"The 1980's are calling to ask for their foreign policy back."

They have run out of Death Notices. Using Soviet ones from 1974.

https://twitter.com/lucian_kim/status/1557777450649542656?s=21&t=FIp2xmTeYNKxqcF-ay3LDA

Downthread speculation is they’ve run out of paper bleach, which they imported from Poland, which is why they can’t print up any more.

Multiple reports that Russian Army Command is evacuating Kherson.

Ukrainian precision has to scare the hell out the Russians.

https://twitter.com/osinttechnical/status/1558721714120425472?s=21&t=EbzldZC2dDwCSee_w0Q3lQ

Three hits to the same bridge span. Through Russian AAD.

This was the last bridge across the Dnipro in Kherson oblast. Russian troops will have to rely on two pontoon ferries for resupply.

Russian improvisation:

https://twitter.com/carlboucherknee/status/1500171666671890433?s=21&t=EbzldZC2dDwCSee_w0Q3lQ

Ukrainian improvisation:

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1558180748611522564?s=21&t=EbzldZC2dDwCSee_w0Q3lQ

On his show tonight, Dmitry Kiselyov says that European countries are backing Ukraine against Russia because they want revenge for the battles of Poltava (1709), Borodino (1812), and Stalingrad (1942-3)

Just to remind you, this is one of Russia's most popular TV programmes

https://twitter.com/francis_scarr/status/1558910251897864197?s=21&t=AeVC5yI1Lxona-BraGARDA

Finland greets Russian tourists with the Ukrainian national anthem.

https://twitter.com/afp/status/1558981875246702594?s=21&t=SqL6nhbmUR-PCWxhEWD1wg

Poland to spend $14.5B in a rapid modernization program. It is one of their largest spends and is S Korea’s largest arms export deal.

While S Korea is not a NATO member all of their systems have 100% NATO interoperability (due to being fully US compatible).

In fact one of the reasons they went with S. Korea is that not only could they get the fighters to Poland faster than anyone else but the FA-50 was co-developed with Lockheed-Martin with one of the requirements being to use as many F-16 components as possible (S Korea and Poland both operate F-16s) to ease supply, maintenance and training.

So good job Russia. Thanks for helping one ally drop your weapons systems, further integrate into NATO while boosting the defense industry of out of main anti-China allies.

4-D Chess FTW.



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...ighter-jets/ar-AA10GOM2?ocid=sapphireappshare

Off the shelf quadcopter.
3D printed fins.
One 40mm grenade.

v

$2 million dollar tank.


https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1559924577492426760?s=21&t=ZJGQmpTAeILRTwOsFxM4dw

Got a message he will be radio silent for a bit.

Hopefully this is good news

So, this is a thing



I’m not sure how I feel about it.

The Russians struck a dormitory for deaf children yesterday with a missile.

https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1560299626145759233?t=sZAK_SpVUct9l6yNJ5LErw&s=19
Romania tells Russia to fuck off

I did not hear about that one.

Oh fucking Christ.

Orcs have finally figured out how to protect munition dumps from HIMARS.

Just store them in nuke plant turbine halls. Plenty of space. What could go wrong.

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1560309427298787331?s=21&t=NZ8yw3D4DNJUhK6bi7XgqA

He puts the biscuit in the basket.

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1559924577492426760?s=20&t=jqM4BjRwTM0S_kPbPOC6Vg

Damn that is a good shot.

Someone should have posted it…

Yesterday.

http://wordforge.net/index.php?thre...eign-policy-back.122262/page-118#post-3429481

This might be the drone Ukraine used to hit Russia’s Black Sea fleet.



Retail price seems to be $10K.

Looking at the damage done it seems Doolittleish, in a good way.

Stavastapol has been Russian for centuries and prior to 2014 Russia had a long term lease.

It’s the closest thing to Russian territory that isn’t in Russia.

Ukraine is signaling they have the desire AND ability to hit them there.

Next time there might be 5 drones. Or maybe the Pentagon comes out and says they don’t see this as an attack on Russian territory and blesses off on US arms and munitions to be used.

One of that last point. One thing I don’t hear discussed enough is the evolution of the Ukrainian and US/NATO partnership. I know I for one wanted the US to go big earlier on weapons delivery but there is something to be said about taking time for the Ukrainians to prove their abilities, tactics and discipline. We now have months of Ukrainian forces being able to shell into Russia indiscriminately but they haven’t. We’ve also seen them go months operating HIMARS without a single loss (losses can equal enemy getting tech).

As time has gone one we have seen the US and other partners move to more and more high tech offensively capable weapons. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn ATACMS were in the pipeline.

Good thread on why we got stuff wrong when assessing RU’s military capabilities.

https://twitter.com/c_m_dougherty/status/1560719779647725568?s=21&t=Jm7F8bjGtVcRF_tO_J_Afw

Although not everyone fell for it. Me going back and forth with @armalyte seven years ago:

Re: Teaming up with Russia

While there are some decent reasons to bring Russia into the coalition, they aren't military ones.

First off, the Russian military just isn't that good. Since Georgia they have started to reform (Georgia was their Grenada) but even so they've only got a deployable military of around 70k. To put that in perspective when I was in Iraq the BIAP base complex alone had 63k Americans. And while these are the best trained and equipped of their military they are only of Southern European NATO quality. Not to mention a lot of these troops have been rotating through the Ukraine so need rest/refit before going on another deployment.

In other words they don't really bring much to the table militarily. But they do bring problems. STANAGexists for a reason. NATO has a unified command structure. We also have 14 years experience working together. Let me put it this way. Even if our radios were compatible (they aren't), and the US was willing to share our crypto with the Russians so we could take to each other (we wouldn't), would Russians take orders from Americans and vice versa (we wouldn't). On the battlefield someone you can't talk to and won't take orders from you is a liability. A liability that their paltry numbers and capabilities doesn't make it worthwhile.

From a military standpoint. There could be arguments made that a show of solidarity is worth it. Or if we decide to work with Assad that we'd need the Russians for middlemen.

I'm just saying that from a military standpoint this wouldn't be some Hollywood movie where the two baddest dudes on the block decide to team up and fight the real enemy. In reality the Italians have a more useful military force.

http://wordforge.net/index.php?threads/mayhem-in-paris.108283/page-15#post-2783391

Everything I've said is accurate. 800k troops who can't be deployed are irrelevant to a discussion about deployable strength.

All that matters is the 70k that can be deployed, and as I said even that is more than Russia can actually field due to a) A significant portion are tied up in the Ukraine. Either currently deployed, just returned or about to deploy and b) The Russians won't fully commit all of their good troops. Even if they would, it could only be temporary, who would they rotate in for them.

In reality Russia is only capable of deploying 10-20k troops, troops that as I say aren't that great when compared to most NATO forces.

http://wordforge.net/index.php?threads/mayhem-in-paris.108283/page-16#post-2783415

First off. Wikipedia.

Secondly, assume for a second there were 300k professional soldiers. That doesn't mean that there aren't only 70k deployable forces.

Who do you think is in charge of all those conscripts that can't deploy? Who do you think runs the bases? The training centers (where a new class goes through every 6 months)? Provides the backbone?

Have you ever studied Russian military organization? It's fucking nuts (from a western standard). There are 2 halves of a platoon. Half the platoon will be enlisted conscripts. They will only be trigger pullers. And not very good at that. Other half is officers and an NCO. Commander, officer. Sub commander, officer. Commo guy, officer. Medic, officer. Anything not a basic grunt, officer. (It should be noted that to become an officer you only need to graduate HS and then go to 2 years military college, this includes specialty training). There will then be one, ONE! NCO who's job it is to keep the grunts in line. And an NCO is just an enlisted soldier that decided not to get out after his term and got a couple months extra training.

Everyone except the grunts will be contract (professional) soldiers. However the unit itself is not deployable or considered professional due to the conscripts.

http://wordforge.net/index.php?threads/mayhem-in-paris.108283/page-17#post-2783520

Let's be clear. The Soviets were never a military superpower in anything but their fantasies and sales pitches of the US's military industrial complex.

The Soviet Union fought a 10 year insurgency ON IT'S OWN BORDER. It resulted in the loss of 15k troops, the bankrupting of their economy and the dissolution of their nation.

The US fought TWO 10 year insurgencies ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE PLANET. They resulted in the loss of 6.5k troops, an estimated decrease of ~2% GDP, and the Democratic landslide victories of '06 and '08.

http://wordforge.net/index.php?threads/mayhem-in-paris.108283/page-17#post-2783530

Obviously the context was different (Syria v Ukraine) but I think my assessment of the Russian military and its offensive capabilities stands up pretty well.

I have to wonder if Ukraine will be to the Russian Federation what what Afghanistan was to the Soviet Union.

I was listening to a podcast recently going over the (US) withdrawal from Afghanistan and what it means for US policy going forward. Someone was talking about the pendulum swing. How Vietnam burned us on Nation Building for 20 years, it started to come back under Clinton and the neo-Cons, now we are burned out again and one of the panelists chimed in that we might not have the luxury of waiting 20 years. Ukraine will definitely need some major reconstruction /nation building and there is a non-zero chance Russia and some of its current ‘republics’ that break away could need it as well.

Ukraine claims they've killed 44K Russian soldiers. That puts the Russian military into a rather dicey situation, I think.

Certainly agree with your assessment in modern times. Slight caveat, from a historical perspective. I think the Soviets were a top flight military well into the 1970s. Certainly after WWII for a decade they were among the most advanced militaries in the world, even if they had doctrinal problems. Their artillery, tank forces, and CAS in that time frame still remained at elite levels, and they simply produced more than the Western allies did during that time frame. They were the first to deploy satellites, mass produced jet aircraft before the US, and had an incredibly frightening nuclear capability. It wasn't until the 70s that the nature of technology began to change significantly and the US and NATO started to eclipse their capabilities. The Soviets economy for a long time was very strong, industrially near par with the US, and again when they fell behind they were able to use HUMINT to steal technological secrets.

Now they are a shadow of that former self.

Somebody, it seems, has decided to really poke the bear.



Sochi is Putin’s favorite city in the world. Either the Ukrainians or dissident forces in Russia have decided that they want to push Putin into screaming