On 9/29/2022 9:28 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 10:22:33 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
> <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
>> news:2b%YK.151317$w35c.69991@fx47.iad:
>>
>>> The soviet system has never generated the type of NCO regime
>>> used in western militaries, which is where the bulk of the
>>> institutional knowledge is contained, and from which most of the
>>> unit-level leadership skills are developed.
>>>
>> Doing so would conflict directly with their strategic doctrine. They
>> don't *trust* the lower level people to be politically reliable
>> enough to be allowed any kind of iniative.
>>
>> For good reason.
>
> I'm amazed that they allow the lower level people to actually have
> live ammo. The temptation to use it on their officers/NCOs must be
> quite strong.

Job security for the Commissars.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:nfhbjh1j28i5tq7vl8sljhr0a07grcg4fr@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 12:20:15 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
> <michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 28/09/2022 12.07, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>>>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:28:21 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>>>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hamish Laws <hamish.laws@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:d7a38641-e26d-4fdd-84c5-558c6709c278n@googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>>>> Not for standard nukes, it can be used to make a dirty bomb
>>>>>> that just disperses radioactive material but that's not a
>>>>>> good weapon
>>>>>>
>>>>> Useful for terrorism, but not for military purposes. Of
>>>>> course, Putin is, these days, more terrorist than head of
>>>>> state anyway.
>>>>
>>>> As former KGB, Putin's expertise lies in gathering together
>>>> 20 or 30 bully boys and sending them out to arrest people in
>>>> the middle of the night. Not in military topics.
>>>>
>>>> Neither in building up an Armed Forces structure capable of
>>>> doing what he wants nor in planning military operations
>>>> (overlooking logistics is typical of inexperience in this
>>>> area) nor (as I expect we shall soon see) in micromanaging
>>>> the forces.
>>>
>>> The actuality is far more nuanced. Back in 2008, to save
>>> funds, the former soviet training systems were discontinued
>>> and the conscription system was reduced to one year of
>>> service. That's led directly to a force consisting of
>>> soldiers with very limited training and a very small pool of
>>> reservists (who, unlike the reservists in the USA, don't have
>>> recurring training operations).
>>
>>Last week, _All Things Considered_ interviewed a Russian who was
>>officially a reservist and therefore subject to La Puta's
>>activation order. When describing his training, he said that he
>>had held a machine gun. Not fired, just held.
>>
>>Because he had a degree, he was commissioned as a lieutenant.
>
> Probably the safest course (for his fellow soldiers), unless
> Russian lieutenants regularly fire machine guns.

Given the number of *generals* who have been killed by snipers
because they can't trust people who are not directly in front of
them to follow orders, I don't believe there's *any* even remotely
safe position in the Russian military right now.
>
> And, if the reports of at least one 60-year-old
> never-been-in-the-Army diabetic being called up are correct, it
> appears that the Soviet Draft System is also ... thoroughly
> Putinized.

There are suggestions that they are specifically targeting people
who are protesting the war.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:dshbjhddnl5l5k35ovf83v9ot75r8k3brv@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 10:22:33 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
>>news:2b%YK.151317$w35c.69991@fx47.iad:
>>
>>> The soviet system has never generated the type of NCO regime
>>> used in western militaries, which is where the bulk of the
>>> institutional knowledge is contained, and from which most of
>>> the unit-level leadership skills are developed.
>>>
>>Doing so would conflict directly with their strategic doctrine.
>>They don't *trust* the lower level people to be politically
>>reliable enough to be allowed any kind of iniative.
>>
>>For good reason.
>
> I'm amazed that they allow the lower level people to actually
> have live ammo. The temptation to use it on their officers/NCOs
> must be quite strong.

There's certainly plenty of historical precedent. But if you shoot
your captian in the back, his political officer will shoot you in the
back. And quite possibly your entire family.

They have many years of experience at how to control their unreliable
subordinates.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:8vhbjhlempoq7l3osohbc475oqeo91mq03@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 10:20:40 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>>news:ljs8jhh7lmjg29n03b9r4061uivhceelci@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:28:21 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hamish Laws <hamish.laws@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>news:d7a38641-e26d-4fdd-84c5-558c6709c278n@googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, September 22, 2022 at 8:18:44 AM UTC+10, Jibini
>>>>> Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>>> And the fuel used in reactors *can't* be used for nuclear
>>>>>> bombs. It's not enriched enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not for standard nukes, it can be used to make a dirty bomb
>>>>> that just disperses radioactive material but that's not a
>>>>> good weapon
>>>>>
>>>>Useful for terrorism, but not for military purposes. Of
>>>>course, Putin is, these days, more terrorist than head of
>>>>state anyway.
>>>
>>> As former KGB, Putin's expertise lies in gathering together 20
>>> or 30 bully boys and sending them out to arrest people in the
>>> middle of the night. Not in military topics.
>>
>>And clearly, nobody in the human race could possibly learn
>>*anything* new on *any* subect in the space of 31 years, eh?
>
> Of course /some/ people manage to learn new things over time,
> but what makes you think Putin is capable of doing so?

What makesy ou believe - "think" is not something you do - that he
isn't?

> "Once
> KGB, always KGB".

What makes you believe KGB people are incapable of learning
anything new? Seriously, dude, what the hell is wrong with you?
>
>>> Neither in building up an Armed Forces structure capable of
>>> doing what he wants nor in planning military operations
>>> (overlooking logistics is typical of inexperience in this
>>> area) nor (as I expect we shall soon see) in micromanaging the
>>> forces.
>>
>>Hindsight is 20/20, of course, but until this year, pretty much
>>everybody, everywhere, especially people who know more about it
>>than either of us, thought he had the second most powerful
>>military in the world. Certianly, it was build over the course
>>of 30+ years according to long standing Soviet/Russian doctrine.
>>The biggest flaw, of course, is that one of the core values of
>>that doctrine is to embezzle as much as possible as often as
>>possible. (There are other, strategic, flaws in it as well, but
>>the corruption is, by far, the worst.)
>
> I certainly did. I was amazed at how well the Ukrainians did
> initially.
>
> And happy. Very very happier. The only thing better would have
> for Putin to have given up and gone home after the second week.

If he had, he'd probably have survived, politically and
biolotically. Now, his fate is sealed. He'll be dead soon.
>
>>> Now that Tsar Putin is holed up in his Winter Palace (which I
>>> trust we know the location of from our various satellites),
>>> the only question is: has he started moving /imaginary/ armies
>>> around (as Adolph did, when the walls closed in at the end)
>>> yet?
>>
>>Personally, I believe he's far too busy worrying about
>>assassination, by his own people. Or the every growing mobs of
>>protestors deciding to engage in yet another long standing
>>Russian tradition, of human wave attacks until there are no more
>>security forces between them and him. (And if anybody
>>understands poorly or un-armed human wave attacks against
>>heavily armed enemies, it's Russians.)
>
> It's a good thing Trump couldn't get enough people motivated for
> such an attack on 1/6/21.

As opposed to the violent insurgency by the left in 2016 when he
got elected.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On 2022-09-29 13:42, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
> news:8vhbjhlempoq7l3osohbc475oqeo91mq03@4ax.com:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 10:20:40 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>>> news:ljs8jhh7lmjg29n03b9r4061uivhceelci@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:28:21 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>>>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hamish Laws <hamish.laws@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:d7a38641-e26d-4fdd-84c5-558c6709c278n@googlegroups.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thursday, September 22, 2022 at 8:18:44 AM UTC+10, Jibini
>>>>>> Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>>>> And the fuel used in reactors *can't* be used for nuclear
>>>>>>> bombs. It's not enriched enough.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not for standard nukes, it can be used to make a dirty bomb
>>>>>> that just disperses radioactive material but that's not a
>>>>>> good weapon
>>>>>>
>>>>> Useful for terrorism, but not for military purposes. Of
>>>>> course, Putin is, these days, more terrorist than head of
>>>>> state anyway.
>>>>
>>>> As former KGB, Putin's expertise lies in gathering together 20
>>>> or 30 bully boys and sending them out to arrest people in the
>>>> middle of the night. Not in military topics.
>>>
>>> And clearly, nobody in the human race could possibly learn
>>> *anything* new on *any* subect in the space of 31 years, eh?
>>
>> Of course /some/ people manage to learn new things over time,
>> but what makes you think Putin is capable of doing so?
>
> What makesy ou believe - "think" is not something you do - that he
> isn't?
>
>> "Once
>> KGB, always KGB".
>
> What makes you believe KGB people are incapable of learning
> anything new? Seriously, dude, what the hell is wrong with you?
>>
>>>> Neither in building up an Armed Forces structure capable of
>>>> doing what he wants nor in planning military operations
>>>> (overlooking logistics is typical of inexperience in this
>>>> area) nor (as I expect we shall soon see) in micromanaging the
>>>> forces.
>>>
>>> Hindsight is 20/20, of course, but until this year, pretty much
>>> everybody, everywhere, especially people who know more about it
>>> than either of us, thought he had the second most powerful
>>> military in the world. Certianly, it was build over the course
>>> of 30+ years according to long standing Soviet/Russian doctrine.
>>> The biggest flaw, of course, is that one of the core values of
>>> that doctrine is to embezzle as much as possible as often as
>>> possible. (There are other, strategic, flaws in it as well, but
>>> the corruption is, by far, the worst.)
>>
>> I certainly did. I was amazed at how well the Ukrainians did
>> initially.
>>
>> And happy. Very very happier. The only thing better would have
>> for Putin to have given up and gone home after the second week.
>
> If he had, he'd probably have survived, politically and
> biolotically. Now, his fate is sealed. He'll be dead soon.
>>
>>>> Now that Tsar Putin is holed up in his Winter Palace (which I
>>>> trust we know the location of from our various satellites),
>>>> the only question is: has he started moving /imaginary/ armies
>>>> around (as Adolph did, when the walls closed in at the end)
>>>> yet?
>>>
>>> Personally, I believe he's far too busy worrying about
>>> assassination, by his own people. Or the every growing mobs of
>>> protestors deciding to engage in yet another long standing
>>> Russian tradition, of human wave attacks until there are no more
>>> security forces between them and him. (And if anybody
>>> understands poorly or un-armed human wave attacks against
>>> heavily armed enemies, it's Russians.)
>>
>> It's a good thing Trump couldn't get enough people motivated for
>> such an attack on 1/6/21.
>
> As opposed to the violent insurgency by the left in 2016 when he
> got elected.
>

Your Trump Derangement Syndrome is showing.

There were protests.

There was no insurgency.

No Democrats exhorted their followers to invade the Capitol.

On Thursday, 29 September 2022 at 21:37:48 UTC+1, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
> news:nfhbjh1j28i5tq7vl...@4ax.com:
> > On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 12:20:15 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
> > <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>On 28/09/2022 12.07, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> >>> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
> >>>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:28:21 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
> >>>> Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hamish Laws <hamis...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>> news:d7a38641-e26d-4fdd...@googlegroups.com:
> >>
> >>>>>> Not for standard nukes, it can be used to make a dirty bomb
> >>>>>> that just disperses radioactive material but that's not a
> >>>>>> good weapon
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Useful for terrorism, but not for military purposes. Of
> >>>>> course, Putin is, these days, more terrorist than head of
> >>>>> state anyway.
> >>>>
> >>>> As former KGB, Putin's expertise lies in gathering together
> >>>> 20 or 30 bully boys and sending them out to arrest people in
> >>>> the middle of the night. Not in military topics.
> >>>>
> >>>> Neither in building up an Armed Forces structure capable of
> >>>> doing what he wants nor in planning military operations
> >>>> (overlooking logistics is typical of inexperience in this
> >>>> area) nor (as I expect we shall soon see) in micromanaging
> >>>> the forces.
> >>>
> >>> The actuality is far more nuanced. Back in 2008, to save
> >>> funds, the former soviet training systems were discontinued
> >>> and the conscription system was reduced to one year of
> >>> service. That's led directly to a force consisting of
> >>> soldiers with very limited training and a very small pool of
> >>> reservists (who, unlike the reservists in the USA, don't have
> >>> recurring training operations).
> >>
> >>Last week, _All Things Considered_ interviewed a Russian who was
> >>officially a reservist and therefore subject to La Puta's
> >>activation order. When describing his training, he said that he
> >>had held a machine gun. Not fired, just held.
> >>
> >>Because he had a degree, he was commissioned as a lieutenant.
> >
> > Probably the safest course (for his fellow soldiers), unless
> > Russian lieutenants regularly fire machine guns.
> Given the number of *generals* who have been killed by snipers
> because they can't trust people who are not directly in front of
> them to follow orders, I don't believe there's *any* even remotely
> safe position in the Russian military right now.
> >
> > And, if the reports of at least one 60-year-old
> > never-been-in-the-Army diabetic being called up are correct, it
> > appears that the Soviet Draft System is also ... thoroughly
> > Putinized.
> There are suggestions that they are specifically targeting people
> who are protesting the war.

That is a stupid suggestion. Presuming that "draft" means
"joining the army" and not "they are taken away by police and
then never seen or mentioned again". Which apparently is
what joining Russia's army is like, this year.

In article <2a14dcd7-b819-4554-93dd-dffc08691e24n@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, 29 September 2022 at 21:37:48 UTC+1, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>> news:nfhbjh1j28i5tq7vl...@4ax.com:
>> > On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 12:20:15 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
>> > <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On 28/09/2022 12.07, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> >>> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>> >>>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:28:21 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>> >>>> Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Hamish Laws <hamis...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> >>>>> news:d7a38641-e26d-4fdd...@googlegroups.com:
>> >>
>> >>>>>> Not for standard nukes, it can be used to make a dirty bomb
>> >>>>>> that just disperses radioactive material but that's not a
>> >>>>>> good weapon
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> Useful for terrorism, but not for military purposes. Of
>> >>>>> course, Putin is, these days, more terrorist than head of
>> >>>>> state anyway.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> As former KGB, Putin's expertise lies in gathering together
>> >>>> 20 or 30 bully boys and sending them out to arrest people in
>> >>>> the middle of the night. Not in military topics.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Neither in building up an Armed Forces structure capable of
>> >>>> doing what he wants nor in planning military operations
>> >>>> (overlooking logistics is typical of inexperience in this
>> >>>> area) nor (as I expect we shall soon see) in micromanaging
>> >>>> the forces.
>> >>>
>> >>> The actuality is far more nuanced. Back in 2008, to save
>> >>> funds, the former soviet training systems were discontinued
>> >>> and the conscription system was reduced to one year of
>> >>> service. That's led directly to a force consisting of
>> >>> soldiers with very limited training and a very small pool of
>> >>> reservists (who, unlike the reservists in the USA, don't have
>> >>> recurring training operations).
>> >>
>> >>Last week, _All Things Considered_ interviewed a Russian who was
>> >>officially a reservist and therefore subject to La Puta's
>> >>activation order. When describing his training, he said that he
>> >>had held a machine gun. Not fired, just held.
>> >>
>> >>Because he had a degree, he was commissioned as a lieutenant.
>> >
>> > Probably the safest course (for his fellow soldiers), unless
>> > Russian lieutenants regularly fire machine guns.
>> Given the number of *generals* who have been killed by snipers
>> because they can't trust people who are not directly in front of
>> them to follow orders, I don't believe there's *any* even remotely
>> safe position in the Russian military right now.
>> >
>> > And, if the reports of at least one 60-year-old
>> > never-been-in-the-Army diabetic being called up are correct, it
>> > appears that the Soviet Draft System is also ... thoroughly
>> > Putinized.
>> There are suggestions that they are specifically targeting people
>> who are protesting the war.
>
>That is a stupid suggestion. Presuming that "draft" means
>"joining the army" and not "they are taken away by police and
>then never seen or mentioned again". Which apparently is
>what joining Russia's army is like, this year.

(Hal Heydt)
There have been news reports of people being arrested and then
handed draft notices, so it may be a case of both.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 03:05:28 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, 29 September 2022 at 21:37:48 UTC+1, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>> news:nfhbjh1j28i5tq7vl...@4ax.com:
>> > On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 12:20:15 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
>> > <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On 28/09/2022 12.07, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> >>> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>> >>>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:28:21 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>> >>>> Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Hamish Laws <hamis...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> >>>>> news:d7a38641-e26d-4fdd...@googlegroups.com:
>> >>
>> >>>>>> Not for standard nukes, it can be used to make a dirty bomb
>> >>>>>> that just disperses radioactive material but that's not a
>> >>>>>> good weapon
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> Useful for terrorism, but not for military purposes. Of
>> >>>>> course, Putin is, these days, more terrorist than head of
>> >>>>> state anyway.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> As former KGB, Putin's expertise lies in gathering together
>> >>>> 20 or 30 bully boys and sending them out to arrest people in
>> >>>> the middle of the night. Not in military topics.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Neither in building up an Armed Forces structure capable of
>> >>>> doing what he wants nor in planning military operations
>> >>>> (overlooking logistics is typical of inexperience in this
>> >>>> area) nor (as I expect we shall soon see) in micromanaging
>> >>>> the forces.
>> >>>
>> >>> The actuality is far more nuanced. Back in 2008, to save
>> >>> funds, the former soviet training systems were discontinued
>> >>> and the conscription system was reduced to one year of
>> >>> service. That's led directly to a force consisting of
>> >>> soldiers with very limited training and a very small pool of
>> >>> reservists (who, unlike the reservists in the USA, don't have
>> >>> recurring training operations).
>> >>
>> >>Last week, _All Things Considered_ interviewed a Russian who was
>> >>officially a reservist and therefore subject to La Puta's
>> >>activation order. When describing his training, he said that he
>> >>had held a machine gun. Not fired, just held.
>> >>
>> >>Because he had a degree, he was commissioned as a lieutenant.
>> >
>> > Probably the safest course (for his fellow soldiers), unless
>> > Russian lieutenants regularly fire machine guns.
>> Given the number of *generals* who have been killed by snipers
>> because they can't trust people who are not directly in front of
>> them to follow orders, I don't believe there's *any* even remotely
>> safe position in the Russian military right now.
>> >
>> > And, if the reports of at least one 60-year-old
>> > never-been-in-the-Army diabetic being called up are correct, it
>> > appears that the Soviet Draft System is also ... thoroughly
>> > Putinized.
>> There are suggestions that they are specifically targeting people
>> who are protesting the war.
>
>That is a stupid suggestion. Presuming that "draft" means
>"joining the army" and not "they are taken away by police and
>then never seen or mentioned again". Which apparently is
>what joining Russia's army is like, this year.

I was amazed to read in an article that, some time back, the former
two-year period for draftees had been shortened to one year. IOW, just
as they were (presumably) getting somewhat proficient, they were sent
home.

This appears to be a change from the former pattern, where they spent
a second year in an actual unit (as opposed to a training unit).

If Putin did this, it is just one more sign that Putin is /not/ a
military leader in any but the most ceremonial sense.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:39:40 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
<taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:

>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>news:dshbjhddnl5l5k35ovf83v9ot75r8k3brv@4ax.com:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 10:22:33 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
>>>news:2b%YK.151317$w35c.69991@fx47.iad:
>>>
>>>> The soviet system has never generated the type of NCO regime
>>>> used in western militaries, which is where the bulk of the
>>>> institutional knowledge is contained, and from which most of
>>>> the unit-level leadership skills are developed.
>>>>
>>>Doing so would conflict directly with their strategic doctrine.
>>>They don't *trust* the lower level people to be politically
>>>reliable enough to be allowed any kind of iniative.
>>>
>>>For good reason.
>>
>> I'm amazed that they allow the lower level people to actually
>> have live ammo. The temptation to use it on their officers/NCOs
>> must be quite strong.
>
>There's certainly plenty of historical precedent. But if you shoot
>your captian in the back, his political officer will shoot you in the
>back. And quite possibly your entire family.

I was thinking of /all/ their officers. Particularly the Commissars.

>They have many years of experience at how to control their unreliable
>subordinates.

The most reliable way being to have them defend Holy Mother Russia
against the Nazi Scum, with a propaganda campaign to whip up public
support.

Putin, being KGB, doesn't care about public support. Had he cared
about it, the strong negative reaction would not have happened.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote in
news:2a14dcd7-b819-4554-93dd-dffc08691e24n@googlegroups.com:

> On Thursday, 29 September 2022 at 21:37:48 UTC+1, Jibini Kula
> Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>> news:nfhbjh1j28i5tq7vl...@4ax.com:
>> > On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 12:20:15 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
>> > <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On 28/09/2022 12.07, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> >>> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>> >>>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:28:21 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>> >>>> Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Hamish Laws <hamis...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> >>>>> news:d7a38641-e26d-4fdd...@googlegroups.com:
>> >>
>> >>>>>> Not for standard nukes, it can be used to make a dirty
>> >>>>>> bomb that just disperses radioactive material but that's
>> >>>>>> not a good weapon
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> Useful for terrorism, but not for military purposes. Of
>> >>>>> course, Putin is, these days, more terrorist than head of
>> >>>>> state anyway.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> As former KGB, Putin's expertise lies in gathering
>> >>>> together 20 or 30 bully boys and sending them out to
>> >>>> arrest people in the middle of the night. Not in military
>> >>>> topics.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Neither in building up an Armed Forces structure capable
>> >>>> of doing what he wants nor in planning military operations
>> >>>> (overlooking logistics is typical of inexperience in this
>> >>>> area) nor (as I expect we shall soon see) in micromanaging
>> >>>> the forces.
>> >>>
>> >>> The actuality is far more nuanced. Back in 2008, to save
>> >>> funds, the former soviet training systems were discontinued
>> >>> and the conscription system was reduced to one year of
>> >>> service. That's led directly to a force consisting of
>> >>> soldiers with very limited training and a very small pool
>> >>> of reservists (who, unlike the reservists in the USA, don't
>> >>> have recurring training operations).
>> >>
>> >>Last week, _All Things Considered_ interviewed a Russian who
>> >>was officially a reservist and therefore subject to La Puta's
>> >>activation order. When describing his training, he said that
>> >>he had held a machine gun. Not fired, just held.
>> >>
>> >>Because he had a degree, he was commissioned as a lieutenant.
>> >
>> > Probably the safest course (for his fellow soldiers), unless
>> > Russian lieutenants regularly fire machine guns.
>> Given the number of *generals* who have been killed by snipers
>> because they can't trust people who are not directly in front
>> of them to follow orders, I don't believe there's *any* even
>> remotely safe position in the Russian military right now.
>> >
>> > And, if the reports of at least one 60-year-old
>> > never-been-in-the-Army diabetic being called up are correct,
>> > it appears that the Soviet Draft System is also ...
>> > thoroughly Putinized.
>> There are suggestions that they are specifically targeting
>> people who are protesting the war.
>
> That is a stupid suggestion. Presuming that "draft" means
> "joining the army" and not "they are taken away by police and
> then never seen or mentioned again". Which apparently is
> what joining Russia's army is like, this year.
>
And yet, when you look at the first hand reports, it's entirely
plausible.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:m95ejht3256bo6qr82ekbm8401qg84h1th@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:39:40 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>>news:dshbjhddnl5l5k35ovf83v9ot75r8k3brv@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 10:22:33 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
>>>>news:2b%YK.151317$w35c.69991@fx47.iad:
>>>>
>>>>> The soviet system has never generated the type of NCO regime
>>>>> used in western militaries, which is where the bulk of the
>>>>> institutional knowledge is contained, and from which most of
>>>>> the unit-level leadership skills are developed.
>>>>>
>>>>Doing so would conflict directly with their strategic
>>>>doctrine. They don't *trust* the lower level people to be
>>>>politically reliable enough to be allowed any kind of
>>>>iniative.
>>>>
>>>>For good reason.
>>>
>>> I'm amazed that they allow the lower level people to actually
>>> have live ammo. The temptation to use it on their
>>> officers/NCOs must be quite strong.
>>
>>There's certainly plenty of historical precedent. But if you
>>shoot your captian in the back, his political officer will shoot
>>you in the back. And quite possibly your entire family.
>
> I was thinking of /all/ their officers. Particularly the
> Commissars.
>
>>They have many years of experience at how to control their
>>unreliable subordinates.
>
> The most reliable way being to have them defend Holy Mother
> Russia against the Nazi Scum, with a propaganda campaign to whip
> up public support.
>
> Putin, being KGB, doesn't care about public support. Had he
> cared about it, the strong negative reaction would not have
> happened.

Russia also has a long and proud history of violent revolution. And
some Russians are very much traditionalists.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On 9/28/2022 12:23 PM, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> "Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:th1vos$dgu2$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 28/09/2022 12.07, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>>>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:28:21 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>>>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hamish Laws <hamish.laws@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:d7a38641-e26d-4fdd-84c5-558c6709c278n@googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>>>> Not for standard nukes, it can be used to make a dirty bomb
>>>>>> that just disperses radioactive material but that's not a
>>>>>> good weapon
>>>>>>
>>>>> Useful for terrorism, but not for military purposes. Of
>>>>> course, Putin is, these days, more terrorist than head of
>>>>> state anyway.
>>>>
>>>> As former KGB, Putin's expertise lies in gathering together 20
>>>> or 30 bully boys and sending them out to arrest people in the
>>>> middle of the night. Not in military topics.
>>>>
>>>> Neither in building up an Armed Forces structure capable of
>>>> doing what he wants nor in planning military operations
>>>> (overlooking logistics is typical of inexperience in this
>>>> area) nor (as I expect we shall soon see) in micromanaging the
>>>> forces.
>>>
>>> The actuality is far more nuanced. Back in 2008, to save
>>> funds, the former soviet training systems were discontinued and
>>> the conscription system was reduced to one year of service.
>>> That's led directly to a force consisting of soldiers with very
>>> limited training and a very small pool of reservists (who,
>>> unlike the reservists in the USA, don't have recurring training
>>> operations).
>>
>> Last week, _All Things Considered_ interviewed a Russian who was
>> officially a reservist and therefore subject to La Puta's
>> activation order. When describing his training, he said that he
>> had held a machine gun. Not fired, just held.
>
> Who was it that had training excercies, that wouldn't pony up even
> for blanks, and just had the traineers yell BANG! The Brits?
> Somebody.
>

In 77-78 My infantry platoon would normally get 40-60 blank rounds per
man for a three day field exercise whereas a combat load out was 120
rounds. In combat there would also be resupply after engagements.

BANG! was heard a lot.

On Tue, 20 Sep 2022 20:21:11 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Even in this age of nuclear weapons, as the Cold War demonstrated, aggression
>> needs to be met with firm resolve and not appeasement.
>>
>> John Savard
>
>But, the Ukraine has no known nuclear weapons. Russia has a lot of
>them. Including the nuclear weapons Ukraine turned over to Russia in
>the not too distant past.
>
>If I was Ukraine, I would not advance my troops across the border.

Trouble is where do you define "the border" to be? Zelensky says 'the
border' is the 1/1/1992 boundaries of Ukraine and that very much
includes all the "separatist provinces" as well as the Crimea. And has
said so publicly within the past month.

Even if the man in Moscow is someone other than Putin while they might
well get their 4 provinces back (e.g. the Eastern Ukraine provinces),
getting Crimea back at the peace table could be tough unless they're
physically in possesion of it when the fighting eventually stops and
if Putin says he's "putting a nuclear umbrella over Crimea" that could
be difficult.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 01:45:15 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
Heydt) wrote:

>The recent "regrouping" left (according to one report) some 35
>tanks, 40 APCs and at least one ammo dump behind and Ukraine is
>putting at least some of the tanks back in service for their own
>forces. One presumes with new paint jobs to reduce the chances
>of fraticidal attacks.

Well yes - I would expect Zalensky to be (1) keen to use all equipment
his military commanders consider usable and (2) eager to avoid "blue
on blue" casualties.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:28:05 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>Not that that will stop Putin using the claim that Ukraine is invading
>Russia to justify whatever bit of nastiness he's thinking of these days.

Very true but the moment Putin uses the first nuke, NATO objectives
WILL include "regime change" as a high objective - and given the
Ukrainians are counting on NATO support for their arms and ammunition
supply they will be as well.

I have even heard claims that China has pledged to the Ukrainian
government that THEY will respond in kind against Russia if Putin ever
used nukes against Ukraine.

At that point, things start looking like the last 10 minutes of Doctor
Strangelove.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:42:15 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

>Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
>>On 9/20/2022 7:48 PM, Quadibloc wrote:
>>
>>But, the Ukraine has no known nuclear weapons. Russia has a lot of
>>them. Including the nuclear weapons Ukraine turned over to Russia in
>>the not too distant past.
>
>In return for a promise that Russia would not attack them.

You mean like they have? TWICE?!?

On Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 6:14:08 AM UTC-4, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Sep 2022 20:21:11 -0500, Lynn McGuire
> <lynnmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Even in this age of nuclear weapons, as the Cold War demonstrated, aggression
> >> needs to be met with firm resolve and not appeasement.
> >>
> >> John Savard
> >
> >But, the Ukraine has no known nuclear weapons. Russia has a lot of
> >them. Including the nuclear weapons Ukraine turned over to Russia in
> >the not too distant past.
> >
> >If I was Ukraine, I would not advance my troops across the border.
>
> Trouble is where do you define "the border" to be? Zelensky says 'the
> border' is the 1/1/1992 boundaries of Ukraine and that very much
> includes all the "separatist provinces" as well as the Crimea. And has
> said so publicly within the past month.
>
> Even if the man in Moscow is someone other than Putin while they might
> well get their 4 provinces back (e.g. the Eastern Ukraine provinces),
> getting Crimea back at the peace table could be tough unless they're
> physically in possesion of it when the fighting eventually stops and
> if Putin says he's "putting a nuclear umbrella over Crimea" that could
> be difficult.

Crimea's a tough one. It's "native population" are the Crimean Tartars, but
they were about 11% of the population in 2014. At that point, ethnic
Ukrainians were only 16%, while ethnic Russians stood at 68%.

This is partly due to Stalin's policy of 'Russification', scattering non-Russians
across the union, while moving ethnic Russians into their place. In 1989, less
than 2% of Crimeans were Tartars, but many have since moved back.

On top of that, Crimea was part of the Russian Republic until 1954, when Khrushchev
transferred it to Ukraine.

So saying 'who should have it' isn't easy. The people are mostly Russian, and it was
part of Russia until 70 years ago. OTOH, it was legally transferred to Ukraine, and
then illegally seized by Russia in 2014.

.... and no one seems to be asking the Tartars what *they* want.

pt

On Tue, 04 Oct 2022 03:19:52 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:28:05 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
><dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>>Not that that will stop Putin using the claim that Ukraine is invading
>>Russia to justify whatever bit of nastiness he's thinking of these days.
>
>Very true but the moment Putin uses the first nuke, NATO objectives
>WILL include "regime change" as a high objective - and given the
>Ukrainians are counting on NATO support for their arms and ammunition
>supply they will be as well.
>
>I have even heard claims that China has pledged to the Ukrainian
>government that THEY will respond in kind against Russia if Putin ever
>used nukes against Ukraine.

They apparently have also warned against admitting Ukraine into NATO.
(Apparently, they are trying to keep the conflict conventional. Even
if Russia (well, Putin, really) loses.)

Delaying Ukraine's NATO entry might, indeed, be something to put on
hold for a while.

Driving the Bear out of Ukraine is one thing. Poking it in the eye
with a stick is something else.

>At that point, things start looking like the last 10 minutes of Doctor
>Strangelove.

But not nearly as funny.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Tue, 04 Oct 2022 03:14:03 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:

>On Tue, 20 Sep 2022 20:21:11 -0500, Lynn McGuire
><lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Even in this age of nuclear weapons, as the Cold War demonstrated, aggression
>>> needs to be met with firm resolve and not appeasement.
>>>
>>> John Savard
>>
>>But, the Ukraine has no known nuclear weapons. Russia has a lot of
>>them. Including the nuclear weapons Ukraine turned over to Russia in
>>the not too distant past.
>>
>>If I was Ukraine, I would not advance my troops across the border.
>
>Trouble is where do you define "the border" to be? Zelensky says 'the
>border' is the 1/1/1992 boundaries of Ukraine and that very much
>includes all the "separatist provinces" as well as the Crimea. And has
>said so publicly within the past month.

It is well-defined and it is the internationally-recognized border.

Neither the Crimea nor any other bits & pieces of Ukraine are on the
Russian side of it.

Just because Putin chooses to live in an alternate reality doesn't
mean the rest of us have to.

>Even if the man in Moscow is someone other than Putin while they might
>well get their 4 provinces back (e.g. the Eastern Ukraine provinces),
>getting Crimea back at the peace table could be tough unless they're
>physically in possesion of it when the fighting eventually stops and
>if Putin says he's "putting a nuclear umbrella over Crimea" that could
>be difficult.

If Putin is replaced by someone /sane/, they might get to continue to
lease the base at Sevastopl for their fleet. They would, of course,
have to pay the lease payments not paid during their illegal
occupation and the rates might well go up going forward.

One question here is: do Putin's tactical nukes work any better than
the rest of his Army? Let's hope we never find out.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On 10/4/2022 8:17 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Oct 2022 03:19:52 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:28:05 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Not that that will stop Putin using the claim that Ukraine is invading
>>> Russia to justify whatever bit of nastiness he's thinking of these days.
>>
>> Very true but the moment Putin uses the first nuke, NATO objectives
>> WILL include "regime change" as a high objective - and given the
>> Ukrainians are counting on NATO support for their arms and ammunition
>> supply they will be as well.
>>
>> I have even heard claims that China has pledged to the Ukrainian
>> government that THEY will respond in kind against Russia if Putin ever
>> used nukes against Ukraine.
>
> They apparently have also warned against admitting Ukraine into NATO.
> (Apparently, they are trying to keep the conflict conventional. Even
> if Russia (well, Putin, really) loses.)
>
> Delaying Ukraine's NATO entry might, indeed, be something to put on
> hold for a while.
>
> Driving the Bear out of Ukraine is one thing. Poking it in the eye
> with a stick is something else.
>
While not poking the bear in the eye with a stick just leaves it
inclined to try again. Given that "Ukraine is going to join NATO" was
one of the given reasons for invading, not letting Ukraine join NATO
because of the invasion is rewarding Russia.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

In article <thhk50$2mdpi$1@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>On 10/4/2022 8:17 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Oct 2022 03:19:52 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:28:05 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
>>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not that that will stop Putin using the claim that Ukraine is
>invading
>>>> Russia to justify whatever bit of nastiness he's thinking of
>these days.
>>>
>>> Very true but the moment Putin uses the first nuke, NATO objectives
>>> WILL include "regime change" as a high objective - and given the
>>> Ukrainians are counting on NATO support for their arms and ammunition
>>> supply they will be as well.
>>>
>>> I have even heard claims that China has pledged to the Ukrainian
>>> government that THEY will respond in kind against Russia if Putin ever
>>> used nukes against Ukraine.
>>
>> They apparently have also warned against admitting Ukraine into NATO.
>> (Apparently, they are trying to keep the conflict conventional. Even
>> if Russia (well, Putin, really) loses.)
>>
>> Delaying Ukraine's NATO entry might, indeed, be something to put on
>> hold for a while.
>>
>> Driving the Bear out of Ukraine is one thing. Poking it in the eye
>> with a stick is something else.
>>
>While not poking the bear in the eye with a stick just leaves it
>inclined to try again. Given that "Ukraine is going to join NATO" was
>one of the given reasons for invading, not letting Ukraine join NATO
>because of the invasion is rewarding Russia.

Once Ukraine joins NATO, it will be impossible for it to contemplate
joining an organization to which it already belongs. Therefore
Ukrainian NATO membership should please Putin as the action to
which he objects would no longer be possible.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 8:27:37 AM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> Crimea's a tough one. It's "native population" are the Crimean Tartars, but
> they were about 11% of the population in 2014. At that point, ethnic
> Ukrainians were only 16%, while ethnic Russians stood at 68%.
>
> This is partly due to Stalin's policy of 'Russification', scattering non-Russians
> across the union, while moving ethnic Russians into their place. In 1989, less
> than 2% of Crimeans were Tartars, but many have since moved back.
>
> On top of that, Crimea was part of the Russian Republic until 1954, when Khrushchev
> transferred it to Ukraine.
>
> So saying 'who should have it' isn't easy. The people are mostly Russian, and it was
> part of Russia until 70 years ago. OTOH, it was legally transferred to Ukraine, and
> then illegally seized by Russia in 2014.

Presumably Crimea belongs to whoever lived there before the first military aggression
against Crimea took place. In any case, since it has strategic importance as a port
for naval vessels, obviously it can't be allowed to remain in the hands of a proven
aggressor nation like Russia.

This does not mean that any Tatars ought to be rounded up and moved there. And
the Russians living in Ukraine before the first of the recent Russian invasions were loyal
Ukranian citizens, so there is no question of ethnic cleansing.

John Savard

On Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 9:17:09 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:

> Delaying Ukraine's NATO entry might, indeed, be something to put on
> hold for a while.

Definitely. Any attempt to delay, hinder, or obstruct the entry of Ukraine
into NATO should not simply be put on hold, it should be abandoned
permanently.

> Driving the Bear out of Ukraine is one thing. Poking it in the eye
> with a stick is something else.

Leaving the door wide open for Russia to invade Ukraine any time in
the future that it may feel like it is something I doubt the Ukrainian
people will be enthusiastic about.

Certainly, given that Russia has nuclear weapons, we may be faced
with limited options and unpleasant choices. And, of course, Russia's
current experience of invading Ukraine has not exactly gone well for
it, so some might entertain the opinion that it would be unlikely to try
again for a while. But if that were _really_ the case, Russia would not
be offended by Ukraine taking the understandable precaution of seeking
full Article 5 protection.

John Savard

On Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 9:32:17 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:

> If Putin is replaced by someone /sane/, they might get to continue to
> lease the base at Sevastopl for their fleet. They would, of course,
> have to pay the lease payments not paid during their illegal
> occupation and the rates might well go up going forward.

If Putin were replaced by someone *sane*, Russia would promptly
agree to hand over all their armaments to NATO and adopt a peace
constitution similar to Japan's. So they would not *have* a fleet to
base in Sevastopol.

That is the only way to ensure that Russia will _continue_ to be
ruled only by sane people for the foreseeable future. Eventually,
American occupation forces will, as they did in Germany, set up
the foundation for a stable democracy in Russia.

But I agree that it is more likely that if Putin were replaced, it
would only be by someone, at best, slightly less crazy, not by
someone sane.

John Savard

On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 4:53:41 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 8:27:37 AM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Crimea's a tough one. It's "native population" are the Crimean Tartars, but
> > they were about 11% of the population in 2014. At that point, ethnic
> > Ukrainians were only 16%, while ethnic Russians stood at 68%.
> >
> > This is partly due to Stalin's policy of 'Russification', scattering non-Russians
> > across the union, while moving ethnic Russians into their place. In 1989, less
> > than 2% of Crimeans were Tartars, but many have since moved back.
> >
> > On top of that, Crimea was part of the Russian Republic until 1954, when Khrushchev
> > transferred it to Ukraine.
> >
> > So saying 'who should have it' isn't easy. The people are mostly Russian, and it was
> > part of Russia until 70 years ago. OTOH, it was legally transferred to Ukraine, and
> > then illegally seized by Russia in 2014.
> Presumably Crimea belongs to whoever lived there before the first military aggression
> against Crimea took place.

God, the historical ignorance here blows my mind. Crimea is one of the most fought
over, conquered and reconquered spots on Earth. The first *known* invasion was the
Scythians booting the Cimmerians about 1000 BC. They were followed by Greeks,
Romans, Huns, Byzantines, Kievian Rus, Mongols, Ottomans, Russians, British and
French, Russians, Germany, Russians again.

Even before that, there are human remains going back to 32,000 BP, and Neanderthal to
80,000 BP (yes, they overlap).

You tell me who "lived there before the first military aggression". If you pick a spot,
give your reasons.

pt