re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.

quote:

---

We'll wait for Trump to have his mind changed for him, but the Kool Aid is strong.

---

He hasn't changed his mind on Ukraine and won't. He's still rooting for the Russians, he's just seeing - as we all are - his buddy get his azz kicked and is hedging his bets. So he's at least smart enough to know that the Kremlin is losing and it's bad politics to back a loser.

quote:

---

How much ammo can the Russians there have?

---

An army runs on its stomach.

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

Would someone in Russia please just push the midget off a building already. How delusional does Putin have to be to actually believe his own propaganda that Russia has not been trying its hardest to capture the Donbas for the past 4 years?

quote:

---

Would someone in Russia please just push the midget off a building already. How delusional does Putin have to be to actually believe his own propaganda that Russia has not been trying its hardest to capture the Donbas for the past 4 years?

---

I've mentioned that I know a guy who is a Poli Sci teacher and his specialty is Russia...

We were talking about the current state of things, and how Ukraine has the upper hand... and how Putin will never back down, until he's dead. And my buddy says "well, he can't... someone under him would use that as an example of weakness and make a plot with a few people to kill him. There is no retirement home for Dictators. Which is why Maduro is so strangely calm and jolly being taken to an American prison, because this is the best possible ending he could ever hope for... eventually he was going to be overthrown and kicked to death or something. But Putin can never stop... and actually, he's going to do something even dumber the more desperate he gets... he will probably attack Poland or the Baltic States... what does he have to lose if he's losing. But he also doesn't believe he can lose if he keeps at it, because he's never lived in a Democracy. He thinks if you just inconvenience people in countries that are first world Democracies enough, they capitulate and will even surrender to him rather than have to fight. And... Democracies do not lose existential defensive wars. I'm not talking about Vietnam, that was not existential for the US... Democracies do not lose wars when their own existence and freedom are on the line. Putin thought the Ukrainians would just surrender, but they didn't and they aren't going to..."

I thought for a second and offered France in WWII, he said "they were outmaneuvered and screwed, they surrendered and kind of colluded, but the people waged a insurgency in little ways that helped the allies a lot.

I'd never considered or heard anyone offer up his theory... but it makes sense... and looking it up:

Success Rate of Democracies in Wars
Democracies have a remarkable track record when it comes to warfare.

Research indicates that they rarely lose wars they initiate, achieving a victory rate of approximately 93%. This high success rate is attributed to several factors that enhance their effectiveness in military conflicts.

Factors Contributing to Success

Reelection Anxiety: Elected leaders are motivated to avoid losing wars due to the potential political consequences, which encourages them to engage in conflicts they are likely to win.

Superior Information Flow: Democracies benefit from independent media that promote open debate, allowing for better decision-making regarding military actions.

Public Support: Democratic leaders often rely on public backing, which can influence their military strategies and choices.

Comparison of War Outcomes
Type of Regime / Win Rate in Wars
Democracies / 93%
Autocracies / 46%

This table illustrates the stark contrast in war outcomes between democracies and autocracies, highlighting the effectiveness of democratic regimes in military engagements.

In summary, while no regime type is immune to failure, democracies have proven to be highly successful in the wars they choose to fight.

quote:

---

In summary, while no regime type is immune to failure, democracies have proven to be highly successful in the wars they choose to fight

---

I'm not sure if you can take a whole lot from those stats.

Autocracies are inherently unstable anyway. The last time we have seen a powerful, stable country become autocratic (at least in the sense you're describing) is.... Maybe never? Nazi Germany rose out of a crippled Germany reeling from the hammer dropped on them after WW1. Russia has never been stable. Napoleon's France came about after the French Revolution.

And then on the flip side you've seen democracies at times be late to the party (or not show up at all) in terms of wars they *should* have chosen to fight in. The US in WW2 being a "late to the party" example.

Thus comparing success rates in wars between the systems is kind of pointless (or maybe just too obvious to matter is a better way of framing it) because democracies are more likely to pass on wars that are unfavorable and autocrats start wars they can't win more often because of inherent structures within those systems. Autocracies also suppress meritocracy so you have less qualified people in higher up positions just based on loyalty to the autocrat. WW2 Germany, especially late in the war, was rampant with that issue.

Ukrainian drones knock out up to 40% of Russia's oil refining capacity – FT

Artur Kryzhnyi — 9 July, 18:57

Ukrainian drone strikes may have knocked out between 20% and 40% of Russia's oil refining capacity.

Source: Financial Times, citing analyst estimates

Details: In June, Russia was processing an average of 4.1 million barrels of oil per day, 28% below the five-year average and 35% below nominal capacity.

Ukraine significantly intensified strikes on Russian oil infrastructure in May. Since then, ten of Russia's largest refineries have been attacked, including the Omsk refinery 2,500 km from the front line, which accounts for around 7% of the country's refining capacity.

The fuel shortage is already affecting 50 million Russians, or 35% of the population, according to the FT's analysis. By 8 July, local authorities or retailers had introduced fuel sales restrictions in the majority of Russian regions.

By 25 June, almost 50 Russian regions had introduced some form of fuel sales restriction, while long queues at petrol stations had spread across the country. Crimea has an official state of emergency in place, with petrol sold only via electronic vouchers.

Ukrainska Pravda

quote:

---

Thus comparing success rates in wars between the systems is kind of pointless (or maybe just too obvious to matter is a better way of framing it) because democracies are more likely to pass on wars that are unfavorable and autocrats start wars they can't win more often because of inherent structures within those systems. Autocracies also suppress meritocracy so you have less qualified people in higher up positions just based on loyalty to the autocrat. WW2 Germany, especially late in the war, was rampant with that issue.

---

You just restated the points of the theory.

I guess kind of, but i guess I'm saying they are bad at pretty much everything and usually second or third tier countries even on a good day so it's not as simple as "autocrats are bad at war". Autocrats are bad at everything.

quote:

---

I've mentioned that I know a guy who is a Poli Sci teacher and his specialty is Russia...

We were talking about the current state of things, and how Ukraine has the upper hand... and how Putin will never back down, until he's dead. And my buddy says "well, he can't... someone under him would use that as an example of weakness and make a plot with a few people to kill him.

---

He is right about that. If Putin pulls out he is signing his own death warrant. It is not a matter of if he get overthrown if he pulls out but when. Of course I do not see how the world's loneliest midget is going to get out of this. Unless Russia has some amazing nonnuclear military capability that they have kept hidden from the world for 4 years, a large mobilization is just going to create more graves for both sides and maybe gain a little territory but nothing decisive. Putin's SMO will go down in history as one of the great f**k ups in history.