If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having difficulty logging in, please REFRESH the page and clear your browser cache and try again.
If you still can't get logged in, please try using Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or Safari to login. Also be sure you are using the latest version of your browser. Internet Explorer has not been updated in over seven years and will no longer work with the Forum software. Thanks
The only interesting things that are going on with the war in Ukraine are political maneuvering and obvious messaging. Last week it was Kim's trip to Russia to be hosted by Putin. Putin is in search of ammunition, Kim wants food and technology. Putin probably didn't get what he wanted - at least what is being made public. Kim probably got some souvenirs. All of this was for show with Putin trying to prove he's not isolated and Kim wanting to show he's something.
This week it's speeches by the parties and supporters of them to both the UN general assembly and Security Counsel. Zelenski pleads for his allies and others not yet in the fold to continue to arm the UAF for the purpose of kicking Russia out of his country. Before the SC, he rightfully asks how a seat on this body can be held by Russia who is involved in military aggression, genocide and has weaponized food, energy and children. Months ago he recommended to Gutierrez that Russia should be kicked off the SC - that's not going to happen but, he makes a point.
The general consensus from analysts that I'm reading is that neither side has any chance of achieving it's military objectives. I read one analysis that is already 6m old that predicted a stalemate that ultimately brings the US military into direct conflict with the RAF in Ukraine igniting something much bigger than a persistent, long lived, low intensity conflict. NATO is not involved as several NATO members won't commit their military to battle under the provisions of the NATO charter. Both sides lose equipment and soldiers in unprecedented numbers but US forces at significantly lower levels of attrition. US technological superiority in aircraft, tanks and fighting at night proves the difference even though the RAF has superior numbers. At some point, Putin is faced with capitulation on Ukraine's terms or escalating the conflict to a nuclear one.
Of course the alternative may be to leave Ukraine to hangout to dry by itself, unaided by the US and EU. Things are trending in that direction and if they come to pass, Putin will prevail. That would be a shitty outcome for people like me but a nuclear holocaust would be averted.
Mission to CFB's National Championship accomplished. JH chased Saban from Alabama and caused Day, at the point of the OSU AD's gun, to make major changes to his staff just to beat Michigan. Love it. It's Moore!!!! time
Being too loud (and vaping), really nothing to call it - but a slow news day. The only thing I didn't like she played the "Do you know who I Am" card before getting kicked out of the theater.
Nit-picking on my part - That's a Pet Peeve of mine.
Tweet
Comment