In reply to aircooled :
The Russians have to have preparations in place regardless, but I doubt either side thinks an actual attack on the parade is likely. Those preparations won't have any material effect on the course of the war, as Moscow has dedicated defenses.
Now, if the Ukrainians really wanted to make a splash, they'd figure out some way to fly a few harmless drones trailing Ukrainian flags over Putin's reviewing stand....
In reply to 02Pilot :
Or some way to deliver to the Russian masses a few facts about the true scale of Russian casualties. Who knows what enlightened peasant may be the next to lead a revolt
In reply to P3PPY :
There are very few enlightened peasants in Russia or elsewhere, and they don't tend to lead movements. They may join or support them, but they don't lead. That tends to be left to the disaffected middle class, often becoming active revolutionaries in young adulthood while pursuing professional, military, or religious career paths (at least initially).
It is very unlikely that even irrefutable and incontrovertible evidence of the true number of Russian casualties would even move the needle on Putin's support in the short term.
Not so surprising development. You simply cannot mediate talks between two countries that don't want to. Now, realistically, Ukraine is certainly stubborn about not wanting to give up occupied land, but are at least interested in stopping the fighting. The Russians show no indication of even being close to agree to that.
A phrase I tend to have to use a lot: There is no sense smashing your head into a brick wall trying to knock it down.
US will no longer mediate peace talks between Ukraine and Russia – State Department
The United States is waiting for concrete ideas from Ukraine and Russia after the war is over
The United States will no longer mediate peace talks between Ukraine and Russia. This was stated by US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce at a briefing on May 1.
According to her, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has made it clear that the style and methodology of the US contribution to the negotiation process will change, and she announced this on April 29.
"The contribution will change in that we will not be intermediaries... We are certainly still committed to that and will help and do whatever we can. But we're not going to be flying around the world at the drop of a hat to mediate meetings," Bruce said .
She emphasized that negotiations should now take place between the two sides – Ukraine and Russia. And now is the time for them to develop and present concrete ideas on how to end the full-scale war.
z31maniac said:Stampie said:Damn what don't y'all understand about politics? I swear it's like you guys have the self control of a 3 year old. It's pretty simple. Here's how to avoid politics in 3 steps.
1) Don't mention a politician by name.
2) If you need to refer to a governmental power that is controlled by elected official then ask yourself how you would feel if someone posted the same about your preferred elected official.
3) berkeleying be nice to others.
Calling people 3-year olds and then telling people to be nice to each other is pretty funny.
I wanted to answer you 3 points, but I don't want to derail the discussion more than I already have.
I'm with z31 on this one. We can't hope to fully understand what's going on here without taking into account all leaders' motivations, past actions which are often an indicator of future actions, and those leaders' politics. War is politics as we've already discussed. If you're talking about war you're already engaged in politics. The two are not divisible.
The interactions that z31 mentions are well documented and only politicized by those seeking to refute them. These facts have been upheld in a court of law. Some government officials, and quasi-officials, were imprisoned for those proven actions.
That said, I'm glad to see this admin's move to consolidate our ties to Ukraine. Having this minerals deal gives the more transactional among us a reason to support Zelensky and the Ukrainian people. It also curbs Putin's ambitions and indicates to him that just because he wants something he can't just take it without there being repercussions for his actions. I like seeing the US punch up for the little guy instead of punching down at people who are just trying to better their lives. More of that, please.
In reply to Xceler8x :
Per Clausewitz (with whom I agree), war is policy, not politics. Both political in nature, but different in substance.
I would also note that Wikipedia has been both used as a vehicle for foreign influence operations, as well as being politicized itself by contributors and staff, and is not really a fully reliable source for anything.
And there I was so confident it would be quickly sorted out. 
In reply to 02Pilot :
Please humor me, is policy not made by politicians?
In reply to TRoglodyte :
Policy is made and implemented by government policy-making institutions. Leaders are certainly major influences, but not the only ones; established bureaucracies have their own interests, as do non-governmental stakeholders.
Policy can be considered outside of politics, particularly foreign policy. There used to be a saying in the US that "politics ends at the water's edge" - I doubt if this was ever actually true, but it reflects a certain mindset that was once held by a fair portion of the population; clearly, that is no longer the case.
In reply to TRoglodyte :
Discussing policy and discussing politicians can be separate conversations, and need to be on this forum. Policy can be discussed factually. Politicians are often discussed emotionally, witness this thread. It's also very different to discuss the particulars of policy Vs. the motivation of a politician to implement such policy.
Meanwhile, in the Russian ranks.
In Donbas, an occupier commander killed three of his own fighters with a grenade
In Donbas, a Russian army officer drove his subordinates into a “chicken coop” and threw a grenade at them.
The Russian Telegram channel Baza reported that a Russian serviceman first got into an argument with three of his colleagues, then drove them into a cage and blew them up.
On April 25, Russian investigators opened a criminal case against 42-year-old serviceman Vladimir Z.
****
From Militarnyi
https://militarnyi.com/uk/news/na-donbasi-komandyr-okupantiv-granatoyu-vbyv-troh-vlasnyh-bijtsiv/
02Pilot said:In reply to Xceler8x :
I would also note that Wikipedia has been both used as a vehicle for foreign influence operations, as well as being politicized itself by contributors and staff, and is not really a fully reliable source for anything.
Friend, the nice thing about wikipedia is that it cites sources.
The article in question cites over 200 different news articles, pieces of congressional hearings, etc.
If your reaction to a wikipedia article with 200+ citations is to cast doubt on wikipedia, your internal bias is probably getting the better of you.
================================
The difference between policy and politics is that our hosts allow us to talk about the former, but not the latter.
CrustyRedXpress said:02Pilot said:In reply to Xceler8x :
I would also note that Wikipedia has been both used as a vehicle for foreign influence operations, as well as being politicized itself by contributors and staff, and is not really a fully reliable source for anything.
Friend, the nice thing about wikipedia is that it cites sources.
The article in question cites over 200 different news articles, pieces of congressional hearings, etc.
If your reaction to a wikipedia article with 200+ citations is to cast doubt on wikipedia, your internal bias is probably getting the better of you.
================================
The difference between policy and politics is that our hosts allow us to talk about the former, but not the latter.
I'm a big fan of Wikipedia, not because they are perfect, but because they are right more often than anyone else on most subjects. I also support them monetarily.
Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:CrustyRedXpress said:02Pilot said:In reply to Xceler8x :
I would also note that Wikipedia has been both used as a vehicle for foreign influence operations, as well as being politicized itself by contributors and staff, and is not really a fully reliable source for anything.
Friend, the nice thing about wikipedia is that it cites sources.
The article in question cites over 200 different news articles, pieces of congressional hearings, etc.
If your reaction to a wikipedia article with 200+ citations is to cast doubt on wikipedia, your internal bias is probably getting the better of you.
================================
The difference between policy and politics is that our hosts allow us to talk about the former, but not the latter.
I'm a big supporter of Wikipedia, not because they are perfect, but because they are right more often than anyone else on most subjects. I also support them monetarily.
...and back to topic plz.
In reply to CrustyRedXpress and Kreb:
The nice thing about the citations, is it lets you confirm the writer's selection and interpretation of the source material aligns with what they wrote. Unfortunately , they can also select sources to cite that support a particular bias if desired.
In reply to No Time :
I will say that more than once, even in my master's research, I have found people cite sources that obliquely -at best- support their argument, or sometimes not at all. If you truly care about a subject you're gonna need to follow the source rabbit trail.
Now Wiki has tons of eyes on their articles so hopefully that can be a form of peer review, butttt I'd say where it shines is as being a good source of sources to begin your own research
02Pilot said:In reply to P3PPY :
There are very few enlightened peasants in Russia or elsewhere, and they don't tend to lead movements. They may join or support them, but they don't lead. That tends to be left to the disaffected middle class, often becoming active revolutionaries in young adulthood while pursuing professional, military, or religious career paths (at least initially).
It is very unlikely that even irrefutable and incontrovertible evidence of the true number of Russian casualties would even move the needle on Putin's support in the short term.
From the things I had read online, the Russian culture may see a high casualty rate as a point of pride, not concern.
When speaking of WWII, the prevailing mindset I saw was that Americans weren't as dedicated as Soviets because they weren't willing to send soldiers to die by the hundreds in mass attacks.
P3PPY said:In reply to No Time :
I will say that more than once, even in my master's research, I have found people cite sources that obliquely -at best- support their argument, or sometimes not at all. If you truly care about a subject you're gonna need to follow the source rabbit trail.
Now Wiki has tons of eyes on their articles so hopefully that can be a form of peer review, butttt I'd say where it shines is as being a good source of sources to begin your own research
In a Paper Skies video that I linked here about Russian propaganda, he showed with documentation that the Russian machine is more than willing to say one thing and with a citation to a paper that says the exact opposite, because they know that few people ever check the citations.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:When speaking of WWII, the prevailing mindset I saw was that Americans weren't as dedicated as Soviets because they weren't willing to send soldiers to die by the hundreds in mass attacks.
If I taught a class on the Cold War, on the first day, to give the students an understanding of the comparative experience of World War Two of the USA and the Soviet Union, I would show them a double feature of Kelly's Heroes and Come and See.
In reply to red_stapler :
It occurs to me, decades later, that the Russians were ignoring the meat grinders that were the Pacific island-hopping campaigns. Must not have fit their narrative 
In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :
The island hopping was bad, but comparatively not as horrible (numbers wise) as it seemed because of the smaller geography. One comparison is that he USAF lost more men (almost half being accidents) than the Army and Marines combined in the Pacific (about 65,000). Both of which are absurdly small compared to Russian losses.
For reference JUST the battle of Stalingrad (it was a pretty big battle of course) resulted in around 800,000 German casualties, and around 1,000,000 Russians!
Now, if the US did have to invade Japan, the US numbers might have approached Stalingrad levels!
Some more info surfaced on the Russia Moskva cruiser (now patrolling the bottom of the Black Sea), as told by a survivor. Not surprisingly, the ship was apparently in poor repair and state including the air defense systems and radars. They also apparently removed 100 or so experienced crew member (probably gave them a rifle and sent them to the font) and replaced them with conscripts (with zero experience and little training) who weren't supposed to be in combat zone. The Neptune missiles were not spotted on radar until they were only a few kilometers out and by then it was too late, so there apparently was no defensive response from the ship.
Multiple Patriot missile systems that were in Israel and are undergoing maintenance are being transferred to Ukraine.
Another first. The Ukrainians used one of their new drone boats to shoot down two SU-30's, (previously they had at least hit a helicopter). So, add two SU-30's to the bottom of the Black Sea patrol unit. The boats carry IR seeking missiles (e.g. Sidewinder) which are pretty self-contained so additional equipment needs are low. They just need to activate the seeker, see / hear it's tracking a target, and launch it. First pic of the drone:
The Russian have come up with a bag that the soldiers can wear that makes them invisible to IR drones. Here is a picture, from a drone, right before being blown up. Yeah, hope they kept the receipts on those! Someone may be taking a visit to the 3rd floor, or, maybe they don't care and this is just a way to give false hope.
Russia has apparently moved hundreds of air defense systems to the layered defense of Moscow, to try and protect the parade. Those systems came from somewhere, that now has fewer! The Ukrainians sent a few drones (maybe two) to Moscow, and they were shot down, but did get to Moscow. You have to wonder how nervous the Russians are getting about this. Zelenskyy (likely doing some famous Ukrainian trolling) assured the world that Ukraine cannot guarantee the safety of anyone visiting Moscow.
Russia appears to be stepping up attacks again (with the typical huge loses and few gains). And clearly proclaiming they have zero interest in stopping the war (doesn't mean they won't or don't actually want to of course). You have to suspect the economic and social situation makes stopping the war rather risky to them unless it can be done rather favorably.
------
Russia has thus far sustained these casualties and the current tempo of offensive operations by rapidly deploying low quality troops to frontline units, although the reliance on such troops is also hindering Russia's ability to conduct complex operations and make rapid advances in Ukraine
Russian President Vladimir Putin's commitment to maintaining the tempo of offensive operations despite diminishing returns underscores Putin's ongoing efforts to leverage further battlefield gains to generate pressure on Ukraine in ceasefire and peace negotiations or otherwise to force Ukraine's collapse.
Putin highlighted domestic support for the war and promoted the ideal of sacrifice on the frontline and the home front, likely in an effort to prepare Russian society for a longer war in Ukraine and potential future confrontations with the West.
ISW continues to assess that Russian President Vladimir Putin remains committed to his long-term military objectives of seizing all of Ukraine and undermining NATO.
The Soviets were in Afghanistan for a decade, against a much less advanced adversary. There was no risk of the Mujahideen making attacks on Moscow, at least not militarily.
That conflict killed an estimated 15,000 Soviets. Ukraine has cost Russia significantly more.
You can't control land with artillery and drone bombs. You need people on the ground doing modern society stuff, like living their lives. So long as the Donbas is a warzone, what Russians will live there? Ukraine can simply take the stance of "if we can't have it back, Russia certainly as hell won't have it either." Ukraine's supply chain is protected by NATO. Russia's supply chain is not. How long before there is nothing left to throw at Ukraine?
People might say "Russia hasn't really tried yet," but I think that's taking a grand view of the Russian military strength. It would make no sense for this not be a swift victory.
In reply to aircooled :
Thinking out loud, how effective are smoke grenades against modern infrared guidance?
Of course the problem is, now you can't see either.
You'll need to log in to post.
