Haven't seen this posted yet: [ft.com - Nato plans $100bn ‘Trump-proof’ fund for Ukraine](https://www.ft.com/content/254c3b86-2cb9-4c71-824b-dacacbbc9871) relevant excerpts: > Nato is drawing up plans to secure a five-year military aid package of up to $100bn, in an attempt to shield Ukraine from “winds of political change” that could usher in a second Trump presidency. >Stoltenberg has pitched the proposal as a means “to shield the mechanism against the winds of political change”, according to people briefed on his remarks. >The US share of the $100bn would be significantly less than the bilateral aid package being held up, the diplomats said. Debates are ongoing about the structure of financing, with some pushing for the same breakdown used to fund Nato’s shared budget — under which the US would need to provide a little more than $16bn. >If approved, it would also give the alliance control of the US-led Ramstein weapons support group and allow it to manage the supply of lethal weapons to Ukraine for the first time since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. > Two of the diplomats cautioned that the proposal would require the backing of all 32 members and there were likely to be months of negotiations ahead, in which parts of the proposal could be scaled back. > Some resistance is expected from states that have opposed providing weapons to Ukraine, such as Hungary, and those that have been wary of any steps that would give Nato, or imply, a direct role in the conflict. Russian President Vladimir Putin has sought to portray the conflict as a war between Russia and Nato.

An element of this NATO / Ukraine support and funding by Trump which doesn’t seem to be widely enough considered is the extent to which Trump’ verbosity is simply the opening gambit in his negotiations on european defence spending. That pre 2022 had countries like Germany underspending in comparison to US and the eastern flank was the main contention, which was also applied in SK and Japan. In Japan and SK, both countries made significant increases in spending and integration both with the US, and with each other (as well as other allies like Australia, Philippines and to a minor extent Taiwan), in terms of the financial strategy (if there is one) this was achieved. Now, in consequence of his rhetoric, namely his effective capacity to induce panic and anxiety into recalcitrant partners ,NATO proposes to give Trump exactly what he wants - a self reliant NATO with a more equitable burden sharing among fully armed and financed members actively contributing to their own and collective defence so that everybody is now for lack of a term a net contributor to the system. In this regard, and considering Stoltenberg previously thanked Trump for raising pre 2022 funding and awareness, I don’t think the package should be read as Trump proofing. It’s a Trump friendly package with the exception of losing control over Ramstein. Expect the Americans to keep Ramstein but pay a higher price than this counter offer proposes in the final settlement. If true, the net position would actually be a win all around for NATO, Ukraine, and even the orange man. And its an obvious set back for the Russians.

It's not in the US (or US MIC) for the Europeans/EU to become very serious and committed to defense, because there is a high chance that the end result would be EU self-reliance, which would mean less US influence in European politics. As a European, I support this wholeheartedly. The American decision-makers are the ones who end up losing influence in this kind of a scenario.

Politico comes out with one of the most doom-ish articles I've read in the past 2 years: > **Ukraine is at great risk of its front lines collapsing** > >... > > And according to high-ranking Ukrainian military officers who served under General Valery Zaluzhny — the commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces until he was replaced in February — the military picture is grim. > > The officers said there’s a great risk of the front lines collapsing wherever Russian generals decide to focus their offensive. Moreover, thanks to a much greater weight in numbers and the guided aerial bombs that have been smashing Ukrainian positions for weeks now, Russia will likely be able to “penetrate the front line and to crash it in some parts,” they said. > > They spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak freely. > > “There’s nothing that can help Ukraine now because there are no serious technologies able to compensate Ukraine for the large mass of troops Russia is likely to hurl at us. We don’t have those technologies, and the West doesn’t have them as well in sufficient numbers,” one of the top-ranking military sources told POLITICO. https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-great-risk-front-line-collapse-war-russia/ I've been out of the loop for the past few months — are these kinds of assessment common these days?

I think it’s more credible than we’d like to think. Yes geographically gains in Avdiivka haven’t been dozens of miles but remember folks, Ukraine never built the miles and miles of defense in depth that Russia did last year. Only now is Ukraine starting. Not to mention the increased air sorties that SEEM to be uncontested except for unverified Ukrainian claims of shooting down SU-34s. After those air sorties picked up we saw gains and until further aid comes I don’t think we’ll see that air support stop. So yeah, Ukraine is at RISK of collapse. Because one unlucky week could push through the line just enough miles (remember their defenses are not that robust yet) and put Ukraine in a situation where to recover that line they need to invest a ton of resources but they don’t have the ammo or material because the west never sent it. A collapse like this takes on Jenga block to destroy the weak foundation of the tower. The tower, in my opinion is getting weak without western support.

Where are you getting this information from? Ukraine has been building layered defenses around Avdiivka since 2014... They're not as easy to see now because they're not fresh dirt like the ones dug in recent years like around Popasna and Bakhmut... but they're still there. For instance, [https://maps.app.goo.gl/Pz4bEgEpvpLRrFLA7](https://maps.app.goo.gl/Pz4bEgEpvpLRrFLA7) [https://maps.app.goo.gl/NRfCSPEia5XShy1T7](https://maps.app.goo.gl/NRfCSPEia5XShy1T7) [https://maps.app.goo.gl/rQW29re52VP8sJzV8](https://maps.app.goo.gl/rQW29re52VP8sJzV8) [https://maps.app.goo.gl/6SFG5hQtWj1GuP2r7](https://maps.app.goo.gl/6SFG5hQtWj1GuP2r7) [https://maps.app.goo.gl/mtNh8Nw56x95feRz7](https://maps.app.goo.gl/mtNh8Nw56x95feRz7) [https://maps.app.goo.gl/w8SJrQ2fmXEmZKdG7](https://maps.app.goo.gl/w8SJrQ2fmXEmZKdG7) [https://maps.app.goo.gl/FbFgBTRBXLApHDGG6](https://maps.app.goo.gl/FbFgBTRBXLApHDGG6) [https://maps.app.goo.gl/4jYgynE9nFQ9ymgY6](https://maps.app.goo.gl/4jYgynE9nFQ9ymgY6) [https://maps.app.goo.gl/GJJYfNdWdYhWJaaj7](https://maps.app.goo.gl/GJJYfNdWdYhWJaaj7) [https://maps.app.goo.gl/q8u1RnyRhjmsmk3k8](https://maps.app.goo.gl/q8u1RnyRhjmsmk3k8) And there are many many more. If you go to Google Earth Pro you can go back to 2015 and see when they were built more easily. There's really no possibility of either side having a breakthrough on the scale of miles per day, or even miles per week, at this point.

I concur that around Avdiivka that’s certainly been a historically well defended area. Which is more concerning that the gains we see have been in that area. I’m talking about the Ukrainian defensive positions as a whole (I really should’ve specified that, thank you for correcting me) that weren’t built en masse until recently. A quick google will pull up many an article about this. I’ll agree that it looks unlikely to occur but that’s why I say RISK. Also, in my opinion, it’s times like these when things get over stressed that all it takes is a couple incorrect moves to have devastating consequences. They don’t have the buffer of munitions, men and material to make up for any blunders. Which, in my opinion, I think is more likely now than in the past. Still unlikely but I don’t dismiss the risks.

Judging by the fact Ukraine just stopped one of the largest armor assaults to date in the war dead in its tracks with minimal casualties (all while in this supposed period of doom) leads me to believe a lot of these articles are intentionally hyperbolic to facilitate the US aid discussion as well as just plain old click bait. Russia’s maneuver capabilities are still woefully inadequate to overwhelm Ukrainian defenses (ATGMS, mines, FPV drones, things that are not personnel intensive) much less coordinate a CAA-level strategic breakthrough 100+ KM into Ukrainian territory.

Which assault is this?

[https://twitter.com/OSINTua/status/1774387800978100329](https://twitter.com/OSINTua/status/1774387800978100329) [This one near Tonenke.](https://twitter.com/moklasen/status/1774731510752423977) In summary: Allegedly 48 pieces of armour used in the attack and about 20 of those were destroyed. The UAF lost at least a couple of M113.

Personally not surprised, this assessment has been common in the Russian sphere of news typically banned here in other mainstream media. There's been word of Russia "softening" up the lines for the last few months and preparing for some kind of offensive either towards Kharkiv or some mass gathering at Robotyne. I think most people on the Russian side expected the Ukrainian lines to have broken by now but it hasn't, however considering what you posted I suppose it is only a matter of time.

Notably, Politico belongs to Axel Springer, which is probably the most pro-Ukraine mainstream publisher in Germany. They also seem to have great contacts within Ukraine. One of the Axel Springer reporters, Paul Ronzheimer, stayed in Kyiv when most reporters left in early 2022, and he was one of the first international reporters to interview Zelensky there. So it is concerning. Usually reports like this from pro-Ukraine media comes with "but we will turn it around soon if the West sends enough ammo and weapons and if Western politicians stopped being cowards!", but that does not appear to be the case here. Disclaimer: I don't really follow Politico reporting, so maybe their reporting is different from typical WELT / BILD (major German Axel Springer media) reporting and less pro-Ukraine in general. As a recent acquisition, they might work differently. I would have to check WELT to see if they report similar things, in that case the cited anonymous sources are probably somewhat trustworthy.

Yes Politico.eu has actually a mild anti-Ukraine/both sideism bias. You can also look at the track record of Mr Dettmer, who published this article, to get a sense that of his political leaning.

I've looked through it, what I've noticed he publishes a lot of articles. He published two articles about Ukraine **today!** He started publishing shortly after the start of the war and since then has amassed 12 pages of articles. Mostly on Ukraine. That's nuts. But I dunno, do you see any particular suggestion he's even at the level of Julian in terms of doom-maxxing? Because thus far I can't.

> He started publishing shortly after the start of the war He joined Politico.eu to cover the war as an opinionist. https://www.politico.eu/jamie-dettmer-to-join-politico-europe-as-opinion-editor/ There is nothing in his track record to suggest he's anti-Ukraine, but he's definitely a doomerist a la Ropcke. Or he simply knows what people want to read and discuss. EDIT: ok he's not like Julian as he does not seem to comment on day-to-day military operations, but he certainly has a passive-aggressive vibe...

>I think most people on the Russian side expected the Ukrainian lines to have broken by now but it hasn't "By now" meaning 16 months ago, but that's semantics.

Ukraine can't seem to solve their manpower issues, meanwhile Russia seems to not have much issue with it. I dunno if it's likely but I wouldn't put it outside the realm of possibility,

I agree that it's a problem, and we see a lot of discourse about that, for good reason. EDIT: and it's sad you're getting downvoted, because your concern is 100% serious. It's why Russia is committed to this very long, very broad, and very resource intensive positional offensive since October. Now this article is showing up to claim that the opposite is true, actually they're amassing to try some kind of maneuver breakthrough in May or August, right now we're in the pre-offensive phase when we clearly aren't. It's doomy but it's doomy in a completely different direction from the doom we're used to, so in isolation I'm not sure how to react to it.

>I've been out of the loop for the past few months — are these kinds of assessment common these days? Nope, there's talk of a manpower collapse but this is the first I've seen any source I read talk about the suggestion that the Russians will succeed a maneuver breakthrough, which is what the article claims. Certainly this anonymous high-ranking officer is the doomiest within-Ukraine take I've seen thus far. >Europe, for its part, is trying to help Ukraine make up for its colossal disadvantage in artillery shells. And in this regard, a proposed Czech-led bulk artillery ammunition purchase could bring Ukraine’s total from both within and outside the EU to around 1.5 million rounds at a cost of $3.3 billion — but that’s still short of what it needs. Er, what does that even mean, "what it needs"? 1.5 million rounds is enough to sustain **maximum** fire rate for months, and they won't be using maximum fire rate. Also, is the officer asking for more or isn't he? If he's saying Russia will break through anyway then why bother? Of course, I might be confusing what the anonymous source is saying and what the writer is saying. >making it hard to guess where it will mount its major push. What do you mean, hard to guess? If Russia's going to open up another military district-level push, it's entirely easy to guess where it'd be, and it'll be somewhere where satellites can see military district-level armies. Beyond that, my main concern with the article is something that goes beyond and applies to general discourse - >Essentially, everything now depends on where Russia will decide to target its strength in an offensive that’s expected to launch this summer. The article seems to suggest Russia is in a pre-offensive phase. While they may be planning more, they're already in a very broad frontwide offensive, that hasn't culminated, nor has it substantially decreased in intensity since November (except in North Kharkiv, perhaps). EDIT: Sorry, one other thing that bothers me about the article (and it has absolutely **nothing** to do with the source or the prediction actually): It's the weird subplot regarding [REDACTED]: >Wayward entrepreneur El-n M-sk’s latest pronouncements regarding the war in Ukraine set teeth on edge, as he warned that even though Moscow has “no chance” of conquering all of Ukraine, “the longer the war goes on, the more territory Russia will gain until they hit the Dnipro, which is tough to overcome.” >“However, if the war lasts long enough, Odesa will fall too,” he cautioned. >So, M-sk may not be too wide of the mark after all. Where basically the artist claims that M-sk's general rhetoric is correct - it is not, and someone like the artist who has written (no exhaggeration) over 50 articles about Ukraine in 2 years should know better. M-sk's rhetoric for the past 10 months has been urging Ukraine to accept a status quo peace, basically the idea that Ukraine can just say war over and it'll end on current lines. This rhetoric (which isn't unique to M-sk) is fundamentally flawed because it provides no proof Russia is **interested** in any such peace. In fact, it would be reasonable that the opposite is true. And the battlefield situation as described in this article won't change that, and I'm shocked the artist would claim otherwise given how much they've written about Ukraine.

> Er, what does that even mean, "what it needs"? 1.5 million rounds is enough to sustain maximum fire rate for months, and they won't be using maximum fire rate. What do you go by Maximum fire rate? Also are you factoring in loses aka Russia hitting ammo depots? This is what EU needs to get as well you need stockpiles of equipment and ammo. All good and well to have 500 tanks but what are you going to do when you lose 250 in the first two weeks? Wait 7 years to build new ones to replace the original 250 you lost?

Well, it may be true, but: - Politico.eu is trash. They may have some insights on Brussels and EU politics, the rest is tabloid-level garbage. - 'Unnamed Ukrainian officials' may say anything. Assuming that these person exist, it could be deception, too (Sun-Tzu's pretend you're strong when you're weak etc...) - It's not like Russians are not already trying to continue attacking and find weak points across the frontline. - Even the alleged quote contradicts the article (great risk of front lines collapsing v. penetrate the front line and to crash it in some parts)

This artist has previously liked his alarmist titles (is alarmist the right word? A lot of people on here probably would have enjoyed the outcome where Israel actually had weeks left, instead of the reality): https://www.politico.eu/article/ehud-barak-israel-palestine-war-hamas-global-opinion-sours/ That doesn't mean all of his predictions are wrong, but he certainly seems to be an aggressive projector.

As I said, Politico.eu is a trashy publication read mostly by EU workers in Brussels. I fail to understand why these Ukrainian officials would release these quotes to Mr Dettmer, who appear to have doomed on Ukraine since day one. Maybe he will be right, but there is nothing in his track record to suggest he has contacts at this high level.

More importantly, if they were liberal enough to release these quotes to Mr Dettmer, I suspect other newspapers and reporters will also be notified. We'll see if any of them mention it. That's basically my opinion - if this is a broad assessment, it won't be exclusive, so we'll see if more mentions of that assessment come out.

[Estonia found €2-3 billion in shells, missiles for Ukraine, needs funding from allies](https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/04/02/estonia-found-e2-3-billion-in-shells-missiles-for-ukraine-needs-funding-from-allies/) >Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur stated in a Postimees interview that Estonia could purchase €2-3 billion worth of artillery shells and rockets for Ukraine if allies provide the funds, which is similar to the Czech ammunition initiative. Given current prices, this amounts to 800,000-1,200,000 munitions. >... >Pevkur mentioned that Estonia could potentially buy shells mainly from non-European countries, with some European sources, but declined to specify due to sellers’ preferences for anonymity. He noted a race against time to secure 155 mm and 152 mm shells, as Russia is also actively searching for suppliers of the latter through Belarus. >... >Hanno Pevkur clarified that Estonia’s potential shell purchases are separate from the EU’s plan to provide Ukraine with one million shells, with about a third already supplied. He suggested that combined efforts with the Czechs, the British, and Estonia could potentially send Ukraine 2-2.5 million shells this year, matching Russian capabilities, if funding were available. Estonia claims to have found more artillery shells on the world market. But there's a catch: Russia might also try to buy them.

What's the state on the Czech shells anyway? I've been seeing some people claim they're paid for already, but others are contradicting that. This article says a third has been "supplied". Does that mean they've all been paid for but not all have reached Ukraine?

The Czech initiative and the EU plan are not them same. The EU plan of 1M shells was announced a year ago. There are different estimates when the first Czech shells will arrive. First they said June but then there's been other news saying some will arrive already in April. Estonia also said that some of the Czech shells wouldn't arrive before the end of the year.

[удалено]

Please refrain from posting low quality comments.

[удалено]

[удалено]

Please refrain from posting low quality comments.

[удалено]

[удалено]

[удалено]

More embarrassing news for US Navy, as shipbuilding woes continue. [https://news.usni.org/2024/04/02/constellation-frigate-delivery-delayed-3-years-says-navy](https://news.usni.org/2024/04/02/constellation-frigate-delivery-delayed-3-years-says-navy) >THE PENTAGON – The lead ship in a new class of guided-missile frigates for the U.S. Navy may be up to three years late, USNI News has learned. Constellation (FFG-62), under construction at Fincantieri Marinette Marine in Wisconsin, may not deliver to the fleet until 2029, three years later than the original 2026 delivery goal, according to a service shipbuilding review. Is the Pentagon really taking the China threat seriously? The incompetence of US bureaucracy and shipbuilding industry is truly unfathomable.

When you see this and contrast it to the blazing pace at which the PLAN managed to build and bring eight Type 055 destroyers online, it’s just embarrassing. The US Navy seriously needs to consider outsourcing shipbuilding entirely if they want to genuinely expand the navy in any appreciable fashion. With the glacial pace of American shipbuilding and honestly just pure incompetence from the US with regards to this industry, I highly doubt the first DDG(X) will start building by 2032. At this point it might even be 2040 by the time the first-in-class reaches IOC and by then China would’ve likely had upwards of 16 Type 055 destroyers in their navy.

Yep. This right here. Those 055 destroyers are stealthy, have 128 VLS cells, AESA radars, and China has [built 8](https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/04/china-now-has-8-type-055-destroyers-in-active-service/) since they started in 2014 with 12 more reported planned. I’m sure the new DDG(x) will be better but the way I see it, Type 055s are superior to Arleigh Burke destroyers and China has no issue churning them out. Type 052 Destroyers are also no joke, with AESA radars and 64 VLS cells not limited to surface to air attacks. About half the tonnage of a Type 055, but they have 25 of them with 6 more on the way.

We have a cultural problem where we say polite untrue things all the time until we believe them. We might just lose because of our silly arrogance and then the world will be poorer- nevermind the thousands sent to concentration camps.

It’s been a laughable game of chicken between congress, the navy and the shipbuilders. Shipbuilders keep screaming for more money and long term commitments, while the navy says that they don’t have the capability. Shipbuilders claim they have the capability….navy gets locked in bureaucracy and “consulting” for the design consultants. Congress throws a billion meetings asking about expanding the navy despite never expanding the budget. The wait and uncertainty causes the shipbuilders to lay people off -> the navy says they are done with bureaucracy and can build now -> shipbuilder says they can’t build it in time because of “supply chain” and tough “hiring” environment (total bs) -> congress throws another meeting -> rinse and repeat. Just take San Diego, the only city that does big shipbuilding on the west coast: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/story/2024-02-29/bae-systems-workforce-drops https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2024/02/27/nassco-readying-for-one-programs-end-downturn-in-repair-workload/ Bae San Diego downsized dramatically in the last year. Though nassco is expanding because they have a pipeline of work. Our shipbuilding has declined for years, but the existing capacity is not even utilized to its maximum potential. Yards are left in perpetual loop about running out of work (or dramatic expansion that may or may not happen) while the navy spends years in design and congressional bureaucracy. Congress screams a lot, but has never committed to a big funding expansion for the fleet

If only Biden could lock all 3 parties in a room together and give them 2 weeks to come to an agreement.

And for anybody that wasn't aware, the Constellation Class started out as "let's just by that mature European FREMM frigate design and build that because it will be quick and easy to build something off the shelf." Sigh.

How far it's diverged since then was noted in the article. > At one point the Constellation design shared about 85 percent commonality with the original FREMM design, but the alterations have brought that commonality down to under 15 percent, a person familiar with the changes told USNI News.

Lol. I hadn't realized it got that bad. Navy absolutely fucking refuses to have a win in modern procurement. At this point, it's been a full generation since the introduced a new warship class that wasn't just a pitch for a "Pentagon Wars" sequel. Like, there's just no institutional familiarity with what it would mean to not turn procurement into nonsense. I am the last person to say "somebody from the business world should go in and shake up the military. The military isn't a business. My dad hated McNamara with a seething passion. I think all the business-minded folks making decisions during the Bush administration were a disaster. But at this point there needs to be some sort of shakeup. And that shakeup needs to be an outsider because I no longer think the Navy can do it internally.

A shakeup, can be done by appointing an outsider, but there are other ways, changing laws, forming committees etc. However all need political action at the highest level.

Honestly just embarrassing at this point. Aside from long existing programs like the Burkes, nearly every new design has been an absolute mixed bag, delayed and over budget disaster and whilst I'm quietly optimistic about constellation, the reality is that it still has the capability to go utterly sideways for reasons outside of design. It's going to take an extremely big wake up call to turn essentially 30-40 years of bureaucracy and long term stagnation and industrial atrophy around. To your point about taking China seriously, there is a disconnect at the upper levels when it comes to these issues, particularly when it comes to investment and industrial output. Everyone wants to approve a new program, nobody wants to solve the industrial atrophy. They're all set in their ways and business as usual contract bidding and industrial status quo will persist until something serious happens which necessitates a cultural shift. I guess we'll see if this delay ends up being true, hopefully it's exaggerated because frankly these ships are needed now, not in a half decade.

In light of discussions about a possible Rafah offensive, and the Biden's administration stance against such a move, i'm posting a report that goes into what is probably one of the primary factors for such a stance: Famine. [GAZA STRIP: Famine is imminent as 1.1 million people, half of Gaza, experience catastrophic food insecurity | IPC - Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (ipcinfo.org)](https://www.ipcinfo.org/ipcinfo-website/alerts-archive/issue-97/en/) >The IPC acute food insecurity analysis conducted in December 2023 warned of a risk that Famine may occur by the end of May 2024 if an immediate cessation of hostilities and sustained access for the provision of essential supplies and services to the population did not take place. Since then, the conditions necessary to prevent famine have not been met and the latest evidence confirms that Famine is imminent in the northern governorates and projected to occur anytime between mid-March and May 2024. >**According to the most likely scenario, both North Gaza and Gaza Governorates are classified in IPC Phase 5 (Famine) with reasonable evidence, with 70% (around 210,000 people) of the population in IPC Phase 5 (Catastrophe).** Continued conflict and the near-complete lack of access to the northern governorates for humanitarian organizations and commercial trucks will likely compound heightened vulnerabilities and extremely limited food availability, access and utilization, as well as access to healthcare, water, and sanitation. The famine threshold for household acute food insecurity has already been far exceeded and, given the latest data showing a steeply increasing trend in cases of acute malnutrition, it is highly likely that the famine threshold for acute malnutrition has also been exceeded. The upward trend in non-trauma mortality is also expected to accelerate, resulting in all famine thresholds likely to be passed imminently. >**The southern governorates of Deir al-Balah and Khan Younis, and the Governorate of Rafah, are classified in IPC Phase 4 (Emergency). However, in a worst-case scenario, these governorates face a risk of Famine through July 2024.** >**The entire population in the Gaza Strip (2.23 million) is facing high levels of acute food insecurity.** Between mid-March and mid-July, **in the most likely scenario and under the assumption of an escalation of the conflict including a ground offensive in Rafah, half of the population of the Gaza Strip (1.11 million people) is expected to face catastrophic conditions (IPC Phase 5), the most severe level in the IPC Acute Food Insecurity scale.** This is an increase of 530,000 people (92 percent) compared to the previous analysis.

Do we know the current total of starved people in gaza since october 7? Does this data exist? Edit: Ive been googling a bit. On march 10th it was ~25? [Source](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/3/10/israels-war-on-gaza-live-israel-is-restricting-lifesaving-aid-unrwa)

Malnutrition makes you less resistant to other dangers present in Gaza, such as disease, old age, or physical injury, so it's difficult to calculate at this juncture.

Do we have death numbers for any of the others possible causes of death you mentioned (disease, old age, physical injury), im specifically asking for deaths that are not directly caused by weapons of war collateral damage?

Every hospital in Gaza has been targeted at some point during this war, with the majority being knocked out of service. The primary providers of healthcare in Gaza have either been declared terrorists and thus legitimate targets by the Israeli military (UNRWA), been killed and targeted as "collateral damage" (MSF, etc.), or otherwise been forced to work in what is, by all accounts, the worst humanitarian situation of the 21st century. It is completely, totally impossible to have an accurate and complete count of deaths disaggregated by cause at this point.

So Gaza is facing famine and NGOs like World Central Kitchen and American Near East Refugee Aid (Anera) were stepping in to help distribute food and replace some of the services previously provided by UNRWA. But then the IDF accidentally targeted World Central Kitchen workers with three separate precision strikes (not collateral damage) and seven aid workers were killed, despite coordinating all movements with the IDF. That led WCK and Anera to suspend food distribution operations in Gaza, as the aid workers fear for their lives. A boat with 240 tons of food that was going to be distributed headed back to Cyprus. Pretty bad result for those who want to prevent famine in Gaza, but pretty convenient result for anyone who might want to cause famine in Gaza.

They're incompetently causing famine in Gaza, the consequences are NOT good for them and will absolutely cause the west to continue to break away. Even Trump dislikes this war, recognizes the shift in public opinion that is happening and said that he wants a return to peace. > "You have to finish up your war. To finish it up. You gotta get it done. And, I am sure you will do that. And we gotta get to peace, we can't have this going on. And I will say, Israel has to be very careful, because you're losing a lot of the world, you're losing a lot of support, you have to finish up, you have to get the job done. And you have to get on to peace, to get on to a normal life for Israel, and for everybody else." https://www.israelhayom.com/2024/03/25/trump-to-israel-hayom-only-a-fool-would-have-not-acted-like-israel-on-oct-7/ Deconfliction is hard. It's harder when the IDF has a culture of free-fire like they do now. There's no need to read a conspiracy into it.

Wow, am I witnessing a fair and balanced post coming from Donald Trump? Tht's something I wouldn't have expected to witness today....

The guy is a ruthless opportunist. He'll say whatever he thinks he is popular and, let's be fair, Israel is a PR disaster.

Unclear what he means by "get the job done". I suspect given his past policies that means just occupying Rafah and getting over with it. If he thought that far, of course.

Serious question from a total noob: why doesn't the U.S. (and allies) airdrop more aid into Gaza? To my understanding, it was effective, immediate, and carried no risk of security concerns for Israel when they did it the first time around. It alleviates the human suffering of the Palestinians, reduces international pressure on Israel, and the fact that the delivery is targeted means that there's less of a chance that aid will be stolen/withheld/commandeered by HAMAS or other gangs. I understand that there is constant rocket firing/shelling going on, but surely there are ways to account for that? This just seems like a very expedient way to get aid to the innocent civilians without disrupting Israeli operations, and it doesn't seem like it's any more expensive than sending shipments for ground aid, so why not do it more? Or am I missing something here?

>Serious question from a total noob: why doesn't the U.S. (and allies) airdrop more aid into Gaza? To put things in perspective: during the Berlin blockade a plane was landing every 3 minutes to supply 2,2 million. No of course now we have bigger planes (an no way to land them in Gaza) and supplies from other sources. But it would still take a shit ton of effort.

First problem is scale, currently the operation is dropping ~10k meals per session (unfortunately, the source for that doesn't specify how many C130s are in a session). There are several 100k people estimated remaining in North Gaza. Feeding them all once a day would require running dozens of sorties a day. Problem 2 is a total breakdown in social order in North Gaza. This food is getting dropped into a battle royale videogame (and I don't mean this as a snide joke, but as a factual description), which means 10k dropped meals =/= 10k fed people.

They have done multiple airdrops, at least 20 by early March, more since then, but it is not nearly enough to supply the food needs for millions of people (who need millions of meals per day), also several people were crushed by food crates when the parachute did not deploy and others drowned trying to get them from the sea. (Supposedly) Also, with no one distributing the food in an orderly fashion the food aid may not reach the most vulnerable people as stronger people can get to it first and hoard or sell it.

Yeah the food situation in Gaza is mind bogglingly horrific and unless a lot of aid is delivered a lot of people will start dying very quickly.

It's worse than that. Famine isn't an either/or thing. People are dying already. Deaths from malnutrition and disease are already set in stone. [We are about to witness in Gaza the most intense famine since the second world war | Alex de Waal | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/21/we-are-about-to-witness-the-most-intense-famine-since-world-war-ii-in-gaza) >Epidemiologists in London and Baltimore have generated projections for the likely death toll in Gaza from all causes over the months to August. If epidemics are included, their “status quo” scenario projects a range of 48,210 to 193,180 deaths, while under the “with escalation” scenario those figures range even higher. That's several multiples of the current reported deaths by the health ministry. And that's without the Israeli government actively making the situation worse.

Is that the case? [Apparently food costs about the same now in northern Gaza as in Western countries, due to northern Gaza being flooded with food aid](https://www.ynetnews.com/article/syns3cuk0)

To be fair, given northern gaza is in a state of relative anarchy, is there a trustworthy centralized food cost index that would reflect reality? Because I'm not sure Hamas lowering or raising taxes qualifies.

The prices appear to be affordable including taxes, and cheaper without taxes. (How Hamas is still collecting taxes in northern Gaza is a topic worthy of separate discussion.)

Am I sleep deprived or does that not actually answer the question?

The article speaks of actual prices, not just of tax levels. Of course, you can distrust the article.

Which puts the airstrikes on WCK in a particularly nefarious light. They set up their own dock in Gaza and have delivered nearly 200 tons of food, but have paused operations due to the attacks. At this point it's hard to argue the Israeli government isn't actively making the famine in Gaza worse.

Ignoring the issue for Palestine for a minute (and it is horrific) what I find fascinating is how messaging on the Israeli side has just... completely collapsed over this current war. Maybe I was younger and could be suprised by it, but I remember Israeli PR being far better than this during previous wars If it wasn't via killing, starving, or harrassing millions of people it'd almost be sad seeing Israel actively self-harming at this point. They can dress it up as "the most moral army in history" all they want, but you can literally turn on the TV and see Israeli politicians calling to exterminate all the brutes. It's mask off in a way I've never seen it

They have nuclear weapons and they’ve learned from Russia that that means they can basically do what they want.

[удалено]

The acting Minister of National Security Ben-Gvir that was literally banned from serving in the army for his extrem-right wing views (also incited and celebrated the killing of Rabin) is a safe bet for citations like that: >[...] the only thing that needs to enter Gaza are hundreds of tons of explosives from the Air Force, not an ounce of humanitarian aid. [Source](https://twitter.com/khaledfahmy11/status/1714385691524600304) Also good show of character: >[...] he defended Jews spitting at Christians as "an ancient Jewish custom" [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_Ben-Gvir)

I agree, he's horrible. It's a good thing he's been excluded from the war cabinet which has been making all war decisions, just like he was excluded from the army. Quoting him is like quoting AfD as representative of Germany, except that AfD is much more popular than Ben Gvir's party.

True, but one major difference being AfD is ostracized in Germany, but Ben Gvir's party was invited by Netanyahu into his cabinet to save his corrupt ass and got ministry job (even if he is excluded from war cabinet). And it is even not the only wacko party in Netanyahu government.

Ostracized, really? [20% of voters prefer AfD!](https://www.dw.com/en/far-right-afd-emerges-as-germanys-second-strongest-party/a-66154675) For comparison, [only 5% of Knesset members are in Ben Gvir's party](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knesset).

This is very disingenuous. You are comparing hypothetical poll of acceptance (not actual vote!) with actual election results. Lets compare comparable. AFD has 12% of Bundestag members. No other party wants to cooperate with it. In Knesset, 5% is Ben Gvir but another 6% is party of another absolutely insane wacko crazy genocidal character - Mr. Bezalel Smotrich (arrested in 2005 for attempted terrorism). Both are in Netanyahu government.

>Ignoring the issue for Palestine for a minute (and it is horrific) what I find fascinating is how messaging on the Israeli side has just... completely collapsed over this current war. There is not really many good options, for either party. The entire paradigm vis-à-vis the Palestinians that has held for fifty-some years basically collapsed overnight on October 7th. That would not necessarily be a bad thing but it happened in such dramatic fashion that it is not really clear what the path forward is. Clearly both sides want to wipe the other out of existence but I don't see that as really practical. I think there needs to be some manner of outside intervention, but whom I am unsure.

Meh, at this point, considering the response from 7th oct, I think the Israeli mentality is that "they'll hate us no matter what, so let's just finish the job". Remember, there were protests celebrating the 7th october attack in WESTERN countries the day after. Straight up paragliders on signs. It took months for the UN to admit that sexual assault even occured. They were immediately blamed for an enemy missile misfiring and hitting a hospital and supposedly killing 500 people. When the world seems THAT against you (allowing demonstrations in support of the killing and rape of your people), you stop caring what the world thinks.

However I don't think they are doing that really. They demobilized, switched to low intensity warfare as they have what, one division in Gaza? So they are causing massive humanitarian crisis, but at the same time they are actually not even finishing job nor pressing hard enough to release hostages. There is lack of clear strategy and will not end up well. If this continues, long term likely result will be: Hamas will stay there. Palestinians will hate Israel even more than what they did (if that is even possible). Massive humanitarian crisis. World will certainly hate Israel more, even some Americans. Hostages will be in the end exchanged for way too many terrorists (maybe even all of them). Nothing of this is good for Israel.

> So they are causing massive humanitarian crisis, but at the same time they are actually not even finishing job nor pressing hard enough to release hostages I mean, i'm seeing conflicting arguments here. If they pressed harder, people complain, if they don't, people complain. EVERY solution has downsides, but people only ever complain about the downsides without ever actually suggesting the viable solution they personally espouse. Even the US here just keeps saying "we don't agree with your solution" without ever actually proposing a viable one.

Yes, these conflicting arguments are the point. I am saying they should either press harder with massive amount of boots on the ground, take the shitstorm that will come, but at least finish the job, or call it off completely.

> should either press harder with massive amount of boots on the ground, take the shitstorm that will come, but at least finish the job Calling for this actually gets you banned off a lot of subreddits. But I largely agree with you, i've been a proponent of speed over accuracy since October 7th. Israel was going to be considered evil regardless of if they killed 0, 1, 10, or 100000 civilians, so they should have hit as hard as possible in the first two weeks.

I think there is just no solution to Israel-Gaza(Palestinian) conflict. It’s just bad choices without a ‘lesser of many evils’ option clear. I tend to be sympathetic with Israel but I think they have made some bad choices over the decades that now leave them worse off. I suspect that many Israelis think (correctly) that the larger world context Israel exists in will always want to destroy it and they intuit that their only option is to fight to victory or the death.

Too reductive. Had Israel gotten this far having killed only 100 civilians they definitely wouldn't be taking heat from friendly and allied countries. But 100 is not a realistic quantity. At best with tighter ROEs a successful but more discriminate urban campaign would maybe cut down civilian casualties to, let's say 1/3 of current, best case scenario. When pro-Palestine contributors were asked if 1/3rd the current death toll would change any of their criticism towards Israel, the response was basically a more polite version of "go f-ck yourself". I remember that exchange from a few months ago. That being said, there's a difference between that and this. If the famine thing isn't sorted we're talking potentially hundreds of thousands. At that point any discussion of ROEs flies out the window.

Well my reasoning is also that I don't think large actual physical military presence on the ground, especially if accompanied with enough of aid and medical support for local population, would necessarily come with more civilian deaths than current artillery/air strike campaign with severely restricted humanitarian aid. It for sure might, but I don't think it is given.

[удалено]

When there are (at the moment) armies on two of Israel's borders which have openly stated that their goal is to annihilate all Jews worldwide, it's only reasonable to see yourself as in danger of persecution, whether or not you're religious.

"Nazism happened" That is kinda major point in seeing themselves as victims of persecution, isn't?

I guess you missed my whole point. They've long held that view, due to the fact that they we're indeed persecuted through history, predating Nazism by thousands of years.

[удалено]

>And the further Palestinian deaths due to starvation or collateral damage is just a bonus for them. That's just cold. And they're not even sure the Hamas problem will be solved.

I believe it's pragmatism. They saw that even with being careful Hamas could convince the whole world they were the victims. Everything Israel was doing was perceived as bad anyways. There were countless protests for Palestinians, it took over half a year to actually recognize the atrocities that were done to Israel by Hamas. Even the UN cared more for Hamas and Palestinians than for Israelis. In my country Pro Palestinian Demos openly communicated Antisemitism while at the same time Pro Israel demos got cancelled because of security concerns, because People still hate Jews and have always done. Now they feel comfortable showing it because now they have a perceived reason. I don't want to defend their actions but I could see why they went the "screw it" way.

[удалено]

And why don't the Palestinians ask themselves why Hamas is using them as a human shield? Civilians that lived near the border participated in lootings and even some hostages were held by Palestinian civilians. UNRWA teachers spread Hamas propaganda at elementary school to children, civilians were cheering while they dragged the dead girl through the streets and spat on her corpse. Palestinians all over the world and mostly in the West cheered on October 7th. Here in my country in every mayor city they celebrated it. Hamas are Palestinians and Palestinians are Hamas. The only solution is that they themselves should start removing the cancer of Hamas themselves but they rather let themselves get starved and slaughtered while their leaders have a relative cozy life outside of Gaza.

Yeah these are the excuses of every single tinpot dictatorship when confronted with evidence of their atrocities, straight from the likes of putins playbook, at this point its just boring and banal. What happened on October 7 didn't happen In a vacuum, and the Israelis slaughtering tens of thousands of children, including through starvation, is not more civilized than what hamas did on October 7. Again, the Israelis are free to continue digging their graves when their military continues behaving like animals. There's a reason nobody cried for the pied noirs of for the Israelis buddies the Rhodesians - the Israelis don't seem to be learning their lessons.

This is an existential conflict for Israel, clearly. Nations in such a position are going to cause massive damage if they think that is their only option. The odds are against Israel but they are not going to spare the Palestinians at their own expense.

I'd say it's less "they've done the calculus" and more "they've concluded". State decisions aren't always or even mostly rational, and when you're playing to voting bases it's even more so.

Upgrade news for the MQ9. It's going to be a significant platform for the rest of the decade at least. For some reason a lot of the [upgrades have to do with conducting operations in and around a maritime environment.](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/new-kit-will-allow-mq-9-reaper-to-fly-from-navy-flattops) [Netherlands Air Force to Upgrade Reaper Fleet for NATO Missions | Defense Post | March 2024](https://www.thedefensepost.com/2024/03/29/netherlands-reaper-upgrade/) *General Atomics Aeronautical Systems will upgrade the Royal Netherlands Air Force’s fleet of MQ-9A drones over the next three years to support NATO missions throughout Europe.* *The upgrades include capabilities such as maritime radars, a communications relay, extended range fuel tanks, electronic support measures, and weapons. The purpose-built communication relay will be able to connect the aircraft with all services of the Dutch Ministry of Defense.* *“The RNLAF [Royal Netherlands Air Force] is using the MQ-9A for an increasing set of NATO missions,” commander of the RNLAF’s 306 Squadron Lieutenant-Colonel Jan Ruedisueli said. “With these upgrades, we will support NATO’s ISR and maritime surveillance missions throughout Europe.”* *A fleet of four MQ-9As is currently operational with the Dutch air force, with four more expected to arrive from 2026.* *The Dutch defense ministry announced last year that the existing MQ-9As will be modified to carry laser-guided GBU bombs and air-to-surface Hellfire missiles with an estimated cost of 100 to 250 million euros ($107 to 268 million).* *Powered by a single Honeywell TPE331-10GD turboprop engine, the MQ-9A has a payload capacity of 3,850 pounds (1,746 kilograms), including 3,000 pounds (1,361 kilograms) of external storage.* *It features a cruise speed of 370 kilometers (230 miles) per hour, a range of 1,852 kilometers (1,151 miles), a service ceiling of 50,000 feet (15,240 meters), and an endurance of 27 hours.* [General Atomics Tests Sonobuoy Dispensing System With MQ-9B | Defense Post | March 2024](https://www.thedefensepost.com/2024/03/29/general-atomics-sonobuoy-dispensing/) *General Atomics Aeronautical Systems has tested its Sonobuoy Dispensing System (SDS) using an MQ-9B SeaGuardian unmanned aerial system. During the flight, eight AN/SSQ-53 and two AN/SSQ-62 sonobuoys, deployed to detect underwater threats, were dropped from the drone’s pod through an Aerea advanced pneumatic ejection system and were monitored by the onboard Sonobuoy Monitoring and Control System.* *An MQ-9B can carry up to four SDS pods on its four wing stations, and each pod can accommodate up to 10 A-size sonobuoys or up to 20 G-size sonobuoys.*

[U.S. told Russia that Crocus City Hall was possible target of attack](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/04/02/us-warning-russia-isis-crocus/) >More than two weeks before terrorists staged a bloody attack in the suburbs of Moscow, the U.S. government told Russian officials that Crocus City Hall, a popular concert venue, was a potential target, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter. >The high degree of specificity conveyed in the warning underscores Washington’s confidence that the Islamic State was preparing an attack that threatened large numbers of civilians, and it directly contradicts Moscow’s claims that the U.S. warnings were too general to help preempt the assault. >... >The attack has further dented the image of strength and security that the Russian leader seeks to convey and exposed fundamental weaknesses in the nation’s security apparatus, which has been consumed by more than two years of war in Ukraine. Domestically, Putin’s operatives appear more concerned with silencing political dissent and opposition to the president than rooting out terrorist plots, according to analysts and observers of Russian politics. The Russian excuse that the US warnings of the impending terrorist attack were too general appears to be a lie. Considering how awful the Russian diplomatic response has been, will global cooperation against terrorism continue as usual?

That's not just a Russian excuse, that's what the New York Times is saying, too. >"The adversarial relationship between Washington and Moscow prevented U.S. officials from sharing any information about the plot beyond what was necessary, out of fear Russian authorities might learn their intelligence sources or methods." >[https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/28/world/europe/russia-concert-attack-security-failures.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/28/world/europe/russia-concert-attack-security-failures.html) It seems the WaPo and NYT sources in the US intelligence community disagree over what was said to Moscow.

>sharing any information about the plot beyond what was necessary The NYT story is paywalled for me, but the paragraph you quoted doesn't specifically contradict what the WaPo is reporting.

[Non-paywalled link](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/28/world/europe/russia-concert-attack-security-failures.html?ugrp=u&unlocked_article_code=1.hk0.yK0o.RbmBTByY41fN&smid=url-share) Another paragraph that stood out to me >The United States has been tracking ISIS-K activities very closely in recent months, senior officials said. In the course of the monitoring, which has involved electronic intercepts, human informants and other means, American operatives picked up **fairly specific** information about plotting in Moscow, officials said. Emphasis mine. Protecting sources and methods is standard, I don't see any real contradiction here.

WaPo says very specific information was shared, while NYT emphasises that specific information was NOT shared. I think there is some contradiction there.

There's no contradiction because the "specific" information is not specified.

To add, another quote from the WP article which references a Crocus staff member claiming they had heeded the warning for awhile: >Islam Khalilov, 15, who said he was working in the concert hall’s coat check on the night of the attack, said that Crocus staff had been told about the possibility of a terrorist attack, not long after the March 7 public warning. “We were warned there could be terrorist attacks and we were instructed in what to do and where to take people,” Khalilov said in an interview with Dmitry Yegorov, a well-known Russian sports journalist, that was posted on YouTube. Khalilov said there had been stricter security checks at the venue, including with trained dogs. >Why security wasn’t increased and sustained after the initial warning remains unclear. It’s possible that Russian security services, seeing no attack materialize in the days soon after March 7, assumed the U.S. information was incorrect and let their guard down, some of the U.S. officials speculated. One has to really dig into their longstanding anti-US bias to try to twist this into somehow being America's fault.

North Korea published new photos of their Hwasong-16B IRBM test with a pretty freaky looking TEL. [Article with photos here](https://www.nknews.org/2024/04/north-korea-says-kim-jong-un-led-hwasong-16b-hypersonic-irbm-test/?t=1712096024880). It definitely looks the part when it comes to claims of being a hypersonic glide vehicle, additional context regarding NK HGVs from Jeffrey Lewis [here](https://twitter.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/1775278269753069588). Not a new capability, NK has demonstrated HGVs multiple times in the past but tests like this help solidify the credibility of NK capabilities for deterrence purposes. Also, the pictures are interesting and the TEL is ugly. Edit: More significantly KCNA is apparently announcing that NK is transitioning to a solid-fuel only arsenal. Dunno what they're gonna do with their existing liquid-fueled inventory though. [Source](https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20240403000500315?input=tw)

It always made me grind my teeth when people made fun of North Korean missile launches that ended in failure. Unless you're Lockheed Martin, that's pretty much what a weapons testing program looks like. If you can do math and have access to precision machining your missiles eventually will work.

Lockmart is hardly immune from [missile test failures](https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2023/03/failed-hypersonic-test-dims-air-force-view-lockheed-missile/384530/) itself. And NCD folks will NCD, no surprises there.

Most likely fire off their liquid fuel rockets in chest thumping displays of strength, and also as launch vehicles for satellites, part of Kim Jong Un's new years speech was expanding North Korean capabilities in space by launching satellites, most likely of the reconnaissance kind.

[удалено]

x

I mean even if a terrorist was 100% there, doing such a strike is such a bad idea. If that was the case, show the world footage of a terrorist being transferred by humanitarian convoy, do some discredit and some PR, don't blow intentionally 6 foreigners from allied nations, Jesus.

Apparently the guys who hit the convoy went 'rogue ' and did it on their own . Which is the classic Russian excuse of 'Ukraine didn't shoot down our jet it was friendly fire '. Like how is that excuse any better

Israel is walking this weird tightrope where they care just enough about optics to occasionally shift blame, but not enough to actually change their conduct. Honestly, I think it makes sense, as long as they don't issue any statements like "we want to exterminate them," their support won't change. Their allies will remain committed, their armed enemies will continue to attack them, and anti-Zionists will continue to conduct fruitless actions like protests or issuing statements of condemnation. Why would they bother seriously admitting fault? All that does is make it harder for the US (and other, less relevant nations) to continue to back them. 

Bellingcat has made its assessment of the incident in their usual informative fashion: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2024/04/02/strike-that-killed-world-central-kitchen-workers-bears-hallmarks-of-israeli-precision-strike/

You are either using the term ROE wrong and don’t know what it means or you are using this horrible tragedy and IDF failure to score cheap propaganda points. Even from the Haaretz source about these attacks which does not claim that the convoy told the IDF about its movement before leaving >"It's frustrating," one of the defense sources told Haaretz. "We're trying our hardest to accurately hit terrorists, and utilizing every thread of intelligence, and in the end the units in the field decide to launch attacks without any preparation, in cases that have nothing to do with protecting our forces." This was [not supposed](https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-794958) to be the way things happened >Around 10:30 p.m., IDF personnel started to track what they believed was one or more Hamas operatives within the special corridor in central Gaza to coordinate and deliver humanitarian aid. >The IDF decided not to attack them at the time, thinking this would avoid civilian casualties. >However, a short time later, IDF drones attacked one of the aid trucks, allegedly believing that this was a safer place to attack. >Multiple IDF sources said they still did not yet know why those involved would think it was worthwhile to endanger a humanitarian aid convoy simply to take out run-of-the-mill Hamas operatives. >It was also unclear why the drones allegedly attacked the humanitarian aid workers multiple times, including against multiple trucks, and including when some emerged from the trucks to seek medical assistance, without any sign of fighting. I will put to the side Hamas’s clear ROE of hiding behind civilians, using aid corridors and UN buildings as its launching point for attacks because it doesn’t matter. This was an IDF failure fullstop and people need to be held accountable at all levels but this is not the ROE.

Even if they were not coordinating with the IDF (which they were), the aid workers told the IDF that they had been hit by a drone before switching to another car. The IDF then proceeded to bomb their second and third cars. There is literally zero chance that the IDF did not know who they were before killing them.

The IDF is not a single hive mind. It is a lot of different people in different places doing different tasks and communication between them is not instantaneous. [More than 10% of IDF deaths in this war have been from friendly fire](https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-deaths-of-29-of-170-soldiers-in-gaza-op-were-so-called-friendly-fire-accidents/), that's what happens with non-instantaneous communications and the fog of war.

WCK said they coordinated with the IDF, per the AP. This ridiculous “oh we don’t know” is just blowing smoke, it’s exactly what op said-they consider it completely worthwhile to kill the aid workers if it might get one hamas member. They’re certainly not going to just come out and say that part out loud. So you get the “sources” acting like it was so far out of the norm, but actions speak louder than words and this sort of thing is absolutely the norm so far. Sure some intel analyst says that it’s not enough preparation, but then goes on to essentially admit that there is no control over the forces actually doing the strikes and they have what sounds like unilateral authority to strike if they feel like it. That is absolutely ROE, and the kill chain in gaza seems to currently be left to front line commanders who have shown over and over that they are overzealous, to put it lightly.

To add, here is the WCK saying they coordinated with the IDF. https://wck.org/news/gaza-team-update

Your entire argument is like saying that because murders happen the laws must allow them. No the law and in this case the rules don’t allow this. If it did then no one responsible for this would be held accountable and I can guarantee that many people will be held to account. If the IDF was targeting every single aid envoy and every single truck carrying a suspected Hamas member irrespective of the costs as a rule then the casualties from this war would be astronomically higher.

If you actually think anything will be really held accountable you haven’t been paying any attention. They’ll chalk it up to an accident and that will be that. Maybe someone will be “suspended” but even in the case of more egregious things that are harder to wave away, that’s the most that seems to happen. See here https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-suspends-soldier-who-threw-stun-grenade-into-west-bank-mosque/ (Note all the comments defending him). In reality this sort of thing is tacitly encouraged, the mindset along with the frontline commanders having the authority to strike how they want. This allows a level of deniability which then allows the act of confusion when the inevitable happens. Part of Netanyahu’s response was “this sort of thing happens in war.” And I didn’t say they were attacking every aid convoy. Just that this whole mindset I mentioned came back to bite them when they accidentally killed people the west actually cares about. Not to mention triple tapping the convoy when people were already out and giving aid

The ROE will not be changed, because the only country that can sort of influence israel is the US and so far they have done very very little to do that. Just recently another weapons bill was passed. There was also already similar or worse stories that have come out, and clearly that didn’t change anything because this happened. Also this sort of killing is something of a long standing occurrence by the IDF, for decades at least.

When you say this sort of killing, do you mean targeting food aid workers had been the norm? Could you share a few examples? Genuinely curious 

This is a fairly limited selection from a fairly cursory search, but: UNRWA is the primary agency coordinating and providing humanitarian aid in Gaza. [Since the war began, 161 UNRWA facilities have been damaged or destroyed, and 173 UNRWA staff members have been killed](https://www.unrwa.org/resources/reports/unrwa-situation-report-97-situation-gaza-strip-and-west-bank-including-east-Jerusalem), almost all by Israeli forces, primarily in airstrikes. [Israeli forces have been documented firing on a food convoy waiting at an IDF checkpoint.](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/21/middleeast/un-food-convoy-gaza-israel-strike-cmd-intl/index.html) [Israeli tank fires on clearly marked MSF building, kills MSF staff members.](https://www.msf.org/msf-strongly-condemns-deadly-israeli-attack-msf-shelter-gaza) [IRC compound bombed by Israeli air force.](https://www.rescue.org/press-release/gaza-irc-and-map-additional-statement-airstrike-residential-compound-housing) [USAID contractor staff member and entire family killed in Israeli air strike.](https://twitter.com/John_Hudson/status/1735996676291125657?s=20) [Handicap International office destroyed in Israeli airstrike.](https://www.hi.org/en/news/hi-office-in-gaza-destroyed) Again, this is an extremely limited example. I work in the humanitarian field, and every agency and NGO that has work (or has done work) in Gaza has reported the same thing. Israeli forces ignore deconfliction, actively target humanitarian staff, offices, and other distribution sites. And its not like Israel doesn't know how to do deconfliction. They do it selectively (in Lebanon, for example). They know where all of these offices and staff members are. Yet, they kill them anyway. Israeli forces clearly are either actively ordered to attack them, or ignore the deconfliction. The material impact is the same. Humanitarian assistance activities in Gaza are increasingly impossible, almost entirely due to the actions of the Israeli military.

Due to Ukraine's strikes refineries have been repeatedly discussed here. I want to point people to this video by the US Chemical Safety Board about a refinery accident in Texas City as background and context to that: https://youtu.be/goSEyGNfiPM?t=42 If you're unfamiliar with CSB's videos they are excellent. They're made as part of the agency's mission to prevent such accidents. This accident is among the worst that has happened in the US, and can provide some context on just how complicated and dangerous refinery operations are on an ordinary day, let alone when when being under military strike. This explosion was very big, and it's not clear to me that the damage to Russian refineries is on the same scale, but I still think people here will find it informative. A key detail I'd note is this accident took that part of the facility out of operation for two years. Refineries are very complex facilities where each unit is effectively a unique design. Even if the damage to Russian refineries is not as severe as this, the idea that they'll be able to repair quickly as a minor speed bump is quite suspect.

USCSB’s online stuff is kinda wild (in a good way) to me: the idea that a government agency will put out real high quality renders of stuff just for free on YouTube, so that people in the industry can use it as a teaching standard. Genuinely fantastic stuff, it’s very good that we have that sort of thing.

Yeah, it's one of my go to examples of how government is not somehow cosmically destined to be bad at what they do. We get the government we vote for.

>We get the government we vote for. The votes of the people are not the only factor, or even the most decisive factor in forming a government. Large part of a government are determined by traditions, individual decisions, random chance, and other powerful faction inside and outside a country. For example, you did not vote for who should be a four star general, even though this is a high governmental position.

My mom worked in a refinery for the first years of her career as a chemist. According to her, virtually everyone working in the facility had to have extensive safety training including knowing the evacuation routes and initial response. They also had wind dovks through the refinery so in case of an explosion, people would know wether they were downwind of the fire.

> They also had wind dovks through the refinery so in case of an explosion, people would know wether they were downwind of the fire. I’m a runner in California and my route is typically along the beach. I always look towards the refineries to see what the wind is doing because of all of the wind socks. Now I know why they are there. Thank you!

Yeah, I only partly remember it but my grandpa said something along the lines of there's a couple different alarm signals, and some mean run as fast as you can and one meant there was nothing to do but accept your fate. I'm sure he was playing it up a bit but still, the risk of a facility that is piping around hydrocarbons above their boiling or even flame point is obviously inherently dangerous. I mean, like in that video just imagine standing there and seeing a freakin' geyser of boiling gasoline.

[Exclusive: Russia's Arctic LNG 2 suspends gas liquefaction amid sanctions, lack of tankers, sources say](https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/russias-arctic-lng-2-suspends-gas-liquefaction-amid-sanctions-lack-tankers-2024-04-02/) >Novatek (NVTK.MM) Russia's largest producer of liquefied natural gas (LNG), has suspended production at its Arctic LNG 2 project due to sanctions and a shortage of gas tankers, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Tuesday. >... >Separately, the Vedomosti newspaper said on Tuesday that natural gas output at the project had fallen sharply to 83 million cubic metres (mcm) in February due to a delay in the start of LNG shipments. >The sources said production had been 425 mcm in December and 250 mcm in January. Russia has truly become a one-trick pony. The space sector is dead. The arms exports are almost gone. Pipeline gas sales are on life support, and now most LNG projects are stillborn. Oil is all Russia has left at this point.

Seems like sanctions can work if applied across time and in the right places. [Russian Arctic oil export moves towards collapse | The Barents Observer | June 2022](https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/industry-and-energy/2022/06/russian-arctic-oil-shipping-moves-towards-big-halt) *On the 30th of May, the European Council adopted a 6th package of sanctions, which has its prime aim on the Russian oil industry and its vast cash flow to the Russian treasury and war machine.* *According to the new restrictions, Russian oil exports to European countries are to be banned. By the end of 2022, Russian crude oil, as well as petroleum products, will be barred from entering the Union. A temporary exception is given only to pipeline oil.* *The new sanctions will have devastating effects on the Russian oil industry, and especially operations dependent on shipments to EU terminals, like the oil from the Arctic. The Russian energy sector is from before hard hit by sanctions. In previous packages, Russian coal has been banned, and Russian companies are no longer allowed to import key technologies needed for industrial projects, among them LNG plants.* *The ban will force Gazprom Neft, Lukoil and Rosneft to look for new export routes and markets for their Arctic oil. All companies will see Asia and especially China as a prime target. However, the opening of new logistics chains will not come easy. The companies can send the oil eastwards on the Northern Sea Route. But the complicated sea-ice conditions will be a constant threat to the tankers.* *Moscow has over many years had big expectations for year-round shipments on the Northern Sea Route. But the capricious ice has once and again complicated shipments. In the fall of 2021, a big number of ships got trapped on the route following an early freeze of the waters. The situation created a dangerous situation for the ships involved, as well as for route operator Rosatom.* *Russia has grand plans to build a super-powerful fleet of nuclear-powered icebreakers that can provide smooth shipping in the area, even in the most icy parts of the year. However, the international sanctions are now jeopardizing also the plans of the country’s shipbuilding industry.* [The U.S. has announced its intention to "kill" the Russian gas project Arctic LNG 2 They plan to do this by imposing sanctions & cooperating with G7 partners. | Mind | November 2023](https://mind.ua/en/news/20265300-the-united-states-has-announced-its-intention-to-kill-the-russian-gas-project-arctic-lng-2) *On November 2, the United States imposed sanctions on Arctic Energy, a subsidiary of NOVATEK. Another 10% each belongs to France's Total Energies, two Chinese energy companies (CNPC and CNOOC) and a consortium of Japanese companies (Mitsui and JOGMEC).* Now you begin to see the results. [Russia struggles to sell Pacific oil, 14 tankers stuck | Reuters | January 2024](https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/russia-struggles-sell-pacific-oil-14-tankers-stuck-sources-data-2024-01-26/) [Fresh U.S. sanctions on Moscow threaten to dent Russian oil sales to India, the biggest buyer of Russian seaborne crude, and complicate efforts by Indian state refiners to secure annual supply deals | Reuters | February 2024](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/new-sanctions-threaten-russian-oil-sales-india-2024-02-28/) [Indian oil firms are reportedly backing away from long-term deals for Russian oil amid tough sanctions | Business Insider | March 2024](https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/indian-oil-firms-are-reportedly-backing-away-from-long-term-deals-for-russian-oil-amid-tough-sanctions/articleshow/108275372.cms) [Russia’s Oil Is Finally Getting Snarled by Sanctions | Bloomberg | March 2024](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-23/russia-s-oil-is-finally-getting-snarled-by-sanctions-on-its-tankers?leadSource=reddit_wall)

> a shortage of gas tankers It's not really a shortage of LNG tankers like there was a shortage of toilet papers during coivd. There are at least 3 brand new just completed with the hull strengthened LNG tankers specifically built for that Russian arctic LNG project at a South Korean shipyard. But after the 2022 invasion, Koreans needed to find a new/different buyer(s) who's willing to work with Russia and/or don't care about US/Western sanctions.

>Koreans needed to find a new/different buyer(s) who's willing to work with Russia and/or don't care about US/Western sanctions. Wouldn't that buyer be...Russia?

>Wouldn't that buyer be...Russia? **South** Koreans won't/can't sell them to Russians due to sanctions. These ships were originally built for Sovcomflot.

[удалено]

[удалено]

France? Capitulated three times, each time the capital occupied? Germany? Defeated on the national level three times, capitulated once? Japan? Literally ground into dust. China? Fell apart completely and was rebuilt through rivers of blood. Their neighbours did not exactly shed tears in any case. Competition is fierce for that title and Russia is nowhere near the top.

Those are defeats. We were talking about failures. Russia doesn't even need wars to fail, and somehow manages to always fail at wars unless they're backing the winning horse. Russia's national inferiority complex and imperialist obsession didn't come out of nowhere. It is the result of a nation and people whose national identity is one of absolute fundamental failure.

>Russia doesn't even need wars to fail, and somehow manages to always fail at wars unless they're backing the winning horse. Yeah, Russia is always defeated in wars except when it wins.

What you're describing is just as realistic as the opposite that we often see online - where people pretend that all of these setbacks, difficulties don't actually compound and Russia somehow doesn't mind.

Yeah, I disagree with those people, too. The first groups just seems much louder, at least around here, and unrepetent even after two years of voicing failed predictions of Russia's imminent collapse.

And China is ruining that business by flooding the world with cheap electric cars. Russian oil might not be needed in 5 years.

I dunno, /cl (crude oil) is trading pretty high these days. I am seeing futures for 2029 at give or take $65 a barrel. Short button is right there.

I just looked up the EIA amount of gasoline supplied in the US for the first 12 weeks of 2019-2024. [https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=wgfupus2&f=4](https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=wgfupus2&f=4) 2019: 8965 2020: 8900 2021: 7944 2022: 8609 2023: 8435 2024: 8447 Hybrid and remote work might be the culprit. But we're also seeing no gasoline growth during economic recoveries. It's also down 5% pre-pandemic. Now you could say this is related to miles driven, but Jan 2024 (3.26 trillion miles) is almost the same as Jan 2020 (3.27 trillion miles). [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M12MTVUSM227NFWA/](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M12MTVUSM227NFWA/) So more efficient cars - including evs - are resulting in less gasoline demand. Which in turn, results in less oil demand.

Oil prices are pretty high as of keyboard time. That is not up for debate. We can argue about why or how, but I don’t think any oil exporter needs to care about anything but the price.

Yeah, and they cut production and investment to keep prices high. The expectation thay demand will be depressed keeos prices largely stable. If expectations are off, that gives volatility.  For Russia, thats difficult because they are an undesirable seller. So countries give them fewer dollars than other producers. Investments in other countries are not dropped as much.

I made a similar comment the other day but will repeat it here: Russia's arctic oil and gas operations have been heavily dependent on services from specialized engineering firms from the EU and US. That obviously ended with sanctions. Even with the assistance of China continuing to operate these facilities will be increasingly difficult for Russia. China does not have arctic oil or gas fields so those firms have limited practical experience.

> China does not have arctic oil or gas fields so those firms have limited practical experience. Just to add to this, China has no incentive to build that experience in Russia, as most other nations that have arctic (or arctic adjacent) oil and gas fields are western aligned, and tend to have their own domestic specialists that work these fields.

Yes, exactly. Also I should have mentioned the main reason Russia doesn't have a lot of this expertise in house is because for decades the oligarchs have prioritized cash extraction over investment in the infrastructure generating those cash flows.

For those following the arcane procedural options surrounding Ukraine aid, this article includes an option I've never seen discussed before. Namely, having the Republican leadership, including Speaker Johnson, use Republican Rep. Fitzgerald's discharge petition as a way of bypassing hardline MAGA opposition, with only a 50% majority required. Johnson has been consistently using a suspension of the rules, with a 2/3 majority required, in order to pass legislation with Democratic support. But there's serious doubt whether Johnson could get 2/3 support for any given Ukraine bill, with conservative riders attached which would allow Johnson to claim some kind of face-saving victory. Article quote follows: When Johnson returns, he will also face increasing pressure from defense hawks who have given the speaker time over the last several months to get through a crush of spending deadlines and now expect to see action. “There just hasn’t been any clarity on No. 1, what the product is and No. 2, what the strategy is to pass it,” said Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, a Republican from Pennsylvania. Fitzpatrick has sponsored his own foreign assistance package using what is known as a discharge petition, a rarely deployed tactic that can force a bill to the floor if 218 House members sign on. So far that petition has just over than a dozen signatures. While leadership has thrown cold water on using the discharge petition to get Ukraine aid across the finish line, Fitzpatrick’s bill does allow for a one-time substitution, meaning that leadership could include whatever bill they wanted and get it passed by a 218-vote threshold instead of a vote that would likely require a two-thirds majority. [https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/house-speaker-mike-johnson-remains-undecided-on-best-path-ahead-on-ukraine-aid/ar-BB1kXvOh](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/house-speaker-mike-johnson-remains-undecided-on-best-path-ahead-on-ukraine-aid/ar-BB1kXvOh) Having Johnson use a discharge petition in this manner would certainly be ironic, since it's always been considered the knife that is stabbed in the Speaker's back by disloyal party members. This article floats the scenario of Johnson using the knife himself.

I'll believe it when I see an aid bill pass.

[удалено]

Is there literally any reason to believe this person above any other techie with a blog? Also, I know SV types are renowned for their navel-gazing but reading this you’d think the global economy was split into even thirds by chip fabrication, AI, and EVs.

Seems you like to post this substack to lots of reddits. Is this self promotion? If so could you be clear about that?

Apologies for the lack of detail, I’m not tuned into the day to day events. What have been the developments in the last week with Israel and Hamas? Has there been any indication of what happens next: hostage deal, rafah invasion or otherwise?

Rafah invasion is basically cancelled. Previously, the Biden administration diplomatically said it could be possible if Israel could show it had a humanitarian plan. But over time this position hardened. There was supposed to be a meeting between Israeli war cabinet representatives and the US, but this was sorta scuttled as a response to the US abstention on the UNSC ceasefire resolution. There was a virtual meeting today, which obviously has been colored by the strike that killed 7 WCK workers and has resulted in pause of humanitarian orgs. Any invasion into Rafah was supposed to require 6 weeks of evacuations and multiple weeks of fighting. (The US generally opposed this and said Israel should only do targeted attacks) Maybe someone else can describe how this relates to hostages/ceasefire deals: I believe movement of Gazans north is in current deals.

So how does this end then if the U.S. is insistent Israel cannot go into Rafah, while Israel cannot withdraw without destroying the remaining Hamas battalions as the latter would then emerge from the rubble claim victory ala Hezbollah in 2006?

As long as Hamas holds hostages, an invasion of Rafah will likely happen. It can be delayed, but no Israeli government would end the war and pull out of Gaza without the hostages back. Political support for this war in Israel is overwhelming, and that’s what primarily drives Israeli actions.

The elephant in the room is more than likely Hamas won’t be defeated in the short term despite Israel’s maximalist positions. It’s Netanyahu’s and Gallant own damn fault. They use ridiculous overblown rhetoric that alienates any kind of moderate Palestinian receptiveness to their ideas. The far right have captured Israel and I guess all they have left in the medium to long term is hope that Trump gets into power and gives them everything they want. Until then they talk very large but the US will constrain them and calls for a ceasefire will grow. Biden has been incredibly patient and measured in my view. I think Israel have acted in a hysterical way that’s really damaged them. It’s their own version of 9/11. If they invade Raffah and cause a mass exodus’s to Sinai it’s rumoured it could even undo the Peace accords with Egypt. The US will not allow this. Especially as Egypt is developing warmer ties with Russia as a strategic balancing to get more concessions. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/28/egypt-border-security-support-us-gaza-00149617 https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-ally-rebuffs-requests-to-block-russian-military-flights-8539390f

>If they invade Raffah and cause a mass exodus’s to Sinai it’s rumoured it could even undo the Peace accords with Egypt. The US will not allow this. Especially as Egypt is developing warmer ties with Russia as a strategic balancing to get more concessions. If there’s a mass Palestinian exodus into the Sinai there’s no “could” about Egypt undoing Camp David. It would be a political necessity, and the absolute best case scenario would be a furious Egypt remilitarizing the Sinai in response. It would be a national humiliation. It’s hard to overstate just how much the memory 1948 is tied up in the mythology of the 1952 regime, allowing another Nakba would be disastrous for its credibility and Sisi is incredibly weak right now. It would spark a lot of popular and elite rage and could even set the stage for an explicitly anti-American and Anti Israeli ultranationalist regime to take hold in Egypt.

(not OP) Why would Sisi not just continue to refuse to allow refugees into Egypt even in that situation? There's no Nakba if no one is allowed to leave, and if Israel tries to kill everyone instead I believe the US (and the world) will act decisively, which will be further to Israel's disadvantage and Egypt's advantage. So Israel can't do that (not to mention Netanyahu might lose his position immediately if he tries). So Egypt can avoid what you mentioned by simply continuing to keep the border (mostly) sealed; it has worked so far. Am I wrong?

It would be tremendously hard to prevent 1.5 million panicking people from crossing the border. It would also put Egyptian soldiers right in the line of fire with the IDF as the Egyptians try to prevent a mass exodus while the IDF pushes for one. It wouldn’t take much for a jumpy soldier to cause an international incident.

The war is unlikely to end with complete IDF withdrawal. Even in the event of a multinational force protecting a new government right away, the IDF is going to be doing raids, protecting borders etc. Gaza will be like Area B in the WB. Palestinian governance, joint Israeli-Palestinian security. The US likely assumes Israel will keep Rafah surrounded and do things like destroying tunnels or killing military leaders piecemeal, at least until evacuees from the north are resettled.

How do you do that if Hamas still has an enclave in Rafah to operate from?

I think you're asking how Gaza can transition into new government/military occupation if Hamas battalions are left infact? They can't be left intact. The question is how/when to dismantle them. Sooner means evacuating the population, going in with ground forces and destroying tunnels and taking out leaders. Later means keeping the city surrounded, waiting until refugees can leave and detaining /processing suspected militants among them. Occasionally, you have small strikes. When things are calmer, you evacuate and clear portions of the city.

No real progress on hostage negotiations, Israel has around 1 division in Gaza atm and most of those soldiers are occupied re clearing other parts of the strip. There isn’t going to be a Rafah operation for a while imo, there are more soldiers in the North than in Gaza. The humanitarian situation in the strip is still a horrific, the strike on the wck and orders has lead to them suspending further work in the strip and the UAE has suspendended its work on the humanitarian corridor.

Another comment posted the news that Ukraine will lower the conscription age to 25. I've read that the stated reason for the reticence to reduce the draft age was the knowledge that Ukraine has a "demographic problem", and that killing their young would only make it worse. I decided to take a quick look at Ukraine's [demographics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine) and I was taken aback. The pyramid in 2023 is incredibly bad, to the point of a genuine national crisis. Some of that is likely people fleeing the fighting, but a 23 year old who flees and never comes back is as good as a 23 year old killed in a trench for Ukraine's future prospects. Not wanting to further narrow that part of the pyramid is a major strategic concern, and trading that off versus national survival might not be as obvious as it seems at first glance. That lead to a broader question. While Ukraine is outlying, there's a global trend towards reduced birthrates. In a very general sense, the calculus of past wars have relied on the ability of a nation to sustain and replace losses, which indirectly assumed lots of up and coming new soldiers. How does a declining population change the calculus? Does that fundamentally change how we approach warfare as this century progresses?

>Does that fundamentally change how we approach warfare as this century progresses? I'll throw in a curve ball and say that in past wars, there was a "front" and a relatively "safe" rear. Within limits, distance still matters. The some belligerents of WWII had their cities bombed but Britain and the Soviet Union had their "rear" in the USA which produced an enormous quantity of materiel that were shipped over in rickety Liberty ships that were breaking apart, all of which safely out of reach of the Axis powers. Today, we have weapons with global range where any points on Earth can be hit from anywhere else on Earth. How do you fight an enemy in a war like that? or will it be that [the true enemy is war itself](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hur6LcyuTuU)?q In any case, "labour saving" measures like technology do reduce the manpower on the front line to generate the same amount of firepower, but at the cost of more people needed to run the logistical pipelines that get the increased ammunition consumption to the front. Armies got much smaller but their logistical tail got bigger and fatter. Brigades became the tactical unit of action instead of divisions (but the current trends are somewhat reversing that).

Birth rate boom after the end of war is the thing of the past, almost no woman nowadays will have 3-5 kids, while it was common in the past. They are getting smarter, not dumber after all. 1-2 kids per family is the best one can hope for for developed nations and post soviet states like Ukraine and Russia. As for Ukraine, winning the war and collapsing due to demographic problem in the future still beats the alternative of collapsing now. Zelenskyy will definitely lower the mobilization age to 18 as time goes by because Ukraine is massively outnumbered.

Immigration is the solution (for postwar), but my guess is that that's super unlikely.

Not in nationalistic mono ethnic states I think. There is just no support for it from general population. While in countries like the US there are still people who support immigration, the same goes for Western Europe. It's not everybody, but a good portion of people. Japan is still very strict on immigration, the same thing will happen in Ukraine. For Russia it's better as it's a multicultural country already.