18 Comments

Right on the money, and unfortunately we have a lot of Americans who paid more attention in history class trying to get into Susie's pants then learning the chapter's about WWI, the period between and WWII. Dumbing Down...

Expand full comment

We all wanted to get into Suzies pants (and some succeeded!). The problem is our "education" system isn't designed to teach rather than indoctrinate.

Expand full comment

I agree completely.

However, unless they’re related to passengers on Air Malaysia Flight 17, many people have forgotten that the invasion of Ukraine began in 2014. The renewal of hostilities was inevitable when little green men failed to secure water supply for Crimea.

And now with even littler NK green men, we are into WW3 like a frog cooking in slowly heating water.

No worries, not a clue.

A big benefit to this extended intro is that it has allowed military industry to expand or raise production to begin cranking out replacements for the matériel being rapidly consumed on all fronts.

Thank you for your work, my Garden State brother.

Obviously you took Bruce Springsteen’s advice and got out while you were young!

Expand full comment

My understanding of the 25-year-old draft age in Ukraine was to preserve their youth for rebuilding.

Expand full comment

Much respect Ryan. You have the same thought process regarding Ukraine as I. We must support them in their efforts to thwart the Russian Communists and the efforts to rebirth the Soviet Union.

I have no faith in our own government, specifically “leaders” (political party aside). Seems most (both parties) are actual communist sympathizers these days.

We the People are basically going to have to fight and defend ourselves on our own, our individual communities from the Communists (Russia, China) and their infiltration here with no help from a government that was supposed to protect us from foreign and domestic threats. Hard times ahead

Expand full comment
founding

While I appreciate the points made in the video, I must respectfully disagree with the idea that the U.S. needs to be involved in Ukraine. Russia has shown significant limitations in its ability to conquer Ukraine, which suggests it does not pose a conventional threat to Europe. Russia’s actions, while aggressive, remain largely regional and focused on the former Soviet states. This doesn’t warrant U.S. intervention, as the situation does not parallel the conditions of WWII. There is no looming Russian juggernaut poised to sweep across Europe, and the responsibility to address this should primarily fall to regional actors.

That said, it’s undeniable that we may still be witnessing a form of World War III, fought not through mass invasions but as an economic and information war. Sanctions, cyber-attacks, and global disinformation campaigns have transformed the conflict, impacting economies and perceptions worldwide. This evolution in warfare underscores the need for vigilance and engagement, even if military involvement isn't the answer.

America’s strength lies not in endless Vietnams or prolonged global wars on terror. It will triumph, as it ultimately did in the Cold War, through unmatched economic power and relentless technological innovation. These are the true pillars of enduring victory.

Expand full comment

First time I saw this my reaction was “welcome to the 21st century gentlemen”

Expand full comment

While I agree with Ryan about the: next war won't look like Ukraine. That only means we don't have control of what the enemy does. So it's axiomatic, understood. I DO NOT agree with Ryan about why this came up at all. The "drone clubs" is a great idea. But not for military "tactics". Just for familiarization and promoting consumer/pro-sumer level markets.

China has a HUGE advantage vs the west in regards to UAV technology. They have this because they have the manufacturing and the data. It can take this advantage and iterate/improve 100 times faster than the west can.

AI will take over the last mile of the battlefield before the war in Ukraine is finished. China has more than a decade of consumer data and has access to all to all of the data coming out of Ukraine as well. We all do. With what China has today their machine learning and computer vision models will be years ahead of the US.

The US and the west have to wrest back from China a competitive advantage in the drone market. We must re-shore, near-shore, and friend-shore consumer drone manufacturing. And stress test the supply lines so they don't rely on China.

"Drone Clubs" would be a great way to help move the ball forward on this. And while we are building out "clubs" we might want to build an electrical and radio engineering club. There are Ham Radio clubs already. But we need people who understand Electronic Warfare as much as UAVs.

In short, the west needs to mobilize and marshal our advantages. To date, we have done the opposite. Most of us have a "I can't be bothered with it" attitude because we have a basic misunderstanding or misplaced understanding of the world we live in.

PS... no country has an answer to swarms of AI drones. No system currently produced OR conceived can shoot down 100s incoming drones all on different vectors and speeds of approach. This will require unbelievable battlespace awareness and mixed-methods approach to knocking them out of the sky.

Expand full comment

Ryan why does “going nuclear” mean a dictator (putin) must consequently lose power?

Expand full comment

Because if it was a strategic strike he would be the first in Russia to die. The US knows where he is at all times. They have a pattern of life on him.

A tactical strike would force his allies to abandon him and he would lose power. Dictators die when they lose power. They don't retire.

Expand full comment

I agree and I also believe that us intel has been used up to this point to protect putin. Rather than to give ukraine the ability to kill him. Brandon came out and demanded regime change and called putin a war criminal but then dropped that line and never demanded it again. That was 18 months ago about the time of the coup when biden stopped being in charge and started to be told only what he needed to know. I wonder who is in charge? It ain’t joe. He called for regime change and the mob who could make it happen within 2 hours ignored him that day and every day since.

Expand full comment

I watch both sides and agree Biden should have been more aggressive. Having said that, we can afford the wisdom of hindsight. The thing is, there was intel in 2022 and 2023 that evaluated putin’s threat of nukes at 50/50.

Regarding the rest of your opinion, I just see Fox channel bias there, not worth addressing.

Expand full comment

Potus called for regime change after bucha . Who is he talking to if he’s not talking to his three letter agencies.

Expand full comment

Thanks for your response Researching Ukraine, much appreciated!

Regarding your first comment, you think the US (or an ally) would assassinate putin in the event of a local nuclear strike in Ukraine? And do you believe putin understands this?

Your second point I need clarification on if you don’t mind elaborating. Why would a tactical strike force his allies to abandon him, and not join him?

Expand full comment

Happy to elaborate. A strategic strike is what most people think of when they think of a nuclear weapon. It's a very high yield weapon that does, never actually seen before, global damage. And most weapons have multiple warheads that can target several cities. This is the apocalypse. Most people on earth will die. But the first one to die in Russia will be Putin. Not because he was assassinated. But because the US keeps tabs on him, knows where he is and can make sure that some of the first nukes sent to Russia in response to their provocation are aimed at him. He will be dead within an hour of he himself giving the order to launch on the USA. It's also important to note that Russia can't "sneak attack" the US with a nuclear strike. We will see it coming.

A tactical strike is a strike on the battlefield. It's a low yield bomb no more powerful than that of the most powerful non nuclear weapons the US and Russia has. The world, all of it, has a vested interest in NOT normalizing the use of tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield. China, India, and Iran do NOT want to see this. They are all better served fighting the west in attritional and asymmetric war. They can't survive on any battlefield where tactical use of nuclear weapons is normalized. So... if Putin were to give the "ok" to use these weapons in Ukraine, it would benefit the leaders of the world to punish Putin mightily. This punishment would have devastating economic impacts in Russia. The Russian elite would have little choice but to remove Putin. That normally means a hanging, or taken out back and shot.

So you see, any use of nukes means Putin loses power. And in both scenarios... he's dead.

People in Washington are supposed to know this. They are supposed to have the scholars, diplomats, and plans in place to see to it that this is turned into policy. Somehow... it is not policy. Instead we have "escalation management". Which has failed to deter Russia.

Expand full comment

The western alliance need not go beyond conventional to make Russia lose

disastrously, be seen to lose, and Putin not live any more.

Expand full comment

Ah, I get it. Thanks.

I just finished reading Bob Woodward’s book War. A lot of people have opinions when they don’t know what they don’t know. I now feel confident to state that the US has been too restrained with putin and his imperialistic drive all the way back to 2014. The west should have acted decisively right from the get-go, despite the screaming fits from the isolationists.

I agree 100% with Ryan’s observation that china is watching this play out, and the more weakness shown by the west, the more emboldened they become.

Once upon a time I was a pacifist. Sadly I’ve had to grow up, the world being what it is.

Expand full comment