The Estonians' fear is understandable. In 2022, they had 17,245 deaths and only 11,588 births.
I propose mRNA-like technology for 155mm shells. We take ordinary 9mm shells, insert a folded blueprint for 155mm shells, plus some secret chemicals, and the shells will turn into 155mm ones on hitting the target.
Is it a coincidence or all of these women in power are completely destroying the romantic idea of "more women in power will make a better society"? I hardly remember a single one that was a good politician in Italy apart from Nilde Iotti a great President of the Parliament, may be the only decent one in italian history. And of course died prematurely. Sigh!
To complete your interesting post I'll suggest your readers this one from C.Johnstone:
"emergency aid of the first pillar is to follow the already established pattern: EU states supply Ukraine and receive money from the European Peace Facility (EPF) in return. Its financial cover has already been increased three times by 500 million euros each time, and in December it was decided to increase it to two billion euros."
Ummm....🤔 Sounds like money laundering to me.😐🤨
When did this EPF form? Apparently middle of 2021.😐
So in the middle of a "global pandemic" and "vaccine distribution crisis", it was vitally important to establish an extra, "off budget" military and defence slush fund??! 🤨😐
We are living in the early stages of DeepFakes. They will become indistinguishable with real. AI poses a mortal threat to, not only humanity, but Life itself. The difference between the possible technological advances and unimproved level of Wisdom will eventually end up in destruction. We are already experiencing some effect of this at work. Elites which see more God-like power for them are without exception Unwise.
No kidding, German Economy Minister (sic) Habeck reportedly wants to ban the use of oil and gas heating units next year, with speculation running rife that Hacken also wants to ration electricity:
A quick review of the resources necessary for war time production will quickly determine Russia doesn't need to import while Europe is short on everything except idiots.
Epimetheus, where do you publish in German again? I want to point my Dad to your posts.
Peace protest was pretty lackluster btw, but I'm still glad I went. Ended up going alone. Heard lots of creative excuses from friends and family though. :D
Hi Fabian, I write under my 'real' name (Stephan Sander-Faes) over at tkp.at.
I'm sorry you had to go to this protest without your family and friends, and by way of consolation, I can assure you that neither would my friends and family (except for my wife) would have come along.
More important than numbers of shells is what percentage are fired for effect and to what effect. Th russians and all the old Soviet satellites still reason that the massed cannonades of WW2 (such as the Battle of Kursk/Prokorovka) is a viable tactic today, since it worked then.
Hence the huge numbers of shells used.
To use a more contemporary comparison: if the US had used WW2-tactics against Irak, B-52s and similarplanes would have carpet-bombed every city expending in total hundreds of thousands of tons of explosives, or even more than a million (Germany alone had 1 400 000 tons of explosives dropped on it from Allied aircraft during the war). Not even 1% of that was dropped on Irak.
Instead they used cruise-missiles, guided artillery and limited airstrikes.
Russia still fights as if it was WW2, and so does Ukraine.
Expect rationing and governement officials paying you a visit come Fall, to see how much of your harvest they can requisition for equitable redistribution.
You're right about the first part; I'm a bit unsure about the latter aspects, but I'm inclined to believe that Russia fights differently from, say, Western countries.
That said, I'd also add that Western planners were caught completely off-guard by this, and I'm sure that it'll be quite a squaring of the circle to adapt US and NATO forces to do both, a highly mobile expeditionary force and a 'solid', heavy force to counter Russia (esp. as China will, in all likelihood, also wage war like that).
It's the same old story as during the Korean War, re: western planners. The idea of an enemy who combines massed artillery fire with an armoured wall preceded by waves of infantry is so alien to us due to the guaranteed losses you'll take, that our planners time and again fail to take that into account.
In Finland - according to Soviet contemporary sources - the losses taken were between 20 to 25 soviet soldiers for every finn, something which was higher than expected but did not diminish the soviet's ability to attack, since they had reserves the exhausted finns lacked.
In Korea, China used wave attacks with unarmed "soldiers", units mostly comprised by people of little worth to Mao anyway, simply to exhaust ammunition, to tie down defences (static warfare benefits the one with the greatest numbers) and to map out where the defensive artillery was situated.
To most westerners, such thinking is so alien we forget that we have historical precedence virtually in living memory.
Vietnam was little different too, since the NVA fought with the goal of winning, where winning was defined as pushing out the french/americans. While the french/US forces had some weird notion of "the morally Good/Just/Righteous war" leading them to think that if they demonstrated superiority in equipment et c enough, the NVA would give up. The relative losses in french/US personnel vs. vietnamese casualties are horrific.
If France/US had actually used tactics that ensures victory, the population, what infrastructure there was and all agriculture as well of North Vietnam had been eradicated by high-altitude bombing campaigns of the kind that was used against Japan and Germany, and a series of nuclear weapons had been used on the border to China to drive the point home to the chinese that any further aggression or support would lead to nuclear weapons being used on chinese units/population centers, a valid startegy since China completely lacked any ability to strike at the US at all and the soviets wouldn't go to war on behalf of the chinese.
But very few westerners can think like that, even as a thought-exercise (especially americans and the british post WW2 due to the 'Good Guy'-identity), whch is why the planners fail again and again.
Small mobile expeditionary forces only work against an enemy who gives up or against a very limited target or alimited localised campaign, and consider the US/international fiasco of Afghanistan.
For a historical example, look at the viking raids that eventually lead to the Danelaw and Normandy. Rather than fully mobilise and militarise, Ethelred the Unready and others of his time bought off the invaders who were eventually either absorbed or driven out, or replaced with new invaders. That won't ever work against african or oriental/asiatic nations/peoples, for the obvious un-PC reasons.
Against Russia's type of warfare, you need to meet numbers with numbers /and/ be much better at killing - magnitudes better as they will simply sacrifice tens of millions as long as they win/you give up or lose, as Germany found out.
China has hundreds of millions to sacrifice. Any war against China that is not led by a massive nuclear assault on all chinese infrastructure (such as the Three Gorges Dam) will be a net loss for the agressor. And while such a war would mean hundreds of millions dead chinese and possbly a cleaning of the top tiers of the party-state, China the nation and civilisation would endure and regrow.
As for China waging war beyond her borders, a combination of military advisors and local forces/mercenaries is the most likely (excepting Taiwan).
While I don't disagree with Epimetheyus at all, part of the history includes the Soviet union pushing ethnic Russians into eastern Ukraine. There's some sense in which I can understand my Ukranian friends saying 'they should go home'.
The Estonians' fear is understandable. In 2022, they had 17,245 deaths and only 11,588 births.
I propose mRNA-like technology for 155mm shells. We take ordinary 9mm shells, insert a folded blueprint for 155mm shells, plus some secret chemicals, and the shells will turn into 155mm ones on hitting the target.
Many txs again Professor esimius! ;)
The path is drawn, "ahinoi"
Is it a coincidence or all of these women in power are completely destroying the romantic idea of "more women in power will make a better society"? I hardly remember a single one that was a good politician in Italy apart from Nilde Iotti a great President of the Parliament, may be the only decent one in italian history. And of course died prematurely. Sigh!
To complete your interesting post I'll suggest your readers this one from C.Johnstone:
https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/us-ambassador-to-china-were-the-leader
Take care!
You're way to kind, my friend.
Thanks for pointing readers to Johnstone's posting!
"emergency aid of the first pillar is to follow the already established pattern: EU states supply Ukraine and receive money from the European Peace Facility (EPF) in return. Its financial cover has already been increased three times by 500 million euros each time, and in December it was decided to increase it to two billion euros."
Ummm....🤔 Sounds like money laundering to me.😐🤨
When did this EPF form? Apparently middle of 2021.😐
So in the middle of a "global pandemic" and "vaccine distribution crisis", it was vitally important to establish an extra, "off budget" military and defence slush fund??! 🤨😐
Yeah. Nothing seems shady about that at all!😑🤦♀️
Oh, sure, the EU is a big criminal institution that does a whole lot of crap without accountability.
It's a feature, not a bug: https://propagandainfocus.com/woe-to-the-vanguished-europes-existential-struggle-between-the-us-and-russia/
Insanity must be contagious. What sort of energy sources will be used to power all this military industry?
Also, here's Peterson on the German gov't [EDIT: fake, apologies]:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha3gfD7S0_E
Spot-on.
Almost convinced me that was Peterson. Clever!
Oh wow, I listened to it earlier today: it sounded like something he would say.
Absurd, and I'm sorry I put this up: I listened to his chat with Kissin, and this sounded like…well, what he would say, quite likely: apologies.
We are living in the early stages of DeepFakes. They will become indistinguishable with real. AI poses a mortal threat to, not only humanity, but Life itself. The difference between the possible technological advances and unimproved level of Wisdom will eventually end up in destruction. We are already experiencing some effect of this at work. Elites which see more God-like power for them are without exception Unwise.
I agree with you: this is going to get worse in the future.
Just plug in all the EVs to power the factories.
Hahahaha.
Or have people use home-trainers.
No kidding, German Economy Minister (sic) Habeck reportedly wants to ban the use of oil and gas heating units next year, with speculation running rife that Hacken also wants to ration electricity:
https://www.news.de/politik/856772630/robert-habeck-plaene-fuer-heizungsverbot-wird-strom-rationiert-fdp-fuerchtet-ueberwachung-twitter-tobt-nach-kritik/1/
I'll write about this tomorrow, I suppose.
A quick review of the resources necessary for war time production will quickly determine Russia doesn't need to import while Europe is short on everything except idiots.
Russia is acting in self-defense, after a long-established line has been crossed.
Epimetheus, where do you publish in German again? I want to point my Dad to your posts.
Peace protest was pretty lackluster btw, but I'm still glad I went. Ended up going alone. Heard lots of creative excuses from friends and family though. :D
Hi Fabian, I write under my 'real' name (Stephan Sander-Faes) over at tkp.at.
I'm sorry you had to go to this protest without your family and friends, and by way of consolation, I can assure you that neither would my friends and family (except for my wife) would have come along.
It was okay. I didn't really expect anyone to come. :D
Ironically I caught a ride to berlin with two pro-war refugee Ukranians. Pro war refugees? Hmmm. This world...
More important than numbers of shells is what percentage are fired for effect and to what effect. Th russians and all the old Soviet satellites still reason that the massed cannonades of WW2 (such as the Battle of Kursk/Prokorovka) is a viable tactic today, since it worked then.
Hence the huge numbers of shells used.
To use a more contemporary comparison: if the US had used WW2-tactics against Irak, B-52s and similarplanes would have carpet-bombed every city expending in total hundreds of thousands of tons of explosives, or even more than a million (Germany alone had 1 400 000 tons of explosives dropped on it from Allied aircraft during the war). Not even 1% of that was dropped on Irak.
Instead they used cruise-missiles, guided artillery and limited airstrikes.
Russia still fights as if it was WW2, and so does Ukraine.
Expect rationing and governement officials paying you a visit come Fall, to see how much of your harvest they can requisition for equitable redistribution.
You're right about the first part; I'm a bit unsure about the latter aspects, but I'm inclined to believe that Russia fights differently from, say, Western countries.
That said, I'd also add that Western planners were caught completely off-guard by this, and I'm sure that it'll be quite a squaring of the circle to adapt US and NATO forces to do both, a highly mobile expeditionary force and a 'solid', heavy force to counter Russia (esp. as China will, in all likelihood, also wage war like that).
It's the same old story as during the Korean War, re: western planners. The idea of an enemy who combines massed artillery fire with an armoured wall preceded by waves of infantry is so alien to us due to the guaranteed losses you'll take, that our planners time and again fail to take that into account.
In Finland - according to Soviet contemporary sources - the losses taken were between 20 to 25 soviet soldiers for every finn, something which was higher than expected but did not diminish the soviet's ability to attack, since they had reserves the exhausted finns lacked.
In Korea, China used wave attacks with unarmed "soldiers", units mostly comprised by people of little worth to Mao anyway, simply to exhaust ammunition, to tie down defences (static warfare benefits the one with the greatest numbers) and to map out where the defensive artillery was situated.
To most westerners, such thinking is so alien we forget that we have historical precedence virtually in living memory.
Vietnam was little different too, since the NVA fought with the goal of winning, where winning was defined as pushing out the french/americans. While the french/US forces had some weird notion of "the morally Good/Just/Righteous war" leading them to think that if they demonstrated superiority in equipment et c enough, the NVA would give up. The relative losses in french/US personnel vs. vietnamese casualties are horrific.
If France/US had actually used tactics that ensures victory, the population, what infrastructure there was and all agriculture as well of North Vietnam had been eradicated by high-altitude bombing campaigns of the kind that was used against Japan and Germany, and a series of nuclear weapons had been used on the border to China to drive the point home to the chinese that any further aggression or support would lead to nuclear weapons being used on chinese units/population centers, a valid startegy since China completely lacked any ability to strike at the US at all and the soviets wouldn't go to war on behalf of the chinese.
But very few westerners can think like that, even as a thought-exercise (especially americans and the british post WW2 due to the 'Good Guy'-identity), whch is why the planners fail again and again.
Small mobile expeditionary forces only work against an enemy who gives up or against a very limited target or alimited localised campaign, and consider the US/international fiasco of Afghanistan.
For a historical example, look at the viking raids that eventually lead to the Danelaw and Normandy. Rather than fully mobilise and militarise, Ethelred the Unready and others of his time bought off the invaders who were eventually either absorbed or driven out, or replaced with new invaders. That won't ever work against african or oriental/asiatic nations/peoples, for the obvious un-PC reasons.
Against Russia's type of warfare, you need to meet numbers with numbers /and/ be much better at killing - magnitudes better as they will simply sacrifice tens of millions as long as they win/you give up or lose, as Germany found out.
China has hundreds of millions to sacrifice. Any war against China that is not led by a massive nuclear assault on all chinese infrastructure (such as the Three Gorges Dam) will be a net loss for the agressor. And while such a war would mean hundreds of millions dead chinese and possbly a cleaning of the top tiers of the party-state, China the nation and civilisation would endure and regrow.
As for China waging war beyond her borders, a combination of military advisors and local forces/mercenaries is the most likely (excepting Taiwan).
Don't forget to switch off your radios when you leave home or Kohlenklau is gonna steal our arms industry's precious energy!
While I don't disagree with Epimetheyus at all, part of the history includes the Soviet union pushing ethnic Russians into eastern Ukraine. There's some sense in which I can understand my Ukranian friends saying 'they should go home'.
I wasn't aware of that.
Seeing as Russia was founded by Swedes, shouldn't the russians 'go home' too, or has it been too long?
The necessities become clearer, do they not