David Strom Asks If Russia Is Losing Its War Against Ukraine

Writing at Hot Air, David Strom observes that with Ukraine suddenly being able to operate with fewer constraints placed on it by the United States, it is able to strike deeper into Russia and inflict more damage on critical infrastructure. He writes:

At the same time that Trump reduced American aid, he also allowed Ukraine to take the gloves off and to put Russian assets in Russia at risk, and the results are stunning. Not only have the tactical battle lines extended into Russia, making logistics infinitely harder, but Ukraine is now systematically dismantling key parts of Russia's economic engine and weapons production facilities. 

And he cites the following from a Reuters article:

    "Virtually all major oil refineries in central Russia ‌have been forced to halt or scale back fuel output following Ukrainian drone attacks in recent days, according to official data and sources.

    The combined capacity of refineries that have fully or partially halted operations exceeds 83 million metric ⁠tons per year, or around 238,000 tons per day. That accounts for around one quarter of Russia's total refining capacity, according to data and sources who spoke on condition of anonymity...

    One of Russia's largest refineries, Kirishi, with capacity of 20 million metric tons per year, has been fully shut since May 5, according to the ⁠sources."      

And, according to the Washington Post, "Russia’s losses from Ukrainian strikes have already exceeded $7 billion, while oil production has reportedly dropped by around 400,000 barrels per day."  So, even as oil prices have sky rocketed due to the conflict with Iran, Russia cannot take full advantage of price surge. Moreover, it places Russia in the position of increasingly becoming a vassal to China. 

    While this sounds good for Ukraine, unmentioned by Strom is the acute manpower shortage faced by Ukraine. For instance, in an article assessing Ukraine's opportunities and challenges in the next several months, Reuters reports:

    Assessing the military situation, John Helin of the Finland-based Black Bird conflict-analysis group echoed Biletsky in saying ‌fatigue was ⁠a problem for Russian forces, while Ukraine's war effort is hampered by a manpower shortage.

    "It does seem like, four or five months into this year, it's much more likely that the Russians will get exhausted before the Ukrainian problems come to a breaking point," he told Reuters. 

The Reuters article continues:

    Russian troops are bearing down on eastern Ukraine's "Fortress Belt" where fighting is raging inside the strategic city of Kostiantynivka, its southern end.

 

    The constellation of heavily fortified ​cities anchors Ukrainian defences. Capturing it would position ​Russia to threaten the rest of the Donbas.

 

    Biletsky, ⁠whose forces hold over one-tenth of the total front line, said his troops were firmly holding the flank around Sloviansk, the belt's northern bastion, and forcing Russia to attack the city head-on.

 

    Such costly assaults have helped drain Russian forces and led to heavy losses of field commanders, he said, in what ​he described as a professional degradation of Moscow's military.

 

    "The lack of personnel no longer allows them to advance the way they did, for example, ​a year ago," said Biletsky.

 

    Biletsky ⁠said it was too early to draw conclusions from Kyiv's recent success, but that Ukraine could capitalise on it by continuing mid-range attacks and advancing "carefully".

 

    Moscow is "radically losing" in battlefield communications because of Musk's crackdown on use of Starlink, Biletsky said.

 

    But he described the sides at parity in evolving technology - with Ukraine leading in unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) and heavy bomber drones, and Russia winning the race for fibre-optic drones, which cannot be jammed.

 

    A ⁠potential blueprint for ​a modernised Ukrainian army, his corps has led efforts to transform training and integrate new technology such as UGVs as ​an important part of its battlefield strategy.

 

    Biletsky's units lead the way in deploying stealthy kamikaze drones and robots armed with machineguns or rocket launchers to replace significant portions of infantrymen, aiming for 30% by 2027, he said.

 

    The next "revolution" will allow commanders ​to stage more "creative" combined assault operations while conserving precious troops, Biletsky said.

 

    "It will happen this year, and I think we'll show how our corps is a vivid example of it," he said.

Russians Using Indians As Cannon Fodder

France 24 reports: "Deceived and deployed: Russia recruits Indians as cannon fodder on the Ukrainian front." There are only 44 confirmed instances, so not something that is going to tip the war. Nevertheless, the article indicates that the men had been brought to Russia on the promise of legitimate jobs, but were later sent to fight on the front lines in Ukraine. Talk about a bait and switch.  

Trump: Russia and China Have Been Conducting Underground Nuclear Tests

Trump stated in an interview with 60 Minutes' Nora O'Donnell that Russia and China have been conducting underground nuclear tests, and that this is the reason for his directive that the U.S. resume testing of nuclear weapons. There really isn't anything more in the article other than the standard denials by China and a discussion of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty which bans all nuclear explosions. 

Shotgun Armed Ukrainians Shooting Down Drones From Airplanes

The New York Post reports that Ukrainians armed with shotguns and rifles, flying in old prop-driven Yak-52 airplanes are accounting for 10-12% of all drones shot down by Ukrainian forces. The article describes the tactic:

    The Yak-52 is so basic that it has no radar, with the pilots only guided by radio before having to rely on their own eyes to spot the Russian drones soaring over the border.

    The prop planes fly within 200 to 300 feet of the drone before the gunner opens his plane’s canopy to fire.

    One of the gunners of the 11th likened the experience to an extreme version of a soldier having to fire his gun while riding on a horse.

    The cockpit gets so cold that the pilots and gunners need thick jackets and fur-lined helmets to stay warm, yet another detail that harkens back to the beginnings of aerial combat.  

Ukraine And The Sunk Cost Fallacy

President Trump and his Administration have done more than anyone to try and reach a peace agreement concerning Ukraine. Special U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff said on Sunday that Russian President Putin would agree to allow the U.S. and its allies to offer NATO Article 5-like security protections to Ukraine as part of a larger piece deal involving territorial concessions to Russia. 

 Outlining some of the details about the private discussions, Witkoff also said Russia had agreed to enact a law that it would not "go after any other European countries and violate their sovereignty. And there was plenty more.”   

As for the territorial concessions, "[t]he Russian leader is said to have told the US president that he wants the eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions, adding he would give up other Ukrainian territories held by his troops in return." 

    As John Daniel Davidson writes at The Federalist, "The Ukraine War Was Always Going To End This Way." 

     This formula — Ukrainian territorial concessions in exchange for security and political independence — was always how the Ukraine war was going to end. The corporate press is pretending to be shocked and scandalized by the mention of an adjustment of Ukraine’s borders, but the outrage is feigned. Given Russia’s strategic imperatives and Ukraine’s indefensible borders, the broad outlines of a peace settlement are exactly what they were in February 2022, before Russia launched its invasion.

* * *

    Hence, Moscow is likely focused entirely on territorial adjustments in the southern and eastern parts of Ukraine, which makes perfect sense to anyone with passing familiarity with Ukraine’s recent history.

    Ukraine’s current borders are a relic of Soviet propaganda, invented by Premier Nikita Khrushchev in 1954 as part of an effort to make the Warsaw Pact look like a diverse coalition of strong states. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, those fictional borders were made “real,” leaving Ukraine with a Soviet nuclear arsenal, Russia’s Black Sea fleet, and control of the ports of Sevastopol and Odessa.

    The situation this created was obviously untenable. Under pressure from the United States, Kiev returned the nuclear arsenal and the Black Sea fleet to Russia, and signed a long-term lease agreement giving Moscow control over the warm-water port at Sevastopol. But it left Ukraine itself with an indefensible territory and millions of Russian inside its borders. As Mario Loyola explained in these pages three weeks before Moscow launched its invasion in February 2022, Ukraine in 1991 wasn’t really a viable state: “It wasn’t at all clear that Ukraine would be strong enough to maintain both political independence and territorial integrity given the weight of vital Russian interests involved.”

    As long as Ukraine stayed in Russia’s orbit, it could control its territory. But, as Loyola writes, “the moment it definitively broke away from Moscow in 2014, it immediately lost control of those areas that were most vital to Russian interests, and nobody with an even minimal sense of Russian and Ukrainian history can pretend to have been taken by surprise.”

This is the obvious and logical conclusion to the war. 

    But there are many interests opposed to this outcome. For instance, in an article published on Saturday at The Conversation, Olena Borodyna argued against any territorial land concessions because it would leave Ukraine vulnerable (but more vulnerable than it is now?):

    For Ukraine, the danger of such a deal is clear. Russia might pause large-scale physical warfare in Ukraine under a deal, but it would almost certainly continue destabilising the country from within.

    Having never been punished for violating past agreements to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity, such as when it annexed Crimea in 2014, Moscow would have little incentive to honour new ones. The government in Kyiv, and Ukrainian society more broadly, would see any accompanying security guarantees as fragile at best and temporary at worst.

    The result would probably be a deepening of Ukraine’s vulnerabilities. Some Ukrainians might support doubling down on militarisation and investment in defence technologies. Others, losing faith in national security and reconstruction, could disengage or leave the country. Either way, in the absence of national unity, reconstruction would become far more difficult.

She also warns of continued Russian attempts to disrupt European infrastructure, such as attacks on undersea cables, and the risk of destabilizing Europe if Ukrainian continue to flee the country. Moreover, she argues, reconstruction would be more expensive and risky because, she envisions, territorial concessions would make Ukraine politically unstable. 

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has already signaled his opposition, stating that Ukraine won't give up land Russia doesn't already occupy, but also indicating that the Ukrainian constitution does not allow for land concessions. And, according to this article from the Guardian--"Ukrainian mood hardens as MPs insist country should not be forced to surrender."--Ukrainian politicians and the public are expressing opposition to such a plan because it would be acknowledging defeat, being the perfect example of the sunk cost fallacy:

     Sevgil Musaieva, the editor of Ukrainian Pravda, said in a column published on Sunday: “We are being forced to behave as if we have to admit defeat. Not military, but political. Not a surrender of arms, but a surrender of thought.”

    She said this was “the most dangerous form of defeat. Because if we accept it internally then external defeat will only be a matter of time.” In fact, “for the first time in a century, Ukrainians put up a worthy resistance”, she said.

    “We have no right to forget Bucha, Izium, Mariupol. We have no right to forget the torture, the mass graves, the children killed and abducted by Russia,” she said, arguing that “without memory we will lose ourselves”.

    Oleksii Kovzhun, a popular Kyiv-based video blogger, said Putin’s demands were “akin to capitulation” and that “Zelenskyy could not legally hand over Donetsk even if he would want to (and he does not)” because it would have to be subject to a referendum. “Ukrainians will not allow it,” he said.

Of course they can be cavalier about peace because they are not financing the war. The U.S. and Europe are paying for it. As I've noted before, the U.S. could have more than paid for fixing every bridge in the country for the amount of money spent in Ukraine, something of much greater worth to the average American. Trump should make it clear that Ukraine can choose to reject a peace deal, but by doing so it will also be rejecting American assistance. There is no reason that we should be trapped by the sunk cost fallacy. 

Oops: Ukraine Claims To Have Stolen Info On Russian Nuclear Subs

From the Business Insider: "Ukraine says it stole intel from the Russian Navy and found weak points in its newest nuclear missile submarine." An excerpt:

    Specialists working for Ukraine's military intelligence agency, the HUR, breached the Russian Navy and obtained internal documents concerning the new Project 955A Borei-class submarine Knyaz Pozharsky, which entered service less than two weeks ago.

    The HUR specialists got their hands on a list of the submarine's crew, including information about positions, fitness levels, and combat instructions, as well as data regarding the boat's layout, such as diagrams of its survivability systems, the intelligence agency said in a statement over the weekend.

Just Some Tsunami News

•  "8.8 magnitude quake strikes off Russia’s Far East. Tsunami waves reach Japan, Hawaii and California"--AP. From the article:

    One of the strongest earthquakes ever recorded struck off Russia’s sparsely populated Far East [the Kamchatka peninsula] early Wednesday, sending tsunami waves into Japan, Hawaii and the U.S. West Coast. Several people were injured, but none gravely, and no major damage has been reported so far.

    Authorities warned the risk from the 8.8 magnitude quake could last for hours, and millions of people potentially in the path of the waves were initially told to move away from the shore or seek high ground.

    The worst appeared to have passed for many areas, including the U.S., Japan and the affected parts of Russia. But Chile raised its tsunami warning to the highest level for most of its lengthy Pacific coast and said it was evacuating hundreds of people.   

 Space Weather News' morning video today mentioned that the it is often the points opposite a quake that receive the strongest tsunamis, which is why parts of South America may have a high risk. In any event, the AP article adds:

    The quake struck at 11:24 a.m. in Kamchatka with a magnitude of 8.8 and a depth of about 21 kilometers (13 miles), according to the U.S. Geological Survey. It was centered offshore, about 120 kilometers (75 miles) from Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Kamchatka’s regional capital.

    Multiple aftershocks as strong as 6.9 magnitude followed.

    Russia’s Oceanology Institute said tsunami waves might have been as high as 10 to 15 meters (30 to 50 feet) in some sections of the Kamchatka coast — but the highest were less than 6 meters (20 feet) near the populated areas of the peninsula and the nearby Kuril islands.

    Meanwhile, lava began to flow Wednesday from a volcano on Kamchatka, the largest active one in the Northern Hemisphere. Observers also heard explosions, the Kamchatka branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences’ geophysical service said.

• "Tsunami warnings fading after one of the largest earthquakes ever recorded. Here’s what to know"--AP. 
• "Some facts about the strongest earthquakes ever recorded"--AP.  Brief facts about the strongest recorded earthquakes. Note that these are not necessarily the most powerful earthquakes in history, but those where equipment existed to measure the magnitude of the earthquake, which really makes them only the most powerful within the past 100 years or so. 

Zelensky: Ukraine Elections Possible If Impossible Conditions Are Met

 Radio Free Europe reports: "Zelenskiy: Ukraine Elections Possible This Year If Martial Law Ends." That all well and good, but what would it require for Zelenskiy to lift martial law? 

“When it comes to 2025, should we manage to achieve the end of the hot phase of the war for Ukraine; once we manage to achieve it along with a strong army, strong weaponry package, and strong security guarantees, then this [elections] will happen," Zelenskiy said in the interview where he was accompanied by his wife, Olena.

So maybe it will end after the U.S. pumps billions more into Ukraine, its population has recovered enough it can actually have a strong army, and there is a security treaty between Ukraine and the U.S. and/or Europe that allows the Ukrainian tale to wag the Western military dog.

Ragnarok Part XVI - Video of Oreshnik Missile Attack on Dnipro

A good analysis of the attack and weapon system, plus clips from a couple different positions of the hypersonic warheads striking Dnipro. I've never seen anything quite like it. Vox Popoli notes that the Russians appear to be readying a second strike with this system.

>

 VIDEO: "Now I am scared: the New Oreshnik Missile Attack on Dnipro"
Millennium 7 * HistoryTech (25 min.)

Ragnarok Part XV - Chinese Cargo Ship Deliberately Cut Cables

From the Daily Mail: "Chinese cargo ship deliberately severed two critical data cables in Baltic Sea by dragging anchor for 100 miles while off radar in attack 'orchestrated by the Kremlin', report claims." An excerpt: 

    European investigators told the newspaper that the massive Yi Peng 3 bulk carrier - 225 meters long, 32 meters wide and loaded with Russian fertilizer - turned off its radar system and dropped its anchor as it glided through Swedish waters to cut the Sweden-Lithuania cable at around 9pm local time on November 17.

    Six hours later, the Ying Peng 3, owned and operated by Ningbo Yipeng Shipping, is alleged to have cut the Germany-Lithuania cable, having travelled around 110 miles. It then began zigzagging, before it raised its anchor and carried on sailing.

    A senior investigator indicated that the ship's path must've been deliberate: 'It's extremely unlikely that the captain would not have noticed that his ship dropped and dragged its anchor, losing speed for hours and cutting cables on the way.'

    Danish Navy ships pursued the ship and forced it to anchor in the Kattegat Strait, which connects the Baltic and the North seas. An initial investigation revealed the ship's anchor and hull was damaged in a manner consistent with damage suffered from deliberate dragging. 

    NATO ships are now guarding the vessel, with Swedish and German authorities negotiating with the ship's owner to get access to the vessel and the ship's crew for further investigation.

Ragnarok Part XIV -- Escalation

Things are hearing up quickly in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. I saw a meme from the Babylon Bee a week or two ago stating that the Democrats had come up with a new way to keep Trump from taking office: starting World War III. It may have been prophetic.

    Earlier this week, the Biden Administration authorized Ukraine to use US-supplied longer range missiles--the the Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMs--for deeper strikes inside Russia. Which Ukraine promptly did, striking a Russian arsenal near the town of Karachev in the Bryansk region of Russia. This is not the first time Ukraine has used ATACMs against Russian military targets (that would have been earlier this spring) but it apparently was the first to strike inside Russia proper. 

    In an interesting move, the Biden Administration has also authorized the provision of anti-personnel mines to the Ukrainians. The shift in policy with land mines, the article reports, "is needed to stymie recent Russian advances against the Ukrainian front lines, according to the official."

    Ukraine officials now claim that Russia has retaliated by lobbing an ICBM (albeit with a conventional warhead) at a target in Ukraine (although U.S. officials dispute that, claiming it was "only" an experimental intermediate range ballistic missile). But whatever it was, "it appeared to be a nuclear-capable weapon that carried multiple warheads, in a further escalation of the 33-month-old war."

    Concurrently, Russian President Putin has revised its nuclear attack doctrine. "The updated doctrine now states that Russia will consider as a joint attack any attack from a nonnuclear country backed by a nuclear power," Politico reports. The new doctrine "also noted that the country could retaliate with nuclear force to a conventional weapons attack that threatens its sovereignty." Russia is also unhappy with the U.S. opening a new ballistic missile defense base in Poland on November 13.

    Meanwhile, "[s]ecret documents revealed Wednesday that Berlin has begun making plans for how it could help deploy as many as 800,000 NATO troops — including Americans — into Ukraine as Russia’s nuclear saber-rattling reaches new heights." 

    Finally, it appears that China may be interjecting itself into the conflict (again). Authorities believe that the Chinese bulk carrier Yi Peng 3 was involved in the damage of two subsea communication cables in the Baltic Sea earlier this week. The ship appears to be detained by Dutch forces currently while the matter is investigated. Nevertheless, the whole thing is reminiscent of an incident almost a year ago when a Hong Kong flagged ship, the NewNew Polar Bear, apparently dragged one of its anchors for hundreds of kilometers through Finnish waters, ripping up an undersea gas pipeline. In that case, however, the ship had left the scene before authorities realized what had happened. 

    One of the things that has always puzzled me in this conflict is the why of it. It has always seemed faintly ridiculous to assume that Putin had any interest in reconstituting the Soviet Empire. Even when considering the more general invasion of Ukraine by Russia, the conflict always appeared to me to be primarily about Russia protecting its ability to access and use its bases at Sevastopol in the Crimea rather than an attempt to take all of Ukraine; and, frankly, if Ukraine had not cut off water to Crimea, this would still be a low level conflict between Ukraine and its breakaway regions. But is there a spiritual dimension to all of this? Is this conflict intended by dark, spiritual powers to eliminate or reduce a certain broad group of people? Because the only peoples directly involved in this conflict are those in North America and Europe (including western Russia).

Ragnarok Part XIII -- Russia Willing to Negotiate and a North Korean Mind Virus

 First up, the New York post reports that "Russia floats idea of ‘reset’ with United States after Trump declares victory." Their hope is that a business savvy and pragmatic president like Trump will not want to keep throwing good money after bad, and so he might be able to get both sides to sit down for serious discussions. Ukraine knows that this will result in it having to concede some territory to Russia, so expect Ukraine to try and throw a wrench into all of this.

    Next up, "North Korean soldiers hooked on porn after getting internet access for first time while helping Russia fight Ukraine: report." Not having ever had free access to the internet before, the North Korean soldiers apparently have discovered and become quite taken with all the porn. But I'm sure that along with the porn, they are probably getting a look at the life (and prosperity) of all places not North Korea. I'm not sure that North Korea will be able to accept these troops back into their country because of what they now know.

Russian Soldiers DEI'd

The Daily Mail reports: "North Korean troops 'gun down their own Russian comrades after shooting in the wrong direction' in latest frontline humiliation for Putin." In other news from the Ukrainian front, the War Zone reports: "Ukrainian Defenses In The East Are Buckling, Russian Advance Is Accelerating."

Ragnarok Part XII - South Korea Considers Supplying Weapons and Munitions to Ukraine

According to The War Zone, South Korea may respond to North Korea's provision of men and material to Russia by sending its own weapons and advisors to Ukraine. The article, entitled "South Korea Could Send Advisors, Weapons To Ukraine Over North Korean Troop Movements," indicates that the first North Korean troops are expected to arrive in Russia's Kursk region today. It is also believed that North Korea has been supplying fighter pilots to Russia. In response, South Korea is considering sending advisors and weapons to Ukraine, which might include the Cheongung-II medium-range surface-to-air missile system,  K9 self-propelled howitzers (as well as shells), K2 main battle tanks, and Chunmoo multiple rocket launchers.

Ragnarok--Part XI--North Korea Sending Troops To Fight In Russia-Ukraine War

 One can argue that the war in Ukraine is already a world war due to the equipment being provided to the combatants by other countries; e.g., NATO countries providing equipment and aid to Ukraine and China, Iran and their allies assisting Russia. 

    But it is one thing to provide equipment or even military advisors, and quite another to have a substantial number of boots on the ground. Thus, I read with interest various news articles reporting that North Korea is supplying troops to Russia to fight in the Ukrainian conflict.

• "North Korean troops prep for combat to support Russia in Ukraine war: ‘Grave security threat’"--New York Post.
• "North Korean Troops Seen Moving to Russia in Satellite Images"--Newsweek.
• "Zelenskyy says 10,000 North Koreans could join Russian forces in Ukraine as he pushes ‘victory plan’"--AP.
• "Ukraine's Zelenskiy says North Korean officers deployed alongside Russians"--Reuters.
• "Nearly 11,000 North Korean Troops In Russia Preparing To Enter The Fight Says Ukraine’s Spy Boss"--The War Zone.

The War Zone article reports:

    “They will be ready [to fight in Ukraine] on Nov. 1,” Lt. Gen. Kyrylo Budanov told TWZ.

    The North Korean troops will be using Russian equipment and ammunition, said Budanov. The first cadre of 2,600 soldiers will go to Kursk, where Ukraine has established a heavily fought-over foothold (more on that later). It is unclear where the remaining North Korean troops will go, he added.

    “We don’t have the full picture right now,” said Budanov.

    Pyongyang’s forces, as we previously noted, have already been killed in Ukraine.

And:

    As we previously reported, Russian President Vladimir Putin submitted a draft law to the Russian State Duma on Monday seeking ratification of a strategic partnership between Moscow and Pyongyang, hammered in June. It calls for each side to provide military assistance to each other in the event of war.

    In another sign of the burgeoning relationship between Moscow and Pyongyang, a report emerged on Thursday claiming that Russian troops are training to use North Korean self-propelled artillery.

But the article also notes that the U.S. had not been able to verify Ukraine's claims. But that may have changed, as the Newsweek article reports that South Korean intelligence has satellite images from mid-August showing approximately 1,500 North Korean special forces boarding Russian transport ships. The New York Post article adds: "The troops, transported to Vladivostok from Oct. 8 to 13, have received Russian military uniforms, weapons, and fake Russian IDs, South Korea’s National Intelligence Service (NIS) said." I can't tell if there were two groups that went to Russia, or if the Russian ships were only just leaving North Korea.

    Newsweek also reports that "[f]urther intelligence reports released on Friday by South Korea stated that North Korea had sent a total of 12,000 troops to assist Russia in its ongoing war against Ukraine." The same article reports:

    Some 18 North Korean soldiers are believed to have deserted the Russian frontline, with Kremlin fighters reportedly searching for them, it was reported on Wednesday.

    The troops were deployed in Russia's Kursk and Bryansk oblasts, about four miles from the border with Ukraine, when they deserted, the public broadcasting company of Ukraine, Suspilne, reported.

    Intelligence officials cited by the broadcaster said the Russian military is searching for the North Korean soldiers, while commanders are trying to conceal the desertion from their higher-ups.

-----------------

Prior Posts:

• Ragnarok
• Ragnarok--Part II
• Ragnarok--Part III: What Are Russia's Intentions?
• Ragnarok Part IV--What Response?
• Ragnarok Part V--Ripples and Consequences
• Ragnarok Part VI--Taking East Ukraine
• Ragnarok Part VII -- Russian Occupation of the Donbas
• Ragnarok Part VIII -- Russia Invades Ukraine
• Ragnarok Part IX -- Could This Go Nuclear?
• Ragnarok--Part X: U.S. Sending Longer Range Missiles to Ukraine?
  

World War III Before Christmas?

The New York Post notes that "Even Democrats want Harris-Biden to end their cowardice and remove Ukraine’s handcuffs." I laughed a bit at the "Even..." part since, historically, Democrat controlled administrations (e.g., Wilson, FDR, Kennedy/Johnson) are far more eager to get us involved in major conflicts than Republicans.

    Apparently upset that they haven't yet gotten the U.S. embroiled in a world war, "[o]n Wednesday, Democratic Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Ben Cardin declared the 'time has come' for easing Harris-Biden restrictions on Kyiv’s use of US weapons, given 'Vladimir Putin’s relentless attacks on Ukrainian civilians.'" But the editorial board also mentions that "[a] bipartisan House group issued similar calls: 'Unless these restrictions are lifted, Ukraine will continue to struggle to achieve victory' and Ukrainians will 'suffer unnecessary death, loss and hardship,' they said." 

    Not to sound harsh, but so what? Do you think that Ukrainian president Zelenskyy cares if he gets the U.S. dragged into a world war--perhaps a nuclear conflict resulting in tens of millions dead--so long as it helps him or his country? As Charles de Gaulle noted, "Countries don't have friends, only interests." 

    The hot issue right now is that Ukraine wants to be able to use Western supplied missiles against targets deep inside Russia. Ukraine's interest in using U.S. or U.K. supplied long range missiles is apparent: "Ukraine sees the ability to use long-range missiles behind enemy lines as a game-changer," reports ABC News, "allowing it to target air bases, supply depots, and communication centers hundreds of kilometers (miles) over the border." 

    It argues that this would help reduce Russia’s air superiority and weaken supply lines needed to launch daily airstrikes against Ukraine – with drones, missiles, and powerful glide bombs – and to sustain its military ground offensive into Ukraine. 

    With winter likely to slow that advance, long-range air strike capabilities will become a higher priority. Kyiv wants to go back on the offensive to offset military manpower shortages 2½ years into the war and to protect its badly-damaged power infrastructure. 

It's debatable how effective the missiles would be since, as the BBC notes:

    ... Kyiv has been asking to use long-range Western missiles inside Russia for so long now that Moscow has already taken precautions for the eventuality of the restrictions being lifted.

    It has moved bombers, missiles and some of the infrastructure that maintains them further back, away from the border with Ukraine and beyond the range of [the Anglo-French] Storm Shadow [missiles].

    But what overwhelming interest does the United States have in Ukraine that is worth the risk of a nuclear war? 

    I don't buy the excuse that it is needed to curb Russian expansionism. Even if you accept that Russia is interested in expansion, the fact of the matter is that Russia can barely wage a war against Ukraine on its very borders. What makes anyone think it could wage a successful war against NATO? 

    And arguments that it helps strengthen us against China are ludicrous. It's like arguing that pumping up your front tire will keep the back from going flat. China's role both as a consumer of Russian exports and in supplying goods and materials to Russia is not weakening China, but strengthening it--especially in its influence over Russia. 

    So what is the U.S. or NATO interest in Ukraine? That our politicians' corruption and bribery not be exposed? That secret biolabs not be revealed? That our "strategic thinkers" not be revealed as empty suits? That certain corporations see record profits selling weapons? What compelling interest do we have in continually upping the ante?

    And lest you think that there will be no consequences, Russian president Putin raises a good point about when a proxy war ceases to be a proxy war and become a direct conflict. As CNN reports:

    Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned NATO alliance leaders that a move to lift restrictions on Ukraine’s use of longer-range Western missiles to strike deep inside his country would be considered an act of war.

    “This will mean that NATO countries – the United States and European countries – are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us,” Putin told reporters on Thursday. 

And, pulling from a lengthier quote in a Vox Day piece:

    “There is an attempt to substitute concepts. Because we are not talking about allowing or prohibiting the Kiev regime to strike at Russian territory. It is already striking with the help of unmanned aerial vehicles and other means. But when it comes to using high–precision long-range Western-made weapons, it’s a completely different story. The fact is that, as I have already said, and any experts will confirm this (both here and in the West), the Ukrainian army is not able to strike with modern high-precision long-range systems of Western production. It can’t do that. This is possible only with the use of satellite data, which Ukraine does not have — this is data only from satellites of either the European Union or the United States, in general, from NATO satellites. This is the first one.

    “The second, and very important, perhaps key, is that flight missions to these missile systems can, in fact, only be carried out by military personnel of NATO countries. Ukrainian servicemen cannot do this. And therefore, it is not a question of allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or not to allow it. It’s about deciding whether NATO countries are directly involved in a military conflict or not. If this decision is made, it will mean nothing more than the direct participation of NATO countries, the United States, and European countries in the war in Ukraine. This is their direct involvement.

    “And this, of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature of the conflict. This will mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the very essence of this conflict, we will make appropriate decisions based on the threats that will be created to us.”

    Those bleating about supporting Ukraine have no winning strategy.  Rather, the strategy at this point seems to be to keep Ukraine supplied with enough war materials (and cash to line the pockets of its oligarchs) to be a constant thorn in the side of Russia. And that would work if we were discussing fairly equally matched countries. But even with Western support, Ukraine lacks the resources--manpower, manufacturing--to maintain a stalemate, let alone defeat Russia. Rather, its resources are declining. The result is that in order to even maintain a stalemate, the West must continually enlarge and expand the aid it provides. 

    But, as Putin is warning, that expansion of aid and assistance will at some point cross a threshold where it is no longer a proxy war. Perhaps it will be enough that the West will be providing the weapons, manning the weapons, and targeting the weapons, as Putin alleges. Perhaps it will not come until a missile strikes a civilian target, whether by mistake or otherwise, and the Russian people (and Putin's rivals) scream for blood. 

    So what do you think? Will we see World War III before Christmas?

"Trust the Science": Journals Closing Because Of Tsunami Of Fake Research

Legal Insurrection is running a news story today entitled "Fake Science Proves Problematic for Academic Publishing as Journals Close From Research Fraud." An excerpt:

    Fake studies have flooded the publishers of top scientific journals, leading to thousands of retractions and millions of dollars in lost revenue. The biggest hit has come to Wiley, a 217-year-old publisher based in Hoboken, N.J., which Tuesday will announce that it is closing 19 journals, some of which were infected by large-scale research fraud.

    In the past two years, Wiley has retracted more than 11,300 papers that appeared compromised, according to a spokesperson, and closed four journals. It isn’t alone: At least two other publishers have retracted hundreds of suspect papers each. Several others have pulled smaller clusters of bad papers.

    Although this large-scale fraud represents a small percentage of submissions to journals, it threatens the legitimacy of the nearly $30 billion academic publishing industry and the credibility of science as a whole.

    The discovery of nearly 900 fraudulent papers in 2022 at IOP Publishing, a physical sciences publisher, was a turning point for the nonprofit. “That really crystallized for us, everybody internally, everybody involved with the business,” said Kim Eggleton, head of peer review and research integrity at the publisher. “This is a real threat.”

The article notes, at least as to Wiley, that "[t]he journals are associated with Wiley’s Hindawi subsidiary, an Egypt-based house that published 250 journals and was acquired in 2021." It also blames AI for making it easier for the "paper mills" to fake research and game the peer-review system. 

    The article also explains:

    Paper mills use AI to produce fake publications, which are then sold to researchers.  Those researchers will pay between $1,000 and S$25,000 for the material. While the quality of the product is poor, it seems that the articles still manage to pass peer review.

    Additionally, paper mills will pay publishers to accept their fake studies.

Unsurprisingly, "[t]he nation with the highest number of potential fakes was China, contributing to just over half the red flags. Russia, Turkey, Egypt, and India were also significant contributors." 

The Deep State Wants To Ratchet Up War Against Russia (Updated)

Breitbart reports: "Intel Lawmakers Urge Biden to Allow Ukraine to Strike Russia with U.S.-Provided Weapons." The House Intelligence Committee, which are lapdogs to the 3-letter agencies, want the Administration to authorize Ukraine to strike at targets within Russia's borders with U.S. provided weapons, as well as train more Ukrainian F-16 pilots.

Related: "Why Is No One Concerned About the Fact That Russia Is Doing Nuclear Exercises on the Ukraine Border?"--Andrew Anglin, Unz Review. Sounds like someone is concerned.

Bombs & Bants Episode 126

 An irreverent discussion of top news stories including more cash for Ukraine, spoiled brats at Columbia, who is the bigger jackass--Biden or AOC--and a lot more. Also, here is a link to the article that I mentioned that explains why the money allotted for Ukraine is too little, too late, and won't get them the munitions they need because we can't produce them fast enough: "What $61 Billion for Ukraine Won’t Do" by Ted Snider at The American Conservative. Besides challenging the absurd contention that Russia will invade Europe if we don't stop him in Ukraine, Snider notes what the money for Ukraine will NOT do: "There are five things the aid package will not do for Ukraine. It will not provide enough money. It will not provide the badly needed weapons, nor deliver them on time. It will not provide the even more badly needed troops. And it will not provide victory." Be sure to read the whole thing.

VIDEO: "Episode 126" (51 min.)

RINOs Try And Figure Out Another Way To Get Money To Ukraine

I previously noted that last week Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, was going to try to arrange a House vote to address military aid to Ukraine and Israel separately from the issue of border security, thus eliminating the main bargaining chip conservatives had to get the Democrats to do something about the border. Well, that plan must have crashed and burned because Democrats and RINOs are now considering a loan package to Ukraine. Politico reports:

    Congressional Republicans are getting serious about one potential solution to the monthslong fight over Ukraine aid: packaging at least some of it as a loan.

    The notion has been floating around for weeks, inspired by former president Donald Trump’s recent statements that all U.S. foreign aid — not just to Ukraine — ought to be loaned, not given outright.

    But the possibility is now being taken a lot more seriously. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) hinted at the new strategy Monday, posting online that he floated the prospect of a “no-interest, waivable loan” during a meeting in Kyiv with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

    The loan option is being taken seriously in the House, as well, where Ukraine aid has been stalled for months. Some of Ukraine’s Republican defenders have taken the idea and shopped it to Speaker Mike Johnson. The speaker, according to people familiar with the talks, told them to put a proposal together, test the waters with their GOP colleagues and then — if the conference approves — perhaps they’ll pursue it.

It still gives away leverage to get some deal on the southern border. And I'm sure that Congress will, at some point, forgive the loan.