Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Our current administration is openly supporting European opposition parties that are pro-Russia. Some have been funded directly by Russia. That would be my main concern on US/European alignment.

I alluded to waffling, the admin is definitely pro-Russian, then it’s not for a minute, then it is again, and back and forth. Someone or somebodies in the admin (career types) are not pro-Russian, that’s my take. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, scramblyn said:

I acknowledged that in my post - the US and Europe are not aligned on broader security policy for Europe, I’m not convinced Europe wants a quicker Russian defeat over a longer one.  No mistaking defeating Russia is paramount. But the sooner Russia is defeated the sooner they can start rebuilding. Why would anyone (but the Ukrainians wanting the war to end sooner) want that ?

Strategically this is true.  It's probably better for everyone but Ukraine and Russia that the war drags on and Russia suffers as long as possible as greatly as possible.

But I think this is just a side effect.  I don't think there's a government in Europe that could stand the backlash of the populous if they said, "We are going to end this war today.  We're going to do it by throwing the entirety of our military might against Russia via Ukraine."  That is what would end the war quickly.  But the European people do not have the stomach for that at this point.  Plus you'd inevitably get the pushback of "Russia could go nuclear!"  No they wouldn't, for the simple reason that Putin wants to live.  Ultimately, if he gets pushed out of Ukraine, as long as he can still beat up on his own people, he'll be cowed, but still around.  For sure Europe wouldn't push for regime change.  No one wants to see a European army trying to follow Napoleon or Hitler's boot tracks across Russia.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
5 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

 

Peace now just means fighting Russia again later, with a greater claim to the lands they took by conquest, while simultaneously encouraging bad actors around the world to do the same.  I mean, if US/Europe doesn't stop them in their own back yard, then it's open season everywhere else.

 

I used to think this, but not any more.

All of Eurpoe now sees who Russia is and have already begun building up thier military srengths and forming stronger bonds with one another. If the war ended today, all of Europe will still keep building those strengths. Especially Ukraine.

Additionally, it will be a decade, at bare minimum, beforre Russia will be able to attempt anything like this again, and Putin will likely be dead by then.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted

Interesting take. The outcome while more intelligent if the primary motivation is actually a secondary effect of a lack of will power. That’s convenient for those who recognize the strategic advantage. 

but the lack of the will to fight aggressively in this war goes to the very point - Ukraine was, is and always will be expendable to Europe. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, scramblyn said:

I alluded to waffling, the admin is definitely pro-Russian, then it’s not for a minute, then it is again, and back and forth. Someone or somebodies in the admin (career types) are not pro-Russian, that’s my take. 

The first part, that the admin is pro-Russia is absolutely true.  It isn't that they "aren't for a minute."  They always are for Russia.  It's just that tossing a bone to Ukraine every so often gives them cover to say, "Well, we tried."  Nah, they aren't really trying.  Trying is sending HIMARS like Biden did.  Tfg is not doing that.  

But I think there are enough career people in our government that are trying to look to a place post-orange asshole where we attempt to regain some trust and cooperation with our long time allies.  Right now, our allies are turning away, as they must.  But that won't always be the case (he said hopefully).

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted

Most of Europe has not been doing nearly enough to re-arm to fight Russia. Poland is ready to go to a total war economy, but the rest of Europe is very much half-assing it. There's been a lot more talk about how they have to be responsible for their own security because we can't be relied on anymore than there's been actual action to that effect.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

I used to think this, but not any more.

All of Eurpoe now sees who Russia is and have already begun building up thier military srengths and forming stronger bonds with one another. If the war ended today, all of Europe will still keep building those strengths. Especially Ukraine.

Additionally, it will be a decade, at bare minimum, beforre Russia will be able to attempt anything like this again, and Putin will likely be dead by then.

Yeah but it’s a decade bare minimum before Europe can go it alone without the US. Status quo in this war benefits Europe provided Russia can’t win. 

Edited by scramblyn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

I used to think this, but not any more.

All of Eurpoe now sees who Russia is and have already begun building up thier military srengths and forming stronger bonds with one another. If the war ended today, all of Europe will still keep building those strengths. Especially Ukraine.

Additionally, it will be a decade, at bare minimum, beforre Russia will be able to attempt anything like this again, and Putin will likely be dead by then.

If Macron or Metz said, "we're taking the army to Ukraine tomorrow" they'd get massive pushback today.  Maybe less so as the war goes on, but I still don't think the European populous has decided, "alright, we've had enough."  I think they're still at, "Let's give the Ukrainians what we can."  Those two things (1. boots on the ground vs. 2. supplying weapons for Ukraine to fight with) are still very far apart politically.  I hope you're correct though, that there's a rising tide of anti-Russian sentiment and a pragmatic understanding that if it's going to be finished, it's up to Europe. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Chad Fuck said:

The first part, that the admin is pro-Russia is absolutely true.  It isn't that they "aren't for a minute."  They always are for Russia.  It's just that tossing a bone to Ukraine every so often gives them cover to say, "Well, we tried."  Nah, they aren't really trying.  Trying is sending HIMARS like Biden did.  Tfg is not doing that.  

But I think there are enough career people in our government that are trying to look to a place post-orange asshole where we attempt to regain some trust and cooperation with our long time allies.  Right now, our allies are turning away, as they must.  But that won't always be the case (he said hopefully).

I was being lazy typing with thumbs, over a beer I would better describe it as a constant tension between pro Russian appointees and pro Europe career officials. I do think it has an effect (and may very well be the cause for some waffling). I don’t think Trump and his people care about optics of “trying” with Ukraine, I think on occasion the voice of reason works and then fuck that we are pro-Russian. There’s the ego too. Make trump look the fool he will turn on you (Putin) for a hot minute. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Most of Europe has not been doing nearly enough to re-arm to fight Russia. Poland is ready to go to a total war economy, but the rest of Europe is very much half-assing it. There's been a lot more talk about how they have to be responsible for their own security because we can't be relied on anymore than there's been actual action to that effect.

This is what I'm saying.  This right here is where Europe is.

Posted
2 minutes ago, scramblyn said:

Yeah but it’s a decade bare minimum before Europe can go it alone without the US. Status quo in this war benefits Europe provided Russia can’t win. 

Russia has mo interest in stopping the war. It's existential for them to reclaim nations that were previously part of the USSR. Their economy is very dependent on the war.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Russia has mo interest in stopping the war. It's existential for them to reclaim nations that were previously part of the USSR. Their economy is very dependent on the war.

That’s why I put the over under at 2 years. I also think Europe benefits from a status quo, and the US is an inconsistent mess mostly pro Russia and hopefully and it seems true is being sidelined as we speak.  All of that points to a protracted and lengthy status quo. Whether that’s intentional or because of the lack of will from the people of Europe is a question, but I just don’t see any real motivation to end this except to win a peace prize, which is a interesting line of thinking - will the ego override the pro-Russia position if a pro-Ukraine peace deal emerges? 

Edited by scramblyn
Posted
1 minute ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Russia has mo interest in stopping the war. It's existential for them to reclaim nations that were previously part of the USSR. Their economy is very dependent on the war.

Are you saying it's existential for Russia, or its existential for Putin?  I think those are two different things.  There will always be a Russia, but they've shot themselves in the dick with this war.  It will be a greatly diminished and downsized Russia if/when they lose this war.  Ethnic groups and former republics will start pulling out/away because Russia can't stop them.  

For Putin, it's existential.  He will be dead if he doesn't keep going. He may be if he does, but he certainly will be if he stops.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Are you saying it's existential for Russia, or its existential for Putin?  I think those are two different things.  There will always be a Russia, but they've shot themselves in the dick with this war.  It will be a greatly diminished and downsized Russia if/when they lose this war.  Ethnic groups and former republics will start pulling out/away because Russia can't stop them.  

For Putin, it's existential.  He will be dead if he doesn't keep going. He may be if he does, but he certainly will be if he stops.

He undoubtedly meant Putin but possibly also Russia as a whole because the tilt of the Russian economy is such that it gets much worse without a war time economy because there is no other economy. 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Are you saying it's existential for Russia, or its existential for Putin?  I think those are two different things.  There will always be a Russia, but they've shot themselves in the dick with this war.  It will be a greatly diminished and downsized Russia if/when they lose this war.  Ethnic groups and former republics will start pulling out/away because Russia can't stop them.  

For Putin, it's existential.  He will be dead if he doesn't keep going. He may be if he does, but he certainly will be if he stops.

Both. Are there Russians that don't want the war? Of course. Most Russians are fully behind the war. Basically any of the people that would take over Russia if Putin dies would see it through same way since Putin has purged Russia's leadership.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Both. Are there Russians that don't want the war? Of course. Most Russians are fully behind the war. Basically any of the people that would take over Russia if Putin dies would see it through same way since Putin has purged Russia's leadership.

You have to wonder if most are behind the war, because most Russians would assume whatever answer they give is recorded by the state to their possible detriment. 

But just like Newsmax or Fox, there are lots of people who simply believe whatever state run television tells them.  There will always be a hard-core group who believes every lie that comes out out of the Kremlin. But I’m sure there are a ton of people who simply don’t want to be arrested or have their meager employment opportunities forever ruined with the wrong poll answer.  

We get to boo and yell at our representatives in Townhall meetings. That gets you a jail cell in Russia.  I have no earthly idea how you can get a sense with the Russian public truly feels.

Posted
11 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

I have no earthly idea how you can get a sense with the Russian public truly feels.

They feel like they want more vodka to numb the despair inherent in living as a Russian in Russia.

That's it.  It's the sum total of "existing in Russia."  It's an evergreen principle as well.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 hours ago, scramblyn said:

Long time lurker infrequent poster here but I’m fully convinced that once the war started and it became clear Russia was in a quagmire that the underlying US policy shifted to keep Russia occupied and to bleed them out slowly. Preventing escalation to even tactical nukes was a secondary motivation, but the benefits of snagging Russia in military and economic death spiral for a half to a full decade here make too much sense. The current admin waffles but I think inside the intelligence communities this still remains the message and causes said waffling in some cases to Ukraine’s favor.

If we wanted to be Machiavellians, this is what we'd do.  Ukraine can be their Afganistan.

2 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

I agree to a large extent to this premise.  Certainly this was true under the Biden administration.  The bold part is my sincere hope - that there are people who are doing the right thing in between the lines who know that "this too shall pass."  

IMHO, the Biden admin engaged in ssslllooowww, incremental, proportional response.  Seems we never learn.

1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

What had to worry US planners is the possibility that by helping to destroy Russia thoroughly, all they would be doing is transferring a large part of Russia’s massive natural resources to China after it seizes large parts of eastern Russia - or at least those parts of Eastern Russia to which China currently has a historical claim. 

And their nukes would wander off.

1 hour ago, Post Oak said:

I think about the F Scott Fitzgerald quote often, "there will be a century of middle class love spent here."

 

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

I think of the Hemingway quote, paraphrasing, "it happened slowly, then suddenly."

I think of the Lenin quote, paraphrasing, "There are decades when nothing happens, and there are weeks when DECADES happen."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

You have to wonder if most are behind the war, because most Russians would assume whatever answer they give is recorded by the state to their possible detriment. 

But just like Newsmax or Fox, there are lots of people who simply believe whatever state run television tells them.  There will always be a hard-core group who believes every lie that comes out out of the Kremlin. But I’m sure there are a ton of people who simply don’t want to be arrested or have their meager employment opportunities forever ruined with the wrong poll answer.  

We get to boo and yell at our representatives in Townhall meetings. That gets you a jail cell in Russia.  I have no earthly idea how you can get a sense with the Russian public truly feels.


I was speaking with a Russian from southern Russia not far from Ukraine, and she tells me that most of her family back in Russia most definitely believe the Russian State Media news regarding Ukraine. She says that attitude is more the norm than the exception. Unfortunately, I didn’t ask lots of questions because she was a patient, but I found it interesting. Brainwashing is real and without easy access to many other sources of information, the Russian news dominates.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

They feel like they want more vodka to numb the despair inherent in living as a Russian in Russia.

That's it.  It's the sum total of "existing in Russia."  It's an evergreen principle as well.  

This is somewhat true as well. When you are poor and hungry, you concern yourself more with your immediate needs and focus less on others including other Russians, the Russian government and most definitely Ukraine and Ukrainians.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Bevo said:

This is somewhat true as well. When you are poor and hungry, you concern yourself more with your immediate needs and focus less on others including other Russians, the Russian government and most definitely Ukraine and Ukrainians.

It is a society of subservient peasants.  Always has been, always will be.  You could hand them the world on a platter, opportunities beyond most people's dreams.....and they'd be back to being subservient peasants in less than a generation.  It is their nature.  There is no Russian culture without that unbreakable foundation.

Life is worth little there because their culture places little value on life.  It's the damndest thing, you'd think eventually they'd work their way out of that way of thinking, but the culture and ethos of Russia has been utterly unchanged for centuries.  They produce some nifty literature and music and such.....and an unbroken line of being peasants who don't even see their own lives as having any value.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 hours ago, scramblyn said:

Long time lurker infrequent poster here but I’m fully convinced that once the war started and it became clear Russia was in a quagmire that the underlying US policy shifted to keep Russia occupied and to bleed them out slowly. Preventing escalation to even tactical nukes was a secondary motivation, but the benefits of snagging Russia in military and economic death spiral for a half to a full decade here make too much sense. The current admin waffles but I think inside the intelligence communities this still remains the message and causes said waffling in some cases to Ukraine’s favor.

3 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

I agree to a large extent to this premise.  Certainly this was true under the Biden administration.  The bold part is my sincere hope - that there are people who are doing the right thing in between the lines who know that "this too shall pass."  

2 hours ago, scramblyn said:

Netflix has a solid Cold War documentary called turning point, ...

semi related, I was shocked to see Russia refining capacity only knocked down 6% thus far. Meaningful but is it enough?

all that to say, I’d put the over under on this conflict ending at 2 years from now and I could be convinced it’s longer.

I’m curious what the intelligentsia on this thread thinks.

"I’m curious what the intelligentsia on this thread thinks."

I believe this thread is the most broad based, informative exchange of information I have been a party too, whether as a student, a professional in the work place, or a casual observer.

My limited search capabilities within the thread are frustrating at times, because many of these individual tangents have been discussed at length, multiple times. An occasional refresh is welcomed, as new information becomes available based on the dynamics of a multifaceted war.

As cumbersome as it may be, going back and reading older posts is beneficial, as most of the responses today are abbreviated versions of the more in depth analysis from previous posts.

I'm guilty of same, as I have posted versions of the same thing many times. The fundamentals stay the same, but the particulars change constantly.

With that said, a rereading of Tom Clancy's "The Bear and the Dragon" is on my holiday list.

It has always made sense for Russia to be the main supplier of Oil and Gas to Europe and China. Always. It didn't happen until Russia joined the commercial side of the world and made a move to monetize their tremendous natural resources. Their oil & gas industry in many ways is in the same state as the Permian Basin was in the 50's-60's.  Well known, but virtually untapped.

Russia played nice, negotiated the Nordstream gas contracts w/ Germany and western Europe, and the Sakhalin LNG contracts w/ Exxon, Shell & SE Asia, and opened the door for foreign investment to step in and monetize the resources. 

And then, Russia's gonna Russia. They invaded Ukraine.

At the end of the day, everybody has a price. Russia has available, exportable, relatively cheap Oil & Gas, and no safety or environmental constraints, and is void of a litigious society.   

2 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

It's a lot more than that, but it's also tough to quantify (paging @PTINS ).  They are refining far less, but they are exporting far less, so they are close to staying even on being able to refine what they need internally.

This is a decent breakdown. 

https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2025/10/russia-refinery-damages?lang=en

I don't think it was 38% (the article is probably right 38% was the upper range), but I wouldn't be surprised if it was in the 20s (only offset because they are exporting less). I don't think 2 years, but I think we will know how things will shake out over the next 6 months, because the tempo is such that Russia refining capacities are going to drop double-digits going forward and as more air defenses are destroyed/exhausted, we will see a lot more targets taken out.

Re: Russia Energy

When I throw my dart, I peg the Russian refining capacity reduction at ~ 20%.

The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) is a great resource for all things energy. The data is very good, but it is not meant to be a near term analysis.

Here is a link to their brief on Russia energy, as of 2024. 

Country Analysis Brief: Russia Last Updated: July 24, 2025

The 38% of Russian refining capacity offline mentioned by @atomheartbevo's reference in the Carnegie article was a simple calculation. Ukraine targeted and hit 38% of the refining capacity, so as much as 38% of the capacity might be offline.

Even with the microscope focused on the US refining industry, getting near term data is hard, as the reporting is such that its better to give the actual data to the government later, rather than giving them preliminary data sooner.

Refining capacity is a loose term. You might have 4 units built over the past 80 years that do basically the same thing. The capacity of all 4 is deemed to be the nameplate refinery capacity, when in reality, Unit 4 runs at 100%, Unit 3 runs at 75 %, Unit 2 runs at a variable rate based on demand, and Unit 1 basically mothballed.

Refineries "make" more products than the crude they refine. There is a 1-3 % gain across the refinery. Crude oil is a mix of bb's, peas, marbles, ping pong balls, and tennis balls. Refined products are more like the purity components, so when you separate the molecules, the volumes "grow" as there are more empty voids between each ball. 

A 400,000 BPD refinery would refine a train of tank cars 4 miles long, every day. Refineries have large storage capacities to insulate them from supply/demand disruptions, say a nominal 10 days of storage on each end; in this case, ~ 8,000,000 bbls of storage. One company may report net change to total storage volumes as "refining", where a second company would report actual refine inputs, and a third may report actual refined products made. I expect the data given to the EIA is consistent, but any reporting on industry trade reporting will be all over the board.

The current state of Russian refining operating rates is a hard thing to pin down, even before the Ukraine invasion.

Russian Nameplate Capacity is ~ 6,500,000 bbl/day (6.5 MM BPD), with a pre-war operating capacity of ~ 5.5 MM BPD, with ~ 17% of the capacity always offline. 

Of the 5.5 MMBPD normal capacity, estimates of capacity reductions range from 0.5-2.0 MM BPD, or an operating capacity ranging from from 91 to 63%. Some of range could be the difference between October actual volumes v. December estimated throughput volume. 

Ukraine has mentioned specific refinery columns that were targeted, but confirmation on exactly what was it, and how bad, is virtually non existent. Did they hit the pressure vessel or the lines connected to it? A breach of the large pressure vessel (10+ ft diameter) is normally a total loss, as these are ASME code vessels with non negotiable specifications.  That wold be a 6+ month replacement. In Russia, maybe they weld a plate over the hole and call it good.  That would take a few weeks or a month.

Normally, Russia produces ~ 200% of their internal diesel demand, and ~ 130% of their gasoline demand, with considerably more exports of diesel than gasoline. On a short term daily/weekly basis, a specific refinery going off line may cause spot shortages. Over time, a refinery can change their operations to make more more gasoline and less diesel. 

The US moves the majority of refined products (90+ % ??) via pipeline to a terminal, and trucks from the terminal to the gas stations. In Russia, other than Moscow and maybe St. Petersburg, most of the refined products appears to move by rail. I combination of a refinery attack, a storage depot attack, and a rail bridge attack in close proximity could cause a product shortage for some period of time.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)

I tried to preface by saying I'm a long time lurker, there isn't a post on this thread I haven't read at least once, I just don't often post because well all I have to add is commentary not facts and commentary of a general nature not from any subject matter expertise (though I have become a bit learned in Ukraine history based on some readings). but as you said it's always worth revisiting assumptions and theses as the situation develops. 

Edited by scramblyn

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...