Ukraine Forever

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Will MTG and Bobo do their howler monkey impressions again?

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Will MTG and Bobo do their howler monkey impressions again?

You mean speak like they normally do?

[Zorral]

From Bloomberg Supply Lines Subscriber Newsletter

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2022-12-21/supply-chain-latest-russia-and-iran-build-caspian-trade-route?

Quote

 

Russia and Iran are building a new transcontinental trade route stretching from the eastern edge of Europe to the Indian Ocean, a 3,000-kilometer (1,860-mile) passage that’s beyond the reach of any foreign intervention.

It shows how two of the world’s most-sanctioned countries are adapting to western pressure by creating trade networks protected from interdiction. The route ships cargo along rivers and railways connected by the Caspian Sea, the inland body of water dominated by Russia and Iran.

Ship-tracking data compiled by Bloomberg show dozens of Russian and Iranian vessels — including some that are subject to sanctions — already plying the route. Tens of billions of dollars are being invested to increase trading volumes. (Read the full story here.)

“This is about establishing sanctions-proof supply chains all the way through,” says Maria Shagina, an expert on sanctions and Russian foreign policy at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Ships sailing the Don and Volga rivers have traditionally traded energy and agricultural commodities. Iran is the third-largest importer of Russian grain. The two countries have announced a raft of new business deals—in a range including turbines, polymers, medical supplies and automotive parts.

US officials are also paying close attention to the corridor, which could also be used to ship Iranian arms used in Russia’s war on Ukraine.

“That’s an extraordinarily damaging, reckless decision they’ve made,” said Robert Malley, the Biden administration’s Iran envoy. “It’s important to put the spotlight on it.”

 

 

[Werthead]

20 minutes ago, Zorral said:

From Bloomberg Supply Lines Subscriber Newsletter

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2022-12-21/supply-chain-latest-russia-and-iran-build-caspian-trade-route?

 

Iran might be setting itself up for a huge problem here. If it continues down the nuclear enrichment route it's pursuing at the moment, Israel might successfully push the US to either bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, or provide Israel with the means to do so itself.

If in the course of such attacks, Iran's drone factories, missile production facilities and everything else they might feasibly export to Russia were also destroyed, that'd be a shame, wouldn't it?

Russia can bluster all it likes, but to Israel, Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon goes beyond an existential threat, and Saudi Arabia would back any such action to the hilt as well, including the use of its airspace.

[Jace, Extat]

We gonna need a SuperMan

We gots an Elon

See y'all on the other side. 

The only question left I suppose is if the scientologists helped prep the masses to Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran on their own initiative or whether that was more of a JC decision.

Either way it's a very exciting time 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Zelenskyy's speech was quite moving. 

[Werthead]

16 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Zelenskyy's speech was quite moving. 

Fairly astute as well, stating that the USA funding Ukraine is not a gift, but an investment and a loan because if Russia is not stopped in Ukraine, the United States will probably have to intervene more forcibly later on, at much greater expense and risk to its people, to stop Russia somewhere else. In that sense, American investment in the war is dirt cheap.

Fortunately even most Republicans seem to get that.

[Werthead]

Apparently part of Russia's only aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov, burst into flames and it took some time to bring the flames under control. This is more remarkable because the carrier isn't engaged in action, it's been stuck in port in Murmansk for years undergoing refits and repairs, with constant rumours that it is no longer serviceable and might be junked instead (after its last actual deployment attracted considerable mockery for it spewing smoke like a lunatic as it traversed the English Channel).

Wagner Group has also deployed weapons apparently imported from North Korea. The weapons seem to be old and might be outdated equipment North Korea was trying to offload to help fund new weapon systems...which is really saying something. There's also been fierce criticism of Wagner within Russia for accepting substandard recruits, now totalling some 40,000 ex-convict troops, who have not acquitted themselves well on the front lines at Bakhmut.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

33 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Fairly astute as well, stating that the USA funding Ukraine is not a gift, but an investment and a loan because if Russia is not stopped in Ukraine, the United States will probably have to intervene more forcibly later on, at much greater expense and risk to its people, to stop Russia somewhere else. In that sense, American investment in the war is dirt cheap.

Fortunately even most Republicans seem to get that.

It's going to be weird in a few weeks/months when Democrats' votes are going to be needed to continue the war funding because there aren't enough House Republicans in the majority to do it on their own. Hopefully McCarthy isn't the Speaker because he might block some of it.

On the speech itself, he did a great job at appealing to a lot of positive tropes here in the US that transcend political ideologies. Not sure how many could have watched it and not agreed the funding must go on as long as needed.

[DMC]

The $45 billion that is about to pass in the omnibus should last until October when the budget itself expires.  Indeed, it is a little over $7 billion MORE than the Biden administration requested.  What happens then, who knows.  The interesting thing I've read today is a lot of the "skeptics" among Trumpist Republicans want Ukraine aid separated from funding bills. 

I doubt they'll keep that tune come next fall, but if so, um, ok.  While almost certainly a majority of House Republicans are gonna oppose further Ukraine aid, there's still clearly the votes in both the House and Senate to pass the next round next fall if Speaker McCarthy (or whomever) is willing to give it a floor vote.  It'd be a much smarter strategic move on McCarthy's end to continue to tie Ukraine aid to the budget/CRs so as to leverage it to secure other concessions.

[The Anti-Targ]

3 hours ago, Werthead said:

Fairly astute as well, stating that the USA funding Ukraine is not a gift, but an investment and a loan because if Russia is not stopped in Ukraine, the United States will probably have to intervene more forcibly later on, at much greater expense and risk to its people, to stop Russia somewhere else. In that sense, American investment in the war is dirt cheap.

Fortunately even most Republicans seem to get that.

They get it, sure, but the question is what is their price to not care.

[Varysblackfyre321]

 

[Wilbur]

I have recently seen in several places the idea that the US has spent ~5% of its military budget to destroy half of Russia's military capacity in Ukraine.

Ethical or moral considerations aside, looking at it only through a cynical view, as an American taxpayer, that seems like a good expenditure.

[horangi]

47 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

I have recently seen in several places the idea that the US has spent ~5% of its military budget to destroy half of Russia's military capacity in Ukraine.

Ethical or moral considerations aside, looking at it only through a cynical view, as an American taxpayer, that seems like a good expenditure.

Yes, this is shaping up to have strategic impact much like the first Gulf War.  Its one thing to support asymmetric partisan resistance to wear out an invading nation.  But to see a major power ground to a halt in a conventional ground war against a vastly weaker power (in terms of economy and raw military capabilities, not grit) is something few folks anticipated, I suspect.  As Wilbur said, setting aside ethical considerations, NATO is not only getting to field test its systems (and note that these are usually a generation behind), but also watching closely the successes and failures of various tactics in the battlefield, and hopefully, adjusting doctrine to defend against and utilize them.  As the saying goes "generals always fight the last war," but in this case, Russia is basically showing its hand for NATO in advance.  Despite some of the initial fears about other major powers taking advantage of the distraction, I suspect the situation in Ukraine is giving a lot of actors some trepidation on any wars of conquest in the near future.

[Wilbur]

1 hour ago, horangi said:

Despite some of the initial fears about other major powers taking advantage of the distraction, I suspect the situation in Ukraine is giving a lot of actors some trepidation on any wars of conquest in the near future.

And anything that reduces the appetite of major powers to engage in wars of conquest is a positive outcome.

Although I would suggest that Russia is not fighting the last war, but perhaps the war before the war before the last war at this point.

[Werthead]

I've seen more than one commentator saying this war might turn out to have positive consequences, in that it has encouraged the west to take defence and security seriously again after thirty years of the peace dividend, and at just the right time, ahead of what other countries might do in the future. If Russia had never invaded Ukraine, everyone had carried on as normal, and five years later, say, Iran attacked Saudi Arabia or China invaded Taiwan, the west might not be in a great state to intervene. Now they'll likely be in a far better position to deal with those contingences, and may dissuade them from happening. China's recent, unexpectedly conciliatory attitude to both the US and even the UK suggest that whatever plans Xi was considering for a surprise, lightning invasion of Taiwan this or next year may have been put on hold (hopefully), at least perhaps until the next Taiwanese elections make it apparent if China can resume diplomatic efforts there.

[Zorral]

 

 

2 hours ago, Werthead said:

encouraged the west to take defence and security seriously again after thirty years of the peace dividend, and at just the right time, ahead of what other countries might do in the future.

Particularly in light of the bit of discussion in the International thread of the militant anti-democracy authoritarianism politics exhibited that's been unchecked in some of the countries such as Sweden, Hungary, Germany, Poland and France

[The Anti-Targ]

I think one thing giving China pause is seeing that it's fookin' hard for Russia to cross bodies of water that are 20m wide. If Taiwan has ground to air and ground to sea capability it will prove extremely difficult to land enough troops to do anything, unless they turn Taiwan into a smoking ruin, which I'm sure they don't want. I imagine China wants to take ownership of an industrially fully functioning economy.

[SeanF]

Imagine if Trump had won, in 2020.  We'd now have Russian soldiers on the borders of Poland and Romania, and the world would be a much scarier place.

[Derfel Cadarn]

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

Imagine if Trump had won, in 2020.  We'd now have Russian soldiers on the borders of Poland and Romania, and the world would be a much scarier place.

Likely. I suspect had Trump been in power and took the position that Ukraine was part of Russia, Boris Johnson’s support would have been a lot less. Same with Germany