Oct 17, 2022

Ukraine


Every military - every large organization of any kind - is going to have problems with incompetence, and the arrogance on the part of incompetent people who will eventually start looking out only for themselves, which leads to the lack of respect among team members that comes from the kind of fuckups that won't stay hidden for very long - which, taken together, explains the inevitability of the collapse of morale in the Russian forces.

It's easy to go negative about things.

And it's really hard to get your guys pumped up enough to throw themselves into the fight with reckless abandon, the way these Ukrainians are doing.

Stay lucky, you magnificent bastards.



Mark Hertling

What Hath Fox Wrought

She makes the point that we all have to understand, and internalize, and get used to: The rubes will line up - by the millions - and vote the way they're told to vote.


Desi Lydic - The Daily Show on Comedy Central

Oct 16, 2022

The Elon Shuffle


We tend to keep on falling for the same shit time after time after time.

If you're a billionaire, you must be the smartest guy in the room, and whatever capability you possess must apply to every other endeavor.

So he asked me, "You're smart - why ain't you rich?"
And I asked him, "You're rich - why ain't you smart?"

I think maybe someone is in Elon Musk's ear telling him he should be using his economic and social power to remake the world in the image of his businesses, and he's perfectly able to do whatever he wants simply by virtue of his bank balance.

I get the feeling someone else - someone who actually knows what the fuck they're doing - got in his other ear and told him to stop fuckin' with things he doesn't understand.


Elon Musk blocked Ukraine from using Starlink in Crimea over concern that Putin could use nuclear weapons, political analyst says

Elon Musk personally rejected a Ukrainian request to extend his satellite internet service to Crimea, fearing that an effort to retake the peninsula from Russian forces could lead to a nuclear war, the influential political analyst Ian Bremmer said in a newsletter published on Monday.

Following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February, Musk — and the US government — provided Kyiv with thousands of Starlink systems, enabling Ukrainian forces to communicate in what had previously been dead zones. The low energy requirements of the service's satellite receivers have enabled connection to reconnaissance drones, providing valuable real-time intelligence on Russian movements and the ability to target them, Yahoo News reported in August.

But recently there have been problems. Last week, a senior Ukrainian government official told the Financial Times reported that the service was suffering "catastrophic" outages on the front lines, prompting speculation that it had been shut off in areas controlled by Russia — perhaps to prevent the Kremlin from exploiting the network.

On Twitter, Musk said he could not comment on battlefield conditions, saying, "That's classified." But Bremmer, the founder and president of the political-risk research firm Eurasia Group, said on Monday that in a conversation with Musk in late September, Musk appeared to confirm that the satellite service was being intentionally disabled.

Neither SpaceX nor Ukraine's ministry of defense immediately responded to requests for comment.

Bremmer said Musk told him he'd been asked by Ukraine's defense ministry to activate Starlink in Crimea, which Russia invaded and illegally annexed in 2014. Bremmer said Musk "refused given the potential for escalation."

According to Bremmer, Musk claimed to have recently spoken with Russian President Vladimir Putin, asserting that he was "prepared to negotiate." (Musk this month proposed a Ukraine peace plan seen as aligning with Russian interests.) Bremmer said Musk told him that in that conversation, Putin threatened to use nuclear weapons if Ukraine tried to retake the Crimean peninsula, which serves as the base for Russia's naval forces on the Black Sea.

On Twitter, however, Musk flatly denied having any recent conversation with the Russian leader, writing on Tuesday that he had "spoken to Putin only once and that was about 18 months ago." The subject, he said, "was space." Bremmer was likewise adamant, tweeting that Musk "told me he had spoken with Putin and the Kremlin directly about Ukraine."

Russian forces have been losing ground in Ukraine's south and have lost huge swaths in Ukraine's east as they've pressed into regions Russia declared it had annexed, sparking concern among arms-control experts about whether Putin and his top advisers may contemplate an attack with a nuke from their vast arsenal in an attempt to stanch their losses.

But then -


‘The hell with it’: Elon Musk tweets SpaceX will ‘keep funding Ukraine govt for free’ amid Starlink controversy

Elon Musk said in a tweet Saturday that his company SpaceX would continue to fund Starlink satellite internet terminals for the Ukrainian government as it battles invading Russian forces.

“The hell with it,” the billionaire tweeted, “even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free.”

It was not immediately clear whether Musk, who is also the CEO of Tesla was being sarcastic. In response to a tweet about the move, Musk said, “we should still do good deeds.” Responding to another tweet saying that Musk had already paid taxes that are funding Ukraine’s defense, he said, “Fate loves irony.”

The tweets follow a statement from Musk on Friday in which he said that SpaceX cannot continue fund Starlink terminals in Ukraine “indefinitely,” after a report suggested his space company had asked the Pentagon to cover the costs.

Musk did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

In a letter from SpaceX to the Pentagon, the company said that the use of Starlink in Ukraine could cost close to $400 million over the next 12 months, according to a report by CNN. SpaceX has signed several contracts with the U.S. government.

SpaceX’s donated Starlink internet terminals have been crucial in keeping Ukraine’s military online during the war against Russia, even as communication infrastructure gets destroyed. Russia began its invasion of Ukraine in February.

Musk drew criticism from Ukrainian officials earlier this month when he posted a Twitter poll gauging support for what he claimed was a likely outcome of the Russia-Ukraine war.

He appeared to confirm that SpaceX was planning to leave Ukraine in some capacity Friday, replying to a Twitter post that referenced the Ukrainian ambassador telling Musk to “fuck off.”

“We’re just following his recommendation,” Musk said.

The SpaceX founder is also in the middle of a $44 billion bid to buy Twitter, which he had tried to get out of. A judge ruled that he has until Oct. 28 to close the acquisition if he hopes to avoid a trial.

And there's the rub. I can sit here and spout off to my 1-or-200 daily visitors*, and nobody has to worry that a million Ukrainians and Russians are going to get blown to bits because of some stupid notion that managed to creep across the axonal gap inside my little brain pan, making me think I know more than the people who've made solid careers out of getting us all through this kinda shit more or less intact.

That's not to say the smart guys always get it right - fake lord knows we've listened to assholes like Kissinger and Cheney and Rumsfeld, and the world has suffered because of it. But the good guys still outnumber the assholes - good guys like Carter and Blinken and Kerry and Albright and Hillary - and the world spins madly on as we muddle through and stumble forward.

*Note: A very big Thank You to everybody who drops by to pick up a few of my brain droppings. (hat tip - George Carlin)

Ukraine


Putin won't survive this war, but details are (as usual) a real booger:
  • How long will it take him to fall?
  • Who takes him down - who takes his place?
  • Will Putin's demise lessen or intensify the Russian war effort?

Today's Reddit

Oct 15, 2022

Jan6 Stuff

I don't know Jim Clyburn, but I think I've seen him interviewed often enough to know his speaking style is always a little halting - measured and careful - like he's always looking for the right way to phrase his comments in order to let everybody know he's considered the opposition's point of view before he's drawn his conclusion, and that as sure as he might be, he's going to leave some room to accommodate disagreement.

This is not that Jim Clyburn:



The Madness Seems To Be Spreading


It's not just the war. Although that shit has a tendency to get pretty contagious - toss that pingpong ball and you're going to set off lots of mouse traps.

We always had a counterargument against the ammosexuals when they insist that America's gun violence has little to do with guns, and it's just that we need to address the problems we have with mental health and blah blah blah.

We've always said other places have mental health issues, and violent hiphop lyrics, and violent video games, and there's plenty of violence built into plenty of traditions in those other places. What they're lacked is guns.

Guess what - now those other places are getting more guns, and they're seeing more shootings.

QED



Ukraine war: Eleven volunteer soldiers killed in Russian military firing range shooting, Kremlin ministry of defence says

The shooting is said to have taken place in the Belgorod region in southwestern Russia, which borders Ukraine.


Two men opened fire at troops at a Russian military shooting range near Ukraine, killing 11 and wounding 15 others, the Russian defence ministry has said.

The shooting is said to have taken place in the Belgorod region in southwestern Russia, which borders Ukraine.

Moscow's defence ministry said that the two men from an unnamed former Soviet nation opened fire on other soldiers during target practice, before being killed by return fire.

The ministry called the incident a terrorist attack.

Today's Tweet


Oy




Jan6 Stuff

(pay wall)

Opinion
Trump’s rambling answer to the Jan. 6 committee shows his weakness


In response to the Jan. 6 committee’s vote on Thursday to issue a subpoena for his testimony, former president Donald Trump released a rambling, seemingly unhinged reply that doesn’t answer whether he intends to testify.

When the committee formally subpoenas Trump, there will be very good reason for him to turn it down, or at least continue blustering to delay answering whether he’ll comply, as his new response does.

The web of illusions Trump has spun around Jan. 6 can’t survive contact with a legitimate, fact-based, rules-bound process. But not testifying is also problematic: It admits to fear of facing genuine questioning, which looks weak. So, Trump must try for as long as possible to inhabit a gray area where he blusters about owning his enemies on the committee while avoiding testifying to the committee at all costs.

Trump’s new response, a three-page letter that he plainly dictated while his lawyers cringed in the background, is aimed at fitting this bill. In a stream of delusion and megalomania, it rehashes all kinds of grievances, most prominently the lie of the stolen 2020 election. This is supposed to show Trump “owning” the committee while refraining from conceding that he does not plan to answer its direct questions.

If Trump were to testify, he would surely struggle to choose between admitting culpability or perjuring himself — or pleading the Fifth Amendment. He would be pressed on whether he knew well in advance that he lost the election, and on whether he decided long before the election to cast doubt on the result no matter what the voting showed, as part of a premeditated scheme to try to overturn an eventual loss.

The committee powerfully demonstrated evidence of premeditation in its final hearing. Trump would be confronted with that evidence.

Similarly, Trump would be cross-examined about evidence that he knew he was pressing his vice president, Mike Pence, to do something illegal in demanding that he scuttle the electoral count in Congress. The committee convincingly demonstrated evidence that Trump was extensively informed of this.

Trump would also face questioning about evidence amassed by the committee that he actively refused for hours to call on the rioters to stand down. This illustrated that Trump likely saw the mob as a weapon to intimidate Pence and members of Congress into allowing states to send new electors that would have made him, not Joe Biden, the next president.

Guess who testified to all these things? A lot of people who were close to Trump himself.

“He’s going to have to say, ‘They’re all lying,’ ” former FBI counsel Andrew Weissmann told me. “Even though a lot of these people worked for him.”

Trump would also have to deny he suggested Pence “deserved” to face hanging by the mob, as a top aide testified to hearing recounted. Trump would have to deny ever suggesting to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) that he approved of the rioters’ rampage, because they “are more upset about the election than you are.”

Trump cannot admit to these things, because they go to the core of whether he showed “corrupt intent,” which would be relevant to whether he violated federal laws. These include obstruction of an official proceeding (the electoral count) or conspiracy to defraud the United States (by interfering with lawful U.S. election processes).

“The key issue in a public corruption case is invariably the intent of the defendant,” Weissmann said.

National security lawyer Bradley P. Moss agrees that Trump would risk self-incrimination. “He can’t substantively admit to what went down without effectively conceding the point of corrupt intent,” Moss told me. “But he can’t misstate facts in his testimony either, lest he be subject to perjury charges.”

Trump must sustain a series of grand illusions in the eyes of the MAGA movement, but embedded in them is a deep tension.

On one hand, these illusions rest on the idea that Trump was gloriously victorious in 2020, the effort to reverse the outcome was a just cause, there was never any coup attempt, and all efforts at accountability over it are nothing but political persecution.

On the other, Trump must maintain the perception that he’s fearsomely in control of events and wields absolute mastery over his enemies. After the committee voted to subpoena him, a “source close to Trump” leaked word to Fox News that he totally wants to testify, to own the committee’s Democrats by rubbing their faces in the “truth” about the stolen election.

But Trump cannot sustain both fantasies forever. Testifying would explode the first and put him in more legal jeopardy. But not testifying would rupture the second. He would need to conjure some way of suggesting he’s owning the committee by cowering from it.

Trump’s escape route requires remaining in the gray area between those two poles for as long as possible. He must try to muddle through to the time when a GOP-controlled Congress might disrupt ongoing Justice Department investigations, and then on to an endgame where the department decides not to prosecute.

As for whether Trump will succeed in this, well, only the department itself can say.