Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

Never give a known liar the benefit of the doubt.

Glad to see john eastman going through some things.

There are some who say that there are too many strawmen arguments on this blog.

“The defense has a certain level of trust in defendant that the government does not.”

“Cheese and Kraken paired together for the appetizer trial.”

President Biden is doing good where he can, and getting it done.

Hot air and ill-informed banter

An almost top 10,000 blog!

They are lying in pursuit of an agenda.

Found liable for massive fraud, is required to post a massive bond, gets a break, then files a *fraudulent* bond!

They were going to turn on one another at some point. It was inevitable.

Authoritarian republicans are opposed to freedom for the rest of us.

Too often we hand the biggest microphones to the cynics and the critics who delight in declaring failure.

Peak wingnut was a lie.

The rest of the comments were smacking Boebert like she was a piñata.

Jack Smith: “Why did you start campaigning in the middle of my investigation?!”

Republicans: The threats are dire, but my tickets are non-refundable!

Fight them, without becoming them!

This fight is for everything.

Somebody needs to explain to DeSantis that nobody needs to do anything to make him look bad.

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

The willow is too close to the house.

Every reporter and pundit should have to declare if they ever vacationed with a billionaire.

You are here: Home / Foreign Affairs / War for Ukraine Update 15: The Ukrainians Are Still Holding, the Issues With the MiGs Goes From Weird To Silly, & Congressman Quigley Gets It!

War for Ukraine Update 15: The Ukrainians Are Still Holding, the Issues With the MiGs Goes From Weird To Silly, & Congressman Quigley Gets It!

by | 152 Comments

This post is in: , , , , , ,

We’re going to start tonight with these remarks from Congressman Mike Quigley earlier today on CNN. I highly recommend you watch the whole 4:33. It is in response to the attack on the maternity clinic and children’s hospital in Mariupol early this morning:

Quigley gets it! What is it, well take a look at this chart:

Quigley’s remarks are clearly rooted in the first stage of the framework: National Purpose. Specifically, the enduring beliefs, ethics, and values that are supposed to anchor all of our national interests. What Quigley has done in four and a half minutes is clearly and concisely make the argument that right now our policy and strategy for dealing with Putin’s reinvasion of Ukraine, the war crimes his forces are committing, the indiscriminate destruction of targets that are purely civilian, often humanitarian in that they’re hospitals and medical facilities, s0lely to terrorize Ukrainians, is NOT rooted in our National Purpose!

For those that haven’t seen the news of it yet, what I was referring to above is that a maternity clinic and children’s hospital in Mariupol was targeted and destroyed by the Russians earlier today.

This massacre was followed by the US and Poland continuing to play hot potato with Poland’s MiGs:

We’re approaching strategic malpractice with the MiG situation. Secretary Blinken spent all weekend working on a way to get the Poles to yes on transferring their MiGs to Ukraine in exchange for new US fighter jets. The Poles finally get there and now the Secretary of Defense doesn’t think it is necessary and the DOD’s official position is it is too risky and could be seen as escalatory.

Escalation is coming no matter what we do.

As I wrote last night here and the night before in an on the fly assessment for some retired senior leaders, Russia appears to be setting the information space, with support from the PRC, to stage a biological or chemical weapons attack, which Russia will then blame on Ukraine and possibly the US and NATO.

Russia is now primarily targeting civilians and non military infrastructure. We’ve long since passed escalatory. Weapons are weapons. Putin already declared that providing weapons to Ukraine was an act of war against Russia. Just like he declared that leveling sanctions and strong economic measures was also an act of war against Russia. Based on his own statements, he’s already got all the justification he needs if he wants to escalate.

Gary Kasparov’s response to this is as correct in its way as Quigley’s was to the bombing of the hospital in the latter’s remarks on CNN:

  • How can they be worried about “provoking” Putin when he’s bombarding civilians? This is war, this is a slaughter, and leaving all escalation to Putin only encourages him to escalate further. Has the lesson since 2014 not sunk in that you cannot meet power with weakness?
  • I’ve been reserved in my criticism of the White House because they have taken some long overdue action. But this strange dance over jets smells. They need to stop covering their ass and start covering Ukrainian civilians from the bombs Putin built with Western money.
  • Why is the greatest military alliance in history letting Putin define what is and is not acceptable action to stop a humanitarian catastrophe? He is mass murdering civilians, so he has veto power over NATO? No. Find a way to fight or you don’t want to.
  • The people who have gotten Putin wrong at every turn, all the way up to his invasion two weeks ago, can shut up about what Putin will think or do now. Their caution & counsel & deals created this slaughter and will make it even worse.

The ambiguity in Russia’s nuclear military doctrine and concepts has completely frozen the US’s, our NATO allies’, our non-NATO allies’, and our EU allies’ ability to properly assess risk, determine how much risk assumed is worth taking stronger measures to retard the humanitarian crisis that Putin is creating in Ukraine and in Europe as the latter tries to take in Ukrainian refugees.

Putin is going to do what Putin is going to do. Not pushing back on him as strongly as possibly only encourages him. We’ve long passed the point where the discussion about well, of course if he attacks a NATO member we’ll do whatever is necessary in response, but because Ukraine doesn’t have a piece of paper that lets them in the club, we just can’t take the risk. This has gone from realpolitik to weird to silly. Putin doesn’t care about the piece of paper. His real problem, as stated in why he invaded eastern Ukraine back in 2014, was that the Maidan revolution brought a Ukrainian government to power that wanted to join the EU. NATO is an additional excuse to and for him in his long list of grievances, but his real goal is keeping Ukraine out of Europe’s, and especially the EU’s, orbit.

More after the jump

For those worrying about the power shutoff to Chornobyl, here’s what the IAEA has to say about it:

  • Lack of off-site power at #Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant “likely to lead to a further deterioration of operational radiation safety at the site and create additional stress for around 210 technical experts and guards,” @rafaelmgrossi said.
  • #Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant now has 2 of 4 power lines + a backup available to the plant. “This is another example of where the safety pillar to secure off-site power supply from the grid for all nuclear sites has been compromised,” @rafaelmgrossi said.
  • IAEA has lost data transmission from its safeguards systems installed to monitor nuclear material at Russian-occupied #Chornobyl and #Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plants.

This is what the rest of Mariupol looks like:

And here’s a convoy trying to get people out of Sumy:

This statement from Secretary Raimondo is excellent!

And this is good news:

As I wrote last night, as long as the Ukrainians can hold their lines in the suburbs, bedroom communities, and towns north of Kyiv, they can hold Kyiv. And those lines must hold because Kyiv is what Putin needs to seize. If he can take it he will install his pet quislings who will immediately sign a bunch of official looking, but bogus documents surrendering Ukraine to Putin and capitulating to all of his demands. Live on the air.

I’ve seen some of you refer to me as pessimistic about the outcome of the war. I’m not sure that’s right. I have been pleasantly astounded at the Ukrainian military’s, the Territorial Defense Forces’, and just every day civilians’ ability to be able to hold on the ground. I’ve been pleasantly amazed at just how bad the Russian ground force has demonstrated itself to be in the invasion. But right now the Russians still have one big advantage. They have the capability, which they are using, to bombard Ukrainian targets from distance, whether using their fighter bombers or long range artillery. I’m reminded of the scene in the Daniel Day Lewis version of The Last of the Mohicans when Hawkeye, Chingachcook, and Uncas finally get Colonel Munro’s daughters and Major Heyward into Fort William Henry. Munro gives a very stark assessment of his tactical situation:

The situation is, his guns are bigger than mine. And he has more of them. We keep our heads down while his troops dig thirty yards of trench a day. When those trenches are two hundred yards from the fort and within range, he’ll bring in his fifteen inch mortars and lob explosive rounds over our walls, and pound us to dust.

I’m not worried about the courage or the fortitude or abilities of the Ukrainians to fight. How could you be when they do things like this:

What I’m worried about is that Putin has the capability to just continue to bombard Ukraine from the sky, from artillery stationed in Belarus and Russia, and just pound and pound and pound away until everything is dust. Which is what he seems to be doing.

I’m also outraged that we’ve completely allowed Putin to freeze our decision making and lock us in to doing things with only the lowest possible risks, but only moderate rewards. Putin will raze Ukraine to the ground if he can’t take it. He will kill or force into exile every Ukrainian who will not capitulate to his will and those within Russian control will be relocated for reeducation and their own “safety”. Either the ideals and values we constantly spout mean something or they don’t. The greatest military alliance in history is currently locked into pencil whipping a request for 28 MiG 29s back and forth between DC and Warsaw in a bizarre game of hot potato. The greatest military superpower in history is completely unable to even establish a secure humanitarian corridor to relive Mariupol because it might provoke Putin into doing something unthinkable. I think the past two weeks have made it very clear that the unthinkable was clearly thinkable.

Which is why this news is very good:

What’s a Star Streak anti-aircraft system you ask?

STARStreak High Velocity Missile was designed to provide close air defence against conventional air threats such as fixed wing fighters and late unmasking helicopter targets.

Thales has addressed the needs of military users around the world and introduced major improvements to provide increased range beyond 7 km, increased coverage and altitude and improved guidance precision against small targets.

The STARStreak configuration is based on the proven principles of high velocity to defeat targets with short unmasking times. The three dart payload maximises levels of lethality and accurate line of sight; laser beam riding guidance enables engagement of the smallest signature targets, which are extremely difficult to defeat and lock onto by traditional fire and forget missiles. The STARStreak missile is capable of being launched from lightweight land, sea and air platforms, from either automatic fire control systems such as the RAPIDRanger or the STARStreak Lightweight Multiple Launcher, Next Generation (LML NG). STARStreak can therefore be deployed quickly into operations and is easy to integrate into a force structure.

Video!!!

More of this type of weapons supply please!

And for the love of someone’s, anyone’s, or no one’s – if you’re an atheist – Deity or Deities: deconflict the MiG transfer!

Open thread!

Reader Interactions

152Comments

  1. 1.

    Anthony

    Please stop referring to no fly zones, and call for bombing Russia, it’s the same thing, though I fail to see how it would make anything better.

  2. 2.

    Calouste

    I was just coming here to ask about StarStreak, but I see the question is already answered. So a lot more effective against fighter aircraft than Stingers I guess?

  3. 3.

    dr. bloor

    That strategy chart is fatally flawed.  Balloon Juice is nowhere to be found among the Forces and Trends.

  4. 4.

    Adam L Silverman

    @dr. bloor: The real reason my assignment at USAWC ended was not because the sequester at the funds for my position, but because I wouldn’t stop arguing to ad Balloon a juice to the framework. You all owe me!

  5. 5.

    Gin & Tonic

    Thank you for continuing to point out the US/NATO’s strategic paralysis. This is a moral calamity of historic proportions.

  6. 6.

    LadySuzy

    Mr. Silverman, I would very much like opinion on this :

     

    Is there a possibility that President Biden isn’t hearing enough different points of views during this crisis ?  Is there any danger of a group-think phenomenon ?

     

    I’m asking this because Colonel Vindman is making the rounds right now and pleading for the administration to look at things differently.  He talks respectfully but seems to imply that in his tight circle, President Biden only has people who’ve been with him for a long time; Colonel Vindman is worried that there is not enough debate , not enough questionning, around the President.

     

    If you have time, please look at this very recent interview of Colonel Vindman:

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySQX9HLnYwU

     

    Posting this, I’m painfully aware that the situation is hellish and I don’t envy any person in position of power. What I’m saying is we have to be assured that the decision-making process is the best possible.

  7. 7.

    jonas

    Ok, fill me in on something. Poland has these MiGs that Ukrainian pilots can fly. Why not just let those pilots come over into Poland and take possession of said aircraft? Why are the Poles saying “oh, we’re transferring these to the *Americans* in Germany who can then, I dunno, let the Ukrainians have them or whatever”? This looks like the Poles trying to wash their hands of supplying the Ukrainians with air power and telling the US “you handle the Russian blowback.” I would say, not cool from a NATO ally. But maybe I’m missing something here.

  9. 9.

    debbie

    These are war crimes. If Russia can’t be expelled from the UN (for whatever ridiculous reason), at least kick them off the Security Council until they stop breaking international laws.

  10. 10.

    Gin & Tonic

    @debbie: The UN is a complete waste of resources at this point and should be closed down. If it cannot do anything about one member state eliminating another then it has no reason to exist.

  11. 11.

    Calouste

    @jonas: Poland doesn’t want to be the first one to cop a nuke if Putin gets upset about this. Maybe also national politics, but I don’t know about that.

  12. 12.

    piratedan

    if NATO decides to intervene (with US backing) my questions are many….

    1. do they evict the Russians from ALL of Ukraine, Donbas, Crimea etc
    2. if they push Russia out of the country, does it end there?  Does Putin allow it to?
    3. If Putin provokes NATO intervention is that carte blance to attempt regime change in Russia?
    4. If there is regime change, what follows?

    If nukes are dropped, are all bets off? i,e, if it stays a “conventional” war, can they allow Putin to stay, but if he presses the button I can’t see any way to allow that to pass…

    apologies for the rambling, but it seems that WWIII is upon us, when will it be acknowledged that it is progress already?

  13. 13.

    Alison Rose ???

    Quigley is exactly right, and I cannot comprehend how so many people are stubbornly refusing to see what is fucking going on here. I mean, for one thing, it’s repugnant to me that we’re pulling this “Oh gee, it’s so sad what’s happening to your country, but see, you’re not in our little club, so we’ll just stay over here and tweet Ukraine flag emojis while you all die” bullshit. Lives only matter if they’re in fucking NATO? What in the actual hell? And for another, Ukraine wanted to be in fucking NATO!! They’ve been trying and I don’t know the whole mishegas around how that happens, but they fucking wanted in and now they’ve have to back off because Putin’s manchild feelings are all big mad. They wanted into our dumb little club and they weren’t let in and now they’re almost blockaded by a madman…….and because of that, we’re just going to sit here and let that madman destroy them?

    I am usually anti-war. I went to anti-war marches. But for the love of God, I am also a realist, and right now the reality is Ukraine needs our help and we’re refusing to give it over a fucking technicality. I don’t want to go Godwin here, but I’ll just say, I’d have a lot more living family members and probably wouldn’t have unknown family in Australia or who knows where else if the US had gotten off its isolationist asses a little sooner in WW2.

    And before anyone tells me to enlist or shut up, please consider the idea that telling disabled people we don’t get to have opinions is fucked up.

  14. 14.

    Ohio Mom

    I don’t know if it is true, the story that FDR knew Japan would attack Pearl Harbor and let it happen because he needed widespread support to enter the war, which the reaction to the bombing would provide — is Biden waiting for a similar moment?

    I’m surrounded by people who are horrified by what is happening in Ukraine but I am also surrounded by people who have been vaccinated and boostered — I know I live in a cozy bubble. I have no idea what popular opinion is.

    Or is the entire calculus about avoiding a nuclear war?

  15. 15.

    Alison Rose ???

    Also I’m gonna step away because I’m really upset, and if people respond negatively to me right now, I’ll probably say shit I’ll regret. So this is a flounce of prudence.

  16. 16.

    TM

    Sincere questions, not snark.  What is the level of assurance that giving Ukraine the Polish MIGs will actually stop Russia from killing Ukrainian civilians wantonly?  So Uk will bomb Russian artillery.  Then?  A full-on air war between Uk and Rus for air superiority? Who will win that?  How much more artillery does Russia have, to replace the sets blown up by the MIGs?

    Have we gamed out scenarios in which Putin wants the US/NATO to escalate?  Say, because it will (or he thinks it will) rally the Russian people behind him?

  17. 17.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @jonas: This looks like the Poles trying to wash their hands of supplying the Ukrainians with air power and telling the US “you handle the Russian blowback.”

    Yup. A whole lot of people are eager for “NATO” to do something that, unless I misunderstand the nature of the organization, NATO is not designed to do (offensive war) and a whole lot of NATO members don’t seem to want to do (again, offensive war).

  18. 18.

    Carlo Graziani

    I still believe thewhole MIG/Air Exclusion/No-Fly-Zone debate is a distraction. What would work, quickly and effectively, cutting around bullshit, would be massive infusions of long-range SAM systems, with support systems. And massive. deliveries of artillery rocket systems,

    If we’re going to send NATO personnel into the war zone, send trainers along with kick-ass ground-based weapons systems, not the tools for engaging air battles into Belarusan and Russian territory. Which is what the air war types are really talking about. And which really has bad, bad downstream consequences that we have to discuss openly, rather than under idiotic euphemisms such as “no-fly zone”‘.

  20. 20.

    jonas

    Am I the only one who’s just a tad bit concerned about a growing sense of glibness about the implications of a nuclear war with Russia? I want to support Ukraine as much as anyone here, but I do not envy the people in Washington or at the Pentagon right now, or in other NATO capitals, who are walking on fucking eggshells here trying to figure out what will or won’t make Putin just go “fuck it” and press the red button.

  21. 21.

    delk

    Mike is my congressman and a good guy. Major LGBT supporter. He’s in Chicago’s Gay and Lesbian Hall of Fame as a friend if the community. I remember when he worked for 44th Ward Alderman Bernie Hansen.

  22. 22.

    LadySuzy

    @LadySuzy: Mr. Silverman, I admit my previous post was done too quickly, before reading everything. So it’s clear that you too are beginning to question the thinking of political and military leadership.

    I’m still curious to know what you think about the worries of Colonel Vindman re: the tight circle around President Biden being comprised of people who’ve been with him for a long time, hence the possible lack of healthy debate.

  23. 23.

    Bill Arnold

    @Calouste:

    I was just coming here to ask about StarStreak, but I see the question is already answered. So a lot more effective against fighter aircraft than Stingers I guess?

    Also effective would be either Buk missile systems (what Russia is using) or equivalents. These would be more grey area, since they could target/destroy aircraft outside Ukraine, but not far outside. Low training time is key.
    Basically, create a no-fly zone with SAM systems including MANPADS. With night capability, somehow.
    That seems to be the direction being taken. Since a Russia-supplied and either Russian or proxy operated Buk system shot down MH17, there is a solid argument against any complaints.

    (The Russian artillery is a different, nastier problem. War crimes being continuously committed, too.)

    I’ll remind people of the basic arithmetic; a full thermonuclear war would kill upwards of a billion (probably several billions) humans, mostly through starvation (short (models vary) nuclear winter causing crops to fail for a few seasons), plus breakdown of civilization for a while (supply chains! etc). That means that increasing the risk of thermonuclear war by 1 percent (over some interval) is functionally equivalent to killing more than 10  million humans. And should be treated as such. Why did the Russians not intervene to stop our bombing of e.g. Laos (a serious many-year war crime)?

  24. 24.

    Yarrow

    Thanks for your excellent posts every night, Adam.

    FYI, the four Kasparov tweets in the box include a repeat. The third tweet in the box should be:

    Why is the greatest military alliance in history letting Putin define what is and is not acceptable action to stop a humanitarian catastrophe? He is mass murdering civilians, so he has veto power over NATO? No. Find a way to fight or you don’t want to.

    Not a big deal, just thought you might want to edit.

  25. 25.

    Chetan Murthy

    @jonas: I think we’re all concerned about nuclear annihilation.  But what exercises so many (both here and elsewhere) is that somehow, that threat is used as an excuse to not give UA any offensive weapon whatsoever.  I mean, no planes, artillery, SAMs, and on and on.  When Russia, in many, many past conflicts, gave their clients all those weapons and more.  Hell, in the Korean War they flew the MiGs they gave NorK.  Given the sophistication of SAM systems, it seems pretty clear Russians were operating the BUK launcher that shot down MH-17.

    So we’re allowing ourselves to be paralyzed in a way that Russia never did and never would.  Allowing ourselves to be paralyzed into not supporting UA the way we should be.

    B/c UA is fighting our fight.  The sanctions we imposed on Russia shouldn’t be lifted until Putin is taken out with a bullet or a fall out a 5th story window, and Russia is defanged, made unable to attack our Republic.  This is our fight too, and we’re playing like we can be hands-off, no involvement except some defensive light arms.  Ugh.

  27. 27.

    jonas

    @Carlo Graziani: I gather that’s pretty much what we’re currently doing. I don’t know about whole SAM systems, but we’re definitely supplying lots of anti-tank systems, Javelins, and the like. Covert NATO support will have to come from training and outfitting Ukrainian fighters in neighboring countries like Poland or Romania and then sending them back into Ukraine to fight. I can only presume that various special forces and clandestine units (CIA, SAS, etc.) are in Ukraine helping local units target and disable Russian assets, but I don’t know.

  28. 28.

    debbie

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Absolutely, but to be fair, the ground was still smoking when the UN was created. Could anyone at that time have thought this would happen all over again?

  29. 29.

    debbie

    @Ohio Mom:

    That’s the version of Pearl Harbor I was taught my first year at college. I don’t think there’s an equivalent moment now.

  30. 30.

    Adam L Silverman

    @LadySuzy: First off it’s Adam.

    To answer your question, yes. Biden’s team is very senior and has been with him for a very long time. The most senior among them have their own proteges they’ve brought with them. And a good chunk of the DOD nominations are bogged down in the Senate so even if those senior appointees don’t have their own people tagged to be brought on at the next level down, no one is going to be hired at that next level down until those folks that need to be confirmed are.

    There are advantages and disadvantages to having a team that has been together for a long time. Whether we’re seeing a disadvantage here, I’m not sure.

  32. 32.

    TM

    @Medicine Man:

    The US and Europe have “thrown a punch,” with massive, unprecedented sanctions.  Or, rather, they have responded forcefully and consequentially without “throwing a punch,” without, that is, resorting to violence.  Let’s not rush to discard that non-murderously violent response.  The stakes are as high as they get–apocalyptic.

  33. 33.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Ohio Mom: It isn’t true. There is no evidence that The Dolphin ever got its last message off warning fleet that the Japanese were inbound to Pearl Harbor.

  34. 34.

    sdhays

    I’ve read the suggestion that at this point Ukraine doesn’t have a functioning airport that could handle the MiGs. I don’t know if that’s true, and I assume that like everything involving war, it’s complicated. But that might also be a factor – not worth the risk since Ukraine’s ability to actually use them is too constrained.

  35. 35.

    Adam L Silverman

    @TM: They’re already in an air war for control of Ukrainian air space. It’s Ukraine’s air space. They are in the right to clear it of Russian fighters and bombers.

  37. 37.

    jonas

    @Chetan Murthy: ​
      I get what you’re saying. Part of it is what NATO countries are saying publicly and what’s going on clandestinely, of course. There’s no question that the Ukrainian army and resistance fighters should be supplied with whatever they need to take the fight to the Russians. And sanctions should definitely be tightened as much as possible, against Putin, but especially his inner circle of mafiosi oligarchs. What I’m seeing here and elsewhere, though, is this kind of nonchalance about possibly provoking a nuclear response from Russia and a lot of times, I don’t know if those observers quite know what they’re playing at.

  40. 40.

    Chetan Murthy

    @sdhays: We also read confirmed reports (from US military and intel agencies) that UA’s air force is substantially still in the fight, still flying sorties.  How can they be doing that, if they don’t have working airfields ?

  41. 41.

    counterfactual

    @sdhays: I’m dubious. There are still two military airfields untouched in western Ukraine, and the USSR made a big deal of making planes that could operate from improvised airfields on the interstate-equivalents.

  43. 43.

    Medicine Man

    @TM: I’m the opposite of eager for a direct, violent response.

    What I’m thinking about is how while we are all trying to gauge the extent to which Putin is bluffing with his threats, Putin is doing the same with us.

  44. 44.

    Chetan Murthy

    @jonas:

    What I’m seeing here and elsewhere, though, is this kind of nonchalance about possibly provoking a nuclear response from Russia

    I don’t share that nonchalance.  So sure, we don’t put NATO fighters into action.  But what irks me, is that it doesn’t seem we’ve done everything else, right up to the line.  For instance, I’ve read multiple times that we don’t want to give UA weapons that could be used to strike Belarus and RU territory.  Why not?  Why not?  Give ’em longer-range artillery that can hit those SAM batteries, hit those missile launchers.  Why not?  And ditto, I don’t understand why we haven’t given them enough artillery to shut down all RU’s artillery parks in UA *already*.

    As I read someplace, we’re giving UA “light arms”.  All “light arms”.  That’s not enough to end this war — just enough to prolong it indefinitely.

  45. 45.

    sdhays

    @Chetan Murthy: The suggestion was that the MiGs required longer runways. But I admit that I’m the opposite of an expert. It’s just something that sounded potentially plausible.

  46. 46.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @jonas: I agree that quite few people have become rather cavalier about the potential for for a nuclear response.  FWIW I still think that trying to thread the needle of supporting Ukraine while trying not to trigger a nuclear war is worth the attempt.

  47. 47.

    Comrade Bukharin

    Jesus fucking Christ. How many of you are calling for direct combat between US and Russian forces? What is the goal? How does it end? What could go wrong? Please read the current discussion on Tom Nichols’ twitter feed.

  48. 48.

    Chbnna

    @Medicine Man: I agree, from what I’ve seen so far what is the point of being NATO if its members are going to be paralyzed by indecision? All I’m seeing is everyone afraid of a madman ….i don’t know what the answer is , i don’t have one but I’m hoping people smarter than me and with more information are working on that.

  49. 49.

    LadySuzy

    @Ohio Mom: The President and his team had been putting all their hopes for a long insurgency after a Russian military victory, coupled with very harsh economic sanctions and an eventual revolt against Putin, either of the russian population or from Putin’s circle.

    They didn’t think that the Ukrainians would resist so fiercely. That resistance has pushed Putin into a dark corner and he’s willing to destroy entire cities, terrorize, exterminate populations.

    So the administration, and other governments in Europe, are caught flat-footed I’m afraid. And forced to answer very uncomfortable questions.

  50. 50.

    HumboldtBlue

    @jonas:

    I still question just how many Russian officers are willing to go that far for Putin. I’m not downplaying the threat, but Putin isn’t a popular leader, he’s a brutal ass, but I still wonder how many men and women in Russia are willing to go doomsday for him.

    I have no answer, and I’m not sure if there is one bar the worst happening, but all of this screams a complete overreach by a man bent on using what power he has for no other reason than I can discern, because he can.

  51. 51.

    Chetan Murthy

    @sdhays: Googling, I find an Al Jazeera link: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/9/us-rejects-poland-offer-to-send-mig-29-fighter-jets-to-ukraine#:~:text=over%20the%20country.-,Ukraine's%20air%20force%20fleet%20consists%20of%20ageing%20Soviet%2Dera%20MiG,fly%20immediately%20without%20additional%20training.

    Ukraine’s air force fleet consists of ageing Soviet-era MiG-29 and Sukhoi-27 jets, and heavier Sukhoi-25 jets

    So MIG-29s from Poland should work fine.  The wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Air_Force#Current_inventory lists 37 MIG-29 aircraft.

    MiG-29
    Soviet Union
    multirole

    37
    8 are used for conversion training[66]

    Sukhoi Su-24
    Soviet Union
    attack

    12[66]

    Sukhoi Su-25
    Soviet Union
    attack / CAS

    17[66]

    Sukhoi Su-27
    Soviet Union
    multirole

    32

  52. 52.

    Chbnna

    @Adam: One thing i’ve been wanting to know is if the US or other intelligence is sure the nuclear warheads in Russia would even work? Also, is there a scenario where we would just bomb the hell out of Russia , like full out blitz before they could hit that the buttons for the nuclear warheads? If they do launch one or a few ones do we have the capabilities to intersect? Pardon the basic /simple questions, I really have very little knowledge of war tactics, more like none :) these are just things i’ve been wondering.

  53. 53.

    Chetan Murthy

    Arrgh, went into moderation, so pasting raw text.

    Googling, I find an Al Jazeera link: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/9/us-rejects-poland-offer-to-send-mig-29-fighter-jets-to-ukraine#:~:text=over%20the%20country.-,Ukraine's%20air%20force%20fleet%20consists%20of%20ageing%20Soviet%2Dera%20MiG,fly%20immediately%20without%20additional%20training.

    Ukraine’s air force fleet consists of ageing Soviet-era MiG-29 and Sukhoi-27 jets, and heavier Sukhoi-25 jets

    So MIG-29s from Poland should work fine. The wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Air_Force#Current_inventory lists 37 MIG-29 aircraft.

    MiG-29
    Soviet Union
    multirole

    37
    8 are used for conversion training[66]

    Sukhoi Su-24
    Soviet Union
    attack

    12[66]

    Sukhoi Su-25
    Soviet Union
    attack / CAS

    17[66]

    Sukhoi Su-27
    Soviet Union
    multirole

    32

  54. 54.

    Chetan Murthy

    @Comrade Bukharin: Lots of us don’t want direct war between us and RU.  Lots of us.  But we *do* want the US and NATO to supply everything Ukraine can use.  Everything.  And to not be worried about “Oh, what if Russia gets mad we’re giving them X”.  Russia has given its clients lots and lots of heavy weaponry for decades.

  55. 55.

    Martin

    @Calouste: Generally yes. Faster, longer range than Stinger, harder to do counter-measures against. I think Stinger is easier to deploy, though, so Stinger might win the ‘best gun is the one you have on you’ contest, but assuming you can deploy both, StarStreak should be more effective.

    I think the UK is sending them half of what they have. It’s a BIG offer.

  56. 56.

    Poe Larity

    I’ve seen some of you refer to me as pessimistic about the outcome of the war.

    You optimists are precious. In Putin’s mind this is just a dry run for 2025, when TFG gets back, leaves NATO and Poland, Latvia and Estonia are the new Lebensraum.

    I don’t want to hear about Poles getting rid of MiGs, I want to hear about them getting A-10s for the battles to come.

  57. 57.

    CaseyL

    To me, this is reminiscent of Enigma breaking Germany’s messaging codes in WWII: when the Allies knew exactly what was going on in the extermination camps, and even the train schedules taking people to the camps to be killed.  They opted not to bomb the railroads, because that would let Germany know that the Allies had broken their code, and then they wouldn’t be able to eavesdrop on Germany’s military plans.

    The cold, rational decision was to let the Nazis continue their Final Decision in order to not give up a strategic advantage.

    What’s going on in Ukraine is a cold, rational decision to withhold direct-engagement military assistance, and let Ukraine continue to be leveled and its citizens killed, in order to avoid triggering a nuclear war.  That’s… an unbearably hard decision to make, but I don’t see how they can do any other.  The consequences of a nuclear war would be a whole planet of Mariupols.  I’m sure that’s the nightmare they’re reckoning with.

    And yes, as Adam just said: let us not forget that the GOP has refused to confirm a LOT of Biden’s foreign policy nominees.  The Biden Admin is working with one hand tied behind its back due to sheer lack of personnel – though I do hope they’re getting informal, volunteer consultations with the nominees.

  58. 58.

    The Pale Scot

    @Ohio Mom:

    FDR knew Japan would attack Pearl Harbor and let it happen because he needed

    That Japan might start a war against the US was proposed by elements in military intelligence because of our embargo of oil is true. That the Kidō Butai, a six carrier task force that had trained for six months to form 100+ air formations, navigate 300 miles and back, launch a coordinated attack, recover all the planes 3000+ miles from Tokyo even existed wasn’t known. It was a uniquely well planned well executed operation. Naval intelligence didn’t know about the Kidō Butai because it didn’t exist until October

  61. 61.

    Butter Emails!

    My desire to get involved directly to help Ukraine is tempered by the fact that I live just far enough away from an almost certain nuclear target that I probably won’t be killed outright, but will get to experience the anguished and frightened cries of my severely injured, heavily burned and dying children while trapped within the the shattered ruins of our house.

  62. 62.

    Martin

    I don’t know. I read these moves by Putin as baiting the US/NATO into the conflict. Not that Putin feels like he can beat NATO, but if Putin feels like he’s losing, he’d much rather lose to NATO than lose to Ukraine if that’s the choice being offered, and Putin can likely justify escalating against NATO, so that changes the contour of things.

    Right now, consensus seems to be that Putin fucked up. If this is a situation where Putin is struggling, I think radically changing the contours of the situation should be done with quite a bit of caution.

    Mind you, I get the humanitarian and moral argument. And yeah, I think the west needs to take some costs to address that. But that’s also easy to say since I know those costs won’t be paid in California. They’ll be paid in Poland or Romania or the Baltics. I think the nations that are most likely to pay those costs should have an outsized say in how to proceed here. If they say we should go, then I think we should go. But we’ve got a LONG history of not acting. We didn’t act in Yemen. Hell, we won’t even act for the folks arriving at the southern border.

  63. 63.

    Kattails

    I would be good with locating Putin’s mistress and spawn and taking them into “protective” custody. In movable undisclosed locations in Ukraine, such as next to maternity hospitals . Well treated of course. Fed as well as the locals and kept as warm. See if Vladdy feels the same about bombing women and children then. Sorry, did I imply that the word protective applied to them?
    I’d also be just ducky seeing him in a Hannibal Lecter grade straight jacket sitting in a tribunal in The Hague.

  65. 65.

    Sebastian

    UA needs a way to disable the Russian artillery.

    We can’t give them cruise missiles, can we? One of the easiest ways forward would be to have Turkey build Bayraktars as fast as they can, which they are probably already doing.

    The MiGs could do it. Load them up with cluster bombs and white phosphor while you are at it.

     

    I have full confidence in the Biden admin to do preemptive disclosures in case of a planned chemical attack. While I have no doubt that Putin wants to use chemical weapons, he has to be clear that such an act would open the door to the delivery of offensive weaponry to Ukraine.

  66. 66.

    jonas

    @Chetan Murthy: For instance, I’ve read multiple times that we don’t want to give UA weapons that could be used to strike Belarus and RU territory.

    The question is whether those systems could be effectively deployed by Ukrainian units without direct supervision/involvement of NATO forces alongside them (or having trained them long in advance). That’s the problem with a lot of military systems: you can’t just parachute them into some country and tell random soldiers to deploy them. It’s complicated.

  67. 67.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @NotMax:

    How on Earth Is Anyone Still Talking About a No-Fly Zone Over Ukraine?

    to answer the question, because most people seem to think it’s cost free, non-violent no-risk something we could do! like a court order or a magic spell. Now to read the piece.

  68. 68.

    Gvg

    @jonas: yes that is how I see it. They don’t want the responsibility. You could say we don’t either. But maybe it would be more provocative to Russia is it come from the US? Some debate that Putin is trying to bait us so he can unite his country. Possibly NATO is almost as big a bogey man to them too.

    I really don’t think the migs or no fly zone is doable at this point. I think we need to do other things….and counter propaganda within Russia some how.

    i don’t know how.

  69. 69.

    Ohio Mom

    @Adam L Silverman: For the purposes of my question, whether or not FDR knew what was coming is irrelevant. I made my question too complicated. Let me see if I can restate it.

    How much do you think Biden is holding back because maybe most Americans are not ready to support deeper involvement? That he doesn’t want to risk domestic political blowback?

    Or is all the cautiousness about not wanting an expanded war involving more countries and/or setting off a nuclear exchange?

  70. 70.

    Comrade Bukharin

    If Putin baits NATO into the conflict then he will sell it as the Great Patriotic War II. Especially if we kill Russians on Russian soil. Russian soldiers and civilians will suddenly be a lot more enthusiastic about the war. Ourrah!

  71. 71.

    Kelly

    @jonas: This looks like the Poles trying to wash their hands of supplying the Ukrainians with air power and telling the US “you handle the Russian blowback.” I would say, not cool from a NATO ally. But maybe I’m missing something here.

    We’re the world’s most powerful nation. Not omnipotent but we can weather blowback better than anyone.

  72. 72.

    Mallard Filmore

    @CaseyL: 

    They opted not to bomb the railroads, because that would let Germany know that the Allies had broken their code

    News about the death camps came from escapees (the bigger the camp the more likely an escape was). The news was confirmed by other means, not code breaking.

    Bombers were not accurate enough to simply take out the rail lines, or to guarantee flattening the camp. Also the camps were rather deep into eastern Europe, and a raid would cost many bombers and crews.

  74. 74.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Comrade Bukharin: that’s a persuasive (to me) point Tom Nichols made a few days back: a shooting war between the US and Russia would be saving Putin from his own blunder

  75. 75.

    Cameron

    Dr. Silverman, I know you and Pat Lang are on the outs, but your proposals and his seem  congruent.  What am I missing?

  76. 76.

    Kelly

    I’m impressed some folks in Poland keeps trying to give their MiG’s away. Every hand off presented so far is a very transparent screen that those are Polish aircraft. Russian client Belarus is right there.

  77. 77.

    Sebastian

    We are two weeks into the conflict and Russia has lost close to 10% of its troops before any urban combat has started. A significant part of his army is stuck without food so this could go up to 1/3 in a fairly short time. I am not sure how this is sustainable.

  78. 78.

    VeniceRiley

    Remember when the military ripped Madeline Albright a new asshole for asking what the use of a fantastic military is if you cannot use it the last time this shit was going down with the Serbs and Russia?
    I wanna play History Repeating Dame Shirley Bassey on a loop.

  79. 79.

    jonas

    @Chbnna: NATO being hesitant/cautious about responding to aggression against a non-member (albeit with profound implications for the alliance) =/= hesitance about defending its own members. That’s the problem here.

  81. 81.

    Chetan Murthy

    @Adam L Silverman: Adam, I read that Ukraine already operations S-300 systems.  And that several Eastern European NATO allies have such systems.  This seems straightforward, no?

  82. 82.

    Redshift

    Adam,

    I have people I love in Ukraine (safe so far, thank god) and I would love to have the Western alliance come riding to the rescue and end this war. But I feel like what you’re advocating for in this post is a big shift from many of your previous ones, and I don’t quite grasp the rationale for the shift. I get that the things the Russian army is doing are horrible, but they’re largely things you were predicting, so I’d like to know how the balance of risks has changed.

    Not pushing back on him as strongly as possibly only encourages him.

    No disagreement, but that doesn’t prove that pushing back on him more strongly will discourage him. And “as strongly as possible” is pretty open-ended. I don’t want Ukraine reduced to rubble, but I don’t want it to get nuked either, and if Putin’s mindset is really “either I get it or no one does,” then what are the chances of that happening if we decide to get more directly involved? (Leaving aside for the moment the question of wider nuclear threats, which tend to be used to end the argument.)

    I’m honestly hoping you can convince me. I would be happy to start making calls to my representatives if I feel confident of the odds of it leading to a better outcome.

  83. 83.

    Ohio Mom

    @Adam L Silverman: That’s what I suspected, and also the part most of us aren’t considering when we list all the things each of us think Biden should do.

    We are thinking about America’s relationships with other countries but he is also thinking about his and the Democrats’ relationship with the voters. We can’t save democracy of we lose the next election.

  84. 84.

    jonas

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: ​
      I think Nichols is right. Putin would desperately like to make this a grand showdown between Russia and the West to distract from the fact that his vaunted military is being ground down in Ukraine right now.

  85. 85.

    VeniceRiley

    My take on the military’s “no to migs” position is they’re skeptical that UA has the discipline to never fly them into Russian or Belarusian airspace…. But they don’t want to say that, obviously. That would be an I’ll timed statement when you 100% support Ukraine morale.

  86. 86.

    Ruckus

    @Butter Emails!:

    I don’t know how to break it to you gently. So I won’t try.

    If there is an all out nuclear war the likelihood of many Americans or Russians left alive is slim. If the blast don’t get you the radiation likely will. There are far more missiles and warheads than necessary and the likelihood that if vova strikes he sends just one is remarkably tiny. And even if he did the likely hood that we respond in kind is much smaller. And both sides know this, even if both sides don’t believe it. The reason everyone has or wants nukes is to keep a madman from using them. We just have to hope that better sense prevails, because that’s the only actual thing stopping their use.

    And while some seem to think vova is not now or yet a madman, I think he is no longer a human with a better side. He is out for what looks to me to be his moment of mad glory, which through out history has always proven to be the worst thing a leader can do. It’s desperation time for him and it doesn’t have to have any logic whatsoever involved. He will come out of this on the loosing side, it’s only how many other humans he takes out with him. And that number is always way, way too fucking high, because it’s always over zero.

  87. 87.

    jonas

    @Mallard Filmore: That’s right. It wasn’t about code security; Eisenhower (iirc) made the call that sending bombing missions deep into eastern Europe to take out concentration camps (or supply lines to the camps) was too risky relative to shortening the war by focusing air power directly at German military and industrial assets.

    Whether that decision was the right one is debatable, of course, but the allies made a call based on what they thought at the time would save more lives in the long run. Perhaps if they understood the full enormity of what was happening in the extermination camps they would have decided differently. We can’t know.

  88. 88.

    patrick II

    It seems things are deemed “escalatory” when they are weapons effective enough to actually change the course of the war in favor of Ukraine.  I read today that we are not forwarding satellite/battlefield intelligence, even though it would greatly enhance the Ukraine army’s effectiveness, but would be seen as “escalatory”.  Same for the MIGs.  It seems Russia will tolerate stingers and javelins which will prolong the war but not actually turn the tide.  If we don’t allow ourselves to do the things that will actually help them win, we are just drawing out their agony.

  89. 89.

    Ruckus

    @Sebastian:

    I am not sure how this is sustainable. 

    I don’t think it is.

    vova seemed to go in half cocked (or all cocked, depending on how you define cocked), thinking this was going to be easy, that the overwhelming strength of the Russian military would overwhelm Ukraine. His understanding of the word overwhelming seems to be pure bullshit. His military is bigger, but his force is seemingly undertrained, seemingly undisciplined, way under supported, and most of the army seemed to be rather unwilling. That’s rarely a successful combination. But that doesn’t mean he can’t do a hell of a lot of zero reward damage in the meantime.

  90. 90.

    Martin

    @Chbnna: One thing i’ve been wanting to know is if the US or other intelligence is sure the nuclear warheads in Russia would even work? Also, is there a scenario where we would just bomb the hell out of Russia , like full out blitz before they could hit that the buttons for the nuclear warheads? If they do launch one or a few ones do we have the capabilities to intersect? Pardon the basic /simple questions, I really have very little knowledge of war tactics, more like none :) these are just things i’ve been wondering.

    Well, let’s just tiptoe into this…

    Do the nukes work? Nobody knows. Not even sure Russia knows. Nukes need pretty steady maintenance. They aren’t cheap weapons to own. Given the state of their trucks and tanks, not a lot confidence they’ve been keeping up the nuclear maintenance.

    As to a decapitation strike (what you’ve described), that’s exceedingly hard to pull off. Effectively impossible. That’s what nations plan for. That’s why the US has multiple ‘doomsday’ planes whose job is to handle that situation. The problem there is that yeah, there’s a lot of ICBMs around the country but sub-launch nukes are something that’s very difficult to counter. There could be a Russian sub off the coast of DC with a few dozen warheads on board.

    It used to be the case (and I’m guessing still is) that there was a US attack sub following each of these around who would probably be tasked with sinking the sub as soon as the shit went down. And Russian ICBMs are harder than US ones to target because some of them are on mobile launchers – trainee etc. So you have to pretty actively keep tabs on them all.

    Bottom line, decapitation strikes are pretty well planned for, and unlikely to work.

    And all that aside, we’re talking about killing upwards of 100 million people, something I’m having a hard time envisioning us doing unless Russia has already launched a nuke.

  91. 91.

    Martin

    @patrick II: I suspect the distinction is offensive vs defensive. Things that could be used to attack Russia are a much bigger issue than things that could be used to defend Ukraine.

    And we do make that distinction very clear with aid between ‘humanitarian aid’, ‘defensive military aid’ and ‘military aid’.

  92. 92.

    littlefootsie

    @Adam L Silverman:

    I can see being tough with North Korea or Pakistan or <insert country with a few nukes here but Putin has enough to annihilate the entire planet. He's also by all accounts certifiable and soley the one in charge of the button. Isn't playing it distant the only play here?

    Yes MBS and NK and other are paying attention and will undoubtedly make the same plays soon, but they don't have a 5k+ nuclear warhead arsenal behind them.

  93. 93.

    Another Scott

    I don’t think that you make a strong case here, Adam. For example, maybe there are some very good reasons not to be overt about transferring the Polish planes. Is there relevant law that has to be followed in the transfer?

    Remember that Biden knew exactly what VVP was going to do and the timing of the invasion. Maybe they have similar intelligence that impacts the decision on the MiGs. His team seems to know what they are doing.

    I also think that your analysis is weak on what happens if you are wrong. The goal here is to have the war end quickly, with an intact independent Ukraine, with as much of the cost on VVP and as little cost on the West as possible.

    The (new) invasion happened 2 weeks ago. It takes time for coalitions to get everything together… We shouldn’t be in a hurry to ratchet up the war if other approaches can succeed.

    Thanks for your work here. It is appreciated.

    My $0.02.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  94. 94.

    Martin

    Haven’t seen any mention of the weather. Supposed to go down to -20C (-5F). Not only will that impact civilians, but it’s going to affect those Russian troops. Guessing a lot of gas is going to get burned keeping heaters going.

  95. 95.

    patrick II

    @Martin:

    How does satellite/battlefield intelligence fit into being an offensive weapon unless you are giving them pictures of Russia?

  96. 96.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    Kai Ryssdal @kairyssdal 8h
    Not for nothing, but we made the Brits tow — yes, tow, with horses — US planes over the Canadian border before WW2

    also, while I’m one of the few people on this thread who isn’t an expert in modern warfare, I’m kind of dubious as to whether 28 fighter jets would be game-changers in this conflict. I’m catching up on Michael McFaul on on the Colbert program. He’s no dove on this, he wants the planes delivered to UKR, but he also just said that the Russians have excellent anti-aircraft capabilities.

  97. 97.

    Carlo Graziani

    @Adam L Silverman:

    By the time we got the Ukrainians up to speed on the SAMs, it would be months

    I’m trying for clarity here. What I believe this entire discussion is really about, after stripping away the circumlocutions, misdirections, and steaight-up bullshit is “in what way is it best for NATO to expand its role in the Ukraine war”.

    There is a school of thought, which in my opinion is dangerously wrong, which holds that some kind of expanded NATO-enhanced air capaBility is the silver bullet that will transform the conflict. The reason that I think this is not the right way to approach the problem is that at the end of the escalation ladders, all these approaches either fail (because the Russians bring up air and air suppression assets that UK AF can’t handle and NATO backs off) or NATO stays in it we wind up with NATO-Russian air-to-air and air-to-ground engagements extending into Belarussan and Russian territory. The phases that follow that one don’t bear thinking about.

    [And that’s even neglecting the danger of disrupting the supremely strategically important, reborn NATO resolve by a reckless call].

    So if we are going to engage, and the issue is getting UKR military “up to speed” on long-range SAM systems, then teams of US trainers could be moving in, much more deniably, with the gear, possibly even operating it, possibly even exposing themselves to enemy suppressive fire if necessary, at much lower risk of growing the conflict. They could be operating from rear areas, after all.

    Also, most of the damage to Ukrainian urban areas appears to be due to artillery rockets, not aircraft. So where is this obsession with air defense coming from? Those guys need their own artillery, and some kind of radar or drone-based spotting. Also good use of advisors. Christ, what’s the matter, this is what US military advisors have been doing in 50 years of conflicts, have we forgotten how it works?

  98. 98.

    Mallard Filmore

    @Martin: 

    Nukes need pretty steady maintenance.

    I bet the launch vehicles need attention also. Don’t want those rascals to explode their propellant in the silo.

  100. 100.

    CaseyL

    @Mallard Filmore:  @jonas:

    Wow, guys – thanks!  The story of not bombing the railways or the camps because it would tip their hand to how much we knew is something I’ve heard and read in a number of places – have never known it was not, in fact, actually what happened.

    ETA – I’m not being snarky.

  101. 101.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @patrick II: I don’t know if/how fighter jets would have impacted the movement of ground-based anti-aircraft weaponry moved in from (I’m assuming) Belarus.

    f Ukraine had 29 more MIGs for the last couple of weeks?

    Poland didn’t offer the MiGs until, what?, 48 hours ago?

    There was “no desire to see them in our custody,” Kirby said Wednesday, adding that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has communicated as much to Poland’s defense minister. The transfer of MiG-29s would not “appreciably increase the effectiveness” of Ukraine’s air force, Wolters added.

    Rather, the Pentagon maintains that supplying Ukraine with ground-based air defense systems, such as surface-to-air missiles, has proved effective at weakening Russian forces, including its air capabilities. The United States is evaluating how to provide Ukraine with more of those types of weapons rather than the aircraft its leaders have asked for.

    The United States already has shipped Ukraine a number of Stinger antiaircraft missiles and Javelin antitank missiles, alongside shotguns and other materials useful for fighting in urban areas, as The Washington Post first reported last week.

  103. 103.

    TKH

    In regard to the MIG 29 issue I would really like a clinical analysis of what it would take to ready these planes from their current Polish configuration to one useful for the UK air force. This will likely require a change of multiple electronic components. Are there 28 unused sets of such components available? What does this reconfiguration require and how long does this take?  Are there 28 Ukrainian pilots ready to fly if only there were a sled? Is there enough ammo for an additional 28 planes?

    And I would like this information from somebody who knows what they are talking about and not from the “ strength of opinion offered is inversely proportional to my actual knowledge” contingent in this commentariat.

    I suggest Ksmiami and Winston punch themselves or each other in the dick. Hard!

  104. 104.

    Sebastian

    Whenever emotions become too strong and overwhelming, feelings of frustration, fear, anger, hate, and other understandably strong reactions to clear and glaring acts of cruelty and injustice, it behooves us to remember that this is the desired outcome of the abuser.

    In an abusive dynamic, all energy is drained from the victim, the world becomes a washer, tumbling and disorienting. The chaos, the grey, the uncertainty, doubt, worry, are natural reactions and states, and conjuring them is the abuser’s way of keeping the victim under their control.

    But anchoring ourselves in undeniable facts breaks the abuser’s spell on our minds. Remember: The Russians are losing and they are losing badly.

    This war started exactly two weeks ago and the allegedly 2nd most powerful army on the planet has completely disintegrated. A hundred miles from their border they are out of gas, out of food, and pinned down by General Mud. The roads are all destroyed. The Russian troops aren’t in the cities yet, they are out in the open only with their overnight bag because this was supposed to be over in three days, right?

    Do you know who is coming now?

    General Winter.

    WaPo

    By Friday morning, much of Ukraine could have temperatures around 14 degrees (minus-10 Celsius). A wind chill from easterly gusts could make the air feel as cold as minus-4 degrees (minus-20 Celsius). Parts of northeastern Ukraine could also get up to 4 inches (more than 12 centimeters) of snow through Friday.

    As a reinforcing shot of Arctic air arrives from Russia over the weekend, temperatures could fall below zero degrees Fahrenheit in northeast Ukraine. The Arctic outbreak and cold temperatures will persist through mid-March, when the blocking high will begin to collapse.

    The diesel will gel. This weekend, hundreds, maybe even thousands of Russian soldiers will freeze to death. Those who can, will surrender.

  105. 105.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Cameron: I have had no contact with him since 2015. I have no idea what his thoughts on this are.

    It is important to remember that he trained and mentored me, so I’m not surprised to be told we’re making similar arguments.

  107. 107.

    patrick II

     

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: 

    48 hours ago was when Poland put the hot potato in the U.S. lap. There had been a plan for some time to have Ukrainian pilots fly them from Poland. Poland never pulled the trigger, fearing reprisal, so they threw it back to us.  Would it have made a difference?  I don’t know. Evidently it has been stalled long enough that it won’t.

  108. 108.

    Sebastian

    @Martin:

    You beat me to the punch, sir.

    This might have very well been the reason why everyone was waiting this past week. Why aren’t we attacking the column? Why aren’t we doing this or that? I bet the US and NATO have kickass weather forecasts for the region.

  109. 109.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Redshift: It’s late and this is a post in itself, so I’ll try to address it tomorrow night. If you e-mail the question that will help.

  113. 113.

    Sebastian

    @Martin:

    This is the center around which everything dances, isn’t it?

    Do the Russian nukes even work?

    Terribly expensive to maintain, such a juicy pot to dip their greedy grubby lil fingers into, who would ever know? It’s not like it will be ever used, innit? Everyone knows we have them, nobody would ever suspect …

    We are supposed to believe they kept this mega-expensive thing going on for 30 years, while they stole everything else, but not this one thing, which nobody but them can verify if it is actually there or not.

  115. 115.

    Kelly

    sorry about repetitive posts nothing seemed to be happening. I noticed a waiting for cache msg in the bottom left. closed chrome to see if that clears up the proble

    edited to add works now

  116. 116.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    Brian Tyler Cohen @briantylercohen. 2h

    BREAKING: House passes legislation banning Russian oil and gas imports by a vote of 414-17.

    NO votes were 15 Republicans, including Boebert, Massie, Cawthorn, Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Gohmert, Gosar, and Chip Roy; and 2 Democrats, Cori Bush and Ilhan Omar.

  117. 117.

    Sebastian

    @Kelly:

    Thanks! Yes, additives, sometimes jet fuel or even simply petrol to avoid gelling. But it doesn’t help, you need to keep the engine running. Below 20C it becomes very difficult to start a diesel engine, you can have as many burning rags in front of the air intake and small wood fires under the engine and the tank as you want. Won’t help.

    That’s if they even have any diesel.

  118. 118.

    Kelly

    So much hinges on weather. A cold snap like this on launch day would have frozen the mud and helped the Russians. Now low on fuel and other supplies it’s a problem for them.

  121. 121.

    Tehanu

    @Alison Rose ???: I am usually anti-war. I went to anti-war marches. But for the love of God, I am also a realist, and right now the reality is Ukraine needs our help and we’re refusing to give it over a fucking technicality.

    Me too. I don’t want this to be happening but I don’t see how we can claim to be for freedom and justice if we don’t do more than we’re doing now.

     

    @CaseyL:  What’s going on in Ukraine is a cold, rational decision to withhold direct-engagement military assistance, and let Ukraine continue to be leveled and its citizens killed, in order to avoid triggering a nuclear war. That’s… an unbearably hard decision to make, but I don’t see how they can do any other.

    But then what’s to stop Putin from keeping on doing it in other places? We just give him everything he wants forever?

  122. 122.

    Reverse tool order

    Not sure how useful bringing up something will be, but don’t see how it could harm the discussion either.

    Most to all of us see there are substantial risks in this war situation and understands “risk” has two dimensions, so to speak. Frequency or probability of an outcome and severity of that outcome. Please forgive the horrible example of extreme risk that is “Russian roulette”, brought up only to be clear quickly. It has high probability (1/5 to 1/10 with 5 thru 10 shot revolvers) and potentially dire consequence.

    My main point is that there does not seem to be much recognition of how many risks are ramifying and cascading outward with any action we do or do not take. Doing nothing will create consequences and entail risks that may not be to our liking, just as doing any something will. Not saying all outcomes will be similarly bad, we simply can’t know the final outcome.

    I don’t know what we should do, just that we’ll do better looking clearly at where we are. The time when this could have been avoided altogether ended with the first steps towards it.

  123. 123.

    RinaX

     

     

    @Redshift:

     

    No disagreement, but that doesn’t prove that pushing back on him more strongly will discourage him.

     

    Exactly. I, too, believe Putin wants the U.S./NATO to get directly involved. Last week everyone was calling for the harshest economic sanctions in hopes it would stop him or put pressure on other Russian officials to intervene. That hasn’t happened, and I don’t think it will.

    Putin will see Ukraine reduced to rubble no matter the consequences. We keep looking for that one solution that stops him. Save for a bullet to the head, I don’t think there is one.

  124. 124.

    Jak

    On the CBS Evening News for 9 Mar as part of one of the stories a clip was shown of Russian tanks moving down a road. Except they were Soviet tanks flying hammer and sickle banners. Better reporting please. They ran the clip twice. There was no doubt.

  128. 128.

    Robert Sneddon

    @Sebastian: ​
      The Russians test-fired their new-generation Bulava sub-launched missiles from a new-generation Borei class SSBN about three years ago, a volley of four missiles in about thirty seconds or so. They all worked, and according to the reports they hit their targets a few thousand kilometres downrange. There was no nuclear payload on board any of them though, of course.

    Any Russian SSBN that targets the US can fire its missiles from mid-Pacific or the northern Atlantic, it doesn’t have to be patrolling just off the American coast to be a threat. SSBNs are, of course, important targets for enemy hunter-killer subs so they get their own “minder” sub as an escort to engage any attackers if the worst came to the worst.

    A lot of Russian military hardware is rusted-out and degraded but nuclear weapons are the crown jewels of any military that owns them and they get treated the best. My own very limited exposure to nuclear weapons technology a long time back taught me that the stated aim was for every one deployed to work perfectly if called upon.

  129. 129.

    prostratedragon

    @Sebastian:  We’ll see in a couple of days whether they know something that no one else knows at present. The weather here at the bottom of Lake Michigan has been a bit volatile this winter, but usually forecasts broadly agree within a few days.

    Have some experience of windy -20F. Brisk. Mechanical things get temperamental.

  130. 130.

    Sloane Ranger

    Just some random thoughts.

    First off, Biden is adverse to foreign adventures and has been for most of his career. He spoke against the surge in Afghanistan for instance. Up until the invasion of Ukraine, most people here considered this a plus. I’m fairly certain the US’s cautious approach is being driven from the top.

    Secondly, there is an understandable reaction upon seeing the devastation being visited upon Ukrainian cities and people that we should do something, this is something, so let’s do it. But, the people who are actually responsible for doing that thing have to think through the implications and decide whether the benefits outweigh the risks and these decisions are ruthless and driven by realpolitik. For instance, we give Ukraine offensive weapons.  They use them to target Russian guns, planes, support depots in Belarus and accidentally blow up a random farmer and his family. This gives the Russians a big propaganda win and blurs the moral lines, making it easier for those nations not fully on board with sanctions to claim that both sides are doing it and go back to business as usual. This undermines the attempt to isolate Russia.

    Lastly, I think the photos and videos of bombed civilian infrastructure, yes including childrens hospitals are vastly more shocking to an American audience than a European one. We had the Blitz, the fire bombing of Dresden, the total destruction of towns like Ypres, which you were spared. I think that Europeans are more likely to accept that these are the brutal realities of modern war than Americans are.

  131. 131.

    bjacques

    So NATO getting more directly involved would excuse what Putin’s done already, is doing now, and plans to do next. And NATO-flagged equipment in battle and the odd corpse in the uniform of a NATO member are things he can show on domestic media to rally the doubters back home.

    So NATO has to assist Ukraine without being much more obvious than what they’re doing now, and they’re doing it pretty effectively, haggling over Polish MiGs to the contrary.

    Ukraine other ally, General Mud, arrived on schedule and stayed long enough to help, and is now being relieved by General Polar Vortex, formerly known as General Winter. Both helped Russia and the USSR in their hour of need, but now take the side of Ukraine in its hour of need, so maybe they favor the underdog. Unlike General Poor Preventative Maintenance, who plays no favorites and is having a field day with the Russian Army right now.

    Any news of the army of Belarus? If they were to mutiny and change sides, they could go at the Russian artillery and missile batteries stationed there. Unlikely, I know, but we’ve had several weeks of unlikely so far.

    ETA: If Russian soldiers who’ve surrendered and are being held in cities being shelled and maybe called their friends in other units, might that weaken the latter’s resolve?

  132. 132.

    elliottg

    I’m sorry, but I think this need to do something is (like Sebastian has pointed out) is wrong. The world is doing a huge f’ing amount. Ultimately, the only way this ends is for one man to make a decision to pull back or for that man to die or the launch of nukes. Planes or a no-fly zone don’t do either of the first two and increase the chance of the third. Planes might help mitigate some of the damage or it just might mean it happens more slowly (what are the projected losses on those planes in combat?). A no-fly zone doesn’t do that at all. Having the army cold and starving and committing atrocities that make every Russian a pariah unless they renounce their citizenship is the best leverage we have to accomplish one of the first 2 outcomes and engaging too forcefully is the best way to accomplish the 3rd outcome.

    The world is currently on the right path in responding to Putin. The ruble is rubble. The economy is dead. Putin is a pariah. The RF army is losing the war (if not the battle). How do planes change the equation for the better? I have no idea, but the arguments here do not make me believe that they are coming from a more thought out position than the one that the US and NATO have staked out based on a whole lot better information and expertise.

  134. 134.

    Rachel Bakes

    Thank you Adam. These reports are now as necessary for my day as Annie’s Covid updates. Thank you for your honest, expertise, and thoroughness.

  135. 135.

    lowtechcyclist

    About the Migs: if our Secretary of State was spending days trying to get Poland to give up its Mig-29s, was our Secretary of Defense totally in the dark about this, or what?

    At any rate, if they’re coming down on opposite sides of this matter, there’s only one guy who can resolve it. This one’s in your lap, Joe. Get those goddamn Migs to Ukraine. Today if possible.

    Adam:

    Putin is going to do what Putin is going to do. Not pushing back on him as strongly as possibly only encourages him.

    We have nukes. “[P]ushing back on him as strongly as possibl[e]” would mean nuking Russia. Certainly all its military targets. I don’t think we want to do that. So what *did* you really mean?

  136. 136.

    Ksmiami

    @Tehanu: The point is this: Putin won’t last forever and as long as we stay United, the Russians will really start to suffer to the point where his time in power will most likely be reduced. There is no good scenario here, but there is no way raising the specter of nuclear oblivion is better. I still think there are indirect ways to get to Putin and hope that our intelligence agencies etc are able to work through some of these clandestine possibilities, but it sucks to not help more.

  138. 138.

    Geminid

    Ukrainian Foreign Minister Kuleba spoke to reporters after a meeting this morning with his Russian counterpart Lavrov. He said that the Russians are not ready for a ceasefire, that they want a surrender and “This is what they are not going to get.”

    The meeting was held in the southern Turkish coastal city of Antalya; evidently Turkish diplomats were directly involved in the talks. From the Times of Israel.

  139. 139.

    debbie

    @bjacques:

    ETA: If Russian soldiers who’ve surrendered and are being held in cities being shelled and maybe called their friends in other units, might that weaken the latter’s resolve?

    Since countless international laws have already been violated, I think videos of the captured and their testimony should be provided and amplified. Show the world what Russia’s “best” think now. Fuck the Geneva Convention and fuck the UN.

  140. 140.

    Geminid

    If 29 Migs flew into Ukraine today the Ukrainians might not have pilots to fly them all, or places to put them that were hidden from Russian surveilance and airstrikes. But it’s possible these Migs might find their way to Ukraine one or two at a time, replacing Ukrainian losses. The CIA has done such things in the past. This, of course, is speculation.

  141. 141.

    lowtechcyclist

    @Geminid:  Zelensky’s been pretty clear that he wants those Migs, so I would assume his military can use them.  It’s quite possible that he has more qualified fighter pilots than fighter planes.

  142. 142.

    Geminid

    Reuters put up a story about the JCPOA talks headlined, “Iran nuclear talks stumble over unresolved Russian demands.” Iran’s chief negotiator returned to Vienna yesterday from Teheran after consultations with his government.

    It appears that outstanding problems in these negotiations have been resolved, except the one Russia raised last weekend. They want some sort of guaranty regarding sanctions against them even as sanctions against Iran are removed. It seems like the other parties, including Iran and China, are intent on reviving the JCPOA so I don’t think Russia will get more than some nominal accomodation.

    The other parties could tell the Russians to pound sand, but they hope to see the new JCPOA endorsed by the U.N. Security Council where Russia has a veto. I think in this instance the Chinese will lean on Russia. They really want to, as they say in Beijing, “git ‘er done.”

  143. 143.

    Gvg

    Somehow I think the urgent thing to figure out is how to feed and warm the Ukrainian citizens under siege. Supply lines even more than evacuations. I can’t think of a way to do that. And I don’t see how migs help, though they might.
    it’s not just the Russian soldiers who are nearly out of food and water

  144. 144.

    Geminid

    Yesterday the Washington Post had a number of articles on the war. One reported on a parking lot in Berlin, where Ukrainian truck drivers were loading up donations from a constant stream of cars. Items ran the gamut from baby food and batteries to coats and fire extinguishers.

    The drivers had been making deliveries in Europe when the war broke out, and were now about to return home, normally a 14 hour trip. One said he would not be back to Berlin, at least not any time soon. He planned to drop his load, hug his wife and daughter, and then join the fight.

  145. 145.

    Nettoyeur

    @Carlo Graziani: Good argument with one proviso: SAMs can shoot down cruise missiles (slow) but are relatively  ineffective against ballistic missiles, which can be launched from outside Ukraine. Patriots help with that to some extent. Likely that eventually airpower would be directed against Russia launchers. Escalation then inevitable. Game of chicken with a guy who is already scaring his own advisors shitless.

  146. 146.

    way2blue

    Adam.  Thank you for sharing your insights on the war against Ukraine.  Your posts, along with Garry Kasporov & Bill Browder’s twitter feeds, have been indispensible.  Yes to the MiGs.  All 70 MiGs.  Yes, last week.  Yes,  next week.  Yes, today!  Tow them across a border if necessary, and fly them to Ukraine with non-military women pilots if necessary.  As apparently happened between the US, Canada & the UK prior to the US joining the fight in WWII…

  147. 147.

    lee

    Just noticed that VP Harris announced Patriot Missiles to Poland.

    My hunch is that this is what was holding up the MIG/F-16 swap.

  148. 148.

    dnfree

    Invalid syllogism left over from logic class long ago:

    We must do something.

    This is something.

    Therefore we must do this.

    I am not claiming to have any better answers.  This situation is agonizing to watch.

  149. 149.

    Dennis

    I’m sure Blinken’s diplomacy on the Migs didn’t point to “okay, Poland announce on twitter that you are giving the Migs to the US and the US is giving them to Ukraine and also giving Poland F-16s.”

    You might as well say “the US will give Ukraine F-16s”, would barely be more escalatory.

  150. 150.

    Carlo Graziani

    What we ought to be asking ourselves is “what happens if Ukraine gets 28 MIG 29 jets delivered, and they are all shot out of the sky in a week?”

    Which, IMO, is the most likely outcome. Russian SAMs and Russian interceptors haven’t had any real targets yet, but Russia has the largest Air Force of any nation in Europe, by a very wide margin.

    So, in that scenario, do we double down with a full-up NATO air war — excuse me, “exclusion zone” — to cover our embarrassment over the inept prelude, the farcical conclusion, and the unforced error granting Putin a propaganda victory for home TV consumption?

  151. 151.

    J R in WV

    @Sebastian: ​

    Below 20C it becomes very difficult to start a diesel engine,

    This is VERY incorrect. 20C = 68F which is a summer evening temp. I started our diesel tractor a couple of weeks ago in temps below 0C in snow with minor issues, a big cloud of white smoke.

    Having run diesel vehicles since 1978, we did add gasoline to the diesel in very cold conditions. We also had a block heater in the engine, which made rotating the engine easy.

    I’m not sure Russian diesel engines were fueled for sub zero temp operations — this was a spring time offensive after all, and their other maintenance issues appear to have truly sucked. A shame for Putinski that it didn’t work out that quickly, isn’t it?

    It doesn’t take much paraffin crystalizing in the fuel to stop up the filters. So if things get cold over the weekend, the engines may well just stop… then it’s fuck you Ivan…

  152. 152.

    Chris Johnson

    I think the bottom line is that Putin is DESPERATE for us to hit him. He’s desperate to turn it into Russia vs. NATO, Russia vs. the USA, anything but ‘Russia’s failing to beat Ukraine, so he’s just trying to war crime as hard as possible to GET someone else to attack him and justify all this’.

    If the troll armies are still getting paid, it’s to try and make the US and NATO attack Russia. No-fly zone is a good start with this, because what then? Then Russia attacks whatever planes are enforcing this and boom, we’re in. Except that if it’s a no-fly zone we are waiting for him to pull that trigger, and he can plan it as well as he could want, to be ready to launch anything he likes the instant things escalate. A perfect set-up.

    Or, just directly attack Russia, which again is what Putin is desperate for us to do.

    How about no.

Comments are closed.