The unconventional Kherson offensive – TTG

My hypothesis on what’s Ukraine doing in Kherson region.

The Ukrainian military likely put a stake on gradually exhausting and embattling Russia’s grouping on the Dnipro right bank — while also keeping it isolated from supplies and from across the river. So Ukrainian forces are likely probing Russian defenses all along the line, looking for weak spots, trying to advance and capitalize on their gains if possible. It certainly does not have enough manpower and hardware for a reckless, costly, Russian-style frontal attack that would guarantee nothing but a high Ukrainian death toll. So the command has to use their brains and do it in a more subtle way. 

I think this operation is not about territorial gains per se, but about grinding the Russian group of 20-25 BTGs down in hard combat until it just can’t go on due to losses, and a total lack of supplies and fresh reinforcements. So I don’t think it makes sense to expect any impressive territorial gains, let alone Ukraine retaking Kherson, any time soon.

In the next weeks, we’ll be seeing heavy fighting and constant Ukrainian strikes upon Russian GLOCs and river crossings. Ukrainian need to always deny Russia of its ability to go on feeding its forces on the Dnipro right bank. That’s a lot of work to do.

So yeah – it’s way too early to tell if this operation was a success.

Comment: So thinks Ilya Ponomarenko, military correspondent for the Kyiv Independent. He’s not be a trained military practitioner, but he’s been covering this stuff since 2014. He’s also a Donbas native now living in Kyiv. His take sounds reasonable to me. Along the same line, Arestovich had this to say in his daily interview from yesterday.

Ukrainian tactics in the south: Arestovich says that the Kherson operation will go on for a long time because the Ukrainians are trying to avoid unnecessary losses of both military and civilians. Arestovich explains that in the army one must always use the strongest capability he possess. In some areas, the Russian army has a numerical superiority in terms of artillery and aviation. However, the Ukrainians posses better reconnaissance and long range accurate weaponry. All Ukrainian military operations are structured around the combined employment of these 2 capabilities. Therefore, Ukraine will play to their strengths and organise the offensive in such a way that it primarily employs these weapons that do not need to be in direct contact with the enemy. We should not expect a “Severodonetsk” style offensive from Ukraine where 9 brigades had to be pulled off the line for refitting after the battle.

Comment: Ukraine has more than HIMARS and M777 guns. They are now capable of employing AGM-88 HARM missiles from their MiG-29s. Their Air Force is conducting sorties regularly now and the Bayraktars are again hitting targets. I’ve seen videos of units equipped with the Dutch YPR-765, an upgraded version of the M-113 APC. I’ve also seen standard M-113s from American stores in use. Poland handed over 240 of their PT-91 Twardy tanks, an upgraded version of the T-72. It doesn’t look like the West has tired of supplying Ukraine with effective and often cutting edge equipment and ammunition yet.

This fact hasn’t escaped notice in Moscow. Sergei Ryabkov whined/warned Washington of this yesterday. “We have repeatedly warned the US about the consequences that may follow if the US continues to flood Ukraine with weapons,” Ryabkov said. “It effectively puts itself in a state close to what can be described as a party to the conflict.”

Depending on how effective the Ukrainians are in reducing the ammo and food stockpiles already on hand with the Russian forces on the west bank of the Dnipro and interdicting Russian logistics at and beyond the river, this unconventional offensive could take weeks or even months. That shouldn’t be very shocking. It took the Russians three months to take Severodonetsk. The Ukrainians are in this for the long haul and, as such, preservation of their forces is an important consideration. Still, offensive pressure must be kept up or this will turn into another frozen conflict. And that would be to Moscow’s advantage.


This entry was posted in TTG, Ukraine Crisis. Bookmark the permalink.

109 Responses to The unconventional Kherson offensive – TTG

  1. Klapper says:

    The Russians are going to win this if they want to; they have massive advantages in resources over Ukraine, should they choose to deploy them. The claim they will soon lose commitment to their objectives might be true (no evidence of that so far), but I think the west will blink first. An example of this is today’s 70,000 strong crowd of protesters in Prague, demanding their pro-western government resign.

  2. cobo says:

    ““We have repeatedly warned the US about the consequences that may follow if the US continues to flood Ukraine with weapons,” Ryabkov said.” I’m waiting for them to back this up. Let’s see, two sanctioned countries operating a military/industrial operation against NATO and other Western allied powers. And some of those allied powers are ready to initiate action, now.

    • morongobill says:

      Wow! I’m sure the Russian MOD is quaking in their boots.
      We are not dealing with grandpa’s Nato, you know.

      Oh well, if the boys(and girls) wanna fight, you’d better let ’em.

      • cobo says:


        I’m currently studying the run up to WWI. I think that it is instructive about the present time, and I see WWII as an outgrowth. So many of the key players and ideologies are at work, today. And the war saw action and change, everywhere. Some of the edgier works lay out dark agendas that were in play. There might have even been a “magical” element at play – or did Gavrilo Princip just get lucky. The reason I suggest extremely aggressive war is that I believe that it is coming, anyway.

  3. Klapper says:

    The Ukrainians don’t have months to show results on the Kherson or any other front. Europe is entering an energy crisis right now and today’s example of the Czech citizens pushing back against their pro-western government is going to spread I think.

    • Serge says:

      There is a front page article on the bbc today titled “As UK counts pennies, we count casualties – Olena Zelenska” with Ms. Zelensky looking smug in a 7000$ Hillary Clinton pantsuit. Whoever was in charge of these optics needs to be fired. I agree that time is running out.

      • TTG says:


        A $7,000 pantsuit? What makes that a $7,000 pantsuit? Do you work for the House of Prada, Serge? Although I do admit it’s a far cry from her husband’s olive drab T-shirts.

        • Serge says:

          Admittedly i just googled “hillary clinton pantsuit price” and averaged out the figures given of 1500, 5000, 7500, and 12k for the respective suits that she wore on compaign. Unless this is an another instance of Zelensky wearing homegrown Ukrainian clothing lines as she did on her US visit, and it doesnt look like it is, I’m sure i’m not too far off.

          • TTG says:


            Fair enough, but I don’t see why she wouldn’t wear Ukrainian fashions even though he husband is plenty rich from his previous career.

          • Pat Lang says:

            OK. I am going to try again. IMO a UA campaign plan to attack all along a broad front is foolish (if that IS their plan). The RU army was not very skilled to begin with and has lost many units damaged beyond what they seem to want to reinforce. This is typically Russian as it was of the Soviet Army. They build disposable units. Now they are creating these “volunteer’ battalions for the same purpose. These will be committed to battle with a couple of weeks familiarization in arms and will be killed by the UA in droves, but every one of them will do some damage to the UA, its manpower base and equipment stocks. In addition to these the UA is facing a variety of mercenary forces which will contribute to the attrition. No. Bloodless war is a fable which civilians always hope for. Ukraine should seek a decisive battle which breaks Russian will to continue.

          • Fred says:


            That certainly seems like the only way for the Ukrainians to win this.

    • borko says:


      yes, things are becoming more difficult as the winter approaches. Especially when politicians start saying stupid things.
      Annalena Baerbock, Germany’s foreign minister said the other day that she wants to deliver to the people of Ukraine no matter what her German voters think.

  4. Bill Roche says:

    Common sense and arithmetic says the UM will run out of men b/f the Russians. Yet Col. Lang points out the rooskies are already maxed out. I believe that means maxed out without full mobilization of their pop. i.e. they have not gone to a universal draft. Do I have this right?
    You mentioned the UAF is flying sorties “again”. Have they received any aircraft from Poland and or Slovakia? On a connected note, you opined that in the future there might be a North Eastern European military alliance. Not NATO, but Slaves Finns and Balts. Do you still think this possible. I don’t have much hope in continued help from west European NATO and Putin’s gas card is big. Destroyed economies as well as public pressure to “turn the heat on” will quickly erode support for Ukraine. I predict it will be gone by the end of November. Ukraine will have to hold the Russians off through April. In your opinion, can they? tnx

    • TTG says:

      Bill Roche,

      Yes, the Russians have the numbers, but they don’t have a working mobilization system anymore. These volunteer battalions they’re raising are given two weeks of training before being shipped to the front. And their method of forming new units rather than fleshing out the worn out, but battle tested, units is nuts.

      The UAF has never stopped flying, but the combat sorties on the Kherson front have increased with both HIMARS and HARM taking out Russian air defense equipment.

      I do think the frontier countries of Eastern Europe will come together in a formal military alliance. It won’t replace NATO, but it will pose interesting questions to the NATO countries of Western Europe.

      I also have a lot more faith in Europe’s ability to weather through this winter than many others have. A month ago, gas reserves for this winter were at 80% capacity. The search for alternative energy sources has been remarkably successful. All those Kachelofen I saw in houses in southern Germany will be put to use this winter. Lithuania has moved away from gas/oil heat to community wood fired hot water heating and have managed to lower CO2 emissions in the process. These are high efficiency furnaces that are renewable with the vast forests in Lithuania. Heat in Europe won’t be a problem, but energy for European industry may very well face shortages.

      • Peter Hug says:

        Once things truly freeze, I expect the Ukrainians will be able to operate more effectively than the Russians.

        Also, gas is likely to be tight but not catastrophically short in Europe this winter. You’re right that this will probably create issues with industry (which will in turn make my life difficult, as many of the raw materials I use are derived from natural gas in the end and manufactured in Europe), but as far as homes and office spaces go, they should be find if they lower their thermostats a bit (and I routinely set mine at 45F night/50F day, and I’ve survived).

        I think they will get through the winter just fine, and furthermore I think that this push is just what they need to get truly serious about going to PV and wind quickly, which will completely remove Russia’s ability to use gas as a blackmail weapon.

        • Klapper says:

          Without economic electrical storage PV and wind will not replace gas fired baseload. The Germans are well advanced in developing intermittent energy sources. They also have the highest electricity costs of the EU.

          • Peter Hug says:

            Work is being done to solve that problem, as you may imagine. I think it’s pretty close to being not such a big deal. (Improving the grid goes a long way to help as well.)


          • Fred says:


            So close that nobody needs to burn firewood in Germany this year? How many of those “so close” storage units are in production and what is the cost per storage unit? Oh, wait, that’s in Findland, so zero.

            “Low-cost electricity warms the sand up to 500C by resistive heating (the same process that makes electric fires work).”

            Ha ha ha ha the reporter doesn’t know what “resistance heating” really means. That’s about the worst energy utilization there is for heat. These people are grifters. None of this crap works ‘economically’ without artificial pricing through tariffs and further subsidies directly from the government.

          • Peter Hug says:

            One salient factor about sand is that it’s pretty damn cheap. The defining characteristic of this approach is that it uses really cheap and commonly available raw materials (sand, a well-insulated silo, and a tube snaking through the sand, optionally containing a heat-transfer fluid) and is trivially easy to build. I don’t know if this is the approach that wins, but it’s now commercially available. And if this doesn’t work, there are a ton of other approaches being worked on, some of which I’m involved with.

            They will get through this winter, although they might get a bit chilly at times, and by next fall I predict that a viable solution will be fully in place and Russian gas won’t be needed in Europe except perhaps as a chemical feedstock (which is the only rational reason to use a fossil fuel of any sort at this point anyway).

          • Fred says:


            “… there are a ton of other approaches being worked on, some of which I’m involved with.”

            I see years of work ahead for you, and your children too, as none of this need be economical because of “climate change.” Until the politicians run out of other people’s money.

        • Fourth and Long says:

          The energy panic in Your Rope a Doperannia isn’t Arnold D. C. Eption’s work again, fooling E. Bill Rooster as of olde?

        • blue peacock says:

          “…get truly serious about going to PV and wind quickly…”

          Neither PV nor wind can provide baseload. The duck curve problem. The only choice is really nuclear. There should be terawatts of nuclear power generators under construction. But the woke don’t want nuclear nor fossil fuel but want to electrify everything.

          California is a good example. Shutting down nuclear – a few gigawatts, buying dirty power from other states as they don’t have enough generation and then wanting to electrify everything. It boggles – this woke mindset on energy policy.

          The US is constructing 2 nuclear power plants the same as BanglaDesh. No kidding!!

          Let’s face it our politicians and those in government tasked with energy policy are just not serious. They are all about PR and nothing else.

          • Klapper says:

            Blue Peacock:

            I would add that fission reactors are not a great match for wind and solar due to the issue of xenon poisoning which is inherent to the process due to the different half lives of neutron emitters vs absorbers. A nuclear reactor runs best steady state,and fuel costs are a relatively small so if a reactor operator loses a power bid to an intermittent energy producer they will keep the reactor running and bypass steam to the cooling towers. Sounds wasteful but they can’t shut the reactor down and send people home easily.

            The upshot is that with nuclear as your baseload intermittent energy development (wind and solar) is a waste of land and money.

      • “Lithuania has moved away from gas/oil heat to community wood fired hot water heating
        and have managed to lower CO2 emissions in the process.”

        Do you have a reliable source for that?
        Take a look at:

        When burned, trees generate more CO2 emissions per unit of energy generated than fossil fuels.
        An oft overlooked fact is that burning wood emits more CO2 than fossil fuels per megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity generated or per unit of heat generated.

        • TTG says:

          Keith Harbaugh,

          Here’s a quick overview of the biomass transition in Lithuania.

          This world bioenergy seminar is more than year old, but the first ten minutes includes a presentation about the Lithuanian bioenergy situation at that time. I haven’t yet watched the rest of the webinar.

          These systems are far more sophisticated that simple wood burning stoves. My brother has a wood burning water heater in his large, self-built post and beam house up in New Hampshire’s White Mountains. He and his family stays toasty warm all winter… and that’s a long winter up there. He goes through less than a cord of wood each year. The newer systems such as the ones now used in Lithuania are far more efficient. I was surprised by the 70% decrease in CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, but I’ve seen that in other sources as well. Fred and I had a discussion on this a few months ago. I found more technically detailed sources back then that said the same thing.

          • Thanks for the info.
            BTW, here is something you might find worth trying:
            big bad baptist double barrel 🙂
            Do they stock such down in Fredericksburg?
            It just showed up in Arlington.

          • TTG says:

            Keith Harbaugh,

            Haven’t seen that here. Of course, I haven’t looked for it either. It might be in our local Wegmans. I do enjoy an occasional Irish Prenup at our local brew pub, Barley Naked Brewery. The brewery closest to my Richmond son, Triple Crossing Brewery, has some fine barrel aged brews. There ‘s one that comes in a smaller wine glass, but I can’t remember the name. It’s what I would call a sipping beer and is extraordinarily good and unique. My son just told me yesterday that they’re now selling some of their old oak barrels for $50 each.

          • Sam says:

            Burning wood still supplies more than five times the amount of global energy than do all the world’s solar panels. 🤣

            – BP, Statistical Review of World Energy 2022; World Bioenergy Association, “Global Bioenergy Statistics,” 2020.

            Read an unreal stat from the Manhattan Institute: over the last 20 years the cumulative subsidies across the world for biofuels, wind and solar have been nearly $5 trillion and they supply today 5% of global energy


            The “greens” dismiss all the environmental impacts of the toxic materials used in solar panels that go into landfills after the useful life of the panels and of course same with wind turbines.

            If they want non-carbon electricity and heat the only real solution is nuclear. Of course the big advantage is that it provides base load. The US Navy has demonstrated that nuclear propulsion can be used extensively and safely. 40+% of electricity generation in France comes from nuclear. Shift the subsidy from solar, wind and battery chemistry to nuclear and allow exploitation of our natural gas resources and we’ll see a dramatic change in our energy landscape.

          • TTG says:


            It’s not just solar panels that that have a toxic price. Batteries are also pretty bad. They’ll both get better over time, just like the use of biofuels did. The newer catalytic stoves, furnaces and boilers are a far cry from open fires and the old stoves.

            The same with nuclear power. Biden just recently pimped out the small modular reactors. I hope they catch on.

        • different clue says:

          The happy hope about burning dried-out plantmass for energy is that the CO2 emitted is not “new net” CO2 from deep underground, but is rather CO2 the growing plants pulled down out of the air to begin with. And when it is burned, the carbon just goes back into the same atmosphere which the growing plants pulled it down from to begin with. Its the Carbon Cycle of Life . . . as Disney might put it.

          Is it really true? It could be true if the energy authorities or businesses are pulling as much carbon back down out of the air with plants scheduled for future burning as they are releasing into the air through burning each year’s harvest of plant fuel material.

          If one harvests and burns all the plant fuel off an area of fuel-plant grow-land, how many years would it take for the next generation of fuel plants on that same area to be big enough to harvest for the same amount of energy yield? However many years it would take, that’s how many fuel-plant areas one would need for rotational growing and harvesting, rotating from one area to the next to the next until one comes back around to the first one which has grown the next generation of fuel plant-mass to harvestable size. If the Lithuanian tree-for-fuel land is being managed on that sustainable basis then it can work. If they are burning more from an area in a year than can be recaptured in tree growth on the other areas in that same year, then they are just slow-motion strip-mining the forest in question, and it will eventually run out.

          In my amateur science buff opinion.

          • TTG says:

            different clue,

            You’re talking about the line that burning biomass is carbon neutral. That’s a marketing line. Burning biomass releases CO2. There’s no way around that fact. But Lithuania found that heating with biomass (mostly district heating) produced a 70% drop in CO2 released from heating with gas. Biomass is also a lot cheaper than gas. As I told Fred, Lithuania is not going to sacrifice her forests for fuel. The process is well managed. They produce enough to export wood pellets. Not every country can do this.

          • different clue says:

            “Burning biomass is carbon-neutral” can be used as a marketing line. But it can also be literally correct in physical reality.

            The carbon released back into the air by burning plants was pulled out of the air by those same plants as they grew to burnable size. So burning plants can be carbon neutral if you are only burning as much plantmass per year as can be grown in the same year for burning next year. If you are not doing that, then your plantmass-burning is not carbon neutral. And claiming carbon-neutrality for it becomes a mere marketing line.

            The EU shows how “carbon neutral plant mass burning” is degraded into a mere marketing line which falsifies the actual reality on the ground. The EU ships wood pellets from the strip harvested forests of America to the furnaces of Europe many times faster than those forests can be regrown. That is not carbon neutral and is falsely described as carbon neutral by the EU as a mere marketing line.

            It is actually as carbon non-neutral as the strip-mining of all the cod out of the sea off Newfoundland was fish non-neutral. And will end the same way for the mixed species forests of Appalachia unless it is forcibly stopped before the last tree has been pelletised and shipped to EUrope.

          • different clue says:

            Here is an article about a situation in which “carbon neutral” is indeed just a marketing line and in this situation, a false one. It is titled . . .
            “Europe is sacrificing its ancient forests for energy”. I read recently that the relict ancient forests of Estonia are included in this general burndown. One hopes that any ancient forests left in Lithuania are not involved in this wood-pellet strip mining activity as well.

            Here is the link.

      • Fred says:


        “lower CO2 emissions” Have they killed off all their cattle and declared any pets non-essential yet? Did they ground private jets and racing cars for entertainment? Just kidding, that’s not the CO2 curtailment that gets a company a big tax break and IMF funding.

        “… vast forests in Lithuania.” So they are gonna kill trees by the tens of thousands and transport them to the biomass plants and fireplaces with what, wood fired steam engines? And what about all that soot coming out of the smokestack:

        Can’t do clean coal like was proposed (but forbidden) with ‘clean coal’ for some unknown reason, like politics. That Lithuaniam biomass plant is a nice feel good project that burns ‘municipal waste’.

        Nothing is mentioned about cost, just feel good fluff. As I pointed out before, ask the people in Gainesville FL how that biomass project that GRU built is working out for them. Hint, highest energy bills in the state.

        “…but energy for European industry may very well face shortages.”
        That’s going to be more destructive to national security in most of Europe than anything the vaunted RU SMO achieves this winter.

        • TTG says:


          Lithuania lowered CO2 emissions by 70% by switching from oil and gas to biomass and extremely efficient boilers. The key is the efficiency of the boilers. Biomass is mostly wood waste from the lumber industry and other industries. Lithuania even exports biomass fuel in the form of wood pellets. They are not going to denude their beloved forests. This move from oil/gas also lowered energy prices for Lithuanian homeowners by quite a bit. The switch to biomass reduced heating prices up to three times less from gas heat.

          • Fred says:


            Do you have a link to the technical details of the “extremely efficient boilers”? How about one for the regulatory structure pricing that winter heating? Is that a central steam plant that supplies steam to the homeowner? (Not too many places in the US still do that.) If so what makes you think the actual costs previously had anything to do with the actual costs of burning wood pellets in a new power plant that is amortized over “x” years? I am happy the government “lowered” costs to homeowners. The obvious question is why did they not do this decades ago as all that oil/gas is imported.

          • TTG says:


            I have no technical details on those boilers, but they’re akin to modern catalytic wood or pellet stoves that burn the wood gases rather than sending them out the flue. District heating is used throughout Lithuania, much like Iceland. It is hot water heating rather than steam heating. This is used throughout cities and even in small towns. They started switching to biomass from gas back in the 90s, not long after regaining their independence. They certainly didn’t have an opportunity to due this sooner under Soviet occupation. They now get zero energy from Russia.

          • Bill Roche says:

            TTG pardon my ignorance but is the use of biomass heating done in individual homes/apts or is it done centrally. If so, how is the heat (hot water?) moved about the town? You don’t need to heat in summer so biomass can be gathered and stored. I wonder, have the Lithuanians experimented with the addition of coal to the biomass furnace? Finally what is the average temp (farenheit pls) of a Lithuanian winter. Do they profit from the Atlantic current? So should Mainiacs but a cold day in Bangor is still a cold day. What was the old old reference “back to the future…”

          • TTG says:

            Bill Roche,

            Lithuania makes wide use of centralized district heating pumping hot water to houses and larger buildings (apartment complexes and factories). Iceland is the same way, but they probably use a lot of geothermal energy. It’s basically hot water heating. I grew up in a big 1840 poorly insulated house in Connecticut with hot water heating. I know how well it works. Average winter temperatures in Lithuania are a little below freezing with lots of snow. It’s similar to Toronto and maybe Moscow. I’ve seen nothing about mixing coal in with the biomass fuel.

          • Fred says:


            I’m not asking for personal expertise, but something besides a line from a puff piece from the Lithuanian goverment running this thing. The “biomass” plant boils water to make steam which is piped around town. There’s nothing particularly ‘efficient’ about any of it and in addition they need to maintain all the piping, steam traps, valve seals and insulate it all as well as treat all the water in the system. It is funcitional for large buildings (which is where it is used here) not single family homes. There’s a reason the West shifted to natural gas and government regulations on CO2 and ‘climate change’ are not it.

          • TTG says:


            These systems are sustainable, cheaper and produce less CO2 than gas fired systems. Why is that not efficient? I found a link to a British firm that installs and maintains these systems with a little more detail on the boilers and some case studies of their projects. There’s another short piece on Lithuania’s transition and a longer study of Lithuania’s biomass industry.




            Didn’t read every bit of those yet, but I did see an interesting figure that 70% of Lithuanian homes are not connected to any district heating system and are heated with wood. Don’t know if that’s wood stoves, individual wood boilers like my brother or what’s called Swedish stoves, Russian stoves or Kochelofen. Hopefully it’s better than the way my great grandmother lived in a thatched roof log cabin with a dirt floor. The cabin had a central open fire and no chimney. The smoke helped keep the insects down in the thatch. It was also used to smoke meat hanging high in the rafters. There was a stork nest on the roof peak.

          • JamesT says:


            I lived in Warsaw for a year and I would assume it is about as cold as Vilnius. Both Warsaw and Moscow are significantly colder than Toronto – about as cold as Ottawa. Toronto (where I live now) is much warmer than Ottawa (where I grew up) because we are sitting right on Lake Ontario.

          • Fred says:


            Sustainable! Like whale oil, unless one year you kill too many of them to get oil for lighting.

            Sustainable, because “Established around 15 years ago, Treco has grown to be one of the UK’s leading multi-technology provider of low carbon technologies. ” some company in the UK that built an ASTOUNDING 700 units says so.

            “ensure sustainable forest management ”
            Forest management, not energy efficiency or cost efficiency either, says the study abstract that you didn’t read.

            “as biomass is increasingly under scrutiny for its actual climate impact.”
            UNDER SCRUTINY because of ACTUAL climate impact.
            ““Upgrade DH” project funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program.”

            Lithuania changed from Soviet central planning to the EU Central planning. So much for independence. Good thing you didn’t read your own sources. Better thing that your ancestors left Lithuanian and came here where you do not have to heat your house in the winter with a wood fireplace like Daniel Boone.

          • TTG says:


            Biomass in Lithuania has been a success story. It works well with their energy, forest management, economic and political goals. I don’t know why you have a problem with that.

          • Klapper says:


            Re: Lithuania wood miracle

            Have you done the math on this? Lithuania has a sustainable wood harvest of 3.15 M cu. m. of wood according to a USDA report from 2017. Say 3.2 million metric tonnes, at 19 GJ/tonne 62 million GJ, converted to electricity at 35% thats 5.2 billion KWh, or 1,862 KWh per capita. That’s only 50% of the current per capita electricity consumption.

            Think you have 70% efficiency if used for heating? The total energy consumption per capita in Lithuania from OurWorldinData for 2021 is 26,000 kWh per capita. Even at 70% efficiency sustainable wood would only supply 16.7% of their per capita energy use (leaving of course no wood for furniture exports etc.).

            The whole idea that a modern society can run on wood is untenable, but pretty typical of the delusional thinking that propels the renewable energy industry.

          • TTG says:


            Lithuania’s biomass fuel comes largely from waste from the lumber industries. They also cultivate fast growing willow specifically for biomass fuel. This is sustainable enough to export wood pellet fuel. This biomass technology is used almost exclusively for heating and hot water. It fully replaced the gas from Russia for this purpose. They still use imported gas from their LNG terminal and pipeline from Sweden.

            The entire world can’t run on wood. It can’t all run on geothermal and hydro like Iceland. Even Lithuania can’t run totally on wood for her energy needs, but wood has allowed her to become totally independent on any energy inputs from Russia very quickly. I get the feeling that’s what bothers you and maybe even Fred so much.

          • Klapper says:


            This conversation has moved beyond Russia and even Lithuania. It’s about the delusional thinking in the west about energy and the transistion from fossil fuels. Your retort is absent of any hard numbers. Start with telling me how many metric tonnes of “fast growing willows” does Lithuania produce every year. Do the math on what percentage this represents of Lithuanian energy consumption.

            Also I gave you the gross energy value of wood production. How of this gross energy is cancelled out by the conversion to net energy (subtract the fuel and electricity used to harvest, transport and pelletize all this wood).

            Realism sets in pretty fast from even back of the envelope calculations on renewable energy.

          • TTG says:


            I have no intention of doing the research and heavy ciphering to satisfy your curiosity. If you are interested, this site offers access to a lot scientific papers on the subject, but it may cost for access or you need some kind of institutional access.


          • Fred says:


            I am full of praise for Lithuanians and their use of biomass – for heating. All glory to the decendants of your ancestors. I will stop asking why they STOPPED using biomass plants to begin with. Thank you for pointing out to commenter “Klapper” that it won’t work everywhere, which is certainly something I knew to begin with.

            They are free of Russian gas? More glory to them. Drill baby Drill and we’ll be free of Venezuelan and Saudi gas.

          • TTG says:


            I think we agree this is not an answer for everyone and everyplace. Prior to regaining their independence, Lithuania did not use biomass plants. They relied on Russian gas and oil and, most importantly, the Ignalina NPP. Lithuania was required to shut down those two reactors as a condition of accession to the EU. They were dirty, prone to problems and without containment vessels. Still they were a major source of energy. They were shut down in 2004 and 2009. The move to biomass was made to deal with the loss of Ignalina. As I told you earlier, wood has always been a major energy source in rural Lithuania and it remains so today. I don’t know if they use some kind of Kochelofen. Those ancient systems are effective even in the deep Siberian north. Maybe they use modern catalytic stoves, but I’m pretty sure they moved beyond the open fires and thatched roof.

          • Fred says:


            The two power plants you mention did not generate steam heating but electricity. The biomass plant we discussed had zero to do with electricity generation. It does not take 3 decades to build an electric powerplant regardless of the fuel source. The Lithunanians, all 3 million of them, got ‘poorly served’ by their leadership who bought into the EU/WB/IMF promises. At least they aren’t getting screwed by Russians.

          • TTG says:


            This isn’t one biomass plant we’re talking about. They’re not even regional. In many areas they’re community based and in the larger cities there are many of these smaller plants. There’s only a handful (13) biomass boilers used to generate electricity, actually both electricity and thermal power. “The total electricity and thermal power installed in these power plants is 62 MW and 153 MW respectively.”

            There are 100 hydroelectric plants in that small country supplying a quarter of the electric power. Small amounts are from wind turbines and an even smaller amount from solar. Those sources account for 30% of Lithuania’s electrical needs. Some 70% of electricity comes from Sweden and Poland through undersea and overland transmission lines. Since that’s an expensive way to get electricity, the many biomass boiler plants providing heating needs goes a long way in reducing Lithuania’s energy costs. Biomass heating accounts for close to a quarter of the country’s energy needs. Gas is now imported from the US and Norway through the LNG terminal at Klaipėda. That LNG terminal supplies gas for the other Baltic countries and also some to Poland. I don’t know if they plan to use gas fired electric power plants in the future. Nor do I know if that would be cheaper than importing electricity directly from Sweden and Poland.

            They could have rebuilt NPPs at Ignalina with newer technology, but that whole process probably would have taken close to three decades to complete and more money than Lithuania had to spend on such a project.

  5. Burt says:

    I’m skeptical that Ukrainian MiG-29s can employ HARM missiles unless it’s a suicide mission.

    • TTG says:


      They’ve managed to integrate the HARM missiles into the MiG-29 avionics and have used them successfully. I’m sure they got USAF help in doing that integration.

    • Leith says:

      Burt –

      Seems like the Ukrainian Air Force technicians have a MacGyver or two. Macgyverko? Macgyversky?

    • TTG says:


      Raytheon has performed the maintenance on our Top Gun fleet of MiG-29s for years. They know then inside and out. They developed the package to integrate their HARM missiles into the MiG-29 avionics and provided the UAF with the necessary modules and screens to do so.

  6. John Merryman says:

    As someone who tries to read all sides of this, to try to peer through the fog of war, one of the points commentators on the other side have been making is that given how much the Western political establishment has invested in this war, if the Ukrainian side was even being marginally successful in what is their largest offensive effort of the war, the Western press would be spinning every ounce of success, but when I read the front pages of the Washington Post, New York Times and the Guardian, there is hardly a mention. A story or two on the nuclear plant is about it. The raid on Mar A Lago and the drinking water issue in Jackson Mississippi are ranking far above it.
    I was predicting a few months ago, that by next year, Ukraine would be memory holed to the level of Afghanistan. Instead it barely made it to the end of the summer.
    Life’s a bitch, when you are the tethered goat.

    • TTG says:

      John Merryman,

      That’s because the Ukrainian MOD has employed some damned good OPSEC measures.

      • John Merryman says:

        That’s been commented on as well, that they have cut off all reporters from the scene, unlike most times in the past, when they have been all too happy to have their side covered.
        As I’ve said before, I don’t have a strategic interest in either side. As I see it, humanity is in an interregnum between recognizing government works best as a public utility and realizing the same principle will eventually apply to banking. Meanwhile it has given banking the upper hand, as they are not subject to nearly as much oversight and don’t have to plan around election cycles. Consequently financial interests have hollowed out the decision making functions of government, leaving a bunch of flunkies, prostitutes and sociopaths filling the roles, whose only real purpose is to create all that government debt the banks need to function.
        The problem is that it can only grow, like a metastatic cancer, because it’s the role of government to make the decisions. So it’s just a matter of clocking the rate of rot, until the whole Tower of Babel implodes. Thus my interest in the Empire’s style of war making, substituting propaganda for strategic aptitude.
        Mission Accomplished.

      • John Merryman says:

        Also whether there is reporting from the front is irrelevant to the issue of the major media ignoring it, to the degree they are. If there was even a fleeting sense of success, or even some degree of stalemate, there would be more coverage. The fact that at the time Ukraine should be needing the most cheerleading, the silence is ominous. My sense is they just don’t want to walk out on a branch they hear cracking, given how poor their ratings have become.
        It does seem Ukraine is pouring in everything they have, their military leadership is not happy, but the political leadership doesn’t have a choice.
        It does seem the picture will be a lot clearer, as to whether this was folly, or not, by the time winter sets in.

        • TTG says:

          John Merryman,

          Zelenskiy doesn’t need cheerleading any more than he needed a ride last winter. He needs the equipment and ammo necessary to keep fighting. As long as that keeps flowing, TV ratings won’t matter.

          • John Merryman says:

            It looks more complicated than that, but time will tell.

          • AngusinCanada says:

            The Ukrainian and western press (and this blog) trumpeted the “Kherson counter offensive” before it even happened (it that’s even the right word). It is preposterous to suggest that Ukraine is now master of opsec and that’s why we haven’t been bombarded with fantastical stories of some great martial success. Yikes.

        • Eliot says:


          “If there was even a fleeting sense of success, or even some degree of stalemate, there would be more coverage.”


          The war the over for them, but it will take a while for it to grind to its inevitable conclusion.

          The human cost for them has been horrific. More than 100k casualties. It will only get worse.

          – Eliot

          • John Merryman says:

            And given there are a lot of Ukrainian refugees throughout Europe, many of whom have access to serious weaponry and the likely resentment of being used as bait, does not seem like the blowback will be just forgotten about.
            Yes, the Russians will have their partisan conflicts, but it’s likely going to be on the other side as well.
            I give NATO and the EU two more years, tops.

      • Christian Chuba says:


        Ukraine was more than happy to announce the start of this offensive weeks in advance and even allow CNN reporters access to the front lines for the first couple of days.

        The fact that they now ban outside media access speaks volumes of their current situation and it ain’t good.

        • Fred says:


          He’s just following the example of Odysseus’ wife Penelope and weaving a tale today, and unraveling it tonight, so as to weave another tomorrow. So are the cheerleaders of the press.

        • Bill Roche says:

          CC I disagree. You use propaganda when it serves you and you don’t when it doesn’t. Nothing strange about that.

        • Leith says:

          CC –

          The announcement several weeks ago, by Zelensky, was to lure more RU troops across the Dnieper River. Ergo putting more potential Russian POWs or KIA in the pocket. Kinda like the old saying “shooting ducks in a barrel”.

    • ked says:

      Americans are far more entertained y domestic theater than foreign flicks. As long as our kids aren’t being killed in significant numbers and our MIC is fully committed, don’t expect a March on Washington for abandoning a people yearning to be free… esp from the Russkies.

      • John Merryman says:

        It’s not like there isn’t a history here, going back to the Vietnam War. It’s like the politicians think they get a do over, whenever things go wrong, but it does take its toll on the deeper relationships.
        Think in terms of an injury to the skin and how some will heal and some will scab off.
        We are reaching a stage where the separation between the surface and the underlaying vitality is becoming more pronounced.
        That’s the problem with making it all about appearances and thinking you are actually fooling people. On the surface, people can be pretty clueless, but when it’s hundreds of millions of people, the deeper processes can’t be ignored forever. We might ignore them, but they don’t ignore us.

        • ked says:

          that’s all very well & good… & takes place inside the USA as far as it goes.
          what’s happening in Ukraine has its own deeper process. a momentum of their history, their time, their place. we’re participants, but it’s their show. maybe it’s just a minor shift in our habitual exceptionalism … but I like it.

  7. jim ticehurst.. says:

    I Like to look Down Range more that 100 Yards… I like to Analyze current Events
    long Range…With a Broad Field of View…That Four Point in Utah…coming over a Ridge..
    Not The Spike I First Saw..
    Its Good to Trust Your Instict..Its Good to Be As Well read as Possible..Its Good To Know History….There are excellent Posters here…BA..

    First..I Look at The Players..Do Backgrounds..Get Data.. I have compared Current Events Globally and Here In the News…To Bible Data..I read early “The Late Great Planet Earth..” Hal Lindsey..I helped me Understand Current Events With Better Insight..bnecause It Has Russia,,China,,The Middle East
    the Creation of a OWG..and how..its a valuable tool..was for Me..

    To Get to My Point..and What Bill Roache said…WW2..started One WAY..Changed Weekly..Ended Different..

    The Queen of England is Not Well..Prince Charles Visits her Daily..What happens
    to NATO..The EU and Ukraine..When HE is King..Possibly soon..??

    • Fred says:


      Maybe the Prince of the realm will get his government to focus on defending their own citizens, starting in Rotherham, rather than focusing on foreign lands.

    • jim ticehurst.. says:

      And So It Was…As I Suspected..The SIGNS were There..And Charles Is King

      There are Growing Concerns..Over Economys..Collapses. Cyber Attacks.
      Lights Out,,High Prices..Transportation Issues..Labor Strikes..Revolts..

      Foreign Reactions. Globally..A Strong Focus ON Energy Controls..Iran is in Play..Winter Is Coming..After Oktober…Wide Screen..Down Range

  8. jim ticehurst.. says:

    Also..What Happens When Pope Francis Dies or Leaves..possible Another Imminent Event…And the New Pope is Strict..Becomes A Powerful force on the World Stage with The Vatican…and Is Not Happy With Catholics Of Influence…Like Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi..?? Worrld Changing..

  9. mcohen says:

    Just fixing positions for November.low visibility.cold.dnieper freezes which will be time for wack a tookie

  10. Lars says:

    There are now European reports that those enhanced paychecks for Russian soldiers are not delivered. I am sure that will not improve morale that appears to be on the down slope. I am a firm believer in tipping points and I suspect the Russian military is heading for one. The idea that EU won’t be able to handle any adverse results from this war is dubious. Just take a look at the size of the EU – and US – economies vs. the Russian one and you will see why.

    • John Merryman says:

      As has been pointed out over on zero hedge, the German economy is $2 trillion of added value dependent on $20 billion of Russian gas. No input, no output.
      So what are they doing now? Buying Russian gas from the Chinese, who are their main added value rivals.
      I realize most people like their arguments to be simple black and white, but the facts on the ground are quite a bit more complicated.
      Positive feedback can switch over to negative feedback rather viciously.

  11. borko says:


    isn’t the tactics you are describing very similar to what the Russians are saying to be doing ?

    They are keeping a constant pressure, probing for weak spots, reinforcing success and trying to preserve their manpower by heavy use of artillery. And at the same time they are reducing Ukrainian supplies of ammo and equipment by constant strikes. And the process is taking months. They still haven’t blown all the bridges across the Dniepr but eventually it could come to that.

    Overall the two strategies seem similar, only on a different scale.

    • TTG says:


      Glad you noticed that. After the Russian failure at Kyiv, they returned to what they know best. They employed massive artillery barrages that eventually destroyed everything in its path be it towns, cities, prepared defenses and, most importantly Ukrainian troops. They then followed up with repeated assaults against those destroyed defenses and depleted defenders until the objective was taken. It was classic attrition warfare. It was a tactic that the Ukrainians could ill afford to participate in for any length of time.

      It worked for Russia because they had the artillery and certainly had the ammunition. They also had very short supply lines. Ukraine did not have sufficient artillery to effectively interdict those supply lines and destroy ammo storage points. Still, Russia didn’t gain that much territory. They advanced only a few miles in three months of these attrition tactics and they paid a huge price in men and cannon barrels for those few miles.

      • John Merryman says:

        Yet doesn’t that go to the strategy the Russians announced from the beginning, to defend the Donbass and demilitarize Ukraine?
        As Catherine the Great said many years ago, the only way she could stabilize the borders was to expand them.
        It seems there is far too much attention to current desires and fads and far too little to larger, deeper and older dynamics.
        One of which is just how fractious Europe naturally is, compared to Russia. Yes, Russians play rough, but Europeans all on the same team seems like the real joke.

  12. Pat Lang says:

    IMO a war of attrition against a much bigger and more numerous opponent like Russia is a really bad idea.

    • jld says:

      Yes, Bhadrakumar who is usually clear headed does not see any Ukr advantage.

    • John Merryman says:

      Logistics is to strategy, what economics is to politics. The gut versus the head. The head might say something like, we are going on a diet, but it’s the gut that feeds the brain, so there are limits.

    • Bill Roche says:

      Right, it’s dumb for Ukraine to choose a war of attrition w/Russia. So a significant battle’s necessary to break the opponents smug demeanor, give hope to the home folks, and demonstrate to America/Europeans that Ukraine is still ass deep in this war. This s/b done b/f Ukraine goes deep freeze. When, October? Where, the Donbass or Crimea? Crimea won’t freeze in Winter. The attrition clock can tick a longer there but it does not stop ticking. If the direction is Crimea remember the RM is loading it up w/heavy stuff. Who knows the answer?

  13. Tidewater says:


    For more than a week I have been watching events unfold at “the bridgehead”, the place on the Ingulets river where the Ukrainians managed to cross on three pontoon bridges and took the oft-contested Andriivka. They then pushed toward Sukhoi Stavok, creating a deep (twenty miles?), narrow salient across steppe land which was so odd-looking on the map that it has since become known as ‘the Rybar map.’ It looked extremely risky, and it seems, tragically, that it was. Russian air and artillery began to savage this force, and the advance stopped at Sukhoi-Savok with what have been described as shockingly heavy casualties. This must have been where the entire ‘Transcarpathian’ was destroyed. As of September 2, it looked as if a ‘ cauldron’ was forming. Then, surprisingly, the Ukrainians came across the river again, using a pontoon bridge that had been left in place by the Russian force that had crossed the river in pursuit after it appeared that the Ukrainian forces were being broken up in the pocket. Ukraine has since been pouring even more troops into the bridgehead in the last few days, managed to retake Blagodativka, and then –around September 3– unblocked the salient. Apparently, there has now been such a commitment of men and materiel into the Andriivka bridgehead and salient that it looks to me as if this might become one of the most important battles of the war.

    Then, today (Sept. 4) I see a Twitter report that the salient is supposedly again blocked.

    My suspicion is that it looks like it might just be turning into a complete Ukrainian disaster with the loss of thousands of troops.

    Am I wrong about this?

  14. Jovan P says:

    ,,Common sense and arithmetic says the UM will run out of men b/f the Russians.”

    I agree with Bill. The Ukranians have gained some initiative, but they are losing far too much men and equipment (equipment more or less). It’s a question whether the Russians have problems of their own or are they deliberately baiting Ukranian troops like they did at Kharkhov (less likely), or both.

  15. jim ticehurst.. says:

    Colonel..I Agree with your Analysis..Logical..Also The One Above You Posted
    People can Talk Strategics ..But To Your Point..Months of Attrition have Taken a Hugh Toll..

    Yes..On Many Levels..There is Chatter here about All That..Mostly on a Man/Material Level..Oh..Wait Till Winter..Etc..Upthread You made
    Expierenced Analysis…Worthy of a REREAD..It was Dated here;
    Posted Sept 4, 5:46..”ALL..I am going to try Again”..

    How many Here Are Colonels. With Your Experience..Been to and Taught at The War College..? Had Your Life Experiences in Combat..? Your Comments Are Worthy of Digesting..And Thinking Over…Period..

    Also…”Attrition” Yes… Damage is all INSIDE Ukraine..NOT Russia..Its All That damage to the Infrastructure..Housing..Water..Heat..Electricity.. And The Suffering of The CIVILIANS…Women..children..Babys..Homeless..What about THAT Attrition..

    Yes…Winter..For The Grim Reaper..Not Russian Tanks..

  16. Worth Pointing Out says:

    Latest reports out of Ukraine state that the Russians have started to deploy the newly-arrived 3rd Army Corp.

    That force is being deployed to Donbass.

    Now that suggests to me that the Russians are very confident that they have events in the Kherson region well under control, and see no need whatsoever to reinforce that region.

    It is my belief that the Ukrainians are just throwing their reserves away by attacking a secondary area, and not only failing but failing so badly that the Russian’s aren’t even bothering to put in any extra effort to defeat it.

    • Leith says:

      WPO –

      Putin needs that 3rd Army Corps in the Donbas. Ukraine has made some advances in that area. Small so far, probably due to Putin sending Donbas units to reinforce Kherson. Units of Ukraine’s 54th Mechanized Brigade have advanced in the east towards Siversk and Lysychansk areas. And a Territorial Defense Battalion, the 63rd, has liberated a village in the Donetsk region. There are also reports of Ukraine SOF openly crossing the Siverskyi Donets River by boat in daylight.

  17. Worth Pointing Out says:

    “Small so far, probably due to Putin sending Donbas units to reinforce Kherson. ”

    Those units being….. which ones, exactly?

    The 3rd Army Corp has been sitting in Rostov waiting to be deployed to battle. Units from it could have been sent straight to Kherson.

    Seems to me that sending Donbass units to Kherson and then back-filling those empty front line positions with newly-arrived units from Rostov is rather over-complicating things.

    • Leith says:

      WPO –

      The 109th Regiment of the so-called DPR for one. Also some RU Rosgvardia units formerly in Luhansk were being moved to Kherson.

      3rd Army Corps has a mixed bag of subordinate units. Many are exceedinly thin in manpower and some are reported to have no more than two weeks of training. And you are right that it is not clear where the 3rd will be deployed. From Rostov they are right next door to the Donbas, but they also could easily be transported west to Kherson by road or rail.

  18. Rick says:

    COL Lang

    How does an army seek, or orchestrate, a decisive battle? It seems to me that many (most?) battles regarded as decisive, e. g. Cannae, Agincourt, Waterloo, Gettysburg, became so only in retrospect.

  19. Sam says:

    French President Emmanuel Macron says he backs a European Union-wide windfall tax on the profits of energy companies

    I suppose they’ll re-nationalize. It is always amazing how politicians and their government staff always focus on short-term political expedience. Never. The policies that created the problem itself. The Germans (both the “right” and the “left” in collaboration) voluntarily shutdown their nuclear power generation and proceeded to get entirely dependent on Russian gas and subsidized solar & wind. Those “renewable” subsidies didn’t reduce energy cost. The bottom line is that overall electricity costs rose consistently for years.

    Not much different here. We have outsourced most of our manufacturing to countries that are either unstable or those who we are on a collision course politically. Of course our elites are making money and benefiting personally. When the crisis arrives the average working folks are screwed again. Yet they keep voting the same guys. I suppose it fits Einstein’s definition of insanity- doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.

  20. Al says:

    In Reuters today:

    “… Mark Hertling, a retired former commander of U.S. ground forces in Europe, said Kyiv’s aim seemed to be to trap thousands of Russian troops on the east bank of the vast Dnipro River, destroying bridges that are both supply and escape routes.

    Russia had left “a force in Kherson, with a river at their back & limited supply lines”, and Ukraine was hitting them with “precision weapons”, Hertling tweeted. …”

  21. Fourth and Long says:

    Newp pleader of United Dingdom is another leader like Show Me Harry Truman and Donald Trumpensteinium the BadMon’sChewer.

    Her Stirname Beak Ins with T R U.

    The Harry Yette Creature herd about the EMPyreOar of Japan and dropped a Twosie of a doozie on him. Hero Eat Toe? Or did you say Hero Heat Toe?

    In the latter case, I Prefer My Toes Pi Ping Hot!

    Lizard To Russ.

    What sin. A name. Is it my maypole syrup you object to? – they thought they overbird it said in Red Scare.

  22. mcohen says:

    Kherson was captured at the very beginning which shows its importance.the russians never thought they would be in this situation.once winter comes and the rivers freeze the bridges will be crucial.the fact that they still stand means there is negotiation.
    By pushing forward the queen the Ukrainian rooks are now ready

    Kherson like khariv are important still

  23. jim ticehurst.. says:

    All that History…Rising Suns..Falling Empires..

    ..How I Wonder What you Are..Red Star.Are You Over.”A Bridge To Far.”??

    The “Third Army”…Sounds Haunting..So Daunting…That WINTER..

    Perhaps Future History..Will Bring A New Opera..”From Russia..With Rage..”
    Fall Setting..A Russian Oktoberfest..Beaware The Bear..On Hind Legs,,MOTHER..
    as in……MOAB…goodby..goodby…….They Breath out a Sigh..Repeating…History..

  24. Worth Pointing Out says:

    TTG: “Depending on how effective the Ukrainians are in reducing the ammo and food stockpiles already on hand with the Russian forces on the west bank of the Dnipro and interdicting Russian logistics at and beyond the river, this unconventional offensive could take weeks or even months.”

    I’m sorry, but in what way is that any different to what the Ukrainians were doing before this “offensive” was launched?

    This is an “unconventional offensive” only insofar as – apparently – it consists of doing exactly what you were doing before only….. what, exactly?

  25. MT_Bill says:

    The military aspect is only one part of this war. Even if the Ukranians were able to make real and significant advances on the battlefield, it would not matter because the economic portion of the war is so lop-sided.

    Industrial production is shutting down in Germany. Stainless steel output is to be cut 50% with the closure of one of the main foundries. Similiar cuts in other areas of manufacturing. At first these will be temporary shutdowns. But if they stay closed, then production will be moved to places like China, India, etc. And that production will never return to Europe, much less Germany. The whole German experiment, where westerners working manufacturing jobss still lead decent lives and can provide a Middle Class lifestyle for their family will disappear.

    In the end nothing else matters. So unless this becomes a nuclear war between powers, that’s the ball game. The question is really the final body count. And besides the toll in human lives, whether NATO and EU end up KIA.

  26. MT_Bill says:

    Just an addendum to where we are headed on the economic war front.

    The $1.5 trillion is needed to cover the current margin calls. I bet we get into the 5-10 trillion range before the energy markets break and we all wish we could afford coal for our Christmas stockings.

    • Fred says:


      Good. Barack and his boys aren’t at the Fed any longer to bail them out with US money and the Europeans can all go broke. It will be the best possible world for the US. We can then jettison these folks and tell them to take care of their own continent.

  27. Hey there, I think your website might be having browser compatibility issues. When I look at your blog in Ie, it looks fine but when opening in Internet Explorer, it has some overlapping. I just wanted to give you a quick heads up! Other then that, amazing blog!

Comments are closed.