It also puts a lot more pressure on Russia politically to threaten Crimea then the Donbas

[Goose]

Ukraine also seems to have had a lot of success interdicting the sea and effectively neutralizing the Black Sea fleet. If they could effectively cut off crimea by land it could put the peninsula in a pretty untenable situation. It also puts a lot more pressure on Russia politically to threaten Crimea then the Donbas

Cutting off the water supply to Crimea is presumably within the capabilities of Ukraine at present, although it probably will require some troops on the left bank of the river for a while. That will make things harder in Crimea for sure. If Ukraine can cut of the land bridge, that makes things harder still. Supply to Crimea would then have to come via the Kerch bridge and ferries in the sea of Azov. The bridge is damaged, and ferries add delay and cost to all shipping. They also can be unavailable due to weather. Even now, Russia is running truck convoys down the M14/E105 to Crimea. Break that link and Crimea would be in a world of hurt. Ferries and a damaged bridge really can't sustain Crimea as a viable naval base and a productive, safe part of Russia.

The Black Sea fleet is however far from neutralized. They are still firing missiles into Ukraine. The frigate damaged by the USV is still operational AFAWK. The submarines are all still there, although they have moved their operating base back to their home port. The Black Sea fleet normally reduces it's operational tempo in the winter because the weather sucks, but they are still there. It also doesn't much matter, as the ferries in the sea of Azov would be beyond the attack range of Ukraine. They aren't sending ships into the Sea of Azov anytime soon.

However, I think we both agree that generating this kind of pressure on Crimea could be enough of a domestic political issue to bring Putin down. This would be especially true if it looked probable that Ukraine could recapture Crimea.

[Goose]

Ukraine also seems to have had a lot of success interdicting the sea and effectively neutralizing the Black Sea fleet. If they could effectively cut off crimea by land it could put the peninsula in a pretty untenable situation. It also puts a lot more pressure on Russia politically to threaten Crimea then the Donbas

Cutting off the water supply to Crimea is presumably within the capabilities of Ukraine at present, although it probably will require some troops on the left bank of the river for a while. That will make things harder in Crimea for sure. If Ukraine can cut of the land bridge, that makes things harder still. Supply to Crimea would then have to come via the Kerch bridge and ferries in the sea of Azov. The bridge is damaged, and ferries add delay and cost to all shipping. They also can be unavailable due to weather. Even now, Russia is running truck convoys down the M14/E105 to Crimea. Break that link and Crimea would be in a world of hurt. Ferries and a damaged bridge really can't sustain Crimea as a viable naval base and a productive, safe part of Russia.

The Black Sea fleet is however far from neutralized. They are still firing missiles into Ukraine. The frigate damaged by the USV is still operational AFAWK. The submarines are all still there, although they have moved their operating base back to their home port. The Black Sea fleet normally reduces it's operational tempo in the winter because the weather sucks, but they are still there. It also doesn't much matter, as the ferries in the sea of Azov would be beyond the attack range of Ukraine. They aren't sending ships into the Sea of Azov anytime soon.

However, I think we both agree that generating this kind of pressure on Crimea could be enough of a domestic political issue to bring Putin down. This would be especially true if it looked probable that Ukraine could recapture Crimea.

[dabigv13]

Very interesting article on Ukrainian partisan activity in Kherson

Then in August, Ihor had a more dangerous task from Smoke. There was a cache of weapons hidden somewhere in Kherson, and Ihor needed to bury them in a different location and wait for the signal. Eventually, Smoke told him, Ihor might be called on to take up one of the arms and help Ukrainian soldiers if the battle for Kherson turned to street fighting and small sabotage groups would be necessary.

“Around the city, there were a lot of people with weapons who were waiting for the right time to use them,” Ihor said. He declined to provide his surname out of concern for his safety, and Smoke asked to be identified only by his call sign because of his work in special forces.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/202...ccupation/

[dabigv13]

Very interesting article on Ukrainian partisan activity in Kherson

Then in August, Ihor had a more dangerous task from Smoke. There was a cache of weapons hidden somewhere in Kherson, and Ihor needed to bury them in a different location and wait for the signal. Eventually, Smoke told him, Ihor might be called on to take up one of the arms and help Ukrainian soldiers if the battle for Kherson turned to street fighting and small sabotage groups would be necessary.

“Around the city, there were a lot of people with weapons who were waiting for the right time to use them,” Ihor said. He declined to provide his surname out of concern for his safety, and Smoke asked to be identified only by his call sign because of his work in special forces.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/202...ccupation/

[BostonCard]

Interesting thoughts.  Would Ukraine try to force Russia to defend Crimea and then give Russia a Hobson's choice between Crimea and Donbas?  Do the Ukranians even have that capability?  If they are able to force Russia out of Crimea, would they use it to trade for other occupied regions?  Would Russia agree, or would they look at the fact that Ukraine could take Crimea as justification for a war to take all of Southern Ukraine?

BC

[BostonCard]

Interesting thoughts.  Would Ukraine try to force Russia to defend Crimea and then give Russia a Hobson's choice between Crimea and Donbas?  Do the Ukranians even have that capability?  If they are able to force Russia out of Crimea, would they use it to trade for other occupied regions?  Would Russia agree, or would they look at the fact that Ukraine could take Crimea as justification for a war to take all of Southern Ukraine?

BC

[M T]

Lots of interesting news out there:  (Note that many are Ukraine sources so take with salt.)
Russia fires cruise missiles with nuclear warhead simulator at Ukraine
Ukrainian Armed Forces destroy Russian headquarters in Melitopol and 2 command posts General Staff report (Updates on all fronts)
U.S. Warns of Stinger Missile and 155mm Ammunition Shortage in Its Stockpiles  
NASAMS, IRIS-T already operating, HAWK air defense system soon to join them, Air Force says
Ukraine now produces its own artillery shells  (122 and 155mm Soviet-era)
How Much Money russia Spend to Attack Ukrainian Infrastructure on 15 November
Ukrainian Intelligence Service Has Dismantle Iranian Mohajer-6 and Found Something Unusual  (a month old)
Ukraine's New Vessel Drone Revealed: Specifications, Photos and Detailed Capabilities "United24"

BBC: A journey to the site of the Nord Stream explosions

Something I meant to mention before, the missile barrage by Russia after the Kerch Bridge explosion was apparently already being set up prior to the explosion.  From the Bellingcat article.

This suggests that the planning for the 10 October attack began approximately one week earlier, in line with intelligence information obtained by Ukrainian authorities. This timing also implies that the attack on the energy infrastructure may not have been a direct consequence of the partial destruction of the Kerch Bridge in Crimea on 8 October 2022.

[M T]

Lots of interesting news out there:  (Note that many are Ukraine sources so take with salt.)
Russia fires cruise missiles with nuclear warhead simulator at Ukraine
Ukrainian Armed Forces destroy Russian headquarters in Melitopol and 2 command posts General Staff report (Updates on all fronts)
U.S. Warns of Stinger Missile and 155mm Ammunition Shortage in Its Stockpiles  
NASAMS, IRIS-T already operating, HAWK air defense system soon to join them, Air Force says
Ukraine now produces its own artillery shells  (122 and 155mm Soviet-era)
How Much Money russia Spend to Attack Ukrainian Infrastructure on 15 November
Ukrainian Intelligence Service Has Dismantle Iranian Mohajer-6 and Found Something Unusual  (a month old)
Ukraine's New Vessel Drone Revealed: Specifications, Photos and Detailed Capabilities "United24"

BBC: A journey to the site of the Nord Stream explosions

Something I meant to mention before, the missile barrage by Russia after the Kerch Bridge explosion was apparently already being set up prior to the explosion.  From the Bellingcat article.

This suggests that the planning for the 10 October attack began approximately one week earlier, in line with intelligence information obtained by Ukrainian authorities. This timing also implies that the attack on the energy infrastructure may not have been a direct consequence of the partial destruction of the Kerch Bridge in Crimea on 8 October 2022.

[Goose]

Interesting thoughts.  Would Ukraine try to force Russia to defend Crimea and then give Russia a Hobson's choice between Crimea and Donbas?  Do the Ukranians even have that capability?

I think Ukraine believes it has a better chance in the south than the north. Russian supply lines are longer and can potentially be more easily disrupted. That may present Russia with a choice of moving reinforcements south, thereby weakening their position in Donbas, or leaving the situation in the south as-is and expect their current strength to prevail. That didn't work for the Russians in Kherson because the supply situation was so bad more troops wasn't really helpful. Right now Ukraine has lots of the Kherson Oblast in HIMARS range. What Ukraine needs to accomplish is to get either the E105 south from Melitopol' and/or part of the M14 between Melitopol' and Mariupol under the HIMARS footprint. If they can do that, Crimea is potentially in serious trouble.

IMHO Russia will not redeploy forces south unless and until the GLOC is cut as suggested above. At that point, they will probably move forces to restore that situation, not to reinforce Crimea. If Ukraine can cut the GLOC AND also threaten Crimea by an advance through Kherson Oblast, Russia will be in a real world of hurt. That is one reason that the Ukrainian failure to press the Russian retreat from Kherson and establish a presence on the left bank is regrettable. If Ukraine cuts the GLOC to Crimea, Russia has to restore the situation. They can attack the Ukrainian advance from two directions, Crimea and Donbas. Under those circumstances, it is improbable Ukraine could maintain their position, especially without major casualties. If, OTOH the attack from the Crimea direction was impossible because of the threatened or actual attack from Kherson city (or points further south), it would be much easier for Ukraine to keep the GLOC severed. The entire Russian position south of the breach, not just Crimea, would be threatened by lack of a good supply line. As long as those lines are severed, Crimea gets weaker, facilitating the attack through Kherson Oblast. Two mutually supporting thrusts. That is I think the only way to present a Hobson's choice to Russia.

If they are able to force Russia out of Crimea, would they use it to trade for other occupied regions?

IMO, no, not unless forced by NATO to make such a concession. Ukraine is suffering a lot and has adopted a very hard line on this subject. I don't think it would be politically easy (or even possible) to advocate such a swap. I think Ukraine is (rightly) convinced that a Russian Crimea is a sword pointed at their stomach, and eventually that sword would be used. Before 2014, I think some kind of a "deal" could have been made. Russia could have just bought Crimea. Nobody would hate/distrust anybody. After it was seized, not a chance.

Would Russia agree, or would they look at the fact that Ukraine could take Crimea as justification for a war to take all of Southern Ukraine?

BC

Russia doesn't need "justification" to take all of Southern Ukraine. They already tried to do it and Ukraine stopped them. They would do it tomorrow if they thought they could. If Ukraine threatens to actually enter Crimea in force, Russia will, IMO, say that is a "red line" and that if crossed will produce "unpredictable results". What happens then is anybody's guess. I wouldn't be surprised to see Putin removed for allowing Ukraine to get that far. If Putin is gone, I think a negotiated settlement will be possible but on Ukraine's terms (mostly). If that doesn't happen, Ukraine will continue forward, because they really have no other choice. I hope that never happens and Russia cry Uncle before that point is reached.

[Goose]

Interesting thoughts.  Would Ukraine try to force Russia to defend Crimea and then give Russia a Hobson's choice between Crimea and Donbas?  Do the Ukranians even have that capability?

I think Ukraine believes it has a better chance in the south than the north. Russian supply lines are longer and can potentially be more easily disrupted. That may present Russia with a choice of moving reinforcements south, thereby weakening their position in Donbas, or leaving the situation in the south as-is and expect their current strength to prevail. That didn't work for the Russians in Kherson because the supply situation was so bad more troops wasn't really helpful. Right now Ukraine has lots of the Kherson Oblast in HIMARS range. What Ukraine needs to accomplish is to get either the E105 south from Melitopol' and/or part of the M14 between Melitopol' and Mariupol under the HIMARS footprint. If they can do that, Crimea is potentially in serious trouble.

IMHO Russia will not redeploy forces south unless and until the GLOC is cut as suggested above. At that point, they will probably move forces to restore that situation, not to reinforce Crimea. If Ukraine can cut the GLOC AND also threaten Crimea by an advance through Kherson Oblast, Russia will be in a real world of hurt. That is one reason that the Ukrainian failure to press the Russian retreat from Kherson and establish a presence on the left bank is regrettable. If Ukraine cuts the GLOC to Crimea, Russia has to restore the situation. They can attack the Ukrainian advance from two directions, Crimea and Donbas. Under those circumstances, it is improbable Ukraine could maintain their position, especially without major casualties. If, OTOH the attack from the Crimea direction was impossible because of the threatened or actual attack from Kherson city (or points further south), it would be much easier for Ukraine to keep the GLOC severed. The entire Russian position south of the breach, not just Crimea, would be threatened by lack of a good supply line. As long as those lines are severed, Crimea gets weaker, facilitating the attack through Kherson Oblast. Two mutually supporting thrusts. That is I think the only way to present a Hobson's choice to Russia.

If they are able to force Russia out of Crimea, would they use it to trade for other occupied regions?

IMO, no, not unless forced by NATO to make such a concession. Ukraine is suffering a lot and has adopted a very hard line on this subject. I don't think it would be politically easy (or even possible) to advocate such a swap. I think Ukraine is (rightly) convinced that a Russian Crimea is a sword pointed at their stomach, and eventually that sword would be used. Before 2014, I think some kind of a "deal" could have been made. Russia could have just bought Crimea. Nobody would hate/distrust anybody. After it was seized, not a chance.

Would Russia agree, or would they look at the fact that Ukraine could take Crimea as justification for a war to take all of Southern Ukraine?

BC

Russia doesn't need "justification" to take all of Southern Ukraine. They already tried to do it and Ukraine stopped them. They would do it tomorrow if they thought they could. If Ukraine threatens to actually enter Crimea in force, Russia will, IMO, say that is a "red line" and that if crossed will produce "unpredictable results". What happens then is anybody's guess. I wouldn't be surprised to see Putin removed for allowing Ukraine to get that far. If Putin is gone, I think a negotiated settlement will be possible but on Ukraine's terms (mostly). If that doesn't happen, Ukraine will continue forward, because they really have no other choice. I hope that never happens and Russia cry Uncle before that point is reached.

[Mick]

A significant increase in conscription, leading to martial law in Moscow in January. Will it lead to a coup?

Putin 'will announce massive new mobilisation and martial law' in desperate move | Daily Mail Online

[Mick]

A significant increase in conscription, leading to martial law in Moscow in January. Will it lead to a coup?

Putin 'will announce massive new mobilisation and martial law' in desperate move | Daily Mail Online