A source I have enjoyed for information is a US think tank – Institute for the Study of War (ISW) – which offers emailed assessments at least daily. These are assessments of current military developments, together with evaluations of open-source intel and commentary in various Eastern European nations. They also generate interactive maps, which find become more helpful as their numbers grow. Once in a while their bias shows, but by-and-large I have found the presentations informative. You can find their website here:

https://www.understandingwar.org/

Their latest bulletin (this morning, PDT) discusses the issues raised in VP’s post: what appears to be a collapse of military leadership, which in places has turned sections of Soviet retreat into a somewhat uncontrolled rout, with Soviet troops deserting their weapons and ridding themselves of their uniforms. One of the interactive maps shows particularly vividly the great strides Ukrainian units are making as a result of the chaos.

One point of interest, particularly given Larry’s concerns: it appears that many of the actively pro-Ukraine Special Operation social media activists are vocalizing rage with this second military collapse, to the extent that they are blaming Putin at least indirectly, and the military hierarchy for continued corruption, bribery and misrepresentation. While I hesitate to speculate, this could have some impact on Putin’s next moves.

Cheers

Brian G

I’ve been reading too much Gorbachev’s death and 1939. I meant, in this case, Russian troops. What I can’t be certain of is whether there were Russian nationals from Ukraine involved, or only Russians as citizens.

Sorry about that!

Cheers

Brian G

B

i assume that those observations of drones are documented and attested in one way or the other. Just snoopiness, or relative active threat? And were these drones Russian, and harbingers of worse than just snooping, would deniability be possible?

Cheers

Brian G

VP, tried a response to your post earlier, and it went pear-shaped. Lemme try again.

Although I get your concerns, I think you should not rely on WW2 and its leadership to show the way for the current horror story in Ukraine.

WSC was a political has-been in 1939. He was one of the architects of the Norway campaign, with all the disasters that included. To his credit, he attempted to carry that blame during the collapse of the Chamberlain government. But when Mr Chamberlain was driven from No 10 Downing St, WSC was prepared to take his place. He was not everybody’s choice. In fact, King George VI was personally a support of Lord Halifax as PM. Halifax was at the time an appeaser, but also a man who felt – even as German troops swept across western Europe – that an agreement could be made with Hitler.

FDR, who would play such a prominent role in WW2, was nearing the end of his second term as POTUS. He attempted to mediate at least some issues of the early European war (looking for talks between belligerents; attempting to bring belligerents into accord against the use of aerial assault on civilian targets. At least three of the major belligerents rejected his arguments and his envoy; he had no power to back his argument. And only be defying the two-term limit could he lead the US into a war. His values were not necessarily those of most US citizens. It wasn’t until PH that the US public had a cause to go to war: by that time, agreements between the US and GB (and Soviet Russia, to some extent) were well in place to attack “Germany first” and then Japan. He planned far beyond his promised in 1940, and worked against the overt values of his constituency.

I don’t know that the “saviour” you’re looking for is the US president. A previous US president created a rift between long-standing political/military allies, so I’m not sure the US president can claim to be the acknowledged leader of the Free World, or West, or whatever. The US is, however, one of the great suppliers of modern weaponry. At this point, this is the role many seem to expect it to play. Mr Biden may appear to be a weak leader, and/or one with cognitive challenges. But he is capable of providing weaponry to Ukraine that is vital at this time.

We’re 8 months into a conflict that has yet to be deemed – on one side, for political purposes; on the other, out of fear of nuclear exchange – a war. I sense what VP is searching for is some kind of end-game strategy. It’s too early to expect that, IMHO, though perhaps we’re on the cusp. And that may be the frightening issue.

What did Emerson write?

Just a quick final note. There are still possibilities for a negotiated settlement. It would probably involve discussions with the Warsaw Bloc nations (including Ukraine) and Russia: NATO would be linked, because NATO expansion to the east is a large part of the unspoken issue still.

And VP, I believe we’re still holding at 100 seconds to midnight!

Cheers

Brian G

Chers

Brian G

I have an (older) brother who does the garage sale thing every weekend. He tells me that you can pick up a 45” flat screen for peanuts, as soon as the 55” flat screens appear. He’s actually bought a few, mainly to give to others. And here I am, remembering my first TV viewing (1953? 1954?), almost 20 years after the coronation of George VI was broadcast. The TV I saw had about a 12” screen, though the body of the unit was about 24” deep. B/W, of course; watched Milton Berle. It was amazing, of course; TV was a mind-blower. Why trivial schtik like Berle drove it’s acceptance I still can’t understand!

Oops! This post is not an aside to the topic at hand; it has nothing to do with it. Sorry, folks.

Cheers

Brian G