Sir Keir Starmer: Malleus Scotnatorum? – politicalbetting.com

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Anabobazina said:

What is the betting that the frock Hannah Waddingham is wearing in the M&S ad will sell out?

That said, it is an utterly absurd extreme example of the outrage bus. I just cannot understand some people’s mentality.

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Just want to check, am I still a “fucking appeaser” for having been right, all along, about the Ukraine war?

Yes, well done on having predicted a stalemate throughout.

Oh...
February 27, 2022 Leon said:
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

Carnyx said:

Eabhal said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

HYUFD said:

MattW said:

Good morning all.

My musing this morning is whether Rishi Sunak is the unluckiest General since ... I don't know ... John Major?

On top of all the failed Hail Mary passes, including the "Long Term Decisions (LOL) for a Brighter Future", and ULEZ showing signs of working better than I for one was expecting, is Rishi now going to have continual revelations of the moral turpitude of the Governments he served in as the soundtrack to the period from now to the General Election?

Smacking slightly of a man trying to use the paddle inside his own canoe, knocking holes in the bottom.

Thanks for the header. Tory share in Scotland ticking up slightly? Hmmm.

John Major won a general election in 1992

I've heard it repeated here quite often now that Ulez expansion has been declared a rip roaring success. I assume the source for this 'news' is a TFL press release. Let's remind ourselves that its success or otherwise depends essentially on where you stood on it in the first place.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/31/ulez-is-a-money-spinning-scam/
"So for every £3 claimed in Ulez payments this year, around £2 is going towards raising it. Given the experience of the congestion charge, we might expect this to fall towards £1 in every £3. Or maybe not, as cameras continue to be targeted by enraged activists. For comparison, the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimated the general administrative cost of raising taxes in the UK to be just over 1% in 2006, and thought this alarmingly expensive."

ULEZ would be even more of a success if they hadn't raised a single penny in fines.*

*It was actually the Tories who suggested it as a revenue raiser, big government swines.

A big boy did it and ran away.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Falklands colonel claims Royal Navy has ‘tradition of cover-up’ on Sir Galahad bombing
Retired General Michael Rose says MoD is still withholding information about the Argentine attack on the British vessel
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/01/falklands-colonel-claims-royal-navy-cover-up/ (£££)

Dura_Ace said:

Anabobazina said:

What is the betting that the frock Hannah Waddingham is wearing in the M&S ad will sell out?

That said, it is an utterly absurd extreme example of the outrage bus. I just cannot understand some people’s mentality.

Just wait until they find out that the national flower of Palestine is the poppy.

Phil said:

Ukraine will get F16s armed with Meteors that will keep Russian airpower out of Ukranian airspace alongside western air defences; .

Leon said:

That’s fine. I don’t mind being a “fucking appeaser”. Just as long as you all admit I was right about the Ukraine war, which you do*

Honestly, this was why I introduced the “Law of Leon”. I was trying to save people from embarrassing themselves and disagreeing with me, because I am nearly always right about everything

And do I get any thanks for this?!

*honourable citations to @Dura_Ace and @DavidL who also, some time ago, had the wits to realise that maybe Ukraine wasn’t going to sweep through Crimea

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

kinabalu said:

I'm not sure 'predicting a stalemate' in Ukraine was ever quite the outlier being claimed.

Dura_Ace said:

Phil said:

Ukraine will get F16s armed with Meteors that will keep Russian airpower out of Ukranian airspace alongside western air defences; .

Meteor doesn't work on F-16. UkrAF are (eventually) getting ex-RNLAF F-16A Block 10B jets that have been through the MLU upgrade program so AIM-120D is the weapon of choice. The 120D is a fucking death-ray with very good range and off boresight capability but nobody has said how many or even if they are getting it.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

Odd too that Israel blocked America from supplying Iron Dome anti-missile systems to Ukraine. War makes strange bedfellows.

Leon said:

Just want to check, am I still a “fucking appeaser” for having been right, all along, about the Ukraine war?

kinabalu said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

Ditto in Gaza, the way it's looking.

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

Ditto in Gaza, the way it's looking.

Really? Have you seen how eastern Ukraine has been depopulated by the Russians, through deliberate policy (not the least by. recruiting all the men below 103 years old?)

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/ukraine-filtration-camps-forcibly-remove-russia/index.html

I can see why people (particularly on the left) get irate about the status of Palestinians. I fail to see why the same people are oddly pro-Russian in their sh*tty conflict.

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Just want to check, am I still a “fucking appeaser” for having been right, all along, about the Ukraine war?

Yes, well done on having predicted a stalemate throughout.

Oh...
February 27, 2022 Leon said:
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?

You actually combed back through PB to find that from February 2022?! Is your life really that empty?

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

Compliance!

Eabhal said:

Carnyx said:

Eabhal said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

HYUFD said:

MattW said:

Good morning all.

My musing this morning is whether Rishi Sunak is the unluckiest General since ... I don't know ... John Major?

On top of all the failed Hail Mary passes, including the "Long Term Decisions (LOL) for a Brighter Future", and ULEZ showing signs of working better than I for one was expecting, is Rishi now going to have continual revelations of the moral turpitude of the Governments he served in as the soundtrack to the period from now to the General Election?

Smacking slightly of a man trying to use the paddle inside his own canoe, knocking holes in the bottom.

Thanks for the header. Tory share in Scotland ticking up slightly? Hmmm.

John Major won a general election in 1992

I've heard it repeated here quite often now that Ulez expansion has been declared a rip roaring success. I assume the source for this 'news' is a TFL press release. Let's remind ourselves that its success or otherwise depends essentially on where you stood on it in the first place.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/31/ulez-is-a-money-spinning-scam/
"So for every £3 claimed in Ulez payments this year, around £2 is going towards raising it. Given the experience of the congestion charge, we might expect this to fall towards £1 in every £3. Or maybe not, as cameras continue to be targeted by enraged activists. For comparison, the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimated the general administrative cost of raising taxes in the UK to be just over 1% in 2006, and thought this alarmingly expensive."

ULEZ would be even more of a success if they hadn't raised a single penny in fines.*

*It was actually the Tories who suggested it as a revenue raiser, big government swines.

A big boy did it and ran away.

There is a darker point here about public services.

In Scotland, for example, SG grants to Local Government have been cut in real terms and council tax has been frozen, all while the services that LAs have a statutory duty to provide have increased.

Motoring is one of the very few areas LAs can raise revenue, so of course councils turn to fines to fund essential services. Even then, the SG legislated to freeze parking fines so they have been massively cut in real terms.

The "war on drivers" is at least as much a necessity for LG as a policy objective representing their constituents.

Luckyguy1983 said:

noneoftheabove said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

HYUFD said:

MattW said:

Good morning all.

My musing this morning is whether Rishi Sunak is the unluckiest General since ... I don't know ... John Major?

On top of all the failed Hail Mary passes, including the "Long Term Decisions (LOL) for a Brighter Future", and ULEZ showing signs of working better than I for one was expecting, is Rishi now going to have continual revelations of the moral turpitude of the Governments he served in as the soundtrack to the period from now to the General Election?

Smacking slightly of a man trying to use the paddle inside his own canoe, knocking holes in the bottom.

Thanks for the header. Tory share in Scotland ticking up slightly? Hmmm.

John Major won a general election in 1992

I've heard it repeated here quite often now that Ulez expansion has been declared a rip roaring success. I assume the source for this 'news' is a TFL press release. Let's remind ourselves that its success or otherwise depends essentially on where you stood on it in the first place.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/31/ulez-is-a-money-spinning-scam/
"So for every £3 claimed in Ulez payments this year, around £2 is going towards raising it. Given the experience of the congestion charge, we might expect this to fall towards £1 in every £3. Or maybe not, as cameras continue to be targeted by enraged activists. For comparison, the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimated the general administrative cost of raising taxes in the UK to be just over 1% in 2006, and thought this alarmingly expensive."

Its objectives were clean air, not fiscal. As I said at the time, a good policy, implemented badly and regressively.

If the objective were cleaner air, particularly in places where air pollution has been most acute, there are many other less disruptive solutions that could have been put in place. This was designed to swell TFL's coffers and it should be judged on that basis.

DavidL said:

Malmesbury said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Just want to check, am I still a “fucking appeaser” for having been right, all along, about the Ukraine war?

Yes, well done on having predicted a stalemate throughout.

Oh...
February 27, 2022 Leon said:
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?

Ambrose Evans Pritchard is sometimes said to have predicted 1,436 of the last 2 recessions.

He's predicted the German Supreme Court ruling the actions of the EU illegal and the subsequent consequential collapse of the EU way more times than that. He is a joke who often has interesting statistics which don't usually mean what he thought.

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

Compliance!

Ah thanks. Let's hope both occupations end one day. We need a 'river to the sea' type slogan for Ukraine, I think. Or maybe there is one.

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

Ditto in Gaza, the way it's looking.

Really? Have you seen how eastern Ukraine has been depopulated by the Russians, through deliberate policy (not the least by. recruiting all the men below 103 years old?)

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/ukraine-filtration-camps-forcibly-remove-russia/index.html

I can see why people (particularly on the left) get irate about the status of Palestinians. I fail to see why the same people are oddly pro-Russian in their sh*tty conflict.

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Just want to check, am I still a “fucking appeaser” for having been right, all along, about the Ukraine war?

Yes, well done on having predicted a stalemate throughout.

Oh...
February 27, 2022 Leon said:
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?

You actually combed back through PB to find that from February 2022?! Is your life really that empty?

30 second search pal, not hard.

Leon said:

In a dramatic twist in the Gazan war, the Houthi army has released a pro-Palestinian musical video which is so gay it could win Eurovision

I’m not joking. It’s hilarious. Watch to the end for the special “gay marching”


https://x.com/avivaklompas/status/1719867507983683944?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

JosiasJessop said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

Odd too that Israel blocked America from supplying Iron Dome anti-missile systems to Ukraine. War makes strange bedfellows.

I don't think that's really relevant to my comment. But as I said before when you raise that; given their expenditure rate of Iron Dome, I bet Israel are glad they didn't give permission...

tlg86 said:

I see the Foreign Office has had a paint job this morning:

https://twitter.com/JAHeale/status/1720011112521810270

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Just want to check, am I still a “fucking appeaser” for having been right, all along, about the Ukraine war?

Yes, well done on having predicted a stalemate throughout.

Oh...
February 27, 2022 Leon said:
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?

You actually combed back through PB to find that from February 2022?! Is your life really that empty?

30 second search pal, not hard.

No, the tragic bit is you quoting me on the week the war broke out. Feb 27, 2022

Not sure what this is possibly meant to prove

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

Didn't they conscript every able bodied man between 18 and 65?

So why wouldn't the average age be middle aged?

They didn't only conscript 18-25 year olds.

This is quite an exceptionally stupid remark, even by your own standards

FeersumEnjineeya said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

Ditto in Gaza, the way it's looking.

Really? Have you seen how eastern Ukraine has been depopulated by the Russians, through deliberate policy (not the least by. recruiting all the men below 103 years old?)

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/ukraine-filtration-camps-forcibly-remove-russia/index.html

I can see why people (particularly on the left) get irate about the status of Palestinians. I fail to see why the same people are oddly pro-Russian in their sh*tty conflict.

I'm not sure the intersection of the Venn diagram is that large. I'm at least as irate about the Russian invasion of Ukraine as the Israeli invasion of Gaza. In an ideal world, Putin and Netanyahu would both end up at the Hague alongside the leaders of Hamas.

I'm confused, Kinabalu reckons there's an ongoing occupation of Gaza, you reckon Netanyahu is invading Gaza.

Yours at least makes sense, since they weren't in Gaza and are going in now, but since Hamas declared war and attacked them and they're only defending themselves by going back after Hamas (which is entirely legal) why would anyone from Israel end up at the Hague?

Destroying Hamas is an entirely legitimate war goal.

If Hamas use human shields, then the Geneva Convention says that Hamas are committing the war crime there and Israel are entitled to kill human shields to get to Hamas.

I'm pretty sure the Geneva convention doesn't say that anyone has the right to kill human shields.

FeersumEnjineeya said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

Ditto in Gaza, the way it's looking.

Really? Have you seen how eastern Ukraine has been depopulated by the Russians, through deliberate policy (not the least by. recruiting all the men below 103 years old?)

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/ukraine-filtration-camps-forcibly-remove-russia/index.html

I can see why people (particularly on the left) get irate about the status of Palestinians. I fail to see why the same people are oddly pro-Russian in their sh*tty conflict.

I'm not sure the intersection of the Venn diagram is that large. I'm at least as irate about the Russian invasion of Ukraine as the Israeli invasion of Gaza. In an ideal world, Putin and Netanyahu would both end up at the Hague alongside the leaders of Hamas. Fat chance though.

tlg86 said:

I see the Foreign Office has had a paint job this morning:

https://twitter.com/JAHeale/status/1720011112521810270

FeersumEnjineeya said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

Ditto in Gaza, the way it's looking.

Really? Have you seen how eastern Ukraine has been depopulated by the Russians, through deliberate policy (not the least by. recruiting all the men below 103 years old?)

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/ukraine-filtration-camps-forcibly-remove-russia/index.html

I can see why people (particularly on the left) get irate about the status of Palestinians. I fail to see why the same people are oddly pro-Russian in their sh*tty conflict.

I'm not sure the intersection of the Venn diagram is that large. I'm at least as irate about the Russian invasion of Ukraine as the Israeli invasion of Gaza. In an ideal world, Putin and Netanyahu would both end up at the Hague alongside the leaders of Hamas.

I'm confused, Kinabalu reckons there's an ongoing occupation of Gaza, you reckon Netanyahu is invading Gaza.

Yours at least makes sense, since they weren't in Gaza and are going in now, but since Hamas declared war and attacked them and they're only defending themselves by going back after Hamas (which is entirely legal) why would anyone from Israel end up at the Hague?

Destroying Hamas is an entirely legitimate war goal.

If Hamas use human shields, then the Geneva Convention says that Hamas are committing the war crime there and Israel are entitled to kill human shields to get to Hamas.

I'm pretty sure the Geneva convention doesn't say that anyone has the right to kill human shields.

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Just want to check, am I still a “fucking appeaser” for having been right, all along, about the Ukraine war?

Yes, well done on having predicted a stalemate throughout.

Oh...
February 27, 2022 Leon said:
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?

You actually combed back through PB to find that from February 2022?! Is your life really that empty?

30 second search pal, not hard.

No, the tragic bit is you quoting me on the week the war broke out. Feb 27, 2022

Not sure what this is possibly meant to prove

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

Compliance!

Ah thanks. Let's hope both occupations end one day. We need a 'river to the sea' type slogan for Ukraine, I think. Or maybe there is one.

From the Dniepr to the Donbass, Ukraine will be one!

BartholomewRoberts said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

JosiasJessop said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

There are remarkably fewer people in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine since 2014, due to the truly murderous and genocidal policies of a Russian government that many of the people protesting over Israel tacitly support when they say the likes of "Let Russia have it cuz peace."

Odd, that.

Ditto in Gaza, the way it's looking.

Really? Have you seen how eastern Ukraine has been depopulated by the Russians, through deliberate policy (not the least by. recruiting all the men below 103 years old?)

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/ukraine-filtration-camps-forcibly-remove-russia/index.html

I can see why people (particularly on the left) get irate about the status of Palestinians. I fail to see why the same people are oddly pro-Russian in their sh*tty conflict.

I'm not sure the intersection of the Venn diagram is that large. I'm at least as irate about the Russian invasion of Ukraine as the Israeli invasion of Gaza. In an ideal world, Putin and Netanyahu would both end up at the Hague alongside the leaders of Hamas.

I'm confused, Kinabalu reckons there's an ongoing occupation of Gaza, you reckon Netanyahu is invading Gaza.

Yours at least makes sense, since they weren't in Gaza and are going in now, but since Hamas declared war and attacked them and they're only defending themselves by going back after Hamas (which is entirely legal) why would anyone from Israel end up at the Hague?

Destroying Hamas is an entirely legitimate war goal.

If Hamas use human shields, then the Geneva Convention says that Hamas are committing the war crime there and Israel are entitled to kill human shields to get to Hamas.

I'm pretty sure the Geneva convention doesn't say that anyone has the right to kill human shields.

Then you're wrong.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

Compliance!

Ah thanks. Let's hope both occupations end one day. We need a 'river to the sea' type slogan for Ukraine, I think. Or maybe there is one.

What occupation of Gaza?

An exceptionally stupid remark, from our MidEast expert.

Here you go:

Although Israel unilaterally withdrew its military forces and dismantled its Israeli settlements in Gaza in 2005 (and does not consider the territory held under military occupation), the UN, International Committee of the Red Cross, and many human-rights organization continued to consider it occupied as Israel military controls Gaza's borders, airspace, and sea access.[24][25][26]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

Compliance!

Ah thanks. Let's hope both occupations end one day. We need a 'river to the sea' type slogan for Ukraine, I think. Or maybe there is one.

From the Dniepr to the Donbass, Ukraine will be one!

That doesn't rhyme.

BartholomewRoberts said:

In war, you are always entitled to kill your enemy, as long as you are proportionate about it and stick to the rules of law. That is the whole point of war.

The crime is using human shields, not killing them. Hamas are the war criminals for using human shields. If they only way to kill Hamas is to bomb them and the human shields they're using, then they are allowed to be bombed.

Special rules exist around hospitals. Hospitals are prohibited to be attacked, but if they are being uses as a human shield then the other side is entitled to give an evacuation order warning that the hospital will be attacked as its being used by the enemies military. After sufficient warning, then the hospital may be bombed too and anyone who remains in it.

Don't use human shields is the point of the Geneva Convention, not don't kill them.

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

Didn't they conscript every able bodied man between 18 and 65?

So why wouldn't the average age be middle aged?

They didn't only conscript 18-25 year olds.

This is quite an exceptionally stupid remark, even by your own standards

Perhaps you can show me the error of my ways?

The median age in Ukraine is 44.7, they said all able bodied adults should join the military and could be conscripted to defend the nation, they banned anyone male 18-65 from leaving the country as they should be in the military instead.

Now the average age is 43. Below the median age of 44.7.

So the average is close to the average, and you find that shocking? Why?

Please tell me I don’t have to explain this to you

kinabalu said:

williamglenn said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

kinabalu said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

DavidL said:

Leon said:

StaffordKnot said:

Eabhal said:

DougSeal said:

Dura_Ace said:

Interesting interview with nightclub doorman lookalike Gen. Zaluzhny here in which he shares a Leonesque analysis of the SMO. Specifically: a) it's a stalemate and b) Ukraine are going to run out of people before Russia does.

The fact that it's in the in-house journal of the CIA probably means something but I can't decide what. Maybe they are prepping him for the succession when the bin liner full of green t-shirts goes off to the charity shop.

What does the last sentence of that post mean?

Zelensky's resignation.

The idea that Ukraine will run out of people before Russia is a fallacy and it would be surprising if it were the view of the CIA. Whilst Russia may be three times the size, in population, there are many things that balance the scales:

• At best Russia can use the population aged between 18 and 40. Ukraine can, is and will put people into the fight well outside those age brackets.
  
• The Russian army is predominantly male and conscripting women would be a step too far even for Putin.
  
• In the early 2000s, Russia was coming out of a steep decline in birth rate. As a result, even if they were all sent into the army (and we know that huge numbers have left) it wouldn't be able to field more than 500,000 men each year to replace casualties.
  
• The Ukrainian army is fighting in a very narrow area. Russia on the other hand has to keep forces across 11 time zones.
  

So, whilst on an arithmetical basis Russia could continue with its current losses ad infinitum, in practice that is not the case. That is why we have reached a stalemate this year. Longer term, if the US keeps supporting Ukraine, the balance of power will be with them.

The average age of Ukrainian soldiers in the Ukrainian front line is now…. 43

Think about that. It’s not a case of “Ukraine might run out of men”, Ukraine has ALREADY run out of men

I don't think that will make nearly such a good song as 19. I read a story yesterday that Russia was now looking to recruit women for the fight in Ukraine.

Both sides are exhausted. I think this may be fizzling out into that Korean armistice

Time magazine agrees with the Economist

“But Zelensky’s convictions haven’t changed. Despite the recent setbacks on the battlefield, he does not intend to give up fighting or to sue for any kind of peace. On the contrary, his belief in Ukraine’s ultimate victory over Russia has hardened into a form that worries some of his advisers. It is immovable, verging on the messianic. “He deludes himself,” one of his closest aides tells me in frustration. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.””

https://time.com/6329188/ukraine-volodymyr-zelensky-interview/

This is why the US are going to have to "Diem" him.

I reckon we will see tacit pressure on Kyiv, from Washington, to quietly seek an armistice over the winter. They might not call it that, it could be framed as a temporary ceasefire, it suits both sides to pretend the War is still going

But it suits both sides to pause the war indefinitely, even more. To rest their men. To rebuild armies. To stop the hideous bleeding

So the lines will become frozen. A tacit acceptance of Russian victory in a few provinces at a terrible cost that Russia won’t want to repeat

In return DC will agree to arm Ukraine to the extent Russia will never try another, further offensive. Maybe something like that will be the endgame

Just a reminder - Y-axis starts at zero:

I wonder how that looks on people rather than area (under occupation)?

Compliance!

Ah thanks. Let's hope both occupations end one day. We need a 'river to the sea' type slogan for Ukraine, I think. Or maybe there is one.

Is 'occupation' the best way to describe the status of Gaza before October 7th? If it were occupied, they wouldn't now need to invade it.

Ok, it could maybe be improved upon. What's the best word for being controlled and imprisoned by another country but not physically occupied by it?

boulay said:

I was quite impressed by the below from the storm - it’s roof slate that has pierced a friend’s Mini Countryman. Looks like some sort of prehistoric tool, the roof slate does as well.

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

In war, you are always entitled to kill your enemy, as long as you are proportionate about it and stick to the rules of law. That is the whole point of war.

The crime is using human shields, not killing them. Hamas are the war criminals for using human shields. If they only way to kill Hamas is to bomb them and the human shields they're using, then they are allowed to be bombed.

Special rules exist around hospitals. Hospitals are prohibited to be attacked, but if they are being uses as a human shield then the other side is entitled to give an evacuation order warning that the hospital will be attacked as its being used by the enemies military. After sufficient warning, then the hospital may be bombed too and anyone who remains in it.

Don't use human shields is the point of the Geneva Convention, not don't kill them.

In war, you are always entitled to kill your enemy, as long as you are proportionate about it and stick to the rules of law. That is the whole point of war.

I think we are entitled to a citation for that one, and also a definition of "enemy".