News reports last evening have told of a surprising and utterly unexpected
amusing sideshow in Rostov-on-Don and other areas in Russia.
Yevgeny Prigozhin, claiming that the Russian military deliberately fired a
missile into some of his forces fighting in Ukraine took control of Rostov
and at least one other Russian city with a force which he claims to consist
of 25,000 troops.
Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is, and
one report is claiming that Vladimir Putin has left Moscow for an undisclosed
location.

My reaction to this news is that while it certainly is positive, there is no real
reason to expect anything but for this rebellion to be completely suppressed
within a day or two, if not hours. Of course, a dictatorial regime like that of
Putin has certain internal weaknesses, which may someday eventually lead to
its implosion and destruction, but usually it is unrealistic to hope for such
an outcome in anything but decades rather than weeks.

However, some reports do have analysts claiming that a genuine threat
to the Putin regime exists in the near term. I certainly _wish_ it were so,
but at the moment I have no basis to go further.

John Savard

On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:

> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,

That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
work... on the roads to Moscow.

John Savard

On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 5:37:38 PM UTC+1, Quadibloc wrote:
> News reports last evening have told of a surprising and utterly unexpected
> amusing sideshow in Rostov-on-Don and other areas in Russia.
> Yevgeny Prigozhin, claiming that the Russian military deliberately fired a
> missile into some of his forces fighting in Ukraine took control of Rostov
> and at least one other Russian city with a force which he claims to consist
> of 25,000 troops.
> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is, and
> one report is claiming that Vladimir Putin has left Moscow for an undisclosed
> location.
>
> My reaction to this news is that while it certainly is positive, there is no real
> reason to expect anything but for this rebellion to be completely suppressed
> within a day or two, if not hours. Of course, a dictatorial regime like that of
> Putin has certain internal weaknesses, which may someday eventually lead to
> its implosion and destruction, but usually it is unrealistic to hope for such
> an outcome in anything but decades rather than weeks.
>
> However, some reports do have analysts claiming that a genuine threat
> to the Putin regime exists in the near term. I certainly _wish_ it were so,
> but at the moment I have no basis to go further.
>
> John Savard
If nobody else switches sides, the only interesting question is how much damage Prigozhin does before he is taken down, but there is always the possibility of some sort of snowball effect - nobody is going to want to go down in history as the analyst that predicted that Prigozhin would fail just in case he somehow succeeds.

On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 11:07:35 AM UTC-6, Andrew McDowell wrote:
> nobody is going to want to go down in history as the analyst that
> predicted that Prigozhin would fail just in case he somehow succeeds.

Then they've missed their chance. Prigozhin has ordered his men back to their
field bases in Ukraine in order to avoid shedding Russian blood.

Apparently Alexander Lukashenko has taken credit for negotiating the peace
agreement.

I was hoping that Putin would call the Chechen forces into Moscow to defend it,
and they would end up renaming the Russian Federation to the Islamic Republic of
Greater Chechnya, but it does not seem like history will take advantage of that
opportunity.

I doubt, however, that Prigozhin's exile in Belarus will last long, if that is indeed
where he ends up. As for Putin: if indeed he has missed any portions of the Evil
Overlord's Handbook, no doubt he will be spending the next few days poring over
Stalin's copy of the work.

It is also possible that Prigozhin's withdrawal is a feint, or some other force in
Russia, seeing weakness exposed, will make a sudden surprise strike. I do not
feel the current situation leaves room for any categorical statements. However,
if Putin does fall in the next few days, while that will be a pleasant surprise, it
definitely will be, at least for me, a surprise.

John Savard

In article <375ccdbc-bd88-4e6c-b0f4-77872f0edfb6n@googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is, and
>one report is claiming that Vladimir Putin has left Moscow for an undisclosed
>location.

(Hal Heydt)
The report I saw said that Putin went to an estate he has half
way between Moscow and St. Petersburg.

The thing I'm wondering about is... Apparently Rostov-on-Don is
*the* logistics center for the Russian forces in Ukraine. The
Wagner group--reportedly--looted military stores there to
resupply themselves. If they continue to hold Rostov-on-Don, how
long will it take for the Russian army in Ukraine to run out of
supplies, specifically ammunition (especially for artillery and
attack helicopters), food, and fuel (for *everything*)?

In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44-8e81-50f555276bf2n@googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>
>> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
>
>That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
>is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
>work... on the roads to Moscow.

(Hal Heydt)
Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
equipment are trying to put the fire out.

On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 8:55:52 PM UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> >
> >> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
> >
> >That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
> >is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
> >work... on the roads to Moscow.
> (Hal Heydt)
> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
> equipment are trying to put the fire out.
I am now seeing multiple reports of a peace deal, with Wagner accepting asylum outside Russia and mercenary work in Africa - which strikes me as bizarre as everything else about this. "Whosoever draws his sword against the Prince must throw away his scabbard" - and if there is one Prince not known for keeping agreements to let bygones by bygones, that Prince's name is Putin.

On Sunday, June 25, 2023 at 6:10:34 AM UTC+10, Andrew McDowell wrote:
> On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 8:55:52 PM UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> > In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> > >On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> > >
> > >> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
> > >
> > >That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
> > >is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say.... repair
> > >work... on the roads to Moscow.
> > (Hal Heydt)
> > Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
> > depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
> > equipment are trying to put the fire out.
> I am now seeing multiple reports of a peace deal, with Wagner accepting asylum outside Russia and mercenary work in Africa - which strikes me as bizarre as everything else about this. "Whosoever draws his sword against the Prince must throw away his scabbard" - and if there is one Prince not known for keeping agreements to let bygones by bygones, that Prince's name is Putin.

I've some analysis that suggests Prigozhin had convinced himself that other forces would join it and, when they didn't - and some of his closer allies in the military were saying that he had to be stopped - anything that gave him a chance of surviving past the week had to be jumped on.

On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 20:55:52 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> >
> >> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
> >
> >That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
> >is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
> >work... on the roads to Moscow.
> (Hal Heydt)
> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
> equipment are trying to put the fire out.

I was going to suggest that if this is what it takes
to get infrastructure repairs done, then they should try
it seriously in the U.S.A. Well, maybe not.

Though previously - "In 1919, the U.S. Army sent an
expedition across the U.S. to determine the difficulties
that military vehicles would have on a cross-country trip."
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System>

Answer: plenty of difficulties.

On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 08:22:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 20:55:52 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> >On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38?AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>> >
>> >> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
>> >
>> >That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
>> >is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
>> >work... on the roads to Moscow.
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
>> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
>> equipment are trying to put the fire out.
>
>I was going to suggest that if this is what it takes
>to get infrastructure repairs done, then they should try
>it seriously in the U.S.A. Well, maybe not.
>
>Though previously - "In 1919, the U.S. Army sent an
>expedition across the U.S. to determine the difficulties
>that military vehicles would have on a cross-country trip."
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System>
>
>Answer: plenty of difficulties.

An may well have led to the "United States Numbered Highway System"
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highway_System],
later replaced (as /Cars/ shows us) by the Interstate Highways.

Then again, maybe not: Rte 66 and friends apparently started /before/
1919. So perhaps it /was/ the Interstate Highways that were put into
place starting in the 50's to help the Army move its troops and
equipment around. Ike, after all, was a military man, and may have
been aware of the problem.
--
"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 Sunday, June 25, 2023 at 11:26:02 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 08:22:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
> <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 20:55:52 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> >> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >> >On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38?AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
> >> >
> >> >That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
> >> >is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say.... repair
> >> >work... on the roads to Moscow.
> >> (Hal Heydt)
> >> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
> >> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
> >> equipment are trying to put the fire out.
> >
> >I was going to suggest that if this is what it takes
> >to get infrastructure repairs done, then they should try
> >it seriously in the U.S.A. Well, maybe not.
> >
> >Though previously - "In 1919, the U.S. Army sent an
> >expedition across the U.S. to determine the difficulties
> >that military vehicles would have on a cross-country trip."
> ><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System>
> >
> >Answer: plenty of difficulties.
> An may well have led to the "United States Numbered Highway System"
> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highway_System],
> later replaced (as /Cars/ shows us) by the Interstate Highways.
>
> Then again, maybe not: Rte 66 and friends apparently started /before/
> 1919. So perhaps it /was/ the Interstate Highways that were put into
> place starting in the 50's to help the Army move its troops and
> equipment around. Ike, after all, was a military man, and may have
> been aware of the problem.

The version I've heard is that it was cross-country trip was precisely a stunt designed to call attention to the danger of inadequate internal transport links. It may not have directly caused the construction of the old Federal Highway System, but was probably directly linked to it. As for the Interstates, I'm pretty sure the military implications of it were never in doubt.

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 09:37:35 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

>News reports last evening have told of a surprising and utterly unexpected
>amusing sideshow in Rostov-on-Don and other areas in Russia.
>Yevgeny Prigozhin, claiming that the Russian military deliberately fired a
>missile into some of his forces fighting in Ukraine took control of Rostov
>and at least one other Russian city with a force which he claims to consist
>of 25,000 troops.
>Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is, and
>one report is claiming that Vladimir Putin has left Moscow for an undisclosed
>location.
>
>My reaction to this news is that while it certainly is positive, there is no real
>reason to expect anything but for this rebellion to be completely suppressed
>within a day or two, if not hours. Of course, a dictatorial regime like that of
>Putin has certain internal weaknesses, which may someday eventually lead to
>its implosion and destruction, but usually it is unrealistic to hope for such
>an outcome in anything but decades rather than weeks.
>
>However, some reports do have analysts claiming that a genuine threat
>to the Putin regime exists in the near term. I certainly _wish_ it were so,
>but at the moment I have no basis to go further.

After yesterday, as others have noted, the situation is changed. A lot
of this has already been mentioned.

-- given the history of Trotsky, I suspect there is no safe refuge for
Prigozhin anywhere
-- it may well be that Putin now looks less formidable to any rivals
he may have than he did before
-- Ukrain appears to have taken even more territory, which makes sense
since the troops are, no doubt, distracted
-- Putin has managed to keep his finger off of The Button; there is no
guarantee any successor would do the same

But, mostly, this is moving so fast that any or all of those comments
may be utterly off-base.

Intersting times, indeed.
--
"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 Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 11:37:38 AM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:
> News reports last evening have told of a surprising and utterly unexpected
> amusing sideshow in Rostov-on-Don and other areas in Russia.
> Yevgeny Prigozhin, claiming that the Russian military deliberately fired a
> missile into some of his forces fighting in Ukraine took control of Rostov
> and at least one other Russian city with a force which he claims to consist
> of 25,000 troops.
> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is, and
> one report is claiming that Vladimir Putin has left Moscow for an undisclosed
> location.
>
> My reaction to this news is that while it certainly is positive, there is no real
> reason to expect anything but for this rebellion to be completely suppressed
> within a day or two, if not hours. Of course, a dictatorial regime like that of
> Putin has certain internal weaknesses, which may someday eventually lead to
> its implosion and destruction, but usually it is unrealistic to hope for such
> an outcome in anything but decades rather than weeks.
>
> However, some reports do have analysts claiming that a genuine threat
> to the Putin regime exists in the near term. I certainly _wish_ it were so,
> but at the moment I have no basis to go further.
>
> John Savard

Nor did anyone else.

We're seeing an old issue with war news coverage, to wit: the day to day stuff is mostly worthless. Information is always contradictory and incomplete, it gets processed through the agendas of various reporting agencies, and the result is that it's usually best to wait and not to too excited about any reports.

That's been true forever, but the 24 hour cable/streaming news cycle makes it worse, because the talking heads always _need_ something to breathlessly run on about, to fill those hours of screen time. So every story becomes a breathlessly important bombshell, even if it's actually unconfirmed or just trivial.

In article <qmqg9i197k0unkih5k6k664g6v77i2crk2@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>-- Putin has managed to keep his finger off of The Button; there is no
>guarantee any successor would do the same

One wonders if Russian nukes are any better maintained than their
trucks.

--
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 6/25/2023 9:25 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 08:22:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
> <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 20:55:52 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38?AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
>>>>
>>>> That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
>>>> is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
>>>> work... on the roads to Moscow.
>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
>>> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
>>> equipment are trying to put the fire out.
>>
>> I was going to suggest that if this is what it takes
>> to get infrastructure repairs done, then they should try
>> it seriously in the U.S.A. Well, maybe not.
>>
>> Though previously - "In 1919, the U.S. Army sent an
>> expedition across the U.S. to determine the difficulties
>> that military vehicles would have on a cross-country trip."
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System>
>>
>> Answer: plenty of difficulties.
>
> An may well have led to the "United States Numbered Highway System"
> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highway_System],
> later replaced (as /Cars/ shows us) by the Interstate Highways.
>
> Then again, maybe not: Rte 66 and friends apparently started /before/
> 1919. So perhaps it /was/ the Interstate Highways that were put into
> place starting in the 50's to help the Army move its troops and
> equipment around. Ike, after all, was a military man, and may have
> been aware of the problem.

Ike was one of the officers on that 1919 expedition.

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

>>>>> On 2023-06-25, James Nicoll wrote:
>>>>> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>> -- Putin has managed to keep his finger off of The Button; there
>> is no guarantee any successor would do the same

> One wonders if Russian nukes are any better maintained than their
> trucks.

That thought crossed my mind while pondering on why this
'special military operation' was started when it was.

More specifically, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the
Soviet-made warheads are nearing their expiration date, while
the industrial capacity to produce new ones no longer exists.

--
FSF associate member #7257 http://am-1.org/~ivan/

On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 09:31:26 -0700, Paul S Person wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 09:37:35 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
> wrote:
>
>>News reports last evening have told of a surprising and utterly
>>unexpected amusing sideshow in Rostov-on-Don and other areas in Russia.
>>Yevgeny Prigozhin, claiming that the Russian military deliberately fired
>>a missile into some of his forces fighting in Ukraine took control of
>>Rostov and at least one other Russian city with a force which he claims
>>to consist of 25,000 troops.
>>Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
>>and one report is claiming that Vladimir Putin has left Moscow for an
>>undisclosed location.
>>
>>My reaction to this news is that while it certainly is positive, there
>>is no real reason to expect anything but for this rebellion to be
>>completely suppressed within a day or two, if not hours. Of course, a
>>dictatorial regime like that of Putin has certain internal weaknesses,
>>which may someday eventually lead to its implosion and destruction, but
>>usually it is unrealistic to hope for such an outcome in anything but
>>decades rather than weeks.
>>
>>However, some reports do have analysts claiming that a genuine threat to
>>the Putin regime exists in the near term. I certainly _wish_ it were so,
>>but at the moment I have no basis to go further.
>
> After yesterday, as others have noted, the situation is changed. A lot
> of this has already been mentioned.
>
> -- given the history of Trotsky, I suspect there is no safe refuge for
> Prigozhin anywhere -- it may well be that Putin now looks less
> formidable to any rivals he may have than he did before -- Ukrain
> appears to have taken even more territory, which makes sense since the
> troops are, no doubt, distracted -- Putin has managed to keep his finger
> off of The Button; there is no guarantee any successor would do the same
>
> But, mostly, this is moving so fast that any or all of those comments
> may be utterly off-base.
>
> Intersting times, indeed.

Whatever. It looks like it's about time to talk about regime change in
Russia, no?

On Sunday, June 25, 2023 at 12:30:20 PM UTC-4, Johnny1A wrote:
> On Sunday, June 25, 2023 at 11:26:02 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 08:22:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
> > <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
> >
> > >On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 20:55:52 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> > >> In article <653460e0-0cd0-4b44...@googlegroups.com>,
> > >> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> > >> >On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 10:37:38?AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is,
> > >> >
> > >> >That city is Voronezh. Apparently an advance in the direction of Moscow
> > >> >is taking place, and Russia is reacting by initiating... shall we say... repair
> > >> >work... on the roads to Moscow.
> > >> (Hal Heydt)
> > >> Including blowing up bridges. And an air attack on a large fuel
> > >> depot in Voronezh. Reports are that 100 firemen and 30 peices of
> > >> equipment are trying to put the fire out.
> > >
> > >I was going to suggest that if this is what it takes
> > >to get infrastructure repairs done, then they should try
> > >it seriously in the U.S.A. Well, maybe not.
> > >
> > >Though previously - "In 1919, the U.S. Army sent an
> > >expedition across the U.S. to determine the difficulties
> > >that military vehicles would have on a cross-country trip."
> > ><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System>
> > >
> > >Answer: plenty of difficulties.
> > An may well have led to the "United States Numbered Highway System"
> > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highway_System],
> > later replaced (as /Cars/ shows us) by the Interstate Highways.
> >
> > Then again, maybe not: Rte 66 and friends apparently started /before/
> > 1919. So perhaps it /was/ the Interstate Highways that were put into
> > place starting in the 50's to help the Army move its troops and
> > equipment around. Ike, after all, was a military man, and may have
> > been aware of the problem.
> The version I've heard is that it was cross-country trip was precisely a
> stunt designed to call attention to the danger of inadequate internal
> transport links. It may not have directly caused the construction of the
> old Federal Highway System, but was probably directly linked to it. As
> for the Interstates, I'm pretty sure the military implications of it were
> never in doubt.

Ike was part of the 1919 expedition.

https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/research/online-documents/1919-transcontinental-motor-convoy

--
Kevin R

On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 3:03:40 AM UTC+10, James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <qmqg9i197k0unkih5...@4ax.com>,
> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
> >-- Putin has managed to keep his finger off of The Button; there is no
> >guarantee any successor would do the same
> One wonders if Russian nukes are any better maintained than their
> trucks.
>

I've read analysis that suggests that part of the reason why the conventional equipment is in such awful state is that shortly after the USSR broke up they had to decide on priorities and maintenance on the nukes was their top priority
(Another large part of the reason for the crap equipment is massive corruption at all levels in the force and probably some "Yeah, we can't tell people that this isn't working as expected so let's just lie, it's not like we'll be using hypersonic missiles in combat anytime soon")

On Sunday, June 25, 2023 at 8:57:41 PM UTC-5, Hamish Laws wrote:
> On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 3:03:40 AM UTC+10, James Nicoll wrote:
> > In article <qmqg9i197k0unkih5...@4ax.com>,
> > Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
> > >-- Putin has managed to keep his finger off of The Button; there is no
> > >guarantee any successor would do the same
> > One wonders if Russian nukes are any better maintained than their
> > trucks.
> >
> I've read analysis that suggests that part of the reason why the conventional equipment is in such awful state is that shortly after the USSR broke up they had to decide on priorities and maintenance on the nukes was their top priority

Whatever the case may be, absent evidence to the contrary, we have to _assume_ that the Russian nukes and delivery systems would work. If someone has a gun pointed at you, absent proof to the contrary you have to assume it's loaded and in working order. Anything else is suicidal.

On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 09:32:56 -0700 (PDT), Johnny1A
<johnny1a.again@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, June 24, 2023 at 11:37:38?AM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:
>> News reports last evening have told of a surprising and utterly unexpected
>> amusing sideshow in Rostov-on-Don and other areas in Russia.
>> Yevgeny Prigozhin, claiming that the Russian military deliberately fired a
>> missile into some of his forces fighting in Ukraine took control of Rostov
>> and at least one other Russian city with a force which he claims to consist
>> of 25,000 troops.
>> Another city he controls is only half as far from Moscow as Rostov is, and
>> one report is claiming that Vladimir Putin has left Moscow for an undisclosed
>> location.
>>
>> My reaction to this news is that while it certainly is positive, there is no real
>> reason to expect anything but for this rebellion to be completely suppressed
>> within a day or two, if not hours. Of course, a dictatorial regime like that of
>> Putin has certain internal weaknesses, which may someday eventually lead to
>> its implosion and destruction, but usually it is unrealistic to hope for such
>> an outcome in anything but decades rather than weeks.
>>
>> However, some reports do have analysts claiming that a genuine threat
>> to the Putin regime exists in the near term. I certainly _wish_ it were so,
>> but at the moment I have no basis to go further.
>>
>> John Savard
>
>Nor did anyone else.
>
>We're seeing an old issue with war news coverage, to wit: the day to day stuff is mostly worthless. Information is always contradictory and incomplete, it gets processed through the agendas of various reporting agencies, and the result is that it's usually best to wait and not to too excited about any reports.
>
>That's been true forever, but the 24 hour cable/streaming news cycle makes it worse, because the talking heads always _need_ something to breathlessly run on about, to fill those hours of screen time. So every story becomes a breathlessly important bombshell, even if it's actually unconfirmed or just trivial.

That was one of the advantages of the print newspapers: if it was a
morning paper, you knew it was (at best) "yesterday's news today", and
if it was an evening paper you knew it was (at best) "this morning's
news this evening". No pretence of be right up-to-the-minute.

Meanwhile, yesterday I saw a report that the Russians decided to use a
chemical weapon in Ukraine. Fortunately (for Ukraine, less so for the
Russian troops) the wind was blowing to the East.

You would think the experience of WWI along these lines would have
suggested to the Russians that /actually checking the weather/ might
be a good idea before deploying such a weapon.

But the real question is: since chemical weapons are weapons of mass
destruction, will NATO react as it (presumably) would to a tactical
nuke? Has Putin finally obtained what may be his goal -- war with
NATO?

Or does he have enough sense to publicly remove the commander
responsible while apologizing for the violation of the Rules of War
(that is, the relevant treaties which Russia has signed)?
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

In article <0qej9i1q10cdlj9q4hekt3ssitspv4ae0v@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
>You would think the experience of WWI along these lines would have
>suggested to the Russians that /actually checking the weather/ might
>be a good idea before deploying such a weapon.

I'd blame a century plus various purges for the lack of institutional
memory but NASA, for example, seems to forget the lessons of crewed
rocket calamities on decade-scale timespans, and I know the uni at
which I work keeps forgetting that ground water depth limits how
deep foundations can be. Organizations are good at forgetting stuff
that's inconvenient to them.

>But the real question is: since chemical weapons are weapons of mass
>destruction, will NATO react as it (presumably) would to a tactical
>nuke? Has Putin finally obtained what may be his goal -- war with
>NATO?

Given the lack of progress in Ukraine, not 100 percent sure total war
with NATO would progress entirely to Russia's benefit.
--
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 Monday, June 26, 2023 at 12:29:38 AM UTC-6, Johnny1A wrote:

> Whatever the case may be, absent evidence to the contrary, we have
> to _assume_ that the Russian nukes and delivery systems would work.
> If someone has a gun pointed at you, absent proof to the contrary you
> have to assume it's loaded and in working order. Anything else is suicidal.

Yes. I was thinking of pointing out this obvious fact myself.

John Savard

On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 10:28:58 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:

> Or does he have enough sense to publicly remove the commander
> responsible while apologizing for the violation of the Rules of War
> (that is, the relevant treaties which Russia has signed)?

I think he has just enough sense to publicly announce that the
report you read was a complete lie and provocation by "Ukrainian
Nazi" agents.

This would serve the purpose of communicating that Russia does
not have the official intention of using chemical weapons in Ukraine
at this time, without admitting to any attempt to have done so.

Admiting to any error, fault, or weakness is not within the ambit of
Vladimir Putin's level of sense any more than it is within Donald J.
Trump's.

John Savard

On Monday, June 26, 2023 at 11:44:43 AM UTC-6, James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <0qej9i1q10cdlj9q4...@4ax.com>,
> Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

> >But the real question is: since chemical weapons are weapons of mass
> >destruction, will NATO react as it (presumably) would to a tactical
> >nuke? Has Putin finally obtained what may be his goal -- war with
> >NATO?

> Given the lack of progress in Ukraine, not 100 percent sure total war
> with NATO would progress entirely to Russia's benefit.

I can agree with that sentiment, but I do not see it as an argument against
the claim that war with NATO is Putin's goal. Instead, I would use the fact
that Russian tanks haven't barreled into, say, Estonia as of yet as my argument
that war with NATO is not Putin's immediate goal at this time. It may be his
eventual goal, after he is more confident that he has established that NATO
has a lack of resolve - _that_ is a position that I had initially agreed with.

At present, though, given the level of unity in NATO's support for Ukraine, I
would have thought that he has instead found that NATO _does_ have a
sufficient level of resolve that any plans for war with NATO that he may have
should be... shelved for the time being.

John Savard