Interesting analysis. It would likewise be interesting to read what some of your former instructors and commanders (as well as the present-day Pentagon, et al) think of what you're providing to us. From TOW missile shooter to military intelligence savant, is a pretty good upgrade.
I can see that my subscription fees are being well spent on satellite imagery and not booze (although I'm unsure as to whether or not you are blowing big bucks on cigars). In any case, your various analyses have convinced me to up the amount of my monthly subscription payment.
As long as I am waxing eloquent - another point: Proxy wars - especially artificially prolonged proxy wars - are the most unethical, immoral wars of all -- not for those doing the actual fighting/sacrificing/dying, but for those who for their own perceived self-benefit, only partially finance/support continued fighting amongst the belligerents in lieu of either not getting involved in the first place or else wise providing all the necessary resources up front to get the war fought in a quick and decisive manner with as little bloodshed as possible.
While I'm thinking about it and as much as I hate (detest is too weak a word) brutal Putin along with his filthy oligarchs, committing an act of war by blowing up Russian gas lines (and directly hurting a Nato ally in the process) is the detestable act of a cowardly, idiotic Presidential Administration.
You are providing great work and analysis on a shoestring budget. Instead of spending money on satellite photos which show only cloud cover, consider using the European website below to search for dates that are more likely to be much less cloudy. (This recalls the frustration of the the Bomber Barons in WWII as they tried to do Bomb Damage Assessment.)
This might be a bit of stupid naiveness on my part, but I'm somewhat curious to know whether A) Russia/US actually have as many nukes as they say they do, and B) Are these nukes that were made decades ago still operational? and finally C) Are the crews that manage them actually competent? We all know about how engaged the CBRN units are.
Do you recon even if the capability is supplied to Belarus that there is any possibility of them being used? Given that NATO has already stated it would respond (using conventional weapons), and Chinese President Xi Jinping has told Putin "no nuclear weapons." Surely this would create more problems for Russia.
Ryan:
Interesting analysis. It would likewise be interesting to read what some of your former instructors and commanders (as well as the present-day Pentagon, et al) think of what you're providing to us. From TOW missile shooter to military intelligence savant, is a pretty good upgrade.
I can see that my subscription fees are being well spent on satellite imagery and not booze (although I'm unsure as to whether or not you are blowing big bucks on cigars). In any case, your various analyses have convinced me to up the amount of my monthly subscription payment.
As long as I am waxing eloquent - another point: Proxy wars - especially artificially prolonged proxy wars - are the most unethical, immoral wars of all -- not for those doing the actual fighting/sacrificing/dying, but for those who for their own perceived self-benefit, only partially finance/support continued fighting amongst the belligerents in lieu of either not getting involved in the first place or else wise providing all the necessary resources up front to get the war fought in a quick and decisive manner with as little bloodshed as possible.
While I'm thinking about it and as much as I hate (detest is too weak a word) brutal Putin along with his filthy oligarchs, committing an act of war by blowing up Russian gas lines (and directly hurting a Nato ally in the process) is the detestable act of a cowardly, idiotic Presidential Administration.
Molon Labe!
“I promise I won’t spend the money on liquor.” Damn, that’s WHY I send you money every month!! 😂😂
You are providing great work and analysis on a shoestring budget. Instead of spending money on satellite photos which show only cloud cover, consider using the European website below to search for dates that are more likely to be much less cloudy. (This recalls the frustration of the the Bomber Barons in WWII as they tried to do Bomb Damage Assessment.)
https://7timer.info/index.php?product=astro&lon=14.398&lat=47.911&lang=en&ac=0&unit=metric&tzshift=0&site=
Keep up the great work. (Also, let me talk to you some day about U.S. Grant, cigars and whiskey.)
Blessings, Alan Caroe, MD
Ok liquor is one thing, do you have any cigar advice? Fantastic content as per usual. D
“I promise I won’t spend the money on liquor.” Damn, that’s WHY I send you money every month!! 😂😂
This might be a bit of stupid naiveness on my part, but I'm somewhat curious to know whether A) Russia/US actually have as many nukes as they say they do, and B) Are these nukes that were made decades ago still operational? and finally C) Are the crews that manage them actually competent? We all know about how engaged the CBRN units are.
Do you recon even if the capability is supplied to Belarus that there is any possibility of them being used? Given that NATO has already stated it would respond (using conventional weapons), and Chinese President Xi Jinping has told Putin "no nuclear weapons." Surely this would create more problems for Russia.
Time for more OSINT to see if McBeth has rightly predicted the new home of Russian tactical nukes:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/25/wagner-group-boss-forces-leaving-bakhmut-yevgeny-prigozhin