Yet another coup in Africa, this time in Gabon.

 

The coup plotters announcing the coup. Reuters. 

Another coup has occurred in Africa with the military overthrowing the president in Gabon after a contested election. Reuters. President Ali Bongo has been taken into custody after the country's election commission declared him the winner for a third term. General Brice Oligui Nguema, the head of the former President's guard, was declared the head of the government until a transition happens. The coup is just the latest in a series of coups in Africa, the eighth since 2020. Bongo's family had been in power for 56 years and did not share the millions of dollars made through the countries sail of oil and minerals. The coup raises questions of what will happen to the 350 French Troops that are currently in the country. 

My Comment:

Yet another coup if Africa. If the Reuters report is correct and there has been eight since 2020 that is really saying something for Africa. It is certainly not the most stable region in the world and this incident could destabilize it further. 

The west is, predictably, condemning this coup, most likely because Ali Bongo was not a threat to the status quo. The new coup leadership obviously is and that is why international groups are condemning this coup. After all, Gabon has a lot in the way of resources, including energy and mineral resources, and the powers that be don't want anything that threatens to cut off those resources. 

Other sources have admitted that the election was at least questionable. Bongo got some 64% of the vote, but who knows if that is true? Bongo and his family did not seem popular as this wasn't the first coup attempt against him and there were riots after the 2016 election. And Bongo also had a stroke in 2018. I think it's very possible there was fraud in this election. 

Regardless, something had gone wrong with Gabon if they had the same family ruling the country for 56 years. That's not supposed to happen in a democracy and I can't believe that in a political dynasty like that the government was actually helping the people. I am guessing the people will be with the coup plotters, at least for a time. 

That doesn't mean that the coup plotters are going to be any better than Bongo. Sometimes coups work out for the better but many times they do not. It could go either way of course and if the situation falls into civil war or worse then the people might regret allowing it to happen. It is of course too early to tell. 

France is probably going to be furious. Many of their former colonial possessions are having these coups and then kicking out their troops. They are fairly unpopular in Africa and most of their former colonies no longer want anything to do with them. 

Major drone strike hits airfield in Pskov Russia...

 

Fire from the strikes. BBC/Telegram. 

A major drone strike has hit an airfield in Pskov Russia. BBC. Two Russian IL76 transport planes were damaged and set on fire during the attack. Pskov is 372 miles away from the Ukraine border and is closer to Estonia, raising questions on who is responsible for the attack. Russia said that the attack caused no casualties and was mostly repelled by Russian air defense. This is not the first time that Russia has been targeted in this region. Ukraine has not taken credit for the attack. 

My Comment:

For such a minor strike this incident is going extremely viral on the internet and even causing quite a bit of a panic. Not bad for a strike that only damaged a couple of aircraft, transport aircraft at that, and one that resulted in no casualties. Russia has 960 IL 76s and losing two of them will not affect the war in any way. 

But if you were to go on Twitter or 4chan or any other website where the war tends to be discussed and you would think that this was the start of World War III. The sticking point appears to be the idea that this attack was launched from Estonia or Latvia. That would, of course, be a casus belli for Russia to launch a greater war on NATO and would probably lead to a nuclear exchange.

That's the theory at least. In reality it has not been proven that these drones came directly from a NATO country. Indeed, I doubt NATO would be that blatant. I am sure that the drones were provided by NATO but the idea that they were launched from Latvia or Estonia seems pretty far fetched. 

Indeed, the only evidence I have seen is that the city of Pskov is kinda close to Estonia and Latvia. I do think it's pretty unlikely that the drones were flown the entire way from Ukraine given that I doubt they have that much range. But I think it's very possible that the attackers were able to launch from inside of Russia or perhaps Belarus as well. 

Even if the drones were launched from NATO, why would this be the thing that set Russia off? NATO has given Russia plenty of reasons to declare war. This is far from the first drone strike that has targeted Russia and we can't forget the Nord Stream bombing that destroyed a major pipeline. If that didn't start World War III, why would this? It doesn't make any sense. 

And, of course, there is the fact that about the only way Russia could possibly lose (and it's no sure thing even then) is if NATO joins the war in Ukraine. Ukraine is pretty obviously losing the war to the point that even the media is starting to admit it. Though some are trying to say that the capture of Robotyne is evidence of something other than object failure. But capturing a tiny village that is still outside the 1st line of Russian defense months after the offensive started is not really evidence of anything. Why would Russia want to screw things up by overreacting to a minor drone strike? It doesn't make any sense.  

China and India agree to deescalate tensions over Himalayan border.

 

Presidents Xi and Modi at the BRICS summit. BBC/Getty.

China and India have agreed to deescalate tensions over the disputed Himalayan border. BBC. President Xi of China and President Modi of India met with each other on the sidelines of the BRICS summit held in South Africa. Relations between the two countries has been poor for years due to conflicting claims over their border. Both sides have agreed to pull back troops from the border and to attempt to improve relations between the two BRICS members. 

My Comment:

Not mentioned in the article that the border disputes between India and China often devolved into violence of a sort. That violence resembled medieval warfare, with soldiers from both countries beating each other with clubs, but generally didn't involve shooting. People still died and it massively increased tensions between the two sides. 

It does seem that might be a thing of the past now. Both China and India have major reasons why they should avoid any conflict with each other. China is focused on Taiwan and India has their own internal problems to deal with. And nobody wants to see a war between nuclear armed enemies like China and India. 

But I think the real cause for this is BRICS. Both China and India are all in on BRICS and are founding members of the ever expanding political and economic alliance. Both countries essentially see the alliance as a lot more important than some border dispute over what is probably fairly useless. And I think it's very likely that the other main members of the alliance were trying to make sure that this issue didn't break the union apart. It very easily could have if some conflict happened over this disputed territory. 

I don't think this issue will go away entirely, both sides are unlikely to give up their claims on the disputed territory. But I do think that some kind of formal agreement to maintain the status quo will be made soon as both countries value the BRICS alliance and have little reason to provoke a conflict with each other. 

Though this is good news for China and India, it's probably bad news for the current occupants of the White House here in the United States. The warhawks want their war with China over Taiwan and without the threat of India possibly taking advantage to take the disputed territory in the Himalayas China can properly focus on Taiwan. And they are losing a wedge issue that could have broken apart the BRICS alliance. 

It's just another example of how blunderingly bad the Biden foreign policy has been. BRICS is the biggest threat to American dominance of the world we have faced since the Warsaw Pact and it's just getting worse. Having China and India cozying on up with each other is terrible as well, though not anywhere near as bad as Russia and China doing so as well. I have said for awhile that the foreign policy mistakes made under Biden are the kind of thing that even Donald Trump would have a massive amount of trouble reversing. 

ISIS has doubled the amount of territory they control in Mali in less than a year

 

A sign saying "welcome to the Islamic State of Gao. Al Jazeera/AP.

ISIS has doubled the amount of territory they control in Mali in less than a year. Al-Jazeera. The 2020 coup in Mali has destroyed a peace agreement and allowed both ISIS and al-Qaeda to regain territory in the country. Mali is doing little against the ISIS and al-Qaeda affiliates, largely because the two groups also fight each other. Mali has kicked out a UN peacekeeping force that spent a decade fighting both Islamic insurgencies. 

My Comment:

ISIS and al-Qaeda have a long history in Africa and had largely been contained by French efforts in West Africa. Those efforts have largely ended now as many of the countries involved have kicked out France, including Mali. 

This has left an opening for ISIS and al-Qaeda to regroup and retake territory. Indeed, West Africa is one of the few places where those groups are still powerful. Indeed, the main problem for both groups is that they keep getting in their own way, ISIS and al-Qaeda have been at each others throats since ISIS was formed in Syria. If they could get over their rivalry they could unite and then be a serious threat. 

I do think that these terror groups are taking advantage of the general chaos that is happening Africa. Indeed that has been their playbook that has repeated again and again. When there are wars and revolutions in the Islamic world ISIS and al-Qaeda ends up taking advantage. It happened in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Nigeria and it could happen in Mali again. 

And the opportunity for these groups? It will be growing immensely if the war between Niger and its allies and the ECOWAS economic alliance happens. Indeed, I have seen no evidence that a war between the two groups is going to be avoided. War certainly seems to be coming and Mali, a major ally of Niger, will be in the thick of it. They aren't doing much to fight these terror groups anyways but if a major war breaks out they will be doing even less. 

So are we going to see a situation like we saw in Iraq and Syria last decade where ISIS and al-Qaeda were able to take over vast amounts of territory and fund terror attacks throughout the world? It certainly is possible. War is absolutely coming and when it does there will be an opening. The only real problem is both groups are fighting each other but that probably isn't that big of a deal in the end. 

I have been saying for awhile now that I was expecting ISIS and/or al-Qaeda to make a resurgence. ISIS has largely fallen away from the news but they are still out there and still a threat. But the entire world is focused on Ukraine and we have depleted our stocks of weapons. If ISIS does manage to make a resurgence it might be awhile before they are dealt with...  

US and Ukraine clash over counteroffensive strategy.

 

Trench warfare in Ukraine. Wall Street Journal.

The United States and Ukraine are clashing over the counteroffensive strategy. Wall Street Journal. The United States wants Ukraine to return to "combined arms" tactics to resume the offensive. However, Ukraine says those tactics do not work with the commander of of Ukraine's armed forces reportedly saying that Ukraine was "...not a counterinsurgency [but]Kursk". Kursk was the largest tank battle of history and occurred on the eastern front between Germany and the Soviet Union. Washington wants Ukraine to gather their forces and make one large concentrated push near Tokmak in the south to resume the push to the Sea of Azov. Ukraine however had launched another attack near Bakhmut that failed and has been subsequently shut down. Ukraine also complains that they really don't have the weapons to use combined arms tactics as they have almost no air power remaining and lack the artillery to outmatch Russia. 

My Comment:

There is a pretty obvious reason why Ukraine moved away from combined arms to their various other tactics, including Russian style attrition warfare and their own "mosquito" tactics of sending light infantry against Russian lines. When Ukraine tried to use combined arms they failed and failed pretty hard. Ukraine's newly formed and western trained armored battalions were badly mauled in the early stages of the offensive and they lost much of the equipment they had been given. In order to preserve at least some of these weapons Ukraine switched tactics. 

What the United States doesn't seem to understand about their own strategies is that combined arms, well, requires combined arms. Ukraine would need air superiority and at the very least artillery parity with the Russians to have any kind of success with combined arms. Ukraine doesn't have this. Ukraine will likely never have this. Their air forces are now a joke and Russia has air superiority and will until the end of the war, F-16s be damned. And they simply can't match Russia for artillery, Russia has far too many weapons for that to ever happen. 

That being said, Ukraine deserves some of the blame here too. The United States has a point that diluting their offensive by launching an attack near Bakhmut was a mistake. Every soldier that was fighting or got killed their would have been better in their offensive in the south. It probably wouldn't have helped but it certainly lessened their chances and it's smart that they finally called off the attack. I don't know what Zelenksy and Ukraine's obsession is with that town but they have wasted so many resources there that it isn't even funny. 

Regardless, I think the bulk of the blame lies with the west. They should have known that western style combined arms tactics were not going to work against a superior force, which is what Russia is. Without out air and artillery power the counteroffensive was always doomed. There were ways that Ukraine could have minimized casualties on their side or maximized the ground they took, yes, but ultimately someone in the Pentagon should have known that they were blowing smoke. 

The smart thing would have been to abandon the counteroffensive in the first place and force Russia to advance on them. Indeed, that seems to be Russia's primary tactic at this point as their offensives have been mostly limited in nature. Russia built up massive defenses and minefields and it has caused a huge amount of attrition against Ukrainian forces. Attacking into that was a mistake and it would have made more sense to make Ukrainian defenses instead. 

But, as always, this is a media war and western support of it was measured in miles taken, not Russian units destroyed and that completely ruined this campaign for Ukraine. I know they could do little else but Ukraine's actions were never based on pragmatism. They held on in Bakhmut long after any sane commander would retreat because they knew it would play poorly if they left, which they did anyways. And they launched this offensive even though it was very likely to fail because western media audiences needed to see the "big arrow" attacks that would take back territory if they were going to continue to support the war. 

Compare that to the Russians. When they got overextended in Kiev and Kharkiv they pulled back. The media, of course, called these defeats but Russia was wise to shorten their lines, regroup and then punish the Ukrainians for overextending themselves. The Russians obviously care about doing what is smart, not what plays well in the media. 

Regardless, I think it's clear that the counteroffensive has failed and that by continuing it at this point Ukraine is only further damaging their cause. They are now throwing their reserves into the battle, and though they have moved the front lines a few miles, they are taking horrendous casualties doing so.

I do think that the Ukrainian commander quoted in the Wall Street Journal piece is right, this is Kursk. If you have read your World War II history you would realize that Kursk, not Stalingrad, was the real turning point of the Eastern Front. The Nazis tried to push an offensive against defense in depth and got their clock cleaned and were never able to regain the initiative in the war. I think it's very clear that the same thing happened this summer in Ukraine... 

The leader of the Wagner Group, Yevgeny Prigozhin, has died in a plane crash in Russia, months after leading an aborted coup attempt against Putin

 

The site of the crash in Russia. Fox News/Reuters. 

The leader of the Wagner Group, Yevgeny Prigozhin, has died along with nine other people in a plane crash in Russia. Fox News. Russia has claimed that Prigozhin was both on the plane and that he died in the crash. Prigozhin famously led 25,000 of his mercenaries on a march to Moscow but the situation was diffused and charges against him were dropped despite the failure of his coup attempt. Prigozhin was active in Africa where Wagner is often employed by local governments. It is unclear what he was doing back in Russia and some officials are skeptical that Prigozhin is really dead. 

My Comment:

If Prigozhin is really dead then I seriously suspect that this is not an accident and it would confirm that his coup attempt against Putin was indeed real and not maskirovka. I never quite fully understood the situation surrounding the coup attempt and Prigozhin himself was a bit of a mysterious figure. If this really was the end for him then I am guessing this was an assassination. 

If it was an assassination nobody should be surprised, the real question is why it took this long. Perhaps Putin's offer of amnesty to Prigozhin was legitimate and he violated it in some way, probably by returning to Russia. Doing so probably infuriated Putin as I would bet a condition of his deal was that he was not to return to Russia under any circumstances. Indeed, no news source I have read has said why Prigozhin was in Russia when he was supposed to be in Belarus or Africa. 

It's possible that it wasn't the Russians that did this though. Prigozhin had a lot of enemies outside of Russia, including the CIA. I doubt any of them were more mad at him than Russia was but it would make sense for the CIA to do this as it would increase tensions between Putin and any Prigozhin loyalists still in Wagner. Still, it seems pretty far fetched but I thought I should mention the possibility. 

Some people are saying that this too was a maskirovka mission to mislead the west into thinking Prigozhin is dead. That is extremely unlikely to me as why would you kill 10 people just to get Prigozhin off the radar of the west, including some who were truly innocent, like the crew of the plane? It makes little sense for Putin to fake the death of a man he is at odds with. Prigozhin himself could have faked his death but if that was the case Russia probably would have seen through the deception fairly quickly. 

I guess I could point out that this could indeed be an accident but that seems about as likely as Jeffrey Epstein actually killing himself. Given the fact that the man launched a coup attack against Russia and Putin has killed threats to his rule before I don't think anyone would seriously consider this an accident even if that's indeed what it is. It's just too big of a coincidence. 

Some people are wondering what Wagner will do in the aftermath of this with the NAFO types somehow convinced that Wagner will march on Moscow again and overthrow Putin in the name of their former dead boss. That seems like wishcasting to me, I doubt that the Wagner troops would do much. Most of them were not onboard with the coup attempt in the first place and the ones that were aren't going to be a big enough force to take on Putin. 

As for Prigozhin himself, I have to say that the guy struck me as a fool. He was always a strange person with a strange history, how many chefs end up creating a PMC and going off to Africa to play warlord? But picking a fight with Putin? It never made any sense to me and he always struck me as a man who didn't know when to shut up. Had he simply fought the war in Ukraine and kept his mouth shut and not tried his insane coup he would still be alive today. 

Rumors are all over social media that Coronavirus restrictions are returning. Is there any truth to the rumors?

 

An image of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes Covid. NIAD. 

This post is going to be a bit different because it's not really a news story yet. If you have been social media for the last couple of days you probably have heard people reacting to the idea that Coronavirus restrictions and mask mandates would be returning over the fall and winter months. This would, of course, be a huge deal given the general lack of threat from the virus at this point and the fact that even President Biden has declared the pandemic over. 

I was extremely skeptical of these rumors at first as the origin of the rumor was literally Alex Jones and Infowars. Adding to that already large red flag is the fact that the report was based on anonymous sources and not anyone going on the record. I have always said that reports with only anonymous sources should be treated with skepticism at best and scorn at worst. The fact that Jones was the only one reporting this and no one else was either was the third strike and I considered the story fake news. 

But since then there were a couple things that might be some truth to the rumor. Earlier this week we found two major cases of mask mandates and other Coronavirus restrictions returning. First, a college in Atlanta says they are bringing back mandates for two weeks despite cases in the area being low, in the "green" area for the local Covid severity index. Shortly after a major Hollywood Studio announced that they are bringing back mask mandates and restrictions as well. Again, cases in Hollywood are still low and it makes very little sense for the studio to do this. 

Those rumors are confirmed at least, but other than that there is a lot of other rumors spreading on social media. That Biden has hired a bunch of people for enforcing these restrictions and such. Those rumors do not appear to have any media backing besides the original reports on Infowars and random nobodies on Twitter. Does that mean that the rumors are confirmed false? Absolutely not, but it's important to note that unlike the two cases with media reports confirming them, we don't actually know for sure either way. 

I'm of two minds on this myself. I honestly can't believe that Joe Biden would be that stupid. All but a few die hard people still wearing masks have moved on from the Pandemic, most people haven't even thought about the pandemic for more than a year now. Bringing it back now for essentially no reason, the Coronavirus disease now is nothing more than a bad cold or weak flu for the vast majority of people, would be massively unpopular, would damage the economy and would give Republicans a major issue to run on in 2024. It could even lead to violence as the one thing everyone on Twitter says is that they won't go along with it this time. Biden has consistently made absolutely terrible decisions throughout his presidency but I would find it hard to believe that even he would be so dumb to think this would work out from him. 

On the other hand, the supposed "return" of the Coronavirus (which never went away in the first place but is now a non-issue) and the associated restrictions would ensure that the various scams and rule changes that occurred during the 2020 elections could come back with a vengeance. I have said for a long time that given how terrible Biden has been and will continue to be as president there is little way he can win legitimately. Bringing back these restrictions and mail in voting would be an easy way to rig the vote. 

If true it would likely backfire on the Biden administration. The Governors of red states would not go along with a 2nd round of lockdowns and the return of mask mandates and neither would a large number of people. People would be absolutely furious as well and most would see it as nothing else than naked political ambition and would react accordingly. 

Of course there is a real chance of this whole thing being bunk. It is Alex Jones and a couple of fairly mild examples in deep blue areas where the coronavirus panic never really went away. And it is a convenient distraction for a lot of news stories that Americans should absolutely be talking about, including the East Palestine train derailment, the debacle that is the Ukraine war, the Maui Fires and even the UFO hearing last month. Not to mention the GOP presidential race. Getting angry over a bunch of restrictions that might not even happen would be a meaningful distraction... 

Saudi Arabia accused of opening fire on illegal immigrants.

 

Ethiopians in Yemen. CBS News/Getty.

Saudi Arabia is accused of opening fire on illegal migrants from Ethiopia. CBS News. The allegations are denied by the Saudis. Human Rights Watch said that migrants have come under fire from rifles and mortars with around 430 people dying. There are also accusations against the Houthi rebels that are in control of much of the border region of Yemen. The Houthis are accused of working with human smugglers and are extorting Ethiopian migrants. The Saudis have a major problem with Ethiopian illegals and is expected to deport 100,000 of them in the next few months. 

My Comment:

Keep in mind that Yemen is technically still a warzone. The Saudis and the Houthi rebels signed a truce last year but the war isn't completely over. Plus, Yemen is a hotbed for terrorists and criminals given the civil war and the general lack of control. 

So did the Saudis kill a bunch of migrants? It's certainly possible. But it might not be out of pure malice. It could be a case of mistaken identity. Like I said, Yemen is a war zone that is full of terrorists and criminals. It's certainly possible that some of these migrants were mistaken for terrorists or criminals and the border guards may not have been willing to risk it to find out for sure and opened fire. That's an example of bad training to be sure and the Saudis should investigate and prosecute the people responsible for it. 

It's also very possible that some of these killings may have been soldiers going rouge and deciding the best way to deal with these people was to kill them. That is something that happens disturbingly often and it's very possible that many of these killings were just psychos that wanted to murder people. 

Still, is there some kind of government policy to murder migrants on the border? I kind of doubt it. Supposedly there are 100,000 Ethiopians that made it across the border and even the worst case scenario for these killings is around 430 being killed. That's nothing and not evidence of targeted killing. 

And it's very possible that the Saudis aren't even responsible for all the killings or even most of them. Again, Yemen is a war zone that is fairly out of control. The Houthis are pretty scary themselves and are certainly capable of killing migrants, though one would wonder why they would. But groups like AQAP or ISIS? They would have no problem murdering civilians like this. Same with the human smugglers bringing these people into Saudi Arabia in the first place. 

Regardless, I have very little sympathy for the Ethiopians. I understand wanting to leave Ethiopia but it makes zero sense to try to go to Saudi Arabia by traveling through a war zone. Ethiopia is a basket case but it is at peace so there is no real immediate threat that these people are fleeing from. And even if they make it into Saudi Arabia they are going to be deported, so what is even the point?

Donald Trump will not participate in the the first Republican debate.

 

Donald Trump. BBC/Getty.

Donald Trump will not participate in the first Republican debate. BBC. Trump is the clear frontrunner in the GOP race and Trump used those poll numbers to justify not appearing at the first debate on Fox News on August 23rd. Trump confirmed that he would not participate in the debates on a post on Truth Social. Trump has cited his large lead and the fact that he fears that the Fox News hosts will be hostile to him during the debate. 

My Comment:

I think Trump is right to not do this debate, though he might want to do one in the future if a candidate becomes a threat. Right now that's not true with any of the candidates. Trump's lead is basically insurmountable at this point so there is little reason for him to debate. 

Indeed, it's kinda of silly that they are even having the debate. Trump had primary challengers in 2020 as well and there never was a debate there because it was obvious that Trump was going to be the candidate. Though there are a few more viable candidates this time around besides Joe Walsh, Bill Weld and the other also rans, there is still little chance of another candidate taking down Trump. 

And I think that Trump is totally right, Fox News does seem to have a grudge against Donald Trump and would use the debate to try and damage him. In the 2016 election cycle the Fox News debate was the most biased one against Trump and I could see that happening again. 

Complicating things is the fact that a few of the candidates at the debate would only be there to attack Trump and that could potentially damage things. Chris Christie and Asa Hutchinson have zero chance of actually winning and are only running because they want to attack Trump. I am guessing that they would be ganging up on Trump during the debate and attacking him relentlessly. They are probably going to do so anyways. 

Trump debating would also legitimize the candidates running against him to some degree. If he doesn't show up it shows that he doesn't consider him a threat at all and that they can be safely ignored. If he did it would mean that he's some way afraid of the other candidates. I know DeSantis supporters are saying the opposite was true but it's really pretty obvious what Trump is doing. 

I do have to say that despite all of that I do miss seeing Trump at the debates. Trump is actually a skilled debater and is very entertaining to say the least, even if you hate the guy. Not seeing him tear into some of the candidates I actively dislike, like Chris Christie, is disappointing. We might never see the 2016 magic of Trump just destroying a candidate like he did with Jeb! Bush. 

As for me, I don't think I will be watching the debate. I doubt much newsworthy will be happening. I will probably watch Trump's interview with Tucker Carlson though, as he's a pretty good interviewer and may even press Trump a bit, which would be helpful. If I have the time and it's a slow news day without much else happening I might even write a blog post about it.  

US approves transfer of F-16s to Ukraine.

 

F-16s from the Netherlands. Reuters. 

The United States has approved a transfer of F-16s from The Netherlands and Denmark to Ukraine. Reuters. Ukraine wanted the fighters in an effort to break Russian air superiority which it has had since the start of the war. NATO has begun the process of training pilots and flight crew to fly and maintain F-16s and are expected to see results from the program in 2024. US officials have said off the record that the F-16s would not have helped Ukraine in this years summer offensive and will not be a gamechanger when they arrive due to strong Russian air defenses and air superiority. 

My Comment:

What a scam by the United States. This is only being done because it will force The Netherlands and Denmark to buy new fighter jets from the United States. That will be a nice bonus for American military companies but won't do a thing to actually help Ukraine. 

Indeed, by the time these fighter jets are delivered, assuming it actually happens, it's very possible Ukraine will have collapsed entirely. Ukraine has pretty much destroyed the third iteration of their army and has even deployed their reserves to their offensive, to the point where they have one US trained division left. Given that Russia has launched their own offensive Ukraine will either have to use that reserve division or pull troops off of the front line. 

Of course it's no sure thing that Ukraine would collapse by the time these F-16's are supposed to be delivered, but even then I don't think these fighters will actually be delivered. People are in general turning away from the war and eventually I think people are going to start questioning this huge weapons deliveries. 

And I still think that if F-16s are deployed they will be destroyed the same way other wunderwaffe have been in the Ukraine war. Deliveries of Leopard Tanks and Bradly Fighting Vehicles have ruined their reputations and will cause countries to think twice before buying them. The same thing will likely happen once the F-16s are deployed and that's a problem for Lockheed Martin. 

Should the F-16s actually be deployed I don't expect them to do much. Before anything else the problem is that there really isn't anywhere to operate these weapons from. Russia has destroyed most of Ukraine's airfields and can do the same thing to any new bases these F-16's would be based at. 

Assuming that problem is somehow solved, how are the almost 50 year old fighters going to survive in a modern combat environment? Russia has very good air defenses and air superiority. F-16s have no stealth capabilities and will likely be outranged by Russian fighters. The only way they could be used is as stand off missile platforms and even that would take heavy casualties. 

Niger is mobilizing civilians due to fears of an invasion from ECOWAS

 

Mohamad Toumba, a coup member, addresses supporters. The Guardian/AP.

Niger is mobilizing civilians due to fears of an invasion from ECOWAS. The Guardian. ECOWAS, an alliance of West African States, have activated a "standby force" after an ultimatum to reverse the coup expired. The force has not yet been deployed. The coup members have asked for tens of thousands of recruits to help defend against any invasion from ECOWAS. ECOWAS is having a meeting to discuss what to do with the standby force though it is unclear what will happen after the meeting. Niger is also dealing with an Islamic Insurgency. In an attack on Niger forces 17 soldiers were killed by terrorists. 

My Comment:

Looks like the Niger situation is getting closer to open war. I don't think Niger would be mobilizing civilians if they didn't expect a major war breaking out. Perhaps this is just to try and deter and ECOWAS invasion, but that would not be my guess. 

The big question that ECOWAS has is if they are going to get support from the United States and France and if Niger is going to get support from Wagner mercenaries. Both the US and France have a major interest in Niger, with France mostly wanted to keep control of their former colonies. The United States supposedly wants to fight ISIS and other Islamist groups but it's really about keeping Russia out of Africa, a goal it has failed spectacularly at. 

Niger is seeking closer relationships with Russia and they could get support from Wagner mercenaries. Given the combat experience Wagner has in counter-insurgency and the real world experience they got fighting in Ukraine, they would be a valuable asset for Niger and would give ECOWAS pause. 

Keep in mind that Niger has allies in Burkina Faso, Mali and Guinea as well. Those countries all had coups as well and would not take kindly to an invasion to reverse a coup. They have already said that they may join the war if ECOWAS invades. 

Could a war still be avoided? Perhaps. I don't think France has it in them to fight in a major war right now. And the United States? I don't think most Americans can even find Niger on a map, let alone justify a war between America and the country. Indeed, war weariness is increasing even though we aren't actually involved in a war right now, at least not directly. People are sick and tired of giving money and weapons to Ukraine, I can't imagine they would be supportive of fighting a war in Africa for reasons that don't really make much sense. There also hasn't been the media buildup you would expect if a war was on the way, at least not here in America. 

Of course ECOWAS could go it alone and that would be interesting to say the least. It would be a real question if they could actually succeed in a war. Nigeria would be the key as they have the biggest and well trained military in the region, but they have their own problem with Islamic insurgents. And the rest of the ECOWAS alliance is split in two by Niger's allies. It would be a tall ask for them to succeed in Niger without western support. 

It's very possible they will go for it anyways. Like I said, I don't see Niger mobilizing civilians if they didn't know something is up. The coup seems fairly popular there and I don't buy the idea that they are doing this just to shore up the coup. It's very possible that a war is coming... 

How should I prepare for the decline of the United States?

 

Own work.

It's very clear to me that things are not doing well in the United States right now. The economy is trashed, we are in a shooting war with Russia, our "president" wasn't elected fairly and is persecuting his main political opponent and everything is just falling apart. 

I also have little faith in things turning around anytime soon. Even if Trump were to win in 2024 I don't think he can undo the massive damage the Biden administration has done. And him winning is a big ask, he not only has to survive until inauguration day, he also needs to overcome the voter fraud and media bias to actually win and even then it's no guarantee that the country doesn't fall apart before he takes office and could begin to turn things around. And it's not like any of the other GOP candidates don't face the same uphill battle he would. And there is zero hope of an outsider candidate defeating Biden in the primary, it won't e allowed to happen. Just ask Bernie Sanders. 

So what does this have to do with me? I've been saving for a new house for awhile now and I have saved a year's salary. Unfortunately, due to massive demand in my area and the increasing interest rates I don't feel that much closer to actually being able to afford a decent house anytime soon. If things don't fall apart, I should be able to afford a house in a couple of years assuming I keep up the savings. 

But I am starting to wonder if that's the wrong thing to do. If things are really going to get as bad as I think they are going to get is saving up money for a house the right thing to do? Will the money I have saved even be relevant if the world falls apart? 

The problem is that there are so many scenarios that it's hard to actually predict what is going to happen. It's clear that America is in trouble but how much and in what form? And what you should do in each scenario is different... 

For example, in a nuclear war with Russia or China scenario (both of which are very plausible) preparing for it would be pretty much useless unless I were to move out of my current area. Northeast Wisconsin would almost certainly be targeted due to the multiple strategic assets found in the region. Green Bay is a major port, Oshkosh makes MRAPS and other vehicles, Marinette makes ships. Even Appleton wouldn't escape since they have a factory that makes firetrucks, which could be converted to military vehicles. 

In that scenario the right thing to do would be to go full hedonist, just doing whatever I wanted and spending all the money I have since it won't do any good if I'm vaporized in a nuclear attack. I mean, I guess I could move to somewhere that isn't going to get nuked but I don't know if a year's salary is enough to do that. Of course if a nuclear war doesn't happen and you bet on it wrong, you would have wasted all your money and would be dramatically worse off. 

But saving my money for a new house could be the wrong move as well. If hyperinflation comes, which is very possible, then saving money is the worst thing you could possibly do. All of a sudden all the saving and scrimping would be utterly pointless as all that money would be practically worthless. Buying a home early that I can't really afford would be the best idea possible since my payments would be fixed as the worth of money declines rapidly. 

What if it's a civil war or "day of the jackboot" scenario? Then I should be buying more guns, ammo and body armor. And even then is no sure thing. If a war happens there is no guarantee that my state will be a battlefield and it could end up like Ukraine where people are partying at the pool while people are dying in droves at the front line. If things are so bad in a 2nd American Civil War where someone like me is on the front lines, then what's the point of preparing anyways?  And there is no guarantee that I would be a priority for the feds if they decide to crack down on everyone that disagrees with them. There would be a lot of people in line before they got to me since my social media following is small. The guns and ammo would be more about protecting myself from raiders and anarchy, not fighting back against the feds. 

Saving money might be the right idea though if we have a non-inflation style economic collapse. My job should be safe in that scenario and I could take advantage of a housing collapse by getting a house a lot cheaper than I would now. Since I consider this to be the most likely scenario, it's the one I'm currently counting on. But if I am wrong?

The final possibility I have thought of is the long slow decline, which means I should actually be investing that money in the stock market. Despite things doing extremely poorly on Main Street right now but Wall Street is still kicking, if my 401k is any indication.  If the economic collapse is still 10 or 20 years in the future I should be able to make some money, at least more than the pathetic amount I am getting in bank interest. That would give me a good nest egg and would give me a good chance at getting a decent house. 

I do have to say that I am angry about all of this uncertainty. I just wish whatever is going to happen would happen (unless it's the nuke scenario for pretty obvious reasons). At this point I'm still a relatively young man and if it happens soon I can still rebuild afterwards when it ends. But the older I get the more that window closes... 

Ships are backed up in the Black Sea after Russia fires warning shots and inspects a freighter.

 

Russian warship Vasily Bykov. Reuters. 

Ships are backed up in the Black Sea after Russia fires warning shots and inspects a freighter. Reuters. Russia announced that their patrol ship Vasily Bykov fired warning shots at a Palau flagged freighter and then inspected it. The ship was allowed to leave for an Ukrainian port after the inspection found nothing. Dozens of freighters are now anchored throughout the region, many of them carrying grain from Ukraine. Russia and Ukraine had a deal to move Ukrainian grain but Russia canceled the deal and won't reinstate it unless it gets better deals for grain and fertilizer. The incident could lead to higher insurance prices for ships heading to Ukraine. Many ports in Ukraine are also essentially close. 

My Comment:

A quick post about an aspect of the war in Ukraine that is going underreported. The naval blockade of Ukraine is a big deal and one that is greatly damaging the war effort there. Ukraine does not have much in the way of resources but it is a grain producer and needs to be able to sell the grain or their budget will be even worse than it is. 

Russia of course knows this and wants to keep the grain off the market. Not only would it hurt Ukraine it would raise the prices of their own grains and that will help pay for the war. Not that they are having too many problems with that anyways, Russia's economy has proven very resilient during the war. 

Russia is of course right to inspect cargo ships as well. It's very possible that weapons could be smuggled in through the sea route, along with other critical supplies. Doing so will likely prevent that and make the war slightly easier to win. Ukraine still has other ways to ship out their products, most notably their land borders, but the sea route is quicker and less complicated. 

Ukraine, of course, has no way to end the blockade against them. They would need a navy to do so and Ukraine's Navy has been totally destroyed. And I don't see any of Ukraine's suppliers going to war with Russia to end the blockade. This is something they will have to deal with. 

Their only option might be to attack Russian shipping and that would probably backfire. Insurance rates for their shipping is already incredibly expensive and blowing up a freighter or two would probably get insurance canceled throughout the war zone. This would hurt Russia but it would hurt Ukraine even more. 

I am not expecting too much from this other than this being the status quo from now on until the war ends. Ukraine can do little to stop these inspections and cannot break Russia's blockade. And Russia has no reason to end the blockade, even though Turkey is trying to get them to restart the grain deal. There is no incentive to do so. 

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won't visit Maui, site of a devastating wildfire. Why Trump and other GOP candidates should.

 

The aftermath of the fire in Lahaina. New York Post/AP.

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris will not visit Maui, the site of a massive wildfire that left many people dead and an entire town destroyed. New York Post. Biden and Harris said they didn't want to be a "distraction" from relief efforts. Harris said that she and Biden were "deeply concerned" about the fire and said that aid would be coming. At least 1000 people are still missing from the fire, which was powered by winds from Hurricane Dora, which was to the south of the Hawaiian Islands. Though Biden and Harris have not appeared in Hawaii, TV personality Oprah Winfrey has been spotted helping at a volunteer tent. 

My Comment:

I was busy this weekend but I haven't been able to blog about this until now. So this is a bit out of date. The casualties have been confirmed at 93 dead with many more expected, with most of the bodies unidentifiable. This is one of the worst natural disasters to hit Hawaii in a long time. 

Biden is, of course, on vacation right now. He's on the beach while all of this is happening. Remember when the media destroyed much of George Bush's legacy for his perceived ignoring the disaster that was Hurricane Katrina? Well this is the 2nd time Joe Biden has done this. 

Remember the East Palestine Train Derailment? An entire town was poisoned by toxic chemicals and the federal government did nothing until they were shammed into do so by Republican politicians. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris still haven't visited it. And they won't visit Hawaii either. 

I do remember who visited East Palestine. Republican politicians like JD Vance and Donald Trump showed up and it was an easy win for them. All they had to do was pass out supplies and actually pretend to care about people. To be fair, I do think that both politicians actually do care about people, but it's very clear that Biden and Harris don't. Biden can't even be bothered to get off the beach for a day, or even send his worthless VP to Hawaii. 

And I don't buy the argument that their visit would disrupt things. They could easily stay on one of the other Hawaiian islands, fly from there with a few pallets of supplies and then help out for a couple of hours. If Oprah can do that certainly the President of the United States, with the near limitless resources of the federal government could do so right? 

I do think this is a big opportunity for Donald Trump and the other GOP candidates. I know that Hawaii is a deep blue state but this is chance to change things. And it has the advantage of being the right thing to do. Indeed, I personally think that Trump, DeSantis and Ramaswamy (along with the also rans) should unite and go as a group. Doing so would show unity in the party and would help as long as they used their considerable resources to help the people there. They might not get as good as reception as they got in East Palestine but it would be a good thing. 

As for why Biden isn't visiting I don't think it has a thing to do with it being inconvenient for the rescue efforts, which are essentially over right now. I think it's for two primary reasons. One, Hawaii is the bluest of blue states and the Biden administration believes that they can't possibly lose the state. They take them for granted.

The other reason is that neither Biden or Harris want to be seen publicly. They know Biden is senile at this point and Harris has the charisma of a toad. Neither of them is capable of pretending that they actually care about people and they know that the gaffes that both would make everything worse. 

Biden asks for another $21 billion for Ukraine from Congress...

 

Joe Biden. AP. 

Joe Biden has asked congress for another $21 billion for Ukraine from Congress. AP. The money is part of a larger $40 billion bill and includes $13 billion in defense aid and $8 billion in humanitarian aid. The rest would be spent on replenishing disaster relief funds, enforcing the border and fighting fentanyl. The last request for aid passed easily and the new bill has support in the Senate but Republicans in the House are expecting a fight as war weariness has sunken in. Support has dropped nationally with less than 50% of Americans still supporting sending new weapons to Ukraine. 

My Comment:

Notice the trick here? They attached the critical disaster relief fund replenishment and border funding into this bill to fund the Ukraine War. So when Republicans in Congress vote against this bill, which they probably will, Biden can say Republicans are voting against disaster relief, despite the fact that the funding of the Ukraine war is increasingly unacceptable among Americans. 

Indeed, the other parts of this bill are things that the government should actually be spending money on. Nobody is against disaster relief, securing the border and fighting fentanyl but the poison pill is Ukraine aid. Attaching the Ukraine aid to this much needed funding is just as cynical as you can be. 

This is going to be a major problem for Kevin McCarthy. If he doesn't allow this to go to vote he faces the possibility of a government shutdown and will take major criticism from the Senate. If he does allow it, it won't pass without the Democrats and if he cuts a deal with him the Republicans in the house will almost certainly remove him from the leadership. He doesn't have a good option here. 

But I don't think he has much of a choice. People are absolutely sick of this war and don't understand why we are sending billions of dollars to Ukraine when there is so much need for aid here. Almost every American could find a better use of $21 billion that would actually help Americans. Hell, just not borrowing more money to pay for it would be a better use of the money than sending it to Ukraine. 

Even worse is the fact that even people that supported Ukraine in their war against Russia have to admit at this point we are just throwing good money after bad. Ukraine is not winning the war. Their offensive has failed and they suffered absurd casualties and lost three armies by now. This money would be used to build a fourth but what is even the point? Russia is going to win now and that seems to be clear to everyone except our government and the few dedicated NAFO trolls left on Twitter. 

Either way, it will be interesting to see how this fight goes. It may very well be the thing that takes down Kevin McCarthy if it passes. My hope is that the war fever that has gripped America will finally break and we will be able to stop wasting money on a war that none of us wanted in the first place. 

Utah man killed by the FBI after he made threats against Joe Biden.

 

Craig Robertson. New York Post. 

A Utah man was killed by the FBI after he made threats against Joe Biden. New York Post. The incident happened at 6:15 AM while the FBI was serving a warrant. The FBI claimed that Craig Robertson was armed when agents shot him during their raid. Robertson had many social media threats against Biden and other top Democrats on Facebook and also threatened the FBI. He also threatened Biden in anticipation of his visit to Utah saying he would "dust off the M24 sniper rifle". Robertson was 75 years old. 

My Comment:

Robertson made a huge mistake in threatening Biden and other top Democrats. That will, at the very least, get you a visit from the Secret Service as it is hugely illegal to threaten the president, even one as undeserving of the title as Joe Biden. Indeed, threatening anyone on social media is a terrible idea as you will get in trouble every time. Robertson was right to be investigated and I think there was more than enough evidence to have him be arrested for a crime. 

What is unique about this case is that Robertson was shot and killed. That is... unusual to say the least. The vast majority of people that make threats aren't even prosecuted, let alone killed by the FBI. To be sure, Robertson's threats were a lot more explicit and time sensitive than most threats but did the FBI really have to kill him?

The situation reminds me of the Branch Davidian standoff. David Koresh was wanted by the ATF for trumped up charges of making machine guns and the ATF had every opportunity to pick him up when he went on his regular walks. Instead of doing that the ATF tried to do a flashy raid in an effort to bolster their funding and distract from the Ruby Ridge scandal. It ended with a huge pile of dead bodies and I wonder if something similar happened here. The Lavoy Fincum shooting is also pretty similar as they took him down in a way that was very likely to end in his death. 

 You can't tell me that there weren't other options than an early morning raid on this mans house. Why couldn't they monitor him until he left his house and then arrest him there when he was less likely to be armed? The way they did it seemed to assure that Robertson was going to die, which might of been the point. It's very possible that this was an assassination of its own instead of an attempt to be an arrest. I am very interested if the body cam footage for this incident will ever be released. Normally I give police the benefit of the doubt but given the FBI's obvious and odious bias against critics of Biden I have very little confidence that this is a good shooting. 

My other question is how much of a threat Robertson really was. He was very clearly well armed and had the rifles and ghillie suits that he was threatening to use to attack Joe Biden. He also had some pretty violent fantasies that if he acted out would be a big deal. He was also threatening the FBI. But he was also 75 years old and it poor shape. Plus it would be unlikely that he would be able to get past Biden's security on short timing. I don't think he had a realistic chance of killing Biden but he might have been able to get someone with less protection then him. 

Was he even serious? It's possible that Robertson was just venting. It's totally understandable that people would be upset about the current direction of this country and I can totally understand being furious with Biden and other Democrats. I am at least smart enough to not do anything stupid about it but maybe Robertson was just kind of an idiot that didn't know better? He absolutely should have known better but sometimes people are just dumb about these things. I'd never issue a threat like this no matter how angry I was, but not everyone knows how badly doing so works out for people. 

It's also a possibility that he didn't care anymore. At 75 and in apparent poor health, maybe this was a suicide by FBI? It wouldn't be the first time someone did something stupid so the cops would kill them is it possible this is another case like this? And perhaps he wanted to be a martyr or something (if so then it worked, people are mad about this shooting). 

I also wonder why Facebook didn't ban him from the platform. He was clearly violating the terms of service but was allowed to continue to post threats. I am guessing the Secret Service must have said something to Facebook to keep him posting. That seems counterproductive. I do wonder if Robertson would still be alive if he had just been banned after he posted something violent...

A war in Africa over Niger is growing more and more likely.

 

Troops from Nigeria, like the above soldiers, would be the primary force in any military intervention. DW/Reuters.

A war in Africa is becoming more and more likely as diplomatic efforts to reverse the coup have failed. DW. ECOWAS, an economic alliance of West African states, threatened military action if the coup wasn't reversed by Sunday, a deadline which has already passed. Chances of a military intervention are high due to US support for the war, largely to counter Russian moves in the region and the threat of Jihadists. A war would be difficult though as Niger has allies in Burkina Faso, Mali and Guinea. Nigeria would have to be the backbone of any invasion of Niger as they have over 200,000 troops along with modern fighter jets and helicopters. However, Nigeria is dealing with their own Jihadist insurgency from Boko Haram. Niger has the advantage of having a large, American trained, army of their own and are very experienced in fighting due to counter-insurgency operations against Jihadists and would expect military support from Mali, Burkina Faso and Guinea. 

My Comment:

American efforts to reverse the coup were rejected by the coup members. Victoria Nuland, warmonger and Ukraine war architect, was laughed out of the country after demanding to see the former president. Niger appears pretty confident that they can hold onto power and aren't interested in what the United States has to offer. 

With ECOWAS calling for war with the backing of the United States and France I don't see how a war can be avoided at this point. The coup plotters have little reason to back down and neither does ECOWAS. There have been military interventions against coups in the alliance before and it certainly can happen again. 

Which side wins is far from clear. Nigeria is probably the most formidable army in the region but they are fighting Boko Haram which is no joke. None of the other ECOWAS countries are as powerful as Nigeria is and they are cut in two by Niger's military alliance, that includes Mali, Guinea and Burkina Faso. 

Niger has a decent army as well and they are backed by the other countries. Mali's military appears to be a joke but Guinea is decent enough and Burkina Faso has a few troops as well. They may also have some support from Russia which could be a gamechanger for them. 

It might come down to if France and the United States join the war. Both countries have significant forces in Niger already and can call up more if needed. Doing so, with the backing of Nigeria and the other ECOWAS countries would make me think that Niger is in big trouble. 

Still, another major war is the last thing the world needs and I doubt there would be much support for a military intervention in the United States or France. Americans are war weary and are sick of the billions of dollars were are sending to Ukraine, I can't imagine they would support another war of choice over a part of the world they don't care about at all. 

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un orders war factories to increase production.

 

Kim Jong Un with a rifle. The Independent/KCNA.

North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un has ordered war factories to increase production. The Independent. Kim toured his weapons factories, most notably small arms and artillery factories. He also complimented workers at a factory that produces mobile missile trucks saying that they provided a solid foundation to expand production. Kim also called for better quality and more production of artillery shells. The thee day tour came during high tensions on the Korean Peninsula as North Korea is showing closer ties to China and Russia. South Korea and the United States will launch a major military exercise in response. It is suspected that North Korea may be more concerned about exporting their weapons to Russia, which is currently involved in the Ukraine War. 

My Comment:

North Korea is one of the more annoying of Joe Biden's foreign policy blunders. Under Donald Trump North Korea had been mostly a solved issue and Trump had a decent relationship with Kim Jong Un. The chances of a war were smaller than they had ever been since the war in Korea ended. 

Biden, of course, pissed this relationship away, like he did with the Saudis, Russians and every other country that Trump had good relationships. In North Korea's case it's more of a case of neglect more than anything. I doubt that North Korea is on the radar of Joe Biden at all. 

Is North Korea preparing for war? It's possible. They, like everyone else, knows that a war between China and Taiwan could be possible and that could be a major opportunity for North Korea. If South Korea is a belligerent in that war it would give North Korea a chance to try and take back the country from the South Korean government, and have the backing of China (and perhaps Russia as well). Having the backing of one or both of those countries could be the only way that North Korea could ever win a war against the South. 

Such a conflict is of course years away, if it happens at all. It's very possible that Taiwan could vote in a pro-China government and make the whole thing moot. And even if it does happen, I don't expect it until the Ukraine conflict is resolved. China also needs a bit more time to build up forces, but less time then it needed a few years ago. 

Regardless, it makes sense for North Korea to prepare for such a conflict. They also have to be slightly concerned that the warmongers in the United States could target their country next after the Ukraine War is resolved. Or even before, we aren't dealing with rational people in Washington anymore and North Korea knows this. It makes sense that they are making weapons.

But the most obvious reason for North Korea to build up their weapons is to sell them to Russia. Russia has built up their own weapons factories but they are using their weapons as fast as they are building them. They are doing a lot better than NATO and Ukraine in producing weapons but even then Russia might want to shore up their stockpiles. 

This has some pretty obvious benefits for North Korea. Not only do they get better relations with Russia they also get much needed cash. North Korea has long had problems with feeding their people and are mostly cut off from the rest of the world due to sanctions. A major arms deal with Russia could massively help both the regime and the people of the country. 

Ukraine peace talks in Saudi Arabia seem to make little progress without Russian participation.

 

Representatives of the more than 40 countries at the peace talks. Reuters. 

Peace talks in Saudi Arabia to end the war in Ukraine seems to have made little progress without Russian participation. Reuters. 40 states participated in the talks including America, China, and India, along with many European countries. Ukraine said the meetings were to build support for their demands for ending the war, including the return of all captured territory. Russia laughed off the talks, calling the talks doomed and an effort to turn the global south against the war. Despite little progress for the talks, they are a win for Saudi Arabia, which was able to secure the participation of many countries including China.

My Comment:

Peace talks without the participation of one of the major belligerents can hardly be called peace talks. These talks were doomed the second it became obvious that Russia was not going to participate in them. Without Russia there was no chance at an actual peace deal. 

Not that a peace deal was likely in the first place. Ukraine is still demanding all of the territory taken by Russia, including Crimea. Taking the four oblast that Russia has integrated into their lands is a tall ask in the first place, but Crimea is totally off of the table. Protecting Crimea was a major reason for the war and there is no way that Russia would ever willingly give up that land. Ukraine can't seriously demand this and except any kind of response for Russia. 

Ukraine is also not in a position to bargain in the first place. Russia appears to be winning the war and Ukraine's much ballyhooed offensive has mostly failed. Far from reaching the Sea of Azov and cutting off Crimea, they haven't even punctured the first line of defense after two months of fighting! Russia has zero reason to give them anything. 

Indeed, the cracks are starting to show in the support of the war. Apologies in advance for linking to CNN, but their latest poll shows that 55% of Americans oppose more support for Ukraine and 51% say we have done enough to help them. As Ukraine's biggest backer it seems clear that the endless supply of arms and money from America will be cut off soon. 

And that's assuming that Ukraine doesn't just collapse in spite of western support. Their best divisions got mauled in their offensive and they can't have too much left in reserves. Morale is low and it's clear that their tactics are not working. Russia has a major military advantage in artillery, drones and air support and that won't be changing anytime soon. 

Ukraine could end the war if they would simply give up the territory that Russia demands but I doubt they will be allowed to do so. Ukraine and Russia almost ended the war when Russia was threatening Kiev but then the UK torpedoed the deal and the war has continued since then. I think if another deal was made the same thing would happen. And Russia has absolutely no reason to trust any deal made by the west. 

So why even have talks? The Saudis got a bit of prestige for pulling this off and have strengthened their links to the countries that were invited, including Ukraine and the United States. They probably knew that nothing much would come from this but it's good headlines for their country and that is something they need. And Ukraine? They get to look like they are serious about peace, even though they pretty obviously aren't. It will be enough to fool people that barely pay attention to the news. 

Ukraine has still not made a breakthrough in their offensive...

 

A Ukrainian soldier in a tank. Politico/AFP.

After two months of fighting Ukraine has still not made a breakthrough in their summer offensive. Politico. The latest attack involved thousands of troops and hundreds of vehicles has not garnered significant results with land taken measuring in hundreds of meters instead of kilometers. Ukraine has had a lot of trouble clearing minefields and even when they do the Russians drop more mines behind them via artillery and helicopters, trapping troops between minefields. Ukraine has deployed 150,000 troops to the offensive though some brigades are still being held in reserve. 

My Comment:

This isn't new for anyone who has been paying attention to the Ukraine war and isn't a blind partisan. Ukraine's summer offensive has been a failure. Despite the huge concentration of forces, the new western weapons and the deployment of freshly trained troops the offensive has hardly taken back any territory at all and was not able to breakthrough Russian lines. Indeed, most reporting I have read has said Ukraine has barely even reached Russia's first line. 

What the article doesn't mention is the fact that Ukraine has taken massive casualties as well. Up to a third of their equipment was lost last month and we have had a month of fighting since then. Though Ukraine doesn't release their human casualties they must be horrific as well, especially since Ukraine switched away from using their armor and going back to infantry assaults. Though the armor was getting destroyed they at least allowed soldiers to survive long enough to flee. Not so much in an infantry assault. 

Western media tends to blame the mines for Ukraine's offensive failing. I don't want to downplay the success mines have had, but they are far from the only thing that is mauling Ukrainian brigades. The fact is that Ukraine is at a technology disadvantage and that Russia is using combined arms. If it was just mines Ukraine would be able to break through, but every time they try to clear the mines they get hit with rockets, artillery, helicopters, drones and missiles. And then they get mines dropped behind them. 

Ukraine on the other hand does not have that. They have limited artillery and drones and are on the offensive so things like trenches and minefields hinder them instead of help. They are also outnumbered and trying to attack Russia's strongest defenses. To be fair to the Ukrainians the fact that they are even still fighting is somewhat miraculous given the disadvantages they have. 

The media is starting to cover the fact that the Ukrainians are failing but they are still pushing the idea that western weapons are going to be the thing that changes the outcome of the war. The Politico article was talking about the Vampire anti-drone system and M1 Abrams tanks as if they are going to succeed where the Bradly Fighting Vehicles, Leopard Tanks and the billions of dollars of other equipment the west has sent Ukraine. 

Regardless, I don't see the Ukrainians breaking through any time soon. If they were smart they would cancel it and hide behind their own defenses and force the Russians to go on offensive. This is what they should have been doing for a long time and would force long grinding battles like Bakhmut. Ukraine would still lose but they would buy time for a more advantageous peace agreement and have a lesser chance of a total collapse. But now? The collapse is probably inevitable.