Air Weapons: Ukrainian Drone War
January 19, 2025: When Ukraine was invaded by Russia in 2022, the Russians expected a quick victory taking weeks or weeks. Three years later, the war continues because of massive NATO military and economic aid, and the creativity of Ukrainians in developing new ways to defeat the enemy. The Ukrainian did this with a combination of ingenuity and desperation. One result was the invention of drone warfare. A year after the invasion it was becoming obvious that drones were dominating the battlefield. Since the war began in early 2022 drones have increased at the expense of traditional artillery. The reasons were obvious. Drones were more flexible, cheaper and came in many different models. Drones could be controlled by nearby operators and sent after targets over a thousand kilometers distant using GPS guidance and several backup systems if electronic jamming of GPS signals is encountered.
This situation began once Russia invaded Ukraine in early 2022 and intense combat meant both sides quickly lost most of their conventional offensive weapons. These losses included armored vehicles, especially tanks for the Russians. Longer range weapons, like artillery, which delivered most of its fire power to targets 30 kilometers distant and a smaller number of guided missiles, which could reach targets over a hundred kilometers distant, tended to survive the heavy losses suffered by armored vehicles that fought at close range. The Ukrainians quickly ran out of artillery ammunition and were the first to adopt drones because they had to, and the Russians are still trying to catch up.
The Russians lost most of their tube artillery in 2023 by burning their tube liners out. By the second half of 2023 both sides had turned to drones, which were cheaper, easier to obtain and provided more flexible alternatives. It was soon discovered that drones had a seemingly endless number of new capabilities. One of the more crucial qualities was the ease of obtaining drones and modifying them or building larger or smaller versions. The technology required for current drone warfare evolved over the last few decades as the commercial quadcopters and hobbyist fixed wing remotely controlled aircraft achieved a degree of maturity in design and reliability. This made it possible for users or developers to confidently and quickly modify existing drones t0 meet their needs.
Most of the resulting drones were short range models operating no farther than ten kilometers from their user. This meant the combat zone was a much more dangerous place than it ever had been in the past. The surveillance was constant and round the clock. More expensive drones with night-vision sensors, usually based on a combination of object and heat detection and interpretation, provided adequate surveillance at night or in fog or misty conditions.
Then there are logistical considerations. Reusable drones have to be recharged or refueled between missions. Drones built as single-use weapons have to be checked out before actual use. This is especially true for the long-range attack models. These fixed-wing drones go after targets a thousand kilometers or more distant and tend to use a single diesel or gasoline fueled engine. These engines must be sturdy and reliable because everything depends on a reliable propulsion system. Another critical component is the navigation and target acquisition system. Resistance to electronic jamming is essential. Electronic jamming technology is constantly evolving to deal with improved guidance systems that make earlier jammers ineffective or less effective. This makes every new drone design likely to be compromised and obsolete in short order. With the inexpensive technology drones use, rapid evolution is easier to achieve and the ability to quickly develop ways to disrupt new tech is essential.
Another major limitation is the need for trained drone operators. They need a dozen or more hours of training before they are able to start operating these drones effectively, and another few dozen hours of actual use before they are able to make the most out of the system. These drones are difficult to shoot down until they get close to the ground and the shooter is close enough, as in less than a few hundred meters, to successfully target a drone with a bullet or two and bring it down. Troops are rarely in position to do this, so most of these drones are able to complete their mission, whether it is a one-way attack or a reconnaissance and surveillance mission. The recon missions are usually survivable and enable the drone to be reused. All these drones are constantly performing surveillance, which means that either side commits enough drones to maintain constant surveillance over a portion of the front line, to a depth, into enemy territory, of at least a few kilometers. At one point, the Ukrainians developed tactics to penetrate farther into enemy territory with continual surveillance, often up to 20 kilometers into Russian-held territory. This made it extremely difficult for the Russians to supply their front-line troops, even with drinking water. The Russians responded but were never able to get ahead of the Ukrainian drone developers and users.
One crucial Ukrainian innovation was massive use of First Person Viewing or FPV armed drones. The drone operator using a wireless connection with the FPV drone could see what the drone’s video camera could see and quickly find a target and attack. The FPV drone operator used a headset covering his eyes to see the drone video and used a controller similar to video game controllers. For some drones, it was a video game controller. When the Russians use enough jamming to prevent any FPV drone from operating, the Ukrainians developed a drone controlled via a thin fiber optic cable. This limited range to a few kilometers but it could not be jammed. Ukrainian engineers found other solutions like a backup guidance system that used a picture of the target plus likely alternate targets for the attack drone to crash into and explode. This use of attacking has long been used by some anti-tank weapons. In those situations the operators get the crosshairs on the target then pull the trigger. The missile launches and homes in on image, even if the target moves. Decades of cheaper and smaller electronics allows these Hone On Image systems to be small enough and cheap enough for drones costing less than a thousand dollars each.
These drone evolutions revolutionized warfare in Ukraine and both sides are producing as many as they can. Not having enough of these to match the number the enemy has in a portion of the front means you are at a serious disadvantage in that area. These drones are still evolving in terms of design and use and are becoming more effective and essential.
Ukraine even created a new branch of their military, the Drone Force. This is in addition to the Ukrainian Air Force that consists of manned aircraft. The Drone Force does not control the drones Ukrainian forces use regularly but does contribute to developing new drone models and organizing mass production for those new models that are successful. Drones have been an unexpected development that had a huge impact on how battles in Ukraine's current war are fought. Drones were successful because they were cheap, easily modified, and expendable.
Both Russian and Ukrainian forces were soon using cheap, at about $500 each, quadcopter drones controlled by soldiers a kilometer or more away using FPV goggles. Adding night vision at least doubles the cost for each drone, so not all of them have or need that capability. Each of these drones carries half a kilogram of explosives, so it can instantly turn the drone into a flying bomb that can fly into a target and detonate. This is an awesome and debilitating weapon when used in large numbers over the combat zone. If a target isn’t moving or requires more explosive power that the drones can supply, one of the drone operators can call in artillery, rocket, or missile fire, or even an airstrike. Larger, fixed wing drones are used for long range, often over a thousand kilometers, operations against targets deep inside Russia.
Armed FPV drones have revolutionized warfare in Ukraine and both sides are producing as many as they can. Earlier in the Ukraine War Russia used Iranian Shahed-136 drones that Iran sold for about $200,000 each. Ukraine demonstrated that you could design and build drones with similar capabilities at less than a tenth of what the Shahed-136. The Iranian drone was more complex than it needed to be. Even the Russians soon realized this and turned from the Shahed-136 for more capable drones they copied from Ukrainian designs or ones Russians designed. Ukrainian drone proliferation began when many individual Ukrainians or small teams designed and built drones. The drones served as potential candidates for widespread use and mass production. This proliferation of designers and manufacturers led to rapid evolution of drone capabilities and uses. Those who could not keep up were less successful in combat and suffered higher losses.
Because of drones, air forces have ceased to be dominant when it comes to influencing the war on the ground. This is despite efforts to maintain their ability to bomb targets in direct support of ground operations. Air forces traditionally have blind spots in tactical air reconnaissance which hurts their overall effectiveness. Blame this on a bad attitude towards Bomb Damage Assessment or BDA. This is the business of figuring out what impact on the enemy was after you bomb. The problem of the air force leaders being deceived by the people on the ground being bombed began during World War II. This was when air forces used large scale aerial bombing for the first time. Right after that conflict, the U.S. did a thorough survey of the impact of strategic bombing on Germany and Japan. It was discovered that the impact was far different from what air force BDA during the war had indicated. The U.S. air force vowed to do better next time. But as experience in more than half a dozen subsequent wars demonstrated, the enemy on the ground continued to have an edge when it came to deceiving the most energetic BDA efforts. Starting in 2022, the Ukraine War revealed the BDA situation had changed, because of the constant drone presence which meant BDA was persistent and that surveillance not only revealed the damage done but identified new targets.
Before drones, the only proven technique for beating the BDA problem was to have people on the ground, up close, checking up on targets, while the fighting was going on. Those with powerful air forces do not want to do this because of the risk of some of their commandos getting killed or captured, and because the intel and air force people were sure that they knew what enemy was up to down there. After 2022 FPV drones solved that problem.
During the early 21st century, when the U.S. developed persistent drone surveillance, the irregular forces they were facing proved capable of reducing the effectiveness of the drone effort. This spotlights another useful fact; airpower can be useful on the ground but that happens over time and not quickly. Small drones changed that by providing continuous surveillance and the ability of drones to attack anything an FPV drone could detect.
Despite being a successful high-tech operation, American air forces, especially the Navy and USAF, frequently have trouble adjusting to changes they do not agree with. When the Cold War ended in 1991 the air force was still largely thinking about continuing to operate as they had done in the Cold War, but the technology and tactics of warfare were changing. The post-Cold War enemy no longer consisted of large, organized forces spread over huge areas. The enemy was increasingly irregulars who were harder to spot from the air. The air force reluctantly adapted, in part because the army and CIA adopted new reconnaissance and surveillance techniques like drones and persistent surveillance. This pattern is returning as the air force reorganizes after the decade of heavy combat and big budgets the war on terror produced. Now the air force is turning its attention to a near-peer opponent in the form of a rapidly expanding and modernizing China's military. Unexpectedly the Ukraine War emerged first with Russia and Ukraine fighting each other. Ukrainians had the advantage of material and intellectual support from NATO countries. Ukraine was the first to develop and use small, innovative drone designs. These often came from civilians, who were seeking to assist friends of family members in the army. Building drones in homes or garages became a major source of drones for Ukrainian troops.
Russia adapted to their disadvantage in drone development by concentrating on electronic jammers, as well as building a lot of drones, often copying successful Ukrainian drones. By rapidly upgrading their jammer technology, Russians can disrupt a lot of new Ukrainian drone tech for a while. This disruption is becoming more important for the Russians because Ukraine has developed several generations of long range that are increasingly reaching their targets deep a thousand or more kilometers inside Russia. That means Russian economic and military facilities far from Ukraine are suddenly under attack. These targets include refineries and fuel storage sites as well as weapons development, manufacturing, and storage facilities. In 2023 these attacks destroyed about fifteen percent of Russian refining capacity, reducing, for months, the amount of vehicle fuel available for commercial and military users.
Air bases and ballistic missile storage or launch sites are also under attack. Targets as distant as the Russian Northern Fleet bases around Murmansk are under attack. The first attack was a surprise because the Russians never expected an attack from Ukraine which was 2,000 kilometers to the south. After that first attack Russia had to upgrade the Murmansk area air defenses. These defenses were stripped of most of their air defense systems in 2023 so they could be used by bases closer to the Ukrainian border. This has caused a shortage of anti-aircraft systems that can intercept some or all of the drones depending on how many drones and air defense systems are involved.
To deal with this Ukraine has increased production of drones considerably and the objective for 2024 is two million new drones built, mostly armed ones. For 2025 emphasis shifted to more long range drones equipped with guidance and targeting systems built to resist jamming. Ukraine is building over 1,500 of these long range drones a month and more Russians are seeing nearby military facilities explode. If the target is a fuel, chemical or munitions storage site the explosions are spectacular. Hitting factories, vehicle parks, military bases or air defense systems is less spectacular but even more worrisome for the Russians. There are not enough air defense systems to guard all these targets and with Ukraine now going after air defense systems as well, it is difficult to produce enough new air defense systems to expand the force as well as replace combat losses.
Hundreds of armed drones used in single attacks are seen as more effective than conventional tube artillery, which is now seen as a poor substitute for drones. Factories for manufacturing drones are often established in underground facilities to avoid Russian missile attacks. Nearly all the components needed for drone production are available commercially and can be purchased from European or American suppliers and imported. Custom components are manufactured locally in well protected installations. Drone quality and quantity are a Ukrainian advantage they do not want to lose.
Russia is also increasing drone production, in part because they lost their few A-50 surveillance aircraft in 2023 and since then depended on drones for surveillance. Another Russian disadvantage is their reliance on larger and more expensive surveillance and attack drones. The Russians have been quick to adapt and copy Ukrainian drone designs whenever they obtain a new one that had crash landed intact. Often all it takes is a description of a new Ukrainian drone. Russian drone manufacturers have become adept at copying Ukrainian drone designs based on minimal information. Because of this both Ukrainian and Russian troops face the same drone threat.
The economic sanctions imposed on Russia because of the Ukraine War have been adjusted to make it more difficult and expensive to obtain drone components. These sanctions have crippled the Russian economy, which is now operating as if it were involved in a major war. China will sell Russia dual-use components that have commercial and military uses, but not solely military items because that would put China at risk of Western sanctions. Russia can have these items quietly smuggled in, but this costs more and takes longer to get what you want. Some military items are difficult for smugglers to get and take longer to obtain. Russia has to be careful about spending because it has gone through its multi-billion dollar national emergency fund and government income is limited because of the sanctions. Ukraine uses every weapon it has access to, including economic ones that make their enemy less capable.

FYEO

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, January 21, 2025 - 01:25 pm: Edit

Artillery: Red Sea Revenge
January 18, 2025: On January 11, 2025, several dozen Israeli, American and British warplanes struck economic and military targets in Yemen. This was another effort to halt the Yemen Houthi rebels from firing on commercial chipping moving up the Red Sea towards the Suez Canal. This was not the first such air operation. In October 2024 American B-2’s bombed Houthi rebel targets in Yemen.
The Houthi rebels continue attacking ships, unless they are Chinese. Iran and China work together to ensure that Chinese ships use the Red Sea route without being attacked. This immunity is obvious and the United States has increased its sanctions to include Chinese firms involved with aiding the Houthis or benefitting from the immunity Chinese shipping enjoys in the Red Sea.
In late 2023 and into early 2025, Shia rebels in Yemen, armed by decades of smuggled Iranian weapons shipments, sought to block commercial shipping from entering the Red Sea by firing rockets and missiles, as well as sending out speed boats carrying explosives or armed men who try to attack or board commercial ships and force the crew, at gunpoint, to move the ship to a pirate friendly port in nearby Somalia. The threats begin at the entrance to the Red Sea, which passes through the 26 kilometer wide and 50 kilometer long Bab-el-Mandeb strait. The rebels do not control any territory near these narrow straits. Rebel controlled territory is over a hundred kilometers north of the straits. The Houthi rebels are launching rockets and guided missiles at commercial ships that get close enough to the shore to hit. Most ships remain out of range and the rebels sometimes send out speed boats carrying armed men to board and take control of cargo ships. Some boats carry explosives, and the operator leaves the boat as it is aimed at a ship where the explosives are detonated remotely or when the boat hits a ship. Western warships destroy most of these boats and armed guards on some cargo ships do the same.
The Americans imposed economic sanctions on the Shia rebels, who consider themselves the true government of Yemen. These sanctions make it more difficult and sometimes impossible for the Yemen rebels to use any money they have in foreign banks. Holding a lot of cash inside Yemen is dangerous and prevents the rebels from moving that money around to buy things they need.
The United States also sent ships equipped with electronic warfare equipment to disable the communications of Iranian ships that were supplying the Yemen Shia rebels with target information.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, January 21, 2025 - 01:36 pm: Edit

Winning: Iranian Spies in Israel Busted
January 21, 2025: In late 2024 Shin Bet, the Israeli security agency reported that it had arrested seven Israelis who had been operating as Iranian spies since the October 2023 Hamas uprising in southern Israel. The seven spies had operated from 2022 t0 2024, gathering information on the Israeli military as well as port activity, Iron Dome batteries and a power plant.
The Iranian spies were originally from Azerbaijan and were caught using specialized espionage equipment to observe Israeli air bases. The Israeli spies were apparently identifying targets for Iran to attack. This was a high value operation because Israeli police found that the spies had been paid several hundred thousand dollars for their efforts. Suspicious activity by members of this espionage team was detected by Shin Bet and that led to the arrest of the team members and disruption of their plot.
Israel is accustomed to dealing with foreign spies. Years ago Lebanese police arrested seventeen Lebanese and accused them of being Israeli spies. Some of the suspects apparently were Israeli spies. Lebanon attributed this sudden success to closer cooperation with Hezbollah and Iran. Well, it admits that it is cooperating with Hezbollah but played down any Iranian involvement. Iran had been sending more intelligence officers, including some senior ones, to Lebanon for several years. Most of these Iranian officials are there to keep an eye on the Hezbollah leadership, which angered their Iranian patrons with their aggressive actions against Israel that led to a 2006 war with Israel. Hezbollah declared a victory, but the Israelis inflicted far more damage on Hezbollah, and Lebanon, than they received. The 2006 attack angered many Christian Lebanese who had long been somewhat pro-Israeli. It was from this population that useful information about Israeli spies was obtained in the last few years.
The Lebanese had caught one or two Israeli spies a year for over a decade. It appeared that the Israelis had an extensive, and not unexpected, espionage network in Lebanon and Syria. The Israelis were known to pay well, and try to get their agents, if discovered, out of trouble. Still, several Israeli spies were executed by Arab countries over the last seventy years, as well as a number of innocents who were prosecuted because the local counterintelligence officials were under a lot of pressure to do something about Israeli spies.
Some of these spies are Jewish, but most are local Moslem, Christian or Druze Arabs who hated the local rulers more than Israel. Many confessed when caught, knowing that, otherwise, long periods of abuse and torture would ensue. The Israeli intelligence effort against its Arab neighbors was intense and prolonged. The Israelis also spied on their friends, which is not an unusual practice. But the Israelis tended to be more successful at it, in part because they lived in a very rough neighborhood, and faced extinction if they did not succeed in keeping their hostile neighbors at bay.


Special Operations: Hamas Decimated and Defiant
January 21, 2025: The Palestinian Hamas militia force in Gaza has survived over a year of attacks by the Israeli Defense Forces or IDF. Hamas fires an occasional rocket towards Israel but these rarely cause any damage or casualties. Israel still has their Iron Dome rocket defense system to shoot down any rockets headed for a populated area. The IDF has thousands of troops in Gaza searching for Hamas members and capturing or killing them. The IDF is also searching for hostages, most of them Israelis, who were seized in late 2023.
Hamas has been around since the 1980s and is a perennial loser in its battles with Israel. One exception was the October 2023 surprise attack that had three thousand armed Hamas members leave their Gaza hiding places and attack unprepared Israelis. Over a thousand Israelis and foreigners in the area for a music festival were killed. This was the largest number of Jews killed in a single incident since the World War II Nazi German efforts to eradicate all Jews. The Nazis killed six million European Jews and six million non-Jewish anti-Nazis from Eastern Europe. That is the origin of the Israeli motto, “never again.”
Hamas in Gaza and Fatah in the West Bank were long-time rivals for Palestinian leadership. Neither was able to overcome the other or form a lasting united Palestinian government. That changed with the October 2023 attack where Hamas took the initiative but failed get into Israel or to overcome Fatah’s nominal government in the West Bank.
How many Palestinians belong to Hamas has always been a guessing game. October 2023 confirmed that there were at least three thousand active Hamas members. The problem is that Hamas recruiting is very informal, and effective. Any Palestinian can walk into a known Hamas location, which can be a café or some retail establishment, announce their willingness to join Hamas and offer, if necessary, to fight and die for the cause. Hamas will often hand the new recruit a weapon. These are usually AK-47 assault rifles and RPG rocket launchers. Both of these weapons are regularly featured in Arab language movies, TV shows and propaganda films. By the time Palestinian children are teenagers, they know all about these weapons and how to use them. If there is a crisis, the Palestinians on the Hamas membership list go to a location and get their rifle or rocket launcher.
This enables Palestinian leaders to call up a large number of armed members on short notice. More organized operations, like the October 2023 attack, required a lot of planning. Many of these Palestinian gunmen had received some specialist training, just in case. Hamas leaders did their work and then used the standard Hamas mobilization system to quickly organize a force of armed Hamas members from the local Palestinian population. Hamas members don’t wear uniforms. They are armed civilians. When Western journalists report that many Palestinian civilians were killed by the IDF, many, if not most, of the dead were Hamas members.
Many of the Palestinian gunmen for the October 2023 attacks were not aware of a major attack until they were called out by their Hamas leaders. Some Hamas fighters had been assigned to get vehicles to take down fences and get Hamas gunmen somewhere fast.
Hamas turned pre-planned improvisation into a formidable tactic that caused a lot of Israeli casualties but ultimately failed when the better trained, armed and led IDF showed up, The IDF quickly killed a lot of the Hamas irregulars and the October 2023 offensive faded away.
Surviving Hamas members back in Gaza spent more time in the tunnel network they had built during more than a decade-long effort. Hamas used foreign aid sent by the United States and other nations to build and then rebuild their tunnel system under Gaza. Years of effort has produced hundreds of kilometers of tunnels. Many of the tunnels were wired for electricity. Power was obtained from above ground generators or simply by plugging into home or commercial business supplies. Many Palestinians made a career of working in and on the tunnels.
When the IDF recently set out to destroy the tunnel system they were shocked at how extensive it was and how resistant it was to attack. In some tunnels there were blast doors to protect against the IDF use of explosives to reach a blocked portion of a tunnel. The Israelis were also surprised at the comfortable quarters for Hamas personnel and leaders. There were tunnels equipped as administrative offices and others were meeting rooms or offices for senior Hamas leaders.
The Israelis soon realized that there was a Hamas town and military installation under Gaza which was difficult to destroy. The IDF is, as of early 2025, still fighting their way through the Hamas tunnel network under Gaza. IDF troops were trained for house to house fighting and had to adapt those tactics for the underground battles in the tunnels. Destroying the tunnel network is not impossible. The Israelis have decades of experience fighting in detecting fighting inside of and destroying tunnel systems. It is slow and tedious work. The IDF will stay in Gaza until the tunnel network is destroyed but destroying Hamas is another matter. There are two million Palestinians in Gaza, including several hundred thousand potential Hamas members. Not all armed Palestinians belong to Hamas. There are some Islamic terrorist factions and several armed criminal groups. Their favorite prey is the food and other aid sent to Gaza by various foreign aid organizations. The gangsters will steal this aid and sell it in local markets. Sometimes the IDF provides armed guards for the aid convoys so Palestinian civilians get this food. Without the food aid, many Palestinians would starve. There are few jobs in Gaza because since late 2023 Gaza has been a war zone. There are some markets, mainly for food, but business is done under wartime conditions. Merchants either hire their own security and arm themselves or pay some of the armed groups to protect them. Life goes on, even in a war zone.
FYEO

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, January 21, 2025 - 01:36 pm: Edit

Air Defense: Missiles Over Ukraine
January 17, 2025: As of early 2025 Ukraine has seven Patriot batteries and NATO nations have assured Ukraine that additional supplies of missiles will arrive as quickly as they can be taken from existing stockpiles or manufactured in the United States. Japan is the only other nation to manufacture Patriot missiles and they are increasing production to replace the missiles NATO nations have sent to Ukraine.
Patriot systems began operating in Ukraine two years ago with the usual spectacular results. This was especially the case because the Ukrainians tended to find additional uses for many of the weapons they received from NATO countries.
Since 1970 over 10,000 Patriot missiles and 1,500 launchers have been produced. After decades of service, some were updated while others were scrapped. Patriot missiles can, with regular upgrades and refurbishment, remain in storage and usable for over 40 years. A growing number of Patriot missiles are doing just that, but many are still fired each year for training and testing. Most Patriot batteries are equipped with both longer-range GEM-T missiles for aircraft and shorter-range PAC-3 MSE ones for ballistic missiles or, if necessary, aircraft. The PAC 2 is older, cheaper, and designed to intercept manned aircraft at ranges up to 160 kilometers, while the PAC 3 is the newest and most expensive version costing $4 million to $5 million each. The Patriot system, with continued upgrades, will likely remain in production until the 2040s, though it badly needs a mobile replacement for various reasons such as attack by swarms of cheap UAVs, plus that the precise location of Patriot radars can be easily determined from orbit. Demand for Patriot missiles in Ukraine means that nearly all the older Patriot missiles are being used and the manufacturers are working overtime to produce more missiles.
Each Patriot battery is manned by about a hundred troops and contains a radar plus four or more launchers. The launcher is designed to use both the smaller PAC 3 missile as well as the original and larger PAC 2 anti-aircraft version. A Patriot launcher can hold sixteen PAC 3 missiles versus four PAC 2s. A PAC 2 missile weighs about a ton while a PAC 3 weighs about a third of that. The PAC 3 has a shorter range that was originally 20 kilometers, but the latest version can do 35 kilometers. The larger PAC-2 can reach 160 kilometers.
Currently Patriot air defense systems are found worldwide. For example, there are 60 Patriot batteries in service in the United States. A Patriot battery includes only one fire unit with up to 8 launchers, one radar, one command post, communication, and support vehicles.
NATO members are heavy users of Patriot systems. Germany has about 10 Patriot PAC-3 batteries; The Netherlands has less than 3 Patriot PAC-3 batteries; Sweden is in the process of receiving up to 4, and currently has up to 2 Patriot PAC-3 batteries; Romania has up to 7 with currently up to 4 more Patriot PAC-3 batteries in the process of being received. Poland has 2 Patriot batteries and plans for up to 12 PAC-3 batteries. Greece has 6 Patriot PAC-2 batteries; Spain has 3 Patriot PAC-2 batteries. Japan has 24 Patriot anti-missile PAC-3 batteries; South Korea has eight Patriot PAC-3 batteries; Kuwait has 7-8 batteries (possibly 6 more in PAC-2); Qatar has 4-6 Patriot PAC-3 batteries; Saudi Arabia has 25 batteries; UAE has nine Patriot PAC-3 batteries and Israel has 4 Patriot anti-aircraft PAC-2 batteries.
Ukraine has asked for Patriot batteries European countries sought to locate and send as many Patriot batteries as they could to Ukraine. Germany organized this effort. By 2025 most of the NATO Patriot batteries were in Ukraine or on their way.
In early 2024 eight Patriot batteries arrived in Ukraine. The Ukrainians wanted 25 Patriot batteries and over a thousand Patriot missiles to defend military and civilian targets from Russian missile attacks. The Patriot batteries already in Ukraine made it impossible for Russia to use their jet fighter-bombers inside Ukraine. Russia does use these aircraft from inside Russia, near the Ukrainian border, to launch glide bombs at targets inside Ukraine. These GPS guided bombs can be intercepted by a Patriot system that is within about 150 kilometers of the target.
Russia had problems producing missiles because of Western economic sanctions. Undeterred, the Russians improvised. They developed ways to produce cruise missiles anyway, but not as many or as capable. Russia has found new sources for components, some of them obtained by smuggling or purchases of components that can be adapted for use in missile production. Most of the smuggling is done via Armenia and Turkey, two countries that are hospitable to smuggling if it has some benefits for locals. Although Turkey is a NATO member, smuggling is tolerated if the smugglers will pay the right people for access. Such corrupt behavior has long prevented Turkey from joining the European Union.
Russia has expended most of its missile stockpiles and the sanctions had, for a while, prevented Russia from replacing those missiles. Restoring Russian missile production hurts Ukraine because the missiles are difficult to intercept and cause a lot of damage to Ukrainian infrastructure and armed forces. NATO is seeking to disrupt the smuggling while it provides Ukraine with more air defense systems that can deal with incoming missiles. The problem is that NATO cannot supply Ukraine with enough defensive systems to protect all the economic targets Russia wants to attack. NATO considers sanctions the best way to prevent increased Russian missile production, but it appears that current efforts will not be sufficient. The solution is more effective sanctions and that effort is underway.
For sanctions to work they must constantly evolve as the sanctioned nations seek ways to evade the sanctions. This is an economic conflict as harsher sanctions are easier to impose than they are to evade. Russia is already spending more of its national budget on weapons production than it is on social services for the Russian population. The Russian government is taking a risk here because, if too much more privation is imposed on its civilian population, there will be more internal opposition to the war effort. This cannot be ignored but Russia feels they can endure this until they can’t. It is difficult to determine how much privation Russians will tolerate before they actively protest the situation. Russia has been able to limit popular protests to the war effort but the protests can increase to the point where the Russian government cannot ignore the welfare of its own people.
FYEO

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Hardcore) on Tuesday, January 21, 2025 - 01:52 pm: Edit

Paul Howard, a radar would pick up a return eventually. Most likely will info from multiple sensors be fused and feed to the command central.
There may numerous false alarms at first and quite a few dead birds before the systems are fine tuned.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, January 21, 2025 - 02:48 pm: Edit

Ukrainian Media posted video of a Russian attack on Silversk, Ukraine position. The date reported was January 19, 2025.

50 motorcycles and several light vehicles, 100 soldiers attacked Ukrainian positions, without pre bombardment, or support from artillery during the attack.

It appears to be an attempt to overwhelm the defenders by using the agility and speed of light vehicles to close the distance to the defenses as quickly as possible. (The narrative offered conjecture that the light vehicles were remote controlled and possibly intended as decoys for the actual attackers mounted on motorcycles in pairs.)

The attack was not successful, and casualties heavy.

The question I have, is, was the attack an example of innovation, or desperation?

Russians have been using motorcycle mounted troops for months, treated as a type of motorized infantry. I.e. to improve the speed and range of the personnel compared to traditional foot infantry.

But the old argument against horse calvary, was, that being on a horse made the individual infantrymen larger targets, and did not endow the soldiers with any apparent defense benefit.

Same argument can apply to substituting a motor cycle for a horse.

Seems like a waste of, in the Russian case, 100 infantrymen ad 50 motorcycles.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Wednesday, January 22, 2025 - 08:36 am: Edit

I predict eventually Battlefield radar will consist of "Large Baseline Synthetic arpecture" systems.

So you have a vast array of relatively cheap radars (perhaps small enough to be pulled around by a pickup) equipped with a genset.

You drag them to a place, get a PRECISE location, and upload all your data to a robust network. A supercomputer somewhere relatively safe process all the data.

Information then allows the users to build a comprehensive picture of the battlespace.

So you can have a ADA unit sitting quietly waiting for word that targets are going to be entering into their engagement "basket" They execute their mission and then displace.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, January 22, 2025 - 03:24 pm: Edit

Meant to comment on this earlier but didn't get around to it until today...

---

Quote:

Air forces traditionally have blind spots in tactical air reconnaissance which hurts their overall effectiveness. Blame this on a bad attitude towards Bomb Damage Assessment or BDA.

---

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, January 22, 2025 - 03:30 pm: Edit

Mike, if I were of cynical dispositon (Heaven Forfend!) I might remark that on the battlefield, "robust network" is an oxymoron. Not that I'm really claiming that, you understand. It's only what I might say if I were of cynical disposition (Heaven Forfend!).


More seriously, I'm (a little) familiar with some experiments that have been conducted along these lines already. It's an interesting approach but, again, a "hard problem".

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, January 22, 2025 - 05:31 pm: Edit

I think Dunnigan means that people in air forces either have too much trust in BDA or are too cynical about BDA. That's been a long-standing attitude of his, and of many others. BDA during a conflict is notoriously wrong and notoriously over-stated.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, January 22, 2025 - 05:58 pm: Edit

If that is what he's trying to say, I agree with him. But I still think describing it as a "bad attitude" is poor wording because that could be interpreted in a number of other ways.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, January 22, 2025 - 09:22 pm: Edit

He thinks the way he did it was obvious to everyone. At least it was obvious to me. I have never interrupted “bad attitude” as “do not care.” People who have a bad attitude about me certainly care a great deal about my supposed crimes.

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Thursday, January 23, 2025 - 11:15 am: Edit

The only thing I know about BDA is from "Red Storm Rising."

In the aftermath of the "Operation Doolittle" attack, Toland did a BDA from satellite photo reconnaissance of the Soviet bombers, and IIRC, he only counted a Backfire as destroyed if he clearly saw pieces knocked off of it.

While I know that a novel written by a civilian, regardless of how highly regarded it might be, is a bad source for any legitimate information, it does seem reasonable to me that not being able to do an on-site analysis of the target can make a BDA difficult to say the least.

For that reason, this underinformed dumba$$ed civvie will ask, "Are we being too hard on the folks who DO the BDAs?"

By Austindlf on Thursday, January 23, 2025 - 11:18 am: Edit

Authentication Error

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, January 23, 2025 - 11:51 am: Edit

Not hard enough.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Thursday, January 23, 2025 - 01:47 pm: Edit

BDA might be improved by persistence in being able to observe the site. Famously in World War II the British faked the destruction of the DeHaviland factory and allowed the Luftwaffe to photograph the site. Had the Germans had continuous observation this would never have worked.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, January 23, 2025 - 02:35 pm: Edit

Morale: Paid To Die In Ukraine
January 23, 2025: Russian soldiers in Ukraine are largely higher paid long-term contract soldiers. These men tend to come from rural areas where jobs are scarce and poverty is increasing. Many of the military-age men had already served one or two years as conscripts. In the last year, military recruiters have been offering these veterans well-paid jobs as contract soldiers if they sign up for a few more years. Most of their pay is sent directly to their families and there are substantial death or disability payments.
So far over half a million Russian soldiers have died or been permanently disabled in Ukraine .In many rural towns it is obvious that many men recently died in Ukraine. That’s made it difficult for recruiters, who have obtained most of their best recruits from these rural areas, where many men are accustomed to hunting or fishing. That means recruits who already know how to shoot and move quietly in the countryside and are in need of a better paying job. As more local men die in Ukraine, fewer are inclined to join the army. This is a problem because most of the rural population of Russia has been slowly declining. In 1970 rural areas held half the population but currently it is only 37 percent and continuing to decline. A century ago, most Russians lived in rural areas but the movement to urban areas has been relentless and continuous.
Men in urban areas have more access to news, better education and more jobs. Urban men are not interested in joining the army, even as better paid contract soldiers. When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, it was voters from urban areas that led the opposition to conscription, but so far, the best they could do was get the term of conscript service reduced to one year. Current conscript laws prohibit conscripts from serving in foreign wars. The government tried to present the Ukraine War as an internal Russian matter because Ukraine was part of Russia. The government passed laws to that effect but most Russians still considered the Ukraine War a foreign war that was off limits for conscripts. The conscripts went to war anyway, but almost entirely in non-combat roles.
To get around this opposition the government provided more cash bonuses to induce conscripts to become contract soldiers. This made sense to conscripts from poor regions but the urban conscripts were not interested and concentrated on surviving their unfortunate circumstances. For urban military-age men, particularly in the Moscow and St. Petersburg areas, rampant corruption in the conscription bureaucracy provides opportunities for those with money to avoid conscription or at least avoid service in a combat unit.
As Russian conscripts and newly acquired contract soldiers continued to suffer casualties in Ukraine, the quality of those troops and their willingness to fight declined. This was accelerated by the even greater decline in the number of combat officers available. Russian officers were also reluctant to have a promising military career cut short by untimely death in Ukraine while trying to lead reluctant troops. Ukrainian forces more frequently encountered Russian units that seemed reluctant to fight but many soldiers wanted to surrender. The Russian government tried to deal with this by making it a criminal offense to surrender. This has led a growing number of reluctant and desperate Russian soldiers to desert and not return to Russia. This makes them stateless but still alive. This is not a new problem and the UN refugee agency is prepared to issue travel documents to the stateless. This allows Russian deserters to move around outside Russia but they still encounter problems finding a job while also learning a new language. It is possible to covertly contact friends and family via the Internet to let them know you are still alive but that’s about all you can do.
All this explains the poor morale and combat ineffectiveness of so many Russian troops in Ukraine. There are some elite commando or airborne units that will willingly fight but there are few of these units. Russian commanders have learned to use these elite units carefully because combat losses are not easy to replace. It takes months to train these elite troops, who are volunteers and there are fewer and fewer Russians volunteering to fight in Ukraine, even as a member of an elite unit.
While all this limits the ability of the Russians to attack, most of their reluctant soldiers will operate on the defensive and take part in building defensive fortifications and planting landmines and other nasty surprises for any attackers. This is what the current Ukrainian offensive in the southeast has to deal with. Ukrainian forces make the most of this by using their long-range weapons, like artillery, guided rockets and aircraft delivered long range guided bombs or air-to-ground missiles to destroy Russian supply storage sites, transportation efforts and headquarters. This leaves a growing number of Russian units without ammunition or other supplies, even food and water. Many Russian troops still have their cellphones and can call home and complain about their increasingly desperate situation. It’s illegal for troops to report on their situation and illegal for Russian media to publish or broadcast it. This slows down but does prevent the bad news from spreading inside Russia.
Most Russians still support their government or simply try to avoid the war news. For those Russians who are involved because they have friends or family members in the military or subject to being recruited or conscripted, the bad news is a useful additional incentive to avoid being sent to Ukraine to fight. Those who do go have little enthusiasm for fighting but will shoot back if cornered and attacked.
Russia recently imported 12,000 North Korean troops who are trained, disciplined and know how to carry out a disciplined attack. North Korea announced that it is willing to send more troops even if that means North Korean soldiers taking over most Russian offensive operations. North Korea sees this as much needed combat training for its troops and a source of income. Russia pays for the use of these troops as well as the cost of maintaining them and the costs of medical care and shipping the bodies of dead soldiers home and paying the family a substantial life insurance payment. Such payments are common in all parts of the world. Currently the families of U.S. military personnel killed in combat receive $100,000 tax free. The government also ships the body back and provides a military burial service if the family wants one.
For North Korea, sending its soldiers to fight alongside Russians in Ukraine is all about money. North Korea has been selling Russia ammunition, rockets and other weapons since 2023. This has become big business for North Korea. Now they can rent their soldiers to the Russians. Supplying Russian needs for the war in Ukraine has become big business for North Korea and they will miss it when the war ends or Russia runs out of cash to pay for their foreign legion.

FYEO

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Thursday, January 23, 2025 - 05:44 pm: Edit

What ever happened to the Foreign Brigade fighting for Ukraine, haven't heard a word since early 2023 about them.....

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, January 23, 2025 - 06:39 pm: Edit

Early in 2024 they expanded to a second battalion. I believe they were separated, never cooperated in combat, and rarely operated without one or two other Ukrainian battalions.

But you are right, there hasn’t been anything new in months.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Thursday, January 23, 2025 - 07:42 pm: Edit

As it happens, there was an article in Newsweek a week ago about Ukrainian women joining the legion in Poland, primarily for war-effort work related to medicine and communications.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, January 23, 2025 - 08:19 pm: Edit

There is a U.S. blogger , title is Business Basics.

In a posted article 5 hours ago claims that since the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, that Ukraine has apprehended more than 22,000 deserters, POW (prisoners of War), to date.

The majority of the video clips are interviews (with captions of english translations) of Both Russian deserters and POWs.

I haven’t viewed all of the videos (that would take days.) but the few I did look at had very critical comments about the support from the Russian government, and a generally negative view of Putin in particular.

It is obviously biased against Russia and Russians and Putin in particular.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, January 25, 2025 - 11:21 pm: Edit

BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP
This is an explosively controversial topic, so I'm going to try to cover both sides. There will be no further posts allowed on this subject. I just feel a need to explain the situation.

"Everybody knows" that the US has this weird concept of "birthright citizenship" which only a few countries use (to varying degrees). So "we all know" that "the supreme court ruled" that if you're born on US soil then you are automatically a US citizen no matter who you mother was or what she was doing on US soil, thus creating "anchor babies" which mean that the parents and siblings get to stay in the US and collect welfare. This seems obvious and we all learned it in high school civics.

But not everyone agrees, and disagreement isn't new, but goes back to the 1860s. The political controversy is because pro-birthright people want more immigration and anchor babies are a sneaky way to get more foreigners into the US. Anti-birthright people want to deport illegal aliens and any of them with "anchor babies" become much more difficult to expel. If you want to expel illegal aliens, you generally oppose anchor babies. To be fair, lots of people who are angry about illegal immigration and think "anchor babies" were a bad idea in the first place don't realize that lots of people think there is in fact no such thing as birthright citizenship. I have heard Fox news anchors blithely state that "What is Trump doing? The Supreme Court settled this a century ago!" Not everyone thinks they did.

The original constitution has nothing on the subject. The 14th Amendment was intended to make freed slaves citizens (which was not just good and noble but practical) and also applied to American Indians or First Nations Peoples or Native Americans or whatever you want to call them. The 14th Amendment says: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." (It is a lot longer but the only relevant parts are there.) [I am going to ignore the long-rejected claim that since Southern states were forced to ratify the 14th Amendment it was never legal. That's not part of the current argument.]

The operable wording is "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The senators who wrote the 14th Amendment are on the congressional record saying that "jurisdiction thereof" excludes babies born to diplomats, tourists, businessmen in the country to buy and sell stuff, and illegal aliens. Two supreme court rulings between 1870 and 1890 confirmed this.

Then we come to the case of Wong Kim Ark. His parents were Chinese who were in the US legally but the way things worked at the time there was nothing about their status that they were on a path to citizenship or not. The parents went home to China. Wong went to China to visit them, then returned and was told he was not a citizen and could not enter. At the time, US law prohibited Chinese from gaining citizenship, a racist law to be sure. The court ruled 6-2 that Wong was under US jurisdiction and hence a citizen. Not everyone agreed at the time, including still surviving senators who originally passed the 14th Amendment.

Opinions on the Wong case today are divided among the few dozen legal scholars who actually understand such things. Some think it creates anchor babies. Some think it only applies to the babies of people who have green cards. Some think it was a stupid mistake which the current Supreme Court needs to reverse, just as they reversed that RvW thing we're not going to talk about.

Trump is basically rolling the dice and hoping that when the Supremes get a grip on it they will cancel the whole idea as it provides a dangerous incentive for illegal aliens to try to get into this country, even for the short while that they await an immigration court hearing.

Which ties into "catch and release". If you and your wife are illegal aliens, you show up at the border, get scheduled for a hearing months or years later, then get to stay and work in the US until your hearing (which tells 97% of people claiming asylum that they don't qualify and orders them to leave but doesn't actually handcuff them and put them on a plane.) If you skip your immigration hearing and hide out until you have a baby, you're golden. More than a few people think that's a terrible way to do things and Trump is rolling the dice with a Supreme Court ruling two or three years from now that may or may not go his way. And no matter how it goes, we may have to go through this all again in a few decades.

So, there you have both sides. Regardless of what any of us want the 14th to say, the Supreme Court will decide and nothing we say or do will change it. No further posts on the situation are allowed, and don't waste time emailing me your opinion or a link to an article that supports your theory. As I said, nothing any of us do will matter. I just wanted you to understand the positions.

I might comment that to suddenly cancel the citizenship of a lot of anchor babies is going to be chaos on a level never seen before.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, January 27, 2025 - 02:03 pm: Edit

Forbes (a mainstream media site) posted an Analysis of thr Russian war effort in Ukraine.

Not going to quote the whole article, a couple of points do seem rel.

First, production in Russia of modern tanks (in this case, T-90) amounts an a average of twenty new tanks a month.

They mentioned that that production rate is four or five times that of Germany.

Reactivation of reserve tanks was said to average 50 tanks per month, so Russia, at present is feeding 70 new or refurbished tanks a month in to the war zone.

The problem for Russia, is every month they lose tanks. The average is 100. Some months as many as 120 tanks, and the peak loss was in August where 150 tanks were destroyed in battle.

It certainly looks like Putin managed to get himself and Russia into a war of attrition, and worse, they (Putin abd Russia) are on the losing side.

By Carl-Magnus Carlsson (Hardcore) on Tuesday, January 28, 2025 - 01:33 am: Edit

Yep, if only someone told Trump that there would be a statue of him in every town square in eastern europe and beyond, and that he would venerated as a hero for centuries by hundreds of millions of people all over the world, if he decisively helped push Russia to collapse (again).

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, January 29, 2025 - 05:52 pm: Edit

MASS DEPORTATIONS
This is an explosively controversial topic, so I'm going to try to cover both sides. There will be no further posts allowed on this subject. I just feel a need to discuss the situation and share some information that is not commonly available.
- - -
President Trump was elected on two issues: immigration and inflation. Of the two, immigration is easier to discuss as economic things get tricky and hard to connect government policies to effects.

President Trump and Border Czar Homan promised a huge mass deportation program starting day one, and have delivered. The White House has given an order for 1,500 to 1,800 illegals to be deported very day, and so far ICE is making a good try at satisfying the quota. Solid numbers are hard to find for the reason that those arrested fit into categories, some of which take a day or two to expel, and some of which are referred to courts instead of expulsion without adjudication.

Polls show at least 55% of American citizens, including 60% or more of recent immigrants, want ALL illegal immigrants deported ASAP, and want the "report for a hearing someday" types to be brought before a judge next week and then deported.

In theory, the policy is "the worst first" which means people known to be violent or dangerous criminals (murder, rape, and so forth) are first in line. The reality is that when a sanctuary city doesn't allow ICE to go into the jail and start pulling people out, ICE has to go hunt them down in their homes or hangouts and when they do that, ICE checks everyone they find. If you're on the criminal list, you go. If you're illegal, you go even if not criminal. So far around half of those deported are not on the criminal list.

When discussing the "worst first" one has to consider "just how the heck do we know" that 1.5 million "un-vetted" aliens had violent criminal records at home? It's not like Venezuela gave us a list. How we're going to find them is unclear. Similarly, how we're going to find "gottaways" (people who slipped across the border somehow) is unclear.

How many illegal aliens are there? No one knows. Before Trump-45 there was a "popular wisdom" number of 11 million, with people arguing that the real number could be twice or three times that. Being illegals, it's not like they stop by a government office to be counted. These include those who slipped across the border unnoticed, those who were "caught and released" and skipped their court hearing, those who went to their court hearing and were ordered to leave and just didn't, visa overstays, and some others. Some of those managed to produce "anchor babies" and gain some kind of legal status. There were also hundreds of thousands of "temporary refugees" who got extended over and over, and other illegal immigrants who managed to come up with some kind of legal status for some reason (such as being a witness in the criminal trial). During the Biden Administration, another 11 million were given "show up for your hearing at some future date" which makes them legal (until they don't show up) but still "illegal" the minds of anti-immigration Americans who want them processed NOW instead of "someday".

It can be argued with some merit that those who are here aren't really an economic burden as they buy things and pay taxes. There is also the argument that many of them are on some kind of welfare or government assistance. There is also the argument that expelling them all will leave a lot of jobs vacant and wreck the economy, and will leave a lot of rented housing vacant and wreck the real estate market. There are arguments that immigrants commit fewer crimes as they want to avoid being arrested, and arguments that they commit more crimes because of the culture they come from.

One thing that has been noticed is that President Trump is using military flights to send them home, costing more than chartering airlines. There is more here than meets the eye. So far, the military flights are using the training flight hours that crews and planes have to do every month to keep current, so it's costing nothing (supposedly). There is also the fact that charters take time to arrange as there aren't a lot of airplanes available for charter that aren't already under contract. (Investors don't buy more airplanes than they can rent.) If it takes a week to arrange a charter to send 140 people home, it costs $300 a day to hold each of them ($42,000 a day = $294,000 total) waiting for a flight. (They do in fairness wait a day or three now as the military has to wait until the deportees from a given country equal the number of seats on a plane). In theory, the military use is a short-term thing until the government can line up civilian charters. The reality is not clear.

Then we have the countries that won't take them back. President Trump bullied Colombia into taking theirs during three holes of golf. China won't be bullied and we're already holding at least one planeload of theirs. Stories have appeared that the US may build detainment camps in other countries to hold those who cannot be sent home, and those won't be free but will probably cost less than holding them in the US. Supposedly at least one country has said they will take anyone Trump wants to send as long as they have X dollars in their pockets when they walk off the plane. Presumably someone from China might find it harder to get back into the US from South Suckistan than from Mexico, and holding them indefinitely isn't going to work. Knowing the government of South Sukistan as well as I do, I suspect they will rob and probably murder the Chinese sent there to await their fate. That sounds like it could be embarrassing when discovered by an investigative journalist.

Second in priority is supposedly those who were not coached well enough to lie their way through an immigration hearing, were given an order to leave, and just didn't. That becomes an "arrest warrant situation" just like the criminals. At least we have an actual list of these.

Then you come down to the rest of the illegals. I don't have any clue how we would deport 25 million illegals who haven't drawn the attention of police by committing a crime. I guess you get 200 ICE agents and 300 soldiers and surround a whole city block and check the ID of everyone inside. Cool, now tell me how you keep other illegals from entering the "cleared zone" and how you keep the illegals in "the next block to the west" from simply moving out of the way of the obvious next search. (I am reminded of my favorite online zombie game where one steadily takes over one block after another, rescuing survivors and killing zombies as you expand the perimeter. Life is not a game, more is the pity.)

Sanctuary cities/states remain an issue. (I can see why they want to keep non-criminal illegals for economic and political reasons but why do they want to keep gang members?) I guess President Trump will try to bully them by blocking federal money. That sounds like a million lawsuits waiting to happen. Good Luck, Donald!

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, January 30, 2025 - 01:05 am: Edit

The UK Daily Mail says that ICE and the USMC will momentarily begin a campaign to expel 100,000 illegal immigrants within a week. If true, you might expect this to be rescheduled if they were counting on surprise.

DHS reports that they have cut off funding to NGOs that use the money to help illegal aliens remain in the US. One has to ask why Biden was issuing those grants in the first place. Further, DHS is gearing up to house illegal aliens from countries that refuse to take them back at Guantanamo. That would be a short term solution for a couple of thousand at most

In other news, it is a historical fact that California turned from red to blue in the early 1990s after 1.5 million illegal immigrants became citizens due to the 1986 amnesty and almost all voted one way. Now imagine that a 2036 amnesty creates 25 million new voters who will 95% vote in one particular direction. This may explain why feelings on the issue are so strong.

POSTED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES. NO REPLIES ALLOWED.