19639

I’m talking about performance thus far in the current war so not existing prior to 2016 is irrelevant (weren’t they in Ukraine in 2014, though?). That’s the impression I have from reading various ISW updates and other news but I’m hardly a scholar on the subject so I could be wrong.

19640

Yeah, Wagner was in Ukraine in 2014, my bad, they were founded then. They didn’t really fight much/at all in that invasion though.

Wagner might be better than the main Russian forces, but I think a lot of what we’ve seen is just them murdering civilians.

19641

Which is all I commented on, with the caveat that it’s a low bar. Per this Barron’s article, quoting a researcher at the Foreign Policy Research Institute:

Which is why the news that not only has Ukraine repelled assaults on Bakhmut for months but are now driving them back is good news. If this is the best Russia has and they’ve thrown everything at Bakhmut for months and now they’re losing ground? Not a good sign for ol’ Pooty Poot.

19642

I thought that, behind the scenes, Kennedy made a deal to quietly remove western missiles aimed at USSR, located in Turkey, in exchange for USSR’s agreement not to put missiles in Cuba. It looked like Kennedy holding firm and USSR backing down, but the reality was more of a bargain than that.

Of course this doesn’t change the larger point, which is that right now, the West’s resolve and commitment to Ukraine is everything.

19643

From what I remember there was the public deal and the secret deal and the secret deal including removing the Turkey missiles in the following months. But yest Kennedy understood that Kruschev needed something to safe face, although it didn’t end up helping in the long run.

19644
19645

What a bunch of clueless dipshits. I mean, I’m glad they’re withdrawing the letter, but maybe they could have thought it through a bit before sending it to the media? Or, you know, have a conversation with the leader of your party who is in the White House. But nah, can’t grandstand if you do it that way.

19646

Now they’re blaming the staff:

But really, I don’t grasp the argument that the letter was a good idea in June (when the narrative was that Russia was winning), but not a good idea now (when that narrative has been debunked by events on the ground). Is their argument that it was a good idea to force a negotiated settlement when Russia seems to have the upper hand, but not such a good idea when Russia is in trouble? My god.

19647

“released by staff without vetting” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. I’m curious what actually happened.

19648

RIP AOC-Kevin McCarthy Caucus 10/24/2022 - 10/25/2022.

19649

I feel like a lot of the progressive caucus is kind of like the tea-party, in that they are used to being the opposition, but they don’t know what to do when it comes to actually being in power and governing.

19650

I don’t think it helps that they’re only partially in power, in that they can’t really get anything done without the centrist / right-leaning dems.

19651

Yes, they pretty much feel that they’re always the opposition.

19652

I don’t think any nuclear power has been as close to an existential crisis as Russia is right now (existential for the regime, at least). So my point was, I think it’s pretty reasonable to be concerned. I am.

19653

… Those responsible have been sacked. …

19654
19655

Well the Soviet Union was, but the pressures were mostly internal, so nuking themselves wasn’t really on the table as much.

19656

This is a first rate military power? Just consistent with everything else we have seen:

19657

Alleged former first rate military power!

19658

BUT AT LEAST THEY’RE NOT WOKE! /s