This Morning ...

 ... Army Group "Dnepr" of Russian Armed Forces, using drones, dropped thousands of booklets over Kherson. 

Booklets, which look like this: 

Give clear instructions to residents of Kherson on how to behave themselves when encountering Russian soldiers. I wonder why all this. Hm, does it mean that Washington Capitals have a shot at Stanley Cup this year? Or maybe it is because Betelgeuse is about to go supernova? Yes, that's it. It is because of Betelgeuse. Whew, it took a couple of hours of hard analytical work to figure this out. 

About Maneuverable Warfare.

You can maneuver in the XXI century ONLY if you fight a third-rate opponent. In reality, you will be detected, and targeting will be provided and after that--well, the fate of the whole Ukie (US) column of HIMARS MLRS battery. You end up dead. Same goes for any armor. RUK/ROK. 

This is the demonstration from Kherson today. Do not maneuver if you fight Russian Army and want to live. 

Another One Bites The Dust...

 ... RUK (Recon-Strike Complex) at work couple of days ago at Kherson axis. 

Three M-270 (with ATACMS or HIMARS) and a lovely secondary detonation of ammo storage. Mr. Iskander is getting now its longer--much-much longer (1000 ++ km) version, just in case. 

Now, I understand that Glenn Diesen worries (rightly so) about possible NATO-Russia clash--the burning ferry with loaded oil at Port Kavkaz does look impressive. But as I stress non-stop--in the end it is COFM (Correlation of Forces and Means) and posture which dictates approach to any kind of war. NATO has neither, trying to hide behind the backs of VSU. NATO simply doesn't have enough of anything. In other words--NATO cannot assemble and predeploy required force to even have a chance against Russia. At least some people in Pentagon understand it. Pathos-ridden rhetoric from West's "elites" (a euphemism for BS) is just that. NATO is effectively de-militarized now. The required FORCE is not there for NATO, period! The best division-size force packed with US and other "volunteers" has been wiped off the face of the earth in ten days in Kursk. 

White House national security spokesman John Kirby said Friday that U.S. officials have been in near-daily contact with Ukrainian counterparts and have made no recent changes to guidance on how U.S. weapons can be used in the Kursk offensive. “They are allowed to use U.S. provided material to defend themselves against Russian aggression. And, as you know, the president allowed them to use U.S. munitions across that border to deal with imminent threats,” Kirby told reporters in Washington. Kirby added that it's unclear how successful Ukraine's operation in Kursk will be over the long term. Russian officials on Friday reported some success in turning back Ukrainian forces in some areas of the Kursk region.

Oh, it is very clear, Mr. "Admiral" Kirby, very clear. 

Good Statements and Not So Good Lessons.

For starters, Larry penned an excellent piece regarding Kherson situation. Here is an excerpt.

So why is the withdrawal from Kherson being touted as a disaster for Russia and glorious victory for Ukraine? Because it looks bad. Got that? It makes it look like Russia is losing or running away from a fight. People offering this type of criticism are like the cretins you knew in middle school who would gather in a circle and shout at two of their compatriots to “FIGHT.” Yet, not one of the hecklers had the stones to step into the ring and throw some punches. I am not trying to read some deep, hidden meaning in the Russian action. I take Generals Surovikin and Shuigo at their word. Keeping Russian troops on the west bank with their back to the river created a risk that, in the event of Ukraine launching a major attack accompanied by blowing damns up river, the soldiers would be trapped and forced to fight without a reliable line of communication.

Read the whole excellent piece by a professional intel analyst (emphasis on professional) and recall that Surovikin in the first day of his command of SMO announced that some "difficult decisions are coming". This was announced on October 8th and since then Russia was evacuating Kherson civilians non-stop. The hope was that Surovikin will not have to do it but he had to. Optics of it is bad and in terms of military lingo it is a tactical-operational setback if one considers the main objective of the war just conquering and holding territory, which it IS NOT--I stress it. Larry gives the whole situation excellent treatment in his piece and that is why it is a GOOD statement from him. Good, because it is, and you have guessed it, professional. 

Now to not so good lessons. I have though say thanks to Joe Blanco for bringing it up because it is a good issue to discuss. Joe wrote, when speaking of Great Patriotic War: 

Russia does not need to look so far back to have learned that going in light, since the beginning of the SMO, would be a bad idea. All Russia had to do was study the Iraq War (2003-2008) when the US thought they could conquer the country with only 160,000 soldiers. Rumsfeld thought that a new slimmed down military could easily take Iraq. Well, at first it seemed to work, but then the Iraqi's rebounded and started the so-called insurgency thus proving going into a country of 25 million with only 160,000 men was a bad idea from the start. The US then had to continually increase troop strength to finally beat back the Iraqis. Fast-forward to 2022 and Russia goes into a country the size of Texas and has the 2nd largest army in Europe knowing the West will fully back Ukraine, with only 180,000-190,000 men. One would of thought Russia should of known better. Russia seems to be continually playing catch-up due to the mistake of going into Ukraine with so few men.  

On the surface, Joe's "argument" seems valid, for non-professionals, but in reality it is grossly flawed. That is why I asked him to present at least three strategic differences between US campaign in Iraq in 2003 and SMO. The differences are profound. Here are just some of them:

1. Iraqi Army circa 2003 was a ragtag force, totally demoralized, corrupt and utterly under equipped, especially in C4ISR realm and with virtually no viable air defense. Iraq was simply crashed by sanctions and had no access to even basic resources. This is absolutely not the case with Ukraine which is de facto a NATO force and NATOization of the VSU continues apace, with second iteration of VSU--the first was obliterated by the end of Summer--having, however waning now, support of the combined West. Feel the difference. VSU is the best proxy US and West ever had.

2. US in Iraq 2003 pursued a strategy of a full occupation of the country with parallel regime change. Russia only recently, in a view of NATOization of the conflict, decided that she wants a destruction of Kiev's regime. But, Russia is NOT interested in occupation of the whole of Ukraine--the hope which NATO planners had from the start of SMO. 

3. Iraq, having GDP PPP smaller than that of the state of New York wasn't even competitor, the scope of resources involved and the political, economic and military weight of warring sides is immense. With Russia's massive economy and industry engaged in the operation, with the indirect help from China, while on the other side Russia fights combined West with its gigantic, albeit fast depleting, resources. 

4. In the end, the main objectives of the warring sides are: for the US--a preservation, however impossible, of its hegemony, for Russia--a destruction of globalism and unification of the Eurasian realm into massive economic force. US Iraq's adventure was an Exhibit A of Ledeen Doctrine: “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world that we mean business.” Today's events are orders of magnitude larger than any Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns, utterly embarrassing for the US, and are about effective survival of human civilization as a concert of nations who respect their own history and national traditions. For that, the combined West must be defeated. The scale of a struggle is titanic and truly global. 

I can continue to list those differences for hours and that is why I always stress that historical lessons should be applied very cautiously, not to mention professionally. That is why Alexander Svechin's strategic truism is truism: "Each war represents an isolated case, requiring an understanding of its own particular logic, its own unique character." That is why applying "lessons" from the US Iraq's adventurism is a very wrong way to go about SMO. You cannot apply "lessons" from Iraq to SMO, especially because--and here comes the most important difference--even today Ukraine has millions of people who identify themselves as Russians and preservation of those people is one of the major tasks of the Russian Army. That is why Russian Armed Forces evacuated 115,000 civilians from Kherson's population of 280.000--this is more than 40% of civilian population. 

Finally, for those who still do not understand, here is flooding map from Kakhovka Dam to Kherson, once the dam gives. 

Anybody wants to defend it, when the waters come?

About Kherson...

... Optics is bad, operationally it is understandable.

Russia has decided to withdraw its troops from the right bank of the Dnieper River, including the regional capital of Kherson. The Defense Ministry explained that it wants to avoid unnecessary losses among its forces and spare the lives of civilians. While saying the decision was not easy, the commanders see little sense in keeping the troops on the right bank, the chief of the Russian military operation in Ukraine, Army General Sergey Surovikin, told Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu on Wednesday. The general pointed to continued Ukrainian attacks on the Kakhovskaya hydroelectric dam on the Dnieper River, arguing that it could mean the total isolation of Russian troops in Kherson. “If the Kiev regime … launches an even more devastating attack on the Kakhovskaya dam, a flow of water could arise that would flood large areas, causing significant civilian casualties,” Surovikin added. This, according to the commander, “would create further threats for civilians and risk total isolation of our force grouping on the right bank of the Dnieper.”

The Dam issue did factor in and several weeks long evacuation of civilians from Kherson (115,000 have been evacuated) was an indication of serious considerations regarding the possibility of VSU destroying the Kakhovka Dam and flooding the area making it completely indefensible. Understandably, all kinds of IPSO trolling started already, as is--naturally--hysteria among the same category of public which was behind spinning a few days ago a complete BS of "high losses" of 155th Marines Brigade in Pavlovka, which was utterly debunked, so, what's new? Could it be the trap? Certainly possible. I should be a part of Gonzalo's Roundtable, together with Brian Berletic, tomorrow and we will discuss this issue. So keep an eye on Gonzalo's channels on YouTube. 

But the real news is this--current at the time of this post: 

This is the start of the final countdown for the United States as a unified country. Yes, I mean physical disintegration of the country down the road within, maybe, 8-10 years, maybe slightly more. We did our civic duty by voting, but above you see the statement of a paralysis of a political system and governance, with huge segments of the American society being in favor of a complete destruction of their own country, which cannot exist as a unified nation. In the end, Kensington Avenue is the future now, no matter who gets to power. 

In the spring, Fetterman won his primary easily, even though he suffered the stroke four days before the vote, which required him to be outfitted with a pacemaker and defibrillator on the day of the election. Fetterman’s strategy, which dates back to a failed 2016 Senate bid and his successful 2018 lieutenant governor campaign, was to visit every Pennsylvania county, even the rural ones that Republicans had been winning in blowouts. His theory was that those visits would not just potentially flip some GOP votes because he had showed up, but motivate the local Democrats to become more involved in the campaign.

Well, looks like America loves her leaders either demented and geriatric or completely incapacitated and incapable of carrying out their duties. You know my attitude towards Trump--I dislike the guy--and it is time for him to just get out of politics because he blew his chance in 4 years from 2016 through 2020 due to being a demagogue and a coward. But I am on record--the crisis is systemic, meaning it is impossible to fix the machine without fully redesigning it completely, no matter what oil, gears and hoses you change. Didn't I warn about it?

Here is your biggest indicator yet. 

Sadly Only In Russian.

Here is Surovikin's interview to Russia 24. 

Immediately, there ARE plans to blow Kahovskaya Dam up. These are plans by Pentagon and VSU is preparing them. Here is how it will look like.

More than 50,000 people will be swept away by a monstrous flooding. But then again, crimes against humanity are increasingly the MO of the combined West. This is why evacuation of civilians is declared from Kherson and Kherson area.

Not Again, Please.

Yes, Ukrainian "offensive" has succeeded because it achieved its main objective--it created informational noise, especially in the environment of "military experts", such as you can take a look at Dima from Military Summary at Gonzalo's Round-table three weeks ago. This is a definition of an amateur spewing sophomoric military BS with conviction. You know how I hate all those so called SitReps' forecasts, because I clearly understand my huge limitations in knowing what respective staffs know on the ground, let alone what people in General Staff know, but allow me, this time:

Russian forces have taken out hundreds of Ukrainian troops and dozens of tanks and armored military vehicles after repelling an ill-fated offensive in the south of the country, the Defense Ministry claimed on Tuesday. A statement added that officials believe the failerd operation was mounted at the personal order of President Vladimir Zelensky. “The effective actions by the Russian forces destroyed 48 tanks, 46 infantry fighting vehicles, 37 other armored combat vehicles, eight pickups with heavy machine guns and more than 1,200 Ukrainian servicemen in one day,” they outlined. The Ministry added that Kiev sustained these losses during a botched offensive whose directions led to Nikolaev, Krivoy Rog, and other cities in southern Ukraine. The ministry went on to say that Moscow’s forces routed the units of the 128th Ukrainian Mountain Assault Brigade, which had been redeployed from western Ukraine to take part in the operation. “Five service members from this brigade laid down their arms and gave in,” the ministry added.

Let me explain... again! Here is a definition from Russian Combat Manual (Field Manual) of Offensive. Combat Manual describes offensive, in this case, for platoon size formation :

179. Наступление проводится в целях разгрома противостоящего противника, овладения назначенным объектом и создания условий для ведения последующих действий. Оно заключается в поражении противника всеми имеющимися средствами, решительной атаке, стремительном продвижении войск в глубину его боевого порядка, уничтожении и пленении живой силы, захвате вооружения, техники и различных объектов. Под разгромом понимается нанесение противнику  такого ущерба, при котором он теряет способность к сопротивлению. Личный состав взвода (отделения, танка), используя результаты огневого поражения противника, должен вести наступление с полным напряжением сил, непрерывно днем и ночью, в любую погоду и в тесном взаимодействии с другими подразделениями разгромить противостоящего противника.

180. В зависимости от обстановки и поставленных задач наступление может вестись на обороняющегося, наступающего или отходящего противника. В зависимости от готовности обороны противника и степени его огневого поражения наступление взвода (отделения, танка) на обороняющегося противника осуществляется с выдвижением из глубины или из положения непосредственного соприкосновения с ним.

Transaltion:  179. An offensive is carried out with the aim of defeating the opposing enemy, capturing the designated object and creating conditions for subsequent actions. It consists in defeating the enemy with all available means, a decisive attack, the rapid advance of troops into the depths of his battle formation, the destruction and capture of manpower, the capture of weapons, equipment and various objects. Defeat is understood as the infliction of such damage on the enemy, in which he loses the ability to resist. The personnel of a platoon (squad, tank), using the results of the fire engagement of the enemy, must conduct an offensive with full effort, continuously day and night, in any weather and in close cooperation with other subunits, defeat the opposing enemy. 180. Depending on the situation and the assigned tasks, an offensive may be carried out against a defending, advancing or retreating enemy. Depending on the readiness of the enemy's defense and the degree of his fire damage, the attack of a platoon (squad, tank) on the defending enemy is carried out from the depth or from a position of direct contact with him.

You may reasonably point out that the definition of offensive by no means contradicts Kiev regime's claims. True in form, not in substance. And here is how professionals view this whole situation:

1. Offensives differ--dramatically. By their aims (scope) and that is why we have strategic offensive operations and tactical ones, where you have formations the size of company-battalion ATTACKING.

2. Here comes this OTHER thing. What is attack. Attack, actually, is a maneuver designed for fastest closing of the distance between us and the enemy (its formations or lines of defense) and here it matters greatly.  

Here is this crucial difference, judging by what this Ukie "offensive" has accomplished we can say that VSU ATTACKED--they surely tried to close the distance fast between them and Russian forces. But did they achieve ANY aims of the offensive? Recall definition of the offensive above which describes the essence. Right, I quote Combat Manual, again: It consists in defeating the enemy with all available means, a decisive attack, the rapid advance of troops into the depths of his battle formation, the destruction and capture of manpower, the capture of weapons, equipment and various objects. Do you see any of that achieved? See the news from RT, quoiting Russian MoD. Now take a look at Larry's explanations:

Ukraine only managed to capture Sukhoy Stavok, a small village with no strategic importance. The Ukrainian operation, however, proved very costly to Ukraine, which lost more than 1200 soldiers and almost 50 tanks. The tanks and tank crews are not easily nor quickly replaced. This does not even qualify as a Pyrrhic victory. The Russians still hold the territory.  

Yes, VSU ATTACKED and got destroyed. Here is another American real professional.

The Armed Forces of Ukraine have no opportunity for an offensive in the Kherson region. This was told by Lieutenant Colonel of the US Army Daniel Davis on Fox News. The Russian military has been moving inexorably forward over the past time, maintaining its presence everywhere. The command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, in turn, talked for months about the offensive in the south, but it did not go beyond words. The Armed Forces of Ukraine simply do not have infantry, ammunition and equipment for offensive operations. Yesterday afternoon, Kiev's forces tried to attack in the Kherson region, but naturally rolled back due to heavy losses and lack of forces.

That's Colonel Douglas MacGregor quoting Daniel Davis. Pay attention how the terminology is used. Now, as people on the ground report (in Russian), the number of attackers of VSU is estimated to be around 12,000, which is roughly a division, but rather two brigades' forces and here, as people from Kherson report is the essence of which I warned for months. 

Численность наступавших оценивается примерно в 12 тыс., что критически мало для развития успеха. Второго эшелона и резервов, в том числе техники, в этом районе у ВСУ пока нет, и это идёт вразрез с заявлениями руководства Украины о «миллионе мобилизованных» для «освобождения юга страны». По сути, украинские военные достигли только одного — продвинулись на 7 км в юго-восточном направлении на отрезке между посёлками Андреевка и Лозово и оказались заблокированы на степном ландшафте в районе н. п. Сухой Ставок. Воспользовавшись повышенным вниманием ВС РФ к этому н. п., Киев попытался ликвидировать Архангельский плацдарм (расположен рядом с посёлком городского типа Архангельское, в 45 км на северо-восток от Сухого Ставка), чтобы исключить потенциальную возможность его использования для нанесения ударов системами «Ураган» по опорным пунктам ВСУ на ближних подступах к Кривому Рогу. Эта задумка ВСУ также потерпела фиаско. Активные контрбатарейные и противотанковые действия со стороны российских подразделений, а также авиационные удары Су-25СМ не только обеспечили сохранение контроля над плацдармом, но и позволили пошатнуть обороноспособность ряда украинских укрепов.

Translation:  The number of attackers is estimated at about 12 thousand, which is critically not enough for the development of success. The Armed Forces of Ukraine do not yet have a second echelon and reserves, including equipment, in this area, and this runs counter to the statements of the Ukrainian leadership about "a million mobilized" for the "liberation of the south of the country." In fact, the Ukrainian military achieved only one thing - they advanced 7 km in a southeasterly direction on the segment between the villages of Andreevka and Lozovo and found themselves blocked on the steppe landscape in the area of ​​village Sukhoi Stavok. Taking advantage of the increased attention of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation to this village. Kyiv tried to eliminate the Arkhangelsk bridgehead (located near the urban-type settlement of Arkhangelskoye, 45 km northeast of Sukhoi Stavok) in order to exclude the potential possibility of its use for strikes by the Uragan systems against the strongholds of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the near approaches to Krivoy Rog. This idea of ​​the Armed Forces of Ukraine also failed. Active counter-battery and anti-tank actions by Russian units, as well as Su-25SM air strikes, not only ensured control over the bridgehead, but also made it possible to undermine the defense capability of a number of Ukrainian fortifications.

Now recall what I said--VSU CANNOT conduct successful offensive operations in the area against such forces as Russia has. As Russian military professional (who I respect, actually) Alexey Leonkov tells today (in Russian)--yep, with Russian ISR complex and firepower you just cannot conceal anything and you are going to annihilated, as is the case. But the most telling sign of a VSU's catastrophe in the steppes near Kherson is this piece of news:

МОСКВА, 29 августа/ Радио Sputnik. Для разрешения украинского конфликта необходимо вести переговоры и искать компромиссы, заявил в интервью итальянской газете Corriere della Sera мэр Одессы Геннадий Труханов.   

Translation: MOSCOW, August 29/ Radio Sputnik. To resolve the Ukrainian conflict, it is necessary to negotiate and seek compromises, Odessa Mayor Gennady Trukhanov said in an interview with the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera.

No shit, genius. Where have you been before and why such a flexibility all of a sudden? And here is the issue: while VSU desperate and catastrophic attack around Kherson may have been an attempt at feint for possible attack in Kharkov area (good luck with that), it is clear that Odessa and establishment of the land bridge to Transdnistria is the final objective of Russia's operations in the South of what used to be Ukraine. In the end, Dmitry Medvedev described 1.5 scenarios in which Kiev has to unconditionally surrender under any scenario. Simple as that. But I am sure that in coming weeks all these military "analysts" such as Podolyakas, Dimas and other professional monetising shysters both in Russia and in the West will continue to tell us about what amounts to a tactical episode which is a good fodder for media circus. Here is my take on this "offensive".

Kherson Is Taken.

Russian Army took a major city of Kherson (in Russian) and that opens roads towards Nikolaev and Odessa. It also completes a land bridge between Crimea and and operational zone. 

Meanwhile, accountants and stock traders in the US, who pass for economists for some reason,  parade themselves as clowns yet again. Here is a quick demonstration:

More than two decades ago, on August 17, 1998, Russia defaulted on its debt and devalued the ruble, sparking a political crisis that culminated with Vladimir Putin replacing Boris Yeltsin and which also eventually resulted in the spectacular implosion of a then little known hedge fund called Long Term Capital Management (which was staffed to the gills with "brilliant" Nobel prize winners) which after receiving a Fed-led Wall Street bailout, ushered in the era of too big to fail. We bring this up because in just a few hours, Russia will be in another technical default. Amid the flurry of capital controls imposed by Moscow today, the Russian central bank banned coupon payments to foreign owners of ruble bonds known as OFZs in what it said was a temporary step to shore up markets in the wake of international sanctions. What it really is, is a technical default on upcoming interest and maturity payments, with a trigger due as soon as tomorrow.

The first question here is, of course, that all these London-based "analysts" do not understand the difference between default as a failure of payments on financial obligations and the RESPONSE, as a deliberate withholding of payments, for geopolitical reasons. The expropriation of the Western assets in Russia will follow. They just don't get it. Which, BTW, reference to Russia's default of 1998 betrays completely. Russia in 1998 was an economic basket case, Russia of 2022 is economic superpower. As I said, I reiterate, any degree in "economics" from any Western educational institution is degree in nothing and is absolutely worthless, because it provides, at best, some basic accountant courses and courses in demagoguery in financial matters. Those "degrees" provide zero tools for strategic planning because they DO NOT teach how real economy operates. All these courses could be compressed into the 12-16 weeks program with issuing accountant certificate. 

Russia MoD released first data on Russia's losses. 498 KIAs, VSU lost 2,800 and I doubt anybody really counts corpses of nazis. This is war, losses are inevitable. Considering, however, a huge scope of operation the losses are light. Yes, I know, somebody loses their sons, fathers, brothers, but that's war, not a computer game. Meanwhile, a sewer such as NYT continues to supply a copious amount of propaganda BS (most of it compiled under supervision of CIA in Poland) and now states this: 

WASHINGTON — Plagued by poor morale as well as fuel and food shortages, some Russian troops in Ukraine have surrendered en masse or sabotaged their own vehicles to avoid fighting, a senior Pentagon official said Tuesday.

LOL. Pentagon, of course, is now seriously butt-hurt for a number of reasons, among which Russia exposing US military as a paper-tiger designed to fight third world weaklings is a major one. It is really pathetic, not to mention the fact that all NYT, WaPo and other "senior officials" from anywhere are themselves who invent all kinds of utter BS. Obviously, these cretins do not know that there are NO conscripts in operational zone. But then again, try to explain to Western presstitude with degree in glorified English what real war is and how it is fought, goo luck with that. They will not be able to report on it honestly even if they wanted to, they simply have no grasp of what REAL war is and what goes into it. The West lives in alternative reality and sees its institutions implode as I type it. 

Europe’s Gas Prices Soar 60% To Record High As Buyers Shun Russia. 

This is just the warmup, folks. You ain't seen nothing yet. EU has to prepare itself to what is coming and what is coming, as I and other warned for years, is an utter destruction of European industries. Russia, meanwhile, is happy since her hydrocarbons are eagerly awaited in Asia. Well, what did you expect from Europe which has as its leader a gynecologist and specialist in children's medicine. So, here is a brief sitrep. I will abstain for now from discussing in depth Russia's economy because it is very dynamic and huge nationalization  is in progress. But hey, let's West deal with its own BS, we know the result already. OODA, baby, OODA. Try to explain it to a lawyer in US Congress what it is and how it is done.